Where'd Melin go?

Upon loading up the SDMB today I noticed that Melin has been replaced by Eutychus55 as moderator of MPSIMS... where'd Melin go?

Alex

Careful where you're walking, folks, it's getting mighty deep in here.

I agree with you 100%, Melin. I've had this discussion a million times. If your heritage is European, you simply have no right to an opposite opinion in matters racial. The truth is, you got hosed. You can speak out against anything .... so long as it's prudent.

Melin is no longer working as a moderator on this board, by mutual agreement.

your humble TubaDiva/SDStaffDiv
for the Straight Dope

Jenny, I never thought I have to say that you lie.

-Melin

I'm reminded of when Trotsky fell out of favor in the Soviet Union. The powers that be went as far as airbushing his face out of all official photographs and destroyed all evidence that he ever existed.

This is the first purge I've ever seen up close. It's fascinating!

Damm!
Where did the thread in the BBQ Pit go? (as if I didn't know!)

------------------
Contestant #3

Hey Melin...name names OK?

------------------
Contestant #3

They keep deleting it, folks -- spread the word before it goes again!

Here's what I posted in response to the OP -- Jenny has deleted it:


Political "in"correctness has led to me being fired as moderator for MPSIMS at
the Straight Dope. I will be posting this message in all of the related boards
(the old board, the SDMB2, and the newsgroup), since I am sure that it will be
deleted from this board as soon as anyone with the power to delete sees it, just
as the thread which gave rise to it has been deleted without comment.

Those who have known me for the last year or so, on the old board and on this
board, know that I have strong feelings that race and ethnicity are matters
which should not govern our daily affairs or our government's interaction with
us, or much else. Individuals should be evaluated as individuals on their own
merits, regardless of race or ancestry. I have argued against and will continue
to argue against those who make generalizations about groups based upon the
color of skin, rather than evaluating people based on their own merits.

Over the last few days a debate developed on the General Questions Board, on a
thread called "minorities." Don't look for it -- it's been deleted.
Fortunately, before it was deleted, I saved all of the relevant postings. On
that thread I made the comment -- as I have made elsewhere -- that it is my
belief (and my practice, and my instructions to my children) that in filling out
forms that ask for nationality and race, the only answers that should be given
are "American" (or whatever one's citizenship happens to be) and "Human." It is
my belief, stated many times, that we would do better to focus on our
commonalities rather than our differences.

Another board moderator is employed in public health. She and I have disagreed
about this issue of forms for a long time, and in our discussion this time she
pointed out that identification of race can be relevant for public health
purposes, for disease tracking, etc. This was a point I hadn't considered, and
I acknowledged that this was a legitimate use for the information, and that I
would modify my practices accordingly when filling out forms that were to be
used for such a purpose. When other posters agreed with my basic philosophy
about forms, however, this moderator told them that they just "didn't get it."
Anyone who disagreed with her position was told that "white people" (her words)
have the "luxury" to ignore or not "to worry about racial/cultural issues" (her
words), because they are white and can disappear into the mainstream. That
comment was repeated at least three times.

I ignored this comment the first or second time it was made, but I finally
responded to it, asserting that such a negative comment about a group of people
based solely upon their skin color was racist, arrogant garbage. Racial issues
affect every person in this country, regardless of race, and one's skin color
does not give one the "luxury" not to worry about those issues. I ran the post
by the moderator of General Questions before I posted it, and got no objection
to it.

Based on my response I was subjected to personal attacks as being hostile,
defensive, throwing a hissy fit, etc. In an off-board conversation I offered to
apologize for my remarks if she would apologize for hers, and she refused. She
further took the matter to Ed Zotti, who has fired me as moderator because I
would not back down from my assertion that as both a moral person and a
moderator I should not let comments which slur a group of people based on their
skin color -- whatever color that skin might be -- go unchallenged. I was told
that this was not "moderator temperment," particularly because there was another
moderator involved. It is now my perception that it is apparently okay to
publicly make statements based on skin color if one is a moderator, but it is
not okay to publicly challenge those statements if one is a moderator.

I note that was not the only poster who was offended by the remarks made by the
moderator. Other posters challenged her on that statement, from stating that it
"ruffled their feathers" to that it made them "VERY ANGRY." One of those
posters cited a history of working against bigotry and for civil rights. My own
extended family is multiracial; I have worked for minority causes and marched in
more a few protests, and my ex-Jesuit husband has been shot at at least once by
an unhappy grower for daring to stand up for the rights of migrant farmworkers
in North Carolina. Nevertheless, this moderator felt that she could summarily
dismiss my opinions and the opinions of other posters -- without knowing
anything about us except her assumptions regarding our skin color -- with the
comment that "white people" have the luxury to ignore racial issues.

In today's politically correct world it is not fashionable to bash gays, and so
on the "Gay Pride - WTF" thread in the Pit another moderator can call a member
poster a homophobe, a "jerkbag," and a "bigot" and, a month later, still be
moderating. Indeed, when a member suggested to that moderator that he should
stay out of the discussion, a board administrator came in to defend him. It is
very fashionable, and politically correct, however, to bash whites -- or to
minimize their sincerity or their understanding -- when whites make statements
on racial issues that those who believe their own racial "credentials" are more
sympathetic do not agree with.

