Requesting clarification of the rules - from a mod, ideally.

[Numanoid]

I think the roles of users and mods shouldn't be mangled together, rather it should be a bit like inmates and wardens in a prison

Wardens should keep control and order from a distance

bluedad has done a worthwhile job, but appears many times in thread discussions like a regular user, but with the power to delete posts if he sees the need to do that.

As such it becomes a bit like Animal Farm, in that some users are more equal than others.

I think it is best either to be a user or a mod.

[Daags]

@bludedad

have a good one, and stay safe!

[thecontrolcentre]

Call me a bad mod.

You're a bad mod ...



I always saw you as more of a Rocker.

[trimph1]

After a 250 mile day on a motorcycle in the hot southern heat ...

I'm so jealous ...

I bet you are..hope you're recovering well.
I'm off in a bit to look at a 2001 Vulcan Nomad 1500.
Must be mad, I've already got two bikes in the garage..
Sort of like synths, I've got 13 of them lying around too...did someone mention GAS?

We ended up with another project car...1969 GTX...GAS we can has!!!

[Kriminal]

I think the roles of users and mods shouldn't be mangled together, rather it should be a bit like inmates and wardens in a prison

Wardens should keep control and order from a distance

bluedad has done a worthwhile job, but appears many times in thread discussions like a regular user, but with the power to delete posts if he sees the need to do that.

As such it becomes a bit like Animal Farm, in that some users are more equal than others.

I think it is best either to be a user or a mod.

Mods are only needed for the odd time spammers turn up and ppl get rowdy, as they have the power to edit/delete posts/fix problems. If they were full time mods, they would have to be paid.

I dont see any probs with current mods. I dont have a prob with them being mods and users.

[Hink]

and also claimed to have warned him privately. So, you warned him for a post you scarcely saw ? ...ummm ... :-/

anyway,
enjoy the ride!

tbh, I only warned him this morning.
As for editing and doing as you suggest, well, for my frame of mind, that's too much work.
Call me a bad mod.
Thanks, now I'm really off on the ride, and I need my keychain so I'll be taking them back.

Gary, you have a life, you deserve a life and tbh I dont blame yah one bit. You're damned if you do and you're damned if you dont so you might just as well take the middle road which is the one that takes you where you want to go. You lived your life, you've raised your kids and unless they're grandkids why on earth would you want to baby sit anymore? Ride safe my friend, keep the shiny side up and all that stuff

[aciddose]

The real issue with the definition of "abusive" is that it isn't a synonym for "offensive" or "aggressive" or similar.

In fact I'd argue that the post in question was with the utmost respect, pointing out a fact observed by the poster and intended not to offend for the sake of creating offense, but to give the reader a knock on the head that might hopefully wake them up to those facts.

The subjectivity of all such things needs to be considered, one must be mindful.

From the mod's perspective... Have you ever seen the movie Chinatown, Daags?

As little as possible...

[Daags]

The real issue with the definition of "abusive" is that it isn't a synonym for "offensive" or "aggressive" or similar.

In fact I'd argue that the post in question was with the utmost respect, pointing out a fact observed by the poster and intended not to offend for the sake of creating offense, but to give the reader a knock on the head that might hopefully wake them up to those facts.

The subjectivity of all such things needs to be considered, one must be mindful.

From the mod's perspective... Have you ever seen the movie Chinatown, Daags?

As little as possible...

As far as your idea of what the 'real issue' is.. it would be worth noting if the rule was simply: "don't be abusive" ... but it's not.

The rule is (and I've highlighted some other keywords for your benefit):

Members should post in a way that is respectful of other users. Flaming or abusing users in any way will not be tolerated and will result in your post being edited / deleted, and you may be issued with a warning and / or a ban.

Your argument about the poster not posting for the sake of being offensive etc, is pretty much moot - in no small part because this thread is about seeking clarification on how the mods are applying this rule. In short: is a post like the one I highlighted ok and can we all speak in this way anytime we feel like 'knocking someone on the head' (as you put it) ? The clarification was provided, by the mod, the answer is a very clear 'no'

case closed. seems pretty straight forward to me.

[aciddose]

So you want to play a game of semantics?

I'll just stick to the words you've set in bold type.

• Respectful: mindful of that which you are dealing with, in this case of the persons you speak to and the environment (the forum) in which you are speaking and thus the consequences of your actions.
• Flaming: to pour "gas on the fire", intentionally intensify things.
• Abusing users in any way (ftfy): to act out for the purpose of abuse or assault upon another user.

Case closed? The case was closed long before you think you opened it.

I'd repeat the exact words you quoted in the post you were offended by. I'm glad the post has already been made as I do not need to repeat it.

With regard to respectful, can you define the way in which you think that his post was disrespectful? Inconsiderate?

Also take into account that the rule isn't a list of rules, it's a single rule. It must be interpreted as a whole and not broken down into component parts.

With regard to flaming, you might be able to argue that his choice of words "threw flames on the fire" in an attempt to heat things up and I would not disagree. Can you argue however that he wasn't making a point? Can you argue his sole or even primary intention was to worsen the situation? I couldn't listen to you even attempt to make such an argument with a straight face. I'd have a hard time not to end up bursting out laughing.

Regarding abuse, can you argue that his primary intent was to insult or attack you? Again, I'd laugh at you if you were to try as I think it is quite clear he had a valid point.

Your objection is at best solely to his use of language in my opinion. I think a warning "you might want to consider toning down your language a bit, making your post less offensive and putting things in a somewhat more gentle way." is the ideal solution to this.

I think you should have considered making the same statement in response. For example if you do acknowledge what he was saying, that would demonstrate your maturity goes a little further than his and you'd have a better chance of motivating him to change the way he speaks in the future.

As things are I'm sorry but you haven't exactly demonstrated a whole lot of maturity...

[aciddose]

But I assume we all refrain from doing so (those of us who do actually refrain that is), in part because of simple decency, but perhaps in larger part because we believe it would result in our account being moderated.

I take issue with this sentiment.

Do you honestly believe most users behave simply due to fear of punishment?

This has been demonstrated false time and time again in various studies. Negative reinforcement is not an effective method of controlling behavior.

You can find heaps of modern books on parenting, courses and consultation on this topic.

The best way to change a person's behavior is to take advantage of their own natural motivations and reinforcements.

Those of us with empathy tend to avoid senselessly attacking others because we would prefer not to be attacked ourselves.

The only world in which people act purely out of fear is a frightening version of 1984 with extreme authoritarian control over a population of sociopaths.


I'm sure there are people out there who may very well hate my guts for talking to them like children and being a know-it-all when I in reality know very little about anything at all. Just try to be respectful and consider the fact that this is how I'd prefer others treat me.

[Daags]

So you want to play a game of semantics?

Nope.

But clearly you do, which was evident from the very first line of your very first post in this thread.

Have fun playing on your own.

Clarification was sought from a mod, clarification was given.

if you have any more 'issues' with the wording or application of the rules, take them up with a mod.

[aciddose]

It is obvious you're aware of how foolish you look and ideally I just wouldn't respond to your post.

I can't help but point out however that if you hadn't wished to make this a humiliating public experience for yourself, you might have considered taking this up with a mod yourself.

[bluedad]

Since the OP's question was answered, (a week ago, who bumped this?)
I'll just put this thread out of it's misery.