MrMark wrote:
Alright, let's back up a little bit here. Pandora, who has posted less than twice a day on average, came across an old topic that no one had responded to and decided to write a response. You immediately had a problem with that and jumped in there with name-calling, (a bannable offense when it occurs repeatedly).
BS. You don't tend into that forum.
This has been a semi-regular occurrence
recently. She has been pulling up large
numbers of threads, with an admitted
purpose of silencing discussions.
Quote:
Things esclated from there, a "form of thread drowning."
Not in the least. The thread drowning was happening prior
to my first post tonight. AND, this isn't the first night that
this has happened. There are a LOT of such posts.
Quote:
Now I've been looking around and I've been seeing where you consistantly have a problem with Pandora and her posts. I'm not seeing where she's trying to silence anybody. I do get the feeling that you wish she would STFU.
No to both of these. I enjoy debating with her.
I like to discuss issues. I don't like to see them
buried. THAT is all that I've objected to.
Quote:
So as your personal "fight," I don't feel it's appropriate for you to try to change this site to better suit you.
Not just me. All the members. I don't
want people chased from here, just for
expressing ideas. I don't want ideas to
silenced either by moderators, nor by
members.
Quote:
It is a take or leave it deal.
THIS is the attitude that you keep expressing.
And if the site were run this way, it would drive
a lot of people into leaving. I'm thankful that
Alex doesn't see it that way. He tries to provide
something useful, as opposed to demanding the
'respect' which you continually crave.
Quote:
The approach that you take is very close to "who thinks so-n-so should be banned." It's rabble rousing, an attempt at mob rule.
It is simply following Alex's suggestion that
the membership patrol itself. I see NO reasonable
alternative. I would have brought one up, earlier
when I was a part of the staff, if I had. I really don't
think that what she's doing is ban-worthy. It clearly
follows that a warning would be pointless (unless intended
to inflame members who don't respect authority, as you
put your purpose before). Given that, I can only follow
the idea of self policing. I think you'll see that the users
of that section will mostly agree. I think that if similar
tactics were used on any other section (except maybe
fun and games), the members would be outraged as
well.
Quote:
I feel this is a good point for me to mention something. Members do not have the right to do anything on this site. Only the owner has the right to do anything on this site. Members have the privilege to post, reply to posts, and read in the exclusive areas.
Your semantics are ridiculous. Read right as privilege
if you must then. Because you could use the same argument
towards Alex using his own site. He has the privilege to pay
for and allow people to post here. Don't be so silly. I know
how committed you are to authoritarianism here, but was
hoping that you had learned something.
Quote:
They have the right to do so without suffering harrassment or personal attack.
I made few, if any, personal attacks,
and only in response to TCO's own, much
harsher ones, on me. As to harassment,
the entirety of membership using that forum
was subjected to it - exactly as though it were
an atomika style attack. I am simply trying to
make that clear.
Quote:
Priveleges can be revoked for repeted violation of the rights of members.
And mods continue to make veiled threats.
28 Jul 2007, 11:43 pm