And so the person who made the sweeping generalization about a group of people
based upon the color of their skin will remain here to moderate among you, and
the person who challenged that sweeping generalization as being an arrogant and
racist comment will not.

I want to thank the Teeming Millions -- and especially my beloved MPSIMSers --
for all the fun and support, for the EMs and the IMs that have come with being a
Board Moderator, as you have asked questions or sought assistance or shared
ideas. Your new MPSIMS moderator, Eutychus (Pat) is a great guy who was a
moderator on the old AOL board too (we could never figure what to call him --
the lone male in the midst of all those Board Goddesses! :)) My thanks to to
the other Board Moderators -- except perhaps one -- for the fun and support in
the past.

-Melin

One word, folks. SHEESH! For the love of God, people! We've had much worse wars over here! I frequented the thread in question, and there was NO REASON for Melin to be removed. *Sigh* And here I thought the SDMB was against censorship. Guess not.

Any bets on when this thread gets removed, folks?



------------------
"And the knowlege that they fear is a weapon to be used against them."
-Neil Peart, RUSH, "The Weapon"

I ran the post by the moderator of General Questions before I posted it, and got no objection to it.

I have learned in a friendly discussion with the GQ moderator that he does not remember this the way I do.

So . . . I want to apologize to Nickrz for giving the mistaken impression that he had in any way "approved" my offending post before it was posted. He did not.

-Melin

Okay, so the moderators had a serious disagreement. Melin was fired over it. Whether that action was justified or not, I can understand how it happened. People have lost paying jobs for less reason.

But why delete the thread where it happened? No matter how vicious it got, I'm sure we've all seen worse arguments. If Melin said something really heinous and offensive (which I higly doubt), and the admins wanted to make sure her statements didn't reflect badly on the SDMB, appending a disclaimer to her post would have done the trick. You know what I mean: "The opinions expressed here are not those of the Straight Dope, this message board, or its editorial staff."

And to say that the termination was by mutual agreement, when it so obviously was not? For shame, TubaDiva! The Straight Dope is a forum for fighting ignorance, and spreading misinformation goes contrary to its most basic ideals.

All in all, I must say that I'm disappointed. I have come to expect better judgement from the management around here.

I'm sure someone will say that I shouldn't jump to any conclusions, since we've only heard one side of the story. But Melin has always been a truthful person in my experience, and I have no reason to assume she would start lying now. As for the remainder of management, they're not saying anything. If this were a "disgruntled former employee" situation, I'm sure that the people up top would have no problem saying so; I take their continued silence, not as proof, but at least as circumstantial evidence that Melin is stating the facts fairly.

I expected more from SD, Tuba, and Nickrz. As far as Jill, that is better left unsaid.

Why hasn't Jill been fired?

Melin - it is obvious that you have a lot of friends who don't want to see you leave. It appears that even the lurkers are un-lurking to show their support for you. Hopefully, the support doesn't go unnoticed by the staff of SD.


------------------
>^,,^<
KITTEN

Coarse and violent nudity. Occasional language.

I'm not as bothered about Melin being fired (although I'm sympathetic to the feelings of betrayal she's probably experiencing) as I am about all these threads being deleted right and left. I think a clash of personalities is an adequate excuse for firing a moderator, but I can't think of any excuse for the administrators' Orwellian approach to shutting her up.

I agree with you Papa, but there is something more to the picture when a moderator gets fired for defending her views while another moderator (with a background with the SD) does not get fired for her bigoted comments.


------------------
>^,,^<
KITTEN

Coarse and violent nudity. Occasional language.

Damnit Ed, it's not a Pit question! Nothing to flame- just something to explain -
in plain, simple, grammatical English: why the "minorities" thread was censored; why one moderator was fired and another seemingly uncensured. These are indeed guestions that belong in this forum, not in the Pit.

-Randy-
Never thought I'd live to see Animal Farm.

Damnit Ed, it's not a Pit question! Nothing to flame- just something to explain -
in plain, simple, grammatical English: why the "minorities" thread was censored; why one moderator was fired and another seemingly uncensured. These are indeed guestions that belong in this forum, not in the Pit.
-Randy-
Never thought I'd live to see Animal Farm.

A little full disclosure would have gone a long way here.

Thank you, Melin's husband.

your humble TubaDiva

There's a long Latin name for the illogical arguement you just made, Tuba. Sorry I can't think of it right now.

I have no connection to Melin and I second what Randy just said. I don't think all the people jumping on you in the Pit right now have anymore connection to Melin than I do.

You're coming off looking like a very petty person, today. Perhaps you should sign off for the day before you make things worse.

TubaDiva is asking someone else for full disclosure? I have a mental picture of a little note: "Hey, kettle! You're black! Signed, the pot."

Whoever Highlander is, I agree with his point, and I said as much on the thread in the Pit. I think that Melin-related discussion has been moved to the flame forum because the moderators don't want anyone taking it too seriously.

This has also been asked in the pit, but I'll repeat it here: has anybody got a copy of the whole minorities thread? Lots of people want to read it, and see what got "the other moderator" so upset that she had to complain to the admins.

One caveat: Ed Zotti says that he "reserves the right" to edit the thread if anyone puts it back on the board. Somebody repost the thing, and we'll see what happens.

[[in plain, simple, grammatical English: why the "minorities" thread was censored; why one moderator was fired and another seemingly uncensured. These are indeed guestions that belong in this forum, not in the Pit.]]Melin's husband

It seems to me that the opposite is true, that the moderator who was fired, Melin, is now a simple board member who can say almost anything she wants while the other one, Jillgat, has agreed to follow the moderator rules. If the "minorities" thread gets put back up, it should be unedited by Ed Zotti OR Melin (Melin said she has "selected" posts from it). But it sounds like she wasn't fired for her views on that thread anyway, but because she complained about following board policies for moderators.

[[in plain, simple, grammatical English: why the "minorities" thread was censored; why one moderator was fired and another seemingly uncensured. These are indeed guestions that belong in this forum, not in the Pit.]]Melin's husband
It seems to me that the opposite is true, that the moderator who was fired, Melin, is now a simple board member who can say almost anything she wants while the other one, Jillgat, has agreed to follow the moderator rules. If the "minorities" thread gets put back up, it should be unedited by Ed Zotti OR Melin (Melin said she has "selected" posts from it). But it sounds like she wasn't fired for her views on that thread anyway, but because she complained about following board policies for moderators.

Change it to "refused to follow board policies for moderators" and you have the situation exactly.

No evil censorship, no victimization of a civil rights heroine, no firing for being politically incorrect. No exciting story of overcoming oppression. (A sad story, though.)

However by this late in the day everybody is happy with the story as they perceive it and don't want to be confused with the facts, so we'll just keep this between ourselves, okay?

your humble TubaDiva/SDStaffDiv
for the Straight Dope

[[No evil censorship, no victimization of a civil rights heroine, no firing for being politically incorrect. No exciting story of overcoming oppression. (A sad story, though.)]]

Stop it! (Fingers in ears, humming the Donna Reed theme song to drown you out).

These matters are addressed in the thread, "REPOSTED: 'Fired for being politically incorrect,'" in the BBQ Pit.

If this is about policy, then this thread does seem most appropriate--and it's shorter, too. Ed said that Melin was fired for 'getting into a public dispute with another board moderator', but it doesn't seem to follow since the two participants were taken out to the wood shed together and (correct me if I'm wrong) up until that dressing down neither was a candidate for the ax. If Melin 'got it', then she wouldn't have been fired, right? It appears that Ed ordered the two to assume the position. Jill did; Melin did not. What is unclear to me is whether Melin refused to back down on her position and agreed to cease and desist publicly at the same time. If so, then what we have here is a 'bad attitude'. Melin? Do you have a bad attitude? Dear, I have one, too. It is what you get when you don't think like the group.

TubaDiva,

You're proving yourself to be bitter, petty, and defensive. You're also setting yourself against the SDMB regs, which I don't think is very smart of you at this point.

In your sweeping generalization that "everybody" is being closed minded about the issue, you are suggesting that you (and possibly one other poster) are the only ones being objective about the issue. That's insulting, and it's clearly untrue.

Claiming that we "don't want to be confused with the facts" is particularly unfounded in light of the fact that we have fought tooth and nail to see the original offending post. Besides that, it shows a lack of respect for the SDMB users, something I find unconsciencable for a moderator.

You owe us an apology, TubaDiva. If you continue to maintain that we, the SDMB users, don't know what we're talking about, then we don't want you to be our moderator.

Sincerely,
Your Quadell

[According to Pliny]

Yes! I find it to be an abuse of a moderator's position to go back and delete comments that they may regret that they made. That's a luxury that the rest of us do not have, and makes it impossible to debate with a moderator on a fair level.

[Drain Bead]

Somehow I'm not surprised. Jenny had some serious abuse of power problems on the AOL board as well, which was one of the main reasons why I left it. If someone saved that post, I suggest you repost it, or at least e-mail it to people who ask to see it.

[Falcon]

I don't have it saved. However, I do remember the gist of it, and will email that to whoever asks. Fair warning - I'm away for 2 days this weekend, so response time may not be the greatest.

[Drain Bead]

Consider this asking.

[Big Iron]

I like and respect Jenny.

I like and respect Jill.

I like and respect Melin.

[Note: Goddesses listed in alphabetical order]


There is plenty of blame (and also some corresponding justification, albeit less) to go around for all three regarding this unfortunate incident.

I am especially sorry to see the SD "community" divided into personally hostile factions over this affair, although to a certain extent I guess that was inevitable.

