comply or die.

[manny]

Posted by Oliver S (here)

Posted by manny (here)
question...
who are we to judge?
when we all learn from other peoples mistakes.

do not judge a man until you have walked a mile in his shoes.

Have you walked a mile in Paul's shoes? Or Ilie's? No, yet you continue to heap upon them indictments and accusations of nefariousness.

no i have not.
and this is not a attack against anybody,but to reconsider the timeline of a ban.
Oliver calm down,we are all on a learning curve.
if it be at my expense.

[Seikou-Kishi]

You are mistaken if you think I am not calm; perhaps you fancy that you have riled me up. You have not.

So this is a learning curve, is it? It seems you've quite taken to the pedagogy, Manny, because all I have seen of late is your pontificating about how others ought to change to come into line with your way of thinking. Here, you conflate "coming to agree with me" with "coming to know", or learning, and I would contend that they are poles apart.

[manny]

Posted by Omni connexae! (here)

Posted by manny (here)
[/COLOR]

Posted by Omni connexae! (here)

Posted by manny (here)
sorry ulli but you know and i know that is bollocks.

Care to provide some reasoning?

i could .
but why spoil the fun.
seek and you will find.

Your full of sh*t.

No offence.

non taken.
you make up your own mind.
if you cannot.
i can point you in the the direction of people who will.

¤=[Post Update]=¤

Posted by Oliver S (here)
You are mistaken if you think I am not calm; perhaps you fancy that you have riled me up. You have not.

So this is a learning curve, is it? It seems you've quite taken to the pedagogy, Manny, because all I have seen of late is your pontificating about how others ought to change to come into line with your way of thinking. Here, you conflate "coming to agree with me" with "coming to know", or learning, and I would contend that they are poles apart.

if i am wrong please tell me so.
does my opinion not matter.
i speak what i think is right.
educate me.

Oliver i am who i am.

[shadowstalker]

a friend of mine here is reading along side me and and even she thinks this is crap, of what SOME mods are doing here on this forum (You know the ones with the guilty conscious of either thinking or doing the blocking or banning) of certain issues and not wanting to really hear the whole story but making up lame excuses of there abuse of power. you know the ones, the ones that dredge up the old "1984" way of thinking. Her words not mine.

[Donna O]

I feel somewhat caught between discussions as I have recently left the moderator team and can see both sides. I hope what I have to say will be beneficial to all views of this subject.

Whilst on the mod team, I did suggest that we have a representative that can liaise between the moderators and the ‘normal’ members. Working as a kind of mediator in a joint effort to move forward and create a healthy and lasting community.

The reason I think this would be helpful is because there is very much an ‘us and them’ situation on the forum and someone needs to bridge the divide with ideas and compromise that everyone can live with.

These ‘representatives’ can be placed on a members only portion of the website where issues are brought to the table and discussed, without the fear of moderation or banning - or being ear marked as an agent provocateur. A kind of no mans land.

We could have several members of different personalities, outlooks and strengths to bring forward current issues, ideas and proposals to the moderators table.

For example, when a person has been banned, a representative of this person could come forward and argue the banned member’s case. Was the banning too severe, was it a validated measure. How is it beneficial to the community? What can the banned do better when he/she returns? The Mod’s can put forward their views and if nothing else, maybe lessons could be learned on both sides of the fence. As we negotiate together.

What do you all think?

[Providence]

Posted by manny (here)

Posted by Oliver S (here)

Posted by manny (here)
question...
who are we to judge?
when we all learn from other peoples mistakes.

do not judge a man until you have walked a mile in his shoes.

Have you walked a mile in Paul's shoes? Or Ilie's? No, yet you continue to heap upon them indictments and accusations of nefariousness.

no i have not.
and this is not a attack against anybody,but to reconsider the timeline of a ban.
Oliver calm down,we are all on a learning curve.
if it be at my expense.

Manny, I feel that your are being disingenuous when you say that this wasn't an attack but just a discussion towards reconsidering the timeline of a ban. The thread is named 'comply or die' and your opening statement is quite pointed....

[Sierra]

A bit disappointed in your lack of response to valid questions Manny. Also don't hear what you think we should have done differently. Or is it the fact that it was a moderator that was insulted make a difference to you?

Describe to me what YOU would have done as moderator if someone had insulted a fellow member in blatant disregard to forum rules.

And Manny sez: i could .
but why spoil the fun.

Fun. Oh. I see. Clarity arrives. Manny is not being serious. Manny is playing, with such vaunted care and concern about a subject that DOES concern others ...

Why ask questions then in response to his original post. He doesn't want an honest dialogue in my opinion.

Sierra

[manny]

Posted by Donna O (here)
I feel somewhat caught between discussions as I have recently left the moderator team and can see both sides. I hope what I have to say will be beneficial to all views of this subject.

