Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Chi_Cygni · 02-15-2005, 01:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by seebs

The Reagan thing was far enough back that it would have been back before the automated messages were all working, I believe, and some mods do tend to give meaningless messages.

This is an interesting case, because the handling of the Reagan thing was incredibly bad; a bunch of staff spontaneously decided that some standard of "respect" for Reagan must be shown. Since then, I've reported a few posts (such as some real charmers involving Arafat), only to be told that there's no such policy.

To be fair, I don't think that policy would now be enforced for conservatives either, but I do think it's abundantly clear that this was a question of emotional responses, not considered policy.

Aha, someone else does remember. I also think you are right about the automated messgae thing not being in effect.

crazyfingers · 02-15-2005, 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chi_Cygni

Jeez I don't remember all te details it was months ago. I just remember the fact that my post was censored for no other reason than it went against the NC&E Mods political views.

I don't have PM's set to flashing in CF so I don't see the PM's right away.

Question:

Are you telling me you doubt the N&CE Mods in CF would censor based upon viewpoint and not content?

My experience is that in a case like that, your post could be ruled as "trolling" which they define as posting anything that "disrupts the peace and harmony of this forum." Note that the post need not actually create any disharmony in the forum to be ruled as trolling. It appears that anything that, in the opinion of the mod, could potentially disrupt the peace and harmony of the forum can be labeled as trolling.

crazyfingers · 02-15-2005, 01:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by seebs

The Reagan thing was far enough back that it would have been back before the automated messages were all working, I believe, and some mods do tend to give meaningless messages.

This is an interesting case, because the handling of the Reagan thing was incredibly bad; a bunch of staff spontaneously decided that some standard of "respect" for Reagan must be shown. Since then, I've reported a few posts (such as some real charmers involving Arafat), only to be told that there's no such policy.

To be fair, I don't think that policy would now be enforced for conservatives either, but I do think it's abundantly clear that this was a question of emotional responses, not considered policy.

I would agree with this. It appears that there are times when "must show respect for X famous person" rule is turned on and off. Note that the X person is not a user of CF. Examples: Reagan, Bush, etc... Does not apply to either Clinton.

seebs · 02-15-2005, 02:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crazyfingers

I would agree with this. It appears that there are times when "must show respect for X famous person" rule is turned on and off. Note that the X person is not a user of CF. Examples: Reagan, Bush, etc... Does not apply to either Clinton.

I have asked and been told that it is not now a rule. I think what happened was that, when it got brought up in Forum Questions, Erwin said "don't be silly, we can't enforce that", and it stopped being a rule.

PHYS251 · 02-15-2005, 02:27 PM

crazyfingers, you're IIDB's equivalent of Erwin, right?

seebs · 02-15-2005, 02:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PHYS251

crazyfingers, you're IIDB's equivalent of Erwin, right?

No. There's no equivalent of Erwin. IIDB is run on behalf of a Board of Directors, who are probably actually less active than Erwin is, but fill his role as the source of Actual Policy.

Day-to-day decisions are made by the admins (e.g., crazyfingers).

crazyfingers · 02-15-2005, 04:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PHYS251

crazyfingers, you're IIDB's equivalent of Erwin, right?

No. As Seebs mentioned, the IIDB is ultimately run by a Board of Directors. I think 5 people at this time. They provide direction on what they want IIDB to be as it relates to the goals of the Secular Web/Internet Infidels.

The Admins report to the Board. There are currently 9 day-to-day Admins. (Note most of the BoD members are also listed as Admins so that they can have access to the Admin forum where they advise the Admins on high level policy.)

Anyway, both groups operate by consensus and majority rules. No one person makes overall decisions. All significant decisions are by vote in accordance with our understanding of the goals of the board.

apenman · 02-15-2005, 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rz777

Chi_Cygni,

I think we are all tired of you bringing up OLD issues that you do not even remember the facts.

Give it a rest, please.

Hello lurker! Are you from CF?? If so, what's your user name there??

crazyfingers · 02-15-2005, 05:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by seebs

I have asked and been told that it is not now a rule. I think what happened was that, when it got brought up in Forum Questions, Erwin said "don't be silly, we can't enforce that", and it stopped being a rule.

Any idea when that change was made? I wonder if they will revoke warnings for what is now seen as silly, unenforceable rule.

chrysalis · 02-15-2005, 06:39 PM

Hello,

It seems that many of you have much more experience with the wacky weird ways of CF moderation and perhaps you can explain this to me because CF will not.

Recently I had a post deleted and got a message from the mod that it had been deleted. She stated that I shouldn't addressed a poster in a post as that is a rule violation and that I needed to read the list rules.

Ok fine, I read and read and reread the list rules and for the love of dog I can't see what was inappropriate in my post. There is a quote function so that you can reply to a post!!! I was replying to a post that had quoted my post!!

I wrote the mod back (there was a comment included in her message that I could appeal at given link or pm her if I had any queries.

I had queries for sure. I wrote and told her that I didn't understand what I did wrong. I explained how thing unfolded in the thread, bla, bla, bla, and asked her to tell me where she sees a violation.

Never heard back from her.
So I wrote her again and asked the same again because I can't for the life of me see what was wrong.
Never heard back from her.
Wrote back again and told her that if she realized that she deleted my post in error that it was OK but please let me know some type of explanation. How can I know what I did wrong if I don’t know!!

Well... that got a response of sorts. She wrote me said she doesn't have to explain anything to me.
WTF? Is this the standard operating procedure around there? As much as hate to say this but at this point I think the fact that I don’t have a crucifix in my icon coupled with the fact that I have a donkey rather than an elephant is the reason this happened.
Am I right? That place is really starting to give me the creeps. What do I do now? What happens when you get x amount of deleted posts? When do get warnings vs having your posts deleted?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

02-15-2005, 02:27 PM	#905
PHYS251 Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Georgia Posts: 610	crazyfingers, you're IIDB's equivalent of Erwin, right?

02-15-2005, 06:39 PM	#910
chrysalis Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: ghetto in Texas Posts: 3,657	Hello, It seems that many of you have much more experience with the wacky weird ways of CF moderation and perhaps you can explain this to me because CF will not. Recently I had a post deleted and got a message from the mod that it had been deleted. She stated that I shouldn't addressed a poster in a post as that is a rule violation and that I needed to read the list rules. Ok fine, I read and read and reread the list rules and for the love of dog I can't see what was inappropriate in my post. There is a quote function so that you can reply to a post!!! I was replying to a post that had quoted my post!! I wrote the mod back (there was a comment included in her message that I could appeal at given link or pm her if I had any queries. I had queries for sure. I wrote and told her that I didn't understand what I did wrong. I explained how thing unfolded in the thread, bla, bla, bla, and asked her to tell me where she sees a violation. Never heard back from her. So I wrote her again and asked the same again because I can't for the life of me see what was wrong. Never heard back from her. Wrote back again and told her that if she realized that she deleted my post in error that it was OK but please let me know some type of explanation. How can I know what I did wrong if I don’t know!! Well... that got a response of sorts. She wrote me said she doesn't have to explain anything to me. WTF? Is this the standard operating procedure around there? As much as hate to say this but at this point I think the fact that I don’t have a crucifix in my icon coupled with the fact that I have a donkey rather than an elephant is the reason this happened. Am I right? That place is really starting to give me the creeps. What do I do now? What happens when you get x amount of deleted posts? When do get warnings vs having your posts deleted?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.