[Mind's Eye] Re: Why Has Allan Been Barred From The Group ?

Wait, Is Archytas leaving the group?

On Sep 16, 7:57 am, Vam <atewari2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sep 16, 1:31 am, ornamentalmind <ornsmindseyes...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Moderation is and always has been subjective. It also is not
> > democratic no matter what pretense or trappings are added to it.
>
> Subjectivity can include emotional instability and rank egotistic
> stupidity. But we all work at learning to be on guard against that
> because IT IS NOT ACCEPTABLE BEHAVIOUR. Especially Moderation of a
> Group... with members who are pretty much evolved and conscientious on
> their own. This Group has had the hallmarks of such great members...
>
> I wasn't meaning that the Moderation process be " Democratic." But it
> certainly needs to be open and transparent.
>
> > gabby, if you feel attacked by vam and want action, let me know
> > specifically and I'll address it. I use judgement when it comes to
> > individual cases.
>
> Nothing in your judgement, Mr Moderator, can force me to give ' value
> ' or assign so much ' worth ' to particular posts. I actually do not
> give much value to Gabby's posts and actually assign much worth to
> them. And I felt it necessary to say as much, when I did.
>
> > Vam, yes it is serious and I've never taken the task/responsibility
> > lightly.
>
> Lightly ? No, OM, I do suggest you take the matter heavily. The
> seriousness implies that the Moderator CANNOT be wrong in his
> judgement in the context, even if he has to give the offender the
> benefit of doubt everytime, all the time. As can be seen, you are in
> absolute minority of ONE, from the reactions on this thread. Perhaps,
> you need to look at your subjectivity...
>
> > Also Vam, as egalitarian as your suggested method appears to be we are
> > not about trials here.
>
> Then you most definitely are not taking the matter " seriously " at
> all. IT IS YOU WHO IS ON TRIAL everytime you have to take a banning
> decision !
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sep 15, 9:41 am, Vam <atewari2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > I believe banning is a serious matter.
>
> > > I really have not kept track of what Allan has said or done. In the
> > > event, I feel there should be a separate thread titled : Why so-and-so
> > > deserves to be banned, by the Group rules !
>
> > > The person can then be clearly charged, allowed to respond, and a call
> > > taken by the Moderator in full public view. Shouldn't be difficult.
> > > After all you wouldn't be doing it every month.
>
> > > On Sep 15, 8:24 pm, ornamentalmind <ornsmindseyes...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Vam, I deleted the offending posts. Allan himself knew he had gone
> > > > over the line and said so in one of his remaining posts. He followed
> > > > that one with more unprovoked direct attacks (self admitted/defined)
> > > > upon me. He knew what he was doing and what the result would be.
>
> > > > Evolution, freedom, acceptance and toleration include self
> > > > responsibility.
>
> > > > On Sep 14, 10:33 pm, Vam <atewari2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > If true, as Allan himself informs me, the act seems disproportionate,
> > > > > a result of disbalanced mental process, and plain gross, as in
> > > > > absolute unfit for a Group comprising of such evolved members who
> > > > > believe in freedom, acceptance and toleration.
>
> > > > > I sure would like to hear the Moderator speak on this matter.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -