REPOST: "Fired for being politically incorrect"

Earlier this evening I had all instances of Melin's post "Fired for being politically incorrect" pulled. On reflection, I should have left it up in the Pit, so I'm reposting.

Concerning the substance of Melin's post, I'll just say that the issue is not political correctness, but rather getting into a public dispute with another board moderator. I have had a talk with the other moderator and do not expect this to happen again.

Here's Melin's post:

-----

I am posting this here as well as in other forums because I know not everyone reads every forum, and I'd like for as many of the Teeming Millions to see this as possible.
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
Former Board Goddess

Jeeze, Ed. I liked it better when it looked like you were trying to cover something up. You've just sucked all the intrigue out of the situation!

In all seriousness, I'm curious about that too -- if two moderators were involved in a dispute, why was only one of them fired? Compared to some of the stuff found here in the Pit, the "minorities" thread was tame -- and unoffensive. If one person (moderator or not) is offended by another, they can settle it between them -- here in the Pit, by e-mail, or by guns at ten paces if they want. It's the firing people part that I'm not getting.

It's been my opinion that moderators should not get involved in ANY discussion whatsoever on the board that they moderate, period. Quietly monitoring for abuses and closing down super-long threads; that's about the extent of what it should mean to be a moderator: a lurker with power.

I don't post alot, but I'm read almost all of the threads. If you are going to fire one moderator, then fire the other one. When I punish my children for fighting, I don't send one to their room but let the other one keep playing.

Good point, RTA. However, on the thread in question, neither person involved in this dispute was the moderator of GQ. Papabear did have a good point - this does lend a hand to the argument for moderators to post comments to a thread under a different screen name.

And jodih, I've made the same points you did. Compared to some of the fights that have occurred on this board, that thread was nothing!

------------------
"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.Me

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

What's wrong with a public debate between moderators? Why is it different than a debate between two members? Moderators are human too, and we all understand that; no one expects them to be perfectly neutral. As long as they're not abusing their power and deleting each other's posts or something, what's the harm?

------------------
"Eppur, si muove!" - Galileo Galilei

What a load of crap. Melin is, 'scuse me, WAS the moderator for MPSIMS... and as the Minorities thread was not in that forum, she was not acting as a moderator in her postings. It's completely ridiculous, not to mention plain wrong, to have her removed as a moderator of an entirely different forum. She did a wonderful job in MPSIMS, this was completely uncalled for. Nickrz, as the moderator of GQ, was fully within his rights to delete or edit Melin's posts, but there is absolutely no reason to strip her of her well-deserved status. If this is the way it's done, then I recommend that Nickrz be fired for posting things like (paraphrasing) "Get the fuck out!" and the like in BBQ threads. Doesn't make sense does it? Because Nickrz still does a good job of moderating GQ. Melin's opinions and postings were not based on junk... they were well thought out, and intelligently presented. So, Jill and Nickrz didn't agree with her. Too damn bad. She didn't agree with them either and I don't see anything about them being ousted. I truly am stunned that this has happened. I thought the purpose of the Straight Dope was to fight ignorance, not perpetuate it.

Guess I've finally got to post on this great message board.

I've been lurking here since literally day one. I wasn't on AOL, so wasn't involved in those boards, but read the weekly columns religiously. I read a lot of message boards, and post to a few on a regular basis (I'm one of the "old regulars" on snopes).

I have to agree that the censorship shown here is way out of line. I don't always agree with Melin, but her views are just as valid as anyone elses. If you want to "draw the line" between moderator and regular poster, then just about everyone here should be fired.

Thank you for re-posting this message so others can follow this saga. Remember the credo of the Straight Dope that you are "Fighting Ignorance"... Let's continue to do so here even if it goes against the agenda of another moderator.

Yeah... I know I'm a Junior Member... respond and free me!!!

-Spud

ChrisCTP -

::Applause:::

My thoughts exactly.

Well, I've gotta say -- this whole thing was clearly VERY badly handled. I didn't frequent the "minorities" thread, so I don't know the specifics of the debate but it certainly seems unfair that only one of the offending moderators was fired. Perhaps a better way of handling this would have been to clarify the rules against moderator debate -- rules, BTW, that don't seem to have been enforced previously. Since the firing was public (or at least has become so), I think the powers that be ought to publicly defend the reason to fire Melin retain the other moderator. Otherwise this may all fester and ruin what has been a great board and a nifty on-line community.

------------------
Jess
Full of 'satiable curtiosity

Sheesh. In my previous post "publicly defend the reason to fire Melin" should read "publicly defend the decision to fire Melin."

Jess (who was trying to talk and type at the same time)

What a load of crap. Melin is, 'scuse me, WAS the moderator for MPSIMS... and as the Minorities thread was not in that forum, she was not acting as a moderator in her postings. It's completely ridiculous, not to mention plain wrong, to have her removed as a moderator of an entirely different forum. She did a wonderful job in MPSIMS, this was completely uncalled for.

Absolutely! I haven't been here that long but I never thought I would have witnessed something so unjust on this forum.

I've seen other moderators post some really rude things. Why weren't they forcibly removed for the moderatorship?

The whole thing seems absurd.

I go away for a few days and what happens? You all go insane on me. I thought I was dealing with adults on these boards, for the most part, at least. Now I find petty, pig-ignorant behavior running rampant among moderators and administrators alike. Is it the heat?

Melin, I thought you were a delightful moderator of MPSIMS and I shall miss you.

Nickrz, you weasel - get a backbone. If things were going awry on YOUR board, why didn't YOU handle it? And how about standing up for Melin? I seem to remember a thread, since deleted, originally posted by C#3 when he was threatened with expulsion - you were quite clear about your views on censorship then, before you became a moderator and tasted power for the first time.

You all disappoint me greatly.

Well, since my previous post of support got deleted along with Melin's original post, I'll repeat it.

Melin, this is a drag. I'm very sorry to hear it happened and I think you are owed a huge apology.

Hey, Ed - Would you care to give us your story of what happened here? 'Cause if it happened the way Melin says then you come out lookin' real bad here.



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

For what it's worth; I have never threatened anyone with expulsion, nor have I ever deleted any thread (much less one of C3's).

I have always been quite clear on my views on censorship. I'm dead-set against it. If someone has a different view of what I've said on that subject, I invite them to search my archives and refresh their memory.

I think it's rather amusing that since the original brouhaha ocurred in GQ, many people assume I was directly involved. I was not.

Melin has already explained, to my satisfaction, the misunderstanding that lead to my being dragged into her post. My role was a tangential and completely inconsequential one, but I suppose you are all free to imagine anything you like.

If you think I am trying to divorce myself from this issue, you are entirely correct.
I strove mightily to stay out of it from the get-go, but was found guilty on the basis of my moderation of the forum where this unseemly tragedy took place.

My job here is to serve and protect the interests of The Straight Dope Message board,
and in that I will brook no quarter. I stand behind Ed and Tuba and the rest of The Straight Dope staff not because of blind loyalty or some sort of evil cabal - but because I know the facts of the matter.

Yeah, but why did just one of them get fired? Was it just the caucasian moderator
that got the ax?

For your information, C3, since you rarely bother to be in possession of a fact before you open your big goddamned mouth, JillGat and Melin are both white. And they both have multiracial families.

Melin, I would not have had this happen to you. I've always felt that you (and, indeed, the rest of the moderators both here and on the AOL SDMB) were always fair. And I have, obviously, been able to disagree with you publicly without repercussion.

I think the whole thing could have been largely avoided if Jill had said, "The only people who have the luxury of ignoring race as a factor also happen to be white." It's a small but subtle difference, and a sentiment with which I agree.

Not having read the original minorities thread, I'm not going to venture an opinion on the actions that have been taken. However, I have read some people's suggestion that board moderators should have a moderator screen name and a seperate non-moderator screen name. In my opinion, that's a bad idea. I can foresee the possibility that people could be having problems with moderators and not realize it. You could get into an argument with Mike King and then find your posts being deleted by moderator Gnik Ekim.

Folks, bottom line:

The reality of our society is that it is acceptable to talk about racism against non-whites. However, open your mouth about racism against whites -- even to the extent of arguing that it is possible (and many will shout you down claiming it is not) -- and you have a problem!

It all boils down to Melin standing up and pointing out that someone was being racist regarding whites, and she got sacked for it, because that's not an "acceptable" view.

Semantics and "he said, she said" debates aside, that's what happened.

I expected better from TSD. I didn't realize they too were an arm of the Ministry of Information...

NICKRZ says:

My job here is to serve and protect the interests of The Straight Dope Message board, and in that I will brook no quarter. I stand behind Ed and Tuba and the rest of The Straight Dope staff not because of blind loyalty or some sort of evil cabal - but because I know the facts of the matter.

"To serve and protect"? What -- you're a Board Cop? Well, you apparently didn't do a very good job of keeping the peace on your beat. And could you possibly sound any more pompous?

We are all adults here and non of us are out to do anything that would harm of threaten the message board, which gives us so much entertainment and information. The moderators and management would be well-served to assume we can handle things maturely unless and until it is proven otherwise. It's nice to know that you stand behind the Straight Dope Staff because you know the facts -- bully for you. But you must recognize that the posters do not know the facts and no one will TELL us what the heck happened. So your assurances of your loyalty and the rightness of your position cut no ice here. If you want our support you're going to have to explain what's going on.

I've gotta go with jodih, on this one, Nick. Your ass is in for a lot of wear and tear if you stay on that fence much longer.

Excellently put, Jodi.


