Campaign to Reinstate Jersey as a Mod

[_Jersey Girl]

Bringing this post back to the forefront.

Here are the moderator actions that I took, Shades. By my count there were 9, 3 of which were Mercury who started this poll thread.

Here they are, Doc. I copied them from the search feature but that'll have to do for now. Let's count 'em.

1. By Mercury who started this poll thread:
Forum: The Telestial Forum Posted: Mon May 19, 2008 9:54 pm Subject: Operation Ghey watch


Moderator Note: Moved to the Telestial Forum.

2. By Mercury who started this poll thread:
Forum: The Telestial Forum Posted: Mon May 19, 2008 9:44 pm Subject: Robert Crockett- Dealing honestly with his fellow man?


Moderator Note: Moved to Telestial Forum.

3. By Mercury who started this poll thread:
Forum: The Telestial Forum Posted: Mon May 19, 2008 9:51 pm Subject: My Theory for why Coggy gave up his handle for a flaccid one


Moderator Note: Moved to the Telestial Forum.

4. This was posted by Chap who posted positively regarding my moderation in this poll thread.

Forum: The Telestial Forum Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2008 5:29 pm Subject: Welcome back Coggins7! And we have mail for you ...


Moderator Note: Moved due to Temple content. A shadow link to this thread remains in the Terrestrial Forum.

5. By Tal Bachman.
Forum: The Telestial Forum Posted: Sat Apr 12, 2008 10:34 pm Subject: That Wade photo...


Moderator Note: Moved to Telestial Forum. A shadow link to this thread remains in the Terrestrial Forum.

6. Coggins lyrics. I typically left posts like this to stand a bit before moving them.

Forum: The Telestial Forum Posted: Sun Apr 20, 2008 8:03 pm Subject: Bachman Talmadge Overdrive


Moderator Note: Moved to the Telestial Forum. A shadow link to this thread remains in the Terrestrial Forum.

7. This one began the final "r*****" discussion on another thread. beastie thanked me for moving it.:

Forum: The Telestial Forum Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2008 2:19 pm Subject: Is apostasy from the Gospel a funtion of natural selection?


Moderator Note: Moved to Telestial Forum. A shadow link to this thread remains in the Terrestrial Forum.

8. Handed this one off to Shades regarding an image of LoaP that was posted:

Forum: The Telestial Forum Posted: Fri May 23, 2008 12:25 am Subject: Relationship between LifeOnaPlate and DCP at MAD Board


Wait a minute. There is something wrong here with posting items to embarrass non-celebrity posters. It is one thing to take on
Dr. Peterson or Tal, but it doesn't seem right to go after an ordinary ...

Shades ended up pulling the post himself.

9. And then the very last thing I did as moderator, just before being asked to resign was to pull the same image as Shades had pulled. The exchanges begin here.

http://mormondiscussions.com/discuss/vi ... 745#162745

Infymus (who posted the image first) and Scratch (who had nothing to do with the image) both protested on the thread itself.

[_Ray A]

I think the poll does all the talking.

Yes 82% ( 42 )

No 17% ( 9 )

All men/women are born equal, some are just more equal than others.

[_Jersey Girl]

I'll begin finishing up the replies that I've left unattended.

You're right when you said this was a "tempest in a tea pot", Shades. Seriously.

If you truly feel that way, than why are you continuing this inane crusade?

Because what has gone on here is wrong.

[_Dr. Shades]

But we inadvertently learned something about the MormonDiscussions board--it's more like MADB than most here might want to admit. Many times I've seen posters here accuse the MADB board of banning posters on the whims of Dr. Peterson or Juliann.

Unlike at MA&D, Jersey Girl wasn't banned.

Shades ADMITTED he gave in to the demands of a couple of posters who threatened to leave.

That wasn't an isolated incident. It was the crescendo of a long build-up.

And another irony--unlike on MADB--where we know who the "privileged" posters are, these MD posters who "call the shots" are anonymous. Posters who have enough clout that Shades was willing to sacrifice a capable moderator to satisfy their whims.

