I had a post removed the other day and all it contained was an answer to a geographical question and a smiley comment on someone else's humorous answer.
I just assumed one of the STW clique wanted to win
I've just checked back on that. Your post was removed because you called another user a naughty word. Hope that assuages your paranoia.
My "you should know better" was partly deserved, I[s] implied[/s] explicitly stated that the owner of superstar was one for using his mouth around gentleman's rude parts.
Having now read the other threads related to this one I am pleased to see that they were all about some genuine old school stw humour, ten years ago every post on here was like them!
I'd just like to point out that while Drac and Cougar clearly do have opinions, and do sometimes contribute to robust debate, I've never noticed them abusing their positions as moderators. I wonder whether some people think they are when they aren't simply because they're "getting away with" their posting style - missing the point that some others on here also get away with similar posting style (I suspect I'm one) because we know where the line not to be crossed is. The trick is understanding the difference between genuine banter and "it's only banter".
Thank you.
In all seriousness, I won't hold it against anyone who uses the Report-Post button on my posts if I cross any lines myself inadvertently. I'd welcome a second pair of eyes sometimes TBH (and for what it's worth, I have banned myself before now...!)
I came to STW from another sports forum. It was unmoderated but remarkable sedate in comparison - too tiring trainging for three sports! Much less vitriole and posse hunting. So STW was a shock at first even though it is apparently "moderate" in relation to other MBK forums etc.
Tudor watches aside, I think this is well moderated. Bloody thankless task and hard to know where to draw the line between mild piss-taking and rudeness/unpleasaness.
But done well here IMO and where inconsistent that is normally funny eg, my recent Kleenex reference was removed while DD and A_A's more open references to mastrubation (Rugby thread) survived. That's quite amusing and the result arguably more appropriate!
Coug's recent reference to little brown people did raise an eyebrow though 😉
Whilst Cougar isn't always politically correct I like the way he enters debate with as much enthusiasm as before becoming a moderator. Special behaviour seems to expected of mods (as this threa dshows) and some behave special, but Cougar is still Cougar. He's also unlikely to ban you for making pertinent observations to i-fanboi, Audi driving, San... .
*awaits ban*
And don't forgot there are some moderators that don't have 'moderator' in their title...
(-:
I've said this before, but any perceived inconsistency is down to the facts that a) we don't always see everything and so rely on reported posts to catch what we miss, and b) different moderators may make differing judgement calls. That is to say, it's very common for issues to be grey rather than black or white (and some people are so very very good at pushing the edges).
We might not always get it right, but we try to.
And don't forgot there are some moderators that don't have 'moderator' in their title...
They are amongst you... walking around like regular people... watching... waiting...
Not sure we have special behaviour we have to play by the same rules as anyone on here. Only special part is we have to play by the rules as it'll soon get pointed out if we don't. We don't always make right decisions. We also don't see every post as its impossible so that's why some posts appear that we've ignored them and allowed rules to be broken.
Only special part is we have to play by the rules as it'll soon get pointed out if we don't.
There does seem to be two schools of thought on this. I've seen comments along the lines of "we can't say anything because you're a moderator" - there's similar examples on this very thread - and the other side of the coin where a couple of folk seem to have to consistently leap on everything I say. But y'know, whatevs.
I'm the moderator for Drac & Cougar, as I wear long trousers...
I think the mods do a good job, one I like and am indebted to one is meh and does come across as quite belligerent.
And don't forgot there are some moderators that don't have 'moderator' in their title...
Speaking which, why do some users have tags attached such as "troll" "lazarus" etc?
Is this the mods bullying online?
Is this the mods bullying online?
Not us, we don't have the privs to change those. Which is probably a good thing on the whole, it's not a set of keys I could be trusted with. (-:
People have been banned by being argumentative, belligerent, and....pithy, without being particularly offensive. A couple of the moderators consistently behave in the same way but get away with it. I'm not sure you can realistically split your posts into 'just another user', and 'moderator' when it says moderator under your name. Result is that it looks like you are abusing the position, not that it really matters of course......
And don't forgot there are some moderators that don't have 'moderator' in their title...
[img] 
[/img]
So its the heed bummers that are doing it.
Question still stand to them tho
I don't feel bullied, I'm still here. I wasn't sure if I should be flattered or insulted when it appeared, as it made me laugh I decided to be flattered. Either way it saves hunting for a suitable smiley to put after posts.
Question still stand to them tho
I suspect the answer will be "because it's funny."
People have been banned by being argumentative, belligerent, and....pithy, without being particularly offensive.
