marg wrote:who I don't even remember ever talking to, B23.
B23=Bond...James Bond. I moderated this place for like 18 months without anyone complaining about me [as far as I know], so I think I can talk. Changing "Danny Boy" to Dr. Peterson is pedantic moderating that adds nothing while creating extra conflict. Dr. Peterson has a thick skin, that type of stuff should be left alone. A good mod would ignore it, because he sure will.
Last edited by Guest on Sat Jan 31, 2009 4:13 am, edited 1 time in total.
Whatever appears to be against the Book of Mormon is going to be overturned at some time in the future. So we can be pretty open minded.-charity 3/7/07
MASH quotes I peeked in the back [of the Bible] Frank, the Devil did it. I avoid church religiously. This isn't one of my sermons, I expect you to listen.
Jersey Girl wrote:Until you list and link to each moderator action that she took and explain how it was biased and not in keeping with the board rules, you're simply blowing baseless smoke.
Let's see it, Ray.
I've already done it. In this very thread.
If you want to keep the sour grapes going, that's your choice, but it's making you look like an ass.
No, you haven't. That's simply false.
Failure is not falling down but refusing to get up.
Chinese Proverb
Jersey Girl wrote:No, you haven't. That's simply false.
Not only I, but others:
Rollo Tomasi quoting skippy the dead:
skippy the dead wrote:For the love of....
Seriously? "Danny Boy" is enough to not only get deleted, but REPLACED with "Mr. Peterson"?????
This kind of moderation is incredibly stupid.
Rollo Tomasi wrote:I completely agree. If this is what the moderating around here has come to, we are in serious trouble. Please, Shades, don't let this bb go the way of ZLMB ....
So, for the overall good of the board, Shades asked marg to stop moderating the Authorship thread.
Shades also wrote:
Dr. Shades wrote:I suppose it was almost inevitable that the pendulum would swing a little too far in the other direction. But when making course corrections, it's probably rare to get it precisely right the first time.
Rest assured that such things won't happen again.
So what do you hope to accomplish? To prove that you are right, and everyone else wrong? Including Shades?
Once again, what others have stated isn't evidence. Let's see your list and links of evidences that demonstrate pervasive bias in marg's moderator actions on the Book of Mormon Authorship thread.
Failure is not falling down but refusing to get up.
Chinese Proverb
Once again, what others have stated isn't evidence. Let's see your list and links of evidences that demonstrate pervasive bias in marg's moderator actions on the Book of Mormon Authorship thread.
One more for the road:
EAllusion wrote:I expressed the opinion I did because I looked over the issue and question and gave my honest judgment. What you called ad hom wasn't even ad hom. This is pretty egregious on multiple fronts. That I choose to post it rather than keep that thought to myself probably was in part motivated by character flaws of yours I do not like. Though, I suspect in this case I might've written my criticism of the moderator decision regardless of who did it. As far as my moderating preferences go, I think anything should go with the exception of advertising plants and spam posts meant to interfere with the functioning of the board. Since the tier system exists, that's not possible, but even within that context there are differences between reasonably tempered biases with the occasional debateable decisions on tough calls and ridiculous biases causing blatantly awful decisions. It's clear where you fall on that spectrum. The idea of making you a moderator was pretty poor in the first place, but thankfully that is no longer the case.
And to regurgitate more facts:
Dr. Shades wrote:For the sake of not wanting to undermine my own moderator, I really would've rather taken this post up via PM, but I think the issue is important enough that needs to be seen by the public here.
marg wrote:Yes, the answer is Dale, enjoys preferential treatment due to poor health, along with his expertise which is of value to the issues presented in the thread.
Marg, with all due respect to you, I'm afraid that that is simply NOT TRUE. NOBODY gets, expects, or enjoys preferential treatment here. NO ONE.
How many times do you want me to repeat it?
Give it a rest. It's over. It's done. Move on. Instead of making yourself look like vengeance on steroids.
Ray A wrote:So, for the overall good of the board, Shades asked marg to stop moderating the Authorship thread.
Where?
Here:
Dr. Shades wrote:Folks,
marg freely complied with my request to cease moderating that particular thread. Not only that, but she has relinquished her moderator status altogether by her own suggestion and choice.
That was quite a significant olive branch she offered, methinks. Hopefully y'all can appreciate this honest effort at peacekeeping that marg made.
So, everyone's concerns about the moderation of that thread are effectively over. Time for a clean slate.
Since everyone else here has spouted their opinion, and this thread refuses to die, here is my two cents:
Do I think that Marg's bias regarding the Book of Mormon Authorship Thread issues affected her moderation decisions? No! I saw nothing in her moderation technique that indicated that.
Do I think that Marg's dislike of ad hom's in general affected her moderation decisions? Yes! She has been very vocal about the fact that she does not like ad hom's thrown at anyone during a thread which she considers a serious discussion. It's obvious that she considers the Book of Mormon Authorship Thread a serious discussion thread. It was this dislike of ad hom's in general which caused her over-zealous move of removing the "Danny Boy" remark. If Marg was moderating with a bias of the issue in mind, she certainly would have let an ad hom toward DCP slide, since DCP is clearly in opposition to her issue bias.
Do I think that Marg was slightly over protective of Dale? Yes....However, I think her heart was in the right place, and this was not necessarily a bad thing. She's new at moderating. None of us are entitled to a learning curve?
Do I think that this whole mess has been blown WAY out of proportion? Hell, yes!!!!
Also, another thing I would like to note..which goes to the whole learning curve issue.....every single time Marg made any type of split, she prefaced her splits with the fact that if any poster felt she had been overzealous, they were free to re-post their comments back in the thread in question!!!
Lord knows that Marg and I have had our differences in the past, but frankly, overall, I found her to be a great help to the moderating team. I'm sorry that she has decided to give up Mod status.
Marg voluntarily gave up her Mod status.
Marg's moderating techniques are moot, at this point.
Jersey Girl wrote:Let's see your list and links of evidences that demonstrate pervasive bias in marg's moderator actions on the Book of Mormon Authorship thread.
I honestly don't think it's pervasive bias that people are worried about; it's any bias at all that worries them.
"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?"