dart-marg-JAK

[_Jersey Girl]

situations like this are exactly why I was uncomfortable with Jersey taking modship. Too much drama.

Grow up Jersey.

I see. So what you're essentially saying is that you expect me to believe that you followed a 10 page thread for days on end in order to equip yourself to make the above determination. I completely buy that. Would you like the Easter bunny to hop through the front or back door tomorrow?

[_marg]

And you didn't reply again on the thread.

Correct, I replied to him in pm. A reply to him on the board would be another off-topic post in that thread. I had already stated I had made a decision to leave the thread, so that was all anyone on there needed to know.

Now, let's make some comparisons between what you stated in your exchanges with Liz and Shades and the accusations you've leveled at me.

This is your statement to Liz:
"so instead of moderators telling participants to knock it off which by the way...was only once, you decided to move it so that the bickering can increase and moderators don't have to step in. So rather than trying to ensure fallacious argumentation is prevented you actually are encouraging it."

This is your description of me:

"You certainly are intervening..you are going behind the scenes and manipulating. Listen to you ..you're having to hunt down moderators to intervene."

So, which is it, marg? You want moderators to offer caution and yet when someone asks a moderator to review the thread, they are "going behind the scenes and manipulating". You want moderators to "ensure that fallacious argumentation is prevented" but you don't want any one to actually report it to a moderator in order that they might take action and if they do, you see that as "going behind the scenes and manipulating". by the way, there were two cautions offered on the thread, not one, and both by "Poor Shades".

First of all in pm you told me you had asked Shades to intervene, so his mod note was at your request.

Second, my words "so instead of moderators telling participants to knock it off" were in reference to Liz's explanation. I don't remember her exact words but essentially her explanation was that by moving the thread she or any mod would no longer have to spend time intervening or telling people to knock it off. Now as far as her explanation for moving the thread, she said it was because of the tone of the thread. So what does tone mean. Well generally I would take that to mean there are too many nasty remarks or fallacious ad homs. So moving it to a less moderated forum, rewards the perpetrators, enables increased ad homs, increased nastiness, the very things that she supposedly was concerned about.

As far as my description of you, it is within the context that I disagreed with the handling of the moderation by moving the thread, not that I don't want moderation in the Celestial. The handling of it was wrong and you were instrumental in that process. Your reprimand to me and JAK for example in the opening post of this thread is out of line. As I pointed out I did think Kevin had said "all historians think Jesus existed" that was not gameplaying, or dishonesty on my part. And in fact I still do think that was the implication he gave. When one says "Dogs have fur"...there is no necessity to say "all", it is implied. Kevin had done that a number of times, "historians say" with the implication being "all" even though not stated. In addition he kept asking for someone to post any historian who doesn't take that position. So that obviously was his intended implication. My response was a clarification of his words and to move the discussion forward. But JAK was correct as was I, that the implication given by Kevin was that all historians take the position that Jesus existed.

In your post to Shades you say this:

"Well Shades if the purpose of the Celestial is to enable threads to evolve productively without dishonest tactics of things like attacking people in order to shift focus away from subjecti, then moving them to Terrestial where rules are more lax, is not gong to accomplish that objective, the opposite will be accomplished. "

And when the thread was moved back up to the Celestial in response to the thread starter's expressed wishes, you now decide you don't want to participate. It's okay with me if you choose not to participate there however, don't you think that when you claim to abhor dishonest tactics, you might take a moment to review your own posts, the preferences you have expressed, acknowledge that those preferences were indeed acted upon (cautions offered) and instead of attempting to call into question the integrity of one who has seen fit to ask other moderators to review the instances of possible infraction of form guidelines and that results in the very type of action you have expressed a desire to see happen, you might for a single second realize that you're barking up the wrong tree with your character attacks in lieu of well reasoned evaluation?

I suppose not.

You see, marg, you claim to want moderator support and when you get it you devolve into the very ad hom's you claim to deplore. Pick a spot and land on it, marg.

