Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » General Comments » Moderation Alert (Page 2)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   
Author Topic: Moderation Alert
kenmeer livermaile
Member
Member # 2243

 - posted      Profile for kenmeer livermaile   Email kenmeer livermaile       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Pentangle -- Wedding Dress
Posts: 23297 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kenmeer livermaile
Member
Member # 2243

 - posted      Profile for kenmeer livermaile   Email kenmeer livermaile       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Incidentally, who else here enjoys the humorous irony of a "Moderation Alert"?

Tomorrow:

Severe Concilation Danger!

Posts: 23297 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
scifibum
Member
Member # 945

 - posted      Profile for scifibum   Email scifibum   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
*raises hand*

I also like "pretty ugly" and "more than completely."

Posts: 6847 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Wayward Son
Member
Member # 210

 - posted      Profile for Wayward Son   Email Wayward Son   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"To infinity--and beyond!" [Wink]
Posts: 8681 | Registered: Dec 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kenmeer livermaile
Member
Member # 2243

 - posted      Profile for kenmeer livermaile   Email kenmeer livermaile       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Pretty ugly is the only one that hits the same range mark. Because it carries conflicting emotional values as well as conceptual contradictions.

Also, moderation alert surpasses them all by not being a direct contradiction, but more a side-bent skewflip.

In fact, it occupies the same basic territory as the left-vs.right-wing martial dilemma, whereby the right typically says that extreme response is the only prudent course, while the left suggests moderation is wise, since war, once begun, is always a full-tilt boneyard boogie.

'a full-tilt boneyard boogie.'


before posting, I usually cut'n'paste tropes like this into a notefile I use as a fiction-writing spare parts/odds/n/ends bin.

Posts: 23297 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Chael
Member
Member # 2436

 - posted      Profile for Chael   Email Chael   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
kidzmom: Battlefield Band is still very much around. I heard them at the last North Texas Irish Festival. [Smile]
Posts: 872 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TommySama
Member
Member # 2780

 - posted      Profile for TommySama   Email TommySama       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
! I don't get it Jesse ! I enjoyed the song.. even if I can't understand half the words
Posts: 6396 | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dave at Work
Member
Member # 1906

 - posted      Profile for Dave at Work   Email Dave at Work   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I see I missed a serious kerfuffle between Pete and Jesse this weekend. I also see that in the thread where Pete's last post is there is a post from OrneryMod which can be parsed to mean that Pete has been suspended until after the election. This is backed up by there not being any posts from Pete since that post. There are however posts from Jesse, the other party in the fight, since then. My concern is that Jesse appears, from my reading of the various posts in the various threads of the forum where the fight took place, to be at least partly responsible for the disruption and he has not been suspended along with Pete.

Seriously, they are both responsible for this disruption, they should share the same punishment or lack thereof.

Also, if there is anything to Pete's claim concerning the content of Jesse's communication with him then he is in violation of this paragraph from the OrneryMod's first post starting this thread.

quote:
If you make a personal attack, you will be suspended until after the election. This includes if the person you attacked was being a jerk, so this is a great time to learn to walk away and use the report button. It doesn't mean to dig up months old posts to exact revenge on old foes. If I feel you're just trying to "get" someone I will ignore your reports. I also reserve the right to ignore you if I feel you are being too touchy in your every perceived slight but I AM serious in stopping these personal attacks.
Seriously either suspend both of them or suspend neither of them.

Edited to fix a spelling error.

[ October 27, 2008, 02:44 PM: Message edited by: Dave at Work ]

Posts: 1928 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Haggis
Member
Member # 2114

 - posted      Profile for Haggis   Email Haggis   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
OM's jurisdiction is limited to what is posted on the boards.

Based on what was posted by Jesse,Pete, and OM I agree with OM's decision.

Posts: 1771 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kenmeer livermaile
Member
Member # 2243

 - posted      Profile for kenmeer livermaile   Email kenmeer livermaile       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Pete drug offboard correspondence onto the board.

Ornery practices, or I should hope, a separation of public vs private policy in its application of rules.

[ October 27, 2008, 02:53 PM: Message edited by: kenmeer livermaile ]

Posts: 23297 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dave at Work
Member
Member # 1906

 - posted      Profile for Dave at Work   Email Dave at Work   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
OM's jurisdiction is limited to what is posted on the boards.

Based on what was posted by Jesse,Pete, and OM I agree with OM's decision.

Based on what was posted by the three of them I do not agree with the OM's decision if that means that one of them gets suspended and the other does not. They are both responsible together and separately for their actions with regard to one another. Punish both of them the same and be done with it.

As to the OM's jurisdiction being limited to what is posted on the boards, that has not always been the case. There was a member banned from this forum a number of years ago for the content of emails allegedly sent by him to other members of the forum. If the OM wanted to he could certainly take the content of the email from Jesse to Pete into account. Even if the OM refuses to do that, Jesse was still an integral part of the fight and should be given the same punishment of anyone else involved.

Posts: 1928 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Haggis
Member
Member # 2114

 - posted      Profile for Haggis   Email Haggis   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Well, I guess that's why it's OM's call, not yours or mine.

