Poly Referendum: What do you think of the new tech subforum?

[Kuciwalker]

At least when you answer a tech question, you ANSWER it.

Usually with "format c:"

[Asher]

The main reason I'd never be a mod is I don't believe in banning people. I would definitely not be the Urban Ranger communist-censorship moderator of doom, nor would I be the Ming wheel-of-justice random-punishment-generator moderator. I'd let things go down as they're posted, and as they should be.

[Last Conformist]

I'd make a good mod. I've got a new pRNG that need to be tested.

[Kuciwalker]

If the admins unbelievably take lotm's advice, I promise to ban all the Mac people left (that Asher hasn't driven off). Except Drake

[Lorizael]

For the sake of curiosity, and because moderating is about more than banning, what do you think a good mod does?

Edit: This question was more or less directed at Asher, but anyone can answer.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Lorizael
For the sake of curiosity, and because moderating is about more than banning, what do you think a good mod does?

Edit: This question was more or less directed at Asher, but anyone can answer.

Consistent application of clearly-defined rules.

Eg, no "what I say goes" clause in the Poly rules...
Eg, no letting LOTM off the hook for calling me a jerk four times when personal attacks are quite simply, not allowed.
Eg, no banning me for my VERY tame response about LOTM's posting habits in response to his four "jerk' comments.

The main, overriding problem with Poly's moderators is they don't understand that a good moderator is a consistent moderator. The lines need to exist for everyone in the same spots, and consistently enforced as such. Right now it's a gong show of randomness.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Asher

Consistent application of clearly-defined rules.

Eg, no "what I say goes" clause in the Poly rules...
Eg, no letting LOTM off the hook for calling me a jerk four times when personal attacks are quite simply, not allowed.
Eg, no banning me for my VERY tame response about LOTM's posting habits in response to his four "jerk' comments.

I mentioned no names. I made no reference to anyones nationality, religion, or sexual orientation.


Here is the thread in question

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=167099&perpage=30&pagenumber=1

[Asher]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
I mentioned no names. I made no reference to anyones nationality, religion, or sexual orientation.

Please don't patronize me. It was clear to everyone who exactly you were referring to.

We are not stupid.

Well, I guess this isn't true. DanQ and Ming profess to be totally oblivious as to who you were talking about.

But guess what? It doesn't even matter. You were specifically attacking a Poly poster repeatedly, name or not. That's against the rules.

Perhaps this is the overriding problem with Poly moderators. They're all artsy. They do not have an inherent logical mind that can apply rules logically to situations as they arise.

[Lorizael]

Originally posted by Asher

Consistent application of clearly-defined rules.

Eg, no "what I say goes" clause in the Poly rules...
Eg, no letting LOTM off the hook for calling me a jerk four times when personal attacks are quite simply, not allowed.
Eg, no banning me for my VERY tame response about LOTM's posting habits in response to his four "jerk' comments.

The main, overriding problem with Poly's moderators is they don't understand that a good moderator is a consistent moderator. The lines need to exist for everyone in the same spots, and consistently enforced as such. Right now it's a gong show of randomness.

I mean more along the lines of... where do you think that consistent line should be drawn.

[MOBIUS]

You have to remember that LotS is paying the owners money in order to peddle his pro Israeli/Judaism drivel 24-7, thus they can't afford to offend him...

[lord of the mark]

anyone who wishes can look at what I posted. That you read yourself into what I described may say something, but not about me.

[Asher]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
I mentioned no names. I made no reference to anyones nationality, religion, or sexual orientation.


Here is the thread in question

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...0&pagenumber=1

thanks to certain folks who take pride in being jerks and displaying their jerkiness at every opportunity,

Unfortunately one of the OTs key jerks has started to import his poor behavior and crude rhetoric into OG

Ive never been the target of an OT jerk

In what way is this not a personal attack? In what way is it not clear who you are referring to?

[Asher]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
anyone who wishes can look at what I posted. That you read yourself into what I described may say something, but not about me.

Just who do you think you are? Really?

Do you really think you're so much smarter than everyone here that you can play these kinds of games?

We're not stupid. Don't treat us as such. It was patently clear who you were talking about.

You broke the rules -- repeatedly -- without any kind of action by the administration. My reply wasn't even against the rules in any way, and it got me banned for 5 frickin' days. And the only reason a reply was made was because you were insulting me and the administration refused to act.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Asher

thanks to certain folks who take pride in being jerks and displaying their jerkiness at every opportunity,

Unfortunately one of the OTs key jerks has started to import his poor behavior and crude rhetoric into OG

Ive never been the target of an OT jerk

In what way is this not a personal attack? In what way is it not clear who you are referring to?

The moderators should ban you right now for playing these stupid games with me.

Do you admit you targeted me?

Do you admit youve used poor behavior and crude rhetoric in OG?

Do you admit to taking pride in being a jerk?

If not, then I dont see how you could read those as descriptions of you.

Are you suggesting that for someone to say theyve been targeted, or to say there are jerks in OT, is not acceptable?

[Asher]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
If not, then I dont see how you could read those as descriptions of you.

Are you suggesting that for someone to say theyve been targeted, or to say there are jerks in OT, is not acceptable?

It's extremely clear who you are talking about from all of your incessant whining in the previous weeks about me.

You know exactly who you were talking about, and so does everyone else.

Shame on you for stooping to this level.

You also are forgetting: it doesn't even matter if you named a name. You specifically mentioned it was a poly poster, then you insulted them repeatedly. This is against the rules...plain and simple.