Moderation Issues (5)

Please use this thread for (and only for) alerting admins to moderation issues and for raising complaints arising from particular decisions. We remind participants that TSZ is a benign dictatorship, the property of Dr. Elizabeth Liddle. All decisions regarding policy and implementation are hers alone.

2,097 thoughts on “Moderation Issues (5)

  1. Thanks. Disturbing to go back and read that stuff from 3 years ago. Same crap.

    I’m curious now–as I pm-ed you–where my alternative theory came from. I’m pretty sure if you look at the early noyau posts, you’ll find some random blathering from me. Otoh, Patrick gave a list of forum purposes in that moderation thread that explicitly suggests sandbox for that.

    So I’m confused. Can you (or someone else) flesh this out any further maybe? E.g., How/why did the whine cellar get turned into noyau? In a word, why did I use it for ‘thoughts for the day’? (I mean other than because I’m a blabbermouth.)

  2. What a maroon; a righteous religious agnostic leading the way with amoral Moderation. ; )

    Is that all that you found trying to ‘catch me’ at TSZ as a ‘rule violator’, a 2013 thread? At the time there were no rules. Alan & later Lizzie jumped in with their ‘new rules,’ which I accepted. Lizzie wrote, “Thanks!” Was there anything more for DNA_Jock left to conjure up for the sole purpose of being ‘in control’ as admin to disallow me & any free person *NOW*, from being able to copy edit their own recent OPs at TSZ? That’s a significant restriction on Author freedom for a blog with little unity run by atheists & agnostics with still not a single Abrahamic monotheist, either JohnnyB or Vincent having made a public Moderation on behalf of TSZ.

    “My intention was to keep the thread on-topic, not to break site rules. I have copies of the deleted posts, if they should be re-posted in Guano. This comment should also be moved to Guano.”

    Guess what? The request wasn’t honoured by a Mod & wasn’t moved to Guano.

    The Moderation’s team’s guiding inspiration is uninspiring. So they seem to be worried one might fix a few small things in an OP, as it might disrupt the otherwise generally ‘peaceful’ and well-behaved atmosphere of this most community-oriented, meaningful, low-ego, high-humility, wisdom-seeking place. ; )

    DNA_Jock: Although when you described yourself as “an established ‘old Author’ with no record of history [sic] altering other peoples’ Comments”, you were incorrect.
    As a matter of fact, you do have a history of deleting comments that you deemed ‘off-topic’.”

    Now that it is established by that evidence I am ‘Old Author’, are you still saying I cannot on TSZ have access to copy edit recent OPs that I have made? If so, that’s a significant negative restriction to posting here that less interests me to participate than I already am because of the predominant atheist/agnostic bias in which religious persons are regularly treated ‘less fair’ by the irreligious, non-religious or anti-religious TSZ Mods.

    So, for now I stay because I would like to find out a couple of things. Thus, I persist in trying to figure out restrictions on *ALL* authors of OPs, not just new authors or contributors. No gain by editing, apparently only if this obviously dysfunction & broken Mod team allows anything through them as gatekeepers. : (

  3. Gregory: No gain by editing, apparently only if this obviously dysfunction & broken Mod team allows anything through them as gatekeepers.

    It’s stochastic. Except in your case. In your case there is discernible bias.

  4. Gregory: What a maroon; a righteous religious agnostic leading the way with amoral Moderation. ; )

    What does moral moderation look like?

  5. Entropy: J-Mac

    Yes, your delusions, such as the evolution of a 5 pound land walking mammal into a 50 ton whale require special mental health attention… and not just of a regular shrink for 80 bucks per week… You need a team of experts, 24/7 constant observation, restraints… the works… Just like the elephant man…

  6. Gregory: Now that it is established by that evidence I am ‘Old Author’, are you still saying I cannot on TSZ have access to copy edit recent OPs that I have made?

    That’s right, you cannot edit published OPs. And the proposal that nobody gets to edit published OPs has received the assent of all of the moderators. We explained this already.

    If so, that’s a significant negative restriction to posting here that less interests me to participate than I already am because of the predominant atheist/agnostic bias in which religious persons are regularly treated ‘less fair’ by the irreligious, non-religious or anti-religious TSZ Mods.

    I, for one, will miss your inimitable writing style.

  7. DNA_Jock: I, for one, will miss your inimitable writing style.

    I don’t believe you.

    DNA_Jock: And the proposal that nobody gets to edit published OPs has received the assent of all of the moderators.

    Some people are just clueless.

    Did you mean to write that the proposal that nobody but a moderator gets to edit published OPs has received the assent of all of the moderators?

    What was this offer about?

    DNA_Jock: As I noted the first time you made this request, if you have specific edits that you would like made, you can ask.

    He can ask who to do what?

    You made my day Jock. Thanks.

