You're a moderator. Doesn't matter who you are. You're a staff member on here. Joke about it, go around it all you want. But at the end of the day, that's the situation. The precedent you set in that thread, as well as other mods backing up that precedent instead of just quashing it was not good.
Morwen posted before Havo.
and
I Catacombed the thread. So, no, other mods didn't 'back it up' and I specifically called out the mods in the thread (though with closer review, Morwen's post was actually okay. If someone asks for advice, and you give them criticism that is constructive, that isn't against the rules.)
Also, mods fuck up sometimes, it happens, and (as happened in this case with Havo and in the past with Morwen and other mods) we deal with it just like when anyone else fucks up. Just like with everyone else, just because you don't see anything except the post being catacombed doesn't mean there isn't anything but the post being catacombed. Mods making mistakes isn't 'precedent setting'. It's just one of the things that happen when you run a forum like this, and overall I think we do an alright job of handling it. You are free to disagree, and to use the report button any time you see mods (or anyone else) breaking the rules. Also, let me address Lyns 'points' directly:
And on that topic:
Lyn, a couple things:
1) We have rules here. You are correct, in that I should not have made an exception for you, I should have simply modded your posts rather than allowing you to change them.
2)
January 24th was the last time we had this discussion. At that point, you had reported Morwen 1 time, ever, as far I could ascertain with a review of the report subforum - and he was modded following that report. You did not even report him for the thread you were objecting to while complaining that we did not pay attention to your reports. Since then, you have reported 4 posts of Morwen's. Of those, 2 were pretty clearly not even close to the rules (at least to everyone on the mod team) though equally clearly you disagreed. One was in the 'The Summit' subforum, which suffered at the time from a somewhat unclear relationship to the moderation of the rest of the forum (and in part due to that thread, we clarified that somewhat - though the post you reported, on reviewing it, likely
still wouldn't qualify for moderation). The last one was somewhat strongly worded, but does not, as far as I can tell, break any of the rules.
So, lets say for the sake of argument that 2 of those posts did break the rules enough to warrant moderation - perhaps we are being lax on Morwen due to his sunny disposition and the fact he knows the secret moderator handshake. Do you know what happens to posters who get moderated 2 times in 8 months? Generally, nothing. If the posts are particularly egregious violations (which none of these would be, even looked at in the most negative light) then maybe a formal warning. If, over the past 2-3 years, he had been modded 3 times, it would probably still be basically nothing, as that still puts him well behind many posters who have not received a formal warning for far more in the way of infractions.
So, the score then, is you have reported Morwen 5 times, with 1 report (the one that predated your not-quite-telling-the-truth about how much you reported him) resulting in moderation. Which is actually pretty in line with our general moderation-to-reports ratio - though I would suggest that 5 reports over a couple of years is not a 'pretty high' inflammatory post count (even were 2 of your reports not basically without any merit and bordering on being submitted in bad faith, and 2 of them look like good faith, but a determination was made they did not break the rules) if that's all you found report worthy.
Also, just to clarify, in the first Seriphyn thread, the moderator who should have posted more within the rules was Havo. Morwen's post seemed constructive to me, when I had time to go back and read it thoroughly. If the other responses there had been in that vein - actually trying to provide useful, constructive advice - it might not have been Catacombed even given the problematic OP.
I would suggest that if you are so deeply dissatisfied with the moderation here, you find somewhere else to spend your time. I'm getting a bit fed up with you being disruptive and trying to undermine the moderation team with accusations which are either outright lies, exaggerations, or which you fail to support with, like, facts. What this looks like is essentially a personal vendetta against Morwen by you, which you couch in terms of complaining about 'a few moderators' and insinuations that we are secretly deleting your supposedly numerous reports. It's also going to stop.
You have 2 options:
1) Leave. It's easy, it's free, and it gets you away from Morwen scarring your psyche with abrasive word-sandpaper. It also gets you away from the conspiracy of mods making your reports magically disappear (actually, it would be
me magically disappearing them, since I think you have to be an admin to delete a post in the Reports subforum) and talking crazy about 'facts' and 'things you actually did'.
2) Stay. If you see someone, anyone, actually break the rules then report it - to make our job easier, feel free to reference the rule or guideline you believe they are breaking. Please note that disagreeing with you is not, in and of itself, against the rules. If I see you pursuing a vendetta against Morwen or anyone else, I will drop a sack of mod hammers on you, but that is easily avoided by not
abusing the report feature (and given the paucity of reports from you for Morwen, I'm willing to believe that the couple baseless ones were in fact just a fluke) and not flamebaiting/trolling. Post constructively and be merry.
Author
Topic: In response to "second attempt thread" mod comment as requested (Read 6132 times)