Being a moderator or not being a moderator isn't a privilege or punishment either way.

Shades explained his reasons for his actions, and as the board owner, he can do as he pleases. But if the explanation he gave is true, then he's lost some of the high ground he inhabited by allowing a couple of unnamed posters to force a moderator out because she wasn't "liked".

Me giving in to a minority of people isn't all that unusual. Remember the "faith-based thread" debacle? A (larger) minority complained about it, so I overturned it. Don't forget about the "R" word affair, either: A minority of people were highly uncomfortable with it, so I activated the auto-censor for it. In another, entirely behind-the-scenes case, ONE person complained about me always correcting people's spelling and grammar, so I promptly quit doing that, too.

I'm sure I'll attempt to please the minority again in the future. More than once, I'll bet.

KEEP IN MIND that I have never, EVER budged on the issue of banning someone, even though various and sundry people have called for persons X, Y, or Z to be banned. It's almost safe to say that nearly everyone has complained about someone at one time or another. But have I ever budged? Has anyone ever been banned? No.

So don't forget this key fact: Just because Jersey Girl can no longer edit posts, delete posts, split threads, or move threads does NOT mean that her freedom of speech has been muzzled. Hence the vast, vast gulf between this issue and the state-of-affairs at MA&D.

[_Jersey Girl]

My goodness, Shades. Is it that you can't think or that you refuse to deal with the obvious?

[_Dr. Shades]

Comments like that are probably what prompted people to complain to begin with.

[_Jersey Girl]

Comments like that are probably what prompted people to complain to begin with.

Here, let me show you.

Me giving in to a minority of people isn't all that unusual. Remember the "faith-based thread" debacle? A (larger) minority complained about it, so I overturned it.

This was conducted publicly.

Don't forget about the "R" word affair, either: A minority of people were highly uncomfortable with it, so I activated the auto-censor for it.

This was conducted publicly.

In another, entirely behind-the-scenes case, ONE person complained about me always correcting people's spelling and grammar, so I promptly quit doing that, too.

How long ago was that and how is a person bringing a complaint about you directly to you at all analogous to the complaints you took behind the scenes regarding me?

As to the comment I made that you are referring to, tell me, did comments l made as a poster effect the mod actions that I took? The fact is, Shades, that you chose to cave in to the demands of "one or more" posters whose complaints had no basis in reality and what you're essentially defending here is that you value the contributions of posters whose thinking is irrational.

Do you see how that makes your reasoning appear to lack clarity of thought?

[_moksha]

...and how many posters here are that valuable?

I vote for Pokatator. Heads should roll if the Spud were to be upset. Dr. Peterson is their Spud and Pokatator is ours!

[_Jersey Girl]

I'm sure I'll attempt to please the minority again in the future. More than once, I'll bet.

The minorities that you listed in your post above made their complaints publicly and their complaints were addressed publicly.

KEEP IN MIND that I have never, EVER budged on the issue of banning someone, even though various and sundry people have called for persons X, Y, or Z to be banned. It's almost safe to say that nearly everyone has complained about someone at one time or another. But have I ever budged? Has anyone ever been banned? No.

Banning is irrelevant to the topic of this thread.

So don't forget this key fact: Just because Jersey Girl can no longer edit posts, delete posts, split threads, or move threads does NOT mean that her freedom of speech has been muzzled. Hence the vast, vast gulf between this issue and the state-of-affairs at MA&D.

Here you miss the obvious thrust of Alter Idem's remarks. So far as I can tell, she has not raised the issue of freedom of speech or banning. She raised the issue of behind the scenes transactions that this community regularly criticizes the MAD board for. If I am mistaken, I hope that Alter will offer correction.

[_Jersey Girl]

Shades,

In a previous post you claimed that "this last bout (of complaints) contained actual anger" and then went on to remark that in the complaints ran an "iron cable" that Jersey was seen as "a hot head who becomes angry over stupid stuff".

So what you're saying is that I was seen as a hot head who became angry over stupid stuff and that you received a last series of complaints that contained actual anger. That sounds kind of conflicted.

