Jersey Girl wrote:This is going to be a long one, so get comfortable (or not). I'm going to make an effort to clear the air here on a number of levels and you can take my words for the straightforward comments that they are or go about believing people who kiss your ass publicly and criticize you privately.
There are people like that?
The other comment that came up most frequently is that you wanted me gone because I'm too outspoken and don't participate in herd mentality. (This post a case in point).
Where on earth did I ever say
that?Likewise, had you paid attention to the PM's we exchanged just prior to your announcing me as a new moderator, you would have remembered that I told you could feel free to terminate me any time. Pay attention to what people tell you. It could save you a month of agonizing b***s***.
If I was free to terminate you at any time, then why did you put up such a wild fight when I actually did so?
In your responses you *claimed that you wanted people happy. When the poll thread and your response to it, proved otherwise. In other words, *you said one thing and did another.
Just because some people wanted you back doesn't mean they were simultaneously unhappy.
Dr. Shades wrote:I could've sworn that people said they'd depart as soon as gramps did, but oh well.
There it is. Instead of "I could've sworn", you could have reviewed the thread. People here know when you've read a thread or not on account of the responses you give. Here the implication is that inspite of your apology to gramps and claims about wanting people to be happy, you don't give a damn enough to click into the thread and review it.
I read lots of threads on a daily basis. I had already read the ones in question. The fact that I don't have a bibliographic memory of precisely who said precisely what at precisely what time doesn't mean I don't give a damn; it merely means I'm only human.
What on earth was I supposed to do? Reach through the monitor and give them 50 lashes with a wet noodle?
No. In the above you appear to think that the only action you could have taken was punitive. You could have done any number of things. How about these for starters:
1. Give them the same speech that you gave to msnobody. Make your speeches applicable to everyone so it appears that posters are given the same treatment (even though I don't agree with the speech).
They'd already heard it.
2. Be a friendly admin who acts on his claim to want people to be happy. "What's been bothering you?" "Is there anything we can do about it" and essentially act like you give the damn you make claim to. Failing to address it in any way, makes you look like you say one thing and do another.
They didn't ask me any questions or otherwise request my input in any way. Who am I to tell them what's right for them in their lives at this time?
No. He's totally gone. He scrambled his account and got out of Dodge.
And you know this. . . how, exactly?
And your remark there makes you look like an arrogant ass who doesn't appreciate a person who served you (and us) well.
I totally appreciate what he did for us. It's just that he'd taken us all down this road before.
When you fail to address the concerns of posters who are expressing their concerns right on the screen, leaves people to feel that their concerns aren't important and that admin is unwilling to hear them out or discuss or validate their concerns in some way. When they feel ignored or unattended to, they come to believe that you care more about the people who attack and cause hardship for people than you do them, they eventually lose interest (up against a brick wall) and begin to reduce their participation and then they leave.
If they don't bring their concerns to me, I have no choice but to conclude that they don't wish for my input.
You are losing posters on this board. They are slipping out right in front of you and when you ignore it, it reinforces all of the above in their minds. Previously, you claimed that you could no longer placate (one or more) people who complained about me as moderator.
As long as this board allows more than one point of view on one or more issues, then this board will be imperfect in at least somebody's mind. If someone concludes that they'd be better served elsewhere, well, there's no accounting for taste.
What effort have you made to placate good and intelligent posters such as those named in these posts? The answer is no effort at all.
No, the answer is that I've already gone the rounds with the speech whose latest recipient was msnobody. They'd all heard it at least once before; it would be a waste of their time to subject them to it again.
Say or think what you will about me. I don't kiss your ass and I never will. If you wish to go on leaving the same sort of impressions on people and essentially making yourself look like a two-faced hypocrite, that's your business.
So if I refrain from wasting people's time, I make myself look like a two-faced hypocrite?
Me, I much prefer truth.
What a lonely road you must travel.
Your board will become over run with people who attack and attempt to disparage others and you'll never see the balanced community that you claim that you hoped for.
When have I ever claimed that I hoped for a balanced community? I only hope for a board where people can discuss Mormonism without fear of censorship, queueing, or banning. Whoever shows up, shows up, balance be damned. You see, as soon as an administrator starts worrying about balance, that's when some posters begin to be valued more than others, which in turn leads to class distinctions. I'd like to keep this the one message board where that
doesn't happen.
You've got a board here. Communicate with the people on it.
Your wish is granted.
I likely will not respond to you again on the thread.
Color me skeptical.
"Finally, for your rather strange idea that miracles are somehow linked to the amount of gay sexual gratification that is taking place would require that primitive Christianity was launched by gay sex, would it not?"
--Louis Midgley