Lena said:
You keep seeing things in my posts that are just not there. First, you accused me of attacking posters, yet didn't respond when I asked you to elaborate.
I was content to drop the subject, but we'll pick it up again.
Your comments to Martha...
Lena said:
Is this what you are referring to? Interesting.
How are you going to get people to sign up? And if you do get people to sign up, what happens when they gain it back again? More deductions? More free stuff?
Martha, you are very respected on this board, your intelligence was mentioned by a few posters, and I've only been here two minutes, but how realistic are you ideas?
... strike me as a lot of critical questions about her proposal without any constructive alternatives or proposals of your own. IMO asking someone you hardly know "how realistic" their ideas are is an implication that you think their ideas aren't very realistic. It might even be construed as bordering on inflammatory.
Lena said:
Now you are suggestiing that I "all over the moderators". How, exactly?
Lena said:
I would think that we are all big girls and boys around here and if the topic gets exhausted, the thread would just die on it's own.
I guess I was wrong.
You & SG agreed with each other that the board is "over-moderated" despite, as we moderators pointed out, numerous "Report to moderator" alerts from other users. I think you're too quick to be critical of the moderators and of the other posters, especially if you're still "new here". If you're new here then perhaps it's better to sit back and watch for a while before jumping in and subsequently criticizing the results.
Lena said:
Is it absolutly forbidden around here to question ideas and actions?
I'll take that as rhetorical but I still feel it's provocative. Plenty of new members join in here with no problems. Based on the numbers, if you're having a problem with me then I suspect that the cause of the problem is not necessarily me.
You're new here so I won't be quick to judge, but I'll point out that the types of questions you're asking have, in the past with other posters, been associated with trolling behavior. Because of that I'm not going to discuss these particular questions again on the board. If you don't think we're done yet then you're welcome to continue the discussion with me via PM or e-mail.
sgeeeee said:
And some didn't. I find a lot of the threads objectionable. When I do I choose either to engage in the discussion or ignore it. I don't need a librarian burning books and I don't need a volunteer moderator deciding what is objectionable to me. Your value judgement. I thought I got some clever comments in there. I guess I have different values than you. Maybe that shouldn't be allowed.
Hey, months ago when this place was turning into a Yahoo! clone I found a lot of the threads to be objectionable too. When the opportunity was offered to everyone, including you IIRC, I volunteered to be a moderator.
You may not need a flame-throwing librarian either but some of the posters feel it's necessary. We're going with the feedback we get, and if you choose not to participate and to not provide feedback then you get just as much out of it as you put into it. If you don't need moderation then... well... maybe you don't need this board either. Tough call. You bring up good points in your posts and you make a contribution here. I'd hate to see you more antagonistic or even leaving over a confusion between civil liberties & discussion boards.
The comments are/were clever. However our non sequiturs are pretty much the same value in all the threads, and this one had been clearly announced as a problem that didn't need more of that type of "contribution".
As for the values, well, I think Gene Hackman said it best in "Crimson Tide": "We're here to defend democracy, not to practice it!"
sgeeeee said:
Dory's board. Love it or leave it!!!
You got it.
sgeeeee said:
If you think the work is too hard, do less of it. That's all I'm suggesting. Stop trying to control the content and flow of the board and let it run it's own course.
The work's not hard-- it's the unappreciative criticism that I find unreasonable. I'm generally happy to be a moderator because I think it gives me an opportunity to support the board and to help keep it the kind of place I like to participate in. I get a lot of good information here, I can get a good answer to just about any question, and I feel that I've developed several close friendships. I'm not gonna let someone mess with that in the name of greater liberty for all. We can get all the liberties we want at M*, TMF, Yahoo!, and Usenet.
But, hey, you're welcome to appeal your user's agreement to Dory. I'm just a moderator!
sgeeeee said:
A major point that the book makes is that it is very difficult to change the policies and practices of those in power.
Sure, especially if you choose to ignore what you object to or to not participate.
sgeeeee said:
It points out that those in power (the book refers to them as bullies) would have no power without supporters (the book refers to them as lackeys). But the world has far more supporters than independent thinkers. There are always lots of people willing to jump to the defence of the bullies because that is a quicker and more certain path to recognition than opposing those in power. In fact, opposing power often leads to being ostracized.
So, for example, if someone says to the bully, "I don't like it when you hit us over the head with a club," there will always be a number of lackeys who quickly point out that they don't mind being hit over the head. It doesn't hurt that much and they probably deserve it. Notice that their statement does nothing to negate the original claim that someone doesn't like it. The statement of the lackey is designed only to endear themselves to the bullies.
Somehow when you set up the strawman like that and hurl hand grenades at it, the system seems so wrong!
But when you call it "majority rules", then IMO it becomes a "representational democracy".
SG, I spent the last half hour putting this together to make sure you understand where I'm coming from. I'm doing that because I respect your input and your choices, even if I think at least one of them is no basis for criticizing the moderation.
But if my choice is to see someone of your status & quality regrettably driven away by your feelings over that moderation, or to watch the whole board go downhill because someone like you objected to the moderation, then I'll favor the board over you every time...