I suggest that everyone should do their best to desist from launching ad hominem (or ad feminem) attacks in discussing this issue.

I also hope the principals can settle their differences and be friends (or at least friendly) once again.

That is all.

[TubaDiva]

No C&P.

A personal statement.

I have no wish to argue with anybody here. It serves no useful purpose, enlightens no one, brings nothing of meaning in its wake.

People in this forum have agreed to disagree. The issue has been fought to a standstill.

Nothing has happened to change the situation in any way. Nothing has happened to cause a change of mind or to touch anybody's heart.

What purpose has been served?

What purpose is being served now?

What else can be said?

People will believe as they wish, for whatever reasons they need.

Acknowledging that differences do exist and that nothing can be done about them, let's move forward.

And on this subject, in this thread, I have nothing more to say.

your humble TubaDiva

[Drain Bead]

Hmmm...how long has it been now, with no response to quadell's suggestion? I think I'll reply, just to move this to the top of the list.

Jenny, we're waiting for you to be a big girl...and we know you're reading this. It's your forum.

[Falcon]

I'm hmming as well, DB. IIRC, Jenny did post a response, which I notice has now been deleted. Since it was deleted for a reason (I assume), I won't give the response in full. (Or what I can remember.) Suffice to say it wasn't an apology.

Just wanted to keep this at the top of the list....

[kayT]

Is anyone else as tired as I am of reading that something got deleted???

[Deceased Equine]

We now have heard from all the people involved in the fray (Ed, Jill, Melin, TUBADIVA), all saying "Whoa."

I think the posting from Melin, acknowledging the equal validity of different perspectives, was very mature and sensitive.

Now it's time to stop beating me.

[Contestant #3]

It's whoa (for me) when I say it's whoa. You opinion under your alternative handle means squat to me.

Of course you could always delete my posts....

------------------
Contestant #3

[According to Pliny]

Yeah! Who's the dead horse and why is he/she too cowardly to post under his/her own handle?

BTW - the GQ forum is down, and I don't have anything better to do than point out other people's hypocracy. There's ample opportunity for that lately!

[Big Iron]

Lord -- you don't think that "Deceased Equine" post was mainly just a joke, as well as being a well-intentioned and correct plea to give the subject a rest, huh? I saw nothing the least bit "cowardly" about it.

Meanwhile, what a surprise it is to see that C3 would like to see the personal vitriol continue.

[TubaDiva]

BTW - the GQ forum is down,

Our intrepid Reader tech staff tells us the problem has been fixed.

Remember that in any upgrade, there's bound to be bugs and we may have a few more of these bumps along the way.

your humble TubaDiva/SDStaffDiv
for the Straight Dope

Tuba is being Tuba again? tsk tsk

John the Cyberian54

------------------

For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism.

[Lew]

I am a member, and also a principle participant on the thread in question. (Though you would never know it if you read the butchered versions you have recieved so far-see my thread about requesting it in it's entirety by email) I have already posted in other threads and am still trying to catch up.
Ed's explanation of the firing was that it happened because she got into a public dispute with another moderator..I have a lot of problems with accusing Melin of this. Here is the MAIN one that I don't intend to see swept under the rug here. What you are not being told (keeping in mind this is all out of context) is:
1. Long before Melin's "offense", Jill had made a POINT of posting as STAFF. Melin's post, that got her fired, was signed specifically "Privately, not as moderator".
2.Ed also goes on to eloquently explain that he had made a previous decision concerning the discussion of board issues in a public forum. He is now choosing to "stretch" this to include this issue. Far as I can tell, there was no decision until this came up. So, did she get fired for breaking a rule that didn't exist?
3.In the face of the decision to make this a policy, Melin apparantly continued to stand up for her right to express her opinions and Jill told Ed what he wanted to hear.
4. It is evident to me, through the entire handling of this, that what Ed wants is a right to censor. Let's hear it for "stamping out ignorance!!
5. I have apologized and explained my absence on other threads. But I am back now, and I am appalled at the lack of "management" on this. (including the fact that Nick failed to move this discussion early on) If it is true that we are presented with this forum with the pretext that Cecil presents..then why is Ed acting this was?
6. I am also insulted that most all of my posts were deleted. I am the person Melin had the audacity to quote back to Jill!
7. I see from the chat about the new system that management and members alike do not like to be bothered with reading an entire thread before throwing in their 2 cents. This is the main reason this thread began to fall apart and was to be my next thread at the time. This was a serious and valid debate, and deserved to be treated as such. Until all this happened it was the most honest and genuine discussion I had been involved in here. If someone is threatened by being asked to address specific points and comments they have made, then they should bow out. I was continually frustrated by Jill's responses. She claims to love debate, but I question that she understands the premise. When a point is put directly to you, and you do not respond on point--you lose that one. She repeatedly ignored these and only continued to restate her position. I am the one that expressed being VERY ANGRY..Had Melin not said what she had, I would have really let loose, we would have ended up in the pit and she would not have been able to run to Ed. Since it was Melin, she had this option. Her last post was to, as far as I can tell, make up wrongs that had been done her and to inform everyone that she was "hitting the reply button on top of the thread and not going near the rest of it. Life is too short." To be fair, these remarks were submerged in other text where she justified herself and apologize..but frankly, IN CONTEXT, it sounded more like a child stamping her feet than a sincere apology.
8. Melin says she offered to apologize, publically, if Jill would and that Jill refused. Nowhere have I seen anyone refute this, so I must assume it is true. So where is Melin wrong and WHAT AM I MISSING?

Jill, Ed and Tuba. Interesting.

Nothing has changed.

:(

JOHN the Cyberian54

[Deceased Equine]

Ouch, ouch, ouch, ouch.

Will the beatings never stop?

Is there any purpose or point to these repetitive rants?

Ouch, ouch.

Dead Horse/Deceased Equine, quit it. You're being excruciatingly annoying.


------------------
"Me fail English? That's unpossible!"

"English? Who needs that? I'm never going to England."

[Deceased Equine]

Laura, that's really funny. Involuted. Or is it convoluted?

I post essentially the same message in several different places -- short and concise -- and I'm being "excruciatingly annoying." Wrong! You should have said that I was beating a dead horse.

Other folks post essentially the same tirade -- long and venomous -- in several different places, and I say they're beating a dead horse.

Convoluted. Or is it involuted?

You are being neither convoluted nor involuted. You're simply being annoying.



------------------
"Me fail English? That's unpossible!"

"English? Who needs that? I'm never going to England."

[TubaDiva]

8. Melin says she offered to apologize, publically, if Jill would and that Jill refused. Nowhere have I seen anyone refute this, so I must assume it is true. So where is Melin wrong and WHAT AM I MISSING?

I sure hope I won't live to regret this. . .

There's a lot that you're missing, including most of the real facts of the case, but arguing with you is not going to make a difference.

I quoted the last because that is so incorrect it screams for rebuttal. Jill has tried to resolve this situation all along, in public, in mail, in IMs.

Jill hasn't even been in the country the past few days and has not been posting or reading the board. To make statements that she cannot answer and to then claim them as truth because she does not answer is quite unfair -- and a distortion of the truth.

your humble TubaDiva/SDStaffDiv
for the Straight Dope

Of course, I have the IM where I offered to apologize for my choice of words if she would apologize for hers.

So do you, Jenny. I sent it to you right after it occurred.

-Melin

First of all, the following in no way, shape or form is intended to represent the views, opinions, or policy of The Straight Dope organization, The Chicago Reader, any former or present staff members, or the Master hisownself. This is a personal statement by me, Ranger Jeff, The Idol of American Youth.

All of the people directly involved in this situation are friends of mine. I don't believe that ANYone involved is happy about what happened and how things were resolved. I know some friendships were ended because of this, I don't think anyone is happy about this. I'm sure not.

I think some tincture of time would aid immensely in putting this situation to rest. I don't think that's gonna happen, because there are some folks who take great joy in squirting hi test on smoldering embers. I can't do anything about that, other than try to not add to the conflaguration.

And while I'm at it....

I like the new reply window. I like the pagination feature on long threads. I like toasting peeps over a fire.

If anyone chooses to take offense at what I've said, get over it or learn to live with it. I've had battles chosen for me before and I didn't like it much. I'll chose my own battles now, thankyouverymuch.

Happy trails to all of you,




------------------
Ranger Jeff
The Idol of American Youth

[Drain Bead]

What the dead horse doesn't realize is that quite a few people are really pissed off about this, and a few cutesy posts under a fake name isn't going to change that anytime soon. In fact, the fake name part of it pisses me off even more, although I won't speak for anyone else. If I speak for someone else, Tuba might make an angry post about me and then delete it before I get a chance to see it.

[Devilfish]

[As far as I can tell, you can do one of three things with this message. You can delete it without mention, you can delete it and ask that it be moved (which I believe is highly inappropriate), or you can leave it be and allow individuals to derive their own opinions. Your call.]

Frankly, this whole fiasco has caused me to lose respect for the three affiliates of the Straight Dope that I had the most respect for: Melin, Jill, and Ed. Among the staff/moderators, Melin and Jill are the only ones who consistently provide well reasoned, well informed, and complete answers. Ed's researching abilities exceed those of anyone else associated with the organization, staff or otherwise (and that's saying a hell of a lot considering some of the people associated with the SD). I suppose Dex deserves a nod at this point too, but since his considerable knowledge is in areas that don't interest me, I really have no perspective from which to judge him. Put quite simply, these people are unmatched by the rest of the staff and members. None of the rest can even come close to their abilities and knowledge. Respect doesn't come easily from me, and there are damned few people in this world who I have ever truly respected. Yet these three have earned a tremendous amount.

Now the three people I respect most out of the whole lot of you are acting like children. Furthermore, one more of the staff who I've always felt rather neutral about (as they've never really done anything exceptionally well but moderate, which they _have_ done exceptionally well up until now) is acting in an even more childish manner.

