Rule Changes + New Restrictions

[pocaracas]

That would leave you completely at the mercy of an individual mod... Imagine a mod gets into a heated argument with a user... the mod must refrain him/her-self from hitting the ban hammer.... imagine this particular mod loses control... (it has happened on other forums, could happen here... though, I don't think it could happen with the present mods ).

How so? An individual mod doesn't have the authority to ban anyone here (with the exception of obvious spammers). Were it to happen, it would get overturned pretty quickly.

yes, but the user wouldn't be happy about it...

[John V]

It's not your observational skills I question so much as your diplomacy, constructiveness, ability to 'gitrdone', judgement, intentions, and among others, "work well with others".

I have comparable experience, though I do not consider myself a skilled facilitator or negotiator. Perhaps your heart is in the right place, I'm just not sure that place is where your words are coming from.

And yes, I agree. Words matter. The more important the matter, the more important the words.

I'm a very skilled negotiator, but I'm not trying to negotiate in this thread. I don't care what the outcome is. My motivation is mostly intellectual.

[Angrboda]

It's not your observational skills I question so much as your diplomacy, constructiveness, ability to 'gitrdone', judgement, intentions, and among others, "work well with others".

I have comparable experience, though I do not consider myself a skilled facilitator or negotiator. Perhaps your heart is in the right place, I'm just not sure that place is where your words are coming from.

And yes, I agree. Words matter. The more important the matter, the more important the words.

I'm a very skilled negotiator, but I'm not trying to negotiate in this thread. I don't care what the outcome is. My motivation is mostly intellectual.

Thank you. Your candor is appreciated, by me if by no one else.

(ETA: And you just invoked a straw man. I was questioning your expertise in relation to knowing how our moderation process might work based on your own, analogous experience. You better not try to 'negotiate' with us via this thread or you may run afoul of the law. [pun intended])


(ETA2: And despite, perhaps, earlier impressions, you are managing to contribute constructive criticism and suggestion, just next time, I would suggest, say it with flowers. The other approach works, but not necessarily from within a context of power relationships similar to those here.)

[John V]

I'm a very skilled negotiator, but I'm not trying to negotiate in this thread. I don't care what the outcome is. My motivation is mostly intellectual.

Thank you. Your candor is appreciated, by me if by no one else.

Sure. And BTW, this is nothing new. I noted in my third post in this thread that the board can do what it wants, and I just posted because I found it interesting:

I've made it clear before and now reiterate that the owners of a site have every right to do with it as they please. Just interesting that you go through the charade of rules which really amount to nothing.

People who are guessing at my motivations aren't reading what I've actually said.

[Captain Colostomy]

Intellectual exercise? Uh-huh...

[Angrboda]

Thank you. Your candor is appreciated, by me if by no one else.

Sure. And BTW, this is nothing new. I noted in my third post in this thread that the board can do what it wants, and I just posted because I found it interesting:

I've made it clear before and now reiterate that the owners of a site have every right to do with it as they please. Just interesting that you go through the charade of rules which really amount to nothing.

People who are guessing at my motivations aren't reading what I've actually said.

I've got a more substantive comment, but don't feel like working it at the moment. As humans, a social animal, we use our built-in "theory of [other people's] mind" to negotiate our environment, because our environment is filled with bodies that have minds, and their behavior can be more successfully predicted by having a model and theory of what they are thinking inside themselves. Speculating on motives is a natural part of this, as motives often explain behavior, thus making such speculation an effective cognitive shortcut, to, say, 'asking' or just 'talking'. But it's also very natural for people to believe their theory about another's motives is fact, and then committing or over-committing on the basis of that error. Please forgive them, Lord. They know not what they do.

[LastPoet]

How so? An individual mod doesn't have the authority to ban anyone here (with the exception of obvious spammers). Were it to happen, it would get overturned pretty quickly.

And rightly so.

Its not that something like that ever happened...

[pocaracas]

How so? An individual mod doesn't have the authority to ban anyone here (with the exception of obvious spammers). Were it to happen, it would get overturned pretty quickly.

And rightly so.

Its not that something like that ever happened...

Good thing I only praised the "current team"

[Mystical]

You're fucking ridiculous John. You've stated clearly what you think the rules should say. Neither is that option fiesable nor is it based in re-al-it-y. If you don't care the outcome why do you keep on talking? I'm perfectly happy with the consensus rulings enacted by the staff. If they wanted to do whatever they wanted there wouldn't be a need for more than an individuals' whim. You hardly seem objective in your objections, despite your 'noncaring' front. Its quite clear what bothers you, who bothers you, how they bother you, and why. Put on your bigboy pants and get over it. We live in the real world where real people have real arguments and both sides have the freedom to say it in whatever manner they please. Including but not limited to pointing out: that you're acting like a dumbass.

[Angrboda]

This may or may not get tacked on to my prior post, but, don't care. I just want to point out to others, that, if John is, as a theist, and opposed to certain practices and behaviors, past and present, simply looking for holes to exploit or whatnot, then that makes his input all the more valuable to us as staff in working to arrive at the most quality result possible, especially given that these rules must govern a mixed community of highly polarized beliefs and believers, commitments, and self-interests.

As has been pointed out elsewhere (not public), some degree of 'trial by fire' may be necessary, and John does appear to be providing some good heat.