International board, or something, and the mods, and ciao

[Shibumi]

So you believe that the Org is surmounted by an elitist corps of mods and their pet favorites, and that the rules are unevenly enforced, and so on and so forth. And you're fightin' angry about it.

Do you have any positive suggestion about what should be done? Beyond, say, you being put in charge?

I have one suggestion: Kindly ask some of the mods to step down, when they have expired their "best before" date. Replace with people who are more friendly towards the world at large, and members in particular.

I can not believe that some of the mods can still roam free around here.

You have such an excellent set up here, loads of friendly people, loads of people who dedicate themselves to these boards. Why let that be destroyed by a few rotten eggs wearing green?

Shape up and admit that some of the mods are doing a less than perfect job.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Do you have any positive suggestion about what should be done? Beyond, say, you being put in charge?

Clever ad hominem Lemur. Just throw out a random accusation that he wanted to "take some power for himself" in order to give less credit to the original point of inequality.

[Tellos Athenaios]

And Tellos don't say it isn't an issue, since it is. Of course it's not an issue for you, you are not affected.
Your comparison with mummy and her children isn't that adequate. If it happens over and over again then it gets annoying. At first, as I noticed it since the beginning I joined this forum, I let it be. I thought: "these things happen" just like your mummy comparison. But you can only take so much, at a certain point you are fed up with it. As I am now.

Still noticing there's no answer for my previous question. I still hope you get to a point where you are able to answer.
I also see Louis' post hasn't been edited yet, which I find strange. You say it's PG 13 right? So do it for those children you want to "protect".

Ho hum. Backroom is run by different types of moderators than the Frontroom is. In the Frontroom they let pass quite a bit except that they move topics not appropriate to the forum. In the Backroom they are a lot more assertive and will slap you with a warning if only you quote some inappropriate language by a fellow poster (well at least that's what happens if you're me quoting PanzerJaeger...).

Now as to the real question: if you feel Louis is in need of some moderator love, you can always report the offending post. That puts stuff on the agenda instead of complaining about it now. Never ascribe to malice and all that. It also helps to ensure that everyone does get treated equally. Even if you are an old timer can appreciate some self-referential joke about members and know that those members will not feel offended about it, doesn't mean others won't. So yeah if it's all so bad you can whack that report button and remind moderators of why and how Louis is a serial forum offender or some such.

Me I'm of the opinion that no system is perfect and by and large we have a relatively well behaved crowd on the forum that by and large manages to keep things pleasant. Of course the new guys are going to be scrutinized a bit more. That's no different from communities in RL. Yes it is entirely unfair when people tend to dismiss the old timer pulling a stunt as that crazy Frenchman who occasionally says silly things like that, he doesn't mean anything by it just can't seem to help it. OTOH he doesn't do it nearly often enough for it to be noticeable by anyone but the hapless new guy who was the unfortunate audience for his joke.

Again, suggest that you take it up with the moderators directly through the report button if it bothers you. Instead of waiting for them to not read the thread (quite possibly they think oh, no not another girl's thread, I've seen enough of those...) and not do anything, say.

[Crazed Rabbit]

You deserved the PM you got Shibumi.

You have a history of provocative trolling and you've been politely warned. You did not seem to get the point when it was politely made to you. As is often the case with trolls, you came to whine in public when banned, putting on a show of being the well meaning and misunderstood victim.

Some people forget that moderators are people with full time jobs and families and we don't want to spend our days arguing with trolls trying to be internet rules lawyers. What do you say to someone who continues to post provocative trolling attempts after being politely warned? How much time out of our lives should we take to coddle unrepentant trolls?

If you're really surprised by the reaction to your provocations then you obviously did not understand why this forum has the high reputation it does.

CR

[a completely inoffensive name]

did not understand why this forum has the high reputation it does.

CR

Usually places with high reputation attract lots of members...

[Crazed Rabbit]

Usually places with high reputation attract lots of members...

