A Reminder About Harassment and Discussing Mod Actions on the Open Board

[Orangecat]

View attachment 895994

Looks pretty faggy.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Yet myriad threads about Joe Biden's supposed mental decline are not dinged.

And it's not a conspiracy theory when all the evidence is out in the open.

A conspiracy theory, by definition, must include facts that have been hidden from the public.

Only time my buttocks get chapped about a thread getting kicked down in the hole is if I waste a bunch of my time posting in it and then it gets moved down there for other people being tards in it.

I think that the tard posts should be mauded and the thread left where it was rather than leaving the tard posts and just moving the thread.

I think some people come into threads to wreck threm on purpose because they know that a thread is more likely to get moved out of sight and kicked down in the hole rather than be mauded.

 

[Ava]

It's kind of a bummer for a mod who wants to participate as a poster but... The safest bet is to not reply, nor respond to postings made by mods.

And that is exactly the reason I try to avoid entering into threads with mods posting as members, especially one very over-zealous mod.

 

[eagle1462010]

And that is exactly the reason I try to avoid entering into threads with mods posting as members, especially one very over-zealous mod.

Hmmm. Call of the wild

 

[BackAgain]

I would like to know why some moderator moved this thread to Conspiracy Theories. All it does is document the events of that awful day.

The Events of January 6th

Waaaahh.

What an awful day!

The horror. The horror.

 

[toobfreak]

Apparently Aye and other mods are taking questions in this thread though.

That is their choice, perhaps because they feel answering them publicly is in the greater interest of the forum for now, but generally, these are also questions which according to the rules can and should be asked in PM. I see the mods get flamed here time and again by various parties, always with the mindset that they have been singled out for some unjust torment, liberals think the forum too conservative and vise versa, but a mod's actions always seem unfair when you are on the receiving end of any action you don't agree with! This is actually one of the best moderated forums I've seen. And yes, a certain amount of moderation IS up to personal interpretation and discretion, so there will always be a certain "human factor" in every mod action unless you want AI computers to run things, so, I've seen this thread coming for a long time.

 

[Natural Citizen]

I see the mods get flamed here time and again by various parties, always with the mindset that they have been singled out for some unjust torment...

It can and has happened.

Trivializing it and reducing any complaint about it or any legitimate expectation of accountability when it does happen to someone to a mere victimhood mindset to be brushed aside and disregarded as being without merit in this collective way that you have does not change that fact.

I'm not saying that people don't unjustifiably complain about any given maud acton when they actually did break a rule resulting in a justifiable maud action. I agree that this happens quite often. But almost all of those gripes have to do with trivial maud actions like deleting posts or moving threads. Stuff that isn't even worth the effort of arguing over, in my view.

But if you think that a given maud hasn't ever resorted to more extreme action out of nothing more than contempt for someone by banning them just because they feel like it while knowing fully well that their chances of being held accountable are slim to none and that it's just a mindset of victimhood on the part of the end user that they got screwed over when they come to expect accountability for a genuinely inappropriate maud action, you're wrong. Again. It happens...

 

[BackAgain]

This may be the worst example of a silly thread commenced by a morning the history of USMB. The OP is quite incoherent.

I’d still like any mod to explain the rational behind a rule that says we can’t question mod decisions except in private.

What kind of pussy rule is that?

Please tell me this thread wasn’t motivated by the criticism offered against a certain (recently un-modded) mod?

TDS is real.

 

[toobfreak]

It can and has happened.
Trivializing it and reducing it to a mere victimhood mindset when it does happen to someone in this collective way that you have does not change that fact.
I'm not saying that people don't unjustifiably complain about any given maud acton when they actually did break a rule resulting in a justifiably bannable offense. I agree that this happens quite often.
But if you think that a maud hasn't ever banned somoene just because they feel like it and that it's just a mindset of victimhood on the part of the end user that they got screwed over when they expect accountability, you're wrong. Again. It happens...

I'm not a big "social media" person. Other than here (and one other place I visited), all of my "forums" have been science-based. I once got banned from a group just for answering a question. I've had 1-2 actions taken on me here I HOTLY disagreed with because it either involved a misunderstanding or misinterpretation of my intentions or actions, or because it involved blind adherence to the "letter of the law," but I'll tell you again: overall, I still consider this place one of the best moderated places I've seen, even by mods who politically might see things diametrically opposite to how I generally do, so, as a moderator myself, my recommendation to members here is that if you keep running afoul of a given moderator here, you should stop and reexamine what YOU can do to better meet the situation, not them, because, in the final analysis, this is THEIR forum, and THEIR rules, not yours or mine, and folks are members here only at THEIR pleasure, not yours.

Put simply: being a member here implies agreement with and acceptance of the rules, period, many that there are. If a person cannot abide within those requirements, no one is keeping anyone here. I like the fact that I get to interact with a lot of people here of ALL persuasions and views who see things from every POV, and that we are pretty much left free to express ourselves and differences openly. I'd sure hate to lose that because the site got closed down for lack of adequate staff sick and tired of fighting constantly with high-functioning autistics who simply refuse to tow the line and are just hell bent on confrontation even if it means their own banishment.

 

[Natural Citizen]

I'm not a big "social media" person. Other than here (and one other place I visited), all of my "forums" have been science-based. I once got banned from a group just for answering a question. I've had 1-2 actions taken on me here I HOTLY disagreed with because it either involved a misunderstanding or misinterpretation of my intentions or actions, or because it involved blind adherence to the "letter of the law," but I'll tell you again: overall, I still consider this place one of the best moderated places I've seen, even by mods who politically might see things diametrically opposite to how I generally do, so, as a moderator myself, my recommendation to members here is that if you keep running afoul of a given moderator here, you should stop and reexamine what YOU can do to better meet the situation, not them, because, in the final analysis, this is THEIR forum, and THEIR rules, not yours or mine, and folks are members here only at THEIR pleasure, not yours.

