I KNEW IT!!!

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Just a big party!

I'm listening...

 

[jagee]

I will also help keep INGO ebola free!

 

[mbills2223]

This man things he's better than you! I am the average man!

Phooey! I "heard" jagee himself earlier say that the little guys should hide in shame and embarrassment!

 

[mbills2223]

jagee is Shannon Watts

 

[jagee]

I'm listening...

The saddle of a true lawman...

 

[jagee]

jagee is Shannon Watts

Name calling. Reported to myself!

 

[mbills2223]

Name calling. Reported to myself!

I only speak the truth...Shannon.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Name calling. Reported to myself!

In fairness, during an election it's called spinning.

 

[jagee]

I only speak the truth...Shannon.

I love my guns, and yours...you can call home and ask my wife!

 

[mbills2223]

I love my guns, and yours...you can call home and ask my wife!

I could do so much with this...but I'm not gonna

 

[jagee]

I could do so much with this...but I'm not gonna

 

[JetGirl]

The argument/dustup/whatever we call it between Que and JG is their concern, IMHO. I'm good with leaving it exactly that: Their concern.

This ^ isn't exactly so, BoR.
If that's how it's perceived, then all of this thread and the end of the one that prompted it are pointless.

It's not a matter of he said/she said. Nothing private ever occurred (no PM, no email, no anything else). It was a legitimate open concern about the rules we are under and the neutrality (or non) of moderation in the discussions.

To point;
Does the moderating team condone moderators instigating in discussions they are taking part in while at the same time moderating, culminating in banning whoever they've personally goaded?

Does the moderating team condone moderators giving "free reign to say anything" while promising to "not ban anyone", only to do the opposite of what they've publicly stated?

Does the moderating team condone a mod instructing members to take actions which all other mods (who've spoken to date) have directed to the contrary? (I.E. one mod saying "no need to contact Fenway, start a poll" while all other mods say polls would not be tolerated and concerns should be taken up the chain to Fenway).

Respectfully, these few questions are what it is all about.... not some random "dust up".

 

[Bill of Rights]

Jetgirl,

Thank you for making your post respectfully. I've tried to earn, to "command, rather than demand" people's respect here.

I'll re-state what I said: It's not my place to condone or condemn Que's posts or actions. I'm not going to do so here. If I was going to do so, it would be in private, to him, and no one else on INGO or elsewhere would hear about it from me. Not you, not any other member, not any other mod.

It is not my place. It is Fenway's. You can ask him to review it, but again, I don't expect you'll get an answer, and if you do, I doubt it will satisfy you. That's not meant as an insult or personal comment; that is, I'm not saying "YOU" would not be satisfied... I'm saying that it would likely be something on the order of, "I'll take a look at the facts and evaluate them. Thanks for your message."

I know this comes off as a "non-answer". I also know that when you know I said I would not get into it, you wouldn't expect (or respect) me to go back on my word.
Comparatively speaking, that's of far less importance to me than the fact that *I* would not respect myself for doing so.

Blessings,
Bill

This ^ isn't exactly so, BoR.
If that's how it's perceived, then all of this thread and the end of the one that prompted it are pointless.

It's not a matter of he said/she said. Nothing private ever occurred (no PM, no email, no anything else). It was a legitimate open concern about the rules we are under and the neutrality (or non) of moderation in the discussions.

To point;
Does the moderating team condone moderators instigating in discussions they are taking part in while at the same time moderating, culminating in banning whoever they've personally goaded?

Does the moderating team condone moderators giving "free reign to say anything" while promising to "not ban anyone", only to do the opposite of what they've publicly stated?

Does the moderating team condone a mod instructing members to take actions which all other mods (who've spoken to date) have directed to the contrary? (I.E. one mod saying "no need to contact Fenway, start a poll" while all other mods say polls would not be tolerated and concerns should be taken up the chain to Fenway).

Respectfully, these few questions are what it is all about.... not some random "dust up".

 

[Rookie]

Backed into a corner and you still remain neutral. Also, answering a difficult post instead of ignoring it. That's why I have a lot of respect for BOR.

 

[Snapdragon]

Backed into a corner and you still remain neutral. Also, answering a difficult post instead of ignoring it. That's why I have a lot of respect for BOR.

 

[JetGirl]

"Backed into a corner" for asking if moderators operate within set rules or guidelines for their actions? Come on.

Seriously.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Whew!! Took the better part of my morning, but I'm finally caught up... *pant, pant, pant*

 

[DoggyDaddy]

And now I have to go cut the grass... please post slowly... I don't think I can do that again!

 

[JetGirl]

You know what? I've lurved Bill to pieces for years, and for anyone to think I was "backing him in a corner" vs just trying to find out if there are mod guidelines or rules they've set up for interaction... Just... Geez!

Maybe there are and maybe not, but we will never know, because asking = ambush?
So.Not.
Whatever

I think BoR knows me enough to grasp my intent even if nobody else reading this does.

Rules. No rules. Screw it. Nobody needs to know.
Need a reason to ban. Don't need a reason to ban. Screw it. Nobody needs to know.

Problems crop up in the future? Better not ask what caused it, how to fix it or the outcome for yourself.

 

[PaulF]

I'll answer your questions:

The standard in place for the moderator staff is "At the moderator's sole discretion".

So, no we don't need a "reason" to ban anyone. We can ban any user at any time for any reason, or no reason at all...it is ENTIRELY up to the moderator involved.

However, banning a user without reason is bad moderation, and bad juju all around. I also try not to moderate a thread that I have been involved in, as it is too easy for users to read more out of my actions than I actually put in. (I've already stepped on myself over that one, I do t want that to happen again).


JG: If there is more to this that you wish to discuss, please PM me. This does not belong on the open forum.