You are correct. Your posts have indeed been long past discussing anything relvant to the topic of Shibumi's thread. In order to not further derail the 'pro-American bias' thread, I've opened this 'pro-incrowd bias' thread. We shall discuss 'the inequity on this forum' here.
Firstly, all of your examples that show moderator favouritism are clearly drawn from posts meant for entertainment or educational purposes - the carnivalesque one by me, the funny intermission by Lemur, the alleged language one by frogbeastegg (for which you have yet to produce any source).
There is no equivalence between what is said for entertainment purposes, and what is not. Perhaps some entertainment is not PG, or falls flat, or is too self-referential for a general public. Maybe even inappropriate upon close scrutiny. There still however remains an ocean of difference with the intended slur, intended spam. For good reason, in criminal law, intention is everything.
What's more, there is also context. Intertextuality. Subtext. These are better explained by examples, which always work wonders:
Poster A:
'You filthy traitor, I'm going to drive over to your house and slit your throat, you macaroni-eating Italian scum'
Poster B:
'You filthy traitor, I'm going to drive over to your house and slit your throat, you macaroni-eating Italian scum'
Poster A remains unedited and unwarned, poster B gets teh holiday. Favouritism? No. Poster A said it in a mafia game and poster B in multiplayer.
Poster A:
'What are you, a fascist?'
Poster B:
'What are you, a fascist?'
Poster A remains unedited and unwarned, poster B gets teh infraction. Favouritism? No. Poster A said it when debating the differences between Franco's authoritarianism and Mussolini's syndicalism, and wanted to inquire about the preference of his fellow hardright member. Poster B made his post after some young girl said she prefers My Little Pony over Pokemon.
Poster A:
'Louise VI is a fat wench with PMS issues'
Poster B:
'Rape'. 'Sodomy'.
Poster A remains unedited and unwarned, poster B gets teh infraction. Favouritism? No. Because what Poster A said is simply true and always appropriate. Whereas Poster B's contributions are written in the 'One Word Story' thread, and must be considered nasty disruptions.
These examples do not reveal favouritism, or incrowds. At first glance, they may appear quite similar. Some are even completely so. The sole difference is intention and context. These must be taken into consideration. This goes a long way to explaining why posts with a superficial similarity can yield a very different response.
Secondly, sometimes, one has simply dealt with two different mods. Or one has dealt with two different subfora of the .org, with different modes of conduct. Or with differences over time. With different moderation requirements: sometimes, a moderator should be invisible, allow for creativity to blossom, whereas at other times she must be right on top of things because of a disruptive atmosphere.
These may all result in different outcomes for comparable posts. These mechanisms, much more than favouritism or incrowds, go a long way to explaining why (superficially) comparable posts may yield different results.
~~o~~o~~<<oOo>>~~o~~o~~
As for moderators, we like to think we hold ourselves and our own to higher standards than ordinary members. I've noticed this in myself too. Before I became a moderator, I used to troll InsaneApache three, four times a week. After I became a moderator, I repented and now I only troll him once a week anymore.
We moderators are mostly friends, at least closely acquainted with each other. How could we not? This is not a big place. This may however create an outward impression of elitist incrowd. Not so! We are merciless judges of one another.
Lastly, this is just a hobby site. Nobody makes money. This entire site is by and for members. We are all just a bunch of guys and gals who enjoy computer strategy games. Some us go on to write a guide, or moderate a forum, or do technical stuff that I never quite understand. We're just members. Anybody can volunteer (yes please!) to be as active or inactive as they please. There is no agenda driven incrowd.