Whilst on the mod team, I did suggest that we have a representative that can liaise between the moderators and the ‘normal’ members. Working as a kind of mediator in a joint effort to move forward and create a healthy and lasting community.

The reason I think this would be helpful is because there is very much an ‘us and them’ situation on the forum and someone needs to bridge the divide with ideas and compromise that everyone can live with.

These ‘representatives’ can be placed on a members only portion of the website where issues are brought to the table and discussed, without the fear of moderation or banning - or being ear marked as an agent provocateur. A kind of no mans land.

We could have several members of different personalities, outlooks and strengths to bring forward current issues, ideas and proposals to the moderators table.

For example, when a person has been banned, a representative of this person could come forward and argue the banned member’s case. Was the banning too severe, was it a validated measure. How is it beneficial to the community? What can the banned do better when he/she returns? The Mod’s can put forward their views and if nothing else, maybe lessons could be learned on both sides of the fence. As we negotiate together.

What do you all think?

brilliant.
but where did it go.
thats the question.

[Donna O]

If I thought I could help I certainly would - though perhaps people can be nominated, if it is thought this is a good idea, and we can poll the results. I was thinking five or six people

[shadowstalker]

now we are getting some where

[Seikou-Kishi]

Posted by manny (here)
brilliant.
but where did it go.
thats the question.

That's the question? There are still several of Sierra's which you haven't answered, in case you'd forgotten...

[thunder24]

Posted by Oliver S (here)

Posted by manny (here)
brilliant.
but where did it go.
thats the question.

That's the question? There are still several of Sierra's which you haven't answered, in case you'd forgotten...

but where did the idea go? I would like to know also...great idea

peace

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by ulli (here)
If 200 members asked you to reconsider the vacation would you reconsider?

Of course we reconsider, even on the basis of a single message, with new evidence or insight to how better to handle a situation.

Just ask manny ... he himself was once the beneficiary of such a reconsideration of the length of suspension.

[Providence]

Posted by manny (here)
brilliant.
but where did it go.
thats the question.

I'm sorry but I disagree, no offense to anyone, I think this just adds another layer of bureaucracy and it complicates things. And I also don't feel that there should be a separate 'room' for things such as this.

[Donna O]

The idea was just an idea and it wasn't developed. People have to agree that it is a good idea first and that was never really decided. I think it would be good to see everyone who is interested to comment and say what they think (also to state if they would be prepared to help)

[thunder24]

The parking lot is still a good idea too

peace

[Donna O]

Posted by Providence (here)

I'm sorry but I disagree, no offense to anyone, I think this just adds another layer of bureaucracy and it complicates things. And I also don't feel that there should be a separate 'room' for things such as this.

Good! We need both sides of the argument. The separate room is not private, just a designated area of the forum for doing the mediation

[Sierra]

Posted by Providence (here)
I'm sorry but I disagree, no offense to anyone, I think this just adds another layer of bureaucracy and it complicates things. And I also don't feel that there should be a separate 'room' for things such as this.

I'm exhausted just thinking about it Providence. We're stretched thin as it is.

[manny]

Posted by Sierra (here)
A bit disappointed in your lack of response to valid questions Manny. Also don't hear what you think we should have done differently. Or is it the fact that it was a moderator that was insulted make a difference to you?

Describe to me what YOU would have done as moderator if someone had insulted a fellow member in blatant disregard to forum rules.

And Manny sez: i could .
but why spoil the fun.

Fun. Oh. I see. Clarity arrives. Manny is not being serious. Manny is playing, with such vaunted care and concern about a subject that DOES concern others ...

Why ask questions then in response to his original post. He doesn't want an honest dialogue in my opinion.

Sierra

agreed this topic has gone on a few hours and may have gone off course.
no it was not a bit of fun...quite the opposite ,anyone who knows me knows that i will stand by what i believe.
but i am also open to many new pepectives.
as this was my origanal post.
so i say again who is to judge who is right and wrong on a alternative media forum.
who banned Lord Sid.
how many people stood behind that banning.
who represented him.
are we not in a court of ****ing law as paul said.
do you not see yourselfs as judges.

[Seikou-Kishi]

Posted by Providence (here)
I'm sorry but I disagree, no offense to anyone, I think this just adds another layer of bureaucracy and it complicates things. And I also don't feel that there should be a separate 'room' for things such as this.

From a moderator's point of view; it might be nice to increase beaurocracy. I'm reminded that governments create so many different agencies that it becomes impossible to correctly assign blame to any of them. The increased beaurocracy might take some of the blame from our shoulders. A welcome respite that would be, as our accusers were looking where to fire their blame next.