Rules and Moderator information

[Xenophon]

It's clear that Hound of Heaven is an AtlanticMike sockpuppet. I assume Shades knows this, and he knowingly and willingly leaves canpakes in the tough position of fielding all this sockpuppet nonsense, while he occasionally drops in to say ...not much. I see this as Shades being amused by the abuse our moderator canpakes heroically deals with and fends off, as virtually the only remaining mod caring for our board. This sockpuppet is causing at least 90% of the board moderation tasks. As far as I can tell, our valiant, unpaid canpakes handles the vast majority of these.

So yes, I see this:

"Mods are abused but since Shades is amused, no one can cry foul."

"Know" is probably too strong a word, which is what creates the problem. Very strong suspicion is likely more accurate. This is true for a lot of the suspected socks as definitively proving the link is difficult if they have even a sliver of experience with using the internet. From Shades perspective, I believe he'd always rather let some sockpuppet nonsense through, lest an innocent non-sockpuppet be punished.

I do agree that canpakes has now and historically done a great job of tanking shots, as it were. They have a real knack for running interference when needed. Although I doubt Shades is much amused by the shenanigans. Rule lawyering and mod abuse has not historically gotten anyone very far with him.

I think this previous post from Shades can probably inform 2 parts of the discussion here. First, that he likely still perceives us in the "building of a monument phase" and not yet into the "no one wants to live here" part.

And second, that sexual harassment is treated entirely differently than other forms of harassment.

[canpakes]

No. The word censor is an absolute last resort.

Constantly updating the word censor in an attempt to keep up with the ever-so-creative sexual and anatomical slurs that people insist on constantly coming up with to hurl at each other is a Sisyphean task. It's easier to just ask them to adhere to the rules.

Dr. Shades, I’m sharing a screenshot from one of my earliest posts on the discussion board. As I mentioned, my daughter gifted me the tablet that I use to communicate with my family and to enjoy browsing the internet.

Hound, I am happy to find out that your mid-60s-aged daughter is still tech savvy at her age. Good for you, both.

[canpakes]

It's clear that Hound of Heaven is an AtlanticMike sockpuppet. I assume Shades knows this, and he knowingly and willingly leaves canpakes in the tough position of fielding all this sockpuppet nonsense, while he occasionally drops in to say ...not much. I see this as Shades being amused by the abuse our moderator canpakes heroically deals with and fends off, as virtually the only remaining mod caring for our board. This sockpuppet is causing at least 90% of the board moderation tasks. As far as I can tell, our valiant, unpaid canpakes handles the vast majority of these.

So yes, I see this:

"Mods are abused but since Shades is amused, no one can cry foul."

We are still a team of Shades and 3 mods. At any time, one or two of us are experiencing ‘in real life’ issues or events that deservedly take our focus away from the board. I’ll need to take a turn at that too, someday, I’m sure.

I’ve benefited greatly from the wisdom of RI’s past moderator experience, and from Xeno’s temperament and sensible grounding. And Shades’ remarkable patience. : ) And the fact that all three put up with my ‘less intense’ approach.

I think that we make a pretty good squad.

[Marcus]

EVERYONE:

I have some basic philosophies regarding this board. Rather than list them all, here are the four that are relevant to this thread:

1. If someone comes here and insists on building a monument to his/her own inanity, why should I stop or prevent him/her from doing so?
2. What good is a Libertarian utopia if no one wants to live there?

Those two guiding principles can be mutually contradictory, so proper moderation is always a delicate balancing act.

3. Entertainment is the ultimate goal of this message board--even for new people, so as to avoid the formation of cliques.
4. When one person's entertainment degrades others' entertainment, we must play "Jeremy Bentham" and moderate according to what the greatest good is for the greatest number.

That, too, is a delicate balancing act.

But REGARDING THE ISSUES BROUGHT UP IN THIS THREAD, your voices have been heard. When I've been able to think straight, I have weighed and strongly considered the points you have made here. Here are my tentative conclusions, but before I start a new thread announcing my executive decisions, I'd like to see if any of you object or have compelling reasons why I shouldn't go ahead with this.

UPCOMING SHIFTS / RULE CHANGES:

1. HARASSMENT: Everyone naturally considers being called out as "harassment." If we prevent newcomers from calling out old-timers, then FAIRness demands that we prevent old-timers from calling out old-timers, too. As I said before, if you want moderators to clamp down on what Atlanticmike and Cultellus dish out to us, are you willing to allow moderators to clamp down on what you dish out to Ajax18? Or do you want the freedom of speech to carry on as you have been? If the latter, then you must grant the two of them the same privilege, because it is IMPERATIVE that newcomers enjoy all the same rights and privileges that old-timers have so as to avoid the creation of an elite class such as what exists at the Mormon Dialogue & Discussion board or Recovery from Mormonism.
   
   NEVERTHELESS, we can safely curtail the sexual harassment that's been seen here of late. Therefore, from this point forward, any criticism or "calling out" that expressly identifies a poster's gender will be either moved to the Telestial or Spirit Prison forums or deleted from within the post, whatever the moderator feels is best to preserve context. "Pussy hats" are fair game, since those are physical objects that people wore whilst protesting, but comments such as "Your husband must be sick of you" or "Are you on your period?" will be moved or deleted because, like I said, they identify a person's gender (well, maybe not the "husband" thing anymore, but you get the idea). To summarize, NO MORE SEXUAL HARASSMENT WHATSOEVER in the Terrestrial or Spirit Paradise fora.
   .
2. SOCK PUPPETS: I am now convinced that sock puppet accounts are far too often created for trolling purposes, mild or otherwise. Plus, they invite their creator to break or circumvent the rules, because a throwaway identity has no "dog in the fight." Therefore, NO MORE SOCK PUPPET CREATION FROM THIS POINT FORWARD. It wouldn't be FAIR to go ex-post-facto, so you may keep the sock puppets you already have, but as a gesture of good faith I respectfully request that you voluntarily relinquish your sock puppet accounts if at all possible. Please send me a private message telling me the sock-puppet accounts you're willing to relinquish and have me delete, as a good faith gesture, but this is NOT a rule and you are NOT required to comply. It's simply a respectful request is all. But all new sock puppet accounts beginning now, as of this posting, will be deleted...

