I 100% agree with you that Martin’s point was ridiculous, especially the insistence that he was unambiguously right.
But the whole thing went down weird, and retracting Shodan’s warning seems like the best retcon.
I support the retcon.
The “nm” is evidence that the poster edited the orig post, and there’s even the option of giving a reason for the deletion. Plus, there is a 5 min time limit.
The disappearing of a post (after 5 min?) seems like a coverup.
I don’t believe so. Is that what you did?
IMO, there’s a difference between editing a post within the allowed 5 minute time limit and disappearing one. I understand that mods have this power but I don’t know when it would be a good idea to use the power on ones own posts.
ETA: Or what mikecurtis said.
It’s not a “retcon”. This isn’t a film, television series, or other fictional work.
oh shit
Busted. I’ll have to reconsider the several years of my life very carefully.
Sorry, everyone. ATMB was not the place for me to post that comment.
Do you think that is the appropriate action?
If so, everyone else who responded should also get a warning. I got two other warnings yesterday (the only I remember getting, both deserved.). That would be three for me in one day, Bone warned me that I had reached the limit of his forbearance (again, justified.) I guess that would mean that I should be banned, because I participated in what looked like an ongoing discussion.
I don’t think the original instruction was particularly clear in the sweep of what was henceforth verboten. You seemed to later clarify the line. Shodan could reasonably expect that he was in safe territory. Doubly so since this was a different context.
What also seems new to me is the banning of subject matter. No Nazis may be discussed in the thread? It seems to me that Nazis come up in quite a bit of debates. It seems unusual and restrictive, especially since the thread is concerning a bunch of people in uniforms holding other people captive under controversial circumstance and then behaving quite badly.
If that is not a thread topic where Nazis and naziism are going to come up, I don’t know what is.
It is sort of like a thread on flowers where someone gets warned. ‘That’s it! No more with the Begonias!
I’d also like to know the reason for going back and disappearing the posts.
I cannot believe that the idea was to deny that they existed, or that they were examples of a mod decision as to what was appropriate and not in violation of a Mod Note. For one thing, I don’t believe tomndebb would do something dishonorable like that, and for another, it can’t work. The collective memory of the Dope is not so easily set aside.
If the idea was to remove them as examples of a mod decision that posts of that sort were appropriate, that won’t help either. Just the opposite - presumably tomdebb did not believe at the time he posted them that they were violations. Now, perhaps, he has changed his judgment. That’s fair enough, but using his mod powers to disappear the posts after the edit window gives evidence that he was and is continuing to act on his judgment as a mod - both in the original postings and in their removal.
OK, he has changed his judgment. That’s perfectly fair. What doesn’t seem fair is to Warn me for not following mod instructions, when I followed the examples of a mod posting in a way that he believed (presumably) at the time were not in violation of the standard of that thread. He’s a mod - his decisions on what is appropriate and not in violation should be presumed to be correct. If he changes his mind later, for whatever reason, disappearing the posts does nothing IMO to change things. How are we supposed to know that his decision as a mod, to post as he did as a poster (and I did as a poster, based on his example and the assumption that he was correct), was going to change after the fact? And especially that he, acting as a mod, was going to go back and retroactively remove his offending posts, as if that did something or other.
If it helps, tomndebb or another mod is welcome to go back and edit my post to say “nm”. If that helps towards a fair solution. I would still request that the warning for following the decision of one mod (as exampled by his posts) be rescinded. That seems fair to me.
If sending his posts down the memory hole does anything, AFAICT it strengthens my case. If it was done for any other purpose, or for no purpose, I wonder why it was done.
Regards,
Shodan
nm
I can’t believe that warning hasn’t been rescinded yet. (Is it because of the holiday?)
As far as I know, it was only one post. It was just after post #233.
I honestly believe there was nothing nefarious about **tomndeb’**s action. He either just thought better of it and decided not to post or reread the thread and saw that you had been warned and so realized the hijack was over. The post wasn’t up very long (there’s only an 11 min gap where it was) and it really said nothing more than a repeat of what he said the day before in post #202.
nm
Turns out you can’t indict a sitting Moderator.
Yeah. It’s kinda a “Moderator Hat On / Moderator Hat Off” thing. If Moderators are to have the power to “disappear” posts, I don’t think they should do it to one of their own posts. Using a “nm” in that instance is more fair, IMO.
lol iswydt
And notably Jonathan Chance has been absent from this thread although he has been online while this thread has been developing.
We’ve been discussing things. That and trying to get us back up. I don’t know about the rest of you but I’ve been getting the errors, too.
While we believe Shodan violated the mod note, we acknowledge that the Circumstances were unclear. The warning is rescinded.
To be clear, though, this is a special circumstance. Posters are required to follow moderation guidance or face the possibility of sanction.
But moderators aren’t.