Moderation Issues (3)

Please use this thread for alerting admins to moderation issues and for discussion or complaints arising from particular decisions.

4,124 thoughts on “Moderation Issues (3)

  1. Tom English: Your level of participation suggests that you’re much in need of an alternative to whatever else it is that you call reality.

    But I gave up online gaming for this blog. I trusted Elizabeth. I believed in her vision. What a fool I am.

  2. Mung:

    But I gave up online gaming for this blog. I trusted Elizabeth. I believed in her vision. What a fool I am.

    No, you saw a trolling opportunity and you grabbed it.

  3. Mung,

    I’ll make my case is when Lizzie is here with time to spend on the issue. It isn’t something she can deal with in five minutes and then go back to whatever she was doing.

  4. keiths: I’ll make my case is when Lizzie is here with time to spend on the issue. It isn’t something she can deal with in five minutes and then go back to whatever she was doing.

    What a lazy assed cop out. If Alan has been as bad as you claim, a few attention grabbing bullet points would suffice. Unless she already has you tagged as a drama queen.

    Try this one: Alan made Mung an admin!

  5. J-Mac: Are you questioning the validity of professor, dr. Dial’s major new theory for the evolution of flight that is changing textbooks?

    I doubt that John will have any serious objection to my comment (the one you are replying to). And I doubt that John has any interest in being a moderator here.

  6. Alan Fox: What about somebody volunteering as additional admin? Lizzie thought six or seven would be good. Are you up for it? Anyone?

    How many times do I need to volunteer? I am up for it.

  7. Here’s when you can be moderator, Mung:

    1) When TSZ is down to two people, you and the moderator; and
    2) the moderator leaves.

  8. Neil Rickert: J-Mac: Are you questioning the validity of professor, dr. Dial’s major new theory for the evolution of flight that is changing textbooks?

    I doubt that John will have any serious objection to my comment (the one you are replying to). And I doubt that John has any interest in being a moderator here.

    You can’t be serious!?
    Isn’t this a contradiction to what has been said so far?
    Why have we spent almost a week debating my posting privileges if it is not such a big deal? Why this whole kerfuffle with my OP # 10 in the first place, if Dr. Dial’s experiment is nothing more than an interesting idea? In light of your comment, my OP # 10 doesn’t look bad at all and it seems that it all boils down to Harshman’s personal preferences, him and the other two of the “holy trinity”…

    If Harshaman has no interest in being a moderator, maybe he should shut his mouth and put up with the info posted here, as we do the same with his…or start his own blog…

    He’s embarrassed himself often enough here, and nobody questioned his posting status, though his boo-boos didn’t make him look more qualified than Robert Beyers…

    To me, this blog is run by hypocrites, both with administrative privileges and without, and I candidly admit I’m loosing interest in posting here…not that anybody cares about that…

  9. J-Mac: Isn’t this a contradiction to what has been said so far?

    I don’t think so. What does it contradict?

    Why have we spent almost a week debating my posting privileges if it is not such a big deal?

    Ask keiths why he started it.

    Why this whole kerfuffle with my OP # 10 in the first place

    Perhaps because you do not understand what evolutionary biologists discuss and why. So your posts mainly consist of erecting strawmen and knocking them down. And John Harshman is not happy with this strawman game.

  10. Neil Rickert:
    J-Mac: Isn’t this a contradiction to what has been said so far?

    [Neil] I don’t think so. What does it contradict?

    J-Mac: Selective memory as needed Neil?

    J-Mac: Why have we spent almost a week debating my posting privileges if it is not such a big deal?

    [Neil] Ask keiths why he started it.

    J-Mac: So now it is keiths fault? I think you got him selectively confused with Harshman who had actually started it but keiths argued against the idea of the censorship of my OPs…

    J-Mac Why this whole kerfuffle with my OP # 10 in the first place

    [Neil] Perhaps because you do not understand what evolutionary biologists discuss and why.

    J-Mac: Isn’t the whole purpose of TSZ to invite discussion of ALL not just evolutionary biologists, and discuss ONLY THEIR VIEWS? If the purpose of TSZ was only to discuss evolutionary biologists’ views, why invite people form UD and others who don’t share the WHY views? This s another contradiction Neil and you know it!!!

    [Neil]: So your posts mainly consist of erecting strawmen and knocking them down. And John Harshman is not happy with this strawman game.