Like how craft beers attract a lot more customers than Coors Light?

CR

[Lemur]

Clever ad hominem Lemur. Just throw out a random accusation that he wanted to "take some power for himself" in order to give less credit to the original point of inequality.

You use that word "ad hominem"; I don't think it means what you think it means.

What I'm getting from this thread is a lot of cries of "INJJUSTICE!" and very little constructive suggestions. If anyone wants to put forward proposals for better self-governance, then by all means, draft it up, propose it, put it on the table. Ask anybody who's worked in an organization successfully; you want something done, propose a sensible, workable solution. Merely complaining gets you nowhere unless you're a rich brat at a boutique store.

Speaking of which, let's have a look at what unhelpful suggestions look like:

Kindly ask some of the mods to step down, when they have expired their "best before" date. Replace with people who are more friendly towards the world at large, and members in particular.

And who shall make this determination of which mods have reached their expiry date? If anything, we have trouble retaining mods, given that modding is (a) thankless, and (b) unpaid. Shall we form a committee to decide which mods are expired? And who shall staff that committee? And how will we know when that committee is past its date? Or would you rather have global votes on which mods should be defrocked? But such a vote would need to be anonymous, so who do we trust to monitor an anonymous vote, if the mods are such a bunch of mutual-bear-soaping , clique-encouraging sycophants?

Shape up and admit that some of the mods are doing a less than perfect job.

I would be fascinated to find where you have found anyone -- anyone -- asserting that the mods are perfect, the admins are perfect, the internets are perfect or that love is perfect. ACIN, pay attention if you want to invoke rhetorical/logical fallacies; that was not an ad hominem, but rather a strawman that Shibumi shared with the group.

What does "shape up" mean in this context? How is this "shaping up" to be accomplished? What positive mechanism can you imagine? Are you capable of imagining and proposing a workable solution to this problem that has you so hot under the collar?

Try, please. Complaints without a plan are worthless.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Like how craft beers attract a lot more customers than Coors Light?

CR

Because choosing between products with different prices attached to them, are exactly the same as two different internet communities which are both free to join?

You use that word "ad hominem"; I don't think it means what you think it means.

What I'm getting from this thread is a lot of cries of "INJJUSTICE!" and very little constructive suggestions. If anyone wants to put forward proposals for better self-governance, then by all means, draft it up, propose it, put it on the table. Ask anybody who's worked in an organization successfully; you want something done, propose a sensible, workable solution. Merely complaining gets you nowhere unless you're a rich brat at a boutique store.

You want to get something done, do it, or at least show a path to it.

You attacked his character bro, instead of tackling his claim. Whatever the logical fallacy is called, that is what you did.

I got a sensible solution here. Make me an admin. I got no qualms with any of you. Centurion pisses me off a lot but I am still facebook friends with him. I got a contest running and I contribute to the game and backroom. I have a stake in this forum, and I always stick up on the side of not overly punishing someone even if what they say annoys me, like 9/11 was deserved.

However, as much as I like you all, none except a very few I would consider friends. I am out of the loop here with these old timers that have been around since before '06. If some moderator dicks around, I will make sure he is punished. People that feel as if they are not in the crowd can trust me.

EDIT: Everyone is complaining because there is no young blood, just oldies tainted with rose colored glasses at all his fellow moderators. So put in some young blood, that is the solution.

[Beskar]

I have to be honest, I have to sum up this thread in a similar style of Fluffy.


I believe some responses should definitely be categorised under "You should have known better" (especially the moderators involved) and no need really to bring them up again.

As for the 9/11 thread, I believe I posted a reply saying about the shame of the negative consequences by the actions which has lead to certain injustices. The thing is, posting an insightful view or opinion is perfectly valid, cheering with a beer as you speak of about planes "slamming them" is incredibly immature and you deserve an infraction point and some serious discussions about your future in the Backroom, Banquo's Ghost reply might not be up to standard but you can easily see where he was coming from, he probably took your reply to the infraction with "What I did wrong?" as a trolling attempt and he was simply caught during a bad moment. Doesn't excuse his behaviour but at least it is understandable on a human level. As a note, Glorification of death is never a good thing, it is disgusting, especially when it is aimed against 'innocents' 'citizens' adults and children.

