Topic: Let's put it to a vote

[_sturt_]

In your opinion, should mods of this board be making their moderation/censorship decisions based on the rules listed, and be able to cite some rule actually offended anytime they make a decision to impose themselves?


I ask because today like never before a mod on this board indiscriminately began blasting away on a thread where the present discussion after 3 pages worth concerned the sub-topic, what is a rational approach to evaluating whether an OC candidate should or shouldn't be getting consideration... that, in a thread titled something about our offensive coordinator search.

Yes, he had reason, but not the kind of reason you would expect. His reason was that I effectively showed that he was trying to redirect the thread in a way that HE preferred, self-evidently trying to protect someone he clearly wanted to protect... perhaps because he liked the guy, perhaps because he just doesn't like me... yeah, I know, definitely the latter, and only maybe on the former.

Note, this is your opportunity to discourage me from ever wanting to post on this board again, so if you're one of those who really dislike me in a personal way, and you're just that kind of person who sees the end as justifying the means... vote no... and make your case for why "no" is the answer everyone else should vote for, too.

If you're one of those who reads my posts or others and you, too, have observed there's some serious questions raised by how the mods appear to treat their buds versus how they treat others... I never ask anyone to speak up on this front, but I'm asking now. Be that voice that votes yes, and make the case for why it's right that the rules both exist and that the rules actually be applied. No more "so-called" rules. Just rules.

[_sturt_]

To the uninitiated... I mean, I know I didn't bother to look for the many years I've been here until just the last couple...

Do these "discipline" rules seem unreasonable?

Why or why not?



(And no, I never received a mod PM... but you already knew that, didn't you.)

[_sturt_]

And then... here are the expectations originally set out by the admin.

Forgetaboutit?

Or does it make some sense that maybe if these were actually applied to the board, it might be an even better environment for discussion?

Why or why not?

[_sturt_]

Okay, I suppose I'll get the voting started then.

Yes, the rules are good.

Yes, the discipline makes sense.

Yes. Standards make sure that everyone is treated equally, and overall contributes to a strong environment on the board. But they're not taken seriously if they're not enforced. And they're certainly not taken seriously if the mods do not even appear to have a clue (based on their own comments and actions).

Yes 1.

No 0.

[_sturt_]

[_sturt_]

It's when people who are NOT the target, and probably never will be, stick up for principle that they most dramatically assert that, yes, principles really do matter.

[_sturt_]

Big City's justification for abusing his magic button?

This.



I wish I could say I'm kidding.

[_sturt_]

I'm amused this morning at the thought of the handful of posters who have visited here and chuckled at the thought that a mod has used his magic button status to ding me... put me in my place, as it were... you folks must feel really warm and satisfied. Good for you.

Not to disrupt that warm and satisfied feeling for you guys, but to possibly stoke the warm and satisfied feeling of those who are my friends (yes I have some of those... I grew up in Huntington, so more than enough, actually) and who recognize the bass-ackwardness of this little drama that Big City has created...

Take heart in the fact that CENSORSHIP ONLY OCCURS when someone with censorship authority feels impotent to USE REASON to combat the words he doesn't like, and resorts to the only other alternative at his disposal.

Take heart in how Big City's blatant censorship ONLY VALIDATES that what I was saying... NO ONE bothers to censor words he believes to be irrational or wrong or convincing, since words like that are harmless anyhow.

Take heart that Big City cannot point to a single evidence of any one of the so-called rules as being offended. And that, sometimes when people use their authority inappropriately, it only comes back as a blight on their own character.

Actually, on that last point, I'm not real warm and satisfied... believe it or not, I don't like to see people do that to their own selves. It's sad and unnecessary. What Big City did here is decidedly less of an injury to me than it is to himself. I'll walk away from this thread today and not think another thing about it... but his attitude/mindset/character touch everything he does and everyone he comes into contact with.

[_sturt_]

This all happens to come down on the eve of what is almost certainly going to be the most consequential week of the last year to me professionally, so this is all I'm going to say... and unlike our friend Apollo who always claims he's done imposing himself into threads but never is... (and worse, hardly ever imposes himself for anything substantive, but merely to distract from the topic if not hijack the thread... I've really grown to think that's a man of virtually no impulse control...)  my commentary on all of this ends here.

I'll revisit things after my real-life priorities return to a season of more typical calm.

But in the mean time, I leave it to my peers here to decide for themselves if

1) Rules matter

2) Rules should matter

3) W0lf's discipline rubric, at least as it's envisioned, is reasonable

4) W0lf's discipline rubric ought to actually be followed

And in so doing, as a by-product, or maybe as the main product... effectively tell me to hit the highway and never come back here. (Or not.)

[_sturt_]

Typo correction... hehe... they actually don't want you to be able to modify your own posts when you get the waterboy treatment... s'helpme...

Take heart in how Big City's blatant censorship ONLY VALIDATES that what I was saying... NO ONE bothers to censor words he believes to be irrational or wrong or unconvincing, since words like that are harmless anyhow.

[2xBison]

and How does it make you feel?

[wasbarryb]

I doubt your ego could handle how badly you'd lose that vote Waterboy.

[MUther]

I think the big question is, is there a statute of limitations on warnings?  You've certainly received them before and have been kicked out of there before.  I even remember Wolf's apology after reinstating you a few years ago.  In other words, you've been on thin ice with them before and tread lightly never occurred to you.  You can hardly claim some sort of discrimination based on the board policy when you've kept doing what you've always done and they decided procedure wasn't needed for their decision this time. 

I don't even know what happened, though I saw I was brought up in the aftermath.  But I can imagine you dissected someone's post and tried to force them to defend it word by word, as is usually the case.  It's a message board.  People say what they feel and then you can choose to accept it or not.  You do not need to ask for clarity on every point.  This isn't a white house press conference.  Most of us aren't professional journalists.  People would like you better if you just said "You're full of %^&* and here's why" and then gave a SHORT retort.  But instead you do point by point quoting, linking material and posts from years ago, and bog down the flow of discussions to the point people abandon threads.  And you don't even see how mind-numbingly annoying that is. 

I gotta say you must be a real hoot to be around at parties when someone says the cheese dip is awful and you tell them the history of cheese dip, ask them what they don't like specifically about that cheese dip, and then counter every answer piece by piece till they decide they not only will never eat cheese dip again, but will probably never attend another party.  That is what it's like for us when you dive into a conversation.   

And one final point.  There isn't some conglomeration of fans that all know each other and sit around thinking up ways to mess with your existence.  I'd say I probably have met and know as many of the posters on a variety of boards as anyone does.  Almost none of them did I know before sports boards were around.  I tailgate off and on with lots of posters and always try to walk around and see people.  The boards are never brought up.  The posters rarely come up.  Everyone has a real person personality that is often very difference from their board persona.  I know the admins and the mods of this board.  They would have to be pushed for a very long time before they would make a decision like this.  So maybe you didn't receive a written warning in triplicate, but you've had ample run-ins with them to understand that a day like yesterday was not only possible, but inevitable.

I won't fall into your little debate trap of vote for the rules or vote for me to go away, thereby suggesting that anyone who doesn't want you around obviously doesn't believe in rules.  But I will say this.  Your inherent value to the board, as is mine, or anyone else's is not so great that the board would not live without you and in some cases be better off without strongly opinionated posters.  So my best advice would be to find somewhere they don't know you and create a different persona that seeks to be humorous without being snide, informative without being a know-it-all, and argumentative without being an @#*^!.  I'm still working on at least 2 out of 3 of those at any one time.  But at least working towards it.   I don't think, by the reaction of the members, that you're going to find happiness here any longer and it will be worse if you're reinstated.  I've never felt a global, collective sigh of relief like that.

[wasbarryb]

  I've never felt a global, collective sigh of relief like that.

Thanks for saying that man. I’ve noticed the same thing and been debating whether to say anything.

I’d actually thought of going so far as to put up a survey on the public board asking if others felt that way or not. Every time I’ve thought about it, I’ve leaned towards telling myself I didn’t want to look like a petulant trouble maker with an ax to grind.

Since -_sturt_‘s removal there really does seem to be a different attitude. We still find things to disagree about, but it no longer seems like a life or death issue where it is necessary to demolish the person we are disagreeing with. We’re able to disagree without being disagreeable again. People are making more jokes again, granted they’re at _  _’s expense, but that’s OK. I get the feeling people no longer are looking over their shoulder wondering “if I make this post is it going to result in one of _  _ attacks?” In short people are smiling again and having fun again.

