I can understand FIREWALL getting upset, as He points out people will glance over the post and what they read they will assume was written by that person/avatar, most would not look at the fine print, I don't usually, assuming that most of the lower print to be signature or "last post edited ..." etc.:hmmm:
Maybe a case of misunderstanding, but He still does have a point IMO.:yep:

full agreement here.

i didnt even see the fine print the first time i read that... i just thought it odd that firewall would say "Dude, a family died" in response to what seemed like a perfectly legitimate OP.:doh:

I would like to reopen this thread just for a bit to add some comments. Neither I nor the moderators feel it is our job to be the "taste police", but occasionally, we will step in if the example is pretty strong. Usually I rely on the rest of the members to dress someone down if they make a post in bad taste.

I can see where Firewall is coming from, he saw some different text in his post and freaked out. He didn't notice the tiny "edited by" tagline at the bottom. Lol, I can see that happening to me :dead:

As a rule, when I edit some comments in a post, I try to add the phrasing
EDIT: That was a bit out off line. --NS
in order to avoid confusion. I do not think I have covered that in the moderator's guidelines, which is where I am at fault. I will fix that.

We all have to keep in mind that Xabba is moderating the GT forum alone, sort of like Gary Cooper. I think he's doing a fine job. This is the place where we all like to express strong opinions,so the moderation is a little more common here.

Neal

I think Xabba is doing a great job. No doubt about that. In this one instance though, a minor error was made and not that big of a deal. My opinion, the error was that insted of changing the text, he should have deleted it and left "EDIT: That was a bit out off line. " as the only text in the post. It's one thing to moderate (I saw the original comment and it rightly should have been moderated) but quite another to change the content of someones' post.


EDIT: I'm sure he did not mean to "change the content of FW's post", he was adding his reason for editing it. But it was not obvious that those were the moderator's words, at first. -- NS

.

Bah, what about the gazillion times that I've been in the brig for saying something like "Oh, I disagree with torturing Iraqi kids".

Not quite those words you used I'm guessing.

Actually not that far from those words. I'm kind of expecting that even that message will be reported to Xabba and as a result of it will be yet another brig call for me. You see the moderating here works on the 'squaeler'-principle, you hit the little exclamation mark - button and give your reason. I guess I could 'squael' more as well but it's not really in my character.

Actually I think the moderation here is better than any forum I've ever been on. It's always fair and I've never seen anyone in the brig that didn't rightly deserve it. I think the only ones who have a problem with it are the ones that have been moderated, or put in the brig. If anything, they under-moderate to a certain degree, letting some people go too far.

Yes but it's still based on the squaeler system. Meaning that a post that violates the rules but isn't reported will go unnoticed. IMO that's not good moderating. Also the rules aren't enforced in a way that isn't open for favouritism. Also, not sure about this, a post that gets more then one 'squael' might be more likely to get a notice regardless of content of said message.

Xabba manages to act as consistent (and determined were needed) as Takeda did, but he keeps an even lower profile (were possible). He hardly ever violated the limits of his authority. We really shouldn't piss him so much that we finally lose him. He would be hard to be replaced in GT.

I would wish that Neal has not reopened this thread, because discussions on a given moderator's pros and cons and long debates about his motives do not help his job nor does it help in maintaining his authority. Debates like this are exactly what the forum rule fobidding to jump on mods in public were meant to prevent.

I think there should be as few rules as the situation allows, Neal. But the few rules one has - should be followed and/or enforced with consistency. ;)

The people involved are communicating via PM. They will work it out. We are not privy to that conversation, and so none of us has the full story. I agree with Skybird, lets let the people involved hash it out, file it away and move forward.

I second the request for the thread to be closed.

As of 0/17/09 8:05 ET, on this site, there are 72,543 threads, 1,064,735 posts, and roughly 36,777 people posting.

Do you really think a half dozen or so moderators can be on top of everything?

Neal is right. When someone steps out of line it is the responsibility of the members of this forum to put them straight (without crossing the line themselves). If that doesn't or won't work then the absolute best thing to do is report the post and let the moderators handle it.

I have always thought that a moderator is a lot like a janitor. Your job is to keep things neat and tidy and once in a while to take out the trash.

JCC

That's one theory. I don't see it that way, but you are entitled to your opinion. Not sure how you are measuring the number of posts reported that receive action vs. the number of posts reported that do not...

Agreed, I think Xabba is sincere and does a really good job.

I only opened the thread because I wanted to make that followup comment, about the editing script, and I always felt it was a little unfair for me to enter a closed thread, make a comment, and not allow anyone else to state their piece.


Ok, will do. :salute: