I won't claim to have followed this argument from its origins way back in the ether of TW time. Nor will I claim to be remotely interested in the semantics of it, a point upon which most TW arguments either founder or simply degenerate into. Furthermore, I'm not actually interested in Beltene's original argument; that seems to be based upon someone starting as many fires as possible, then coming crying to her mates when someone gives her a bollocking for it.

I think the interesting point of this argument is, as usual, the alleged need for impartiality on the part of moderators and administrators. Certainly, unless I'm guilty of a gross misinterpretation of her latest post, that appears to be the crux of Shelle's point: that being that those in an 'elevated role' ought to act with utter impartiality.

In my experience of TW, this has never been the case, and nor should it ever become so. There has been extremely occassional evidence of mods editing too willingly, and some posters began to feel targetted. The only reason for this, as far as I can see, is that as 'repeat offenders' it's their posts that are likely to get checked more often. Nobody - resident peroxide fatboy excluded - has the time or desire to read every single thread and post on this site, so if a mod's here on 'mod-duty' they're more likely to check out the posts of people who have been known to push the boundaries most often. Be they Beltene, Monkeyboy, Strawman - it does happen! - or whoever. Of course, some slip through the net, and that's when those who did get edited kick up a fuss, and all these sympathisers start crawling out of the panelling. I don't expect, though, that K edited Beltene's posts merely because they were Beltene's. They were screen stretching, and he was there to remedy it. Where's the problem?

But that's approaching Shelle's argument from a tangent. To meet it head on, as it were, I would suggest that as neither Adam, nor any mod to my knowledge, has edited any of your posts to change the content or point, then nobody has abused any powers.

Adam doesn't like you, you don't like Adam. So what? He's as eligible to hold grudges here as anybody else. So long as he doesn't go banning you - which, I suspect, he hasn't - or abusing his administrative powers, then what's the problem? That you two hate one another is what TW has been built on. The personal attacks, the snide comments, the all out arguments are exactly what's always happened here. But there's no point in trying to draw them out to make someone's administrative powers the point of the debate; frankly, people don't give a fuck about that.

In a far more convoluted manner than I originally intended, I'm saying let go of the 'Me vs. The Mods' mentality. It sort of undermines some of the fun of your arguments. And you're sure as hell not a dumb poster - surely you can see that?

If I've missed the point, then apologies. It wouldn't be the first time...

later,
Chris...

I could stay if you asked me,
So for God's sake don't ask me to stay