Andres posts some good posts, he has a tendency to do that, big it up to the Belgium guy, Lemur too, my forum-adoptive father.

First thing I saw when I read your name, 'phantom' "Why does he have only 4 posts?", which has me curious, why aren't you posting from your main account? Are you simply here to fan the flames of this incident? You may not be having "Shiny 'senior member' title" as you put it, but I am instantly drawn to the fact you haven't been seen posting around, what does this matter to you, whos' sole contribution to the forum is replying to this thread?

As for the later example of the two warnings, one from Crazed Rabbit (ie: fascist) and Secura (ie: rape and sodomy one). I think Crazed Rabbit might have been a little trigger happy, since in that game there was rumours of extreme right-wing organisations, but the Secura warning was an example of really good moderation on the site. There is no way with a straight face you can consider "Rape" "Sodomy" as valid entries in a one-word story thread and Secura decided to simply politely inform you and did a minor edit with a nice friendly smile.

[Beskar]

It's bull**** that I get infraction for things I post while other members do the same but don't get the infraction just because they are buddies with those moderators.

Since "Senior Members" are classed as buddying with Moderators, I will show you something...

I posted this:

If I am mafia, so are you. We are the same alignment, dumdum.

I was given a warning and it was edited to:

If I am mafia, so are you. We are the same alignment.

[Be nice - GH]

I said "dumdum" comment in jest / lighthearted, but it was still the same, it was classed as a personal attack. Did I end up raging and posting in the watchtower? No, I understood why he did it, I apologised for wasting GH's time to him and simply continued on plodding around the forums. There is no bias, me and General Handkerchief are the best of friends, bosom buddies, but as soon as I crossed the line, he acted in his moderator duties to correct me.

[Centurion1]

you didnt get a warning you just got your post edited.

[Drunk Clown]

I some responses should definitely be categorised under "You should have known better" (especially the moderators involved) and no need really to bring them up again.

As for the 9/11 thread, I believe I posted a reply saying about the shame of the negative consequences by the actions which has lead to certain injustices. The thing is, posting an insightful view or opinion is perfectly valid, cheering with a beer as you speak of about planes "slamming them" is incredibly immature and you deserve an infraction point and some serious discussions about your future in the Backroom, Banquo's Ghost reply might not be up to standard but you can easily see where he was coming from, he probably took your reply to the infraction with "What I did wrong?" as a trolling attempt and he was simply caught during a bad moment. Doesn't excuse his behaviour but at least it is understandable on a human level. As a note, Glorification of death is never a good thing, it is disgusting, especially when it is aimed against 'innocents' 'citizens' adults and children.

Again we are past that. We all agree it was a bad and inappropriate joke.

Andres posts some good posts, he has a tendency to do that, big it up to the Belgium guy, Lemur too, my forum-adoptive father.

Yes, Andres made very good posts and I wished he would continue. Lemur however has only some jokes and some posts to get around the main problem this thread is about.

First thing I saw when I read your name, 'phantom' "Why does he have only 4 posts?", which has me curious, why aren't you posting from your main account? Are you simply here to fan the flames of this incident? You may not be having "Shiny 'senior member' title" as you put it, but I am instantly drawn to the fact you haven't been seen posting around, what does this manner to you, who sole contribution to the forum is replying to this thread?

Why does that matter? He was spot on.

As for the later example of the two warnings, one from Crazed Rabbit (ie: fascist) and Secura (ie: rape and sodomy one). I think Crazed Rabbit might have been a little trigger happy, since in that game there was rumours of extreme right-wing organisations, but the Secura warning was an example of really good moderation on the site. There is no way with a straight face you can consider "Rape" "Sodomy" as valid entries in a one-word story thread and Secura decided to simply politely inform you and did a minor edit with a nice friendly smile.

