Rules and Moderator information

[Whiskey]

Shades and Xeno,

Can you please address these items? Thanks.





If any or all of these questions can't be addressed, I will assume that 3 is a confirmed Yes and 4 is a confirmed No.

Awesome. New questions. Here are your answers:

1. Nope.
2. Whole sentences are best if quoting another poster with ID.
3. There is no mod named ‘panny’.
4. Posts don’t always need to be reported prior to being moved if a mod makes the move based on observation, and at their discretion.

What’s next?

So you moderated a post that was not a rule violation.

On that note ...

[canpakes]

Awesome. New questions. Here are your answers:

1. Nope.
2. Whole sentences are best if quoting another poster with ID.
3. There is no mod named ‘panny’.
4. Posts don’t always need to be reported prior to being moved if a mod makes the move based on observation, and at their discretion.

What’s next?

So you moderated a post that was not a rule violation.

On that note ...

Your insertion of text into another person’s quoted snippet was moderated by me. This practice of inserting text into other people’s quotes is generally considered unacceptable. One of the reasons why it is now considered unacceptable is because you abused the practice under your previous Binger account. I believe that you even earned a time out for it.

Now you’re looking for an exception to this policy and demanding that another rule must be created to disallow another attempt by you to do something disingenuous, or that you’ll whine about it and keep doing it, for no good reason.

If Shades decides that’s OK, then you’re free to proceed. As will everyone else be free to do the same.

[Hound of Heaven]

Would I be within the rules of the board?

Yes, but please keep in mind that if any of the post you screenshot end up being moved to the Spirit Prison forum then they'll become irrelevant.

First of all, happy new year, Dr. Shades.

I want this year to start off on a good note, so I have a question for you, can you please think about not letting Canpakes moderate Whiskey at all? That way, we won't have to watch them fight over stupid stuff. If Canpakes feels Whiskey is breaking a rule, he should have to ask you or Xeno to make the final decision before any punishment is given, because it's clear he hates Whiskey and he treats Whiskey differently than he treats other board members. Im sick and tired of Canpakes bringing up stuff Whiskey possibly did 2 or 3 years ago, telling us about it, then using it against Whiskey for his reason for punishing him. Whiskey isn't on any kind of restrictive posting, so Canpakes shouldn't use Whiskey's posting habits from 2 or 3 years ago, to judge him now. Not only that, but he's doing it openly on the board, telling everyone he's doing it, because he wants to piss Whiskey off!

I'm asking because it's clear that Canpakes is using his moderating powers to annoy Whiskey so they can fight here in front of everyone, and I'm sick of seeing Canpakes hold Whiskey to a higher standard. It's clear that he's doing it only to annoy Whiskey. As a moderator, Canpakes should be trying to de escalate situations, not make them worse.

Here are a few reasons why I think you should not let Canpakes use his moderating talents to regulate Whiskey. You told Canpakes not to moderate any thread that Whiskey is commenting on, about a month ago, but he plainly didn't listen to you. Another reason is that Canpakes, as a moderator, can't contain himself. He is actively looking for an excuse to regulate Whiskey without any complaints from a board member, but he won't do the same to his friends like drcam or Schmo or any of his other friends.

Another reason is that you or Xeno have overruled Canpake's decisions at least six or seven times in the last six months when I asked. For example, Canpakes banned Whiskey for two weeks for no reason other than that Whiskey offended him. And in this case, Canpak was so wrong about his choice that even Jersey Girl questioned why he banned Whiskey, saying that he shouldn't be moderating threads he's in. It's clear that Canpakes doesn't like Whiskey, which is fine, but it's also clear that he can't separate his moderating self from his regular board participation self. This means that everyone has to watch Canpakes treat Whiskey differently on the board because he wants to embarrass and upset Whiskey in front of all the board members.

Please think about not letting Canpakes moderate Whiskey at all. It's evident that he can't be fair to Whiskey, which is the most important thing for a moderator to do.

Im not going overboard and asking you to remove Canpakes as a moderator, im asking you to remove his ability to moderate Whiskey, because it's clear Canpakes can't stop judging Whiskey unfairly.

[Hound of Heaven]

Would I be within the rules of the board?

Yes, but please keep in mind that if any of the post you screenshot end up being moved to the Spirit Prison forum then they'll become irrelevant.

Shades, please consider this example of Canpakes clear bias towards Whiskey as an example of why he shouldn't be moderating him. In the image below, Canpake's is clearly admitting he proactively moderates Whiskey without any complaint from a board member. For over a year, i have been asking Canpakes to proactively moderate Drcam, Schmo and Wang Chung, and every time I asked, Canpakes says I need to make an official report because you don't want him moderating post without an official report being made.