    J-Mac: Erecting strawman as Harshman sees it and the other two of the trinity?
    If I submit a post on Harshman’s statements or admissions about miraculous insertions of genes into the tree of life that Sal exposed and Harshman admitted, Is this going to be equal to strawman? Come on Neil! We all know what this is about…
    It’s all about defending a set of beliefs…right or wrong…and pretending that is not the case…It is quite pitiful when one really thinks about it… but it’s nothing new…Ideologies are, and often have been, supported at any cost…

    That is the main and only reason why my OPs are being censored and that’s the truth…Can you handle the truth? I’m sure you can…after a while you get used it…

    Someone once said:

    “…If you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it, and you will even come to believe it yourself…”

  11. J-Mac: So now it is keiths fault? I think you got him selectively confused with Harshman who had actually started it but keiths argued against the idea of the censorship of my OPs…

    Harshman complained about your posts. But it was keiths who made it a debate about alleged censorship.

    That is the main and only reason why my OPs are being censored and that’s the truth…

    Your OPs have not been censored.

  12. Neil,

    Harshman complained about your posts. But it was keiths who made it a debate about alleged censorship.

    Says Neil, who actually came out against the proposed censorship before chickening out:

    I would still like to know what is this nefarious scheme that Alan supposedly proposed and that I agreed to.

    In my discussions with Alan, my actual proposal was rate limit. And I suggested that it be applied broadly, not just to J-mac.

    And:

    If Alan had ideas of suppressing posts based on content, then he never brought that up.

    You know now that he is proposing that, yet you’re not objecting. Why not?

    And here:

    John:

    Couldn’t there be at least some minimal standards of what constitutes a proper post?

    Neil:

    Who is going to set the standards? How will they be enforced?

    You’ve abandoned principle and wimped out of defending TSZ against Alan’s encroachment. I guess moderators got to stick together, right or wrong. Right, Neil?

    The result of all this:

    So J-Mac can now truthfully say that he’s being punished and threatened with censorship despite violating no rules with his series of OPs.

    And yet another moderation fuckup goes onto Alan’s lengthy resume.

    And you let it happen.

  13. It’s easy to forget the “read more” tag and not so easy to find and add it. Is it possible to do so that the tag automatically adds itself after the first paragraph? Or at least when a member starts a new OP, this tag is there to begin with and it takes deliberate user action to ignore it?

  14. keiths: And you let it happen.

    Yes, While Alan is basically all over the place–against ex ante moderation except when he isn’t, has been granted vast powers by Lizzie at some times and none whatever at others (and it’s nobody’s business which times are which), Neil functions largely through being cryptic and laconic. He doesn’t have to explain anything–he can just sound sage, like a wizened guru, and, hopefully, everyone will simply go away because, well, the great and powerful Oz has spoken.

  15. Erik: It’s easy to forget the “read more” tag and not so easy to find and add it.

    I’m not finding that difficult.

    If I notice that a new post lacks that, I usually add it (without asking the author’s permission).

  16. Neil Rickert: I’m not finding that difficult.

    This point is not a matter of mod opinion. It is a matter of opinion of those who actually post OPs.

    Neil Rickert: If I notice that a new post lacks that, I usually add it (without asking the author’s permission).

    So the need is there. I was making a suggestion to you to automate a recurring task, but you decline. Okay.

  17. J-Mac: Why this whole kerfuffle with my OP # 10 in the first place

    Because some times, some things written (yours) are so fantastically, unbelievably stupid and incoherent, it is deeply deeply saddening to us people who have such high hopes for you. We are lashing out in frustration in our disbelief that it is even possible for a grown man seemingly capable of operating a computer keyboard (except the punctuation key) to write something so intolerably dumb as you do.

    Let me make my already moderation-worthy statement more obvious here: You are an idiot, and you are an idiot to such an extend I find it a little bit depressing to see. I feel sorry for you the same way I feel sorry for developmentally retarded people who need to wear helmets lest they hurt themselves from their inability to properly control their limbs.
    I wish you would go to the exemplification of the internet’s stupid-nexus (aka uncommon descent) and mud-wrestle the rest of the vacuum skulls over there.

    By the way, don’t bother answering. If I wanted your opinion, I would beat it out of you. Given that I abhor violence, and your opinions are of no imaginable worth, I would welcome it if you took the hint and fucked off. (h/t hackenslash)

    Thank you for your cooperation.

  18. Neil Rickert: Are you volunteering to rewrite the software?

    This answer is in the correct category and you should have provided it the first time.

    Of course things depend on the platform. I have seen on Github that the kind of alteration I suggested is simple there. If WP makes it hard or impossible, so much worse for WP.

  19. The name of the blog fits perfectly into what has been discussed over the last week: The Skeptical Zone aka The Moderation Issues Zone…

    Why not devote all the upcoming OPs to the moderation issue as it is a dominant theme already?

    What a joke!

