Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Desdichado" data-source="post: 5082733" data-attributes="member: 2205">The particular incident that sparked this forked thread came across as arbitary, petty and bizarre.&nbsp; I would never in a million years have guessed that the post in question was a &quot;moderator&quot; post, in part because I never would have guessed that a moderator would arbitrarily ban a discussion that they had initiated just because people were disagreeing with the conclusion that the the moderator had decreed was true by fiat.&nbsp; There was nothing &quot;moderateable&quot; about the discussion until you decided that suddenly you were going to threaten to moderate it, as near as I can tell.&nbsp; And frankly, that kind of preemptive &quot;I'm going to moderate this now because someone might possibly be offended by it if it goes on&quot; style moderation is pretty ridiculous in my opinion anyway.Plenty of the moderator action on these forums comes across as abritrary, petty, and nonsensical.&nbsp; There are entire discussions on other messageboards, thousands of posts long, that largely discuss the arbitariness and nonsensical moderation that sometimes happens here.&nbsp; The least the moderators could do when in engaging in it follow some posting protocol so people know clearly what in the world the moderators are doing.&nbsp; If the moderators can be insulting and threatening to others, as the case here seems clearly to indicate, just because their opinions are not accepted as Truth with a capital T, then at least let us know that you're going to start &quot;slapping people&quot; to use your terminology, for disagreeing with what you say.Because otherwise, all we've got is yet another example of moderation that doesn't make sense and ultimately harms the site overall.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Desdichado, post: 5082733, member: 2205"] The particular incident that sparked this forked thread came across as arbitary, petty and bizarre. I would never in a million years have guessed that the post in question was a "moderator" post, in part because I never would have guessed that a moderator would arbitrarily ban a discussion [I]that they had initiated[/I] just because people were disagreeing with the conclusion that the the moderator had decreed was true by fiat. There was nothing "moderateable" about the discussion until you decided that suddenly you were going to threaten to moderate it, as near as I can tell. And frankly, that kind of preemptive "I'm going to moderate this now because someone [I]might[/I] possibly be offended by it if it goes on" style moderation is pretty ridiculous in my opinion anyway. Plenty of the moderator action on these forums comes across as abritrary, petty, and nonsensical. There are entire discussions on other messageboards, thousands of posts long, that largely discuss the arbitariness and nonsensical moderation that sometimes happens here. The least the moderators could do when in engaging in it follow some posting protocol so people know clearly what in the world the moderators are doing. If the moderators can be insulting and threatening to others, as the case here seems clearly to indicate, just because their opinions are not accepted as Truth with a capital T, then at least let us know that you're going to start "slapping people" to use your terminology, for disagreeing with what you say. Because otherwise, all we've got is yet another example of moderation that doesn't make sense and ultimately harms the site overall. [/QUOTE]

Verification