I have posted all the mod actions that I took on this thread, twice in fact. All the actions that I took involved moving attack threads and Coggins lyrics to the Telestial Forum as per your instructions. Except for the last. In the last action I took, I cloned an action of yours regarding pulling an image of LoaP that you had made the decision to remove. When I saw the same image appear on a newer thread, I pulled it as you did in the following exchanges for which I will use one post that contains most of the dialogue.

http://mormondiscussions.com/discuss/viewtopic.php?p=162848#162848

They have alternate copies as well.

<image deleted>

[MODERATOR NOTE: If you want to use poster images, please do not include any information/images obtained anywhere other than a source that the poster has created her/himself and overtly and purposefully made public.~Jersey Girl]

Oh PISS OFF Jersey. This image was made available ON THE INTERNET. It's LOP's dumbass fault for posting such an image. On top of that, did you just pull that rule out of your ass? Why didn't Dr. Shades post it under his rules?

If you post a picture of yourself on the Internet, then it is PUBLIC DOMAIN.

Except on Dr. Shades board, where it will be moderated off by some obscure rule that a Mod decides to create ON THE FLY.

f*****g mods, always protecting the Mormons on this site.

Moderator Note: I"m editing this reply since you chose to modify your post, Infymus. No moderator, including myself, created a rule "ON THE FLY" nor did I pull it out of my ass. I pulled it out of Shades ass and via the link that will appear at the end of this post in which he makes a public policy statement regarding the image in question. If you have an issue with this, feel free to take it up with him.~Jersey Girl.

http://mormondiscussions.com/discuss/viewtopic.php?p=158400#158400


Now, "speaking as a man". The next time you decide to tell me to piss off and comment regarding moderation or moderators, try inquiring before leveling baseless accusations as if you're being persecuted. It doesn't go over well on this end.

That's not a "guideline," Jersey, and Shades was obviously wrong in his rationale, as I later pointed out via the posting of a link. He originally reasoned that the pic shouldn't be up because Shades thought that I'd somehow "hacked" into a non-public Photobucket account in order to get it. Well, that's not what happened at all. LoaP himself freely posted that image. I could have continued arguing as to why the original posting should not have been deleted by Shades, but decided to let it go. That said, you had no business waving the scepter of censorship in this thread.

If anyone is of a mind to, they can use the above link to see the culmination of the exchanges wherein I noted that you had not rescinded your decision and maintained that decision by my actions. Telling Scratch to take it up with you and him saying that he already had. Yet, I had no notice from you that you had rescinded your decision.

In the above you see that Infymus posted the image of LoaP. I pulled it using phrasing cloned from your own phrasing. Following that, Infymus protested by telling me to "PISS OFF" and accusing me of favoritism toward TBM's and concluding with scolding by Scratch telling me :

That said, you had no business waving the scepter of censorship in this thread.

And the very next day you approached me regarding my status as moderator.

I don't know, Shades. It seems to me that hot heads who get angry over stupid stuff are much like those above who became angry over your moderator pulling an image that you yourself had pulled, that was an altered image of one of your posters that one or more of them wanted to use to get over on another one of your posters, one of whom chose to scold your moderator for acting as a clone of yourself and telling your moderator that she had no business "raising the scepter of censorship" in the thread when what she (I) did, was follow precedence set by you.

In closing, the iron cable that I see in all of this is that you're willing to have your mods go to bat for your decisions and when people complain via some type of sense of entitlement that your mod does exactly what it is that you expected, you're willing to go belly up and roll over on your mod. If your moderators have no business acting as expected, what is their business?



As Boaz and Lidia stated on the announcement thread you made:

"Christ on a crutch people.... this is just... a.... message board."

A poster who often goes much maligned on this board and with whom I couldn't agree more in this case. Still, when you give someone a job to do and they do it, I should think one would act on somewhat stronger a principle than that of "pleasing" people for if you set your mind on pleasing, you will see that the effort is ever shifting and repeatedly places you in conflicted positions to the point where people no longer perceive you as one who is decisive. You have multiple issues to resolve here, Shades, and I will be glad not to take part in it.