This is very confusing

Post Reply New Topic

I could of actually mentioned that in the PM to her... DOH!
And I automatically tend to reply to people without PM'ing them alot of the times, which I should do more often.

Also I like to get my point of view and my opinion across however i'm not really attacking anybody in any way but its just a recap on the reason why she was possibly de-modded.

I have not been bringing up other fora?

You have not devalued my opinion by your words and I won't contest this. Lau has and it seemed that he was trying to hang me twice over the same offence. Mind you when I did come back another mod started to harass me and it seemed that I had a "burn notice" on me. Is that the right term? I think it is. A mod OK to shoot me on sight. This is another example of what happens when there is poorly construed communications and/or rulings. It probably surprises you little to realise then that after a dustup with said mod, it was in turn Lau who put forth the view that I was "More trouble than I was worth and better to just ban". So yeah, thanks for the support Lau, very open-minded. You, M I do not view in this respect.

You may bring up WP being stymied to act of off forum behaviour. I say that kids NEED protecting whilst here and this place ought to, as a support forum, be supportive and safe. It is no good saying well it is inconsequential what happens off board. At the very least a "friendly PM" letting the poster concerned know that they at least know and hold a dim view of the poster's extra curricular activities and remind the poster what kind of board they are on and what purpose it stands for, ought be expected.

It would also stand to reason that such verified and verifiable knowledge ought to at the very least put up a red flag to mods concerning future behaviour.

Now repeating yet again. I styled myself in a role of a vigilante. I sought to draw a target on my back for TLPG and stick in his face as the leas I could do to protect other members as the Mods seemed ineffectual of doing anything. I knew the end result and it was a matter of time. I have no misgivings and am not apologising and nor saying that what I did was right nor that I ought not have been banned.

You may not like me bringing up these specific exmples but when talking about tings in generalities, sometimes drawing on specific and detailed references to why things failed or are important rather than delegate things into the inconsequential, irrelevant or unlikely, really helps. I have only my own history to draw on and it supports my reasoning. I do not use it to make myself appear a better person or condone my actions but to give reasons and point of real reference.

No, you have not been bringing them up in specific conversation; my comment was meant in an anticipatory fashion, that if there are elements you wish to discuss to do so in separate fashion and not attached to another forum as so to avoid any comparative conflict.

I've not encountered a "burn notice" for you or any other member on WP, even as I've read through the history. I can say that members who have been banned and are allowed to return are generally held to a high standard for behavior, with my own approach being that a "two-strike" policy is appropriate in those situations for a definite length of time after they have returned to the site. That's just my own approach, however, and not codified as part of any rules or instructions.

Kids do need protecting, and it is important that all members of WP - not just the moderators - work towards that goal. At the same time, the parents of these children also need to be involved. What happens elsewhere isn't inconsequential, but I still maintain that is cannot be used as the basis for action being taken against someone here. That opens up entirely too much opportunity for abuse. And in that situation, where is the line drawn between awareness, and an accusation of stalking the person who being abusive towards members here? For every benefit, there seems to be at least two significant issues that come up as a result. Awareness is the key thing, as seeing how someone acts when they think no one else (or no one who 'matters' as it were) is watching is often the best indicator of how they will act over the long term.

That you recognize your actions and take responsibility for them is encouraging, and admirable. Many individuals would take a defensive position in that situation, so I commend you for that. Acting a a vigilante, however... isn't something I can support. It compromises the ability of moderators being effective, and results in the person with the best intentions also taking the brunt of the consequences for their actions as well. I'm ok with specifics, providing that they do not provoke other members or attack them by proxy. The only way things change or improve is through a willingness to observe and examine, and the commitment to making the changes necessary to succeed.


M.