Er... I Spy... no violation?

[Fandango 1,439]

I think the moral of the story, and that of the previous week or so is that we need competent moderators, ones who are in touch with current culture and not drive by mods who ban people for PM messages. You know who you are, Kathryn is the only moderator who shows up on a regular bass,(I know Krikit has issues with her housing situation), but William, you are a horrible moderator, out of touch with pop culture and VJ culture.

I think Kathryn is a terrible moderator...too trigger happy.

On the topic of moderation, I hate hate hate 'invisibilizing' posts. Let people's words be out there for all to see. You wanna lock the thread? Whatev, but don't invis the post too.

[Ban Hammer 13,345]

I think Kathryn is a terrible moderator...too trigger happy.

On the topic of moderation, I hate hate hate 'invisibilizing' posts. Let people's words be out there for all to see. You wanna lock the thread? Whatev, but don't invis the post too.

first line - i totally disagree. you only see the ones that are actioned, not all the reports that are received. i believe she exercises considerable restraint.

invisibilizing posts are needed imo. if they were not invisibilized, it's out there for people to see and they can be quoted right back to the poster to restart the fight. additionally, they'd continue to draw reports.

[Pooky 3,786]

first line - i totally disagree. you only see the ones that are actioned, not all the reports that are received. i believe she exercises considerable restraint.

invisibilizing posts are needed imo. if they were not invisibilized, it's out there for people to see and they can be quoted right back to the poster to restart the fight. additionally, they'd continue to draw reports.

Agree on both points.

Kathryn may get undue bad press because the majority of OT thread closures are by her. However, I have yet to see a decision that i could find much fault in (understanding that I am not ever-present, just going by the ones I see).

As for making posts invisible, that, I think, is a no-brainer. If a post is deleted for foul and abusive language, that is a really good reason for keeping it deleted. I certainly don't want to see that type of thing on permanent display and I like to think I'm pretty tolerant of internet abuse on here.

[TBoneTX 45,308]

I may be out-kicked from certain parts of VJ for saying this, but I thoroughly respect ALL of the Moderators. Period, end of story, si man. This answer changes, however, if it is learned that one or more does not share at least an occasional exchange of wedgies with his/her SO, si man.

Some threads are made invisible (or are deleted) because immigration fraud is being contemplated, si man? It's not just threads with foul or offensive language, no man.

Edited August 9, 2010 by TBoneTX

[Fandango 1,439]

first line - i totally disagree. you only see the ones that are actioned, not all the reports that are received. i believe she exercises considerable restraint.

invisibilizing posts are needed imo. if they were not invisibilized, it's out there for people to see and they can be quoted right back to the poster to restart the fight. additionally, they'd continue to draw reports.

Not if the thread was locked, silly. And truthfully, anyone can 'restart' a fight with or without a quote. I'm all about accountability and I think everyone should be made to stand by what they've said. Years ago, a poster made a prolific rant against me. At the time, this poster was considered one of VJ 'sweethearts'. The post was filled with hateful, vile, contempt for me. I thought it was great wrt letting people see what I always saw. The post was invisibilized lickety split, and the poster kept her 'sweetheart martyr' image in tact.

If I blow up at someone and spew ####### at them, I'm prepared to stand by what I've said. I think modding goes too far sometimes....we are a board of adults, conflicts will arise from time to time. Not the end of the world, really...and it shouldn't be that we have to pretend it never happened in the first place.

And posts for foul language etc...don't we already have a filter on that? Visa fraud posts...that's a grey area for me and I dunno about that one, because I see the importance of keeping info correct, but when there's a 'higher authority' to decide what's fraud, what's not, I think we're in the UPL murky area there.

And re: Kath, I'm not trying to make this about her, it was in response to someone saying William was one of the worst. I think the ones I've seen, the locking in OT for going 'Off topic', and many other things I've seen forms my opinion. But we can disagree, that's coolies!

[^_^ 5,021]

first line - i totally disagree. you only see the ones that are actioned, not all the reports that are received. i believe she exercises considerable restraint.

invisibilizing posts are needed imo. if they were not invisibilized, it's out there for people to see and they can be quoted right back to the poster to restart the fight. additionally, they'd continue to draw reports.

good audition.

[Ban Hammer 13,345]

good audition.

[^_^ 5,021]

now all you have to do is sleep with the producer.

[Ban Hammer 13,345]

now all you have to do is sleep with the producer.

gemmie?

[^_^ 5,021]

You lost me. What?

[Ban Hammer 13,345]

You lost me. What?

she's the "producer" as op of this thread.

[^_^ 5,021]

Oh.

[Ban Hammer 13,345]

Oh.

you need your coffee, don't you?

[^_^ 5,021]

Doctors orders - no caffeine. I'm dyin' here.

[Ban Hammer 13,345]

Doctors orders - no caffeine. I'm dyin' here.

you have my sympathy.