I do not complain about my infractions, I understand why they are infracted/warned. I said I respected Secura's way of warning/infracting me; it's a standard you other moderators should use too (solution Lemur?).

Now Lemur,

You already want solutions? You haven't even admit it you guys acted wrong! Let me tell you how it works. First you have a complaint, then the guy to whom you complain agrees or disagrees (not yet happened). If that's done we can find a solution together.So answer my question please about Louis, it pretty much sums up whether you think it's fair some people here have free passes.

But yeah, about solutions (as you want them already ). Promote ACIN a moderator, I'm sure he would be a great moderator. If there's one thing I notice about him that he's objective.

And Tellos,

Haven't I brought up enough attention to Louis' post? Yet it's still unedited. And no, mods didn't think "Gah! Another gender thread, let's not check this one" as they posted in it, reacting to Louis' post.

[Papewaio]

The rules aren't flat across the forums.

Most of the misc forums tend towards the other themes of the Org and as such have different rule biases to cater for different events.

Frontroom has the Bade and now the Hunk Threads.

Backroom is the place for politics. It generally more of a mature bent in the arguments with a less mature ribbing of each other. Play with the ball not the balls. Lots of people get warnings... heck I even tried giving warnings (to myself... didn't work, just had to apologise which is harder, much much harder) when I modded there... strange but true. Generally the idea is that you get a couple of points, have some time out, regroup and come back with better arguements.

The Backroom has always had a caustic vein... cleansing or deadly as the case may be... very addicitive if a little bit too base. When we had more assistant moderators it was seen as a place not fair to put an assistant moderator in. It does require a certain dark humour with some fairly big boots to use whilst trying to keep up with a 101 long thought provoking threads. For those who don't understand... try reading everypost in every thread in the Backroom for a week without getting entangled.

=][=

The Backroom is childs play compared with how the Moderators go head to head. We are selected for the forums we moderate in a manner in which we are seen as the best fit for the forum. We are also generally selected to cover time zones and personality types.

Yeap we have a broad spectrum of people with different opinions. They are human and guess what make mistakes, don't assign to malicous intent what can be explained by human error.

We do not always agree, in fact 100% consensus is a rarity. It is a good thing, we have the ability to still function without being droids. We sometimes debate things to the nth degree.

On the whole the moderators want to see the patrons self moderate. None of us what to spend our time sending out warning points, we want to spend our free time as particapents in the fun, not sweeping up after the elephant has passed through.

=][=

Are there in groups... well yes... but often it feels as a moderator one is a pariah and you and just get to sweep up the mess left over by the party hard in group.

Are there people who know each other over a long time, yes and they have a short hand in speech and jokes.

Was the Org a more rough and tumble place in the past. Heck yes. But we do try on the whole keep it PG in the main forums and always have done so.

Some of us in shame have taken the black. Others have left the Org... my biggest regret is Pindar leaving. I'd happily take the black or even hot pink to have him back.

=][=

BTW if you think we only pick our non-warned members to be senior members please in 140 words or less explain the awesome-ness in boundless energy and warning points that is Devastin Dave.

Or that one of our biggest spammers became one.

We are simply not that organised to be facists and we haven't the access to the cool drugs to be the in crowd.

[Lemur]

Now Lemur,

You already want solutions? You haven't even admit it you guys acted wrong! Let me tell you how it works. First you have a complaint, then the guy to whom you complain agrees or disagrees (not yet happened). If that's done we can find a solution together.So answer my question please about Louis, it pretty much sums up whether you think it's fair some people here have free passes.

No, if you've ever attempted to effect change in an organization, you would know that what you describe bears no relation to "how it works."

As for your "question", which I shall quote for sheer amusement: "whether you think it's fair some people here have free passes," I mean, come on. When do you plan to stop beating your wife? Answer: nobody here has a "free pass." Some people are given a little more leniency than others, but that's due to track record, level of contribution, and general rep. If you're asking that these factors play no role, then you're demanding that human nature be circumvented.

