The Great Moderatorial Experiment, PART THREE: The aftermath

[_KimberlyAnn]

I haven't posted here much of late. I haven't read enough to know how the experiment has gone.

But I voted "Worse." First, because I can. And second, because I'm frankly tired of all the bellyaching over Shades's original vision for the board. I found it off-putting back in April with the "Faith-Based Thread" experiment and I find it off-putting now.

I also do not believe majority rule is always the right thing. Whatever the result of the poll, the bottom line is that this board belongs to Shades. He can do with it what he will and the rest of us can like it or lump it. Or like it and lump it, if one happens to roll that way.

KA

PS. I do SO dislike the bold red mod comments. I dislike them so much that I wrote a poem about them which sucks so I think I'll keep it to myself.

[_Moniker]

I also don't care what changes you make to this board. I think that should be left up to the board denizens and at this point don't count myself as one of them.

[_skippy the dead]

I also don't care what changes you make to this board. I think that should be left up to the board denizens and at this point don't count myself as one of them.

QFT

[_Gadianton]

I voted about the same. I used the ignore feature as Dr. Shades recommended, so for me, it's all good either way. Well, I've always disagreed with Dr. Shades slightly about moderating. And, I've always agreed just a little with the way MAD moderates. MAD recognizes what ZLMB didn't, that there is no way to systematically implement rules in a totally fair way anywhere, let alone on a message board, and that if you give people the expectation that things will be fair, they will drain your blood, and then some, trying to keep the score even. Of course, the MAD mods have huge reading comprehension problems and completely bizarre and ridiculous ideas about things such as "godwin's law" which counteract their positive points.

And for Shades, well, anarchy doesn't work, unfortunately. You have to be willing to censer certain stuff and sometimes that censering has to be by gut feeling rather than explicit rules, and always without apology.

Overall, I haven't experienced to much lameness at the hands of our new mods.

To GoodK, I will say that I hope you stay. I complained via the formal complaint button about Harmony's post to you on your thread today. I think that was the first time ever I have used that feature here or on any board. One of the other Mods then split Harmony's lecture off to another thread. A lecture that was incredibly weird considering it was like, "you can stay in telestial the rest of your life if you don't do things my way" echoing Christ Butters "you can stay here until you are 21.." I don't know if she meant that intentionally but I was like, WTF?

Not that I dislike Harmony. Well, my general recommendation to a continued moderation would be to save the public lectures, just make the edits you think you need to make and take any needed debates offline if debates are in fact really needed, usually they aren't.

[_Bond James Bond]

I voted the same. No matter how you moderate the exmos, if you don't create an environment that actively favors the Mormons you won't attract them that much. They can't hack it in an even environment, not due to their ability to argue but due to the crappy set of facts they're starting with as Mormon apologists. The divide is too great between exmo critics and Mormon apologists, and common ground will always be a narrow place between two groups taking such absolutist claims which stand in direct contrast to each other.

That's my thought on Mormon message boards in general.

[_cksalmon]

by the way, Chris, I know you are enjoying your queer little stamp but you were wrong to censor me and now you have helped me become certain that I am done with this board.

Cool. As long as you realize, in all seriousness, that, in line with Shades's vision, you, GoodK, are and will always be personally absolutely, unequivocally, totally, obviously, and always welcome at MDB, now and in future, then I trust in your ability to choose for yourself.

Here is an excerpt from a private communication from early this evening, by the way:

I've modded here according to the rules established by Shades, per his moderatorial experiment. You can find those rules here:

Do not make mention of anything that allegedly transpired or is transpiring via the chat room or via private message. People who communicate behind-the-scenes obviously intend their communications to remain behind-the-scenes. Any post on the board itself making reference to such things will be deleted.

Take it up with Shades, privately, if you wish. He wrote the experimental rules, not I. Better yet, stick around and make your voice heard. MDB is the place for such things, after all.

I truly can't say that I'm happy that you're "done with this board."

But, I don't think it is too much to ask, if you're serious, for you to make your principled exit on the foundation of cogent reasoning. "You were wrong to censor me and now you have helped me become certain that I am done with this board" ain't that, bro.

Meh.

Queer-stamping Chris

[_Lamanite]

Just make me a mod and I'll fix this place right up!
I'm pretty sure Richard Bushman and Dan Vogel, with John W moderating, could have a debate without resorting to petty insults and personal attacks.

I'm pretty sure we could pull it off too. IF, honest intellectual debate and learning were even a smidgen of the purpose for this board. Or maybe its not the board and just the participants. I don't know. I just know I've never threatened to punch someone in the throat until I started posting here. Coincidence? Maybe.


Big UP!


Lamanite

[_Moniker]

For those not familiar with the board history: Shades and the mods decided on the faith based rule and a number of posters on the board did have issues with how the board would be changed. The faith based rule was short lived and overturned.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=5715

[_gramps]

Just make me a mod and I'll fix this place right up!
I'm pretty sure Richard Bushman and Dan Vogel, with John W moderating, could have a debate without resorting to petty insults and personal attacks.

I'm pretty sure we could pull it off too. IF, honest intellectual debate and learning were even a smidgen of the purpose for this board. Or maybe its not the board and just the participants. I don't know. I just know I've never threatened to punch someone in the throat until I started posting here. Coincidence? Maybe.


Big UP!


Lamanite

You seem like a nice guy. But, sometimes you are full of s###.

You personally threatened a new poster on the MADness board. I called you on it and invited you up on to the rocks. See here:

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index.%20...%207314&st=20

Remember, you were spouting off about constitutional stuff and that poster let you know that you didn't know what on earth you were talking about. Your head was basically up where the sun don't shine. BIG UP!

You took it personally enough to try and scare him. The big bully in charge of controlling new posters over on MAD. That is you, at times.

I am sure hoping no one would even consider for a nano second having you here as a moderator. What a joke.

That was the other board, not this board. It doesn't matter what board you are on. You are unstable, in my view, anyway.

Edited to add: For some reason, that link doesn't work. Funny, it works from my pm box. Just paste it in. It's there and a very interesting read.

Second edit: This is becoming hilarious, and really sad. Someone has pulled Lamanite's offensive threat thinking none of us would be able to read it. But, I saved it. Here it is. This is the full quote before someone this early morning (utah time) took it out.

I made room for error in the document. Also, I would like a reference from the constitution stating "racial slavery is awesome". It appears you are intellectually inept and dishonest. Women not voting is a cultural phenomenon that has been repaired. The documents ability to adjust and evolve for the further protection of God given rights is Divine in my opinion. It truly is a living document.

My knowledge of Scalia's jurisprudence is sufficient. (This next paragraph has now disappeared.)

You sure have a mouthy tone for only being here (MAD) a week. Take it slow, and please be careful how you approach people. Some of us are not as far away as your computer would have you believe. Just pretend I am in the room when you post and you won't be as brave as you were in this last post. There are crazies in cyberspace, you never know how short some of our fuses really are.
Lamanite

[_gramps]

Everyone ought to have a gander at my post above. This is getting too funny for words.

Lamanite, you have been caught. Who was trying to protect you over there, or was that your own doing?

Oh, come on Big Up, send your posse to come get me. I'm shaking. Terribly.

And just remember, legal expert that you are, there is no 'fighting words' excuse. So, go ahead take a shot at me. Please.

[MODERATOR NOTE by Dr. Shades: Gramps, please help keep this thread on-topic by sticking to the Great Moderatorial Experiment. You already have a thread going about Lamanite's post at MA&D. Thank you!]