Thanks for the reminder of that post.

Does this mean canpakes has to stop posting with his "Marcus" sick puppet?

Ironically, I used to post under a name that was more easily identified as female, and when I changed, I was accused of having created a sockpuppet. An example is given above. In reality, I changed because of the sexual harassment I was receiving. That harassment, back then, I assumed was part of the 'entertainment' value here so I tolerated it --by which I mean I stayed and fought back where I could--until my spouse found out by reading one of Atlanticmike's responses.

My spouse's response was so visceral and so overwhelming that I thought he was having a heart attack. Literally. It was an incredibly scary event, and it scarred me permanently.

That's when I realized I had been trained as a Mormon to laugh along with the idea that 'sexual harassment' was a normal component of 'entertainment', and so I pushed even harder to have sexual harassment realized here as the evil that it is. I have no idea if anything I said influenced Shades, but I am certainly pleased with his decision to remove the sexual harassment, or at the very least hide it down in the basement.

A friend who is a professional in PR recommended I use a less gender identifiable name for safety, so I changed. They said that sexual harassment online stays online, right up until the moment that it doesn't, so it's better to protect oneself and one's family. Even in venues that exist only for entertainment.

Also, as a statistician, I understand using the word "know" may be problematic, but, also as a statistician, I understand that avoiding taking action because one doesn't fully 'know' is a response that recklessly relies on a lack of perfect knowledge when increasingly strong likelihood is sufficient for most statistical purposes. (That's why everyone here, I am fairly certain, carries some form of car, home, fire, and or health insurance.) Given the number of times Atlantic Mike broke the rules of this 'entertainment' board in the past, allowing him to drive right up to the edge and attempt to drag the board over, then responding that we let it happen just in case he isn't doing what he's obviously doing is not an appropriate response, in my opinion.

And while I appreciate the loyalty shown toward Shades, in the rest of the world outside this 'entertainment' venue, the frequency of and the type of things that Hound of Heaven posts about and to moderators here is rightfully considered abusive. This board is defined as being here for entertainment, so by definition that abuse is tolerated because it is entertaining. That's unfortunate.

[Marcus]

I think this previous post from Shades can probably inform 2 parts of the discussion here. First, that he likely still perceives us in the "building of a monument phase" and not yet into the "no one wants to live here" part.

And second, that sexual harassment is treated entirely differently than other forms of harassment.

Your first point is not quite accurate. The member of women I have run into on other internet and real life places who tell me that they left this forum because they decided they didn't want "to live here" is astonishingly large. Their reason is invariably related to your second point, but I have not been able to convince anyone to return by telling them that sexual harassment is no longer allowed in the upper subforums here. They are not amused when I suggest they just stay out of the other areas.

...Rule lawyering and mod abuse has not historically gotten anyone very far with him...

I see. Jubilee, anyone?

[Marcus]

We are still a team of Shades and 3 mods. At any time, one or two of us are experiencing ‘in real life’ issues or events that deservedly take our focus away from the board. I’ll need to take a turn at that too, someday, I’m sure.

I’ve benefited greatly from the wisdom of RI’s past moderator experience, and from Xeno’s temperament and sensible grounding. And Shades’ remarkable patience. : ) And the fact that all three put up with my ‘less intense’ approach.

I think that we make a pretty good squad.

Oh.

... I’ve asked to be released from my calling so I won’t have any duties here...

Did I miss something? His request was temporary and RI is back as a moderator?

[canpakes]

Did I miss something? His request was temporary and RI is back as a moderator?

Yes and no. Check out this post:

viewtopic.php?p=2907251#p2907251

[Marcus]

Did I miss something? His request was temporary and RI is back as a moderator?

Yes and no. Check out this post:

viewtopic.php?p=2907251#p2907251

Oh dear. I'm so sorry. Well, clearly he doesn't need to come back to wrangle idiots on an entertainment board, so I assume you mean no.

[Res Ipsa]

We are still a team of Shades and 3 mods. At any time, one or two of us are experiencing ‘in real life’ issues or events that deservedly take our focus away from the board. I’ll need to take a turn at that too, someday, I’m sure.

I’ve benefited greatly from the wisdom of RI’s past moderator experience, and from Xeno’s temperament and sensible grounding. And Shades’ remarkable patience. : ) And the fact that all three put up with my ‘less intense’ approach.

I think that we make a pretty good squad.

Oh.

... I’ve asked to be released from my calling so I won’t have any duties here...

Did I miss something? His request was temporary and RI is back as a moderator?

No, Marcus. You didn’t miss anything. While I have taken sanity breaks in the past, I permanently resigned as a moderator here when I posted what you quoted.

Cp and Xeno have this covered.

[Marcus]

Oh.

Did I miss something? His request was temporary and RI is back as a moderator?

No, Marcus. You didn’t miss anything. While I have taken sanity breaks in the past, I permanently resigned as a moderator here when I posted what you quoted.

Cp and Xeno have this covered.

I'm sorry for your loss, canpakes directed me to your post.

Your comment about C and X having it covered is confusing, as the last post from C said you were still on the moderator team and your name is still in green, indicating mod status. No worries, though, I'm sure a mod will clarify. Welcome back.