Put simply: being a member here implies agreement with and acceptance of the rules, period, many that there are. If a person cannot abide within those requirements, no one is keeping anyone here. I like the fact that I get to interact with a lot of people here of ALL persuasions and views who see things from every POV, and that we are pretty much left free to express ourselves and differences openly. I'd sure hate to lose that because the site got closed down for lack of adequate staff sick and tired of fighting constantly with high-functioning autistics who simply refuse to tow the line and are just hell bent on confrontation even if it means their own banishment.

You're still speaking on the premise that someone has broken a rule that justifies a ban.

If someone breaks a rule that justifies a ban, then that's one thing. Still, though, there's a process involved that would lead up to that level of maud action.

But what if they haven't broken a rule that justifies a ban and they get banned anyway just because a maud feels like it out of nothing more than contempt?

You think that's acceptable practice? It sounds like this is what you believe.

And this isn't ''their'' forum.

They're volunteers who come out of the same pool of misfits as the rest of us.

If you decided you wanted to be a maud, is it all of a sudden your forum? And are the rules all of a suden your rules, to be arbitrarily interpreted and enforced/ignored, whichever the scenario calls for, to serve as the illusion of justification of support for your intent?

Of course, not.

I will grant you, however, that this is ''ownership'' mindset that you reference really can evolve over time as a given maud becomes ''tenured'', so to speak. Depends on a given maud's personal nature, I suppose, as to whether that particular mindset is adopted, and in that same tenor, naturally begs the question of why one who might adopt that mindset would volunteer for the role in the first place, as well as what one hopes to get from it. Kind of like politicians when they run for office. That you've forwarded that assumption of ownership here as a circumstance of acquiring maud status is basically confirmation that it is accepted thought and supports the idea that if you tell a lie long enough, people do tend to start accepting it as truth when it really isn't. And it's a precedent that, once set, only encourages and normalizes/maintains the arbitrary practice of rule interpretation and therefore action/inaction.

But it's not true. It's not their forum. And they're not their rules. Not in the ownership context that the claim was invoked anyway.

 

[toobfreak]

You're still speaking on the premise that someone has broken a rule that justifies a ban.

Perhaps. I'm not personally up on how the bans work here. I think they are submitted then agreed to by committee. But this is not a court of law, there is no contract or guarantee of fairness. There are no appeals unless they grant them. Broken rule or not, justification or not, they can ban you just because their nose itches. There is no guarantee of "fairness." But I think that if you generally try to follow the rules and stick to the topics (more or less, its easy to wander), you will be OK.

I doubt there is any sinister plot afoot here to "get" people, unless you go out of your way to make yourself a problem.

 

[Natural Citizen]

I doubt there is any sinister plot afoot here to "get" people, unless you go out of your way to make yourself a problem.

Well what, in your view, would deem one ''a problem'' that would justify a sinister plot to ''get'' them?

A problem for what? Seems like a rather subjective charge.

I ask this since you mentioned that you're a maud on another board.

 

[ShahdagMountains]

Following around from thread to thread the moment they post is an issue that will be looked at closer, as there is a rule against harassment.

Does that apply to the “normal” posters too?

 

[Natural Citizen]

Ah well. You don't have to answer that if you don't want, toobs.

I'm kind of tired of talking about it anyway. I should be getting my work done anyway instead of screwing around on here. The sun will be up soon.

 

[the other mike]

The RULES state issues with moderation should be taken up by PM with the mods. There is also mention that harassment will not be tolerated. This includes any form of harassment aimed at moderators.

The mods have been very lenient in the past with allowing some of you to question us about decisions we have made on the open board and also with the harassment we receive whether as replies in threads, having threads started about us, mocking us in threads we participate in as members, etc. We have answered questions some of you have had regarding why threads were moved, posts deleted, etc. We have taken time to explain why we do what we do and how we go about it. We have played "nice" while taking heat and threats from many of you on the open board and also in PMs. Those days are over!

Consider this announcement the ONLY warning to all members of this forum: Any and all violations of the rules mentioned above WILL NOT BE TOLERATED and WILL result in BANS! If ANY of you think you are above the rules, think again!

It's amazing the level of narcissism from anonymous individuals . I almost take myself so seriously out here in real life.

(You must feel like Gary Busy in Point Break sometimes when he finally decks his boss ...
"Respect for my elders. Plain and simple ")

 

[Zincwarrior]

I hope I didn't get a mod pregnant.

We're waiting on the test results.

 

[White 6]

Does that apply to the “normal” posters too?

YES. There already rules against it. It is harder for us to see, as it takes multiple instances to prove, which does not suit the normal report method. My advice might be to capture screen shots along with names of threads, and when you have enough to prove, PM a mod.

 

[White 6]

I guess some of the questions posed in this thread got too hot, or cut too close, as the mods have vanished.

More like had other things to do, such as have a life, and were logged off. When I logged off, there were only two on the whole board.

 

[ShahdagMountains]

YES. There already rules against it. It is harder for us to see, as it takes multiple instances to prove, which does not suit the normal report method. My advice might be to capture screen shots along with names of threads, and when you have enough to prove, PM a mod.

I left it too late, as l thought no one would be interested in picking it up.

There were two of them. So bad, l left some threads, and decided on ‘ignore’.

It seems to have eased off, although l bet they’re reading this.

And there’s a third one, who keeps me on the radar, periodically reproducing my posts on his favourite thread. For some strange reason.

 

[Synthaholic]

Any updates on those Walmart tunnels? Inquiring minds want to now.

Me, to Walmart employee: "No, where's the HUMMUS?!!"