As somebody who has been contacted and slapped about a bit for my behavior by the current OM, I can tell you that OM makes it perfectly clear what is considered unacceptable. You are given a warning not to repeat such behavior. I took it seriously, which is why I still get to post.

Posts: 1771 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Redskullvw
Member
Member # 188

 - posted      Profile for Redskullvw   Email Redskullvw   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I am assuming Jesse got some sort of very stern warning.

That email was ugly. No two ways about it.

Posts: 6333 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kenmeer livermaile
Member
Member # 2243

 - posted      Profile for kenmeer livermaile   Email kenmeer livermaile       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Private email is private. It can be made public by a click, but still, the on-Ornery/off-Ornery divide still exists, at least in theory.

Me, I put Pete on my blockmail list years ago, and don't mail him squat, although I might have sent him a private commiseration for his family's health woes.

You want ugly? I know of private emails between Orneryans involving graphic frontal/aroused nudity.

It wasn't shared, cuz that's howm private works.

Posts: 23297 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kenmeer livermaile
Member
Member # 2243

 - posted      Profile for kenmeer livermaile   Email kenmeer livermaile       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
" If the OM wanted to he could certainly take the content of the email from Jesse to Pete into account."

Sounds to me like the Bush regnancy doctrine of executive privilege. Let's tap private email accounjts to promote Ornery security from terrorism while we're at it.

Tangentially, i quote aq note-scrap for my novel:

"Through binocs I saw my distant neighbor masturbate on his front porch, giving me the finger with his free hand.

"When I saw him a few days later, I mentioned it, jokingly. He denied it, effortlessly, making me feel somehow wrong."

No denial available here, email paper-trails being what they are, but the principle remains.

[ October 27, 2008, 03:30 PM: Message edited by: kenmeer livermaile ]

Posts: 23297 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dave at Work
Member
Member # 1906

 - posted      Profile for Dave at Work   Email Dave at Work   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Private email is private. It can be made public by a click, but still, the on-Ornery/off-Ornery divide still exists, at least in theory.

. . .

It wasn't shared, cuz that's howm private works.

I agree with the decision to remove the content of the email, even though it prevents me from evaluating Pete's claim as to its content myself. Pete should not have posted the content of the email. He should have forwarded it to the OM and the OM should then have dealt with it.

If a member sends hate mail or threatening mail to another member it should be considered 'on-Ornery'. I don't mean that the content should be posted for all members to see, I mean that such correspondence has an effect on the relationships of forum members and should be taken into consideration in disciplinary actions concerning the parties involved. I know that I personally would forward any such correspondence I received to the OM and fully expect him to investigate and if necessary take action.

It shouldn't matter, but was the email sent with the forums email or private message functionality or direct from one personal email account to another? If the message was sent through the forums functionality, even though it was private, it still involves the forum and the OM clearly has to be concerned about the use of forum functionality in that manner. Regardless, the content of that message is directly relevant to the disruption caused by the two of them and if either party provides it to the OM he should take the content into consideration.

Edited final paragraph second sentence for clarity.

[ October 27, 2008, 04:00 PM: Message edited by: Dave at Work ]

Posts: 1928 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
OrneryMod
Administrator
Member # 977

 - posted      Profile for OrneryMod   Email OrneryMod   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Let me reiterate that last night I had to juggle a number of things at once and could not devote my full attention to the board. Unfortunately, I am still quite busy and can still not give it all the time I would like. I am playing catch up. Ever since OSC's articles got spotlighted on Rush and the Drudge Report I have been busy activating dozens and dozens of accounts a day, answering questions, and checking up on reported posts (mostly mild stuff but once in a while something more serious). There are still a couple reported posts that I'm trying to make a decision on one way or another.

I don't know that I've read every post of Jesse's so if he has made some personal attacks, report them and I'll take a look at them. From what I saw he was staying quite calm. I agree that the reported email was quite ugly but I am not an email moderator.

There's a reason we aren't allowed to modify our posts after a short period of time. It would change the context of our fellow members words if we changed our own words weeks later, wouldn't it? I can't see the context of Jesse's words. I can't even confirm the exactness of Jesse's words. I don't have any reason to suspect that Pete is lying about it but I am just unwilling to go there when I can't see the whole picture. I feel incapable of being the judge in that regards. It's the same with the lying term. Are there cases in which people actually are lying? Sure. There may even be cases in which it potentially might be "provable". But I don't feel capable of being the judge and so I don't want those accusations bandied about. Leave me out of it. Leave us all out of it. It's not that I don't feel for someone who receives an ugly email. It's just that I also feel for all the others that didn't receive the email and don't want to be dragged into it. If someone said in an email that they were planning to do something bad on the board, I MIGHT take that into consideration as a preemptive block (like I ban accounts that are obvious spambots before they spam us) but I really have a problem with being an email judge as a rule.

