I'm just trying to sift fact from opinion and remove any possible bias...

---

Ok, enough. Let's keep in mind the title to this thread and get back on topic. This is a place to suggest a proposal for a change, not to belittle others which borders on personal attacks. This *is* the Politics forum where the rules are a little more relaxed, but there are still limits. Please get back on topic before anyone goes over those limits.

---

Jim

Some people plan their life out and look back at the wealth they've had.
Others live life day by day and look back at the wealth of experiences and enjoyment they've had.

Thank you Jim.

---

Daniel

Please get back on topic before anyone goes over those limits.

Here's the limit ---> | <--- Oops, I've just crossed the line... ;)

---

It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .

Ok, enough. Let's keep in mind the title to this thread and get back on topic. This is a place to suggest a proposal for a change, not to belittle others which borders on personal attacks. This *is* the Politics forum where the rules are a little more relaxed, but there are still limits. Please get back on topic before anyone goes over those limits.

Sounds good...but we have a long way to go...just stating the obvious.

---

Account frozen...

Ok, enough. Let's keep in mind the title to this thread and get back on topic. This is a place to suggest a proposal for a change, not to belittle others which borders on personal attacks. This *is* the Politics forum where the rules are a little more relaxed, but there are still limits. Please get back on topic before anyone goes over those limits.

Fair enough...I personally liked the proposal but think that if you are going to institute a ban it should be unanimous and transparent and I think that if there is a dispute it should be more then 50% to sustain the mod'ing...on the idea of kid friendly I already posted my thoughts.

---

I have one moderator that refuses to stop sending me personal insulting emails.

I've got another poster that states that they are disappointed when they cannot 'dig up dirt' on me in google.

I have another poster that falsely claims I am or have been in a mental institution. (a friend of someone that harasses me/stalks me)

Is phoning my local police department a sign of a well balanced individual? I have been sent pm's by a 'group' threatening to sue me if I did not 'shut up' in certain political threads.

Try fixing those things. Then talk to me

---

Founder of BOINC team Objectivists. Oh the humanity! Rational people crunching data!
I did NOT authorize this belly writing!

Sorry to hear that.

Hope somehow the situation improves for you soon...

---

Never surrender and never give up. In the darkest hour there is always hope.

The kitties hear you,
gentle purrs.. gentle purrs......it's ok, my friend.

---

"Time is simply the mechanism that keeps everything from happening all at once."

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?


Just a comment that this is a very old problem, and not only for here. ...

Quite a long discussion...

Two thoughts come to mind:

1:

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? ... variously translated as "Who will guard the guards?", "Who watches the watchmen?", "Who shall watch the watchers themselves?", or similar.

... "They will guard themselves against themselves. We must tell the guardians a noble lie. The noble lie will inform them that they are better than those they serve and it is therefore their responsibility to guard and protect those lesser than themselves. We will instill in them a distaste for power or privilege, they will rule because they believe it right, not because they desire it."

The saying has since been used by many people to ponder the insoluble question of where ultimate power should reside. The way in which modern democracies attempt to solve this problem is in the separation of powers. Never give ultimate power to any one group...

So... To moderate as a 3rd party 'equal' or to moderate as a 'noble guardian'? Or does power corrupt?...


2:

And how to avoid 'colouring' modding due to personal sympathies and favour?

Can the "Agatean Wall" really work to remove all personal bias and personal interest?


Myself, I think that the reality is that we're all human and that Peer Pressure is very useful to maintain a general reasonableness that most can agree on.

A 'moderation group' can be usefully part of the overall peer pressure. However, the moderation group must be widely diverse enough that obvious cliques do not form.


Regards,
Martin

(Just my views)

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

The way in which modern democracies attempt to solve this problem is in the separation of powers. Never give ultimate power to any one group...

So... To moderate as a 3rd party 'equal' or to moderate as a 'noble guardian'? Or does power corrupt?...

True, but people must remember that this is *not* a democracy. The "ultimate power" here belongs to the University of California since they are the ones "running the show". They own the servers, and supply the bandwidth to support these forums so they dictate the rules. The "king" you might say. However unlike many "kingdoms", (where what the "king" says goes, no matter how unreasonable, with no way for a normal "citizen" (or in this case, user) to have a say in the way things are run) there is a way for normal users to offer feedback, and the "kings" will listen and react (within reason). Please take note of the new moderation email in the sticky in this forum, and check out the new additions to the posting rules when you make a post for examples of how the feedback works. The email change was because users complained that the old format was too technical ahd hard to understand. The posting rules were amended to include some rules that weren't clearly stated anywhere. This was also by user feedback.
In our case, the "moderators" are like the king's guards. They enforce the king's rules, but also act as a feedback mechanism to the king (and to each other). Unless a poster clearly violates the rules (such as posting an obviously pornographic picture, etc.) then a discussion takes place involving other moderators and sometimes a vote is taken to either support or not support a proposed action. This is the way the moderators are "self moderated", and we are also supervised by the "king". And not only that, if someone disagrees with a certain moderation action, then a polite email to the modlist stating the reason you think the action was not called for will result in a review of the action and possibly reversing that action. Notice that I said "polite". All requests are considered, but a polite message will be treated with a lot more respect than one containing flames, threats, name calling, and other abusive comments.
Now to the users ourselves. We are (or at least should be) self policing. If you see a post that you think might be in violation of any of the rules, there's a red "x" at the bottom of each post. Click on it and explain why you think the post is in violation of the rules. The moderators will review your complaint and if it is a legitimate violation of the rules, action will be taken.

So the system in place here is not strictly a "kingdom", nor is it a "democracy". Rather it's a system with elements of both.

And how to avoid 'colouring' modding due to personal sympathies and favour?

Can the "Agatean Wall" really work to remove all personal bias and personal interest?


Myself, I think that the reality is that we're all human and that Peer Pressure is very useful to maintain a general reasonableness that most can agree on.

A 'moderation group' can be usefully part of the overall peer pressure. However, the moderation group must be widely diverse enough that obvious cliques do not form.

Please read my section on moderators above. Here again, unless there is a clear and obvious violation of the rules, sometimes lengthy discussions take place before an action is either carried out or not. Plus we have the feedback paths mentioned above to give extra input into whether a certain action should be carried out (or reversed if it has already been made).

Let me end by saying "we are all human". Nobody likes to make mistakes, but since we are human, sometimes mistakes get made. Likewise nobody likes to be threatened, flamed, or otherwise abused. So let's all act like human beings and treat each other in a civilized way. I know there are quite a few religions represented here and I'm sure most of them have a guideline for living which would be similar to this: "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you".

Just my own personal feelings.

---

Jim

Some people plan their life out and look back at the wealth they've had.
Others live life day by day and look back at the wealth of experiences and enjoyment they've had.

You have condemned all who post in the cafe as disruptive and fighting and stated that it should be removed.

Everybody has the right to their opinions including Moderators, but when you state your bias in public and so clearly, you have to understand when people start to question your motives.

I made a general statement and gave the opinion that it's simply not worth keeping open.

Go ahead and question my motives, as that is your right. As I will question most of your motives as to what exactly is your intent.

---

Oh I must have missed that again...now you posted it's your opinion...I thought you just told the thread you posted Tony's words...dude you can't have it both ways now what is it your words or his words...

Yes, you did miss it again. Please try to read more carefully. I didn't state that I posted Tony's words (which is why I didn't put it in quotes like you wanted). What I stated was that I was alluding to Tony's words, hence no quotes, but still my opinion.

Nice try on twisting there.

Now you tell me what am I to belive your words or Tony's...your statment or his...your aformentioned statment in violation of the rules or did Tony put the words in your mouth.

No. I never told you that you have to choose who to believe. Again, you're interpreting the situation as you wish.

I posted that I will miss Tony, alluding to his statement that he will not be returning and gave an opinion that he shouldn't have done what he did with the outcome that happened and that I will miss him and I don't like this unfortunate chain of events.

I'm absolutely amazed at your insistence at making this into something it's not.

---

A 'moderation group' can be usefully part of the overall peer pressure. However, the moderation group must be widely diverse enough that obvious cliques do not form.

Though I know most will refuse to believe it, you should see the Mod list right now. There's plenty of discussion and peer review and differences of opinion given by all. I have over 1,400 emails from just the last two weeks all representing discussion and difference of opinions.

