By my reading of it, that was what it still looked like at the time. Now that it is an issue and I have gone back and re-read it, I see where Shodan was correct.
No, you just say that even when attacked in public, we should “resolve” those issues in private. As far as I can see, that is simply a way of saying that we cannot actually defend ourselves, since attacks, (as opposed to differences of opinion), are not going to be “resolved” in some off board discussion. You even went out of your way to flip the situation so that instead of addressing attacks on mods, you ignored that topic to complain that when I defended myself I was “attacking.”
I am sure that you believe you are expressing some high minded view, but the practical result of your suggestion is that there be open season on mods.
I hope that others will take the time to follow those links to nowhere. The first one leads to another restatement of pretty much the same question to you when you made a similar accusation. Your response to me has a link that doesn’t work.
The second link goes to my statement to you that the link you provided as a cite doesn’t work and my denial of your accusation. Since I could not see the original statement that I made, I can’t address that, but I did make a guess about what I might have intended and that was that you…“take your personal attack on someone to a private medium for resolution. I probably thought there might be someone there capable of helping you with your seemingly insatiable hostility.”
Thanks for the reminder that this is the second time that you have made this accusation against me while failing to provide the original cite.
I’ve just noticed something about your most recent post to me:
Your post is about “we” and “mods” up until that last clause and then it’s about you. My criticism in the posts you were refering to and in the threads yesterday and today have all been about YOU. Other mods may snipe and sting, but I don’t know of another moderator who retaliates in language that is so blatantly scathing and potentially destructive. You can’t hide behind the other mods and pretend I’m criticizing them with these posts.
I seem to recall giving you examples of how you could defend yourself without attacking. Or perhaps it was how to criticize without being a bully. But I can’t provide a cite so perhaps I didn’t get around to it.
And I suppose you consider such a statement to be “defending” yourself.
Tom, there is no open season on mods. I am not the source of your problems here.
The “bad link” to which you keep alluding is not a citation, it is simply an underscore emphasizing that the exchanges under discussion were never part of my job as moderator, but simply attacks on me in the Pit.
Your point that I am just so mean when defending myself needs to be considered in the light that I was being attacked on my person in the BBQ Pit.
I did not make a big deal about your error at the time, but since you continue to make the same error, I am pointing it out, now.
None of the purported “attacks” of which you accuse me occurred in Great Debates or in exchanges where I was acting as Moderator. They were all attacks on my person in the BBQ Pit or ATMB. That is why I consider your position to be one of silencing the Mods–or silencing me, if you prefer. You give lip servce to claiming that you have never said that the Mods, (or I), could not defend ourselves, but you then go on to treat any defense I have posted as an “attack,” thereby giving you the opportunity to make an “exception” to rule out any defense I post.
The repeated charges against me have been that I have used my mad Mod powers to win arguments in GD–a lie that is repeated on several occasions without anyone providing a single instance of it happening–and that I use my mad Mod powers to silence people whose views I oppose, another lie.
The current foofaraw is an example of the latter lie. I was accused of closing a thread because a particular poster was making points against a belief of mine. Yet, a review of the actual thread demonstrates that I acted in good faith to close an out of control thread instead of simply handing out Warnings like lollipops. (Interestingly, when I did post the nine potential Warnings from a fairly short period, the person complaining that I was abusing him would have received four of them, jeopardizing his ability to post. Had I done that, we would be here with the same crowd claiming that I was just picking on him for his views, despite the clear evidence that he had broken the rules.) It is also interesting that while the claim is that I shut down the thread to silence a certain viewpoint, there were at least three other threads going, simultaneously, where similar views were posted, (but without the violations appearing in the thread), where I have done nothing to stop the discussion. Nor did I say anything in closing that thread that would have led to a belief that any topic was off limits. That is simply a slur that gets repeated without evidence ad nauseam.
As leander’s quotes make obvious, you did exactly that.
