|
|
Post by dav on May 25, 2015 12:22:19 GMT
Thomas has always struck me as an MJ fan. There's nothing wrong with that, even if you're in a moderator position, but not stating your bias, and acting on it, is definitely wrong. Being impartial, in a debate as heated, as the one that divides Spidey fans, between Gwen and MJ, is very complicated, that's why I created two isolated boards for them. The idea was to keep fans apart, to avoid fighting. It was also clear to me, that group leaders shouldn't be moderators. Unfortunately, I'm still tasked with the duty of overseeing the MJ board, because I still haven't found anyone willing to take on the mantle of group leader, there. As for Mets, We are in complete agreement. It's like with my Clone thread. The only warning I gave people is that if they didn't follow the rules that I established, I would Put them on "ignore" They could still post if they wanted to, but I wouldn't engage them. And yet because I didn't cave to Mets' will, and engage the trolls on the thread that I started, he closed it! As I said, I hope he continues to become increasing more tyrannical to the point where people abandon the CBR forum, or enough complaints come in where Mets and whomever the admin guy was that backed him, suffer some consequences. It's not likely, but it would be nice! I noticed that about the Gwen and MJ boards, when I wasn't able to post on an MJ thread. Very smart idea on your part! Very diplomatic solution! |
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on May 25, 2015 18:54:50 GMT
Opening a Gwen thread in the CBR forum has its perils, I remember there was a particularly annoying individual, who constantly tried to have the last say in mine; at first, I tried to ignore him, but at some point I had to address some of his points. In the end, he overstepped his boundaries, and got banned.
Having separate boards for Gwen and MJ isn't a perfect solution, but the trick has worked so far (fingers crossed).
|
|
|
|
Post by dav on May 26, 2015 0:20:53 GMT
Opening a Gwen thread in the CBR forum has its perils, I remember there was a particularly annoying individual, who constantly tried to have the last say in mine; at first, I tried to ignore him, but at some point I had to address some of his points. In the end, he overstepped his boundaries, and got banned. Having separate boards for Gwen and MJ isn't a perfect solution, but the trick has worked so far (fingers crossed). You mean Mets actually banned an Anti-Gwen member? This guy must have been a REAL douche! |
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on May 26, 2015 8:36:28 GMT
That he did, I don't know if it was because of a post in my Gwen thread, or somewhere else. I just know that Thomas deleted one of my replies. He argued that a banned member, couldn't defend his point of view. The implications aren't trivial: - A banned member retains some rights, even though he was exiled from the community.
- A law abiding citizen doesn't get to have the right to reply, to the banned member's last post.
- A banned member gets to have the last word on any topic, as long as the post isn't the one that got him expelled
|
|
|
|
Post by dav on May 26, 2015 22:45:07 GMT
That he did, I don't know if it was because of a post in my Gwen thread, or somewhere else. I just know that Thomas deleted one of my replies. He argued that a banned member, couldn't defend his point of view. The implications aren't trivial: - A banned member retains some rights, even though he was exiled from the community.
- A law abiding citizen doesn't get to have the right to reply, to the banned member's last post.
- A banned member gets to have the last word on any topic, as long as the post isn't the one that got him expelled
Its interesting how willy-nilly Mets can be with rules! Being so fairhanded in one case and abuse his authority in others! |
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on May 27, 2015 7:23:42 GMT
Many times, I wonder if there's just one set of rules.
|
|
|
|
Post by dav on May 27, 2015 22:42:35 GMT
Many times, I wonder if there's just one set of rules. There may just be one set of rules, but it's the mods who who think they have prerogative to enforce them selectively!  |
|
