Rules and Moderator information

[Whiskey]

No, you damned liar. But you are free to address the lie that I am asking for special treatment. What treatment am I asking for that is special? None. Right? Just the damned opposite. I am offering the special treatment of having my account deleted if I can't put your lying damned ass on the foe list. If Xeno approves of your moderating and meddling, I do not want any special treatment whatsoever. I want to simply have my account deleted. That is not special treatment you lying piece of damned crap.

Hey Xeno. Are you still a moderator?

Point to ‘previously’ in my post.

Also, as you are now partially quoting a PM to both of us from Shades, do you wish to post the second part that addressed your own behavior?

Thanks. I look forward to you fixing that.

Screw you, panny. Screw you. Run your own damned errands. Or, get your moderator over here to delete my account. Where the “F” is Xeno?

[canpakes]

Point to ‘previously’ in my post.

Also, as you are now partially quoting a PM to both of us from Shades, do you wish to post the second part that addressed your own behavior?

Thanks. I look forward to you fixing that.

Screw you, panny. Screw you. Run your own damned errands. Or, get your moderator over here to delete my account. Where the “F” is Xeno?

This is super simple, yes? Point to the word ‘previously’ that you claim is in my post.

Also, as you are now partially quoting a PM to both of us from Shades, do you wish to post the second part that addressed your own behavior?

Thanks. I look forward to you fixing that.

[Whiskey]

Screw you, panny. Screw you. Run your own damned errands. Or, get your moderator over here to delete my account. Where the “F” is Xeno?

This is super simple, yes? Point to the word ‘previously’ that you claim is in my post.

Also, as you are now partially quoting a PM to both of us from Shades, do you wish to post the second part that addressed your own behavior?

Thanks. I look forward to you fixing that.

Shades and Xeno,

This is another example of the same pattern that keeps repeating and that needs to be addressed directly.

panny the moderater asserts that I [resurrected myself right back into the exact same conditions that I now claim are intolerable.] That statement is not a neutral observation. It asserts a premise: that the conditions are unchanged and that only my tolerance has changed. That implication is built into the sentence itself. Whether or not the word “previously” appears is irrelevant. Any reasonable reader understands what is being claimed.

That premise is false. The conditions are not the same. They have changed, including explicit clarification from Shades regarding moderation boundaries. panny knows this. Yet the premise is asserted anyway and treated as fact. This is the recurring issue - a moderator asserts an imagined premise as true, draws conclusions from it, and then treats any refusal to engage on those false terms as evidence that the other party has “no argument.” That tactic may be annoying but tolerable from a regular poster. It is not acceptable from someone exercising moderator authority. I am repeating this. I will continue to repeat this until my account is deleted. Just as Xeno's silence on the matter is his endorsement of the conditions, my repetition is my exclamation and rejection of the conditions.

Compounding the problem, panny repeatedly re-enters threads to needle and provoke, sometimes by re-quoting his own prior posts solely to reignite contention. If the target responds, moderation can follow. If the target does not respond, the provocation stands unchallenged. In both cases, the moderator controls both the trigger and the consequences. This is not about tone. It is not about disagreement. It is not about hurt feelings. It is about structural integrity. Moderators cannot credibly function as both combatants and referees in the same exchanges. When that line blurs, every moderation action and the structure of the forum becomes suspect, regardless of intent. Jersey has pointed this out to panny, he gives no craps.

I am asking for clarity and boundaries. Either this pattern is acceptable under your moderation model, or it is not. If it is acceptable, then acknowledge it plainly as the reality of how this board is moderated. With that acknowledgment, I am done here and ask that my account be deleted immediately. If it is not acceptable, then acknowledge that as well and explain why this conduct continues.

What is not acceptable is the ongoing ambiguity, where this behavior persists while remaining officially unaddressed. At that point, silence functions as consent, and consent establishes the rules in practice, not in theory. I will consider Xeno's silence for months now to be his endorsement and with that, I want my account deleted immediately. I am not interested in resolving this. It seems Hound, ceeboo and I are the only people on this forum that do not enjoy, prefer or endorse this level of nonsense from the moderators so let's just wrap this up. Delete my account instantly. Give the people their cake, goddamnit.

[Marcus]

...Shades and Xeno,

This is another example of the same pattern that keeps repeating and that needs to be addressed directly.

panny the moderater asserts that I [resurrected myself right back into the exact same conditions that I now claim are intolerable.] That statement is not a neutral observation. It asserts a premise: that the conditions are unchanged and that only my tolerance has changed. That implication is built into the sentence itself. Whether or not the word “previously” appears is irrelevant. Any reasonable reader understands what is being claimed.

That premise is false. The conditions are not the same. They have changed, including explicit clarification from Shades regarding moderation boundaries. panny knows this. Yet the premise is asserted anyway and treated as fact. This is the recurring issue - a moderator asserts an imagined premise as true, draws conclusions from it, and then treats any refusal to engage on those false terms as evidence that the other party has “no argument.” That tactic may be annoying but tolerable from a regular poster. It is not acceptable from someone exercising moderator authority. I am repeating this. I will continue to repeat this until my account is deleted. Just as Xeno's silence on the matter is his endorsement of the conditions, my repetition is my exclamation and rejection of the conditions.

