Rules and Moderator information

[Whiskey]

Hound, adding: Send your request to Shades. You like to bounce around along the edges of the rule set and I don’t mind erring on the cautious side. You’re not going to hurt my feelings (and neither is Shades) if the post is moved back.

There’s no need to descend into madness over it. : D

Hound, do you think DCP will be more or less likely to harass the dearly departed if he reads about the passing of such a nemesis in paradise or in prison or in telestial? After all, our concern here is wanger's concern here for DCP's concern here for Moksha's concerns from his mortal life. I think it is a small concession to have the thread relocated if wanger feels validated about the the threats from DCP on Moksha.

[canpakes]

Hound, adding: Send your request to Shades. You like to bounce around along the edges of the rule set and I don’t mind erring on the cautious side. You’re not going to hurt my feelings (and neither is Shades) if the post is moved back.

There’s no need to descend into madness over it. : D

Hound, do you think DCP will be more or less likely to harass the dearly departed if he reads about the passing of such a nemesis in paradise or in prison or in telestial? After all, our concern here is wanger's concern here for DCP's concern here for Moksha's concerns from his mortal life. I think it is a small concession to have the thread relocated if wanger feels validated about the the threats from DCP on Moksha.

This comment doesn’t seem to have anything to do with the thread topic. Do you want me to move it to Hound’s thread? It’s a better fit there, and he’s feeling lonely.

[Hound of Heaven]

That's total BS and you know it. Posters have the ability to enable a word censor on their own user control panel.



You're saying it's easier to just ask them to adhere to the rules than telling the offended party to enable their own word censor with one click?

No. You don't know how the word censor works. People don't get to enable a word censor or their own word censor. They can either disable or leave enabled the one and only word censor, which I myself program, and nobody else programs. And like I said, constantly updating the word censor in an attempt to keep up with the ever-so-creative sexual and anatomical slurs that people insist on constantly coming up with to hurl at each other is a Sisyphean task. Although it's easier to ask people to adhere to the rules, the word censor's existence is nevertheless necessary because some people adamantly refuse to adhere to the rules--or are pathologically incapable of doing so.

Sort of like how policemen exist even though it'd be much easier if everyone just obeyed the law. See how that works?

Shades, stop it. Just stop it.

Stop what? Telling you the facts? Okay.

The posters in question didn't develop their approaches yesterday. They've done it throughout their posting history.

Thank you for telling me something I've always known from the very, very beginning.

Hell. They did it to me and we went at it one:one for a good long while. What changed? Communication between myself and them. Probably a report or two on my part?

Bully for you! More power to ya.

But what you're now saying is that the word censor that everyone has access to and can enable with the one click serves no real purpose.

??? You honestly, truly believe that the word censor serves no real purpose??

Wow. Just, . . . wow.

Hound of Heaven/Heaven's Hound can report the posts s/he finds offensive instead of gumming up the works around here with his/her endless complaints and questions.

Yes. But endless complaints and questions are pretty much standard fare around here. You yourself should be, umm. . . especially aware of that fact.

Have any sense of Deja Vu lately?

Like the post to which I'm responding?

Shades, I understand I can't use prison content in paradise, but I can use paradise information in prison, correct?

Of course. Using higher-caliber communication than the absolute minimum is always to be desired. Heck, it's one of the things that separates man from the animals.

Dr. Shades, Canpakes, in his role as a moderator, has engaged in several immature actions on the board. Now, he is publicly mocking a board member's disciplinary status, which undermines the professionalism and integrity of the board. This also establishes a concerning standard for the management of sensitive issues within the board.

What Canpakes and Binger engage in daily with their insults and personal jabs is acceptable to me, as Canpakes is communicating as a board member, not a moderator. However, when a moderator uses red lettering to publicly shame a board member like Canpakes has done, that crosses the line and contradicts everything I believe you represent!

If you haven't come across the post from Canpakes in his role as a moderator, here’s an image of his statement. It’s clear he’s attempting to provoke Binger while simultaneously showcasing for his progressive friends on the board. Shades, Canpakes' behavior towards Binger is incredibly unprofessional; he seems to be trying to gain favor with his peers while simultaneously trying to undermine Binger by publicly reprimanding him in front of the entire board. Shades, you would never behave this way, nor would Xeno. So why is Canpakes permitted to act like a spoiled child, accustomed to doing whatever he pleases because he knows no one will compel him to behave like an adult?

Will you please reinstate Binger so he can post? He did nothing to warrant a suspension.