I don't claim I want moderator support the board claims it gives it, that the Celestial is highly moderated. Well if moderation involves rewarding the perpetrators, if the end result is increased nastiness, increased problems with "tone" then by moving it over to Terrestial..then the moderation is ineffective. Tone isn't improved by doing so. I do think if the board is going to claim that the Celestial is highly moderated then the focus should be on decreasing excessive fallacious ad homs..which includes by the way vulgar and derogatory comments, and if that is done, the tone will improve. So if someone points out that someone is posting excessive ad homs, yes I think a moderator who is skilled in recognizing when ad homs are excessive and fallacious should step in. That is in the best interests in keeping the Celestial forum a place for productive discussion with minimal dishonest gameplaying.

Think about it, why should anyone devote time and energy to posting thinking there is some protection from game playing which will sabatoge that effort, when all that ends up happening is the gameplayers are rewarded and the gameplaying can escalate?

As far as that thread, and my participation I had stated I was out of it. I've received no acknowledgment so far that the handling of the moderation was wrong. Why should I assume that if I participate it won't happen again, that the thread won't get moved because of the tone or whim of a moderator? Shades did ask me if he moved it back would I participate and I said I was not willing to commit. I said to him I thought he should move it back whether I participate or not. It shouldn't be a function of whether I participate, it should be a function of whether that is the right thing to do or not. And the right thing to do for the board not to appease one person. If he doesn't see it as the right thing to do, then I have no assurance that the moderation will improve. As it turns out it got moved because of Richard's request, but that is still no indication to me that the Celestial is going to be a properly moderated forum. It is better to err on the side of less moderation than to have moderation which serves to make things worse. Essentially a moderated forum should be a place for posters to avoid dishonest game playing...and that includes derogatory remarks, vulgar language, but it should also include excessive fallacious ad homs.

[_marg]

You certainly are intervening..you are going behind the scenes and manipulating.

Um, no. If she was going behind the scenes and manipulating, she wouldn't be blatantly stating here what her issues are.

Jersey Girl has NOT intervened in this thread because she is an active participant. Frankly, I think that is an ethical position. She asked the other Moderators to take a look at it. I was the first one to review it, so continue your bitch with me, not with Jersey Girl.

And, for what it's worth, Marg, your precious thread has been moved back to the Celestial Forum. I honored Richard's request, as the originator of the thread.

Nothing has been split off. Everything is intact, so, please, by all means, be my guest to have at it.

You have yet to give a good explanation for moving it. If tone was the problem then I assume there must have been an excessive number of fallacious ad homs. If that is the case Liz, moving it to Terrestial only aggravates that situation.

[_Jersey Girl]

The board offers moderation and that's exactly what you got. For the record, I told you that I asked Shades to review the thread and offer caution instead of moving the thread. I did so in light of your previous objection to Celestial threads being moved to lower forums thus providing a virtual guarantee that the quality of discussion would deteriorate, a perspective with which I happen to agree. Also, for the record, I asked Shades to review the thread a total of three times. Twice he chose to comment in the thread and the third time he chose not to. Unbeknownst to you, I reported this very thread to Shades for his review and told him straight up that I would apologize for it if he deemed it inappropriate.

I can think of no reason why you would criticize the board for lack of moderation and when you get it, you heap ad hom's on me for asking someone else to review a thread on which I am a participant. To date, I have made no determinations on threads where I am a participant nor have I made determinations on threads where you and JAK are participants due to the obvious fact that we are familiar with eachother and I wish to avoid conflict of interest. Therefore, when I want to comment in the way of support or criticism regarding either you or JAK, so take your baseless ad hom's against me and pound salt.

I'm suspect that you think I asked a moderator (Liz) to move the thread to the Terrestrial. I infact, did no such thing.

Should you choose to go to the mat with me here, I'll be right there with you, sis, and you got a solid gold money back guarantee on that. Straight up and no crap.

Have a lovely day.

Jersey Girl

[_marg]

The board offers moderation and that's exactly what you got.

I see so according to you it was handled correctly. So I was right to assume nothing has changed. There is moderation which is effective and there is moderation which creates more problems than it solves.

