Just don’t forget to ask for those kisses. You never know…
Happy to see the lightness in enlightening; however, I seem to find no real answer as to why a veteran poster can troll and ad hominem while a newbie can’t.
OK, firstly, apologies all round for being away for so long. I’ve been working very long hours for the last week or two and haven’t had the time to do much of anything.
Secondly, allow me to apologise for the way I reacted. I should not have posted in the manner that I did, and there is no excude for my behaviour. There is no reason that “a veteran poster can troll and ad hominem while a newbie can’t.” However, a veteran poster who has shown a history of good-natured debate may be forgiven the odd lapse, since we know that most of the time he is OK. If someone new comes along and posts meaningless nonsense immediately, we can conclude he has nothing of worth to offer.
However, I maintain that banning jones was the right thing to do. He wants constructive criticism? The criticism existed before he even posted, they were in the rules of the forum. He never actually asked for help or advice, he just signed up and started posting threads without caring about whether he was actually adding anything constructive. Had he asked for advice, he would have had it. He didnt, so he’s gone for good.
This is as you say “an elitist club”. Our criteria are simple; express yourself well and be constructive. This forum is not, and never has been, open for all to do as they like. Follw the rules and you will be fine. If you aren’t used to high-level debate, ask for help and it will be provided. If you post nothing but drivel, you will be banned in short order.
In short, read the rules before posting. If you don’t, why shouldn’t we ban you?
This is the problem with ILP having moderators who are posters. This morning i wrote a pm to PoR to apologize to him for my rude behavior in his comeback thread. It was not warranted or allowed. We are moderators and we are human. We are engaging with other members and get as hot as they do, but Mother Theresa I am not, and there are many mods who say outrageous things - no just me. I don’t think what you said was right either but it was no better than what some other members get away with…
I don’t know what the answer is to that question, but I need to be respected and respectful. If I could delete that to PoR, I would. It was wrong.
DO we need a nice priest and this can turn into the confession thread. It has been one day since my last confession - Ben, forgive me.
Irrellus,
Let me give you the perfect example of the “judgement calls” that moderators are asked to make:
You and another member have posted back and forth to each other over a 6 month period of time. You have exchanged barbs occasionally, and the moderators know that it is just good natured poking at one another. I have a few “friends” in ILP and we could engage in name calling and it would be understood by the moderators as the two of us just taking the piss out of each other. Nothing serious.
Then we have someone with 5 posts under their belt getting nasty, someone who obviously has not read guidelines or has chosen to ignore them.
Reading posts from both situations, they look both the same, and yet, they’re not. One needs a warning, the other is just two friends poking at one another.
Our job is to know the difference and to interfere with members as little as possible. Can you see the quandry?
HVD, et al,
IMO, good responses. I wouldn’t be a moderator because of such pressures as expressed here. I will tell my son to read rules before attempting posts anywhere. For God’s sake, he’s just a kid. Is the bootcamp concept a good idea? I still see no excuses for the breaking of rules by veteran posters. It is never in the interest of good debate. Playfulness is fine, but there should be a forum just for that. Philosophy or relgion can be fun to discuss; but the discussions really need not be so blatantly tempermental as are some I have seen. The problem seems to be between clear expressions of well-thought ideas and ego assumptions. Of course, ego enters into everything we write; but the more thoughtful among us do attempt to curtail the solipsism and narcissim that invalidates our arguments by putting them in a self-referentiall box that allows no admittance of what is other. Thanks for the considerations given here.
Ego and temperament in posting usually comes from great insecurity. When I am feeling particularly insecure, I may lash out at someone for no reason. If you notice - the members here who are the most respected are the least insecure. Even the posters who are brilliant are not respected if they act like two-year-olds. All they seem like are brilliant two-year-olds ---->quietly pitied by all. Funny… they usually never see insecurity in themselves and yet they are as transparent as glass.
I not only see it clearly in myself but, I admit it!
Gee, Bessy. The very thought of a brilliant two-year-old is terrifying. Most two-year-olds frighten me on some level. Brand new egos, usually some manner of verbal skills, motility, and an unmitigated will to power.
Holy crap!
Case in point–To my thread on contradictions between Christ and Christianity–post; “Jesus said:Fuck this thread!” Second post by the same person–“I came here to goof, and goof I shall.” Need I say more?
Ierrellus,
I read your thread, and while there was an interruption, there was a good discussion afterword. It would be nice if there were perfection,but there is no more of that in ILP than there is in RL.
Hang in there. You got more out of that thread than talking to the wall…
tentative,
Then why is perfection imposed on newbies?
Thanks for your suggestions, Ierrellus. We’re going to be discussing the separate area idea among others at our next staff meeting.
Ierrellus,
I’m not sure where you’re coming from. Perfection is expected from no one. Newer members have the same rights under posting guidelines as everyone else. Typically, newcomers who have problems are those who have failed to read posting guidelines or have chosen to ignore them. A number of new members come from flame sites and simply begin with ad hominems, thinking it is acceptable everywhere on the net.
I’ve not seen any sort of discriminatory moderation from any staff member.
No ad hominems evident in booboo’s threads.
No content in boo boo’s threads either. Look at the guidelines and play moderator for a minute. I think you’ll see why…
Who determines the value of content? Moderators? Rules? If either, they are not equally distributed.