UPDATE ON MODERATORIAL POLICY

[_marg]

The utterance of the two unutterable words was enough to destroy confidence and raise ire. That was the damage.

I agree that was the damage but I can still say I made a mistake as far as that response went and I will post after I post this ...a clarification on it. In addition I will note you didn't ask me for a clarification in private or on the board, before your decision.

As far as a comment you made Shades previously that the Book of Mormon authorship thread is not Celestial I believe there was a discussion briefly on that in the Mod forum and it was decided rather than move it to leave in Terrestial but treat it much like Celestial.

If so, I either missed it or forgot about it. Even so, I should've put the kibbosh on it.[/quote]

Really Shades? You don't appreciate there is a difference between that thread and the majority of most other threads in the Terrestial? You have no appreciation that Dale is a treasure trove of research information with the ability to present it well and that thread offers something of value the vast majority of other threads don't? Come on Shades..

. . . and bias in the form of how the "Danny Boy" remark was handled?

It may not have been bias, but it wasn't how Terrestrial threads are handled, thus garnering ire.[/quote]

Well that is a flat out lie, that i garnered ire. No one noticed it. Why because it was done retroactively, it wasn't evena blip on anyone's radar screen. You really are being dishonest and grasping at straws, if you are using that as an example of egregious moderation.

[_marg]

Rays motives were spiteful.

I'm not worried about his motives. I'm only worried about whether or not there's some merit in what he says.

Exactly and what I'm saying is that his motives are an indication that there was no merit in his complaint, that he was motivatied for reasons entirely different to his complaint. That's whyI point out he was motivated by spite, stemming from a discussion which spanned a month. Why he can not handle some people disagreeing with him and taking it as a personal affront to his intelligence I have no idea but he does.

[_marg]

Shades you keep bringing up the 2 unpardonable words. Well that's your choice or decision that they are unpardonable. But words can easily be misconstrued and although you have decided to take a military type attitude, life doesn't necessarily have to be that way.

So I’m going to comment further on my response to the accusation I gave preferential treatment to Dale. I admit I posted thoughtlessly,my response as far as time stamps indicate I posted 8 minutes after Ray posted. I was in a rush and just heading out the door for the evening. I came back to a post by you asking for me to not moderate the thread. I realize my response was poorly worded.

I'll address the quotes which is what I responded with that night.

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.

I do not want him wasting time replying to unwarranted cheap shots thrown his way.

The first time I ignored it by Mikwut, and Dale responded . Then more posts from others ensued related to the ad hom.

So I chose to nip it in the bud so to speak and ask Mikwut to refrain.

Instead of Dale enjoys preferential treatment it should be that Dale and by extension the S/R thread enjoys preferential treatment, from cheap shots to Dale and from others who might try to sabotage the thread. Not that anyone has, but that’s why it needs to be moderated, in case.

Dale is the thread for all intents and purposes. Without him it wouldn’t be nearly as extensive and have the depth of research information it contains. He has the expertise and ability to offer factual information few others could. He’s in poor health. So he shouldn’t be subjected to undue harassment. If a moderator steps in on his behalf they are protecting the development of the Spalding-Rigdon theory discussion, not him because he’s simply an extension of it. Ray doesn’t think the Spalding theory should get any protection, but I’d argue that it should. It’s not going to get it over on MAD and the RFM board doesn’t keep threads very long. So where else can those involved and truly interested in the theory carry on a discussion unhindered, especially when there is such pressure against it from those with deep pockets to do so and those with strong emotions against it.

As far as what moderating I was referring to…at one point 4 posts went back and forth between Mikwut and Dale with Dale beng offended and Mikwut apologizing. So the warning post by me was an acknowledgment that I noticed he (Mikwut) was again getting close if not already there, once again insulting Dale. But warning mikwut to refrain is not an indication of undue bias against critics.

Sure there are other ad homs in there but on the whole it's not excessive and not disruptive. There are also superfluous posts in there but again, I'm letting those stay as long as they aren't too disruptive.

There were some minor ad homs which Ray pointed out, but the ramifications of them less likely to be develop into anything significant. To accuse Dale of being flippant and dismissive is rather egregious given the length, care and extent of Dales’ postings adn given I specifically asked him to be concise.

