wildernesse

What about participating in a debate (even a heated one) would compromise a moderator? Is it because they can't behave themselves and don't want their bad behavior to be connected with their moderating of other people's bad behavior, because I don't know, that would be hypocrisy?


The problem is that sock puppets are false fronts and they provide an avenue for known people to behave in a way that they don't have to take responsibility for. Why would a moderator need a false front if not that they can't behave themselves and it would look bad for people who are bad about breaking the rules to also enforce the rules?

--tibac

Badfish

That's a good question. I don't know. I mean you are who you are, why not just post using your 1 and only username so that your views can be attributed to the uniqueness of yourself.

I think originally it was thought that a mod couldn't argue heatedly and at the same time uphold the rules.

Also one must consider the mindset of a Christian, and the fact that they are human yet will display the same level of heat as anyone else, and maybe that is a bad reflection on the staff, especially a Christian staff.

Actually I'm not sure, I think I'll throw my sock puppet away. hehe

Stormy

It makes the other posters feel really stupid after they figure it out.

I actually liked Badfish much better when he was GTX.

Why was I like the last to know??

Badfish

When that forum was created atheists and apologetics was not a part of it, so when all people were allowed there, it caused some worry among the staff, I am pretty sure that there would be no reason now to use an alternate name.

I used to cruise around as GTX, because I could be free from my ties with the staff, little did I know that everyone knew it was me, until I was called on it.

So I was guilty of using a sock puppet, but I can say that I never used it to leverage Badfishs' debate or to misrepresent anything, I even used my picture in GTX's profile, an older picture, but still.

I am thinking that they are a cause of concern and I do not think I will allow it on my board, neither members or staff.

Yeah, I got this little forum I created, if you want to come and join, please do, it's a tiny board now, but has some easy going topics. And everyone is welcome. (Except sock puppets). heehee

The Hangout

I know I already posted a link, in the other thread, but since that thread was removed no more linkie.

I am not trying to create a conglomerate, but my wife is running it and it's fun for the teenagers, or will be hopefully, it's going to have an anime forum and some other forums.

Since I am posting a link to my site, I will put a link to IIDB in my signature at my site.

Arikay

I agree. Someone shouldnt need to hide behind a mask. It really doesnt seem christian to me to pretend you are someone else when in a debate. But then, what do I know about christianity.

Ive used the name of Ari on the iNet for so long, I consider it my own name.

lunachick

If moderators do not have the integrity to both engage in lively debate AND abide by the rules, then they are not fit to be Moderators. Simple, really. It shows that their character just can't cut it - walk the walk, as it were - and their actions should be, as wildernesse has said, as transparent as any other members with regard to interaction on the public boards.

Besides, does having a sockpuppet that everyone knows help you any? No, it just makes you look more of a cowardly fool.

And those who post under sockpuppets and are able to remain unknown by their original or moderator name are not worthy of respect. Not my respect anyway.

How do they expect to preach what's "right" and "good" and "honest" if they cannot even be true to those within their own groups? It makes me wonder what else they do behind their smoke and mirrors. Masks are for hiding behind - nothing more. They smack of hypocrisy and deceit. Why do they need to hide, unless they are playing some rather silly and disingenuous game?

WWJD?

mfaber

Well, it looks like a pattern is developing. The mods' MO (modus operandi) is simply to assign as many warning points as it takes to have a member challenging their right-wing fundamentalist views "silenced":

• One mod can assign the "fatal" number.
• Or they can simply gang up on someone that they want to be rid of (more likely since it is less obvious what they are up to if they agree amongst themselves to "tag team" the targeted "heathen" in advance)

I mean does anyone really believe that Havoc really "deserved" 3 warnings over one post, all which were so conveniently assigned in the "magic" half-hour! The mods must really think people are too stupid to wise up to their little "plausible deniability game plan" (they can always "blame" the poster by claiming the poster deserved banning/suspending because they broke the rules). Since the mods don't seem to be held accountable for their actions, it is a situation ripe for abuse (records of why warning points are assigned seem to mysteriously vanish, requests for explanations are just ignored, etc.)

The "beauty" of the plan is this. They can censor people any time they wish to ensure that only views that they approve of hold sway AND at the same time can maintain the fiction that CF is has an "open" forum.

Unfortunately for them is that their MO and agenda are quite obvious.

Badfish

Why? GTX was free spirited and had no need to uphold the constant image of Fundamentalism, I could have fun and not compromise my staff name.

On one hand I knew that Badfish was a fundie that needed to portray an image of Fundamentalism (I am a fundie, yes), but I am also human and wanted to have fun without being tied to Badfish.

I feel bad about that, it does seem wrong, but at the time I was only a member at several Mopar and Home Theater Forums and didn't need a sock puppet. When I became a staff member at a Christian site, everything changed, I went from being a regular Christian to being a one track minded fundie (not because of the forum, because of me). I spent countless and I mean a huge amount of time, months, days and hours, stayed up till the wee hours helping to create rules and having meetings there only to be considered unworthy because I was a human and not a pawn, yea, I did some stupid things that I feel bad about, but I feel that I was treated as a lower class Christian for acting in a human type of way.

I am going to have to realize I am not the mouthpiece for God and not on staff anymore, just recently I have vowed to myself to back off of people and not to cram my views down their throat.

Sorry for that, I hope I expressed my view so it can be understood, and I am in no way bashing any forums, just trying to provide an abstract view of what it's like to be a Christian and how even a God loving person like me is far from perfect and also the ones who stand in judgement against me for minor offenses to the Christian faith, when they are no better than I.

We are all human, we are not emotionless robots.

seebs

The weird thing is, I've gotten ONE warning in my whole time there, and the mod relented when I said I hadn't meant my post the way it was interpreted.

In that time, I've argued that I don't think the Bible condemns homosexuality, that literalism is a really bad thing, and whatever else. I argue all SORTS of things that offend people at great length, but apparently, Erwin sticks up for me - possibly because of my apologetics efforts. I don't know.

Badfish

See? I didn't see it as a mask, only a means to be myself without the baggage. GTX was not even known to the staff, it was a way for me to be me, without compromising my elite staff name, I wasn't just a Mod, I was a Senior Admin only answerable to a couple of people, and some of the things I wanted to say, probably would have been looked upon as unbefitting of a Christian representative.