posted
Well, I posted it immediately after I noticed that she'd locked the thread -- precisely because it would have been a completely irrelevant issue had I waited until the thread fell off the first page, and because I knew she was reading the board at that time.
posted
Look, what happened was easily, easily, taken as an insult. Tom basically accused kacard of abusing her powers as a moderator for partisan reasons. It certainly constitutes a "legitimate reason to be angry with [him]."
Posts: 1894 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, I'm not standing here as the world's greatest authority on what stuff means. So, it may be that they were offensive to some people. I mean, I don't see it, but that doesn't matter because Kristine has already said that she misunderstood what Tom was saying and she understood Tom wasn't being offensive. So, the issue is resolved.
I recognize you are trying to be a peacemaker here, Kat, but Engrish being what it is, even the most intelligent, most wonderfullest people in the world can miscommunicate.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dag, do you really think discussion would have fallen apart if a mod had replaced a post with "Deleted due to inappropriate material. Guys, don't compare people to Stalin. Just don't."?
I mean, really? I've seen this sort of thing before, and it didn't derail anything significantly here.
I could see at most a few disgruntled mutterings, but I'm certain the discussion would have gone rumbling on, just without the spectre of Stalin. And this for such an action in an ongoing thread -- even moreso were the thread to have lain inactive for a few days.
[Mind you, I'm fine with one of the mods having deleted the item. I don't think it makes sense to have deleted it for the reason of avoiding derailment -- that would seem absolutely bizarre to me, but then so does college football -- but the act of deleting by the mod isn't something I'd challenge in itself.]
Posts: 2919 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Tom basically accused kacard of abusing her powers as a moderator for partisan reasons."
Specifically, what I did was point out that she, as a moderator, should avoid locking posts simply because she believes -- even correctly -- that they contain inaccurate information precisely because she wouldn't want anyone to think she was abusing her powers as a moderator for partisan reasons; locking posts based on perceived inaccuracy without appearing partisan would be almost impossible for a thinking person with a life in MeatSpace to do fairly, IMO.
I think some people leapt to the conclusion that I was accusing Kristine of having actively suppressed opposition to the Bush administration; clearly, that was OSC's assumption. And certainly some other posters on here did express worries of that nature. But as someone who's moderated a number of other forums in my day, my primary concern was that she seriously reconsider whether involving herself in political threads in her official capacity as a moderator would be a long-term positive.
posted
I know Storm, and that's why I kept my post as short as I did--I originally said a bit more. It's just sort of confusing me how some people are acting like Kristine's intial reaction to this thread was unjustified.
It basically was my contribution to the "Kristine is a great lady" portion of this thread, which fine qualities some people were saying weren't demonstrated here.
I was not attempting to take the thread back to square one.
Apologies if I overedited.
Posts: 1894 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Dag, do you really think discussion would have fallen apart if a mod had replaced a post with "Deleted due to inappropriate material. Guys, don't compare people to Stalin. Just don't."?
I mean, really? I've seen this sort of thing before, and it didn't derail anything significantly here.
I could see at most a few disgruntled mutterings, but I'm certain the discussion would have gone rumbling on, just without the spectre of Stalin. And this for such an action in an ongoing thread -- even moreso were the thread to have lain inactive for a few days.
[Mind you, I'm fine with one of the mods having deleted the item. I don't think it makes sense to have deleted it for the reason of avoiding derailment -- that would seem absolutely bizarre to me, but then so does college football -- but the act of deleting by the mod isn't something I'd challenge in itself.]
But that wouldn’t have been in-kind either, so it still wouldn’t satisfy Karl’s complaint. My whole point is that a single objectionable post in the midst of a larger discussion demands different action from the mods than an entire objectionable thread.
While it might be better to replace than delete, I think it’s unreasonable to take that different treatment as signs of bias. In fact, I think that if the mods deleted that post, it can be taken as a good sign that there isn’t bias.
posted
I suggest that we drop this. Picking at it isn't going to make it better. Tom and Kristine have resolved the miscommunication. If they're okay, I don't see a reason for anyone else not to be fine as well.
Tom said his piece. Kristine understands it and whether she agrees or disagrees, the point is that she is the moderator and will do what she thinks is best. And her track record is such that whether one agrees with this particular decision or not, we all owe her great thanks for keeping this place alive and useful/productive/positive for us all.
I never thought that Tom was being disrespectful or forgetting the debt that we all owe Kristine. But it's enough that she felt hurt by it, and OSC as well. But that's solved now.
Let it be.
Really... Sometimes you just have to let things go.
I know it's difficult. I'm in one of these situations now and it is very hard to just stop asking for more details and more post-mortem analysis.
But it's time to bury the corpse. Enough already.
We need to move on.
Tom, you are a wise and wonderful person. And I think Kristine likes you best. Drat it all!
Moderator's pet!
Kristine, you are without equal in the world of moderation. I tried to moderate a board once and finally just had to give up before I burst an artery!
The rest of us -- I think the posts demonstrate that we all care about this place enough to worry about it and the feelings of the people here. And the ideals (largely unspoken) that are reflected here. I'm proud to be a member of this group and my respect for you all grows daily.
Let us cease this too-close examination and focus on something else.
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Tom, this isn't an attack, but you didn't say anything of the sort. You asked, over and over again, for assurances that the mods would be impartial.
You may have thought you were implying you were simply giving her advice on how it looked to people, but it could just as easily--in fact, even more easily, be construed as you saying you really, really thought she was being partisan.