------------------
------------
--Rowan
Shopping is still cheaper than therapy. --my Aunt Franny

I have never seen so many SDMBers agree on anything. For the first time, we have C#3, RTA, Melin, PLD, jodih, myself, and all the rest uniting on an issue.

NickRz, you claim to stand behind Ed and Tuba (when no one else here does) because you "know the facts of the matter". Would you care to fill us in? We're adults here.

I know I only have Melin's POV here, but she sounds morally in the right to me. If she did indeed take a stand against a racist statement, as it seems for her post she did, then I aspire to do the same. And if it costed her her job, I respect her the more because of it.

Ed, tell us what happened or I'm going to have to believe you're covering something up.

Your Quadell

Wow, Nickrz, that did NOT help your cause. You sound like a self-important mall cop. You may want to rethink, or at least restate, your POV.

Kudos to you, jodih...I agree.

Well, Ed, are you going to explain your side, or let us seethe here in our own growing bitterness? And JillGat, are you going to defend yourself, or shall Melin become a sainted martyr and you the Big Bad Bitch?

Probably not. It seems the way most of these things are "handled" is not to handle them at all. Ignore them, refuse to speak, and eventually everyone will stop asking about it and things will move on.

What a healthy way to handle problems. Such integrity. Such morality. Such fairness.

Such cowardice.

Just a quick reply to the above, and then I figure to be done with this.

The two board moderators involved in this dispute were Melin and Jill. Both had been posting to a thread called "minorities" (since pulled) on the General Questions forum.

Jill contacted me Monday morning to say that Melin had posted what Jill considered a personal attack against her. She wanted me to pull this post and her own (Jill's) posts that precipitated it, on the grounds that it looked bad to have two board moderators quarreling in public.

There had been a previous incident in which Melin appeared to side with a user against another moderator (not Jill) on an administrative matter. I had sent a note to all moderators saying that I expected them to keep their disagreements internal. At the time I was thinking mainly of disagreements about board moderating duties. I was reluctant to tell board moderators they couldn't get into ANY sort of argument. But I had warned them against appearing overly partisan.

Anyway, I read the "minorities" thread at Jill's request. Jill had made a certain point repeatedly in several different posts, and once or twice had been a bit snippy about it. Melin had replied with a strongly worded but brief post to the effect that Jill's comments were "bullshit." Jill had posted something saying she hoped she hadn't been misunderstood, etc.

The whole thing seemed pretty mild compared to some flame wars we've had and I told Jill I didn't see the need to delete any posts. Apparently she'd also been in touch with Bruce, the GQ moderator, and he said the same thing.

That evening I got a note telling me to take another look at the "minorities" thread. It had gotten pretty ugly. Other people had taken sides; a friend of Jill's had jumped on Melin with both feet. Melin had posted a long indignant note accusing Jill of racism, among other things. I was appalled. I was not concerned about the substance of the argument; I simply did not want two moderators duking it out in public. I sent the following note to both Melin and Jill (quoted in its entirety): "I'm not going to get into who's right and who's wrong, who started it, or any of that stuff. I'll just say this: I do not ever want to see a public dispute on the SDMB between SDMB moderators. Please acknowledge."

Jill's reply, in its entirety, was, "No problem here." Melin sent me a long note recapitulating the entire argument, suggesting that she felt it was a moderator's duty to challenge racist statements, etc.

It seemed clear to me at this point that Melin just wasn't getting it - that the purpose of having moderators was to moderate, not to pour fuel on the flames. So I decided Melin would have to go. The question was whether I should can Jill too, since she had been partly at fault. I decided against it, since (a) Jill's initial instinct was that moderators shouldn't bicker in public, and had brought this matter to my attention privately, before it got out of hand, and (b) she stopped arguing when I made it clear I wanted an end to this. Melin, on the other hand, is STILL arguing.

I am sure Melin is a good person. Clearly she is smart and articulate. But there's no question in my mind that we're better off having her as a user than a moderator. Jill has made her share of mistakes (hey, so have I) but has shown a better understanding of what this moderator thing is all about.

This is completely ridiculous . I have lost ALL respect for the Straight Dope, something that I have cherished and respected for many years. This is the last place that I thought this kind of crap would happen. This is truly sad. Management will not be allowed to forget this, as I'm sure my fellow members will attest to. If there is really a Cecil, I have lost all respect for you, too, for not handling this yourself. This is, afterall, YOUR SHOW. You should all be ashamed of yourselves!

Thanks for the explaination, Ed. But what interests me is why the "minorities" thread was deleted in its entirity and why you spent so much time running around deleting Melin's threads, when you could have just posted the above response (last night!)

If ANY OTHER MEMBER of this board had made the statements Melin had made, we wouldn't be in this situation. Are we saying moderators can't make comments on threads? Even if it's not in their area? If so, better remove David B - lord knows he's made a lot of comments over in Great Debates, some nice, and some not. Time to remove him!(And yes, that was sarcastic for the humor-impared.)

And one last thing. Put back the goddam thread, folks. Let everyone at least see what happened. That way we can all use our intelligence that this board purports to promote, and decide for ourselves. I've never felt my sig line was more appropriate, which is sad. I expected more from this board.

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

What the heck is wrong with moderators arguing? And on a thread they're not even moderating, yet?! You've done far more harm to our perception of moderators with your actions than a thousand arguing Jill and Melins. As long as they perform their duties honestly, they have the same rights to publically argue as any one of us. I don't care in the slightest whether it says "moderator" or "member" after someone's name. They can disagree with me, I can disagree with them, and anyone can disagree with anyone else.

------------------
"Eppur, si muove!" - Galileo Galilei

Well I, for one, have substantially LESS of a problem with this now. It appears that Mr. Zotti decided things were out of hand and he handled it as he saw fit -- hey, he's the administrator. We might not all agree with how he handled it, but that's HIS job, not ours.

The problem for me always was the furtive, cloak-and-dagger purging going on, which was (and is) antithetical to the "fight against ignorance". If you race around deleting stuff and firing people and then put up a wall of silence, you can expect us posters to get suspicious -- and upset. This is not to say that every detail of board administration should be publicly handled, but when a public discourse suddenly becomes a MISSING discourse, we have to start wondering what's going on. I only have two further comments.

First, it seems to me that this whole dust-up could have been avoided if Mr. Zotti had posted at the end of the minorities thread something like: "This is getting out of hand; everyone simmer down or I'm locking this thread. Melin and Jill, we need to clarify the duties of moderators, and I'll be e-mailing you both."

Second, it seems to me that perhaps Mr. Zotti needs to clarify what is and is not acceptable for moderators to post. Apparently, not only are moderators prohibited from disagreeing on adminsistrative matters -- where the necessitiy of a united front is understandable -- they are prohibited from disagreeing in their capacity as posters, simply because they are moderators as well. It's not for me to pass judgment of the wisdom of that as a policy, but I do think it should have been made clear to the moderators before now.

The bottom line for me is that I think this is a wonderful environment for discourse and humor on a wide variety of subjects, and I'd like to see it get back to that. I still think Melin's firing was unfortunate, and I hope she'll continue to participate as a poster, because I think she was a valuable addition to our twisted little group.

The explanation of why Melin was terminated has left me with questions as to the "policy" of mods posting. Can two moderators not disagree on a topic? If I were to post a "nature vs. nurture" question in GQ and two (non-GQ) mods had different opinions, could they not post and defend their posts?

Sweety, there's no need to be condescending.
I buy the books. I look at the "Chicago Reader" banner ads, and I even click on them sometimes. We make The Straight Dope money, which is why they try to honor our wishes. And we obviously wish to know the truth. That is, after all, why we're on this message board in the first place.

Now let's not get sidetracked by unrelated semantic arguments.

Ed has the right to fire whoever he wants. The fact that almost all of us disapprove, though, is a bad sign.

Doesn't anybody have the old thread in their cashe somewhere?

Your Quadell

There'a petition in MPSIMS for the reinstatement of Melin as a moderator. I put my name on it, and I recommend that everyone else who's disgusted, stunned, or otherwise displeased with the situation should, too.

And as I stated over there... the other moderaters might consider cleaning up their now sullied reputations by putting their names on it, too, if they even care what we, the general public, thinks about them.

Apparantly this is a matter of some great interest and concern to your users, Ed. It also appears that 9 out 10 think you made a bad move, even after hearing the facts of the matter from all sides. Is it possible we're right?

Guys, you know what? We're not taking a vote on this. It's an internal matter.

As for reposting the original thread, I don't have a copy. If somebody else has a copy, feel free to repost it in this forum. I reserve the right to edit out the parts where everybody goes ballistic; that's why I pulled the thing in the first place.

I reserve the right to edit out the parts where everybody goes ballistic; that's why I pulled the thing in the first place.

Then how will we understand why you pulled it?

------------------
"Eppur, si muove!" - Galileo Galilei

:chanting:Me-lin,Me-lin,Me-lin

As long as the moderators aren't getting into it with someone on their own board, what difference does it make? I believe firing was uncalled for. Close the thread if it's continued beyond all hope but don't punish someone for having a strongly based conviction.

------------------
And can it be that in a world so full and busy, the loss
of one weak creature makes a void in any heart, so
wide and deep that nothing but the width and depth
of vast eternity can fill it up!
-Charles Dickens "Dombey and Son"

Sheesh. Even Cecil admits it when he's wrong.

I'm going to make a couple of points:

1. Once we delete a post/thread, it's gone from the system. We can't hide stuff and later unhide it.

2. If it weren't for the moderators, this MB would have been taken over by the spammers long ago. I should know, I've pulled my share of purely commercial posts.

3. Is OpalCat still reading this site?

4. I'm sad that this whole thing happened.

Lynn/SDStaff Lynn
For the Straight Dope

Mike,

"user" was Ed's word, not mine.

Here's my vote: Goodbye

Well. I'm glad Ed took the trouble to let us hear his side of the story. Now that I see the rationale behind Melin being fired and Jill being retained, I'm willing to let it drop. I still think it was poorly handled, but this is Ed's site and he has the right to make management decisions as he chooses. As far as I'm concerned it's over.

------------------
Jess
Full of 'satiable curtiosity

Ed:

What is the point of saying the original can be re-posted if the parts we are interested in seeing for ourselves are deleted??

Oy vay.

And while you may not be taking a vote, that doesn't mean we aren't still right, only that you have the power to ignore us. Bully for you.



------------------
*************
Are YOU ready for Y2K? Take my advice: Panic early and avoid the rush.

I'm going to stick my neck out and more or less side with Ed here--not that I think either Melin or Jill did anything unforgivable or even wrong (I've always emjoyed both of their postings). But what needs to be done from now on is to firmly establish rules and outlines for a Moderator's duties. Maybe they should be even stricter, and Moderators should not post their opinions. In that case, people should re-think whether they'd rather BE Moderators, or just posters (me, I'm happy to stay a simple, shy little poster). The trouble arose because Ed, Melin and Jill all had different thoughts and opinions as to what a Moderator can and can't do. If that were laid out in black and white, it would not happen again. I also get the feeling there are some Personal Things going on here, and people get fired because of those every day (right or wrong).

Tell ya what, Ed...I think you've made it abundantly clear that our opinions have no value because we only post here, while you are the great and powerful Internal.

If that's the attitude of the admin here, I'll go elsewhere.

The Straight Dope may not be dead, but I think cancer has just been diagnosed.

I agree with Flora. I also think it's really easy for all of us to Monday-morning-quaterback this thing, with what should have been done, but that's pointless. Someone has to make the decisions on how we keep all the balls in the air around here, and it is counter-productive for the peanut gallery to second-guess those decisions. I'd like to think that if it happened again, it would be handled differently, but I see little reason in continuing to beat this particular dead horse.

I also think the idea of flying along without moderators is silly. They're the grease beneath our wheels (if not the wind beneath our wings) and they keep things running smoothly around here. It's too bad there wasn't greater clarification of the parameters of their duties before now, but I hope that's being rectified.

[quote]There'a petition in MPSIMS for the reinstatement of Melin as a moderator. I put my name on it, and I recommend that everyone else who's disgusted, stunned, or otherwise displeased with the situation should, too.
And as I stated over there... the other moderaters might consider cleaning up their now sullied reputations by putting their names on it, too, if they even care what we, the general public, thinks about them. [/quote}

Ed has spoken; some of our other moderators have already weighed in with their stuff, here's mine.

We ask our moderators not to fistfight in public. That's not argument, that's not discussion; that's disagreement that topples over into abuse. If staffers have difficulties with one another, it's an internal matter and should not be on public display.

If you work here, we want you to (no pun intended) moderate your actions. By the nature of the situation, staff members are held to a higher standard of behavior than users; all of you certainly expect stuff from us that you do not expect of one another.

And that's as it should be.

If a staffer does not wish to abide by these conditions, then what choice is left? Any reasonable person (and you are all reasonable people) can see how this plays out.

A resignation was tendered . . . and it was accepted. Hence, it was by mutual consent.

She was not "fired for being politically incorrect;" she can't work here if she won't follow rules. For anybody to say otherwise is to be untruthful to you, which is unforgiveable.

It's complicated by the fact that this simple matter of staffing has been blown up into a full-fledged psychodrama, with the "victim" as the star of the show. Why she chose to do that, I cannot begin to tell you; I can only say that it baffles and saddens me.

I am infuriated that you as users and we as staffers have been so used and abused. It disturbs the trust between us that must exist for this site to be successful; if you do not trust or believe us, then what good is anything that we do?

I hope that we can recover from this . . . and go forward.

your humble TubaDiva/SDStaffDiv
for the Straight Dope

PS You should also know that this woman was my dear friend and I hired her over the objections of others; I let affection take the place of reason. My mistake, and I have paid the price; I have lost the friendship.

Put the freakin' Minorities thread back up, in its entirety, and unedited. Close the thread so no one else adds to it; just make it a read-only thread.

We need to see the whole thing, including the "ugly" parts. Ed doesn't have a copy, but I know Melin has some of the posts. Put it back up.

And nice to know our opinion is ultimately of no value to the way things are handled in such situations, Ed. That's simply repulsive.

This is the pit, right???

Up until now, I might have disagreed with some decisions (particularly the ongoing refusal to let the unexpurgated minorities thread return), but I did not sense a truly reprehensible attitude until Ed's last post.

Ed, you can take your attitude and stuff it! "We're not taking a vote here." Oh yes we are! You can ignore it if you like, but I am voting that 1) I've clicked on my last banner on your site, 2) I've bought my last print copy of any SD book, and 3) I'm looking for a good alternative to this site.

You can call us users, customers, whatever you like, but piss enough of us off, and your franchise won't be worth snot. You've made your condescending, disdainful, superioristic attitude abundantly clear.

Me, I think it's a plot to keep everyone interested in this board - something has to compensate for the gawdawful load time, why not a combination of defining racism and constitutional rights?

I am infuriated that you as users and we as staffers have been so used and abused.

Tuba, you seem to be indicating that Melin abused us in some way. How do you rectify this with the fact most of us feel she shouldn't have been kicked out in the first place? You seem to be playing the "That bad woman, I'm sorry she did this to you" game, and I doubt it will be very effective.

Let's try to get some sense here. Does anyone disagree with the following statements?

1) Ed has a policy that moderators not publicly (adamantly) disagree with other moderators.

2) Ed has no problem with a moderator posting controversial posts about racism in their own names.

3) One did, and Melin felt she had to speak out publicly against a public statement she found abhorant. We don't know exactly what she said.

4) Ed said "stop." Melin said "No" because of issues of conscience. Melin was fired.

5) All traces of Melin's POV were deleted. Ed admitted this was a mistake, and put her POV back in the pitt.

6) Most of us think Ed made a bad move.
Most of think this could be avoided.
Most of us believe that aside from disagreeing publicly with a moderator, Melin was doing a great job.

7) Almost all of us want to know the details of what really happened in the offending thread.

Are we in agreement?

Your Quadell

P.S. Now let's see how many relevant posts I missed while I was writing this...

hey Tuba:

I was kinda thinking you seemed like a nice enough person...POV I can't appreciate, but nice enough. Then I read THIS:

PS You should also know that this woman was my dear friend and I hired her over the
objections of others; I let affection take the place of reason. My mistake, and I have paid the
price; I have lost the friendship.

What the HELL was that about? For? Mean? THAT is just disgusting. ALl kinds of ugly, unexplained, uncalled for implications in that little remark.

Everyone here has voiced nothing but approval and appreciation for Melin as both a user and mostly as a moderator. And here you come along making icky insinuations about her, that she is was in some way unacceptable right from the very beginning, but you stood up for her...now the people who didn't want her were right! Oh dear, poor you, now you've lost the "friendship".

Man, if any of my friends made a remark like that about me, damn straight they'd lose me as a friend!

YUCK.

stoidela... totally offended.

Thank you, Stoidela, that was my reaction, too. Yikes--I thought there were Personal Things going on, but I had no idea what a Peyton Place The Straight Dope really is!

Man, if any of my friends made a remark like that about me, damn straight they'd lose me as a friend!

Well said, stoidela. Even friends who have betrayed you (and Melin did not do anything of the sort) should not be denigrated in public, out of respect for the friendship you had. I don't recall Melin saying anything snarky about TubaDiva.



------------------
"Eppur, si muove!" - Galileo Galilei

TubaDiva, you are pathetic. Truly pathetic. That P.S. at the end of your post is childish and absolutely uncalled for. This is the pit, right? Where we can say what we feel, right? Sick it up your ass! Stick it way far up your ass! You have no business being an administrator on this MB if you're going to act like this.

Dirty Devil:

LOL - good for you!

And an excellent point! Whatever the hell started this whole mess, THAT was a fire-able offense, in my opinion!

WOW - This is a first! I actually agree with Stoida!

I think we can all appreciate the explanations from Ed and Melin and even Jill and Lynn and I was respecting your own opinion too Jenny, that is until I got to your sly, back-handed back stabbing ("I hired her over the objections of others; I let affection take the place of reason. My mistake, and I have paid the price")

I read the thread and my personal opinion was that both parties were to blame for it getting out of hand, however, it didn't seem bad enough to pull - but what is my opinion? It is sad and pathetic that such a minor disagreement turned into something so nasty, especially with supposed adults.

I would love for Melin to stay and even if she isn't reinstated as a moderator, I would beg her to continue posting (that is, if anyone is left after this little circus). However, I think the damage to the SD continues to be made by remarks such as Tuba's.

Things keep sinking further and further into the shitcan. You can't blame Melin for this one, Ed, you can blame the continous digs from your staff (i.e. Jill getting one last word in and Tuba's public dig).

Lynn - I compliment you for explaining the situation gracefully and without stooping to backstabbing.


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

Coarse and violent nudity. Occasional language.

Ed, I don't know if you have done this, but I would advise you to do this immediately if you have not. Write an AUP specifically for the moderators, it can be publicly posted or private between the moderators, but write it, and then abide by what is on it. State clearly what actions are and are not allowed, and just what the lines are for moderators. If something not covered by the AUPmod comes up, then add it to the AUPmod and start dealing with it then. But don't wait until something happens then say, 'It was against my policy.' that too easily smacks of favoritism and lack of consistancy. To much of what has happened here seems to be of the retroactive rules varity.