We've always had a problem with children in the various incarnations of the SD message boards. Hell, on days that we were on the Welcome screen, it wasn't at all unusual to have four or more children come running in and ask stupid questions, all the while screaming with feigned indignation at the unfair treatment they had received. Frankly, though, in all of my wildest dreams, I had never even imagined the possibility that we would be overrun by four children who were all members of the staff.

I say in absolute honesty, that in all the years that I've read the SD boards, I have never witnessed four individuals disgrace themselves as severely as they have.

I hope that you will pause for a moment to think about that.

Because I've been thinking about it for a week, hoping that perhaps I could find some justification for their behavior. How on Earth could three people that I respected so much act like this? I have come to the conclusion that I am simply a bad judge of character.

It has become obvious that the principles of the staff of the SD and my principles are now in opposition. My principles (where they intersect with the SD) tell me that I should work to eliminate ignorance. I don't know what the principles of the staff are, though I used to think that they were the same. Clearly, I was mistaken. Their mission is no longer mine. Perhaps it never was.

My contribution here is not a large one. Its absence in the past has meant little, and there is no reason to think that it would mean more now. However, whatever insignificant amount that I am capable of contributing, you simply do not deserve. In the future, if I feel compelled to contribute information, I will post it in misc.facts.straight-dope and provide a reference in the thread. Anyone who truly wants the information can get to it easily enough. I can no longer find it within myself to contribute to this board directly.

-Bob, signing off

[Lew]

TubaDiva-Obviously, I do not have the facts on what happened in the office, or in IM's. None of us do. The excerpt you chose to get so angry about, was a pretty simple straight forward statement and question. It came from Melin's post, it evidently took place before she got fired, and, to this point, Ed and Jill have not refuted it. Jill may well be out of the country...she has, however, posted to the new minorities thread that was started for those of you that actually want
to continue this discussion. (I believe it's in Great Debates)

As for the rest of the facts, I seem to be one of the only people that DOES know the facts of what went on in that thread...Everything that I have seen reposted is butchered so badly that you can't tell WHAT happened.

You and I have NEVER communicated before. Where do you get off implying that I am a liar and can't be "argued" with??!! I was, in fact, VERY involved in that thread. I think that gives me, at least, as much right as all the other people, to interject what I know and how I feel about the situation.

I'm beginning to wonder if, even you folks, have an honest copy of the thread.

[JillGat]

Regarding my posting "officially" as a staff member on that thread, my post by SDSTAFFJill was a mistake. The computer I use at work puts that screen name in by default (though I don't even use it anymore), and I didn't see it in time to change it. My moderator screen name on this message board is "JillGat." I apologize for the confusion that caused. Although moderators are free to post our views and opinions on the message board, we are never really posting as "individuals as opposed to moderators" because the board adds "moderator" under our names (unless we use pseudonyms, which I don't do). I support the SDMB policy that moderators not fight or attack each other publically on the message board. I think it should be possible for us all to express our views without insulting each other. I apologized a few times in that thread and I apologize again if I have insulted anyone.
Jill

You all agree to the arbitrary and capricious censorship rules of the SDMB when you post on this board. So, why are you so surprised? It was that way on the AOL SDMB too. The "moderators" do not moderate, are cliquish, wield power at whim and exercise bias in their "evaluations." It will NEVER change.

By agreeing to these unfair rules you are enslaving yourselves to tyrants. Duhhhhhhhh


------------------

For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism.

[Lew]

John--You are absolutely correct...and that is the main thing that most of us are angry about. Unfortunately, many of us chose this board because it operates under the copywrited name of "SD...fighting to stamp out ignorance." It is represented as a forum for freedom of expression and thought. The actions of this staff (deletions, etc.) is in direct opposition of this message. It is my belief that Cecil and the Reader should think about what they are attaching there copywrite to.

Jill--I have inquired, in other threads, if anyone has a copy of what went on after the night of the 2nd. The last posting (of Melin's) that I have is the is the one where she expressed that your statement (not you) was garbage spelled B-_-_-_.....Before that she was personally attacked by Terey, and after that all of us were accused of being "hens having a hissy fit" by someone new to the thread. I haven't heard anything from you, until now, either through the boards or by email...and we both know that I am the one you think Melin took a stand with against you. If something else took place, publicly, I have asked to be filled in...so far, to no avail. The most extensive reposting I have read is butchered by half, the only post of mine that is there is my last and the one Melin quoted from. The only thing that posting accomplished was to cast a very different light on the discussion. What am I to think?!

[VegForLife]

John--You are absolutely correct.

Well, I thought I'd heard everything, but I guess I was wrong.

Lew, I'm assuming you didn't frequent the old AOL board. If that's the case, and if John's on this board to stay for a while, I urge you to stick around so that you can publicly regret that statement. No flame intended there, it's just that. . . we'll, you'll see.

"SD...fighting to stamp out ignorance."