For the record, I told you that I asked Shades to review the thread and offer caution instead of moving the thread. I did so in light of your previous objection to Celestial threads being moved to lower forums thus providing a virtual guarantee that the quality of discussion would deteriorate, a perspective with which I happen to agree. Also, for the record, I asked Shades to review the thread a total of three times. Twice he chose to comment in the thread and the third time he chose not to. Unbeknownst to you, I reported this very thread to Shades for his review and told him straight up that I would apologize for it if he deemed it inappropriate.

Right and what ended up happening is it got moved and I've yet to hear one of you acknowledge that was not what should have been done. It solved nothing.

I can think of no reason why you would criticize the board for lack of moderation and when you get it, you heap ad hom's on me for asking someone else to review a thread on which I am a participant.

You have little appreciation if any on what fallacious ad homs are. That is the problem. In this thread we are in fact discussing moderation. It is also in the Telestial forum. I'm on topic and adhering to the rules of the forum...which is it doesn't claim to have any.

As far as my criticizing the board of moderation. Let's get things straight. I involved myself in a thread as did JAK in the Celestial forum in which CC spent most of his posts dodging the issues and attacking JAK instead. GAD did some attacks of his own, they were not as excessive as CC, no moderater said anything. I didn't complain, there were a few directed at me.

Later I'm not sure which forum but actually you even pointed this out to me in a pm, I believe Moniker (possibly not her) complained that JAK had written some ad hominal posts in that same thread. And Shades then posted that he had gone into it and changed a few words in accordance with Moniker's complaint. I then posted a list of additional ad homs by CC and GAD...and said to Shades if he's going to change one he might as well do the rest. In a pm I told him don't bother it's done and overwith.

However I thought if mods are going to do something about ad homs I would point them out when they were excessive. I did in one thread involving Kevin and I believe that may have been the one in which Shades handled it by moving it to Terrestial. I complained about that and he agreed with me that he shouldn't have handled it that way.

Well the same thing has happened, the tone was given as the reason for moving the entire thread, with then no acknowledgment within the thread, of the ad homs creating the negative tone. Instead of rectifying the actual problem it was once again exasperated.

And you don't see the problem, and Liz doesn't and at this point in time I'm not sure whether Shades does or not.

But certainly no one was preventing you from posting which is your complaint in the OP of this thread. I asked you a question, there's been no response from you on that question in thread. And really you've responded to very little of anything JAK has said.

To date, I have made no determinations on threads where I am a participant nor have I made determinations on threads where you and JAK are participants due to the obvious fact that we are familiar with eachother and I wish to avoid conflict of interest. Therefore, when I want to comment in the way of support or criticism regarding either you or JAK, so take your baseless ad hom's against me and pound salt.

I'm suspect that you think I asked a moderator (Liz) to move the thread to the Terrestrial. I infact, did no such thing.

But you are in agreement. You've made no statement to indicate it should have been handled differently.

You also chose to write oncalled for reprimand in this thread. And I have years of memories of you not offering much in the way of addressing actual issues in a discussion but instead being a crap disturber and shifting the topic away from issues typically onto you.

Should you choose to go to the mat with me here, I'll be right there with you, sis, and you got a solid gold money back guarantee on that. Straight up and no s***.

Have a lovely day.

I see no appreciation or understanding of what the issue is. It's fine and dandy for those people who don't put much effort into their posts to not be concerned if a thread gets inundated with posts which serve to detract, shift focus off issues onto people, and in general just a poor discussion ensues. And frankly the majority of people on MB's generally put little research or effort into their posts, there is little reward for doing so, and so the majority have little to lose.

There's poor moderation which shows bias in mods, and/or does little to keep arguments productive and honest. And then there is good moderation, which curtails the gameplayers and does keep people honest and the discussion progressing productively for all.

I can see no reason to ever move a Celestial thread to a more lax area which allows greater game playing. I can see posts moved which have excessive ad homs. Mod warnings in a thread against excessive ad homs (which includes derogatory and vulgar language).

