If they don’t know its an official policy then by definition they don’t know that they are NOT supposed to violate it. Therefore it stands to reason that its possible they (or other mods) did violate it in the past because they didn’t know to NOT violate it.
How hard is it to say “I don’t know, but I’ll get back to you on that”?
I’m sorry, but you’ll have to wait for the next upgrade.
[/QUOTE]
Marley wins the thread! 
To whom shall I forward it?
Heck.
Forward it to me. I’ll give you my word I won’t share it with another soul. I’ll also give you my word ANY post I make regarding the contents of the PM or my interpretation of it I will run by you first. If you don’t like it, I won’t post it.
Note, I am not a mod.
Here is another example, actually from a thread that you started.
You opened a thread about possibly offensive ads appearing on the SDMB, and later in that thread TubaDiva posted a message about reports that the ad could contain malware, and requested information from anyone else experiencing a problem.
Someone indicated those were “very serious accusations” for **TubaDiva **to make (paraphrasing) when she was just requesting more information, so to support her position that she was following up on a user report she posted the report.
The irony. Thats funny. I’d forgotten about that. I’d just had a brain fart back then and forgotten at the time , because I, for all practical purposes, didn’t visit the “other board”, so I didn’t make the connection at that time (and I did think the ads a little on the tasteless side).
I agree that each case should be decided on its own merits, but without the filter of whose side politically the poster doing the reporting is on. For one thing, liberal posters outnumber the conservative ones on this board by a huge ratio, and a fair number tend to be a lot more abusive in their responses. So it stands to reason to me that there could legitimately be more offenses to report which are coming from the liberal side of the board than from the conservative side. So to dismiss reports out of hand simply because they’re coming from a conservative poster who isn’t reporting a similar number of offenses on the part of other conservatives seems to me a highly fallacious way to go about determining which reports a moderator should take into consideration.
Stop this!
Nothing is more annoying.
I can judge for myself if I like something.
Loses the thread.
Forward it to me and I’ll share with the staff. I’m not sure what it supposed to be accomplished by sending it to billfish678. 
Forwarded to Marley23 without comment.
Billfish678, thank you for your offer. Perhaps later.
billfish678, this is becoming very stupid in a big hurry. The OP asked a question, two mods answered individually, and an admin weighed in with an official answer the next day. Nobody was stalled, delayed, given non-responses or bad information. “I don’t know” would not have been a useful answer since you’d have probably seen the same speculation in the wake of a full answer, and it’s less helpful than a mod saying “here’s what I do.” Those may not have been the answers that you personally wanted to see, but they’re useful responses just the same.
Thank you for the PM, Cub Mistress. I’ll take it up with the other mods.
And unbiased opinion. Or at least one thats not aligned with the interest of the mods.
PS. When you see me bitching for an answer right after a mod says “let me check on that, I’ll get back to you all” you have my permision to kick me in the balls. You guys sure know how to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory (or at least come off looking decent).
I’ve often wondered that myself. :rolleyes:
I’m not sure how to respond to Cub Mistress’ situation without divulging anything personal, but I think we have to say something. I’ll put it this way: the report concerned two SDMB posters who know each other IRL, and it was obvious who reported the post. So identifying the person who reported the post didn’t violate anyone’s confidence or provide any information that would not have already been apparent. And it probably would have been impossible to address the substance of the report without saying who reported it. So this was a great thought experiment but not a real violation of our policy. If you report a post, the mods won’t identify you.
It wasn’t a thought experiment on my part, it was a simple statement of fact, and it remains so. You will notice that I am not raising hell about this, I haven’t even hinted as to the identity the moderator in question, and I didn’t even raise the question in the beginning. I simply answered the question truthfully. I even said this information was not a mystery to me.
I can think of a least one way to reword the PM to eliminate reference to the complainant, but the end result would have been same.
I’m sure you’re telling the truth. I was trying to say it would have been a good thought experiment.
Mewl Dear, I hereby request permission to use this response whenever I encounter someone certifying a thread as “won”.
mmm
We can’t, though. You guys have publicly stated that you will not go against each other due to concerns about solidarity. This means that, between a well-respected poster saying something, and a mod saying something, the poster can be trusted more, as we don’t have to worry about them covering for someone else.
And until Dex responded, none of you had given us a clear statement, a tactic that is often used by those who don’t (want to) lie in order to hide the truth. The closest we got were personal assurances, which were nice, but not what was asked for.
I’m not saying you did anything wrong. Just don’t be surprised that people don’t quite trust you as much as you would like when you do the things mentioned above.
No, that’s not what we’ve publicly stated. If a mod says something that is factually incorrect, we have to put the record straight. (If twickster had said there was no policy about thread reports, do you think we would all change the rules and pretend she was right?) What we won’t do is second guess each other’s moderating because it’s counterproductive to have mods fighting it out in public.