Moderation Questions
The last iteration of the moderation discussion thread was a complete disaster. Numerous attempts to keep it on topic fa
i cant really go to bat for luciom as he posted a lot of nutty extreme stuffthat said - i have no doubt that crossnerd will find an excuse to perma mets sooner or later, rafiki seems to be gone, gs hasn't been seen for a while, and so if you're not careful the i/p thread is gonna end up as a bunch of people posting terrorist propaganda back and forth to each other all day witho
by the way, all of the above turned out to be 100% fact. crossnerd actively searching for a reason to perma mets was telegraphed a mile away
I didn't find his last post particularly note worthy but I'm not aware of his fully body of work in that thread. Maybe he ripped off a particularly bad PM or there was a deleted post.
Maybe let that thread go wild? Maybe shut it down?
mets' issue is that he is not capable of dropping an argument and wont shut the **** up despite being asked/told repeatedly to do so by mods. this describes half the posters on this forum.
My reading comprehension must be way worse than I thought. I really never saw him say anything that was so much worse than what was directed towards him. Admittedly he was particularly emotional with the I/P stuff but I don't think anyone he replied to really took it too hard at all. They were mainly just waiting to snap back.
I'm fairly familiar with trolly's body of work. How do people get riled up over him? His responses are normally on topic and to the point. I don't read every thread in the sub forum but I really don't see the issue.
Why is this kind of thing allowed? ? Trolly makes FAR more personal attacks than does Mets, while hardly ever contributing actual content.
Could any mod actually answer my question for once? Why is this exact kind of post allowed?
The I/P thread is modded to a different standard than the rest of the forum. I think we let most things go in most threads, but when the topic repeatedly brings out problems, then we clamp down in that thread. I don't know if this is the best way, but it's how we've been operating (and to be clear, there was no discussion or directive to mod this way, it's just a description of the situation).
Not sure I understand how a conversation with assurances from Mets is going to be a useful indicator of his ability to abide by the rules in the heat of the moment.
I didn't find his last post particularly note worthy but I'm not aware of his fully body of work in that thread. Maybe he ripped off a particularly bad PM or there was a deleted post.
Maybe let that thread go wild? Maybe shut it down?
He could not, would not, stop calling people antisemites. His last post in that thread he called multiple posters antisemitic and then accused me of being antisemitic, “chasing away the Jews”, and wanting a “Jew-free zone”. Mets is aware my family is Jewish. It’s just past the point of absurdity and he will not stop.
If it were any other poster, he’d have been banned a long time ago without the option of coming back.
He should have been permabanned previously for sexually harassing another female poster not too long ago but for some reason he wasn’t. That’s not my forum though.
mets' issue is that he is not capable of dropping an argument and wont shut the **** up despite being asked/told repeatedly to do so by mods. this describes half the posters on this forum.
Bolded also clearly isn't true. Mets is the only one who refuses to let things go after multiple warnings. I've seen numerous other posters get warnings and back off. It's just more hyperbole, like that nonsense about him having to grovel.
Even if cross and mets don't like each other because of some prior beef a year ago, that doesn't begin to explain why all the other mods agree with how things were handled; he's clearly just flailing around looking for some pretext to argue about.
He could not, would not, stop calling people antisemites. His last post in that thread he called multiple posters antisemitic and then accused me of being antisemitic, “chasing away the Jews”, and wanting a “Jew-free zone”. Mets is aware my family is Jewish. It’s just past the point of absurdity and he will not stop. If it were any other poster, he’d have been banned a long tim
About a week before you banned Mets, you posted this:
Alright. Then I will ask King Spew to take over moderating you since that is apparently what you want. You are the problem, but at least you won’t be *my* problem anymore.
What caused you to change your mind?
I was raised in a family where one of my parents was an attorney as well, DonkJr. It might be helpful to remind you that subterfuge must be subtle in order for it to work. A lot of your “work” itt recently has been, shall we say, fairly overt.
I was raised in a family where one of my parents was an attorney as well, DonkJr. It might be helpful to remind you that subterfuge must be subtle in order for it to work. A lot of your “work” itt recently has been, shall we say, fairly overt.
I would hope that my posts are seen as "overt" by other posters. Your response might be too subtle for me, as I legitimately have no idea what you are trying to say, what you are accusing me of, or if you even are accusing me of something.
I am on no higher or lower moral ground than you are. We both post here. I'm sure that we both disagree with a lot of what is posted here.
I'm sure that you agree that this is not the worst corner of the internet. And I'm sure you agree that if it were bad enough, you would leave (as I would).
bc the posting elsewhere is worse doesn't give you the cover for tolerating the way posting here is handled.
Boids,If I must address anything, it is the fact that you are projecting your own issues.I don’t expect many to know things that happened in the distant past in a different subforum, but you and I both know that over ten years ago you lead a similar campaign against me during a time where I was very much publicly struggling with my mental health. You found much entertainment in
Congratulations
This was one single joke made in poor taste that wouldn't be appropriate to call sexual harassment fwiw.
You are not privy to the actual complaint made by the person it was directed toward, who very much called it sexual harassment and made it clear she never wanted to post in a thread with him ever again. This is evidenced in his user notes. It is significantly worse than how you are summarizing it here. It caused real harm.
You are not privy to actual complaint made by the person it was directed toward, who very much called it sexual harassment and made it clear she never wanted to post in a thread with him ever again
I know exactly what the complaint is. And how the person takes it doesn't change the fact that it's misleading to call a single bad joke sexual harassment.
I mean say that Mets should have perma'd for a bad joke of a sexual nature directed at a female poster if you want and I'd have little to say-- but calling it sexual harassment implies something different than what actually happened.
You are not privy to the actual complaint made by the person it was directed toward, who very much called it sexual harassment and made it clear she never wanted to post in a thread with him ever again. This is evidenced in his user notes. It is significantly worse than how you are summarizing it here. It caused real harm.
I know exactly what the complaint is. And how the person takes it doesn't change the fact that it's misleading to call a single bad joke sexual harassment.
Sexual harassment depends on the person feeling harassed. Nobody gets to tell them if it’s harassment or not, they get to decide
On that note, making fun of someone for not being able to conceive is def sexual harassment of the highest degree
