MMMMMM Advocates Violence Against Americans

[MMMMMM]

[ QUOTE ]
You or Mat has made this mess MMMMMM even if your actions were right. It does not funtion well that you state politial opinions and operates as the mod in the same thread.

[/ QUOTE ]

I can see where one might worry about a potential conflict, but I am doing my best to ensure that my moderation duties do not cross over into my political views (or vice versa). Thus far I have not noticed any difficulty in completely segregating the two endeavors. It really isn't that hard to read posts to see if they violate minimum civility, or the Terms and Conditions of the User Agreement. That really has nothing to do with one's political views one way or the other.

[ QUOTE ]
You should discuss with Mat that he or someone else mods the threads in which you participate.

[/ QUOTE ]

2+2, as far as I know, does not have any such special implementations. It is my guess however that the mod function is an evolving effort of 2+2's part. Actually I don't wish to make my mod duties any more complicated than they already are.

[ QUOTE ]
Your defence of Adios in the other thread was very unsuitable action with the mod hat on, in my opinion. He had a hidden message against many posters that was just as dirty as Jokerwild's post. With your politics hat on it would be ok.

[/ QUOTE ]

You consider adios' hidden message (if even there was one) to be *just as dirty* as jokerswild's post??? Are you serious? Sorry but it is hard for me to believe you can even write that with a straight face.

[Myrtle]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi Myrtle,

I see your point regarding recusement. Here are the reasons I don't feel I really should have needed to do that in this instance.

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe that the operant principal behind the act of recusement is to prevent ANY hint of impropriety whatseover. No offense intended, but how you feel should have nothing to do with this decision.

[ QUOTE ]
I did not let the fact that he directed the remarks at me influence my decision in the slightest. I can honestly say that my decision would have been the same had he directed the remarks at any other poster. So, why should I have recused myself, except to unduly worry about shallow impressions? The posters who have been here for years pretty much know what is going on. .

[/ QUOTE ]

Your comment about ‘shallow impressions’ is subjective and can be read into a number of different ways. I feel that your ‘pretty much know what is going on comment’ is dangerous and smacks of double-speak and double-think.


[ QUOTE ]
At any rate, let's suppose I had deferred the decision to any of the most civil, long-term and respected posters on the board. Say Andy Fox, John Cole, sam h., HDPM and adios. Do you really suppose their decisions regarding the banning of jokerswild would have been much different? (I would doubt it but of course I can't speak for them).

[/ QUOTE ]

You are correct in the fact that you cannot ‘speak for them’. However, even though you may hold their opinions in high regard (as I also do), it is not appropriate, in this case, for you to draw anyone else into this exchange in an attempt to lend credibility to your own actions or point of view.

[ QUOTE ]
If I were to put it to a vote on the forum, I don't think the views of those who frequently name-call and engage in other childish and destructive behaviors on the forum should even count towards a vote on such a banning. I wouldn't really mind putting it up for a vote, except that many of the voters should be disqualified because they engage in the same forbidden practices (albeit to a lesser extent, of course). It's not like everyone on the forum has nearly the same level of maturity as yourself, you know. Many of them seem to view partisanship at any cost almost as being their raison d'etre on this board, and don't hesitate to act churlishly or worse whenever the impulse may strike them or when they feel their views are being challenged.

[/ QUOTE ]

I thank you for the compliment on my maturity level, but would also be the first to offer that I can get down and throw dirt with the best of ‘em, too. The KEY point to this thought is that in your above statement you are making subjective and arbitrary judgments based upon your, and yours’ alone, value system. What would a vote in this case prove? Even if we could accurately and clearly boil this issue down to only two salient, but different points of view that we could choose from, the chance of any consensus is slight.

[ QUOTE ]
While I try to be lenient and to exercise my best judgment, posters can be banned at the moderator's discretion. Especially after they receive a direct warning and then promptly go ahead and do the exact same thing again.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that anyone in a position such as yours must have a firm grasp of the subjectivity of different perspectives that can be reasonably (and sometimes even unreasonably!) held by others.

