CALL FOR MODERATORS

[Sledge]

Here's my current IP:

73.23.140.87

Go to town.

That does it. Poor security practice and bad form.

You should not be a moderator at this time. You can't be trusted.

Shades!

That's not poor security. Public IP addresses are public information.

[Dr Moore]

You cannot discover personal information from an IP address. You can discover the originating ISP and sometimes the general geographic area, but that's it.

You can discover information about host networks, depending on the situation, which can identify an individual's employer and significantly winnow down the pool of candidates for a sufficiently motivated defender of the kingdom. It's been done before and I'm betting you know that. Also, your weak technical defense that somehow an individual's IP address is always harmless information is either intentionally misleading or grossly ignorant. I don't think you operate like an ignorant person, so I'm going with misleading. But either way, I trust you less as this weird moderator campaign goes on.

[Shulem]

That does it. Poor security practice and bad form.

You should not be a moderator at this time. You can't be trusted.

Shades!

That's not poor security. Public IP addresses are public information.

It's not helpful and is poor judgement on your part. Posting your IP out on a public board and taunting people is really, really, stupid.

[Morley]

How easy it would be for Sledge to share IP addresses with interested parties, which has actually been done on other boards to in order for Mopologists to identify places of employment and ultimately a near bullseye identification of people who are now active at this very board today. Again, I don't trust Sledge and personally I would be taking more extreme opsec measures to participate here if he is assigned moderator privileges.

You cannot discover personal information from an IP address. You can discover the originating ISP and sometimes the general geographic area, but that's it.

Here's my current IP:

[edited out]

Go to town.

the aggressive campaigning bothers me too. I agree with your assessment.

There's a surprise.

Sledge. The ability to reveal someone else's IP address is powerful. Let's say that scattered about in your posting history over the past few years, you've told the board you're an English Professor, did your undergrad at BYU, are an active LDS who contributed to Al Gore's campaign, and that you're a combat veteran of the First Gulf War. Adding geographical information to that mix, it wouldn't be too hard for someone to do a little research and narrow it down to find your identity. Surely you know that.
.

[Res Ipsa]

Lem, this is a longstanding point of disagreement between us. If I think you've misapplied my words, I'm going to clarify.

I do my best. but yes, I disagree that you are as clear as you seem to think you are. It regularly seems to result in you feeling the need to lecture various people. A need I don't agree with.

Obviously, my clarification wasn't clear, so I'll take another crack at it. If I recall correctly, the words you quoted were in response to a specific question you asked about why I, as a moderator, would want an LDS person on the team to consult.

The LDS person under discussion being sledge, yes.

I answered your question, which was clearly based on how I think about moderating. Obviously, Shades is the authority figure that sets the expectations for moderators. In this case, the expectation is "clone of Shades." My opinion as to what I think I have to do to become a clone of Shades is not intended to be any kind of authoritative statement about moderator qualification. Each moderator gets to figure out for herself how to think about becoming a clone of Shades.

Then say that its your own opinion. You stated this:

Because being a clone of Shades requires a moderator to do his/her best to recognize her/his personal bias and to set it aside when acting as a moderator...

When you say things like the above, yes, it sounds like you are being authoritative, especially since you were recently a moderator here.

Even if you and Sledge accepted my view as authoritative or even reasonable, it applies only to conduct as a moderator. Having bias that a person demonstrates as a poster is not relevant to whether the person can recognize that bias and set it aside when acting as a moderator. That's what I meant by my comments having nothing to do with whether Sledge can (i.e., has the ability to) be a clone of Shades.

But you used the term personal bias, directly within the context of commenting on how to moderate for Shades. You specifically said this:

Because being a clone of Shades requires a moderator to do his/her best to recognize her/his personal bias and to set it aside when acting as a moderator...

and yes, I am asking whether Sledge can set aside that bias, so I got the point you are ridiculously belaboring. Next time, please pay more attention to what I write before you jump to your conclusions.

But yes, I get it. You speak, I interpret that the best I can in the context of a discussion, you don't like it so you blame me for misunderstanding.

Yes, it's longstanding. Please try to be clearer at the outset when you communicate. I'm sure it will go far to resolve this issue. In the meantime, I will refrain from quoting or referring in any way to any comment you make in order to avoid miscommunication. In return, I would politely ask you to please dial back your condescension. Other people are also educated and communicate for a living, but you seem to have this idea that only you do it correctly. It's tiresome to keep trying to be civil when you break out this side of you.

Statistician, solve thyself.

[Jersey Girl]

I understand, but I really don't think moderators have access to personal information, other than IP address, which don't tell you anything.

I've been posting online over 2 decades. I have seen people, even here, play fast and loose with people's in real life on the board, in the chat, via messages, and via email. I've seen people get pissed off and divulge, sometimes in collaboration with another pissed off poster. I've seen people drunk doxxed here. I've seen in real life jump around the boards on to blogs and back again. I've seen persons wrongly identified and wrongly accused, thereby putting an additional innocent party's in real life in harm's way--family, friends, employment. I've had posters here share in real life about their adversaries behind the scenes with me when I never once showed an interest in it. IP addresses are but one source of confirmation that can lead to pursuit of additional in real life.

I don't like it. I don't do it. I don't like it when others do it because they use it to damage people.

Again, and speaking only for myself, I need more time to know you.

No direct reply to this? Did I miss it?

[Lem]

... I would politely ask you to please dial back your condescension. Other people are also educated and communicate for a living, but you seem to have this idea that only you do it correctly. It's tiresome to keep trying to be civil when you break out this side of you.

Statistician, solve thyself.

Lawyer, dial back your ego.

(and it's Professor Statistician to you, dearie. Don't overstep. )

[Jersey Girl]

Yes...and moderators should treat their time as a moderator much like an arduous journey to destroy the ring, completing their calling and election.

“Exhausted from expending much energy on edits initiated by troll minions of the Adversary, the moderators collapsed across the Couches of Wayfair, and awaited a pickup from the Ventis of Arabica …”

The Couches of Wayfair. Omg.

[Sledge]

You can discover information about host networks, depending on the situation, which can identify an individual's employer and significantly winnow down the pool of candidates for a sufficiently motivated defender of the kingdom. It's been done before and I'm betting you know that. Also, your weak technical defense that somehow an individual's IP address is always harmless information is either intentionally misleading or grossly ignorant. I don't think you operate like an ignorant person, so I'm going with misleading. But either way, I trust you less as this weird moderator campaign goes on.

My IP is owned by Comcast. I guess you could then assume I work for Comcast, but that would be a silly assumption since Comcast provides a large percentage of public IPs to their clients. Comcast probably owns several million IP addresses. Really narrowing it down there!

So you're wrong. But thanks for playing. Unfortunately I don't have a door prize.

What I do have is a commitment to be the best damn moderator you've ever had, and I only ask for a 90 day trial!

[Jersey Girl]

How easy it would be for Sledge to share IP addresses with interested parties, which has actually been done on other boards to in order for Mopologists to identify places of employment and ultimately a near bullseye identification of people who are now active at this very board today. Again, I don't trust Sledge and personally I would be taking more extreme opsec measures to participate here if he is assigned moderator privileges.

You cannot discover personal information from an IP address. You can discover the originating ISP and sometimes the general geographic area, but that's it.

Here's my current IP:

73.23.140.87

Go to town.

the aggressive campaigning bothers me too. I agree with your assessment.

There's a surprise.

Um, yeah, no. Based on that move alone, I would never endorse you as a moderator here. Maybe unless you quit grandstanding over a long period of time. Otherwise, no.