Teenage Wildlife

IMPORTANT: Use your registry nickname as your username when logging in to Conversation Piece!


Free for All
   >> Site Douchebag
Thread views: 41932 Previous threadView all threadsNext thread*Threaded Mode

Pages in this thread: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | (show all)
KModerator
(thunder ocean)
11/03/05 10:43 AM
Re: I agree with MB new [re: RabbitFighter]  

Hmm, perhaps I should return just to get some of the crap off EJ. After all, I'm a much juicier target.

Project Michelangelo | LiveJournal

NomDePlume
(kook)
11/03/05 10:55 AM
Re: I agree with MB new [re: K]  

Or maybe you, EJ and Ohramannish should crawl off into a hole together somewhere and leave the moderating to Adam. He's the only one that enjoys any popular support.

""Looking for love, not sex" -- the tagline of many a troll who doesn't believe they are worthy or capable of sex in its own right, but god, the thought of carrying that sort of middling self-esteem all the way to 36 is disturbing."

Starlite
(stardust savant)
11/03/05 12:44 PM
Re: I agree with MB new [re: ohramona]  

In reply to:

So what is your complaint? I'm lacking in objectivity and moderation? I've "leashed" myself in too far? All of the above?


Both, with the second one possible rather than definite. I think when you started as a mod, you (from what I remember) started out very... well... moderate. Trying to not take obvious sides in many disputes that could be problematic, conciliatory all around, etc. Then in later months, I've noticed that you haven't been as keen to follow the nicey-nicey-role.

However, since it's hard for anyone to follow the nicey-nicey role all the time, I'm thinking that I'm noticing this specifically because you're a mod. And that probably you're still more moderate than before you became one.

In reply to:

And if you could supply an example or two of where I've not been objective and/or moderate, I'd appreciate it.


This. That made me feel rather uncomfortable. It bothered me to see a mod be snarky to someone when that poster criticized how the board was run. There's more on that same thread. And there were one or two occasions previously, but I can't find 'em right now--one was to ddz, another... uh... don't remember.

I did say it doesn't happen very often.

Re: Dara

In reply to:

In fairness to EJSunday, as far as I'm aware he has managed to restrain himself from doing this, in the face of considerable provocation. A lesser man would have cracked and given into the temptation to abuse his position in an attempt to silence his critics.


Okay, yes, what I said was unfair of me. Let me put it this way: logically, I know this, and I guess I do believe that EJ has been pretty objective. But emotionally, due to all this frackas, I can no longer trust in it.



ohramonaModerator
(acolyte)
11/03/05 01:49 PM
Rule1: Mods can take it but they can't dish it out new [re: Starlite]  

I'm still feeling a contradiction here. When you say (paraphrased) "lacking in objectivity and moderation", that says to me "be more moderate and neutral"; but when you say "leashed in too much", that says to me "be more spontaneous, edit/censor yourself less". So which do you want?


In reply to:

This. That made me feel rather uncomfortable.



Oh, well then, I'm terribly sorry if I hurt your feelings by making a snarky comment to shelle. I can see how that comment would make you feel so much more uncomfortable than the comment of Shelle's:

In reply to:

Before, I was just offering some mild and I thought helpful criticism about how you might moderate less fractiously. Now I'm pretty much convinced you're just a lousy moderator, and a pathetic weasel of a human being.

If you want to dispel this mental image I have of you now, AdolfSunday, I suggest you apologize immediately.



that I was responding to! You don't think hir comment is a bit harsher? It is IMO. Oops! There I go with my opinion again! Sorry!

In reply to:

It bothered me to see a mod be snarky to someone when that poster criticized how the board was run.



The post I was respopnding to was more a criticism of EJ than it was of "how the board was run" now, wasn't it? I really don't give a flying rat's ass about criticisms of these boards. I'm for freedom of speech! I'm for freedom of expression. I'm glad everybody feels free to criticize. I have criticisms of these boards, too! It was the particular language and terms that shell used that spawned my comment. But I didn't go in and *moderate* her comment. I didn't even suggest that she tone down her language. I, in my way, expressed my opinion about the way s/he chose to express hirself. Plus, it was funny! You know: crabby women? Menstruation? Any of this sounding familiar to you? I'm not suppose to do this? I have to walk around like ... like ... well, read any 1984 lately?

In reply to:

I've noticed that you haven't been as keen to follow the nicey-nicey-role.



Well ...fucking barf in a handbag! I'm sorry, I must've missed the line for the little blue pills when they were handing out the moderators' badges! If this characteristic is required of the forum's moderators then I'm handing in my badge the moment Adam gets back! I only hope I can maintain my pinkness.




If I could think of a good sig, I'd post.

Starlite
(stardust savant)
11/03/05 02:00 PM
Re: Rule1: Mods can take it but they can't dish it out new [re: ohramona]  

But you see, your subject line is exactly where it's at. I do agree with that. It's not fair, but I feel that's how it is.