[canpakes]

If you haven't come across the post from Canpakes in his role as a moderator, here’s an image of his statement. It’s clear he’s attempting to provoke Binger while simultaneously showcasing for his progressive friends on the board. Shades, Canpakes' behavior towards Binger is incredibly unprofessional; he seems to be trying to gain favor with his peers while simultaneously trying to undermine Binger by publicly reprimanding him in front of the entire board. Shades, you would never behave this way, nor would Xeno. So why is Canpakes permitted to act like a spoiled child, accustomed to doing whatever he pleases because he knows no one will compel him to behave like an adult?

Will you please reinstate Binger so he can post? He did nothing to warrant a suspension.

Hound, there were communications via PM between Binger and I running up to the temporary ban, and both Shades and Xeno were cc’d by me on all replies. I refused Binger’s request for a permanent ban as I don’t feel that the situation warrants it (just as I had argued the same during his last tour). Binger insisted that any ban action should be announced to the community, which is an entirely reasonable request. And I stated to Binger that Shades can countermand any ban decision and it would make no difference (In other words be of no offense) to me. It’s Shades’ board, right?

Consider this quote:

The ONLY thing that matters on this board is my entertainment. That is it. Nothing else matters.

That said, it’s interesting that you are referring to ‘Whiskey’ as ‘Binger’, completely unprompted. ; )

[Hound of Heaven]

Hound, there were communications via PM between Binger and I running up to the temporary ban, and both Shades and Xeno were cc’d by me on all replies. I refused Binger’s request for a permanent ban as I don’t feel that the situation warrants it (just as I had argued the same during his last tour). Binger insisted that any ban action should be announced to the community, which is an entirely reasonable request. And I stated to Binger that Shades can countermand any ban decision and it would make no difference (In other words be of no offense) to me. It’s Shades’ board, right?

You truly are quite the manipulative individual! Honestly, you are truly one of the most emotionally unstable individuals I have ever come across in my life. First, let's take a moment to acknowledge that whenever I address a post to Shades, you tend to respond almost immediately, perhaps due to your emotional state. This often leads to you speaking on Shades' behalf rather than allowing him the opportunity to express himself. It seems there is a desire to influence the overall dynamic of the board instead of letting Shades communicate his thoughts directly. Your connection with Shades is quite reminiscent of the bond shared by a friend of mine and his wife. Whenever someone poses a question to his wife, he interjects to ensure that the questioner comprehends his perspective, rather than permitting his wife to respond. You, Canpakes, approach this situation similarly by not allowing Shades to express himself without giving your opinion first! That's classic manipulative and abusive behavior on your part. All you had to do was allow Shades to speak for himself, but you can't because you're emotionally unstable. Now, just like every other emotionally unstable abuser, you're going to make anyone excuse for your manipulative behavior, go ahead, it's your time to manipulate.

Your deep emotional investment in this discussion board seems to drive a desire to manage every aspect of the conversation. Now, let's examine the approach you took regarding the binger situation. Initially, you acknowledge that for weeks you have been pressing Binger regarding his content, and anyone familiar with this board will recognize that you, Canpakes, rather than the other two moderators, predominantly focus on board members who lean conservative. One only needs to examine your moderator rulings to observe that your actions seem to target conservatives such as myself, MG2.0, Binger, or Ceeboo, while simultaneously permitting DrCamnPP to make inappropriate comments without addressing such posts appropriately. There again, proving you view the dynamic of the board to consist of two teams, and instead of being an umpire, you have chosen to be the coach of team progressive, and you have chosen to abuse your moderating powers so you can help your team win! Once again proving you don't understand what it means to be a moderator.

Your personality traits are not well-suited for a moderator role, as you tend to be highly emotional and seem more focused on impressing your friends on the board rather than maintaining the impartiality expected in that position. Consider what you just acknowledged regarding the Binger disciplinary action you implemented; it reflects a level of manipulation and control on your part. Binger requested that his disciplinary action be made public, as you mentioned, and he also asked for a permanent ban, according to your account. As a person who emotionally unstable and has a tendency to exert control over others, you opted for selective compliance by conceding to some of Binger's requests. However, the essential aspect of grasping why you are highly emotional and unstable lies in comprehending the significance of granting Binger one of his requests while denying the other. It appears that you, as an emotionally driven moderator, decided to publicly announce the discipline of Binger. In your perspective, this action portrays you as transparent and authoritative. However, you refrained from imposing a permanent ban on Binger, as doing so would imply a loss of control over the situation. Not giving Binger a permanent ban gives you the ability to maintain some level of power over the situation involving Binger, which you desire. A moderator that actually cares about the wellbeing of the people that post to this discussion board would have granted his request. But you don't care about anyone that doesn't share your Marxist views, therefore, you chose to not ban Binger because you don't want to lose control over the situation. Right now, you still control Binger and it makes you feel good! You enjoy the control.