My goal is to allow the discussion to progress with as little disruption vis moderation or from posters as possible, and without unwarranted attacks on individuals with Dale getting preferential treatment to an extent due to special circumstances noted above.

My main goal was that the S/R theory have an opportunity to develop unhindered by anyone wishing to sabotage it. The thread is different than other threads in the terrestrial. It is a much more serious thread, which should be obvious without explanation. The Spalding-Rigdon theory needs preferential treatment because there are many Mormons, because of their emotional ties to Mormonism have a hard time tolerating it, perhaps have contempt for it just as Ray expressed personally though he’s not Mormon. I have seen over the years time and again that when it comes to religious apologetics the typical refutation is personal attack rather than addressing issues, and that just serves to derail or hinder discussion. By extension of the thread, Dale is pretty much the thread. That is he is the one who has accumulated years of research to share. Without him the thread wouldn’t exist with the quality of posts that it has.

You may wonder what is my beef.

Well accusations by Ray against me were not justified. And whether anyone likes it or not I will post in greater detail on that. He was not the least bit motivated by concern for the thread, in fact he's stated the opposite, that he has contempt for the S/R theory.

I made a mistake, and quickly wrote a poorly worded post..not reflective of my actions.

You didn't consult with me before making a decision, which shows an attitude you have of bowing into complainers easily and not taking care to get at least a bare minimum of perspective from a moderator's side. That may be because you don't respect moderation, perhaps you don't care about the quality of the board, or perhaps you just want the least amount of trouble, perhaps you want numbers to your board and you think bowing into complainers is the way to go, I don't know what you think.

But in any event I'm not going to stand for crap that I moderated with undue bias, or moderated with egregious actions against critics. I will acknowledge my mistake in my post but that's it.

[_Dr. Shades]

In addition I will note you didn't ask me for a clarification in private or on the board, before your decision.

I didn't think I needed a clarification. It was pretty cut-and-dried.

Really Shades? You don't appreciate there is a difference between that thread and the majority of most other threads in the Terrestial?

Of course. I also appreciate the fact that every thread is unique, no matter where it's posted.

You have no appreciation that Dale is a treasure trove of research information with the ability to present it well and that thread offers something of value the vast majority of other threads don't?

Of course I do. But the Terrestrial Forum is the Terrestrial Forum.

Well that is a flat out lie, that i garnered ire. No one noticed it.

They noticed it after it was brought to their attention.

Why because it was done retroactively, it wasn't evena blip on anyone's radar screen. You really are being dishonest and grasping at straws, if you are using that as an example of egregious moderation.

It doesn't matter when people noticed it. It only matters that they noticed it at all.

Exactly and what I'm saying is that his motives are an indication that there was no merit in his complaint, that he was motivatied for reasons entirely different to his complaint. That's why I point out he was motivated by spite, stemming from a discussion which spanned a month.

Rollo Tomasi and Skippy the Dead voiced similar concerns too, not just Ray A.

Shades you keep bringing up the 2 unpardonable words. Well that's your choice or decision that they are unpardonable. But words can easily be misconstrued and although you have decided to take a military type attitude, life doesn't necessarily have to be that way.

The damage had been done. It's very hard to misconstrue the two unforgivable words.

Instead of Dale enjoys preferential treatment it should be that Dale and by extension the S/R thread enjoys preferential treatment, from cheap shots to Dale and from others who might try to sabotage the thread.

There you go with the two unforgivable words again. It doesn't matter who or what is being referred to by the two unforgivable words; the problem is that they're being employed at all.

Dale is the thread for all intents and purposes. Without him it wouldn’t be nearly as extensive and have the depth of research information it contains. He has the expertise and ability to offer factual information few others could. He’s in poor health. So he shouldn’t be subjected to undue harassment.

Well, nobody "should" be subjected to undue harrassment.

If a moderator steps in on his behalf they are protecting the development of the Spalding-Rigdon theory discussion, not him because he’s simply an extension of it.

That's just it. Around here, nobody and nothing gets protection. The "faith-based threads" debacle taught us that.

Ray doesn’t think the Spalding theory should get any protection, but I’d argue that it should.