The sensitivity to this concept must be at the top of the list. If it is not, regardless of the reality of the various positions, there will always be room open to the cry of 'the deck is stacked'.

In the end, those who have contributed to this thread will form an opinion and carry it forward.

For those who believe that you have not walked the line as finely as required, there will be lingering doubt, and that is a situation that could have been avoided had you more closely considered your alternatives.........

[MMMMMM]

[ QUOTE ]
6M - I don't really care who you ban (other than me I suppose, but even then...). But in the interest of fairness (which I do care about), didn't you promise several times to post a sticky with the exact rules?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes and it is still under development (it's not as simple as it might seem at first glance).

[ QUOTE ]
And didn't you say that the slate would be wiped clean at that moment, and that punishments would commence at that moment?

[/ QUOTE ]

That was the general impression I wished to convey--but that shouldn't be taken to mean that absolutely ANYTHING up until then is acceptable or without potentially serious repercussions.

[ QUOTE ]
I know you gave that guy warnings, and it seems like he either misrepresented you or offended you in some way, or both. But many people here have been misrepresented. Hell, half the time BGC types out a sentence he's misrepresenting or maligning all the liberals on this forum!

[/ QUOTE ]

I gave him a very specific warning and he violated it in multiple ways, and egregiously so. There is also quite a difference between mildly "offending" a group of people in some vague way, and outright lying about someone in a specific and defamatory manner.

[ QUOTE ]
My point is I think you should post the sticky with well-defined rules, clear the slate INCLUDING reinstating this joker guy, and then let the banning begin (when truly necessary).

[/ QUOTE ]

That was my general intention, until he so grossly stepped over the line after being seriously warned. I already have posted that all users are to adhere to the Terms and Conditions--which are already posted on the website. When I get the Sticky finished it will include portions of the T of C as well as certain other guidelines. In the meantime nobody should think that they have carte blanche to post or say anything at all regardless of how defamatory or otherwise in violation of the T of C it might be.

[PhatTBoll]

[ QUOTE ]
Truthful statements (and statements of opinion) are not defamatory.

[/ QUOTE ]
Surely a good lawyer such as yourself realizes that there are indeed instances where entirely truthful statements are defamatory.

[Mat Sklansky]

I'd like to say a couple things. My personal political views are quite radical. If I was king, we'd all be walking around as naked hippies. I'm serious. The first time I encountered a post by M, a couple years ago, his sentiment made me ill. The details are irrelevant.

What is relevant, is that I have never seen another poster so consistently take the high ground in terms of having a respectful tone, than M. I've never seen him resort to namecalling or cheap insults.

I don't know of anyone else, willing to take this responsibility, who would be more fair.

As far as Joker is concerned, consider him banned by me.

Mat

[Myrtle]

[ QUOTE ]
I'd like to say a couple things. My personal political views are quite radical. If I was king, we'd all be walking around as naked hippies. I'm serious. The first time I encountered a post by M, a couple years ago, his sentiment made me ill. The details are irrelevant.

What is relevant, is that I have never seen another poster so consistently take the high ground in terms of having a respectful tone, than M. I've never seen him resort to namecalling or cheap insults.

I don't know of anyone else, willing to take this responsibility, who would be more fair.

As far as Joker is concerned, consider him banned by me.

Mat

[/ QUOTE ]

Matt,

Appreciate your sentiments and my politics, such as they are, are probably very close to yours.

Unlike you, I have never read a post by M that has made me ill......maybe I just missed all of his good ones... [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

However, with all respect, although taking the high-ground in terms of having a respectful tone is a nice thing, it is not a core part of the issue that this string is exploring.

Willingness to take on the responsibility of a modereator is to be applauded (and I do), but in and by itself, it in no way constitutes 'how fair' an individual is.

[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
What is relevant, is that I have never seen another poster so consistently take the high ground in terms of having a respectful tone, than M. I've never seen him resort to namecalling or cheap insults.