------------------
>>Being Chaotic Evil means never having to say your sorry....unless the other guy is bigger than you.<<

---The dragon observes

I thought there were Personal Things going on, but I had no idea what a Peyton Place The Straight Dope really is!

You have much to learn, grasshopper. . .

Rich

TubaDiva wrote:
By the nature of the situation, staff members are held to a higher standard of behavior than users; all of you certainly expect stuff from us that you do not expect of one another.

That is an incorrect statement. I know that there are real people doing the volunteer work around here; I don't expect them to become saints in the instant they are given the Magic Password.

I have no problems with moderators arguing, or even fighting, whether with users or among themselves. All I ask is that they do their jobs well, which Melin certainly did.

Putting that aside for now.

Ed Zotti wrote:
Guys, you know what? We're not taking a vote on this. It's an internal matter.

Translated into plain English: "We fire who we want, so fuck y'all."

Thanks, Ed. You make me feel all warm and fuzzy inside. It's so nice to know that you don't need to make the users happy. You all are doing so well that you can afford to piss off a few hundred of Cecil's most dedicated fans. You don't really need any of us to visit the website, read the columns, or even buy the damn books.

Admit it: you people really screwed the pooch on this one.

The only thing I have to add to this thread is that I'll miss Melin as a moderator. I thought she was doing a good job.

Shadowfox

Another thing.
TubaDiva also wrote:
[quote]A resignation was tendered . . . and it was accepted. Hence, it was by mutual consent.[/b]
In a word, bullshit. Just last month I was asked to leave my job; I was given the choice of resigning or being fired. The fact that I technically resigned does not mean that leaving was my choice.

Another thing.
TubaDiva also wrote:
[quote]A resignation was tendered . . . and it was accepted. Hence, it was by mutual consent.[/b]
In a word, bullshit. Just last month I was asked to leave my job; I was given the choice of resigning or being fired. The fact that I technically resigned does not mean that leaving was my choice.

Oh Tuba ... Do you even see how uncalled for that was, dear?

Suze - "Dammit, I'm staying OUT of the middle" - anne

Oh, and P.S.
TubaDiva, do you realize just what your last remark sounds like?

"Nobody wanted her to work here, but I convinced them to hire her anyway. And this is the thanks I get! How ungrateful! Even worse, I've lost a friend too!"

Yep, my heart just bleeds.

I get the feeling that our dear TubaDiva will be losing many more "friends" before this debacle is over.

And Melin, if this little cliche makes you feel any better...

...with friends like that, who needs enemies?

Haven't any of you ever been in a position where, as management, you had to fire someone, or one of your co-workers was fired, and they were free to bitch and insist that they were treated unfairly, and say whatever they wanted, and the management, bound by confidentiality, could say nothing?

Maybe some of you should think about that. You're only ever going to hear one side of this story.

I'd like to point out a couple of inconsistencies, if I may.

1) Did Melin leave voluntarily?
TubaDiver: A resignation was tendered . . . and it was accepted. Hence, it was by mutual consent.
Ed Zotti: I decided Melin would have to go. The question was whether I should can Jill too . . .

2) Can the administration bring back deleted threads?
Lynn Bodoni: Once we delete a post/thread, it's gone from the system. We can't hide stuff and later unhide it.
Ed Zotti: . . . Melin had posted the identical response on multiple forums . . . In a moment of pique I said to delete them all. Later I thought better of it and reposted her message to the BBQ Pit . . .

Just thought I'd share.

Your Quadell

Jeez, take a Valium, you guys. Yes, the situation could have been handled differently. No, I probably wouldn't have fired Melin if it were up to me, but you know what? It wasn't.

I like this site -- a lot. I think the moderators do a generally good job of moderating and the administrator does a pretty good job of administrating. I also think that criticism flies thick and fast the first time a mistake is made, while gratitude is rarely ever expressed.

I'm not going to stop participating on the Boards just because The Powers That Be made an administrative decision I might disagree with. Mr. Zotti's point that this is not a democracy does not translate into "fuck you all;" it is an observation that the decisions made around here are not made by vote. It's his site, he has to do as he thinks best, and while we may disagree with him, we've got to let him run the show -- because it's his show. Demanding that the Board be run the way the posters want is both unrealistic and literally impossible, since so few of us ever agree with each other. It would be like letting the monkeys run the zoo.

Look, don't the moderators and the administrator generally do a good job? I think they do. And I think we should crawl down off of their collective back and let them do their jobs -- even if we would do the job differently if it were ours to do.

Most everything that I have heard from Ed and Tuba has been articulate and reasonable. I really do not understand the anger felt by the other members here.

The powers that be have to assure that they have effective management of the boards. If those moderators are, in the opinion of the powers that be, jeapordizing the boards civility or order, then those moderators should be removed.

I know that this is an unpopular position. I personally like Melin and think she has some great posts. I also agree with the position she took that started this. But all of that aside, Ed acted within his authority and made a rational decision.

It is tough to be a manager. I am sure he did not enjoy having to fire someone. It is an unpleasant thing. And if you haven't had to do it before....well wait until you do and then see how you feel about his decision. Cut the guy some slack.

------------------
"Do that which consists in taking no action and order will prevail" --Lao Tzu

I don't know who "Cecil Adams" really is (and I don't particularly care), but he at least pretends to be a real person. So where is his opinion? After all, the Straight Dope is his invention, this message board and this web site have his name all over them, and he should be ultimatly responsible for what's going on around here. How about it, Cecil? Got anything to contribute? Or do you just keep your hands clean and let others do the dirty work for you?

Devil - The unfounded rumor is that Ed is Cecil. Of course, no one knows that for certain. :)


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

Coarse and violent nudity. Occasional language.

Diane -- Blasphemer!!! ;)

Diane -- Blasphemer!!!

Yeah, I like making a bad situation - WORSE! <efg>

In a word, bullshit. Just last month I was asked to leave my job; I was given the choice of resigning or being fired. The fact that I technically resigned does not mean that leaving was my choice.

Um, I'm afraid it does. Had you chosen not to resign, you would have been making the choice *not* to leave. Had you then been fired, you could claim that your departure was their choice, not yours. Assuming you have described the situation accurately, you made a conscious choice to leave.

(Note: this is not a comment on Melin's alleged resignation, as I don't know the details of that situation.)

Rich

Most everything that I have heard from Ed and Tuba has been articulate and reasonable.
I would agree that Ed has been helpful and honest in helping straightening out for users what really happened. Would you allow strangers to vote over which employees you should hire? This is not public office (Although the backstabbing quota seems to be full). Tuba's comments did sound alot like a monitor attacking someone though.
I does seem like it is our loss though.

VegForLife, here's a little more detail.

I knew that when I started applying for new jobs, I would be asked to give my previous employer as a reference. In the market for my profession, for someone with my relatively lightweight resume, an unfavorable reference would make it quite difficult to find a decent position.

The HR department at my former company has a written policy about references. If called about a former employee, they will offer only the following portions of information:
1) "Yes, that person worked here."
2) Dates of employment
3) Ending salary

4a) "That person resigned."
OR
4b) "That person was terminated for reason X."

When I was asked to leave my job, my supervisor gave me the following choice:
- Tender a resignation that very morning, and stop work immediately.
or
- Be fired for a manufactured reason, and stop work immediately.

Either way, I was to be escorted out of the building within ten minutes. So as far as I am concerned, the options were identical, except that one of them would put a big dent in the future of my career.

Now, tell me again why leaving was my choice.

Aura:

You brought it up, now I gotta ask and I hope you will answer.

Given that your firing seemed to be rather, shall we say, emphatic, what was the ACTUAL reason you were fired?



------------------
*************
Are YOU ready for Y2K? Take my advice: Panic early and avoid the rush.

Long-time lurker, first-time poster. I have zero inside information about the particulars of this conflict. This is just to provide background and another perspective.

I used to be in charge of a commercial forum on AOL, and I hired several people to be moderators. Two of them were like Spock and McCoy -- one was super-organized but a little cold, the other was empathetic but could get over-emotional. I had to sweat out a lot of carefully worded notes to both of them to keep them working well together.

Finally, one day the emotional one flew off the handle and would not calm down or back down. I had the interests of my company to consider as I let this moderator go, but I didn't miss having to referee any more disputes.

I have no idea whether this true scenario has anything to do with the conflict you've been talking about, but I remember writing much gentler messages of regret as I explained to the users about my missing moderator, and I remember that there were many more things I wished I could say but couldn't.

In the dispute here, I'm stunned that all these well-spoken moderators and administrators have been uniformly horrible in how they've handled everything. I can see both sides in the original philosophical dispute; reasoned arguments that express ideas without personal attacks are the best way to air such differences. So it started when both sides let their emotions run away with their typing fingers.

Then in the aftermath of the moderator's departure, Ed et al thumbed their noses at the readers, pointing out correctly but undiplomatically that it's their basement, their rules. They could have expressed the same general ideas within an honest message that they judged these actions to be the best for the boards and their users as a whole, and that they were sorry for any annoyance or inconvenience.

I hope that everyone learns from this. Type once, edit twice, then take a deep breath and reread what you wrote _before_ you click the Submit button.

Now, tell me again why leaving was my choice.

I'm sorry, you seem to have been typing without paying attention:

When I was asked to leave my job, my supervisor gave me the following choice:

Your employer gave you a choice: resign or be fired. You chose to resign. By definition, that means that leaving was your choice. What your employer would have told prospective new employers is immaterial. Whether or not you deserved to be fired is immaterial. You resigned. Your choice.

Rich

Literally, "asked to resign" / "forced to resign" / "fired" are not the same. In practice, they are different terms for the same transaction. They differ only in the external story the two parties implicitly agree to.

IMHO, it's not worth quibbling over "asked to resign" vs. "fired". Most readers can see beyond the minor diplomacy of these semantics.

Veg, this is semantic distraction. Whether she technically "resigned" or not isn't the point. The reality of it was that she was going to have to leave, one way or the other. Even Ed, always the realist, said he "canned" her.

Right. So, after all the discussion, what do we have?

Ed makes the rules. None of us voted when he hired the new moderators, so we shouldn't feel surprised that he didn't ask for our votes before he fired one.

Still, we should hold some sway, since we pay the bills in the long run. So we can voice our opinion, which we did with unbelievable unity for a group like this. And he can listen, or he can shrug us off. I hope he listens.

If he does, he'll have the job of making some pretty specific guidelines about what's allowed and what isn't. If he doesn't, he'll have lost a very good moderator, and a piece of the trust of his biggest fans, the SDMB regs.

All eyes on you, Ed.
Your Quadell

Being a fairly new member here, I've sat back in total fascination at how the teeming millions (okay, at last count, it was under 45) criticize the decision of the people who run the show here.

I was personally surprised to find a moderator who'd either left voluntarily or been sacked flooding each and every message board with her "message", obviously after she'd been told by the administrators the error of her way. Ed's explanation addresses this action accurately.

I believe that when an action is taken by the administrators of this or any other such organization, to attempt explaining it to the people who are NOT administrators is unnecessary. By the rabid responses to those explanations, my beliefs stand firm.

I intend to go on perusing the boards, answering where I can...and enjoying what I've found here. Set my tail on fire in this message string if you wish, because I won't be back. The administrators say the matter is over, and I accept their decision.

------------------
"There will always be somebody who's never read a book who'll know twice what you know." - D.Duchovny

Just to make sure there's no misunderstanding: I was never commenting on Melin's departure, as I am not familiar enough with the details to make an informed opinion as to whether she was fired or she resigned. I was commenting on AuraSeer's contention that, "the fact that I technically resigned does not mean that leaving was my choice."

I stand by my statement that this is inaccurate (although the continuation of this tangent is taking away from all the fun flames). Had she not resigned and instead thumbed her nose at her manager and said, "go ahead, fire my butt!" and then been fired, I would agree that leaving was not her choice (although that act alone might have warranted the dismissal). Instead, she resigned. Perhaps with good reason (not having a "termination" on her employment record), perhaps not (maybe there could have been a "wrongful termination" suit in it had she let them fire her). In any case, by definition, to resign is "to give up deliberately."

Regarding the specific case of Melin (and probably extrapolating to AuraSeer's situation), quadell writes:
Whether she technically "resigned" or not isn't the point.

While I agree that it isn't the point, I also believe that the distinction between "resigning" and "being fired" is important, and I therefore disagree with Captain Clueless's contention that, "it's not worth quibbling over 'asked to resign' vs. 'fired'."

Rich

Veg:

If you wanna get technical about it, she is correct and you are not. Because her original assertion was that LEAVING was NOT her choice. And it was not. She was going to be gone one way or another. She was not given an option to NOT be gone. She was only given a choice as to how the end result of her no longer being employed there would be accomplished.



------------------
*************
Are YOU ready for Y2K? Take my advice: Panic early and avoid the rush.

I'd be happy to get technical about it, Stoidela. At the point in time at which the company said, "resign or be fired," she made a choice. Had she chosen differently, a subsequent act by the company may have resulted in a similar outcome. But we'll never know if that would have happened, because she made the choice to leave. Leaving first, before finding out if they would follow through with the other option, was her choice.

Does the company suck? Could be. Did they treat her fairly? I have no idea. If I was in the situation as it was described, I'm sure I would have done the same thing. But it would have been my choice.

You may disagree, but I don't think it's just a matter of semantics. Somebody asks you to resign and you decide to do it, fine. Just don't claim you had no choice, because you did.

Rich

Normally I try to keep my nose clean and stay out of disputes like this. Whether because I'm wise and can see both sides of an issue or I'm an coward and rather sit on the fence. Either way the original thread in General Questions should not have been deleted. As it can not be re-posted without being edited by management for better or worse I will not copy it here. If anyone would like to see the thread as of 08-02-99 07:10 PM please e-mail me and make up your own mind.

------------------
"You CAN'T be evil. 'Cos no matter how many 'bad' things you do on purpose,
you MUST be doing it because you think it's the right thing to do."

Normally I try to keep my nose clean and stay out of disputes like this. Whether because I'm wise and can see both sides of an issue or I'm an coward and rather sit on the fence. Either way the original thread in General Questions should not have been deleted. As it can not be re-posted without being edited by management for better or worse I will not copy it here. If anyone would like to see the thread as of 08-02-99 07:10 PM please e-mail me and make up your own mind.

------------------
"You CAN'T be evil. 'Cos no matter how many 'bad' things you do on purpose,
you MUST be doing it because you think it's the right thing to do."

I am posting this while I'm only halfway done with reading the thread, and will post more when I have finished. I wanted to take a moment to invite anyone who had saved the thread or parts of it to repost it at the Teeming Millions Homepage message board, which will NOT be censored, you have my word.

http://fathom.org/teemingmillions/bbs.html

------------------
&gt;^,,^&lt;
"Cluemobile? You've got a pickup..."
OpalCat's site: http://fathom.org/opalcat
The Teeming Millions Homepage: fathom.org/teemingmillions (http://fathom.org/teemingmillions)

Ok, no one asked, but here is my opinion:

It is LAME that a moderator is not allowed to be a "poster" when out of their forum. I think this is a bad policy. I agree with the person who pointed out that our respect of the moderators is not needed for them to do their jobs.

It is also pretty crappy that Melis was fired. I don't think it was neccessary. I may have the facts wrong, but it sounds to me like Melin took it to Email with Ed, but when she continued to make her point -in email- he decided she was unworthy to moderate the board. This sounds to me like kids getting suspended from school because the principal catches them smoking at the mall on the weekend.

I also have to agree that Tuba's remark was VERY low and uncalled for. It was very dismissive of Melin's capabilities, which I think have never been in question. It was like saying "she wasn't fit for the job anyway, you know..."

I can't help but feel a loss here. I will probably keep posting occassionally, but my enthusiasm and respect for this site has dropped drastically. I know nothing I say will change the outcome, but I do want to go on record as feeling that this was rotten.

------------------
&gt;^,,^&lt;
"Cluemobile? You've got a pickup..."
OpalCat's site: http://fathom.org/opalcat
The Teeming Millions Homepage: fathom.org/teemingmillions (http://fathom.org/teemingmillions)

DOH "Melin" not "Melis"
I knew who I meant, but I type one more than the other and my fingers got ahead of me.

------------------
&gt;^,,^&lt;
"Cluemobile? You've got a pickup..."
OpalCat's site: http://fathom.org/opalcat
The Teeming Millions Homepage: fathom.org/teemingmillions (http://fathom.org/teemingmillions)

Veg:

Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.

Just last month I was asked to leave my job; I was given the choice of
resigning or being fired.


You are being ridiculous.

Ed: Major screw up here, I'm afraid, and I'm not talking about Melin.

Drain Bead: Believe I must correct you here: it's "...who needs enemas", not "...who needs enemies"

Stoidela, thanks for your input. I'll file it appropriately.

Personally, I'd feel more satisfaction saying, "I chose to resign because management at the company is a buncha creeps anyway, if I hadn't resigned they probably would have dishonestly trumped up some charge and fired me" rather than, "I didn't have a choice."

But if you'd rather be a victim, and not take responsibility for the choices you make, have at it. . .

Rich

On the bright side of all of this, absolutely NO one-dimensional psycho-strawmen were invoked in the making of this argument...

VegForLife:
You just don't know what you are talking about. Being forced to resign is a choice to give up unemployment benefits in exchange for avoiding a "fired" reference to other employers. If an employer says "you can resign or be fired", there isn't an issue as to "finding out if they would follw through". You know that they will. Being forced to resign is a firing with cosmetic enhancement, nothing more.

I have only lost one job against my will, and it was under this sort of circumstance. The issue of a reference can be the sort of thing that can be critical to your career.


Tuba:
All I can say is that I'm glad I'm not one of your "dear" friends. Is that sort of attack by an employee okay by Ed just because it is thinly sugar-coated?

OK. We have all decided (to our own satisfaction, at least) who are the good guys and who are the bad guys. At this point, I can't think of any statement (or action) that anyone could make that could make everyone happy. (Obviously, there are actions that could make a majority happy, but those actions have their own ramifications for future conflicts.)

I am saddened by the whole turn of events, but I am also of the belief that dwelling on this will simply create a Northern Ireland or Former Yugoslavia in miniature. (I hate you because you said/did this 3,568 posts ago to a friend of a friend in a different Forum.)

On the other hand, the issue that Jill and Melin got angry over was an important issue for our times (given that, with a few notable exceptions, the membership, here, tends to be a motley of USAns. I would like to see the origianal thread re-posted. If Melin has the complete thread (or complete from some point to the end), let her post it. If it can be retrieved from backup, let that be posted. Post it here in the BBQ Pit. Lock it as soon as it's posted so that we have to start a new thread with, perhaps, less heat and more light. But post it.

I don't want to contradict Lynn. I would not be surprised that moderators have no way to recover a lost or deleted thread. On the other hand, I would be extremely surprised to find that the Chicago Reader or the Straight Dope was not taking weekly volume backups with nightly incremental backups. (That would suggest that a single head crash could force the whole board to start from scratch, some day.)