Furthermore, your question about how rules are enforced in the backroom has been answered multiple times in this thread, which bodes ill for your reading comprehension and ability to assemble complicated devices from instructions.

People who are disruptive and/or gain a reputation for trolling will receive more scrutiny, and be tapped with warning points more quickly. It says so in the rules. PJ already made an eloquent post about this, which appears to have missed you entirely.

As for Louis' post, which appears to be giving you 10000 miles per gallon, may I point out that nobody reported it. Ever. You didn't report it. Ever. Nobody took offense and nobody was chuffed about it. His post only became an issue when you raised it here as PRIME EXAMPLE of EVIL DOUBLE STANDARDS.

So what happens when we obey your commands and edit it? Oh, you find another example from the past five years, and demand that SOMETHING BE DONE. And when we fix that? Another.

Sorry, these particular monkeys don't feel like dancing on your command.

A truly tasteless joke about 9/11 in an active thread where a mod has already said PLEASE DO NOT MAKE TASTELESS COMMENTS is a very different creature from an off-color joke that nobody reports or comments upon. Different is different.

[Beskar]

you didnt get a warning you just got your post edited.

I got a warning as well.

[Tellos Athenaios]

And Tellos,

Haven't I brought up enough attention to Louis' post? Yet it's still unedited. And no, mods didn't think "Gah! Another gender thread, let's not check this one" as they posted in it, reacting to Louis' post.

Funnily enough, no, the relevant moderator did not post there. You can look at who wields mod powers where by looking at the “Moderator” list in the forum index. As it happens, Secura is the only one with mod powers (aside from Admins) here. She also does the rounds in the Frontroom. Again if you disagree with Louis' post to such an extent either report it, or take it up with her directly.

[a completely inoffensive name]

no one even replied to my suggestion of making me an admin.

[Andres]

Would Andres' name color change have anything to do with the opinions expressed in this thread?

No need for conspiracy theories. I stepped down a long time ago out of my own free will. I only joined staff again temporarily, after Tosa's passing. Temporarily became 5 months which was too long. Because I have other, RL, priorities, I decided to step down again at the beginning of this month.

I've said what I had to say here; no need for me to keep repeating myself.

[PanzerJaeger]

What I'm getting from this thread is a lot of cries of "INJJUSTICE!" and very little constructive suggestions.

A lot of cries from the same four people, one of which doesn't even have the nerve to use his own completely anonymous account and may or may not be one of the other three.

[a completely inoffensive name]

A lot of cries from the same four people, one of which doesn't even have the nerve to use his own completely anonymous account and may or may not be one of the other three.

I don't really have an alt account. I said that for lulz to see what you guys would do.

[Montmorency]

The Phantom Menace?!?!?!

[Beskar]

no one even replied to my suggestion of making me an admin.

Because you would simply be too awesome and make everyone else feel little compared to you.

[Secura]

Wow, that was quite alot of stuff to get through; I've cleaned up the thread and removed everything I deemed irrelevant to the subject at hand or just inappropriate.

I know that this is quite an emotionally-charged subject and that the Watchtower is the place for bringing such grievances to light, but I'd like to ask that you keep it civil when you're posting; alot of good things have been said from both sides, it'd be a shame to drag the discussion through the mud. :3

This applies to both members and staff.

So put in some young blood, that is the solution.

By young blood, do you mean in terms of their time at the forum or their actual age?

I said I respected Secura's way of warning/infracting me; it's a standard you other moderators should use too

I'm always keen to hear feedback about my moderating from both fellow staffers and members, and I'm pleased that you took that warning for what it was, a simple heads-up about your posts; thank you for that.

Having said that, moderation is very much open to interpretation, and as such no two moderators respond the same way to things even if there is some consensus reached; my own moderating may be agreeable to some, but others may see it as pedantic or condescending (I always wonder if my PMs come across as too mother-to-child or not :<)... it should by no means be the basis by which other moderators follow. :P

As it happens, Secura is the only one with mod powers (aside from Admins) here. She also does the rounds in the Frontroom. Again if you disagree with Louis' post to such an extent either report it, or take it up with her directly.

Well-said, sir! The reported post function is there for a reason, don't be afraid to use it!

If you find someone's post in the Frontroom/Watchtower to be offensive, spam or whatnot, you should report it regardless of the colour of the poster's username; I do not treat anyone with favouritism, even those such as Beskar who I know 'IRL', and will always act in a manner appropriate of the robes.

This applies to other areas of the Org too; staff will act on reported posts, regardless of the source. :3

no one even replied to my suggestion of making me an admin.

I can't give a response to that offer (only being a mod myself and all! :P), but I do have something I think you could answer, given your posts thus far; what qualities do you think a staff member should have and which of those do you see/not see in the current team?

The Org's content and moderation starts with you guys, so now's your chance to really tell us what we're doing right and wrong.

[Louis VI the Fat]

We hold us selfs to higher standards then ordinary members on account of we of got the best edumacation of u all so we desserve preveligis. If u want in too u have to be in kraut with Ser Clegane

~~o~~o~~<<oOo>>~~o~~o~~

Banquo is under no obligation to play along with feigned ignorance. In fact, I am happy he took the responsibility of not indulging it, of not setting a precedent of endlessly explaining and PMing back and forth over the perfectly obvious. God forbid, if he'd done so, the next time time somebody does a quite conscious Fred Phelps* in a remembrance thread, and we don't correspond for weeks about it again, we would've been called out for favouritism.

* Fred Phelps of the Westboro Baptist Church, who heckle funerals of soldiers and policemen and shout at the relatives they had this coming.

~~o~~o~~<<oOo>>~~o~~o~~

I do not think any of this would've been handled at all differently if, say, this happened in a remembrance thread over the shhooting in Norway. The first one to next summer post 'Cheers to whomever it was that slammed those Norwegian kids' in a remembrance thread will get a major infraction. In fact, I remember at least one major infraction that was issued over a troll post in the 'Mass shooting in Norway' thread of three months ago.

So this is not about pro-American bias. (Of a European moderator no less with a personal history of active duty fighting terror groups losely supported by America...)

[Kekvit Irae]

The suggestion I posted at the end of page two would have ended this debate long before it started. :P

[Drunk Clown]

No, if you've ever attempted to effect change in an organization, you would know that what you describe bears no relation to "how it works."

Ah, so you know how it works? Please enlighten me.

As for your "question", which I shall quote for sheer amusement: "whether you think it's fair some people here have free passes," I mean, come on. When do you plan to stop beating your wife? Answer: nobody here has a "free pass." Some people are given a little more leniency than others, but that's due to track record, level of contribution, and general rep. If you're asking that these factors play no role, then you're demanding that human nature be circumvented.

It appears you have missed my question, cos this was my question:
Was it justified that Louis did not get a punishment for making such an inappropriate post in the Gender thread?
Post #44
Your mention of track record is a total joke, fag is fag, a slur not allowed. And I call what you call "leniency" a free pass, as it's not leniency it's way past that.

Furthermore, your question about how rules are enforced in the backroom has been answered multiple times in this thread, which bodes ill for your reading comprehension and ability to assemble complicated devices from instructions.

Would you be so kind to tell me again, as I clearly missed it

People who are disruptive and/or gain a reputation for trolling will receive more scrutiny, and be tapped with warning points more quickly. It says so in the rules. PJ already made an eloquent post about this, which appears to have missed you entirely.

Nah, I didn't miss it. Post #52.
It appears you missed it.

As for Louis' post, which appears to be giving you 10000 miles per gallon, may I point out that nobody reported it. Ever. You didn't report it. Ever. Nobody took offense and nobody was chuffed about it. His post only became an issue when you raised it here as PRIME EXAMPLE of EVIL DOUBLE STANDARDS.