I'm not sure if you intended that to be a direct quote, but I believe the actual phrase is, "Fighting Ignorance Since 1973 (it's taking longer than we thought)." What you quoted may appear elsewhere, but I haven't seen it. I'm not trying to be overly critical there, but since you used quotations, I thought you might want to make sure the phrase you used was the one you intended.

It is represented as a forum for freedom of expression and thought.

You know, in all the years that I've been involved in one way or another with the various incarnations of The Straight Dope Message Board, I've never seen it represented as a forum for "freedom of expression and thought," at least insofar as I think I understand your meaning. To me, it's always been a place for people to ask questions, get answers (and flames), and be entertained. I have *always* assumed that my continued participation was at the whim of the staff, and they had every right to dump any post of mine for any or no reason. That knowledge hasn't diminished my enjoyment of the board in the least -- and I have most certainly had posts dumped!

The actions of this staff (deletions, etc.) is in direct opposition of this message.

Maybe I'm the only one, but I completely disagree. Maybe that's just because I don't agree with your apparent assessment of "What The Board Is."

Rich

[Big Iron]

[[John--You are absolutely correct ]] Lew


Talk about things you don't hear very often ...

[Drain Bead]

Well, Bob and Rich, if anything can be said in Cyb's defense, it's that it seems he's gone to college since I've last seen him. I'm amazed he can spell "arbitrary" or "capricious," much less use them both in a sentence, and correctly, no less! Hell, take away the trademark "duhhhhhh" and he sounds like anyone else on this board.

(I did, however, get a huge chuckle out of the fact that the first person to respond to him agreed with him. Wonders never cease.)

[Lew]

OK folks...I obviously was not clear. I was being sarcastic. I agreed with his statement about what other boards do. As I continued to say, that is exactly why people are upset. They don't expect to be arbitrarily censored here.

I am sorry for the confusion...if you have read any of my other posts on this subject, you know that I am NOT happy about this situation.

[VegForLife]

Hmmm. . . I'm not sure I understand your point, Lew. It doesn't look to me like John said anything about what "other boards do," and I'm not really sure where your sarcasm is. No matter, my sarcas-o-meter has been off before, perhaps it's malfunctioning again.

if you have read any of my other posts on this subject, you know that I am NOT happy about this situation.

Yep, that's clear. It still sort of surprises me, though, that everyone's so uptight about this, and clamoring for the "original thread," when Ed made it clear that that wasn't the reason that anyone was fired, or resigned, or whichever it was. But whatever. I have no desire to beat the dead horse, lest it come and berate me. :)

Oh, and in the spirit of "full disclosure," yes, I'm a staff member, although just barely: I'm not a moderator, but I've contributed to a few mailbag items.

Rich

[Lew]

Ok, so my apology and clarification wasn't good enough for you... you just want to reveal me as the angry, senseless or inept individual that you evidently see me as. (oh well)
BTW: Had you listened to the people that are so angry about this, you would know that, the main issue is not the firing.

I don't need to know if you are "staff". I have never responded to ANYONE here based on who they are. I actually try to understand what they are attempting to say. I know that is not a common practice here and it is becoming increasingly clear that I am now considered someone to take offense at, by some of you. That is really too bad, but I'll try to cope. Besides, I will soon be joining Quadell, Papabear and the many others that have left in protest.

FTR: the other boards I was referring to was his reference to the AOL SD board. I'm sorry, if I don't know all that history (as I have stated elsewhere, and as my profile shows, I am relatively new here.

Ed's first explanation of why he fired Melin was because she had argued "publicly" with another staff member.

[VegForLife]

Ok, so my apology and clarification wasn't good enough for you...you just want to reveal me as the angry, senseless or inept individual that you evidently see me as.

You know, I don't think anything I've written in response to your posts so far would give any reasonable person that impression, Lew. But now that you mention it. . .

I don't need to know if you are "staff".

Well, that's nice to know, but I was posting this for the benefit of others who have indicated elsewhere on the board that "full disclosure" would be nice. I can direct you to specific posts, if you haven't seen them.

Besides, I will soon be joining Quadell, Papabear and the many others that have left in protest.

The door swings quickly, so. . .

Ed's first explanation of why he fired Melin was because she had argued "publicly" with another staff member.

One of us must have mis-read something. I'm fairly certain we're not going to agree on who it was. And it doesn't really matter. You can go on being angry, I'll go on being amused. . .

Rich

[Lew]

I rest my case.

[Lew]

BTW, for anyone else that doesn't know what I mean by Ed's original explanation...It is in his 8/3/99 posting in "Repost:..."

[Deceased Equine]

Police (without moving): Yes, yes, we go!
General: These pirates slay.
Police: Yes, yes, we go!
General: Then do not stay.
Police: We go, we go.
General: Then why all this delay?
Police: All right! We go, we go!
Yes, forward on the foew!
Ho! ho! ho! ho!
We go, we go, we go!
Tarantara-ra-ra!
General: Then forward on the foe!
All: Yes! forward!
Police: Yes! forward!
General: Yes! but you don't go
Police: We go, we go, we go!
All: At last they really go! Tarantara-ra-ra!