  20. J-Mac: Why not devote all the upcoming OPs to the moderation issue…

    It’s against the rules. Haven’t you read the rules? It’s clearly and unambiguously stated in the rules that OPs shall not raise issues concerning moderation and that posts concerning moderation must be posted in the Moderation Issues thread.

    Yeah verily, the blog owner hath spoken and it has verily been written so in stone.

  21. Mung: It’s against the rules. Haven’t you read the rules? It’s clearly and unambiguously stated in the rules that OPs shall not raise issues concerning moderation and that posts concerning moderation must be posted in the Moderation Issues thread.

    Yeah verily, the blog owner hath spoken and it has verily been written so in stone.

    Damn it! I thought I had found a good idea to revive this blog from the boredom of the Common Design vs Common Descent OP overkill…

    Thank God for your OPs or I would forget TSZ exists 😉

  22. J-Mac,

    Why not devote all the upcoming OPs to the moderation issue as it is a dominant theme already?

    It’s true that the moderators have completely mishandled this, precipitating a week-long moderation kerfuffle that they are unwilling to fix, out of some misguided combination of ego and ‘circle the wagons’ thinking.

    However, don’t forget your own role in this. Your inability to throttle your moronic OP output is what set the stage for their fuckup.

  23. walto: Yes, While Alan is basically all over the place–against ex ante moderation except when he isn’t, has been granted vast powers by Lizzie at some times and none whatever at others (and it’s nobody’s business which times are which), Neil functions largely through being cryptic and laconic.He doesn’t have to explain anything–he can just sound sage, like a wizened guru, and, hopefully, everyone will simply go away because, well, the great and powerful Oz has spoken.

    I find this comment from you, walto, someone whose opinions I value and whose contributions I appreciate, truly disappointing.

    There’s no dichotomy between “absolute power” (don’t think I ever used “vast”) and “rearranging deckchairs”. I must be a poorer communicator than I thought.

    Neil and I are delegated absolute power by Lizzie the benign despot, in her absence, to operate within the WordPress software. In principal, we can permit, edit, or erase all content; allow, limit, or block access to any contributor; modify the appearance, change themes, add and remove plug-in apps. We limit ourselves to actions that we believe reinforce the aims Lizzie stated when setting up TSZ and (I hope and think I can speak for Neil as well) support the idea of free and civil discourse between people whose views vary widely, and to encourage discussion that rarely happens elsewhere because of the tendency of the in-group to dominate.

    The “rearranging deckchairs” refers to the fact we are limited to WordPress. Changes to the platform are only possible (such as trying a tandem forum or multi-blog) with access to the server.

    Had you thought about volunteering for admin duty? Only mung has offered so far.

  24. keiths,
    Don’t play the innocent. You are part of the problem. It would be great if due to some miracle, you could see that and even become part of a solution.

  25. Alan,

    Don’t try to spread the blame. This was your screwup, not mine. I opposed your actions from the beginning:

    Alan, in the other thread:

    After discussion with Neil, we’ve agreed that further opening posts from J-Mac will require admin approval for publishing. This will not be unreasonably withheld.

    Threatening J-Mac with censorship is a huge overreaction at this point. It’s out of line with the TSZ ethos and it will feed his martyr complex.

    Worse still, you haven’t explained to J-Mac (or to the rest of us) exactly why he is receiving this “special” treatment and what he must do to avoid having his OPs censored.

    Why the overreaction? Why not approach this calmly and carefully instead of resorting immediately to threats of censorship?

  26. keiths steadfastly refuses to take a look at his own behaviour. who could have predicted that.

  27. Mung,

    I take responsibility for my actions, and I hold others responsible for theirs.

    Alan proposed a scheme in which J-Mac is unfairly punished for doing something that was completely within the rules. His OPs are subject to censorship based on moderators’ judgments regarding their content. I opposed the scheme. So did you.

    After initially expressing opposition, Neil is now, without explanation, circling the wagons and abetting Alan. Neither of them can explain why they are sticking with Alan’s approach, which runs counter to Lizzie’s aims, when another, much better approach is available. One that’s fair and doesn’t give the moderators the power to judge and censor OPs.

    Alan’s impulsive overreaction has precipitated a week-long moderation brouhaha, and now he and Neil are refusing to fix it. It’s pitiful.

  28. keiths: Alan’s impulsive overreaction has precipitated a week-long moderation brouhaha, and now he and Neil are refusing to fix it. It’s pitiful.

    I agree.

    I also think that Frankie’s continued ban is pitiful. Patrick isn’t even here any more, so asking Frankie to bow down and lick his feet in order to be allowed back no longer makes any sense. Patrick was appointed judge of when Frankie could come back. Patrick’s no longer here.