You think a member wants to report a moderator's post if it already has been quoted by moderators? That not something you don't think twice about. If you do it, you're immediately in a bad spotlight. But yeah it does give 10000 miles per gallon, as it's the perfect example. If I would have posted it I think it would be 2 infraction points. That's quite big.

So what happens when we obey your commands and edit it? Oh, you find another example from the past five years, and demand that SOMETHING BE DONE. And when we fix that? Another.

Sorry, these particular monkeys don't feel like dancing on your command.

No, why would I do that?

A truly tasteless joke about 9/11 in an active thread where a mod has already said PLEASE DO NOT MAKE TASTELESS COMMENTS is a very different creature from an off-color joke that nobody reports or comments upon. Different is different.

Any kind of "flaming", slurs, or insults -- addressed to either an individual or a group -- is extremely inappropriate. Please respect etiquette at all times.

I find this quite similar. Fag under slurs. Shibumi's post under Tasteless comment.

Maybe another rule for you:

The Org expects its patrons to remain civil even in the face of disagreements.

[InsaneApache]

Fag has many meanings. To ban a word that is only offensive to north Americans is hubris on their part.

[Lemur]

Ah, so you know how it works? Please enlighten me.

Already described it, in detail. I've made change happen in large organizations, far larger than the Org, so I have a little bit of experience with this. The steps, assuming you want it laid out.

1. Establish problem
2. Establish scope of problem
3. Try to determine who has a stake in keeping problem around (there's always somebody who benefits from dysfunction)
4. Avoid those people as you work through this
5. Determine chain of command/responsibility
6. Who can I go to who is (a) as high as possible on the food chain and (b) will listen to me?
7. Determine proposed solution to problem (this is the crucial bit)
8. Start selling local stakeholders on the solution / build coalition
9. Avoid people who have a vested interest in keeping dysfunction around while building coalition
10. Approach the highest person on food chain in the following manner: (a) We have a small problem that does not in any way reflect on you or anybody you care about, (b) here is an easy-to-implement solution that already has a consensus, (c) by implementing this solution you will look like a smart guy, hep cat and savior of the company.

And as you can imagine, that course of action gets things done.

I call what you call "leniency" a free pass, as it's not leniency it's way past that.

And I am astonished that you did not report the post or express your concerns until this thread, where you are leaning on it like an aging one-hit rock band that has a single crowd-pleasing song which needs to be played with an extended instrumental and audience singalong. You think this is entirely about Louis and his mistake; I think that's a dodge at best. Indeed, the fact that you are only able to cite a single example of questionable mod behavior points to the barrenness of your argument. If you were on a board where the mods were running wild (and I've been on a few) you would have hundreds of examples you could reference. You wouldn't be able to swing a dead cat without hitting a mod abusing his or her powers. But what's your ace in the hole? A non-native English speaker misusing a word for ciggies and gay folks. Weak.

You think a member wants to report a moderator's post if it already has been quoted by moderators? That not something you don't think twice about. If you do it, you're immediately in a bad spotlight.

Ah, so not only is there an in crowd and an out crowd, there's also a pervasive climate of fear. The Org is a rather wretched place, when looked at from your perspective; kind of like North Korea, but with less starvation.

Maybe another rule for you:

MM-hmmmm. Do tell. I do not perceive the inherent value in all of the fuss you have kicked up. From an organizational change perspective, your actions have been ill-conceived, ill-timed and ill-spent. If your goal is to change something, then you have gone about it completely backwards, less like a strategist working on large-scale change and more like an angry kid in a retail store. So from the perspective of (a) something is wrong and (b) I want to fix it, I just don't see how your actions line up.

[Secura]

Was it justified that Louis did not get a punishment for making such an inappropriate post in the Gender thread?

As one of the local moderators of the thread in question, I was one of the first ports of call in the event that the post was to be moderated, so I can only apologise that Louis' post has drawn so much ire.

