|
|
|
|
#51
08-09-1999, 05:16 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
[As far as I can tell, you can do one of three things with this message. You can delete it without mention, you can delete it and ask that it be moved (which I believe is highly inappropriate), or you can leave it be and allow individuals to derive their own opinions. Your call.]
Frankly, this whole fiasco has caused me to lose respect for the three affiliates of the Straight Dope that I had the most respect for: Melin, Jill, and Ed. Among the staff/moderators, Melin and Jill are the only ones who consistently provide well reasoned, well informed, and complete answers. Ed's researching abilities exceed those of anyone else associated with the organization, staff or otherwise (and that's saying a hell of a lot considering some of the people associated with the SD). I suppose Dex deserves a nod at this point too, but since his considerable knowledge is in areas that don't interest me, I really have no perspective from which to judge him. Put quite simply, these people are unmatched by the rest of the staff and members. None of the rest can even come close to their abilities and knowledge. Respect doesn't come easily from me, and there are damned few people in this world who I have ever truly respected. Yet these three have earned a tremendous amount. Now the three people I respect most out of the whole lot of you are acting like children. Furthermore, one more of the staff who I've always felt rather neutral about (as they've never really done anything exceptionally well but moderate, which they _have_ done exceptionally well up until now) is acting in an even more childish manner. We've always had a problem with children in the various incarnations of the SD message boards. Hell, on days that we were on the Welcome screen, it wasn't at all unusual to have four or more children come running in and ask stupid questions, all the while screaming with feigned indignation at the unfair treatment they had received. Frankly, though, in all of my wildest dreams, I had never even imagined the possibility that we would be overrun by four children who were all members of the staff. I say in absolute honesty, that in all the years that I've read the SD boards, I have never witnessed four individuals disgrace themselves as severely as they have. I hope that you will pause for a moment to think about that. Because I've been thinking about it for a week, hoping that perhaps I could find some justification for their behavior. How on Earth could three people that I respected so much act like this? I have come to the conclusion that I am simply a bad judge of character. It has become obvious that the principles of the staff of the SD and my principles are now in opposition. My principles (where they intersect with the SD) tell me that I should work to eliminate ignorance. I don't know what the principles of the staff are, though I used to think that they were the same. Clearly, I was mistaken. Their mission is no longer mine. Perhaps it never was. My contribution here is not a large one. Its absence in the past has meant little, and there is no reason to think that it would mean more now. However, whatever insignificant amount that I am capable of contributing, you simply do not deserve. In the future, if I feel compelled to contribute information, I will post it in misc.facts.straight-dope and provide a reference in the thread. Anyone who truly wants the information can get to it easily enough. I can no longer find it within myself to contribute to this board directly. -Bob, signing off 
|
| Advertisements | |
|
|
|
|
#52
08-10-1999, 02:11 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
TubaDiva-Obviously, I do not have the facts on what happened in the office, or in IM's. None of us do. The excerpt you chose to get so angry about, was a pretty simple straight forward statement and question. It came from Melin's post, it evidently took place before she got fired, and, to this point, Ed and Jill have not refuted it. Jill may well be out of the country...she has, however, posted to the new minorities thread that was started for those of you that actually want
to continue this discussion. (I believe it's in Great Debates) As for the rest of the facts, I seem to be one of the only people that DOES know the facts of what went on in that thread...Everything that I have seen reposted is butchered so badly that you can't tell WHAT happened. You and I have NEVER communicated before. Where do you get off implying that I am a liar and can't be "argued" with??!! I was, in fact, VERY involved in that thread. I think that gives me, at least, as much right as all the other people, to interject what I know and how I feel about the situation. I'm beginning to wonder if, even you folks, have an honest copy of the thread.
|
|
#53
08-10-1999, 03:01 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Regarding my posting "officially" as a staff member on that thread, my post by SDSTAFFJill was a mistake. The computer I use at work puts that screen name in by default (though I don't even use it anymore), and I didn't see it in time to change it. My moderator screen name on this message board is "JillGat." I apologize for the confusion that caused. Although moderators are free to post our views and opinions on the message board, we are never really posting as "individuals as opposed to moderators" because the board adds "moderator" under our names (unless we use pseudonyms, which I don't do). I support the SDMB policy that moderators not fight or attack each other publically on the message board. I think it should be possible for us all to express our views without insulting each other. I apologized a few times in that thread and I apologize again if I have insulted anyone.
Jill
|
|
#54
08-10-1999, 06:48 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
You all agree to the arbitrary and capricious censorship rules of the SDMB when you post on this board. So, why are you so surprised? It was that way on the AOL SDMB too. The "moderators" do not moderate, are cliquish, wield power at whim and exercise bias in their "evaluations." It will NEVER change.
