Codify Thread Starter Rights and Get a Mod Team

[Dr. Shades]

You honestly think that's the same as using a cussword in a discussion?

Not necessarily. But how much person A respects or disrespects any rule is proportional to how seriously I take his or her cries that person B is breaking a rule.

That's not an opinion, that's trashing a discussion board, and you're letting it happen.

Comments about the motives of people participating in threads has always been FAIR game.

AtlanticMike and WaterDog/Cultellus have now trolled dozens of SP threads, and broken YOUR rules repeatedly. Do you need more examples?

Their posts may be briefer and less delicate than those contributed by our long-timers, but are they saying anything essentially different than things that are routinely said to, for example, Ajax18? Or Subgenius, back when he was still here?

[Lem]

Comments about the motives of people participating in threads has always been FAIR game.

You consider this a comment about Jersey Girl's motives?

Anyway to include Jersey Girl's bruises, black eyes and broken bones? Maybe we could also have her go broke while Doc Cam and Schmo spend her money on Canadian beer and Clinton Kane bumper stickers. I think her loyalty to these clowns who continually crap on her community would make a lot more sense to the reader/viewer if we made the battered woman aspect more obvious.

So implying that Jersey Girl is a battered woman is a legitimate comment on her motives for posting?

[Jersey Girl]

Making another run at this.

If people can't control themselves enough to avoid using cuss words in the Spirit Paradise and Terrestrial Fora, what use is moderation to them?

You are asking here what use it is to moderate them and as I have stated, it's not about cussing.

Here is what use it is to moderate the board in general. This is a brand new board. People spent hours upon hours of their spare time to make it happen and for the first time ever, some folks dropped actual money in the hat to pay for it. Let me be clear in saying that I contributed exactly no funding for it. Those things are part of the reason that moderation is useful especially when you see it now getting shitted up by people who are simply spamming it.

Shades, this is me here. I knew this board when it was but a twinkle in your eye back on Z. I watched it be born. I helped it be born. And supported it's rebirth at least four times by my count. This is not about me being bossy. This is not about me wishing to control other people. It's about taking care of the baby. I think I made the second post on this new version of the board at the request of one who asked me to give it a test drive. Someone trusted me not to screw it up.

How many times have you seen me create threads like this? How many motions have you seen me make in Terrestrial over the years? And why?

Because it's about taking care of the baby.

Let people help you. Put out a call for mods in Terrestrial and give the community a chance to respond. Give people a chance to nominate folks they trust. You're not the only one who can root them out, you know. You're not the only one who can separate personal interests or biases from duty.

You already know that. Act on it. Think about it.

[Lem]

Comments about the motives of people participating in threads has always been FAIR game.

This addition by Cultellus was made apropo of NO post. Shades, do you consider this to be an acceptable comment about canpakes' motives?

Pannycakey is a pissboy. That is an important omission from the cross-post.

[Jersey Girl]

Comments about the motives of people participating in threads has always been FAIR game.

You consider this a comment about Jersey Girl's motives?

Anyway to include Jersey Girl's bruises, black eyes and broken bones? Maybe we could also have her go broke while Doc Cam and Schmo spend her money on Canadian beer and Clinton Kane bumper stickers. I think her loyalty to these clowns who continually crap on her community would make a lot more sense to the reader/viewer if we made the battered woman aspect more obvious.

So implying that Jersey Girl is a battered woman is a legitimate comment on her motives for posting?

[Lem]

Comments about the motives of people participating in threads has always been FAIR game.

You consider this a comment about Jersey Girl's motives?

Anyway to include Jersey Girl's bruises, black eyes and broken bones? Maybe we could also have her go broke while Doc Cam and Schmo spend her money on Canadian beer and Clinton Kane bumper stickers. I think her loyalty to these clowns who continually crap on her community would make a lot more sense to the reader/viewer if we made the battered woman aspect more obvious.

So implying that Jersey Girl is a battered woman is a legitimate comment on her motives for posting?

Hi Shades. I would still be interested in your opinion as to whether implying Jersey Girl is a battered woman is a "fair game" comment "about the motives of people participating in threads."

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Dear Brother WaterDog,



Why do you behave this way? Why do you say such things. This is not of the Lord. Honor your covenants, and your priesthood. I exhort you this very day to do so.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

How far our priesthood has fallen.



I can’t imagine the Lord wants his servants to behave in such a manner.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

The Lord himself turned the other cheek; he suffered himself to be buffeted and beaten without remonstrance; he suffered every indignity and yet spoke no word of condemnation. And his question to all of us is: “Therefore, what manner of men ought ye to be?” And his answer to us is: “Even as I am.”



Oh, dear Brother WaterDog. Dear, dear brother. Cease this meaningless behavior. Repent. Come back to the Lord, our Savior.

[Dr. Shades]

Hi Shades. I would still be interested in your opinion as to whether implying Jersey Girl is a battered woman is a "fair game" comment "about the motives of people participating in threads."

I don't know. It depends on whether he was commenting on the way her posts sound vs. whether he was insinuating that that's what she herself must be.

In the meantime, before we recruit more moderators--and no one is allowed to nominate anyone; the person him or herself must volunteer--I need to know three things:

1. If Atlanticmike and Cultellus's posts toward others are qualitatively different from everyone else's posts toward Ajax18, and
2. If there's a difference between calling us out on what they perceive to be our negative behavior vs. mere trolling, and whether & how we can know on which side of the line our two new posters fall, and
3. If the former, whether there's a kernel or more of truth in any of what they've been saying.