So do we even have any form of moderation here?

So after the amazing shit show that was Gabe and Michelle crapping all over the message board here I think it is a good time to ask this question.

What happened here is ridiculous, two people were allowed to run wild like a couple of monkeys flinging shit everywhere. Regardless of who you want to see as wrong or right there the fact remains that they were allowed to carry on completely unchecked.

Why? Light moderation is one thing but why should two defective people be allowed to run wild like that? Especially when others have been kicked off for doing the same?

Didn’t we kick off Beezodog for hijacking threads and not letting an argument die?

Of course that leads to another thing; we have some loose rules but they never seem to be enforced, why?

So what is it, do we have an enforce rules or can people just do whatever they like? Because it mostly looks like people can just act however they want…

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Anne Alt on September 2, 2014 at 1:41pm

Very well said. Thank you Dave, for continuing to be a voice of reason.

David Barish said:

While I rode my bike this weekend this discussion has continued. I have read some, but frankly, not all of the posts. The conversation between Gabe and Michelle has sparked a valid discussion and a less worthy repetition. I have reflected on the original discussion and here is what I see:

Michelle objected to the use of the term retard. This is an outdated term that is not appropriate but I think has a lot less meaning than a word such as...oh, lets say nigger or cunt. Those two words are beyond outdated. The are offensive as soon as they hit the page. I thought twice before typing them but felt they need to be there to compare to Gabe's term. Had Michelle called Gabe out and moved on we all would have been better off and perhaps Gabe would have thought about it rather than reacted childishly to her continued whining on the subject. At this point the rest of us mostly tuned out and the conversation degenerated.

The real problem is what happened after the initial disagreement over what can be said. Gabe dug in and simply incrased the volume and intensity. He seemed to be intentionally baiting Michelle into even more shrill complaints about propriety. She, not seeing the forest through the trees, took that bait and ran with it until she was in a place where where she was isolated and alone.

I feel a need to speak to people at both ends off this conversation.

To the supporters of Gabe- I agree he can use this term and I agree that it is not a good choice (please note my choice of words here) to use it. If that's how he wishes to express himself we know who he is and we take his words in the context of the language he chooses to use in support of his arguments.

At stage two of the problem Gabe's offense is much worse than the use of the term retard. He was a bully and piled on increasing abuse. He was a predator in the forest seeing a wounded animal. He could not resist. Michelle was shrill and annoying but she meant well and did not deserve the abuse.

To the supprters of Michelle- Its fine to be a touchstone for ethics, propriety and morality. We can all use a dose of this. Do not, I repeat, DO NOT assume you always have the moral high ground. Do not assume that you can interpret right from wrong and that all who oppose you are part of the male dominated hedgemony of this female owned website. Sometimes the things you see are not best interpreted through the lens of your Freshman Women's Studies seminar. They are better seen as humans making poor decisions or bad netiquette that harkens back to the playgrounds of one's youth. Recognizing the vulnerability that is exposed in such behavior may help you see that this is not a powerful statement and may help you leave it alone.

As to part two, you too have a part in this. Once you state that a wrong has been committed you cannot take the ball home so none of the rest of us can play. You cannot sweep the conversation and sweep who participates. We are adults. This is not AYSO soccer. Everybody doesn't get a trophy. We are not living in the federation utopia of the 24th century. Shit flies and if it bothers you, duck.

Doug is an interesting case. He has been an active voice on the forum and often a divisive one. He seems to be aware of that and simply wants things to be fairly moderated. I agree with that. I think its a fine line to say that Michelle and not Gabe should be banned. Frankly I think neither should be banned but both should be spanked. That being said, I can live with the decision that was made. Its the increasing flaming and bitching that wastes our time and annoys the community. Still, I beg all to consider this when they post. Over the weekend, I did follow the thread. Numerous times I began typing a reply and simply deleted it thinking my voice would not add to the conversation. The more we do that the less we will need to resort to the wisdom of the overlords.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Chitown_Mike on September 2, 2014 at 5:50pm

I think it was more of a "better time and place" statement than "let's turn a blind eye". That is how I read it at least, I wasn't looking for the "hidden" (aka assumed) meanings in David's post. I did see the blatant antagonizing of Michelle on the grounds of free speech, and I saw her insistent pestering and belittling of those with opposing viewpoints on the grounds of "moral superiority".

Just waiting for Godwin's Law to show up......any post now.....

Davis Moore said:

This just reads as a long winded apology for/defense of the use of discriminatory language on the grounds of not upsetting the status quo.

I'm sure the civil rights era was full of similar imminently reasonable sounding people saying things like "We all know segregation is a bad thing, but it's not that bad. Besides, trying to integrate the races is just going to cause too many problems. Let's just let nature take it's course and change will happen when the time is 'right'."

Thank goodness civil rights leaders didn't listen to the sage advice of the wise, old, white and self-appointed grand poohbahs.

David Barish said:

While I rode my bike this weekend this discussion has continued. I have read some, but frankly, not all of the posts. The conversation between Gabe and Michelle has sparked a valid discussion and a less worthy repetition. I have reflected on the original discussion and here is what I see:

Michelle objected to the use of the term retard. This is an outdated term that is not appropriate but I think has a lot less meaning than a word such as...oh, lets say nigger or cunt. Those two words are beyond outdated. The are offensive as soon as they hit the page. I thought twice before typing them but felt they need to be there to compare to Gabe's term. Had Michelle called Gabe out and moved on we all would have been better off and perhaps Gabe would have thought about it rather than reacted childishly to her continued whining on the subject. At this point the rest of us mostly tuned out and the conversation degenerated.

The real problem is what happened after the initial disagreement over what can be said. Gabe dug in and simply incrased the volume and intensity. He seemed to be intentionally baiting Michelle into even more shrill complaints about propriety. She, not seeing the forest through the trees, took that bait and ran with it until she was in a place where where she was isolated and alone.

I feel a need to speak to people at both ends off this conversation.

To the supporters of Gabe- I agree he can use this term and I agree that it is not a good choice (please note my choice of words here) to use it. If that's how he wishes to express himself we know who he is and we take his words in the context of the language he chooses to use in support of his arguments.

At stage two of the problem Gabe's offense is much worse than the use of the term retard. He was a bully and piled on increasing abuse. He was a predator in the forest seeing a wounded animal. He could not resist. Michelle was shrill and annoying but she meant well and did not deserve the abuse.

To the supprters of Michelle- Its fine to be a touchstone for ethics, propriety and morality. We can all use a dose of this. Do not, I repeat, DO NOT assume you always have the moral high ground. Do not assume that you can interpret right from wrong and that all who oppose you are part of the male dominated hedgemony of this female owned website. Sometimes the things you see are not best interpreted through the lens of your Freshman Women's Studies seminar. They are better seen as humans making poor decisions or bad netiquette that harkens back to the playgrounds of one's youth. Recognizing the vulnerability that is exposed in such behavior may help you see that this is not a powerful statement and may help you leave it alone.

As to part two, you too have a part in this. Once you state that a wrong has been committed you cannot take the ball home so none of the rest of us can play. You cannot sweep the conversation and sweep who participates. We are adults. This is not AYSO soccer. Everybody doesn't get a trophy. We are not living in the federation utopia of the 24th century. Shit flies and if it bothers you, duck.

Doug is an interesting case. He has been an active voice on the forum and often a divisive one. He seems to be aware of that and simply wants things to be fairly moderated. I agree with that. I think its a fine line to say that Michelle and not Gabe should be banned. Frankly I think neither should be banned but both should be spanked. That being said, I can live with the decision that was made. Its the increasing flaming and bitching that wastes our time and annoys the community. Still, I beg all to consider this when they post. Over the weekend, I did follow the thread. Numerous times I began typing a reply and simply deleted it thinking my voice would not add to the conversation. The more we do that the less we will need to resort to the wisdom of the overlords.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Davo on September 3, 2014 at 9:11am

I feel this thread may have done this now:

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Far'arned Retrogrumpalunkus #63 on September 3, 2014 at 10:00am

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Anne Alt on September 3, 2014 at 10:40am

Yep.

Chitown_Mike said:

I think it was more of a "better time and place" statement than "let's turn a blind eye". That is how I read it at least, I wasn't looking for the "hidden" (aka assumed) meanings in David's post. I did see the blatant antagonizing of Michelle on the grounds of free speech, and I saw her insistent pestering and belittling of those with opposing viewpoints on the grounds of "moral superiority".

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by h' Zerocats on September 3, 2014 at 10:47am

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Far'arned Retrogrumpalunkus #63 on September 3, 2014 at 11:41am

h' 1.0 said:

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Chitown_Mike on September 3, 2014 at 4:39pm

Self-sealing Stembolt said:

h' 1.0 said:

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Doug Haynes on September 4, 2014 at 10:30am

OK, so just to keep score here so I can be clear on this all:

The owner of the site has no input on what was or was not OK in what transpired or in how it was moderated.
The rules here are selectively enforceable based on wether or not you are part of the 'cool kids club.'
Lee works very hard occasionally moderating selectively for no compensation, which means he must pay for his ad here, right?
It's OK to derail this thread with pictures and nonsense because you don't like it but not others.