Having said that, I want to put in a word for Pete. While he can get carried away sometimes he does make efforts to comply with the moderator in ways that many others do not. So many others, when told to stop, refuse to ever admit any wrongdoing and simply give smart alec responses while blaming others. While Pete may go to great lengths to explain himself, he also is willing to comply even when he doesn't understand or simply disagrees which I believe shows a maturity vastly above many of the rabble-rousers of the board. I ask that people do not continue to gossip about him and the whole drama while he is away. Remember, you did not see all the emails between Pete, Jesse, and me. If you disagree with an action taken or feel there is something I may not be aware of, please take it up with me privately rather than making a big public stink of it here.

Thank you.

Posts: 1260 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MattP
Member
Member # 2763

 - posted      Profile for MattP   Email MattP   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
If a member sends hate mail or threatening mail to another member it should be considered 'on-Ornery'. I don't mean that the content should be posted for all members to see, I mean that such correspondence has an effect on the relationships of forum members and should be taken into consideration in disciplinary actions concerning the parties involved.
When people start going at each other, a frequent refrain from the mod is "take it offline." What you're suggesting is a situation where there is effectively no "offline" to take it to.
Posts: 3481 | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Funean
Member
Member # 2345

 - posted      Profile for Funean   Email Funean   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Don't we still have the option of removing the "email me through the forum" functionality by not including an email in our preferences? It would be one thing if the PM function were enabled, or if you couldn't avoid getting emails from board members, but I see no reason whatsoever for OM to be involved in email events provided they aren't dragged onto the board. Or phone calls, for that matter.
Posts: 5277 | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
OrneryMod
Administrator
Member # 977

 - posted      Profile for OrneryMod   Email OrneryMod   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I also refuse to moderate any fights at msquared's house during any OrneryCon. [Wink]
Posts: 1260 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dave at Work
Member
Member # 1906

 - posted      Profile for Dave at Work   Email Dave at Work   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
If the emails are part of the on board problem then they should be taken into consideration. If they aren't then they should not. When the Mod asks people to "take it offline" They should completely take it offline. As long as the issue doesn't spill back onto the forum it shouldn't be an issue. This is a case where it did spill back onto the forum. The entire public, on the Ornery Forum, fight that someone got suspended over was spawned by that email. The content of that email damn sure should be considered in any disciplinary action.
Posts: 1928 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
KnightEnder
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The Mod even has jurisdiction in my home. I smarted off to Stacy and questioned her motivations (She claimed she 'wanted' to have sex but I think she just wanted to get me of her...back. So to speak.) last week and the Mod hasn't let me talk to her since. Tough love!

KE

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kenmeer livermaile
Member
Member # 2243

 - posted      Profile for kenmeer livermaile   Email kenmeer livermaile       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"If a member sends hate mail or threatening mail to another member it should be considered 'on-Ornery'."

scuse me, Dave, but what's private is private. Ornery own no one or no one's things. Only exception I is for someone to use OM as a notary public to record potentiala evidence in case of future subpoena evidence.

Off board is off board. Some of your arguments with your girlfriend surely effect your Ornery presence, Dave. Should we your love life into online nery discussion?

[ October 27, 2008, 08:43 PM: Message edited by: kenmeer livermaile ]

Posts: 23297 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
RickyB
Member
Member # 1464

 - posted      Profile for RickyB   Email RickyB   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"If a member sends hate mail or threatening mail to another member it should be considered 'on-Ornery' ... I know that I personally would forward any such correspondence I received to the OM and fully expect him to investigate and if necessary take action."

I agree. We pay the bastid more than enough! Oh, wait...

You've never run a forum, have you? Requiring a voluntary moderator to get into emails is insane.

Posts: 19145 | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jesse
Member
Member # 1860

 - posted      Profile for Jesse   Email Jesse   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I strongly resent the implication that I in any way "threatened" anyone. Had I done so, Law Enforcement and not the OM would have been the appropriate authority to deal with the issue.

I suggest that anyone making that accusation contact the FBI, or withdraw the charge.

[ October 28, 2008, 12:17 PM: Message edited by: Jesse ]

Posts: 11410 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kenmeer livermaile
Member
Member # 2243

 - posted      Profile for kenmeer livermaile   Email kenmeer livermaile       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
stray will defend our honor for us. [Wink]
Posts: 23297 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
canadian
Member
Member # 1809

 - posted      Profile for canadian   Email canadian       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"So many others, when told to stop, refuse to ever admit any wrongdoing and simply give smart alec responses while blaming others. While Pete may go to great lengths to explain himself, he also is willing to comply even when he doesn't understand or simply disagrees which I believe shows a maturity vastly above many of the rabble-rousers of the board"

Go suck eggs!


But seriously, DaW, email moderating? I'm not allowed to say you're nuts, and I won't, and never would, but that IDEA seems nuts to me. What about phone calls? Real life meetings?

Where do you draw the line?

Oh, I know!

On the board.

Posts: 5362 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kenmeer livermaile
Member
Member # 2243

 - posted      Profile for kenmeer livermaile   Email kenmeer livermaile       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Regarding taking it off line, I prefer to poop in people's shoes.
Posts: 23297 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kenmeer livermaile
Member
Member # 2243

 - posted      Profile for kenmeer livermaile   Email kenmeer livermaile       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
What Mod means to me
Posts: 23297 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1