Moderation Issues (2)

cropped-adelie-penguin-antarctica_89655_990x7421.jpgAs the replacement Moderation page has developed the old bug so that permalinks no longer navigate to the appropriate comment, so here is yet another page for continuing discussion on moderating issues. The Rules can be found there so anyone with an issue should check that they are familiar with them.

2,308 thoughts on “Moderation Issues (2)

  1. Alan Fox,

    Having a site where YOU decide which insults you like and which you don’t is utter bullshit Alan.

    You getting to decide who gets to insult and who doesn’t is still bullshit, even on December 22. I wonder how long it will take Lizzie to understand that.

  2. walto,

    Now see if I was Alan, I could say I think your post in inappropriate, I want to be able to decide who gets to say offensive things and who doesn’t. Apparently they still don’t have enough power to decide whose posts to close or move, so they want even more.

    The more Lizzie says they are doing the job just as she wants, the more I will ridicule her. And Alan will continue to say his insults are the valid ones.

  3. Now Lizzie is just sad and puzzled as to why everyone doesn’t think here partisan moderators are great.

  4. So much hate from the minions of peace.

    Won’t that cause a faith hernia at Christmas time?

  5. Alan Fox: Site rules here are an honest attempt to strike a balance between free speech and censorship.

    Sorry Neil. My posts are being censored and they don’t even violate the rules. At least not the ones in writing.

    Thanks Alan. Sometimes reviewing old threads comes in handy. 🙂

  6. Mung: My posts are being censored and they don’t even violate the rules.

    You may see them as being censored. I don’t.

    What I see, is editorial discretion about how they are presented.

    If you don’t like that, then you can setup your own site where you are the editor and you get to exercise editorial discretion.

  7. petrushka: So much hate from the minions of peace.

    Not even a token effort at “peace on Earth, goodwill to men” from the supposed followers of the Prince of Peace on this thread.

    I’ll celebrate Christmas with my (decent christian) family and my atheist internet friends, thank you very much, and we’ll have a fest of love and human kindness. 🙂

  8. Mung,

    Not Guano? Seriously?

    Yes Guano. Though when I was called ‘scum’ by Gregory, I was actually disappointed it was Guano-ed. Takes all sorts, eh?

  9. phoodoo, you likely couldn’t care less one way or the other, but for whatever it may be worth, I am THIS close to clicking the “Ignore Commenter” under your posts.

    I guess the good thing from your perspective is that if everybody did that, you could post whatever you want on any thread you like! 🙂

  10. Mods:

    This post by Lizzie in the Intelligence, Intention and Teleology thread is against the rules (she is talking about rules issues in the wrong thread) , please send her post to guano and give her the appropriate warning, thank you. See quote:

    It would help, William, if you didn’t start from the assumption (which is against the rules, in fact, but no matter)

  11. Lizzie, Please answer as to why you say you have great faith in your mods, whom by your own admission don’t follow the rules?

    Thank you.

  12. walto: I hope your book writing goes really well in 2016! (I want that thing!)

    Allan,

    If you are writing a book… My best advice is… sex sells!!!

  13. Alan Fox,

    Alan, so glad you are here. Could you please remove Lizzie post discussing rules with William to guano please. You would think by now, she would know the appropriate place to discuss such things, but I guess it takes time.

    Thanks bro.

  14. Dear admins,

    keiths is allowed to create OP’s on moderation here at TSZ without having them closed down by the admins but I am not. What’s up with that?

    Is this the TSZ version of fair and balanced?

  15. phoodoo,

    Nonsense. Lizzie is pointing out to William that making assumptions about what people think rather than asking what other people think breaks the rule about posting in good faith.

  16. phoodoo,

    Mods:

    This post by Lizzie in the Intelligence, Intention and Teleology thread is against the rules (she is talking about rules issues in the wrong thread) , please send her post to guano and give her the appropriate warning, thank you. See quote:

    It would help, William, if you didn’t start from the assumption (which is against the rules, in fact, but no matter)

    Elizabeth’s post is focused almost exclusively on the topic of the thread. Her mention of the rules is parenthetical (literally) so the comment you are complaining about progresses the discussion rather than distracting from or derailing it. There is no violation of the site rules.

  17. Alan Fox:
    phoodoo,

    Nonsense. Lizzie is pointing out to William that making assumptions about what people think rather than asking what other people think breaks the rule about posting in good faith.

    Right, that’s exactly what I said, she is talking about the rules, that is against the rules in other threads.

    So you will be moving it soon, yeah?

  18. phoodoo,

    Lizzie, Please answer as to why you say you have great faith in your mods, whom by your own admission don’t follow the rules?

    If you have complaints about specific behavior, please provide a link to the offending comment.

  19. Mung:
    Dear admins,

    keiths is allowed to create OP’s on moderation here at TSZ without having them closed down by the admins but I am not. What’s up with that?

    I don’t see any OP from Keiths since LMizzie decided that the existing moderation issues tyhread is adequate for discussing moderation issues.

    Is this the TSZ version of fair and balanced?

    I believe TSZ is trying to be fair to all who have a genuine point to make.