---

You have condemned all who post in the cafe as disruptive and fighting and stated that it should be removed.

Everybody has the right to their opinions including Moderators, but when you state your bias in public and so clearly, you have to understand when people start to question your motives.

I made a general statement and gave the opinion that it's simply not worth keeping open.

Go ahead and question my motives, as that is your right. As I will question most of your motives as to what exactly is your intent.

No, you made a statement that All posters in the cafe are disruptive and fighting and your wish for it to be removed.

My Motives and Intent are clear, Don't tar everybody with the same brush.
If you don't like the cafe, just stay away, leave it to us who like it.

---

Join Calm Chaos

You have condemned all who post in the cafe as disruptive and fighting and stated that it should be removed.

Everybody has the right to their opinions including Moderators, but when you state your bias in public and so clearly, you have to understand when people start to question your motives.

I made a general statement and gave the opinion that it's simply not worth keeping open.

Go ahead and question my motives, as that is your right. As I will question most of your motives as to what exactly is your intent.

No, you made a statement that All posters in the cafe are disruptive and fighting and your wish for it to be removed.

My Motives and Intent are clear, Don't tar everybody with the same brush.
If you don't like the cafe, just stay away, leave it to us who like it.

Just because someone indicates that it may not be worth keeping the [insert forum name here] does not mean that all members of that forum are disruptive. It means that there are some that are disruptive enough to cause the moderators of that forum a great deal of trouble.

---

BOINC WIKI

You have condemned all who post in the cafe as disruptive and fighting and stated that it should be removed.

Everybody has the right to their opinions including Moderators, but when you state your bias in public and so clearly, you have to understand when people start to question your motives.

I made a general statement and gave the opinion that it's simply not worth keeping open.

Go ahead and question my motives, as that is your right. As I will question most of your motives as to what exactly is your intent.

No, you made a statement that All posters in the cafe are disruptive and fighting and your wish for it to be removed.

My Motives and Intent are clear, Don't tar everybody with the same brush.
If you don't like the cafe, just stay away, leave it to us who like it.

Just because someone indicates that it may not be worth keeping the [insert forum name here] does not mean that all members of that forum are disruptive. It means that there are some that are disruptive enough to cause the moderators of that forum a great deal of trouble.

OzzFans quote was
"That's why I would rather get rid of the Cafe and Politics forum. They're simply not worth it in the larger picture, regardless of what the current inhabitant (who do nothing but bicker and fight) think."

Thats condemning all of us who post there.

---

Join Calm Chaos

This back and forth stuff is still continuing? When will it end?

Anyhow, the proposal idea was definately something interesting to read. As several mods have said, it wouldn't work. This Super Mod, they have a life, a job, and family. But yet they would be expected to be on here to try and weed through the hundreds of redx emails and complaints as well? Thats a full time job all on its own.

At the rate things are going, and what I've read from David A on the boinc_dev list, theres way too much time being put into forums. This is all a luxury to have here folks. The project allows the forums to be here. IF the rules keep being pushed more and more, what more reason to give Eric to shut them down? Yeah, you'd have quite a bit of pissed off crunchers, who would quit. Who would be to blame?

I know that theres those that would like to see changes in the moderation group, and that most of the mod's would like to see some posters permanently gone. But in the end, Eric has final say. He gets fed up enough with all the B***S***, he has all the more reason to just delete the forums.

Anyhow, thats my thoughts on all of this. Weather anyone agrees or dis-agree's, thats your opinion. These are mine.

Anyhow, off to enjoy my time with my family. :-)

---

OzzFans quote was
"That's why I would rather get rid of the Cafe and Politics forum. They're simply not worth it in the larger picture, regardless of what the current inhabitant (who do nothing but bicker and fight) think."

Thats condemning all of us who post there.

No, that's saying that the bad outweighs the good.

---

OzzFans quote was
"That's why I would rather get rid of the Cafe and Politics forum. They're simply not worth it in the larger picture, regardless of what the current inhabitant (who do nothing but bicker and fight) think."

Thats condemning all of us who post there.

No, that's saying that the bad outweighs the good.

Ok, seriously, can this stop?

---