or maybe he could lay off and only delete the more flaming posts and real spam instead of the "sort of spam"

he doesn't have to delete all that shit he does. I mean really what good has he done compared to what he has fucked up on??

The rules are the rules. While there may be other excusing circumstances, the severity of the rulebreaking is not grounds for instant vindication.

Well, Moose, I am glad that you are so confident in him, and that settles that! Why even bother when he can obviously do no harm? He is like Jesus Christ, for Christ's sake.

On this specific subject I don't really care which way I go. Note that it is significantly easier to draw the line to include "sort of spam" than not to.

Yes. Feel free to repost deletions in these cases with a more descriptive post detailing what you actually meant to say.

There are so many ways to take that.

Yeah, definitely reminds me of old SeN, but many of these locked topics should not have been locked, as much as he claims to be non-biased, it really seems like he is extremely biased.

Can you guys stop talking about "old SEN" being "great" because that is such bullshit. People complained every single time, whether or not you were here, on this exact same topic and we know exactly what you're going to say. You're just joining this bandwagon without any real ideas for improvement, asking people to do something that is impossible.

I was agreeing with Moose, as I'm sure everyone here can agree, old SeN was much more strict about what you post than it is today.

As far as I can tell by your (and mostly everyone else's) posts, the "strictness" has not changed because it's still full of crap.

Dear Doodan:
Subjectivist fallacy. However, why would a moderator be taking action against his statement if he expresses himself appropriately? If he doesn't, then that is why a moderator is taking action, not because of the subject of his message. There is opinion, and then there is how that opinion is expressed. The "how" is the realm of the moderators.

The exception would be anything that goes against the core rules, such as no hacks, wares, pornography, etc. When people argue against the rules using something like America's Bill of Rights or the First Amendment as their platform, I like to use a simple analogy to put things into perspective. My forum is my house. Like guests in my home, I expect posters to follow my house rules, or they will not be welcome in my home.

Applying that analogy to your above example about a Neo-Nazi, that would be like him walking into a Jewish home and wondering why he's getting kicked out. =oP


---------------------------------------------
Dear Esponeo:
Sometimes people being moderated actually deserve it.That wasn't the point. Non sequitur is Latin for "It does not follow", and is a logical fallacy. My meaning was that people getting pissed off does not equate to you doing a good job moderating. They are unrelated. Good moderating can result in no one being pissed off. Contrary, bad moderating can result in people being pissed off.


Good about not locking, but with deleting be wary of nitpicking. (For my definition, read #5.)


Really?
Sounds to me like they were helping to encourage him.
And look, even some actual conversation beyond compliments. Just one post after this, you locked the thread.


Avoiding the Issue with an Equivocation Fallacy as your Straw Man? C'mon, who are you trying to fool here? Do I really need to quote everything in context just to demonstrate how absurdly obtuse that comment is?

Perhaps it has something to do with your PM looking like this:
whats your problem?I would ignore that too. Well, in actuality, I wouldn't. I would yell at you to be more polite/respectful/specific/etc. Regardless, I can not say that such a PM merits any positive response.I don't talk to dead men.You will never be worthy of moderatorship with that attitude.
Later...
And there you have it, plain as day. You know I'm going to call you on this kind of stuff, so why are you wasting both our time?

My original points still stand.


None of my actions in the past few days have been motivated by anger.Maybe, maybe not, but that wasn't the point. You have shown that quality several times in the past, with the comment on dead men having been the latest. If you are taking measures to avoid responding emotionally, I applaud you and hope that it continues. However, only your actions will prove this.

Now, let's address the point you wanted to make. That within the past few days you have not responded with contempt, anger, or negative emotions of that ilk. Granted, you only specificed anger, but you were referencing my post about how you let things get to you, and the comment I quoted within showed contempt, a passive expression of anger. Thus, I think this is fair cause to broaden the definition that you cast.

You posted July 1st, 3:51am, saying that you have not acted on anger, etc, within the last few days.


Posted July 1st, 12:19am, just 4 hours earlier (literally three posts above), you wrote:
This post oozes with smug contempt. Sophomoric pigeonholing. Another facet of the same attitude. This thread got to you, and anger demands retribution. Case in point.

Dear Hercanic: You just invalidated the above post.

(Yes, I did read your post)

How long were you at SeN? And did you only go to the non-SC related forums? Because I saw virtually no off-topic comments in the SC related forums, and if there were any, there was always something relevant to the topic added in. SeN has definitely changed since I started coming to it, I can't see how you could miss it.

You guys aren't going to accomplish anything in here by bashing a moderator. Sure, you and I, dislike the actions being held by this moderator. However, bringing a topic on these forums is not a great solution. The wise thing to do was to PM Moose and politely explain the situation. If he apologizes for the previous actions, but he still wishes the moderator to stay, it's his decision. Don't get me wrong, it's a bad move for a whole community to get pissed over a moderator and still keep that moderator here without any changes made; but you have to think of all the assholes in the world (no offense, Esponeo), as well as the admin has all the right to do whatever he feels. Quit whining and either leave, or get over it.

No.

Non sequitur fallacy? No. It's not an argument and regardless it does follow.

Dear Devilesk:
Your assertions are unsupported.


Dear Cheeze:
Incorrect. *I* am not the thread. Who I talk to does not change who this thread is addressed to. Also, bear in mind all conversations contained herein are under scrutiny from the administration. Therefore, even though I direct my discourse toward Esponeo, the administration is included as an observer.

Yea, just like yours.

Devilesk, please elaborate. Otherwise your posts are simply disruptive and will be deleted.

Guys Hercanic seems to know what hes talking about, we should just see how he mods because all I'm seeing is gold from him.

Now I'm kind of pissed because I saw a couple posts from Esponeo and it seemed to me he had changed the way he was moderating and he has partially... but not enough and I have to say I'm not on his/your side anymore. Now that we can all look at the posts you've deleted I realize they're stupid reasons. I don't just hate on people could you try to lighten up like I've been saying.

@Moose I'm confused why you have such little input in this, your the one can do something about this and you idle by. This modding rant means little if you don't take any action.

Dear Zell:
While I appreciate the vote of confidence, I am not dedicated enough, time-wise, to this community to be a proper moderator.

As for Moose, when an administrator is mostly quiet about their opinion on a matter, it usually means they are watching to see where things lead. When they've reached a decision, they will make it apparent and this thread will end by their hands, one way or another. The thing about this issue is that nothing is concrete yet. It could go either way, hinging on how Esponeo acts and reacts.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Py_XSWemlyM


EDIT: Apparently it only uploaded the first three minutes.
EDIT: Okay I don't know if the whole thing is up or not. I watched it once and it ended early.

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Jul 3 2008, 4:59 am by Esponeo.

He described devilesk perfectly!

And he said excuse me! Schmid has mannerisms!

And knows how I post... >.>