  20. walto,

    Cheers walto. If I spent less time trying to explain evolution to people who clearly don’t want to understand it (it being the greatest threat to Western Civilisation since the last one and all) I might get somewhere! 🙂

  21. Patrick,

    Oh, Patrick has ANOTHER interpretation of the rules! Why didn’t you say so sooner Patrick the Pitbull? Its ok to talk about the rules parenthetically! Got it, thanks for the new info!

    So its up to you to decide which parenthetical statements are ok then?

    How much did you cost again, Pitbull?

    Kind of tough being consistent with the rules when you have no moral compass I guess. I understand.

  22. Elizabeth: Until then, I am “featuring” new posts that are not about Moderation

    That is precisely what I said you were doing. Glad we can finally agree on something. 🙂

  23. Allan Miller,

    Wait, people who don’t WANT to understand it?? That’s against the rules to say…Oh wait, its moderation, its ok, go on then.

    BTW, isn’t Patrick kind of a scurrilous asshole? But Lizzie, likes him so…

  24. Patrick,

    How could you not be? You are great at protecting Lizzie. Heck, you would probably bite your own balls off to safeguard her.

    I can see why she likes you, and doesn’t really care if you follow her rules.

  25. Alan Fox: The only option we admins have is to move rule-breaking comments to guano.

    I’m nominating this post for gaffe of the year.

    Thank you Alan, for the laughs.

  26. phoodoo,

    you would probably bite your own balls off

    Dude, I can’t even sit in full lotus. My nether regions are safe from my own teeth.

  27. Patrick: If you have complaints about specific behavior, please provide a link to the offending comment.

    I did that. Nothing was done. I’d start a thread on ad hominem and addressing the post not the poster, but it would probably get censored closed.

  28. Mung: I’m nominating this post for gaffe of the year.

    Thank you Alan, for the laughs.

    No problem! A sense of humour is key to a happy life.

  29. phoodoo,

    Wait, people who don’t WANT to understand it?? That’s against the rules to say…Oh wait, its moderation, its ok, go on then.

    What makes you think that was an attack against a particular individual – or here?

  30. Mung: I did that. Nothing was done. I’d start a thread on ad hominem and addressing the post not the poster, but it would probably get censored closed.

    Of course. If it is a moderation issue, we already have a thread for discussing moderation issues. And here you are posting in it!

  31. Mung: I did that. Nothing was done. I’d start a thread on ad hominem and addressing the post not the poster, but it would probably get censored closed.

    Yes, it would. But you are free to discuss it here.

  32. Alan Fox: I don’t see any OP from Keiths since LMizzie decided that the existing moderation issues tyhread is adequate for discussing moderation issues.

    What rule did my OP’s violate? The rules have not changed.

  33. Mung: What rule did my OP’s violate? The rules have not changed.

    They didn’t violate a rule. But I don’t want endless OPs on Moderation. They go in Moderation Issues. The main page is for discussing interesting stuff, not site meta.

  34. Alan Fox: I believe TSZ is trying to be fair to all who have a genuine point to make.

    How did this OP not have a genuine point to make?

    Why was it closed to comments?

    I’d still like an answer to that, Elizabeth.

  35. Elizabeth,

    Then maybe you should have listened to us a long time ago when we told you there is a problem with your moderation Lizzie.

    But no, you preferred to stick by your “I have great faith in my moderators, they are doing a great job.” line.

    THAT is why you are having endless posts about moderation Lizzie! It really shouldn’t be that hard for you to understand. But apparently you prefer loyalty, to truth.

  36. Alan Fox: Of course. If it is a moderation issue, we already have a thread for discussing moderation issues. And here you are posting in it!

    A thread on ad hominem is not a thread about moderation issues. Sadly, there’s no reason to think the admins here know the difference.

    I posted a link to a post that was a direct attack on me and got a “huh?” for my efforts. It didn’t even have the protection of being an “aside.”

    So even posting complaints about moderation in the moderation issues thread turns out to be a losing proposition.

  37. OK, well, I’ve got to go now. I have to get to Scotland for a funeral tomorrow, then away until after Christmas.

    I’ll try to sort out some stuff when I get back – clarify what I think our rules and moderation policies should be etc.

    Do your best till I get back.

    Peace and Goodwill to All!

    Lizzie

  38. Mung: So even posting complaints about moderation in the moderation issues thread turns out to be a losing proposition.

    I disagree. Lizzie has said she makes sure she at least reads all new comments here. Consider the possibility that your recent rash of complaints may not have the persuasiveness that you yourself credit them with.

  39. Elizabeth: Do your best till I get back.

    Peace and Goodwill to All!

    Safe journey and we’ll try not to let the place burn down while you’re away.

  40. Alan Fox: Consider the possibility that your recent rash of complaints may not have the persuasiveness that you yourself credit them with.

    You’re hilarious Alan. You and Neil both. You, like Elizabeth, have nothing to say.

    Don’t you have someplace else to be too?

  41. Mung: You’re hilarious Alan. You and Neil both. You, like Elizabeth, have nothing to say.

    Don’t you have someplace else to be too?

    Not tonight. And the satellite dish has shifted so there’s no BBC to watch.

Comments are closed.