I'm not saying your intentions weren't noble, and that you weren't trying very hard to be polite and respectful. All I'm saying is that it really did come across disrespectfully and, in the inital post, at least, and one or two of the subsequent ones, as a little contemptous.
Again, not an attack. I'm not saying you were being contemptous. I think you've done a good job of clarifying what you were trying to do, and what your real intentions were.
I just don't think you realize how strong what you were saying came across. Your brief, one-or-two sentence posting style packs a wallop--I'm sure that's why you use it--but it also leaves a lot to the imagination. In this case, it was really, really easy to fill in those holes with intentions you didn't mean.
Posts: 1894 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:My whole point is that a single objectionable post in the midst of a larger discussion demands different action from the mods than an entire objectionable thread.
While it might be better to replace than delete, I think it’s unreasonable to take that different treatment as signs of bias.
Sure enough. I think we understand each other, even agree.
As long as we beat the Hokies, the season won't be a loss.
(did I do it right? )
Posts: 2919 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Would you meet me in a box? Would you meet me with a fox?
Not in a box. Not with a fox. Not in a house. Not with a mouse. I would not meet you here or there. I would not meet you anywhere. I would not meet celia and bill. I do not like them, Scott-I-R.
(i think i'm done now, )
Posts: 157 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
AJ, I have no idea what a Hokie is, even whether it is an abstract concept or something tangible I could sit on, or eat, or throw across a lake.
I'm coming to terms with the notion that despite all the internal hand-waving to the contrary, despite the investment of a substantial amount of creative energy in the stories I tell myself, I am just Not Cool.
I am from the species of the Not Cool, Homo uncoolious. I am best suited to the Arctic environment where there are few distractions, many frozen nose hairs, and no interpersonal interactions to interpret. Sad, but true. [/confession]
[ September 09, 2004, 12:28 PM: Message edited by: Sara Sasse ]
Posts: 2919 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
OMG! Someone actually ASKING me (or dkw) to TALK about the wedding!!! I thought you'd never ask!
Well...so far we have finalized the arrangements for:
- bride - groom - wedding party - officiants - church - music during the service - readings during the service - reception hall - wedding gown - tuxedoes - fabric & pattern for bridesmaids gowns - flowers for the wedding party & church - catering for the reception - wedding night - honeymoon airfare and lodging - music during the reception - style and wording of invitations - style of cake & decorations - style of table decorations at the reception
Things still being finalized, but nearly done: - cake (pretty much final, but purchase pending) - printing of invitations - purchase of elements of table decorations - seamstress to create the bridesmaids gowns - relocation of the groom - rehearsal dinner - gifts for the wedding party
I don't think there are any really big decisions left hanging out there. We're feeling pretty unstressed at the moment. Things might get frantic nearer the date. dkw and I both have trips scheduled 1-2 weeks before the wedding that we can't get out of. It could be very trying.
posted
CT, I have no idea what a Hokie is other than a Virginia Tech fan either <Grin> (And I know there are a few Va Tech fans on this board that will probably yell at me for that)
Considering the humble origins of the "Sooner" and that Oklahoma's mascot is technically the "Sooner Schooner" I'm sure it isn't much worse. "Sooner" derived from the people who snuck across the OK border illicitly before the Land Rush, and therefore got the best property because they were their "Sooner". So considering my team is named after a bunch of illegal hooligan claim jumpers I'm sure "Hokie" can't be much worse.
posted
Not Kat, nor Dave, nor Bob Scopatz Could tempt me off the beaten path. Not POD, not Ed, not NI nor Ced Would rise the thought up in my head. I like them all (that's MOSTLY true), And wish them good, through and through. But jump from cyber into meat? I'd rather hack off both my feet.
posted
I actually saw a duck 'phallus' a while back. Weirdest thing. Kind of like a white balloon hanging from the bird's nether regions.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm pretty sure Scott has met T_Smith and Pat and probably anyone else that lives close to him.
I think what he's really trying to say is that he's a lazy bastard who can't be troubled to mix with you common folk.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Your brief, one-or-two sentence posting style packs a wallop--I'm sure that's why you use it--but it also leaves a lot to the imagination. In this case, it was really, really easy to fill in those holes with intentions you didn't mean."
You know, you may be right.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dude...you're virtually a lawyer. I wouldn't go within a mile of you without about fifty lbs of garlic, a super soaker filled with holy water, and a stake-O-matic. And then only in broad daylight. That's just common sense.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm going to have to research cloacas when I get back out of sheer curiosity now. However I've realized exactly how delirious I am due to the randomness of my posts and how my brain is all over the place, so I'm going to go take a nap in my car for my lunch break.
At my cousin's wedding in Hawaii, we had a bonsai toast. Every one raised their glass of champagne and shouted "bonsai" three times as loud as they could. The louder the shout, the more luck for the couple.
The bride was half-Japanese, so that's where it came from, but it was just such a COOL event. At the end, everyone burst into applause. I vaguely would like to do something similar, but may have to change the word shouted. What could I have people shout instead?
quote:Dude...you're virtually a lawyer. I wouldn't go within a mile of you without about fifty lbs of garlic, a super soaker filled with holy water, and a stake-O-matic. And then only in broad daylight. That's just common sense.
And no one is better at circumventing common sense than lawyers.
posted
I told my brother he should have about ten turkey buzzards burst from the wedding cake when he cut it. While he thought it was a pretty good idea, the bride didn't think it was that great. Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
-- but the act of deleting by the mod isn't something I'd challenge in itself.]
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Kiss]](graemlins/kiss.gif)
)
![[Cry]](graemlins/cry.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