It may deserve protection from derailments, but it doesn't deserve protection from criticism. Methinks thou conflateth the one with the other. I image others think the same thing, too.

It’s not going to get it over on MAD and the RFM board doesn’t keep threads very long. So where else can those involved and truly interested in the theory carry on a discussion unhindered, especially when there is such pressure against it from those with deep pockets to do so and those with strong emotions against it.

Just because it can and should happen here doesn't mean it shouldn't be criticized.

There were some minor ad homs which Ray pointed out, but the ramifications of them less likely to be develop into anything significant. To accuse Dale of being flippant and dismissive is rather egregious given the length, care and extent of Dales’ postings adn given I specifically asked him to be concise.

I agree, but the proper response would've been to hold his feet to the fire by asking precisely how Dale is/was flippant and dismissive.

My goal is to allow the discussion to progress with as little disruption vis moderation or from posters as possible, and without unwarranted attacks on individuals with Dale getting preferential treatment to an extent due to special circumstances noted above.

And there you go with the two unforgivable words yet again!

My main goal was that the S/R theory have an opportunity to develop unhindered by anyone wishing to sabotage it.

And there's a right way and a wrong way to do that. Splitting derailments is the right way. Stifling criticism is not.

The thread is different than other threads in the terrestrial. It is a much more serious thread, which should be obvious without explanation. The Spalding-Rigdon theory needs preferential treatment because there are many Mormons, because of their emotional ties to Mormonism have a hard time tolerating it, perhaps have contempt for it just as Ray expressed personally though he’s not Mormon.

And there you go with the two unforgivable words YET AGAIN! You still haven't learned.

I have seen over the years time and again that when it comes to religious apologetics the typical refutation is personal attack rather than addressing issues, and that just serves to derail or hinder discussion. By extension of the thread, Dale is pretty much the thread. That is he is the one who has accumulated years of research to share. Without him the thread wouldn’t exist with the quality of posts that it has.

Right.

Well accusations by Ray against me were not justified. And whether anyone likes it or not I will post in greater detail on that. He was not the least bit motivated by concern for the thread, in fact he's stated the opposite, that he has contempt for the S/R theory.

Ray was just one of the people who had concerns.

I made a mistake, and quickly wrote a poorly worded post..not reflective of my actions.

Yet you're still using the two unforgivable words as though they weren't a mistake at all.

You didn't consult with me before making a decision, which shows an attitude you have of bowing into complainers easily and not taking care to get at least a bare minimum of perspective from a moderator's side.

No, I didn't consult with you because I didn't need to. The complainers had a right to complain, since they too had read the two unforgivable words.

That may be because you don't respect moderation, perhaps you don't care about the quality of the board, or perhaps you just want the least amount of trouble, perhaps you want numbers to your board and you think bowing into complainers is the way to go, I don't know what you think.

I think that we lost at least a year's worth of trust and goodwill thanks to the utterance of the two unforgivable words. I had to do what I had to do in order to reverse the damage to some extent. I don't need to consult with anyone about the obvious.

But in any event I'm not going to stand for crap that I moderated with undue bias, or moderated with egregious actions against critics. I will acknowledge my mistake in my post but that's it.

You may acknowledge your mistake, but you don't seem to internalize the recognition thereof due to your consistent repetition of it.

[_marg]

In addition I will note you didn't ask me for a clarification in private or on the board, before your decision.

I didn't think I needed a clarification. It was pretty cut-and-dried.

I realize you aren't interested in this other than to protect yourself. Let's see I posted that post and you responded with your post within one minute, so you didn't even read it. Anyhow I'm not just writing it for you Shades.

Really Shades? You don't appreciate there is a difference between that thread and the majority of most other threads in the Terrestial?

Of course. I also appreciate the fact that every thread is unique, no matter where it's posted.

Well that's good to hear I was beginning to wonder what it is you cared about when it comes to this board.

You have no appreciation that Dale is a treasure trove of research information with the ability to present it well and that thread offers something of value the vast majority of other threads don't?

Of course I do. But the Terrestrial Forum is the Terrestrial Forum.

Do you have a military background by any chance?