  8. Mung: Did you mean to write that the proposal that nobody but a moderator gets to edit published OPs has received the assent of all of the moderators?

    As it was, I think, my suggestion, I’ll explain. A level playing field would involve everyone having the same permissions. All hassles over who can publish what are solved. But it means new, unknown members would have the ability to edit and delete anyone’s comments to their own OPs. I think that is a bit risky. The alternaive is everyone has to request admin action to publish. With a reasonable number of admins, icluding Lizzie, VJT and maybe mung in there, it is going to be difficult for any one rogue admin to game the system.

    Anyway, Lizzie’s blog – Lizzie’s choice.

  9. Alan Fox: Anyway, Lizzie’s blog – Lizzie’s choice.

    Without doubt. That is the fundamental rule I go by, unless she changes it.

  10. Mung,
    “We explained this already.” See the preceding page of this thread for the context.
    I am disappointed that you don’t believe my appreciation of Gregory’s contributions here; I’ve been quite open about that, even admitting that I missed him when he was away in December.

  11. This is a good example of the sort of post that I would Guano:

    Squawk box

    I typically have dazz on Ignore because of the plethora of comments from him that violate the rules. That way I’m not tempted to respond in kind. It has a side effect that I don’t fill up the Moderation Issues thread complaining about them.

    You’re welcome mods. 🙂

  12. Yeah, because it’s totally wrong to point out that someone who admits to be willing to start flame wars is a troll, right? LMAO

    I don’t care if my posts get guano’d when deserved, I don’t even give a damn if I get banned, but appointing Mung as a mod is a stupid idea IMO.

    It’s none of my business anyway, so suit yourselves

  13. Now, now, dazz, Mung seems to be indulging in some very high-end, meta-trolling.
    Enjoy the artistry.
    🙂

  14. Mung:
    This is a good example of the sort of post that I would Guano:

    http://theskepticalzone.com/wp/squawk-box/comment-page-5/#comment-229669

    I typically have dazz on Ignore because of the plethora of comments from him that violate the rules. That way I’m not tempted to respond in kind. It has a side effect that I don’t fill up the Moderation Issues thread complaining about them.

    You’re welcome mods.

    dazz is a troll who contributes nothing to TSZ… Robert Byers at least has tried….
    I have no idea why dazz has been tolerated by admins….
    Maybe they view him as harmless pest…;-)

  15. I’m not asking the mods to Guano dazz’z post. I’m merely pointing out posts that I would Gauno, were I a moderator, so people can get a feel for what they could expect.

    I don’t plan on linking to posts that I would not Guano.

    Neil Rickert: In that should go to guano, then so should the post to which it was replying.

    Based on what, Neil?

  16. Because of the ignore button, I like the idea of “guano-free” zones. Secondly, if the topic is highly technical and specific, after about the 1st 20 comments the thread tends to moderate itself.

  17. J-Mac: dazz is a troll who contributes nothing to TSZ

    He constantly violates the rules and doesn’t care that he constantly violates the rules. So he’s a valuable contributor here.

  18. dazz:
    Yeah, because it’s totally wrong to point out that someone who admits to be willing to start flame wars is a troll, right? LMAO

    I don’t care if my posts get guano’d when deserved, I don’t even give a damn if I get banned, but appointing Mung as a mod is a stupid idea IMO.

    It’s none of my business anyway, so suit yourselves

    Some part of me has always kind of wanted to get banned. Good way to deal with unhealthy, addictive behavior. 30 days wouldn’t be sufficient though, I don’t think. I’d probably need to have the door locked for at least six months.

  19. Mung: He constantly violates the rules and doesn’t care that he constantly violates the rules. So he’s a valuable contributor here.

    Dazz is like me. He has a limited threshold for vomit. So we respond–maybe sometimes inappropriately. But there’s always provocation–whether it be some incoherent nonsense about praying to quanta or some sanctimonious self-puffery regarding the importance of allowing bullying according to Tom Paine.

  20. walto: Some part of me has always kind of wanted to get banned. Good way to deal with unhealthy, addictive behavior. 30 days wouldn’t be sufficient though, I don’t think. I’d probably need to have the door locked for at least six months.

    What I think it is that when we argue we reassure ourselves we are right. That assurance counts for something, and hence it can be addictive. Keiths has done much to reassure me I was right about so many things.

  21. walto: He has a limited threshold for vomit.

    His threshold though only applies to a specific class of people.

  22. Mung: He constantly violates the rules and doesn’t care that he constantly violates the rules. So he’s a valuable contributor here.

    I hear you… 😉 the ignore button is very valuable in this case…

  23. Mung: His threshold though only applies to a specific class of people.

    My vomit detector is more sensitive and broader-scoped. He’s got the old 2000 model I think.

