Is there a protocol for dealing with problem moderators?

Post Reply New Topic

So you complain about not seeing the full thing of why you got a warning and then you refuse to see it unless the moderators do something that goes against the rules...

You're being disingenuous. It was explained and highlighted in the warning PM you were sent.

That's a lie and a slander. Am I allowed to post the pm?

No.

Then don't insult me publicly when I'm not allowed to defend myself, you hypocritical jackass.

It was the truth. Whether you agree with what was explained and highlighted is an entirely different matter.

I'll choose to ignore your personal attack; another moderator may not choose to be so reasonable about a clear rule break.

I think everyone can see what is going on here.

Yes. I suggest you stop digging this particular hole now.

Well, I'm not a moderator - so I have no problem biting here.

Lets start off with your post in a thread titled "Does any1 think Aspie men struggle with women as much as... (people here assert they do)" to wit, your first response is "I never had a problem with girls."

Somewhat condescending, but fine.

Continuing:



Again, pretty condescending - but *jussst* on the right side of the line as to whether that's a personal attack or not.

Continuing:



I'm assuming that this is what you were warned about by hyperlexian. Apart from this being completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand, and therefore being nothing but a poorly-veiled attempt to boast about your conquests - it's also inherently provocative, which means trollish. That post could very well be a personal affront to a) lesbians (assuming you're a male, as anything else wouldn't fit with the topic of discussion - you asserting that your powers of attraction are so awe inspiring that *even* lesbians are powerless against your charm [*gag*]), and b) anyone who has a traditional view of love or marriage (you make a point of saying that this woman was "in love" - this is provocative by the same definition as before).



There, now I've explained it to you - even publicly. Congratulations.

Last edited by sliqua-jcooter on 03 Apr 2012, 6:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.

"behavior intended to provoke or belittle other members"

I'll have to remember this one for the Politics, Philosophy, and Religion section...

SLIQUA before you butt in

No No No No, you have not read it properly. He is only saying what ValentineWiggins said.
For Petes Sake, read the post again.

Is anybody going to read this properly, or is this outrageous mis quote gonna stay here???????


Read the thread carefully, of you dont get your mistake, I will take you through line by line

I still read it the same way I did before - he's calling the collective that posts in the L&D section "forum whiners". I interpret that as a rather direct personal attack.

No he isnt, he is referencing ValentinesWiggins post of two or three up. Read it again. Or do I have to go and get the whole thread?

Before you do a hatchet job on someone, give them the respect of reading the blasted post eh?

Oh, actual engagement, neat! Something the moderators are sadly afraid to do.

I don't want to derail the main point of this thread, which is that moderators should be more accountable, and I stand by my suggestion that official warnings should be allowed to be made public without seeking permission.

But I'll engage, because I think that's always the best way...

"I never had a problem with girls" - this is factual with no emotional overtones. If you feel condescended, that's something you've brought to the table.

"Wiggin's self-selecting forum whiners" - a reference to Valentine Wiggin talking about forum whiners. I added "self-selecting" to emphasise the statistical point.

Kissed by a complete stranger - someone had just written about this! So mine was slightly off-topic waffling, which I do when I see something I'm familiar with. I don't know if you've ever done this yourself?

Now, please pay attention to what I actually wrote next, because it's important and on-topic. The lesbian in love kissed me not because of anything to do with me, but because she was made strong by love and she could see that I needed to be kissed. I mean she was a lesbian ffs - I wasn't her type! I realised later that she was probably autistic. She didn't need to learn social skills. She already had everything she needed, she just needed to feel safe enough to express it. That's a very important point, maybe the most important point of all points. Perhaps that's why it's scary?