Well that is a flat out lie, that i garnered ire. No one noticed it.

They noticed it after it was brought to their attention.

But Shades it was one insignificant event. And the complainers were complainers who knew nothing of the events. Doesn't it occur to you that some people like to post complaints just for the sake of it. Wasn't it skippy who said that what she found wrong about it was that I hadn't put my name to it, then later Liz asked me and went back and my name Washington attached. So skippy didn't even know what the heck she was complaining about and yet you are relying on her complaint. Thank goodness I quit moderating. Fortunately the bit I did wasn't much time investment, thank goodness for that.

Why because it was done retroactively, it wasn't evena blip on anyone's radar screen. You really are being dishonest and grasping at straws, if you are using that as an example of egregious moderation.

It doesn't matter when people noticed it. It only matters that they noticed it at all.

That's not true, it doesn matter what is noticed and that was not noticed. And frankly there is nothing wrong with changing Danny Boy..it's a slur against him. I don't care if you don't think it is, I do. and if I do, I'm sure others do.

Exactly and what I'm saying is that his motives are an indication that there was no merit in his complaint, that he was motivatied for reasons entirely different to his complaint. That's why I point out he was motivated by spite, stemming from a discussion which spanned a month.

Rollo Tomasi and Skippy the Dead voiced similar concerns too, not just Ray A.

Rollo does't want any moderation, that's his stance. and I agree with him no moderation is better than poor moderation. Where I disagree with rollo is that there are some discussions which are let's say of more value to participants. That is they are willing to put in time and effort as long as it doesn't turn into a joke. Tal Bachman from my recollection basically left this board, because it would just get derailed into attacks on wade or droopy. I'm sure if I talked with rollo further we'd come to a mutual agreement. skippy the dead didn't have a clue what was going on, and just posts to be heard for the sake of being heard...and Ray was motivated by much more than by what he claimed.

I'm glad we are having this chat because I really like to see your character more fully. At one time I thought of you as being highly principled. I realize now that's not the case, you have a mindset of locking tosomething and not being able to be flexible and look at issues from different perspective.

[_Ray A]

I'm glad we are having this chat because I really like to see your character more fully. At one time I thought of you as being highly principled. I realize now that's not the case, you have a mindset of locking tosomething and not being able to be flexible and look at issues from different perspective.

Oh, the irony.

[_marg]

You may acknowledge your mistake, but you don't seem to internalize the recognition thereof due to your consistent repetition of it.

Shades I appreciate I made a mistake in my post, I've said it numerous time however I did not moderate that thread with undue bias against critics and that seems to be the stance you are taking..that I did. You are not acknowledging any any fault as well, which is that you acted quickly yourself with no consultation with me.

And for my part, I have decided that I'm not going to be quiet about Ray. I took it for a month listening to him tell me I'm biased and closedminded and I kept trying to reason with him. That post was an extension of his mindset for that month.

[_marg]

The damage had been done. It's very hard to misconstrue the two unforgivable words.

That's your choice that those words are unpardonable.

Words can be misconstrued. I wrote a clarification explaining but then again, as you say you aren't interested in a clarification.

[_Ray A]

And for my part, I have decided that I'm not going to be quiet about Ray. I took it for a month listening to him tell me I'm biased and closedminded and I kept trying to reason with him. That post was an extension of his mindset for that month.

Oh sure, you're going to expose everyone on this board for his biased they are, how wrong their opinions are, and that you could never be biased.

And you shouldn't talk about being "two-faced". When you let loose after giving up your mod status you came out and told everyone your real feelings, that all of those who disagreed with you are "morons".

I'll have more to say, and also look forward to your "chronology". You already have one glaring mistake.

[_marg]

I'm glad we are having this chat because I really like to see your character more fully. At one time I thought of you as being highly principled.

And this debacle is somehow evidence that I'm not?

Exactly I think of you as one who follows rules that you have set, that you are not flexible once you make a decision and your goal is to keep it simple.

You have the mentality of a bureaucrat.

Consequently I don't think you are highly principled. I don't think you are interested so much in what is ethically right or wrong but rather you are interested in what is right or wrong based on rules you've set up mentally because of complexity of situation may not be the most ethical decision.