I was current with the thread until midnight (EDT) on Monday or Sunday (whenever it was last available). At that time, nothing had been posted that was too hot for the BBQ pit. If Ed chooses to enforce a "no fighting" rule on the moderators, that is his perogative and we can stay or leave as we see fit, but I think some of the speculation would be put to rest if we could see the actual posts. (I realize that the first reaction if it is posted will be 80-90% of the respondents screaming "Melin was fired for THAT?" while another 10-20% will huff "Well, no wonder they threw her out!" However, we have already heard both Ed and Melin. The actual posts will probably confirm what we each already want to believe, but at least there will not be speculation over the actual words posted.)

Bias acknowledgment: I tend to agree more nearly with Jill's ideas, but I saw no reason why Melin (moderator or not) could not post any of the ideas that I saw up until the last post I read.

(Actually, I'm just ticked off that it got deleted before I had the time to post a contribution.)

------------------
Tom~

Well! I'm not quite sure how to feel about this.

Melin, you're the only moderator who's ever yanked one of my messages (too much cut&paste of a copyrighted page), though I'm sure others have been tempted. I must say you were correct to do so. Thus, an hour ago, if anyone had asked me to name the moderators on this board, you're the only one I honestly could have named (besides David B whose status was made an issue of by someone in another thread, and Mr. Zotti himself, of course). I really don't read the tiny text under people's names specifying whether they are moderators or not, because it never seemed to matter before. I am sorry to see you go, Melin.

Knowing now that there are hidden guidelines controlling what moderators may or may not post, I will view their opinions differently. I'm sure everything in the guidelines will be couched in terms of "civility" and "temperance" and so forth, but from the impression Melin was obviously left with, one wonders if the remaining moderators will not feel compelled to edit themselves for content, as well. Whether it's true or not, I'm left suspecting, and that's too bad.

Mr.Zotti has tried to explain to us his view, albeit a bit belatedly and not exactly wholeheartedly. It is not an indefensible position he presents, though of course to the personality types (like me) who frequent this board it inevitably seemed high handed and inappropriate for the tenor of the SD. It leaves us with a bad taste in our mouths, and a bad impression of how seriously open this forum is. And that's too bad, too.

TubaDiva, I will graciously assume that the tone of your post came out not quite the way you intended. I've done that once or twice. JillGat, I don't know you, and I don't know the whole story, so I guess I can't really hold this against you.

But of course, I'm not being allowed to know the whole story, am I, Mr. Zotti? Until I've read the posts in question, I can't possibly decide whether to leave this board or not. The fact that they are missing is the sorest spot, for me anyway (I couldn't get OpalCat's link to work). I guess I'll compromise: Instead of a boycott, I'll just restrict my reading. The turnover in your ads will go down by some fraction of my usual contribution; but if time passes and the board recaptures my attention by the spirit of openness I thought I was seeing before, I'll no doubt find myself drawn back in.

First: I'm male, for those who assumed otherwise. (I think I may need a new username if this keeps up.)

Second: Veg, Stoidela, the fired/resigned discussion is getting a bit tangential for this thread. I'm opening a new one in GD entitled "Fired Or Not?" Let's take it there.

Thanks for posting the "minorities" thread, C3. I finally feel like I have a clearer understanding of what prompted the SD staff to act as they did.

I would have to say that it was the right decision, poorly executed. Melin's carpet-bombing of the boards with her side of the story didn't exactly make it easy for the SD administrators to come out of this looking good, but then that was probably the intent.

All it took was showing me the thread. I get it now. Thanks for posting it, Contestant #3.

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

Thanks from me too, Connie...is that the full thread, or just a segment?

I have to disagree with Leslie on this one.

Yes, the thread turned into a whine-in.
Yes, everyone was nit-picking everyone else.
Yes, feelings were bruised.

But hell, that's SOP for this board-- moderators included.

IMHO, it was in no way grounds for any kind of action, other than a polite "take this to the pit, you guys" (which was suggested early in the thread).

No, I don't agree with the public posting of what was assumed to be a private discussion (the IM thing), but AFAIK, the IM log was not posted--chalk it up as an hasty statement in an emotional moment. I'm sure before actually posting such a thing, Melin would have thought better of it.

Personally, I think the topic was perfect for TSDMB--emotionally charged, lots of grey areas, and both sides know that they're right.

If that was indeed the full thread, then mark me down as "baffled" as to what the big deal was.

This is creepy and wrong. My respect for this site has plummeted.

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

THE STRAIGHT DOPE

Cultivating Ignorance Since 1999

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

[[I think the whole thing could have been largely avoided if Jill had said, "The only people who have the luxury of ignoring race as a factor also happen to be white." It's a small but subtle difference, and a sentiment with which I agree.]] plD

Thanks. I think you articulated my point well there, but it doesn't guarantee that others might not still misinterpret, disagree or be offended by it. Which is their right. Anyway, that is not the issue here. I like to debate, but I don't like to get into personal fights. SD Moderators are free to become involved in discussions and debates, but it doesn't look good when we start flinging mud at each other. It's embarrassing.

I haven't responded to the some ten threads on this topic because 1.) One would have to be online 24 hours a day to keep up with all of them (and the bulk were posted last night apparently, so it's [i]unfair[/] to say that they were being "ignored" by the administration) and 2.) I'm anxious to put this behind me and stop bickering about it. The only way I can see to do that at this point is to stop talking about it.. at least for me. It starts to feel frustrating and pointless and no fun anymore.

I enjoy working for the Straight Dope and am sorry for any part I may have played in this mess.
Jill

I stopped posting on the Minorities thread when I was told by Jenny to do so. I was told to "take it to email" and so I did, telling Ed why I thought the comments about people with white skin were inappropriate, ESPECIALLY from a board moderator -- did we want people to think that the board endorses those views? -- but keeping that email private. I did not take the matter to this board until after I was replaced as MPSIMS moderator.

I have saved copies of mine and Jill's posts on that thread, as well as those of a couple of other people who apparently felt the same way I did. Why not repost it and let people decide for themselves?

-Melin
Former Board Goddess

[[(i.e. Jill getting one last word in and Tuba's public dig)

Man. I get dissed if I don't talk, and I get dissed if I do. I give up.

Jill

Jill,

My beef isn't with you. My beef is with Ed and whomever else has adopted the "nothing to see here, move along" mentality.

Ed explained that he sacked Melin because she refused to play nice. Uh . . okay. Sounds fishy but okay.

But deleting the "minorites" thread, running around deleting Melin's posts and closing threads about it smacks of the kind of totalitarianism that I always thought THE STRAIGHT DOPE was against.

Clashes happen. Firings happen. Okay fine. But running around hiding information, closing threads, and putting your hand to your forehead and saying "I can't talk about it, it's too traumatic" is not the way to make this issue go away.

This site is for people who like to get to the bottom of things. Playing "hide the truth" or even giving the illusion of playing it is just going to fan the flames.

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

[[1.) One would have to be online 24 hours a day to keep up with all of them (and the bulk were posted last night apparently, so it's unfair[/] to say that they were being "ignored" by the administration)]]

Sorry.. screwed up my code there. Meant to say [i]unfair

Thanks for the explaination, Ed. But what interests me is why the "minorities" thread was deleted in its entirity and why you spent so much time running around deleting Melin's threads, when you could have just posted the above response (last night!)

I deleted the minorities thread because it would have taken me all morning to cull the offending posts one at a time. Hey, it was a busy day.

I got a call yesterday night saying Melin had posted the identical response on multiple forums, most of which were inappropriate for what she had to say. In a moment of pique I said to delete them all. Later I thought better of it and reposted her message to the BBQ Pit, where it should have been in the first place. It was down for maybe an hour, 90 minutes. What can I tell you? I make a mistake, I fix it.

If ANY OTHER MEMBER of this board had made the statements Melin had made, we wouldn't be in this situation. Are we saying moderators can't make comments on threads? Even if it's not in their area? If so, better remove David B - lord knows he's made a lot of comments over in Great Debates, some nice, and some not.

Quite right, if a non-moderator had made the statements Melin had made, we wouldn't be in this situation. That's the point. As I said, I've been reluctant to tell moderators they can't get involved in ANY argument, but I do expect them to express themselves temperately (even if it means biting their tongues). I felt Melin crossed the line. That in itself wouldn't have been so bad; we all get mad and do things we regret later (see above). But she wouldn't let go, even after I told her to stop. When you've got people working for you (even on a volunteer basis) who won't take direction, as a manager you don't have a lot of choice.

What the heck is wrong with moderators arguing? And on a thread they're not even moderating, yet?! You've done far more harm to our perception of moderators with your actions than a thousand arguing Jill and Melins. As long as they perform their duties honestly, they have the same rights to publically argue as any one of us.

You know what? I don't like people working for me to be screaming at each other in public. I'm just wacky that way.

Let's see...

A Moderator is fired for voicing her opinion...

Posts and threads turn up suspiciously missing...

An attitude of "I'm in the know and you're not"...

Admin worrying more about what looks bad in public than in "fighting ignorance"...

Moderators telling the users "let's all stop talking abou this embarassing issue so we can all just have fun again!"...


Lord help me--I think I'm back on AOL!

Jill, if I may summarize your post:

Point 1) Allow me to get the last word in on the "racism" thing now that the thread has been erased and my opponent has been expelled.

My response: That's just pathetic.

Point 2) It's bad for Moderators to fling mud at each other.

My response: Agreed. And it could have been avoided by neither of you posting as moderators, giving contoversial opinions, and seeming by Ed to represent the SD with your views.