Assuming you mean the people I think you mean, it was before my tenure so I can't really comment on that. I would expect though that people are more likely to earn a life ban for being persistently disruptive and derailing every thread they touch rather than merely enjoying a lively debate. Certainly, that's the yardstick I'd use.
Bear in mind also that sometimes there's more going on that you don't see. Some have sent in very offensive emails which have contributed to their being no longer welcome, for example.
Some of the moderation e-mails sent out were less than diplomatic. Recent ones have been civil.
This is the only forum I frequent.
If you didn't know Drac & Cougar were mods, I don't think you could tell.
Which is nice.
Drac has a very dry sense of humour, which still confounds me on occasion.
I know I do too, which really annoys some folk - all sorted by friendly emails, hopefully.
Not sure what it takes to get banned on here, I've never even had a formal warning.
Anyway, thanks mods, whoever you all are.
I'm the moderator for Drac & Cougar, as I wear long trousers...
Shit Dad's here.
People have been banned by being argumentative, belligerent, and....pithy, without being particularly offensive. A couple of the moderators consistently behave in the same way but get away with it.
There's far more to it to that.
So who is non-shit dad then?
[quote=angeldust ]People have been banned by being argumentative, belligerent, and....pithy, without being particularly offensive. A couple of the moderators consistently behave in the same way but get away with it.
Well personally I'd suggest that it's incorrect to ban such people - one I'm aware of it seems that the ban was because other people reacted to the belligerence by being offensive and it was easier to ban him than those actually causing the problem - [s]mods[/s] mob rules.
Hence I'd not be very comfortable with mods getting banned for doing similar.
being argumentative, belligerent and pithy is fine then? Great, carry on then.
Edit.....above was a reply to drac, not aracer.
Note, I'm not interested in anyone getting banned
Have always thought that stw was moderated petty well. I know of a few people being banned for what on the face of it seem fairly innocuous posts but have actually turned out to be abusive gobshites via other media.
The liberal way in which stw tends to be moderated is to its benefit. I used to frequent lfgss quite a bit which certainly was totally in moderated. Could get a bit bitchy at times which spoilt the threads. Loads of 'in' jokes that were just abusive posts really. And then there's some of the other MTB forums, some of which are moderated to within an inch of their lives with moderators getting very carried away.
being argumentative, belligerent and pithy is fine then? Great, carry on then.
Edit.....above was a reply to drac, not aracer.
Nope it's not as well you know.
If that's the case (and this was my point), perhaps the mods should set an example and practice what they preach. If I look back at Cougars last 20 posts ( not going to in practice btw) I reckon I would describe a large proportion of them as being argumentative, belligerent and pithy, and not following 'stw expected behaviour' (for want of a better description), but that's okay because he is a mod? Just an observation...Perhaps it's just the particular threads I tend to open......
I think it depends what you describe as "argumentative, belligerent and pithy" and what the mods deem to be unacceptable. The thing is, a certain amount of that done in the right spirit is one of the things that makes this place great - it is when it is done in a negative way it is a problem (TBH I'm not sure Drac's post saying "it's not fine" is the most helpful, because clearly a lot of it is fine - I'm assuming there is a bit of background to this, but as we're not supposed to discuss specific moderation decisions...).
I suspect there isn't a total meeting of the minds on this one - I don't believe I've ever seen a post from Cougar or Drac which falls on the wrong side of the line and which wouldn't be fine according to any of the other mods irrespective of their status. As I mentioned before there's a difference between genuine banter and "it's only banter". Maybe it would be instructive if you could actually go through Cougar's recent posts and find one which you think is unacceptable - if you really think a large proportion of them are, then it shouldn't be too hard to find one.
That certainly would prove my point aracer, but frankly I'm not that arsed, and not that sad! None of Cougars posts have ever been directed at me..... like I say, this is just my general opinion of what I see of his output i.e. It is not very moderate for a moderator.
Note...there is no 'background' to this, or a specific issue..this is just the observations of someone who has been on here for ~15 years, and is noticing a general trend.
Which proves Cougars point form the previous page (and mine) that moderators are either expected to behave in a special way or behave in a special way. Cougar hasn't changed, which IMO is to his credit. He's still as helpful as ever on IT questions and still as opinionated as ever when driving Gods start spouting nonsense.
[quote=angeldust ]this is just my general opinion of what I see of his output i.e. It is not very moderate for a moderator.