You see, I read the post several times (with much eyerolling on my part, it must be said), and decided that the post was typical Louis, having seen his interactions with the moderating team and various Tavern patrons during my time at the Org. However, rather than leave it be entirely, I decided to wait and see if anyone reported the thread, especially Fragony who I felt to be the most likely to be offended by what was said... I wasn't certain if the 'fag' thing would be taken as friendly banter or a sly dig, given it's context here in the UK may not be the same in the Netherlands or wherever else.

Ultimately, the post wasn't reported and I let it slide; in hindsight, that may not have been the best decision and I apologise again for it.

You think a member wants to report a moderator's post if it already has been quoted by moderators? That not something you don't think twice about. If you do it, you're immediately in a bad spotlight.

I stand by what I said earlier, and still encourage you to stand your ground and report the post regardless of who says it and who has quoted it; you shouldn't feel uncomfortable or hesistant, the Org is as much your site as anyone's. :3

[Drunk Clown]

Already described it, in detail. I've made change happen in large organizations, far larger than the Org, so I have a little bit of experience with this. The steps, assuming you want it laid out.

1. Establish problem
2. Establish scope of problem
3. Try to determine who has a stake in keeping problem around (there's always somebody who benefits from dysfunction)
4. Avoid those people as you work through this
5. Determine chain of command/responsibility
6. Who can I go to who is (a) as high as possible on the food chain and (b) will listen to me?
7. Determine proposed solution to problem (this is the crucial bit)
8. Start selling local stakeholders on the solution / build coalition
9. Avoid people who have a vested interest in keeping dysfunction around while building coalition
10. Approach the highest person on food chain in the following manner: (a) We have a small problem that does not in any way reflect on you or anybody you care about, (b) here is an easy-to-implement solution that already has a consensus, (c) by implementing this solution you will look like a smart guy, hep cat and savior of the company.

And as you can imagine, that course of action gets things done.

I prefer bringing attention to a problem this way. It actually has quite a big impact and raises awareness.

And I am astonished that you did not report the post or express your concerns until this thread, where you are leaning on it like an aging one-hit rock band that has a single crowd-pleasing song which needs to be played with an extended instrumental and audience singalong. You think this is entirely about Louis and his mistake; I think that's a dodge at best.

No, that's what you think. You think it's all about me wanting to bring Louis to justice. It's the perfect example.

Indeed, the fact that you are only able to cite a single example of questionable mod behavior points to the barrenness of your argument. If you were on a board where the mods were running wild (and I've been on a few) you would have hundreds of examples you could reference. You wouldn't be able to swing a dead cat without hitting a mod abusing his or her powers.

Haha, no you and other mods are proving my point pretty well too in this thread. You are disrespectful and hostile.

But what's your ace in the hole? A non-native English speaker misusing a word for ciggies and gay folks. Weak.

Are you using Louis being a non-native English speaker as an excuse? Although most posts are joking he is great in formulating sentences and I believe his grasp in the English language is more than good.

Ah, so not only is there an in crowd and an out crowd, there's also a pervasive climate of fear. The Org is a rather wretched place, when looked at from your perspective! Kind of like North Korea, but with a little bit less starvation.

Well done, make me the bad guy.

MM-hmmmm. Do tell. I do not perceive the inherent value in all of the fuss you have kicked up. From an organizational change perspective, your actions have been ill-conceived, ill-timed and ill-spent. If your goal is to change something, then you have gone about it completely backwards, less like a strategist working on large-scale change and more like an angry kid in a retail store. So from the perspective of (a) something is wrong and (b) I want to fix it, I just don't see how your actions line up.

So, first you said I had my head up my butt. I'm an angry kid in a retail store. My arguments are really weak. I have apparently a very puny mind. And you edited your post over 20 minutes, but first it said you were doubting my integrity. That I'm trolling here and nothing else but being disruptive.

How do your action line up as a moderator?