By agreeing to these unfair rules you are enslaving yourselves to tyrants. Duhhhhhhhh ------------------ For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism.
|
|
#55
08-10-1999, 02:21 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
John--You are absolutely correct...and that is the main thing that most of us are angry about. Unfortunately, many of us chose this board because it operates under the copywrited name of "SD...fighting to stamp out ignorance." It is represented as a forum for freedom of expression and thought. The actions of this staff (deletions, etc.) is in direct opposition of this message. It is my belief that Cecil and the Reader should think about what they are attaching there copywrite to.
Jill--I have inquired, in other threads, if anyone has a copy of what went on after the night of the 2nd. The last posting (of Melin's) that I have is the is the one where she expressed that your statement (not you) was garbage spelled B-_-_-_.....Before that she was personally attacked by Terey, and after that all of us were accused of being "hens having a hissy fit" by someone new to the thread. I haven't heard anything from you, until now, either through the boards or by email...and we both know that I am the one you think Melin took a stand with against you. If something else took place, publicly, I have asked to be filled in...so far, to no avail. The most extensive reposting I have read is butchered by half, the only post of mine that is there is my last and the one Melin quoted from. The only thing that posting accomplished was to cast a very different light on the discussion. What am I to think?!
|
|
#56
08-10-1999, 04:13 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Lew, I'm assuming you didn't frequent the old AOL board. If that's the case, and if John's on this board to stay for a while, I urge you to stick around so that you can publicly regret that statement. No flame intended there, it's just that. . . we'll, you'll see. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Rich
|
|
#58
08-10-1999, 06:49 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Well, Bob and Rich, if anything can be said in Cyb's defense, it's that it seems he's gone to college since I've last seen him. I'm amazed he can spell "arbitrary" or "capricious," much less use them both in a sentence, and correctly, no less! Hell, take away the trademark "duhhhhhh" and he sounds like anyone else on this board.
(I did, however, get a huge chuckle out of the fact that the first person to respond to him agreed with him. Wonders never cease.)
|
|
#59
08-11-1999, 01:49 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
OK folks...I obviously was not clear. I was being sarcastic. I agreed with his statement about what other boards do. As I continued to say, that is exactly why people are upset. They don't expect to be arbitrarily censored here.
I am sorry for the confusion...if you have read any of my other posts on this subject, you know that I am NOT happy about this situation.
|
|
#60
08-11-1999, 02:19 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Hmmm. . . I'm not sure I understand your point, Lew. It doesn't look to me like John said anything about what "other boards do," and I'm not really sure where your sarcasm is. No matter, my sarcas-o-meter has been off before, perhaps it's malfunctioning again.
Quote:
 Oh, and in the spirit of "full disclosure," yes, I'm a staff member, although just barely: I'm not a moderator, but I've contributed to a few mailbag items. Rich
|
|
#61
08-11-1999, 03:45 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Ok, so my apology and clarification wasn't good enough for you... you just want to reveal me as the angry, senseless or inept individual that you evidently see me as. (oh well)
BTW: Had you listened to the people that are so angry about this, you would know that, the main issue is not the firing. I don't need to know if you are "staff". I have never responded to ANYONE here based on who they are. I actually try to understand what they are attempting to say. I know that is not a common practice here and it is becoming increasingly clear that I am now considered someone to take offense at, by some of you. That is really too bad, but I'll try to cope. Besides, I will soon be joining Quadell, Papabear and the many others that have left in protest. FTR: the other boards I was referring to was his reference to the AOL SD board. I'm sorry, if I don't know all that history (as I have stated elsewhere, and as my profile shows, I am relatively new here. Ed's first explanation of why he fired Melin was because she had argued "publicly" with another staff member.
|
|
#62
08-11-1999, 04:11 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Rich
|
|
#65
08-11-1999, 06:24 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Police (without moving): Yes, yes, we go!
General: These pirates slay. Police: Yes, yes, we go! General: Then do not stay. Police: We go, we go. General: Then why all this delay? Police: All right! We go, we go! Yes, forward on the foew! Ho! ho! ho! ho! We go, we go, we go! Tarantara-ra-ra! General: Then forward on the foe! All: Yes! forward! Police: Yes! forward! General: Yes! but you don't go Police: We go, we go, we go! All: At last they really go! Tarantara-ra-ra! From Pirates of Penzance, by Gilbert and Sullivan.
|
|
#66
08-11-1999, 06:40 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Rich says:
Look at me, look at me everybody...I'm STAFF...aren't I special!! Fuck you Rich and the Deceased Equine that you rode in on. You guys would love for this situation to fade away but its going to take a lot longer than you'd like. Obviously, most of the STAFF still does not "get it". toodles, ------------------ Contestant #3
|
|
#67
08-11-1999, 07:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Contestant #3, you're just so. . . clever. I thought you meant something else when you said you liked to eat dead animals.