Ah, well opinions clearly vary on how moderate moderators should be. Personally I reckon if there was a clash between the two (not that I believe there is) he should keep posting the way he does and give up being a mod. To throw back a comment he made recently, Cougar and Drac are some of the good guys.
edit: or what edu wrote
My opinion is that if they don't behave moderately (and imo some are not) they are abusing their position. I acknowledge that you disagree (educator).
Have to agree with that chain of thought....if he wants to carry on being as opinionated (and sometimes aggressive) with his views, he probably should give up being a mod. There have been a couple of posts recently along the same lines, so I'm not the only person with this view.
I think it depends what you describe as "argumentative, belligerent and pithy" and what the mods deem to be unacceptable. The thing is, a certain amount of that done in the right spirit is one of the things that makes this place great - it is when it is done in a negative way it is a problem (TBH I'm not sure Drac's post saying "it's not fine" is the most helpful, because clearly a lot of it is fine - I'm assuming there is a bit of background to this, but as we're not supposed to discuss specific moderation decisions..
And that is the problem. Trying to judge between a long winded discussion and utterly pointless petty arguing. Those who were banned for arguing took it to a level I could never reach, have the time to or even be arsed to do.
As I said we don't always get it right but we never ban for the sake of it. You've either had many warnings, broken a massive Cardinal Sin or a returning banned who refused to change their ways.
Have to agree with that chain of thought....if he wants to carry on being as opinionated (and sometimes aggressive) with his views, he probably should give up being a mod. There have been a couple of posts recently along the same lines, so I'm not the only person with this view.
Have to agree with that chain of thought....if he wants to carry on being as opinionated (and sometimes aggressive) with his views, he probably should give up being a mod. There have been a couple of posts recently along the same lines, so I'm not the only person with this view.
Again can you provide evidence to this and why was it not reported? Your the first person I'm aware of to express such views.
[quote=angeldust ]My opinion is that if they don't behave moderately (and imo some are not) they are abusing their position. I acknowledge that you disagree (educator).
So you are suggesting that mods shouldn't be allowed to post in the way that is acceptable for other people? I'm not sure I follow that train of thought - ISTM it is possible for the active mods on here to separate their two identities.
I should point out that I don't agree that he should give up being a mod because he is opinionated (in case that wasn't clear), simply that he is more important as a contributor IMHO (though I don't really know how much he does as a mod).
edit: though one potential abuse of power just occurred to me - presumably the mods can edit their posts for longer than 15 minutes after making them - I know I'd make use of that if I could 😉
Yes, I'm suggesting mods should have to be moderate if they want that 'job'. There is a big difference between generating discussion, and being deliberately antagonistic/aggressive.
Sorry, I just don't care about it enough to spend any time to dredge up 'evidence'. If that means you don't accept my opinion, so be it.
Also, don't you think there is going to be some reluctance to reporting a moderator? Potential for conflict of interest is huge. for that reason, I probably wouldn't bother.
[quote=angeldust ]Also, don't you think there is going to be some reluctance to reporting a moderator? Potential for conflict of interest is huge. for that reason, I probably wouldn't bother.
Really? You would have to assume they were corrupt for that to be an issue. Personally I wouldn't hesitate to report a mod - though personally I very, very rarely report for conventional reasons (I can only think of one occasion in the last year or so, involving direct personal abuse, the sort of thing I've never seen any of those mentioned even approach - hence why we're still asking for examples of what you're referring to).
For the record, I don't think I've ever reported anyone in ~15 years, which should give you an idea of how seriously I take this place. I'm not suggested a coup or anything! Just particularly don't like seeing people abuse their position.
Yet you can't give us an example.
This is most odd.
Anyhoo.. Regarding your point that mods should moderate themselves over and above that of other users.. Thanks for that input. I've considered it. And I don't agree. So it won't be happening. Shall we move on now?
Yet you can't give us an example.
It's not that I can't, I just won't. Because I can't be arsed. It's really not worth the time.
This is most odd.
You think? I disagree.
Anyhoo.. Regarding your point that mods should moderate themselves over and above that of other users.. Thanks for that input. I've considered it. And I don't agree. So it won't be happening. Shall we move on now?
Any reason why we should have to move on? I'm enjoying the discussion. I have no expectations of anything changing, just expressing my opinion.
Any reason why we should have to move on? I'm enjoying the discussion. I have no expectations of anything changing, just expressing my opinion.
🙄
Well, you sure are testing the tolerance towards argumentative, belligerent and pithy.
I'm finding your approach tedious and provocative. Have you always been like this, even with your earlier usernames?