Your handling of the Binger situation and your tendency to speak for Dr. Shades before he has the chance to respond clearly demonstrate a manipulative nature and significant instability. This raises serious concerns about your suitability as a moderator, as it appears you thrive on the power imbalance and struggle to maintain neutrality in discussions.

[Hound of Heaven]

Oh wow!!!!!!

I just went to Spirit Prison to see what's happening over there and guess what i saw??

That you Canpakes are just as much responsible for derailing the thread you banned Binger for!

Canpakes, go take a look at the first thread in Spirit Prison. You have just as many moved post to Prison as Binger does. You derailed the thread just as much as Binger did, are you going to give yourself a two week ban so you can go Christmas shopping?

You are literally an idiot!







DR. SHADES! Why is Binger banned for two weeks for his actions in a thread, while at the same time your moderator Canpakes had to move just as many of his post from the same thread to Prison? Please inform us how that makes any sense whatsoever.


Dr. Shades. If you examine the first thread in Prison, it's the same thread that Canpakes banned Binger for apparently acting inappropriately, you'll see that both Binger and Canpakes equal number of post moved to Prison because both were derailing the thread titled MAGA:Why a Trump Vote is the Ultimate Dating Dealbreaker For Women! Not only that, if you read the same thread in Spirit Paradise, Canpakes still has over a dozen post that are most definitely only posted to derail the original topic of the thread. Is there any way we can get Canpakes banned for two weeks so he understands that he's not the King of the board? In total, between the moved post to Prison and the post that are derails in spirit paradise in the thread i mentioned above, Canpakes has accumulated over 30 post in one thread that were written to derail the thread. Wouldn't you consider 30 post in one thread written to derail, spamming the board? Why isn't Canpakes held to the same standard as Binger?

[Dr. Shades]

I won't be able to get to this issue until much, much later tonight. Sorry about that.

[Hound of Heaven]

I won't be able to get to this issue until much, much later tonight. Sorry about that.

No problem. I understand you're busy. Thanks for responding.

Here's five examples of Canpakes derailing the same thread he punished Binger for derailing. At some point Canpakes needs to start acting like a legitimate moderator.



All im asking is for you to consider allowing Binger to post without restrictions , since a moderator was the one egging him on the entire thread. I don't think it's fair for a moderator to ban someone while the moderator is acting in the same manner. It's an abuse of power. Does that make sense, Shades?

[canpakes]

Hound, there were communications via PM between Binger and I running up to the temporary ban, and both Shades and Xeno were cc’d by me on all replies. I refused Binger’s request for a permanent ban as I don’t feel that the situation warrants it (just as I had argued the same during his last tour). Binger insisted that any ban action should be announced to the community, which is an entirely reasonable request. And I stated to Binger that Shades can countermand any ban decision and it would make no difference (In other words be of no offense) to me. It’s Shades’ board, right?

You truly are quite the manipulative individual! Honestly, you are truly one of the most emotionally unstable individuals I have ever come across in my life. First, let's take a moment to acknowledge that whenever I address a post to Shades, you tend to respond almost immediately, perhaps due to your emotional state. This often leads to you speaking on Shades' behalf rather than allowing him the opportunity to express himself. It seems there is a desire to influence the overall dynamic of the board instead of letting Shades communicate his thoughts directly.

Good morning, Hound -

I don’t track post times and don’t have notifications enabled. When I post is entirely convenient to my own schedule. And my posts do not prevent Shades from posting; I’m unsure how that would work but perhaps that involves some aspect of particle physics, or magic?

Your connection with Shades is quite reminiscent of the bond shared by a friend of mine and his wife. Whenever someone poses a question to his wife, he interjects to ensure that the questioner comprehends his perspective, rather than permitting his wife to respond. You, Canpakes, approach this situation similarly by not allowing Shades to express himself without giving your opinion first! That's classic manipulative and abusive behavior on your part.

How does your imagined scenario with a patriarchal husband answering for his wife compare to a situation where Binger specifically asked that I announce any imposed ban immediately to the board?

All you had to do was allow Shades to speak for himself, but you can't because you're emotionally unstable. Now, just like every other emotionally unstable abuser, you're going to make anyone excuse for your manipulative behavior, go ahead, it's your time to manipulate.