You went back to the thread in question to try to find something to warn me about, as a way of punishing me for reporting rules violations that you wished to overlook. I even sent you a link to the post where you stated explicitly that use of the word “falsehood” would not be tolerated. Since Diogenes did use the word, and since you did wish to tolerate it, you did a scan of the thread looking for something you could use, saw the word "lie’ in my post, and that was enough for your knee to jerk.
Now, after your error has been pointed out, repeatedly, you are trying your usual "I wasn’t wrong, I really meant the exact opposite of what I said, and you are misinterpreting me’.
We have already covered this.
No one has insulted you in this thread. Please stop falsely accusing me of doing so.
And here we have another example of why your moderation is so piss-poor.
Immediately after going off half-cocked and falsely accusing me of saying that another poster is telling lies in GD, you accuse posters of telling lies in ATMB. I am beginning to wonder if this might not be a deliberate attempt at provocation. That is, you are doing what you supposedly dislike in others, coming as close to the line as you can manage. If anyone responds in kind, you will seize on it as an opportunity to Warn him. Or perhaps you are hoping to create a trainwreck that will get the thread locked so that you can avoid responding in any subtantive way.
It is definitely not complimentary. I happen to disagree with you that this is the kind of language that should get a warning in Great Debates.
I would suggest this to you: if you think it’s an insult, don’t use it. There is no rule that says that you shouldn’t be more polite than other posters. If other debaters are OK with using it (and more importantly, if the moderators of GD are OK with people using it in GD) then I would suggest you live with the fact that you have a difference of opinion with the moderators of GD.
I went through the thread from the point where I first was called to look at it few days ago and clicked on the successive quote button for every post that had an apparent violation. I then went back and limited the quotes to the apparent violations. I did not even look at the posters’ names while I compiled the list. Your post showed up as an apparent violation because you used the silly syntax of separating the claim of lying into a paragraph divided from your explanatory claim and I later had to re-read it a couple of times to figure out what Lute Skywalker was saying, since this is definitely a low priority in my daily thread reading. I could not even have told you which usernames showed up in that list until I went back to it, this morning, regarding a point I was making in my response to Zoe. You are simply not that important to need to be singled out for attention. The thread is still up on the SDMB. Start reading around 11/04 and look for insults and claims of lying. They should match up very closely to the list I compiled unless you deliberately choose to base it on username instead of text posted.
This, of course, is a direct lie. You and others have laid that charge against me on numerous occasions and have not yet provided a single case where this has actually happened, even whern I have asked that you do so. After three or four years, I’d have expected even you to give up pursuing that particular lie.
First off, everyone else on the planet understood Shodan’s wacky crazy syntax, so maybe you need to calm down a bit when you are desperately scanning for “possible violations”. Secondly, unless you can read his mind you cannot call someone else’s “wonderings” a direct lie, no matter how delicious the irony you think you’ve found. Especially when it reads like you are provoking, making his thoughts all the more likely to be spot on.
I keep thinking back to when this board first started up, when we emigrated from AOL.
We were glad to be out from under AOL and its occasionally heavy-handed & intrusive policies. We were a community and we knew each other, members and mods and admins alike: first and foremost we were the Teeming Millions, the folk of the Straight Dope Message Board. We could finally comport ourselves as adults.
Without pointing a single finger or identifying a single culprit: it makes me sad that the board has over time become so polarized and adversarial between the ‘powers that be’ and the ordinary members.
Where once there was a generic ongoing standard assumption of good faith (the mods and admins assuming it of the members, the members assuming it of our mods and admins) and an overarching sense that we all wanted the same overall result for our board here, there is now a grumbling suspicious willingness to believe bad faith exists behind every comment (from either side, as viewed by the other) and instead of sense of a shared vision, folks on either side of the divide appear quite ready to believe that the board (and/or the true spirit of the board) must be protected and defended from the bad intentions as well as the bad judgment of the ones on the other.
I haven’t and probably won’t. It was just an example of how someone can suggest prevarication. I just removed a comment about “rewriting history” myself.
Certainly your recent responses at ATMB were personally insulting (as I have demonstrated earlier) and they were in response to a question posed to you as a Moderator. And that is just from this week. Try providing cites for those times when you were not acting as a Mod that I have rebuked you.