3) I haven't responded because I can't keep up.

My response: Okay, that's fair.

4) I haven't responded to this because I don't want to talk about it, and I wish you all would stop talking about it too.

My responses: Well we aren't going to ignore it. Sorry. You still have your job, any evidence of abuse of your position has been covered up, and people are seeing you as the bad guy. Of course you want the issue to go away. But we won't be satisfied in an environment where disagreeing with moderators is punished, where certain posters can't air their views, and where entire incriminating threads just disappear for the protection of the moderators who are left.

It seems to me that if moderators were forbidden from posting (as moderators representing the SD), there would be no problem with anything that happened here. "Phenomenal" or whoever would have disagreed with "Jilly" or whoever, and that would have been fine. But as it is, no one is happy with the way things turned out. Learn from this. If you moderators don't represent the Straight Dope, then firing Melin was unjustified. If you do, then act like it, and stop posting comments that are perceived as racist under your own names.

Your Quadell

Whoops. Really screwed up the code that time. Oh well, you know what I mean. BTW, if anyone considers reposting the "minorities" thread, I would think reposting the whole thing rather than selections of it would be the way to go. I don't feel one way or the other about it.

Wow. I can't believe it. There were 5 important posts between when I started writing my response to JillGat and what I finished. I would prolly have written it differently, had I see Melin's response, Ed's response, and others before I posted.

Anyway, my point remains.

A) Put the thread up, with a disclaimer. We're your customers, Ed. We're all calling for this. Humor us.

B) Tell your moderators to get in arguments, if they must, under a different name that doesn't represent the Straight Dope.

Your Quadell

First off, Ed, thank you for the explanation.

But I still think you made a bad decision.

As has been pointed out in one of the other threads, neither Jill nor Melin was acting as a moderator in that thread. They were not stating that their own opinions were those of the Straight Dope as an entity; they were not throwing their weight around as holders of the Magic Password. They were simply posting their own opinions, as any participant may do.

Maybe it was a mild disagreement, or maybe it degenerated into a screaming hair-puller. Either way, who cares? It's the Internet, for crying out loud! We've all seen worse! Go check out some of the religion threads, or any number of topics in Great Debates-- hell, even some of the replies to loverock. People get emotional. That's part of being human.

Saying that moderators aren't allowed to argue is just plain silly.

Falcon: I'm with you, let's see for ourselves!

Having been a moderator many years ago, on a local BBS, I have some experience with this sort of thing.

First of all, the whole idea of a "moderator", the way it is apparantly being used here, is ridiculous to me. It is abundantly obvious that virtually all the posters who participates on these boards are (mostly) intelligent, mature adults. We don't need a "keeper" of any kind. If we want to fling shit at each other, we are perfectly capable of either ducking, or flinging it back. And anyone who doesn't like it is perfectly free to step out of the way.

Secondly, who CARES if the moderators get into it? I certainly don't. Is it necessary that they be "respected"? No... it has no effect on the performance of their "job" (whatever the hell that is). Are they suppposed to appear as though they have no opinions in a place that is all about opinions? Why? And Ed seems very concerned about moderators going at it with each other, although, as has been pointed out, there is nothing wrong with them going at it with a [i]user[/]. Why the distinction? Especially if they are going at it on a board that neither of them is responsible for? What do any of us care what moderators say or do, so long as it does not mean that they are ABUSING their powers by censoring or otherwise mistreating a user? Hmmm?

Since moderating is a volunteer job, it seems as though the reward for doing it is to be denied the opportunity to fully participate in these forums. How nice.

Whole thing stinks.

------------------
*************
Are YOU ready for Y2K? Take my advice: Panic early and avoid the rush.

Damn, that's the last time I walk away from my PC in the middle of a post... too many other people got to my point first. =B^)

I say repost the whole "minorities thread", please.

------------------
"Eppur, si muove!" - Galileo Galilei

We're your customers, Ed.

Uh, My Quadell, we're users, not customers.

You know what a user is don't you.

Wow, I had the same experience! A whole buncha posts popping up between the time I started mine and finished it!

Apparantly this is a matter of some great interest and concern to your users, Ed. It also appears that 9 out 10 think you made a bad move, even after hearing the facts of the matter from all sides. Is it possible we're right?

Just a thought.

------------------
*************
Are YOU ready for Y2K? Take my advice: Panic early and avoid the rush.

Uh, My Quadell, we're users, not customers.

We're customers in a way. Our clicking on those ad banners pays for this. I don't think the SD set up this message board purely out of the goodness of their hearts.

------------------
"Eppur, si muove!" - Galileo Galilei

I still love Cecil.

Jill, I don't think Diane was complaining that you posted. We're glad you posted and let us know where you stand on the firing issue.

Diane (well, several of us actually) objected to your getting the last word in about the minorities thing, making sure your opinion got voiced even after the thread got deleted.

Your Quadell

[OpalCat]

Much if not most/all of the minorities thread has been added to the message board at the TM Homepage, if anyone wants to read it.
http://fathom.org/teemingmillions/bbs.html

------------------
&gt;^,,^&lt;
"Cluemobile? You've got a pickup..."
OpalCat's site: http://fathom.org/opalcat
The Teeming Millions Homepage: fathom.org/teemingmillions (http://fathom.org/teemingmillions)

[Monty]

Opal: I wasn't going to post at all in this thread; however, your last posting above compels me to remark on what you are doing here.

What you are doing here is jumping into a morass and touting another site as a better place; in this case, that just happens to be your site.

In some parts, that's called trolling and in some other parts, it's called spamming.

[Jodi]

Hang on a second -- Several posters have asked that the thread in question be reposted. They have been told:

1. The STMB does not have the ability to repost the thread itself, but someone else can repost it if he or she wants to; and

2. In the event the thread is reposted, the STMB reserves the right to censor it for content again.

In light of these representations, it seems reasonable to conclude that the chances of ever reading on this Board the thread that caused this whole meltdown, in its entirety, are slim and none.

OpalCat runs a very entertaining sister site that serves to keep people up to date on what's going on and who's who in our twisted little world. In so doing, she adds another, much appreciated dimension to the site. She risks her good relationship with The Straight Dope, which allows her site to reference it, by deciding to post a thread that the SDMB presumably would prefer not to be posted (we can presume that because the thread was taken down). So, by posting the thread:

1. She is doing the posters a favor, by placing it in a place where they can conveniently access it and make up their own minds on whether or not it was objectionable; and

2. She is doing so with at least some small risk to her own site, and there is no guarantee The Powers That Be at The Straight Dope will appreciate her doing it.

Now, I'm not interested in reading the thread anyway. I think this horse is dead and rotting and I see no need to further beat it. But I don't think that OpalCat's obvious attempt to do a favor for those who are still interested should be rewarded with accusations that she is a spammer or a troll. And as I've asked before, can't we all just take a Valium? There's entirely too much name-calling an sniping going on over an issue that's already caused enough damage. Jeez.

[sly]

Opal: I wasn't going to post at all in this thread; however, your last posting above compels me to remark on what you are doing here.

What you are doing here is jumping into a morass and touting another site as a better place; in this case, that just happens to be your site.

In some parts, that's called trolling and in some other parts, it's called spamming.

Aw, c'mon, get your head out of your ass. She's not selling truck parts, for chrissake, she's reposting a thread that was pulled from the SDMB so that those who were interested could be brought up to speed, alright?

[AHunter3]

a) I respect the work done by our moderators, who have an often difficult job. When you have an often-difficult job, you fuck up sometimes, and it often isn't fair to hurl pissed-on invective-coated postings at moderators when [you think that] they fucked up.

b) The above statement should be reread twice, once for Melin, once for Ed. Concentrating on Ed, well, I think you fucked up but it was your call to make. I assume good intentions on your part at the time. Without hesitation.

c) While I realize that under far too many social circumstances it is dangerous to decide that you made a mistake after a multitude of people claim that you made a mistake simply because, subsequently, people will feel that the sheer weight of noise and numbers overturned city hall and propriety and so forth, you...COULD consider it a challenge of sorts...the crafting and delivery of a statement that would indicate that you had, for reasons unrelated to the volume and intensity of the clamor, come to reconsider a decision, for specifiable reasons, accompanied by an equally specific statement explaining that it was NOT a case of the squeaky wheel obtaining the proverbial grease. If, of course, you do in fact find yourself wishing that you had engineered a different outcome. (Yes, for the record I think the dismissal of Melin is an inappropriate outcome, based on what I know).

d) I was afraid of this. It's like the AOL-era CPB wars all over again. I hate to see good people declaring that they are leaving or becoming disgusted with the board. Could we perhaps have some loyalty here? I don't mean blind loyalty, but let us make what is already mainly a very good thing better, even if friction is the cost of it...and even if we disagree now, let us hash this out and survive it, not stalk off and take our marbles with us?


------------------
Designated Optional Signature at Bottom of Post

[According to Pliny]

Monty:
Opal: I wasn't going to post at all in this thread

Then don't!

I don't think there's a single person who has contributed to this thread that isn't at least a little curious about what was in the "minorities" thread. Ed has as much said he won't allow it to be posted here in its entirty. If you think it's an abuse for Opal to use this board to steer people toward the uncensored truth, you have given up the fight against ignorance.

Okay guys, it's time to end this and move on.

Please all remember there are always three truths to every story: the story told by one party, the story told by the other party, and then there's what really happened, which is usually some combination of the two plus a little more thrown in.

There's an email going around that says that I lied. I'd like to assure you that I did not lie, and that every fact I have told you about what happened has been made in the sincere belief in what I have said. I have tried to present my point of view accurately. When I made a mistake about Nickrz, for example, I posted a retraction after he and I discussed it.

The other people involved are, I think, also sincere in that they think things happened the way they say they happened. As I have reflected on this over the last few days, and have seen what Ed has posted, I have come to believe that what's happened here this week has been the end result of some major miscommunications all around. I think I made some, I think Jill made some, I think Ed made some, and I think Jenny made some. At least, I hope that's what's been happening, because I don't think any of us are bad people, I think we all just didn't listen really well to what each other was saying. To the extent that I caused any of the problems, I apologize. To the extent that anyone else has caused the problems, I say -- it's over, let's put it behind us.

I am touched, and somewhat amused, frankly :), to have gotten support across a wide range of folks, from people with whom I've had differences in the past (C#3? Phil?), or whose posts I have pulled for one reason or another, all the way through people with whom I had friendly, chatty relationships with over on MPSIMS. As I said over there, it's a cliche to say "I'm honored" -- but I really am. Thank you all, from the bottom of my heart.

Anyway, time to move on, shall we? I think I'll take a break for a while -- I'm getting ready to go on vacation soon -- and then maybe check back here once in a while. Stay in touch, okay?

To borrow a quote, "thanks for the memories." Deity bless.

-Melin
Former Board Goddess

[AHunter3]

Farewell, Melin, then. Don't be a stranger :)


------------------
Designated Optional Signature at Bottom of Post

[OpalCat]

I'm not at all surprised that Monty chose this opportunity to take a cheap pot shot at me.

Monty? Give it up. Ed said very specifically that he would edit the thread if it were posted. That seemed pretty crappy to everyone. Well I happened to run a board where it could be posted without censorship, so I offered its use. Once the thread was actually THERE, I posted that it was, for those inclined to read it. What is there is more complete than what is here in the Pit.

If you think it was some kind of an "ad" for my site... think again. I don't need to place such ads, as all of my sites do quite nicely for traffic, thankyouverymuch.

In keeping with the spirit of the Pit, I'd like to invite Monty to take his bony, ears-sticking-out ugly head and remove it from his smelly, shit-encrusted asshole for once.

------------------
&gt;^,,^&lt;
"Cluemobile? You've got a pickup..."
OpalCat's site: http://fathom.org/opalcat
The Teeming Millions Homepage: fathom.org/teemingmillions (http://fathom.org/teemingmillions)

[ChrisCTP]

I finally did get the opportunity to check out the reposting of the Minorities thread on the TM Homepage. It's been thoroughly slaughtered. Big surprise, right? Much appreciation for posting what you could get your hands on though, Opal.

BTW, Opal, I happen to love the TM Homepage, and I have it bookmarked.

------------------
--Christina D. Sanders--
Purveyor of Substandard Poetry
Queen of Idealism
Prisoner of Realism
Mistress of Surrealism
Hunter of new -isms
Professional Procrastinator
Suburban Savage
Jane Doe Extraordinaire

[jens]

I guess there's not much for me to add. This has been my favorite "place" for months now, and I don't think I will abandon it, but I've lost a lot of fondness for it, and a lot of trust in those who run it.

Goodbye, Mel, and good luck.

[Rowan]

Wow-- THAT'S how I feel, Jens. I just haven't been able to get my slogan together.

I just don't have any enthusiasm for this board anymore.

And loyalty? Puh-leeze. This is entertainment, not my family. I don't watch Masterpiece Theatre when WGBH chooses a stinker, out of loyalty to PBS, or some such thing.

I've been reading the Melin-related threads for the past couple of days, but nothing else, and this is my first post in days. I used to post to threads on this board almost every day.

Anyway, been nice knowing you, and maybe someday I'll be back, but for now--

Shalom.

--Rowan (Rivkah)

[pricciar]

Wow,
I go on vacation for a week and all kinds of things blow up.
I would have to echo what a few people before me have said.
I used to read this board regularly, and contribute staggardly as a fun way to take my mind off of things. This episode leaves a skunky taste in my mouth. I am sure I will continue to need to take breaks during the day, but I am unsure that the Straight Dope message board will be the first place I hit.
I would support the idea that I remember PapaBear making a long time ago, when Contestant 3 and David B. were in the middle of one of their tiffs, Moderators - moderate, Posters post never the two shall meet. Oh, well, maybe I am tired, and this annoys me more then it should, I will try posting a happy message to the MPSIMS, see if I can escape the nasty name calling and backstabbing that seemed to go on here. Melin, you are great, you will be missed.

Pat

[Deceased Equine]

Melin, I think that was a very sensible and mature posting. It looks as though everyone had a different perspective, valid to them, and tempers flared. That's sad, but done, and it's time to move on. Ed, Jill, Melin, and TUBADIVA have all said, "Whoa," and I think we should respect their wishes, and stop beating moi.

[Nickrz]

If any of you had been paying attention, you would have seen Thirsty4 had a copy of the thread and was offering to email it to anyone who asked, LAST WEDNESDAY. It's an unexpurgated cache file of the board page.

That's where I got mine, and if any of you would still like to read it, just email me.
bmarlin@xnet.com

[Lew]

I HAVE THE ORIGINAL THREAD IN AN EMAIL FOLDER. I WILL BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO MAIL IT TO ANYONE THAT ASKS (I'LL SET UP A SEPARATE THREAD FOR THIS).

I was a major element on this thread and the member, it seems, that Jill or Ed or someone felt that Melin was defending against another administrator. This is pure bullshit. (I can say it in the Pit) All she did was quote some things I said in order to make her point that she was not alone in her opinions. We all do that all the time, on every thread, at every site...and she, very simply, was not defending anyone but herself.
I posted last at 9:22 PM..after Melin's "terrible offense" (Give me a break!!) I have had personal things to deal with and have not been back until today. I am overwhelmed with all the material I have to catch up on. (perhaps some of you can guide me to the sites concerning this..there seem to be many)
I am also OUTRAGED that Melin was fired over this and have ALOT of things to say. Mr. Zotti's decision to fire Melin apparantly came as a result of the 24 hours between my last posting and time this thread was started. He says he gave this a lot of thought and attention. I find this hard to believe in such a short time period. I intend to address some things directly to Mr. Zotti, as well as Cecil, when I have read more about what is happening.
This is appalling!! In the extreme...
As an administrative decision...it was, at best one of frustration. As per Mr. Zotti's own words, he chose to "stretch" a previous directive (not policy) to fit this incident. He demanded a response. Jill's was immediate approval (duh!!) and Melin opted to maintain her position. Does this mean that Zotti is only interested in puppets or does he just choose to accept, as truth, that which is said to please him and happens to be self-serving for the "yes person"?
I am deeply concerned about what has happened here and want to apologize to all for not being here to provide the information you have asked for. I'll sign off here and start a thread (in Great Debates) for email requests and other questions for me.

[Lynn Bodoni]

{{If you wanna get technical about it, she is correct and you are not. Because her original assertion was that LEAVING was NOT her choice. And it was not. She was going to be gone one way or another. She was not given an option to NOT be gone. She was only given a choice as to how the end result of her no longer being employed there would be accomplished.}}

Actually, Melin was given a choice. She was told to stop a certain behavior, and she chose not to stop it.

Lynn/SDStaff Lynn

[OpalCat]

Did she continue to post on the board after Ed said to stop?

------------------
&gt;^,,^&lt;
"Cluemobile? You've got a pickup..."
OpalCat's site: http://fathom.org/opalcat
The Teeming Millions Homepage: fathom.org/teemingmillions (http://fathom.org/teemingmillions)

[Lew]

OOps--I don't understand the new system--so I can't tell where my thread got posted, but it is there. I have read pieces and you guys really need to get the ENTIRE thread if you are interested in knowing what really happened. I have also posted responses to 2 other threads...This has gotten so far from what happened I don't even know how to help.

[Stoid]

LYNN:

Uh... try reading more carefully. You were responding to what I had said about AURASEER's resignation, it had nothing to do with Melin.

------------------
*************
We do precision guesswork

[cornflakes]

I have only read Zotti's posting of melin's letter and skimmed a few other postings, so sorry if this sounds out of touch. I'm a nightshifter and it's late for me.

I lurked the original 'miorities' thread and, on the whole, it struck me as one of the few honest and open discussions on race that I have heard. melin's comments did not strike me as racist. Her firing, on the other hand, is unfair and could be considered wrongful termination if it could be proven that she did not want to leave (and this thread is proof of that.) The Straight Dope blew it.

[Lynn Bodoni]

{{Regarding the specific case of Melin (and probably extrapolating to AuraSeer's situation), quadell writes:


quote:
----------------------------------
Whether she technically "resigned" or not isn't the point.
----------------------------------
}}

Stoidella...seems pretty clear here that Melin's case WAS the case under discussion. You did not make it clear that you were talking about another case.

Opal, Melin made it clear that she would do and post as she wished, regardless of what Ed told her. (Or at least, this is my understanding of the conversation, I wasn't included in it.) As a general rule, that tends to get you fired in ANY job.

Lynn (as a poster)

[JYDog1]

<<If you do, then act like it, and stop posting comments that are perceived as racist under your own names.
Your Quadell>>

Allow me to take a little side trip here. This is C&P'd from way back in the thread, and I have to ask, who decides what will be perceived as 'racist?' Some people have thicker skin (as we can see by this 3 page journey) than others. Just askin'.

yer dog

Now, we can do this the hard way, or the . . .actually, there's just the hard way.

[AHunter3]

This, too, is part of our history and should not disappear in the pruning process. However, it is not my attempt to reopen any old wounds or hurt any previously soothed feelings.

[Eutychus]

Some history is best left alone.