The moderation issue was being made an issue by Chris, who wanted to officially resign from the moderation job. Then there was a sort of discussion during which several people said they wouldn't do the job and several people who said they would do the job. That is all I know. In fact, I've assumed that you, Orn and Chris still hold the moderation rights in order to secure the group and wait for a worthy successor.
No shit, Molly. Lack of transparency and communication on your side is what I see.
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 1:00 PM, Molly <mollyb363@gmail.com> wrote:
Always in favor of a pissing match Gabby? The issue before the group
now is one that was avoided when Chris announced his exit. How is
this self determined group to self govern? As much as some would like
to continue to spew and point fingers, that may very well be the
reason no one feels up to the challenge of becoming moderator. Your
MO is to rail against authority. The point here is, as a group,
either we all take responsibility for our own actions and the way
moderators and other members are treated, or the group falls apart.
Your last post is somewhat of a confirmation of the latter.
On Sep 19, 11:01 am, gabbydott <gabbyd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'd prefer Orn to speak for himself. Besides, why don't you, Molly,
> just press the button to unban Allan from eternal damnation?
>
> On Sep 19, 12:59 pm, Molly <mollyb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Heavy sigh. Deep sense of loss.
>
> > On Sep 19, 1:42 am, Vam <atewari2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > OM, seems the members have left the Group to yourself.
>
> > > As I'd said... it is you who is on trial when you reduce as serious
> > > matter as a decision to ban to a personal " This is between Allan and
> > > me." !
>
> > > No, Sir, it is not. The members and their perception matters.
> > > Transparency, fairness and proportion matter.
>
> > > On Sep 16, 9:56 pm, ornamentalmind <ornsmindseyes...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Vam, you don't like it. I get that. This is between Allan and me. He
> > > > is banned from this group.
>
> > > > On Sep 16, 9:52 am, Vam <atewari2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > What are the specifics ?
>
> > > > > Which are the hyperbole ?
>
> > > > > Allan, my friend ? I do not even know him well.
>
> > > > > Loyalty ? What's loyalty got to do with this ?
>
> > > > > You've taken a decision, where you were on trial ! Remember that.
>
> > > > > On Sep 16, 9:48 pm, ornamentalmind <ornsmindseyes...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Vam, your hyperbole is laudable especially when coming to the aid of a
> > > > > > friend who is perceived to have been wronged. Loyalty has its place.
> > > > > > The specifics in this case fly against your stance though.
>
> > > > > > On Sep 16, 5:57 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 -
0 comentários:
Postar um comentário