Compounding the problem, panny repeatedly re-enters threads to needle and provoke, sometimes by re-quoting his own prior posts solely to reignite contention. If the target responds, moderation can follow. If the target does not respond, the provocation stands unchallenged. In both cases, the moderator controls both the trigger and the consequences. This is not about tone. It is not about disagreement. It is not about hurt feelings. It is about structural integrity. Moderators cannot credibly function as both combatants and referees in the same exchanges. When that line blurs, every moderation action and the structure of the forum becomes suspect, regardless of intent. Jersey has pointed this out to panny, he gives no craps.

I am asking for clarity and boundaries. Either this pattern is acceptable under your moderation model, or it is not. If it is acceptable, then acknowledge it plainly as the reality of how this board is moderated. With that acknowledgment, I am done here and ask that my account be deleted immediately. If it is not acceptable, then acknowledge that as well and explain why this conduct continues.

What is not acceptable is the ongoing ambiguity, where this behavior persists while remaining officially unaddressed. At that point, silence functions as consent, and consent establishes the rules in practice, not in theory. I will consider Xeno's silence for months now to be his endorsement and with that, I want my account deleted immediately. I am not interested in resolving this. It seems Hound, ceeboo and I are the only people on this forum that do not enjoy, prefer or endorse this level of nonsense from the moderators so let's just wrap this up. Delete my account instantly. Give the people their cake, goddamnit.

This is just too precious. I thought I would quote it before Binger invokes his usual 'delete a thousand posts, then cowardly run away' technique.

Not only has weeWhiskers broken specific rules by posting pm content, and multiple other language and personal attack rules, in this post he is insisting Shades stop others from expressing opinions and making statements that upset him!! Also, he wants Shades to stop someone from entering a thread to "needle and provoke" him! That's beyond absurd. The Master of the "needle and provoke" Universe wants a mod to stop others from using his technique on him. SMH.

Like I said, too precious.

[Whiskey]

This is just too precious. I thought I would quote it before Binger invokes his usual 'delete a thousand posts, then cowardly run away' technique.

Not only has weeWhiskers broken specific rules by posting pm content, and multiple other language and personal attack rules, in this post he is insisting Shades stop others from expressing opinions and making statements that upset him!! Also, he wants Shades to stop someone from entering a thread to "needle and provoke" him! That's beyond absurd. The Master of the "needle and provoke" Universe wants a mod to stop others from using his technique on him. SMH.

Like I said, too precious.

Nope. All false assertions from you too, Lem. But darling nonetheless. So darling.

[canpakes]

… I am asking for clarity and boundaries.

I’ll take it that you haven’t been able to find the word ‘previously’ in my post as you claimed, and are now spitting out a thousand words of spin trying to cover for that.

Also, I believe that posting the contents of PMs is not allowed under the rules.

That’s pretty clear.

Next question?

[Whiskey]

… I am asking for clarity and boundaries.

I’ll take it that you haven’t been able to find the word ‘previously’ in my post as you claimed, and are now spitting out a thousand words of spin trying to cover for that.

Also, I believe that posting the contents of PMs is not allowed under the rules.

That’s pretty clear.

Next question?

It is pretty clear that Xeno agrees with you completely too, right? In that case. Let's wrap this up. Shame about the PM. I mean. It was instructions for you that you ignored. But still. Feel free to have Xeno or Shades delete my account if you want to keep moderating this way.

[canpakes]

I’ll take it that you haven’t been able to find the word ‘previously’ in my post as you claimed, and are now spitting out a thousand words of spin trying to cover for that.

Also, I believe that posting the contents of PMs is not allowed under the rules.

That’s pretty clear.

Next question?

It is pretty clear that Xeno agrees with you completely too, right? In that case. Let's wrap this up. Shame about the PM. I mean. It was instructions for you that you ignored. But still. Feel free to have Xeno or Shades delete my account if you want to keep moderating this way.

What do you suggest the mods should do if you have violated the board rules regarding PM contents?

[Whiskey]

It is pretty clear that Xeno agrees with you completely too, right? In that case. Let's wrap this up. Shame about the PM. I mean. It was instructions for you that you ignored. But still. Feel free to have Xeno or Shades delete my account if you want to keep moderating this way.

What do you suggest the mods should do if you have violated the board rules regarding PM contents?

Oh look, another premise from the moderator.

Answer: Delete my account and shove a large piece of furniture up your ass. Like an armoire. Something like that. A complete dining room set maybe.

[canpakes]

What do you suggest the mods should do if you have violated the board rules regarding PM contents?

Oh look, another premise from the moderator.

Answer: Delete my account and shove a large piece of furniture up your ass. Like an armoire. Something like that. A complete dining room set maybe.

lol. You and the Hound account, and your kinks. No wonder you’re so cranky.

Anyhow, are you changing the conditions once again? Now your account should be wiped because you’ve been unable to control yourself regarding posting the contents of PMs?

Can I pick the next name you’ll use when you make a new account? That would be fun.