  24. Mung:
    I would also Guano this post by John Harshman.

    You’re doing a great job, keep it up: you’ll never land the mod position with stuff like that ;-d

  25. dazz: you’ll never land the mod position with stuff like that

    It violates the rules. If you’re saying I could never be a mod because I’d enforce the rules, well, you may have a point. 🙂

  26. Mung: It violates the rules. If you’re saying I could never be a mod because I’d enforce the rules, well, you may have a point.

    The difference between us is that you actually are utterly ignorant on the various rules we discuss here.

    In all seriousness, if I’m ignorant about something I’d much rather have someone let me know and maybe learn something. You want to torture the rules to make that a guanoable offense, fine. Again, I’m willing to bet you’ll never get to mod here with crap like that

  27. walto: I was assuming he meant you’re easier on non-theists.

    I know, and then I would remind him of Tom Mueller.

  28. dazz: The difference between us is that you actually are utterly ignorant on the various rules we discuss here.

    Which part of the following do you not understand:

    Address the content of the post, not the perceived failings of the poster

    This means that accusing others of ignorance or stupidity is off topic

  29. Mung: Which part of the following do you not understand:

    Stop addressing my perceived failings. Please guano ^^

  30. Neil Rickert: In that should go to guano, then so should the post to which it was replying.

    Based on what, Neil?

    It wasn’t a personal attack one someone. It wasn’t even a personal attack on a group of people.

  31. Mung: Based on what, Neil?

    I’m pretty sure that you asked that before. And I chose to ignore it the first time.

    If somebody responds to a provocation, then the provocation is as much of a problem as the response.

  32. Neil Rickert: If somebody responds to a provocation, then the provocation is as much of a problem as the response.

    All my posts are provocative. That’s the idea. So they all belong in Guano. Unless no one responds to them.

    Now apply your rule to all the other provocative posts that are made here.

  33. Mung: So they all belong in Guano.

    I don’t agree with that way of reading the rules.

    As I see it, we move a post to guano when that post is disruptive of discussion.

    Moving a post to guano is also disruptive. So I try to weigh the disruption that would be caused by moving against the disruption that remains if I don’t move. And I’ll grant that I am not a perfect judge of what that decision should be.

  34. DNA_Jock: Finally, Meyer would be in for some Kitzmiller-level embarrassment were he to sue. JS does not have the same disincentive, and is far more disposed to complain about his treatment here. For Meyer, the optics would be terrible, and Lizzie has a solid ‘honest opinion’ defense.

    Fuck off Jock. You are such a kiss ass cheerleader.

    You can’t blame keiths for having his opinions about Swamidass, and then make all these bullshit excuses for Lizzie. You might think this is good enough to fool the Omagains of this site, but even a lot of the jaded atheists are going to see right through this double standard horsecrap. Just because they aren’t going to be brave enough to call you out on it, they see the hypocrisy quite clearly. There aren’t that many suckers even here Jock.

  35. dazz: and then I would remind him of Tom Mueller.

    Upon what evidence do you base your belief that Tom is not a theist? He sure sounded like one to me.

  36. I got so over-fricken-whelmed by the steady flow of ‘experimental evidence’ by means of unrestrained speculations for nested hierarchies that I decided to post an theistic evolution easy-breezy OP…

    Admins, please post.

    thanks.
    J-mac

  37. J-Mac,
    I forgot to tell you, at the last minute second, a squeeze of lemon juice. and maybe a little grate of rind.

  38. Alan Fox:
    J-Mac,
    I forgot to tell you, at the last minute second, a squeeze of lemon juice. and maybe a little grate of rind.

    Now you’re talking… 🙂 to make the scallops taste zesty, right?
    Any wine recommendations…? Nothing fancy …

  39. J-Mac,
    I have a five euro palate. But I live slap-bang in the middle of the Languedoc, renowned for producing cheap, quaffable wine. I doubt you’ll find it in the US but Picpoul de Pinet is excellent with seafood. Maybe US producers have started growing the Picpoul variety. It is the grape from which cognac is made, used to be considered only good enough to distil but there’s been a rethink.

    Not Chardonnay!!!

  40. Alan Fox:
    J-Mac,
    I have a five euro palate. But I live slap-bang in the middle of the Languedoc, renowned for producing cheap, quaffable wine. I doubt you’ll find it in the US but Picpoul de Pinet is excellent with seafood. Maybe US producers have started growing the Picpoul variety. It is the grape from which cognac is made, used to be considered only good enough to distil but there’s been a rethink.

    Not Chardonnay!!!

    Thanks Alan!
    White or red?
    I could get pretty much anything here but there is a minimum order…
    A buddy of mine is shippin in 200 cases of Lithuanian beer at $70 a pop… I don’t even like beer that much but he needed someone to fill in for the order to come here…

  41. Please use this thread for (and only for) alerting admins to moderation issues and for raising complaints arising from particular decisions.

    😉

Comments are closed.