But yeah, you're right, I'm special. And you're not. Rich
|
|
#68
08-11-1999, 08:20 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Dream on carrot boy...
------------------ Contestant #3
|
|
#70
08-15-1999, 07:31 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I posted to this board last week commenting on how you give up your freedom when you post to the SDMB. I see that it was "edited" out, LOL, and not put on the board. I guess Tuba and Ed do not want any views that they feel sheds truth on the proceedings on this board. Nothing has changed.
I'll bet mine was not the only post "censored" out. JOHN the Cyberian54 ------------------ For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism.
|
|
#71
08-15-1999, 10:56 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Hey, John, you might want to learn how to use the MB before you toss around accusations.
There are two pages to this thread. Your post took place on page 2. Of course, if you can't figure that out, I'm not sure you'll ever see this message explaining it, but what the heck. At least this way people who can figure it out will know your accusation was untrue. The message you posted is still right here on page 2. If you manage to see this message, just page up a few times and you'll see it, posted 8-10-99 at 6:48 AM. Lew and Drain Bead even responded to your message.
|
|
#72
08-15-1999, 03:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Hey David,
Don't you think that you could have responded with a little less acrimony? Oh I'm sorry, what was I thinking? A moderator that operates with a "moderate" demeanor? nah!! ------------------ Contestant #3
|
|
#74
08-15-1999, 08:16 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Way to go JillGat, you get an A+ for the day for rationalizing David's rudeness!!
That's the SDMB way of doing things...who cares about right and wrong as long as the moderators publically stick up for one another... ------------------ Contestant #3
|
|
#75
08-15-1999, 09:22 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Been said already. Viscount Melbourne, one of Queen Victoria's Prime Ministers, said to his cabinet: "It doesn't matter what stand we take on this issue, as long as we all take the same stand together."
Seriously, though, Con -- Read Cyb's post, which (falsely) accuses David of deleting posts. Re-read David's response. You really think that was out of line? And the answer is: no, Con#3 has not conscious thought, he only says the most inflammatory thing he can, because he's such a [ CENSORED by CKDextHavn, Administrator]
|
|
#76
08-15-1999, 09:35 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
No, YOU re-read it. His post said nothing about David. Didn't even mentioned David by name...
I think that I'm going to track down the section in the book of nettiquette that refers to the proper and expected behavior of a moderator. Apparently, you and your cronies: a. Haven't read it b. Read it but forgot it c. Read it, but figure that you are above it d. Couldn't really give a damm because your SDMB power has gone to your heads You guys really set a great example out here you know? ------------------ Contestant #3
|
|
#77
08-16-1999, 08:22 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Oooops. I apologize, I had read Cyb's accusation on a prior visit, and so didn't reread it, I only looked at David's response coming fresh from the Great Debates forum. So I was incorrect when I said that Cyb had accused David falsely; I should have said that Cyb accused Tuba and Ed falsely (and, by extensions, all moderators).
David replied. You thought David's reply was immoderate. I think you're full of yourself. If a Moderator said "Good morning" to you, you would think it was sarcastic or insulting.
|
|
#78
02-09-2000, 01:49 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Oh, boy, was THAT ugly!
Guys, this Board is the sole property of The Chicago Reader, Inc., and since they are a private entity not affiliated in any way with any government agency, they can delete anyone's post at any time, delete any threads they care to because it's THEIR property, NOT yours. It says so in the copyright notice in the bottom of every page of every thread. I get the feeling that some of you haven't read it. It also means they have the right to ban anyone because posting is a PRIVILEGE and not a RIGHT. You post with THEIR permission and if you don't agree with it, go start a message board of your own. Deleting and/or editing posts or entire threads does not violate the First Amendment because that Amendment applies ONLY to the government and NOT the private sector. Thanks, Melin, for providing me the link to this thread, though I may not have used it the way you wanted me to. Sorry you were suspended, but I'm still not sure exactly what happened. ------------------ >< DARWIN > ____L___L__
|
|
#79
02-09-2000, 02:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I didn't want you to "use" it at all. I'm sorry to see it back up in "live" space. You asked for information upon which to make your own determinations, and I sent it to you.
I'm not getting drawn back into this debate. Again, I am sorry that you saw fit to post on this thread and revive it. -Melin
|
 |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Linear Mode