See my questions immediately above.

Your deep emotional investment in this discussion board seems to drive a desire to manage every aspect of the conversation. Now, let's examine the approach you took regarding the binger situation. Initially, you acknowledge that for weeks you have been pressing Binger regarding his content, and anyone familiar with this board will recognize that you, Canpakes, rather than the other two moderators, predominantly focus on board members who lean conservative. One only needs to examine your moderator rulings to observe that your actions seem to target conservatives such as myself, MG2.0, Binger, or Ceeboo, while simultaneously permitting DrCamnPP to make inappropriate comments without addressing such posts appropriately.

This is an odd statement. One of the last posts I’ve moved to Prison was from Doc Cam, when I split off Binger’s and my derail. I can’t remember doing so with MG or Ceeboo, ever. It would seem that your recollection is tainted by your own perceptions of political ‘teams’ that you hold, not I.

There again, proving you view the dynamic of the board to consist of two teams, and instead of being an umpire, you have chosen to be the coach of team progressive, and you have chosen to abuse your moderating powers so you can help your team win! Once again proving you don't understand what it means to be a moderator.

What did the Doc Cam team ‘win’ when I moved his comment into Prison a few days ago?

Your personality traits are not well-suited for a moderator role, as you tend to be highly emotional and seem more focused on impressing your friends on the board rather than maintaining the impartiality expected in that position.

You’ll have to be more specific as to which friends you’re referring to. None of my friends spend time on this board, and I’m not seeing how booting a post from Doc Cam is going to make him put me on his Christmas gift list.

Consider what you just acknowledged regarding the Binger disciplinary action you implemented; it reflects a level of manipulation and control on your part. Binger requested that his disciplinary action be made public, as you mentioned, and he also asked for a permanent ban, according to your account. As a person who emotionally unstable and has a tendency to exert control over others, you opted for selective compliance by conceding to some of Binger's requests. However, the essential aspect of grasping why you are highly emotional and unstable lies in comprehending the significance of granting Binger one of his requests while denying the other.

Moderators don’t really ‘grant requests’; moderators exist to apply board rules when necessary.

It appears that you, as an emotionally driven moderator, decided to publicly announce the discipline of Binger. In your perspective, this action portrays you as transparent and authoritative.

Does it? That’s nice. But, it was really about speaking to Binger’s wish and his point on transparency. Like how we discuss things here. I view transparency as a good thing. Wouldn’t you agree?

However, you refrained from imposing a permanent ban on Binger, as doing so would imply a loss of control over the situation. Not giving Binger a permanent ban gives you the ability to maintain some level of power over the situation involving Binger, which you desire. A moderator that actually cares about the wellbeing of the people that post to this discussion board would have granted his request. But you don't care about anyone that doesn't share your Marxist views, therefore, you chose to not ban Binger because you don't want to lose control over the situation. Right now, you still control Binger and it makes you feel good! You enjoy the control.

Your paragraph here raises a few questions:

• To recap, you’re saying that banning Binger would have been a good thing for everyone else. That’s your opinion. But what is your rationale and how does that adhere to the board rules? Are you saying that if you were a moderator, you would ban some people to keep other people ‘happy’?

• What does not banning Binger have to do with Marxism? Do Marxists have a moratorium on banning when they moderate Internet discussion boards?

• How would a moderator “lose control” over a board member and their behavior by imposing a temporary ban as opposed to a permanent ban? Are you implying that a temporary ban will result in Binger acting out on an even greater scale when he returns from a temporary ban? Your conclusion here is interesting.

Your handling of the Binger situation and your tendency to speak for Dr. Shades before he has the chance to respond clearly demonstrate a manipulative nature and significant instability. This raises serious concerns about your suitability as a moderator, as it appears you thrive on the power imbalance and struggle to maintain neutrality in discussions.

Actually, I’m incapable of speaking for Shades as I currently lack godly powers. As you’re also noting, I can’t even control his daily schedule. : )

[canpakes]

Oh wow!!!!!!

I just went to Spirit Prison to see what's happening over there and guess what i saw??

That you Canpakes are just as much responsible for derailing the thread you banned Binger for!

That thread split isn’t why Binger was temporarily banned.

And I moved some of my own posts to Prison after playing along with Binger because our shenanigans would be a derail if they filled the thread. Makes sense, right?

Now you’ll have to tell me how moving my own posts is somehow favoring myself or whoever is on ‘my team’. : )