In reply to:

So which do you want?


While you're a mod, I want choice A. Generally, I'm for choice B. I regret that being a mod, imo, requires choice A over choice B, but that doesn't mean I don't expect it.

In reply to:

You don't think hir comment is a bit harsher?


Of course it was. But this is where the higher standard for moderators that I was talking about earlier comes in.

And that comment does make me feel uncomfortable, because Shelle can say whatever she wants, but she has absolutely no power on these boards beyond that. You do. Mods are also supposed to be representative of the boards; attacking users in that light seems wrong to me.

In reply to:

Well ...fucking barf in a handbag!


Yeah, that line was written specifically for that effect.

I'm sorry you seem to be taking this so personally.

Edited by Starlite on 11/03/05 02:03 PM (server time).



ohramonaModerator
(acolyte)
11/03/05 02:09 PM
Re: Rule1: Mods can take it but they can't dish it out new [re: Starlite]  

In reply to:

But you see, your subject line is exactly where it's at. I do agree with that. It's not fair, but I feel that's how it is.


I feel you are incorrect. I feel my self expression is appropriate. If I'm wrong about that, not only will I retire the mod badge when Adam returns, I'll leave TW altogether.

In reply to:

I want choice A.


Geez, I'm sorry to hear that. I was really hoping you wanted me to be myself. Maybe I shouldn't have phrased that so "either or". I think I'm somewhere in between A and B.

In reply to:

this is where the higher standard for moderators that I was talking about earlier comes in.


Well just 'cause you were talking about it doesn't make it any kind of done deal! And look how puny my post was compared to hirs! Yet you still call me out on it!

In reply to:

Mods are also supposed to be representative of the boards;


Mods are suppose to delete that Goats stuff, and occasionally move a thread from one forum to another. And to wear pink.



If I could think of a good sig, I'd post.

Monkeyboy
(acolyte)
11/03/05 02:21 PM
Rule 2: a few years can change perception new [re: Starlite]  

Ohro, what you seem to be missing is that the very paradox that you seem to be presenting as an excuse is the same paradox that we are presenting as the crux of the problem. It is a no-win situation, not because of the people moderating but because of the way it is set up.

An important thing to understand is that this isn't a campaign to oust the mods as posters and to punish them for being horrible people - that's not the case at all. What all this really points to is that there is a problem with the system - and as much as you'd like to say that you can be objective about this, you are a part of that system. For you or any other mod to say that there isn't a problem is something like the chef telling a table of complaining customers that their meal was actually very delicious and that they are crazy for thinking otherwise.

We deserve better.

Shelle
(electric tomato)
11/03/05 02:26 PM
Re: Rule1: Mods can take it but they can't dish it out new [re: ohramona]  

In reply to:

If I'm wrong about that, not only will I retire the mod badge when Adam returns, I'll leave TW altogether.



Geez, don't be such a fucken drama queen!

Starlite is 100% right on this.

If you can't see the difference between

1) a powerless pion such as me getting frustrated and resorting to some below the belt insults after a mod has effectively said "I'm not talking to you because you are not important enough to deserve a serious response", and has made it clear he's also going to ignore all the serious points raised by other posters
and
2) someone in a position of authority suddenly landing in the middle of a serious discussion just to counterinsult someone who dared to pick on hir mod buddy

then you really have no business wearing pink and having that stoopid looking M next to your name.

If you were a nobody like me and made the comment, fair enough. I'd have been happy to either laugh it off or trade insults.

But when you march in here with your pink uniform and badge, it's different. You're effectively saying "If anyone has a beef with one moderator, you have a beef with us all". That's intimidating to anyone.

I understand that you mods all want to stick together. You should ask yourself though why it's just you lot sticking up for each other.

As far as I can see, you were retired from these boards before my little outburst of potty mouth sent your craven friend running to you for support.

I like dogs. You always know what a dog is thinking. It has four moods. Happy, sad, cross and concentrating. Also, dogs are faithful and they do not tell lies because they cannot talk.


ohramonaModerator
(acolyte)
11/03/05 04:24 PM
But ... but ... but ... but ... "M" is for MILF! new [re: Shelle]  

Here ya go hon:





If I can't be me ... no one can!

ohramonaModerator
(acolyte)
11/03/05 04:28 PM
It's the apostrophe new [re: Monkeyboy]  

In reply to:

there is a problem with the system



Which is ... ?

In reply to:

as much as you'd like to say that you can be objective about this,



Actually, all I've said is I'm not gonna hang out where I can't be me.



If I can't be me ... no one can!


Pages in this thread: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | (show all)
Previous threadView all threadsNext thread*Threaded Mode
Jump to

Teenage Wildlife Davie Bowie | Email Us! Forums powered by WWWThreads v5.1.5perl

Teenage Wildlife Home Page Bowie's music Info on Bowie Other Media Have your say! Search the Site Help me!


Toolbar (Interact)

Etete Systems