But if the idea of moderationa in the Celestial is simply to rid it of vulgar language and that is the extent of the moderation, and mods intend to go in there and move entire threads, then I won't invest in it which is what I said when the thread got moved. I'm not the only one thinking along these lines by the way.

[_Jersey Girl]

Back up the truck and don't you worry, sis, I'm right here as promised.

What, in your view, should have happened instead of moving the thread to the Terrestrial?

[_Jersey Girl]

Don't worry, marg, we'll get you straightened out eventually. Let's start with where you're posting:

You have little appreciation if any on what fallacious ad homs are. That is the problem. In this thread we are in fact discussing moderation. It is also in the Telestial forum. I'm on topic and adhering to the rules of the forum...which is it doesn't claim to have any.

This is the Off Topic forum.

[_marg]

Back up the truck and don't you worry, sis, I'm right here as promised.

What, in your view, should have happened instead of moving the thread to the Terrestrial?

Frankly from the time I posted that Kevin had said "all historians agree Jesus existed" I didn't follow closely the discussion between JAK and Kevin. I'm not aware of a problem with tone, which apparently is the issue. I don't know what that complaint is all about.

But if tone is the issue and that needs to be improved then generally ad homs are what need to be curtailed. And the way to handle those is to write a mod warning..indicating they have been noted and it's not acceptable. If the entire post is just one big personal attack and nothing of substance in it and it's pretty consistent from a person, then probably move it. If a person can not post without lacing their posts with attacks on whomever they are conversing with then they shouldn't be posting in the Celestial. When people catch on that gameplaying is not acceptable they will eventually stop. A few ad homs are no big deal, it's when it is pervasive, consistent that sort of thing that the discussion turns into a game by the gameplayer employing them. So anything which curtails them without penalizing the honest participants is the way to go, if one wants to raise the level of discussion and keep it honest.

I didn't see much ad homs, but then I wasn't looking for them or focussing on it. You guys are the ones complaining of tone, I would have done nothing. But if there were excessive disruptive ad homs then give a warning note to cease.

Really at this point in time I don't know what the problem was that you had or Liz had. "Tone" tells me little.

As far as the discussion between JAK and Kevin over what.. I said he said, you should let them argue it out. You don't need to do the thinking for others. In sub argument tangensts, I would lean towards giving the benefit of doubt and assume someone isn't attempting to be dishonest or disruptive, unless it is blatantly obvious. It is better to err on that side than to interfere when people are attempting to work something out. And it may take many pages, a few days. So what..as long as they aren't personally attacking one another I don't see the problem. As you know with a threaded view, those sorts of sub argument tangents can be ignored by other participants, they don't disrupt a thread. But since that isn't available here, the best thing is to skim those posts if you aren't interested and post/reply to the ones you are interested in.

[_marg]

Don't worry, marg, we'll get you straightened out eventually. Let's start with where you're posting:

You have little appreciation if any on what fallacious ad homs are. That is the problem. In this thread we are in fact discussing moderation. It is also in the Telestial forum. I'm on topic and adhering to the rules of the forum...which is it doesn't claim to have any.

This is the Off Topic forum.

My quote above is within the context of your words which I was addressing. And as this point in time I'd have to go back, and I'm not going to do that. I generally quote and then address those words. If you want to bring what it was I addressed in a post, then it will jog my memory.

***Added note...ok I understand now, you are pointing out which forum it is. Frankly I don't know what the supposed rules are for the off-topic. I'm not really concerned what goes on here, because it isn't a thread which requires much work or research. If it got moved, I don' think it would make much difference.

[_Jersey Girl]

My comments will be in bold and I'm giving no effort to cleaning up the post to make it more readable than that.

Back up the truck and don't you worry, sis, I'm right here as promised.

What, in your view, should have happened instead of moving the thread to the Terrestrial?

Frankly from the time I posted that Kevin had said "all historians agree Jesus existed" I didn't follow closely the discussion between JAK and Kevin. I'm not aware of a problem with tone, which apparently is the issue. I don't know what that complaint is all about.