I don't know of anyone else, willing to take this responsibility, who would be more fair.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is it fair to say that, while we might all agree MMMMMM is extremely polite, quite chummy, and one helluva guy, that when the standards of behavior are 'don't maliciously misrepresent' and 'don't insult' - that even the best of us couldn't moderate fairly when the paradigm is so subjective?

I, for one, am not here to put MMMMMM on trial; I've stated numerous times I think he's quite civil, articulate, and (except in the case of joker) has been more than fair - I just dislike the standards he (and I suppose 2+2, if 2+2 supports such standards) has created.

[Mat Sklansky]

I may be missing something, but if the issue is that M abused his power by banning Joker, I'm totally Ok with that decision. When I look at his posts, he seems like an ordinary troll. If there's more to this, I did indeed miss something.

[MMMMMM]

[ QUOTE ]

I believe that the operant principal behind the act of recusement is to prevent ANY hint of impropriety whatseover.

[/ QUOTE ]

My take is that being concerned about *any hint* of impropriety is too high a bar in this instance. I don't think anyone's trying to get elected or approved for a judgeship or anything like that; and moderators are given considerable latitude to exercise their best judgment. I don't think recusement is fully appropriate or necessary here. I'm sorry but we'll just have to disagree on this point.

[ QUOTE ]
I feel that your ‘pretty much know what is going on comment’ is dangerous and smacks of double-speak and double-think.

[/ QUOTE ]

No double-speak intended: all I mean is that the Other Topics (now Politics) posters who have been here for many years are very familiar with jokerswild's insults, name-calling, twisting of words, defamatory accusations, and so forth. By saying "they know what's going on" I mean this is old hat to them. Par for the course. Perfectly in character for jokerswild. It's happened more times than one could count. Ask any of the veteran posters whom I named about jokerswild (or about lol!, or about Ray Springfield (if they go back that far)) and see what they say about those usernames, if you care to.

I offered jokerswild a chance at a fresh slate along with a warning and an assurance. He promptly violated both and the T of C *and* the warning as well, and in very unmistakable fashion. As far as I'm concerned this shows he didn't want another chance; and now he's gone.

Also as I've stated before, if some posters think I am being too harsh in this, well, so be it. I'm not running for public office here. I'm doing the best and fairest job I can of trying to get the forum into some semblance of civility and that includes issuing a few warnings and one banning (jokerswild, who, by the way, I am nearly certain has been PERMA-BANNED before as username "lol!"--but who I believe managed to sneak in under a new user name).

In short I acted objectively on this and I'm not overly concerned that a few posters may think I didn't. I explained my reasoning and believe it's solid. Jokerswild posted false and defamatory statements aboout a user which is clearly forbidden in the T of C. Moreover he combined it with bad name-calling and worst of all he did this right after a very specific warning.

I'm sorry to say it but ensitivity to perceptions of impropriety goes only so far in my book. If that were all we ever cared about we'd never get anywhere in life or in discussion or in debate. At some point a line has to be drawn regardless of the opinions of some. And I think an objective examination will clearly show that jokerswild crossed that line (as he has innumerable times in the past).

I appreciate your input, Myrtle, but I just don't see it in as "politically correct" a sense as you seem to. Sometimes you just have to say screw perception and do what's right. That's my view and I think most who actually analyze the situation will concur that jokerswild eminently deserved banning. As for those that don't, well, you can't please all of the people all of the time. Sorry about that.

[Arnfinn Madsen]

There is not many who have asked for his resignation as mod in this thread or in any other threads, Mat. Most of us are just giving input on how to mod. The politics forum is probably the most difficult to mod as tensions sometimes rises high and the border between freedom of speech (which you probably legally could ignore due to the nature of 2+2-website) and unproper targeting at other posters is blurry.

I respect him as poster, but personally feel that he has been a tad biased and just want him to pay attention to this, since if he becomes more biased, in the end all the lefties will go elsewhere and this forum will be practically dead.