    I also think that putting Gregory on a watch list is pitiful.

    I think that appointing johnnyb a moderator was pitiful.

    I think that making up new rules and refusing to add them to the rules page is pitiful.

    It’s pitiful that good ideas are rejected and bad ideas are implemented.

    It’s pitiful that I’m trying to think up a way to turn this all into a song.

  29. Alan,

    Neil and I are delegated absolute power by Lizzie the benign despot, in her absence, to operate within the WordPress software.

    Bullshit. Moderators are limited by the rules here, just as commenters are. This very thread exists because Lizzie wanted the moderators to be answerable to the commenters, rather than wielding absolute power. All the regulars, including you, know this.

    You are trying to rewrite history. Stop lying.

    You are the prick who took the moderator job, then later claimed that you weren’t bound by the rules because you had given Lizzie “no specific undertakings” when you accepted it.

    What kind of an ass takes a job, then turns around later and says “Oh, by the way, I never actually agreed to be bound by the rules, so fuck you, I’ll do what I want”?

    Your behavior is appalling. If you want to know why you don’t get the approval you crave, look no further than your own actions.

  30. Mung: It’s pitiful that I’m trying to think up a way to turn this all into a song.

    Holey, holey, holey!
    Skeptic Almighty!
    Twenty-four by seven, our plaints shall rise to Thee.

  31. Mung: I also think that putting Gregory on a watch list is pitiful.

    I didn’t know about that, and yet had pegged him early on as the operator of “J-Mac.”

  32. walto,

    Yes, While Alan is basically all over the place–against ex ante moderation except when he isn’t, has been granted vast powers by Lizzie at some times and none whatever at others (and it’s nobody’s business which times are which)…

    Exactly. And now he’s actually trying to deny it.

    We’re not idiots, Alan. Anyone can see that when you say this at one point…

    Neil and I are delegated absolute power by Lizzie…

    …and this at another…

    Without Lizzie’s input, admins are limited to deckchair rearrangement.

    …and…

    I’m not prepared to make any significant changes to rules without input from Lizzie and I will try and make contact with her again.

    …that you’re just covering your ass, saying whatever’s convenient at the moment.

    This censorship scheme of yours was a major screwup, but instead of acknowledging your mistake and fixing it, you’re fishing for excuses to leave it in place and contradicting yourself in the process.

    Neil and a slew of commenters know and have indicated that the rate-limit proposal is superior to yours. (Neil’s spine then went rubbery and he circled the wagons with you, for which he’s offered no explanation.) You know it too, but your fragile ego won’t allow you to do the right thing. You’re placing your own interests ahead of TSZ’s, yet again.

  33. Tom English: I didn’t know about that, and yet had pegged him early on as the operator of “J-Mac.”

    Congratulations Tom! This is the best calculation you have ever done in your life, though I wouldn’t want you to be my accountant… for obvious reasons…

    I have something special for you. Pay close attention at 2:33 min mark:
    http://www.yousubtitles.com/The-Nutty-Professor-1012-Movie-CLIP-Relations-1996-HD-id-425370

    Have a spectacular evening Tom! 😉

  34. Tom English: I didn’t know about that, and yet had pegged him early on as the operator of “J-Mac.”

    Gregory’s account is not restricted as a matter of fact.

  35. Alan,

    There’s no scheme.

    Of course there is. Why do you keep repeating that pitiful denial? Playing dumb only makes things worse for you.

    You changed J-Mac’s status so that his OPs require moderator approval, and you threatened to censor them based on moderator judgments of their contents.

    That’s your scheme, and the rate-limit scheme is much better, as even Neil recognized.

  36. Alan Fox: Gregory’s account is not restricted as a matter of fact.

    Good to hear. “J-Mac” is somebody’s instrument of parody and broad satire. There aren’t many candidates for the operator, and I’ve seen some of Gregory’s themes coming through. Obviously, I don’t know for sure who the operator is. But I find it useful to keep Gregory in mind.

  37. Mung,

    “This is the worst place in town”, said Mr Mung. “The coffee stinks, the service is terrible, I can’t abide the customers, and the decor is like someone vomited on the walls. I’ve been coming here 30 years”.

  38. Allan Miller:
    Mung,

    “This is the worst place in town”, said Mr Mung. “The coffee stinks, the service is terrible, I can’t abide the customers, and the decor is like someone vomited on the walls. I’ve been coming here 30 years”.

    It’s called an addiction just in case you didn’t know…it’s stronger than reason…

  39. J-Mac,

    It’s called an addiction just in case you didn’t know

    It’s called a joke in case you didn’t know. dot-dot-dot

Comments are closed.