(April 4, 2012 at 12:12 pm)reverendjeremiah Wrote: I must respectfully disagree. From his point of view in light of common events he equated it with a personal attack. I have spoken with him of forum and he still holds to the attacks, but I must admit I have not spoken to him of possible browser issues on his end, or somewhere in between the signal.If he still holds to the "personal attacks" then he is as deluded as he is vicious. The staff pointed out to him multiple times that his posts were still there; he ignored us and instead decided to spread lies about the staff being "corrupt".
Quote:You have a pit dont you? Please remember that from his point of view he saw it as a personal attack from someone capable of erasing his postings. I of course would not have gone on a rage such as that, but I would claim my bias of actually knowing how the webs work because of that. Whateverest has a bit of age upon him, and many in that bracket are just not that savy to the net. Being men of coding we should stretch out a hand of understanding to such people. Put him in the pit, give him some explanation of why he was there while the staff looked into fixing the problem both in code and communication. I see it from my opinion as the staff using a sledge hammer when a tack hammer would have had a much better effect.Don't they say wisdom comes with age? A pity that seems to be the exception rather than the rule. Most older people seem to cling onto their presuppositions, despite the mounting evidence against them. In the pit, he can still do damage. I am trying to minimize damage here; there has been too much misinformation plastered about over the last few days, without people like whateverist adding to it.
Quote:So even though I have been VERY respectful about this, you insist on insulting my inteligence and experience? I AM a moderator for my union and have saved many peoples jobs from miscommunications such as this. I have even saved the employers and foreman from charges by keeping them up to date on current laws and contractual agreements. I was also a moderator of the biggest Virginia atheists yahoo group a decade ago. I never used the ban button for anyone other than spammers. For members you use the "moderate" button. You put ALL involved parties into moderation and you stand between them as an unbiased mediator. Hopefully people shake hands and go back to being productive members of the community after the moderation.
FYI, adding the word "respectfully" in front of every disagreement you make does not make you respectful, especially when it was only yesterday that you made this post where you stated you had "ZERO" respect for me now. So yes, I will insult your intelligence and experience over this; I think that after all the times you've literally picked at straws trying to defend some of the scum who come here, I have that right.
I don't care if you "moderate" your union; this is the Internet, it's an entirely different playing field. Same with a decade old Yahoo group; again, today's web is a free-for-all, not the limited pleasant place it once was. These days, we have more than spammers, we have active trolls, we have people who disrupt activity by repeatedly posting pornography, and we have people who try desperately try to evade their bans. You are incredibly naive when it comes to their motives behind this; people who evade bans are not doing it because "they must really love the forums". They are doing it to be assholes and piss people off. If they really did love the forums, they would accept that they behaved like a git, sit out the length of their ban, and return with apologetic posts.
If we ran things your way, it would be like pardoning escaped prisoners because "they obviously love being in society". You are naive; you think your friendship with these people gives them a carte blanche to do anything they like. Well, it doesn't. I stand by my assertion; you would make a terrible moderator; your forums would be overrun by trolls and vandals.