The remainder of your response does not seem to relate to what I have had to say about you. You might want to address these comments to someone else:
(I did not even participate in the thread that you are posting about.)
Oh, horseshit. Anyone who raises the same “question” on multiple occasions over several years without there actually ever being a case made for any such incident having actually occurred is clearly engaged in accusations, not questions, and your parsing of his “rhetorical” question as though it was not either a direct accusation or a slur through innuendo is silly.
Funny, reading through this and the associated threads in ATMB, I was thinking the same thing about accusations of posters’ words being lies. And while the rule with specific language about lies may be unique to GD, it seems to me that the reason for it is that accusations of lying are insulting and jerkish in nature.
Go back to the earlier thread to which I already linked. You have a lot of finger shaking in my direction in that thread, which occurred in ATMB, not in GD, and where I was not acting in my capacity of Mod.
As to the “insulting” replies I made: I was responding to a poster who had already posted, not a question, but simply a baseless complaint, in a thread in which he had already insulted me in several posts before I replied. My response used exactly the tone, (without the direct insults and name calling), that he employed, yet you have no problem claiming that I have stepped out of line while ignoring his behavior.
This is a pretty clear example of your belief that Mods, (or, at least, tomndebb), should only be targets for invective who must go to off-board communications to beg other posters to stop being mean.
Of course, you would take that view. As long as you can ignore the history and the invective directed at me, you can stand at the side, wistfully excliming that I am not the submissive target that you would prefer to see in a Mod. The fact that you can pretend that I was only being asked a question in that thread demonstrates an astounding lack of perception regarding what was actually posted. Whether that failure of perception is deliberate or due to some difficulty in reading what has been posted, I do not know.
It is interesting, to me, that after the OP of that thread announced that he had no idea why I had been so cruel to him, (even though my comments in the thread I closed were general and did not single him out for chastisement), when I tallied up the direct violations of GD rules, he was responsible for half the violations, all of them blatant, himself. That such an erudite poster would be unaware that name-calling is prohibited in Great Debates is a ludicrous claim.
All he had to do to deermine what he, (or any poster), might have done wrong would be to re-read that last couple of pages of the thread. All he needed to do to continue his line of discussion was open a new thread, without insults, on the topic of his choice, and none of this hullaballo would have occurred. Instead, he opened a thread in the wrong Forum for the express purpose of insulting me, then continued his insults in the ATMB forum in violation of the rules, and all you can say is that I have been naughty in responding (even if I did refrain from hammering him with my mad Mod powers).
If you are not paying attention to events as they occur, perhaps you should refrain from commenting upon them.
Nor do you appear to have actually read the thread about which you are posting.
I haven’t been discussing any post which I have not read. You are confusing a follow-up post (which I did read) with the post to which it referred (which I did not read.)
Tom, your complaints about me have become incoherent to me. I have no idea what thread or threads you are posting about now. If you want to put a link in a current post, perhaps I can follow your thinking. Otherwise, you are all over the board.
My understanding is that ATMB is the place that I may, as a poster, make complaints about Mods and moderation of the SDMB as long as I am civil. You may choose to call that “finger shaking” I suppose. Since you say that you were responding to a poster who had posted a complaint in ATMB, it would seem to me that you were acting as a Mod.
I really can’t think of a good reason for a Mod to use the sort of insults that you do anyway. Do you really think that we can ever see you as a “moderate” person again after you go on a tirade? You confuse the ideas of “not using invective” with being submissive.
You are making an accusation that I have addressed previously. Do you not pay attention to my responses in this thread? This is a misrepresentation of what I think. Stop twisting, Tom
I don’t think that anyone at SDMB should be a target for invective outside of the Pit. I don’t like seeing anyone abused.
Tom. Dude. Zoe is one of the most cool-headed, thoughtful posters here. With respect, you should not be projecting beliefs onto her that she does not hold and has not expressed. It’s not fair to her, and poisons your own credibility.
Poisons his what?