From Pirates of Penzance, by Gilbert and Sullivan.

[Contestant #3]

Rich says:

Look at me, look at me everybody...I'm STAFF...aren't I special!!

Fuck you Rich and the Deceased Equine that you rode in on.

You guys would love for this situation to fade away but its going to take a lot longer than you'd like. Obviously, most of the STAFF still does not "get it".

toodles,

------------------
Contestant #3

[VegForLife]

Contestant #3, you're just so. . . clever. I thought you meant something else when you said you liked to eat dead animals.

But yeah, you're right, I'm special. And you're not.

Rich

[Contestant #3]

Dream on carrot boy...

------------------
Contestant #3

[Big Iron]

[[Look at me, look at me everybody...I'm STAFF...aren't I special!! ]] C3


Seeing as that sort of attention-craving is the primary field-mark of trollicus spaceballus, that vapid accusation is really a riot.

I posted to this board last week commenting on how you give up your freedom when you post to the SDMB. I see that it was "edited" out, LOL, and not put on the board. I guess Tuba and Ed do not want any views that they feel sheds truth on the proceedings on this board. Nothing has changed.

I'll bet mine was not the only post "censored" out.

JOHN the Cyberian54


------------------

For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism.

[David B]

Hey, John, you might want to learn how to use the MB before you toss around accusations.

There are two pages to this thread. Your post took place on page 2. Of course, if you can't figure that out, I'm not sure you'll ever see this message explaining it, but what the heck. At least this way people who can figure it out will know your accusation was untrue.

The message you posted is still right here on page 2. If you manage to see this message, just page up a few times and you'll see it, posted 8-10-99 at 6:48 AM. Lew and Drain Bead even responded to your message.

[Contestant #3]

Hey David,

Don't you think that you could have responded with a little less acrimony? Oh I'm sorry, what was I thinking? A moderator that operates with a "moderate" demeanor? nah!!

------------------
Contestant #3

[JillGat]

David was responding to an accusation of "censorship."

[Contestant #3]

Way to go JillGat, you get an A+ for the day for rationalizing David's rudeness!!

That's the SDMB way of doing things...who cares about right and wrong as long as the moderators publically stick up for one another...

------------------
Contestant #3

[C K Dexter Haven]

Been said already. Viscount Melbourne, one of Queen Victoria's Prime Ministers, said to his cabinet: "It doesn't matter what stand we take on this issue, as long as we all take the same stand together."

Seriously, though, Con -- Read Cyb's post, which (falsely) accuses David of deleting posts. Re-read David's response. You really think that was out of line?

And the answer is: no, Con#3 has not conscious thought, he only says the most inflammatory thing he can, because he's such a [ CENSORED by CKDextHavn, Administrator]

[Contestant #3]

No, YOU re-read it. His post said nothing about David. Didn't even mentioned David by name...

I think that I'm going to track down the section in the book of nettiquette that refers to the proper and expected behavior of a moderator.

Apparently, you and your cronies:

a. Haven't read it

b. Read it but forgot it

c. Read it, but figure that you are above it

d. Couldn't really give a damm because your
SDMB power has gone to your heads

You guys really set a great example out here you know?



------------------
Contestant #3

[C K Dexter Haven]

Oooops. I apologize, I had read Cyb's accusation on a prior visit, and so didn't reread it, I only looked at David's response coming fresh from the Great Debates forum. So I was incorrect when I said that Cyb had accused David falsely; I should have said that Cyb accused Tuba and Ed falsely (and, by extensions, all moderators).

David replied.

You thought David's reply was immoderate. I think you're full of yourself. If a Moderator said "Good morning" to you, you would think it was sarcastic or insulting.

[jab1]

Oh, boy, was THAT ugly!

Guys, this Board is the sole property of The Chicago Reader, Inc., and since they are a private entity not affiliated in any way with any government agency, they can delete anyone's post at any time, delete any threads they care to because it's THEIR property, NOT yours. It says so in the copyright notice in the bottom of every page of every thread. I get the feeling that some of you haven't read it. It also means they have the right to ban anyone because posting is a PRIVILEGE and not a RIGHT. You post with THEIR permission and if you don't agree with it, go start a message board of your own.

Deleting and/or editing posts or entire threads does not violate the First Amendment because that Amendment applies ONLY to the government and NOT the private sector.

Thanks, Melin, for providing me the link to this thread, though I may not have used it the way you wanted me to. Sorry you were suspended, but I'm still not sure exactly what happened.

------------------
>< DARWIN >
____L___L__

I didn't want you to "use" it at all. I'm sorry to see it back up in "live" space. You asked for information upon which to make your own determinations, and I sent it to you.

I'm not getting drawn back into this debate. Again, I am sorry that you saw fit to post on this thread and revive it.

-Melin

[jab1]

I'm just not doing at all well lately, am I? Still, I think I made valid points in the rest of my post. This will be the last I say about the matter on this board, in email or anywhere else.

------------------
>< DARWIN >
____L___L__