I hope _  _ can see reality and make a real decision what he wants to do. If he wants to start behaving like he wants to be an honest member of the board and participate as an equal member rather than an all-powerful deity: fine. If he chooses to go somewhere else; equally fine. If he tries to come back and start the same old stick, I hope the mods will cut him out and remove him for good like the cancer he so clearly chose to become.

[MUther]

I tried to give constructive feedback and my honest opinion, which is mostly what he asked for.  He always seems like he feels backed into a corner with the whole world against him but never realizes he built the walls that form the corner. 

[_sturt_]

I can understand the desire for a certain few people to come to this thread and, rather than actually discuss the topic, discuss personalities... (not that I "read-read" what is above, but I scanned it... didn't see any votes, let alone any discussion to support a "yes" or a "no" vote) ...

How perfect in its own way that this little congregation of lost souls came together in both posts and likes in one thread to unanimously... hijack... hehe... you caught that, didn't you?... in my best Foghorn Leghorn, "Hijaaa, Hija, Hijaaaack, I say"... yet another thread...

Though you just know that they are reading this right now, yelling screaming protesting at their monitors that... no, never... not them... to the contrary, that ***I*** am the one doing the devious deed...

They're as right about that as they ever were.

So, not a surprise that they're self-delusional about the hijacking thing, now or before... or whatever other mindless drivel cooked up and posted here... but from where I sit, it still is surprising that they evidently fail to get how paper-thin their protests and logic and motives are to anyone with some level of adult intelligence.

Anywho...

I have indeed returned as I said I would (... though, it pains me to move off my perfect 9000 post count number... really hate to do that)... only to find that the mischievous brats' hijacking strategy proved effective.

There's zero evidence that anyone was willing to publicly discuss the topic at-hand...

Perhaps, for fear that the admin would take a dark view of anyone who would endorse that basic human ethics suggests "rules and consistency, good... no rules and inconsistency, bad"... you just know there are people who feel like they're being ungrateful if they appear to take issue with the admin, right?... even though they feel he's painted himself into an ethical corner... and then, on the other hand, not at all inclined to endorse the opposite of that publicly, for fear that they would be labeled not so smart, whether explicitly or implicitly.

Oh well. Case was made, and I can feel good that I gave it an effort to promote "rules and consistency, good."

Before I exit stage left permanently, though... at post #9001... DANG IT!!!... I do want to offer this one more something in what hopefully can put an end to this silliness that this chaos is all about me... that I am the personification of the one-off... that I am just an abrasive person who no one in his right mind would ever enjoy engaging in a meaty, substantive discussion...

No, it's not me.

It's you MUther... it's you Apollo... it's you E-Man... etc ... as well as you, Dale, and your mods.

If term "brat" means someone who sits in the back of the classroom and cracks jokes or tries anything diversionary just to try to stay away from having to engage the discussion of the class... if it means someone who whines when things don't go his/her way... if it means someone who consciously misleads at times... if it means someone who is prone to palpable emotional outbursts... then, just my perspective, but I think there's no shortage of brats gathered here in this thread.

My take?

You are so inflamed by people... well, me, mainly, but occasionally others like dshoe... posting strongly-supported conclusions that you disagree with... and since you generally hold popular opinions (which may or may not be well thought out and rational) rather than unpopular opinions... it makes you especially venomous on those occasions. Can't contain yourself. It's not mere disagreement, but disagreement to the point that some of you start the name-calling thing, others just look for any way to cry out "hijack" or "troll" or some other key word to try to regain some rhetorical footing, and still others start begging Dale and the mods to please please please end this torment, and give in to the censorship thing... or, at least, maybe one of the mods can rearrange the thread so that it doesn't look so bad for "our side."

Me?

I'm a normal, average-intelligence person, but one who doesn't come to any given topic with any preference automatically based on what is popular or, similarly, who is posting one position or another.

How can I say such a thing? I mean, just look at those smites and likes and thanks... atrocious, right?

In my best Lee Corso... "not so fast, my friend"...

Here are my last words to W0lf from several days ago, and now, my final words to the rest of you... friend or foe... read 'em and weep, or better, have a chuckle... life ain't so bad...

[wasbarryb]

Whine and cheese are a great combination. Hope you had some cheese along with your whine Waterboy.

Did you happen to notice that no one stepped forward to vote for you?

Enjoy your self-perceived popularity on those other boards. If, they enjoy your company over there as much as we enjoy your absence, everyone wins.