If you don't know what the complaint is about, why are you complaining?

But if tone is the issue and that needs to be improved then generally ad homs are what need to be curtailed. And the way to handle those is to write a mod warning..indicating they have been noted and it's not acceptable.

And that's exactly what happened, marg. Two cautions were given to Kevin.


If the entire post is just one big personal attack and nothing of substance in it and it's pretty consistent from a person, then probably move it.

And therein lies the problem. I agree with you in principle that entire threads shouldn't be moved to a lower forum because it's a virtual guarantee that the quality of discussion will deteriorate. I've stated that publicly and privately in mod communication. What you fail to understand and Shades pointed this out in one of his public mod comments, it's nearly impossible to do what you're suggesting because the non-Celestial remarks are embedded in topical posts. The only option there would be to edit out remarks from within existing posts and if that's done the next thing we'll have here is people complaining that their posts are being censored or suspecting that their posts will be censored which will in turn, reduce their participation on account of losing faith that the integrity of their posts will be lost. Once you begin editing posts from within, there is no guarantee that someone who is able to do that won't at some point misuse the privilege of moderating. Gawd, I just said privilege. It's a royal pain in the ass to look at a thread and try to determine where to cut, split or move. The thread in question is a prime example of that. Had anyone attempted to move posts out of the thread, the thread itself would have been cannibalized to the point of making the thread incoherent to read. I challenge you to look at that thread and tell me where you yourself would make the splits.


If a person can not post without lacing their posts with attacks on whomever they are conversing with then they shouldn't be posting in the Celestial. When people catch on that gameplaying is not acceptable they will eventually stop. A few ad homs are no big deal, it's when it is pervasive, consistent that sort of thing that the discussion turns into a game by the gameplayer employing them. So anything which curtails them without penalizing the honest participants is the way to go, if one wants to raise the level of discussion and keep it honest.

This has been discussed publicly on the board. What you're suggesting is that people lose the ability to post in the Celestial which is reminiscent of FAIR's pundit forum. I don't know if people can be locked out of a forum or not. You can make that suggestion to Shades and see if it's do-able.

I didn't see much ad homs, but then I wasn't looking for them or focussing on it. You guys are the ones complaining of tone, I would have done nothing. But if there were excessive disruptive ad homs then give a warning note to cease.

I haven't complained about the tone so leave me out of it. I infact, made no complaints at all until this thread. Warning notes were given twice on the thread.

Really at this point in time I don't know what the problem was that you had or Liz had. "Tone" tells me little.

I've said nothing about "tone".

As far as the discussion between JAK and Kevin over what.. I said he said, you should let them argue it out. You don't need to do the thinking for others.

How many times have you intervened between Kevin and JAK?

In sub argument tangensts, I would lean towards giving the benefit of doubt and assume someone isn't attempting to be dishonest or disruptive, unless it is blatantly obvious. It is better to err on that side than to interfere when people are attempting to work something out. And it may take many pages, a few days. So what..as long as they aren't personally attacking one another I don't see the problem. As you know with a threaded view, those sorts of sub argument tangents can be ignored by other participants, they don't disrupt a thread. But since that isn't available here, the best thing is to skim those posts if you aren't interested and post/reply to the ones you are interested in.

I have asked for a threaded view option on this board since I got here and prior to that in the first format. Shades is checking that out with keene.

Now, a few random comments. You stated in a previous post that you have memories of me being a crap disturber and shifting focus on to myself.

Were your memory at all accurate, you'd have memories of me being attacked by a crap disturber for years on end. I make it a habit never to fire the first shot. I do however, almost always return fire when the situation warrants it. As for your claims of manipulation and conniving. I'll tell you what, on the other board there was definitely manipulation and conniving going on and not a damn bit of it was coming from me. This board isn't that board. This board is run by people of integrity who have the back bone to make a damn decision. So either you like open season on people or you will appreciate the job the moderators do on this board to make participation possible for a diverse community. Whether you agree with their decisions or not, at least they're on it.