So clearly, as you can see from Canpakes own words, he's willing to moderate Whiskey proactively, but he's not willing to do the same for his friends like Drcam or Schmo. It's clear he's willing an actively moderating Whiskey differently than everyone else, and for this reason, please consider not allowing Canpakes to moderate Whiskey. We would all benefit from you and Xeno moderating Whiskey, and letting Whiskey and Canpakes interact as board members only.

[Hound of Heaven]

Dr. Shades, I’m not seeking a response to this post; I’m sharing it for you to reflect on the information I’m presenting.

[SNIP!]

If a moderator engages in a direct confrontation with a board member in a thread and opts to ban the board member rather than simply leaving the discussion, that individual is not fit to hold the position of moderator. A moderator must understand how to navigate the path of least resistance IF THEY ARE GOING TO ENGAGE IN THE SAME BEHAVIOR as the members they punish.

Your concern is acknowledged. A conversation has already been had such that I'm hopeful this won't be an issue in the future.

And lastly, please remember this conversation, the one above, that we had. It's obvious Canpakes isn't listening to whatever you and he discussed in the conversation you had with him. He is still hunting for Whiskey in threads for the purpose of pissung him off. As a board member, that's fine, but Canpakes is still abusing his moderating powers to target Whiskey.

Again, im not asking for Whiskey not to be moderated, im asking for you or Xeno to moderate Whiskey at least until Canpakes can learn how to be unbiased towards everyone on the board as a moderator.



OK, im done until we hear your decision if you're so kind to share your opinion. Thanks!

[Whiskey]

Your concern is acknowledged. A conversation has already been had such that I'm hopeful this won't be an issue in the future.

And lastly, please remember this conversation, the one above, that we had. It's obvious Canpakes isn't listening to whatever you and he discussed in the conversation you had with him. He is still hunting for Whiskey in threads for the purpose of pissung him off. As a board member, that's fine, but Canpakes is still abusing his moderating powers to target Whiskey.

Again, im not asking for Whiskey not to be moderated, im asking for you or Xeno to moderate Whiskey at least until Canpakes can learn how to be unbiased towards everyone on the board as a moderator.

OK, im done until we hear your decision if you're so kind to share your opinion. Thanks!

I am not done. Xeno and Shades, please check your PM's. I prefer to have this conversation privately, but it seems that that option has been denied as well.

My offer still stands. My conditions remain.

1: "[blah blah blah]" is an unacceptable notation for a text omission within a quote? Yes/No
2: panny's partial omission of text within a quote without any notation is acceptable? Yes/No
3: panny is a moderator on this board? Yes/No

Three Yes results and Shades can delete my account and block my IP forever. I will insist on it. Deal?

[canpakes]

Happy New Year to you, Hound account and Whiskey!

I’m sad to see that you fired up both accounts within minutes of each other so early this morning. Last night must have been pretty lackluster for you. Here’s to a better 2026.
: )

[Whiskey]

Happy New Year to you, Hound account and Whiskey!

I’m sad to see that you fired up both accounts within minutes of each other so early this morning. Last night must have been pretty lackluster for you. Here’s to a better 2026.
: )

Xeno and Shades, I do prefer to do this in PM's, but as I have already noted, that option seems to be off the table too.

Can you please address your moderator's behavior here? Clearly, given the standards, he can't also moderate this thread. I agree with Hound that panny should not be moderating ANY thread that includes any contribution from anyone that panny is needling and antagonizing. This sock puppet BS is repetitive lie from panny. Hardly worth addressing. He has brought that up before. In the previous case, it was when he was violating another moderating standard by disclosing that I had made a report of a post. Even that assertion was a crock of crap and lies, considering that panny has also complained when I used the report button.

You cool with this, Xeno?

Thank you, Whiskey, for finally learning how to use the report button.

Next up: the Hound account.

[canpakes]

I’ve changed my mind. You may have partied too much last night and now the fallout is causing you to post nonsense.

I raise my coffee mug to you. Here’s to a better 2026 … I guess.

[Marcus]

And lastly, please remember this conversation, the one above, that we had. It's obvious Canpakes isn't listening to whatever you and he discussed in the conversation you had with him. He is still hunting for Whiskey in threads for the purpose of pissung him off. As a board member, that's fine, but Canpakes is still abusing his moderating powers to target Whiskey.

Again, im not asking for Whiskey not to be moderated, im asking for you or Xeno to moderate Whiskey at least until Canpakes can learn how to be unbiased towards everyone on the board as a moderator.

OK, im done until we hear your decision if you're so kind to share your opinion. Thanks!

I am not done. Xeno and Shades, please check your PM's. I prefer to have this conversation privately, but it seems that that option has been denied as well...

How was the option to speak to Shades through PMs denied?