Development Issues

Cookie, haven't you repeatedly criticised me for "whining" about moderation on P.ie?

I think you're in danger of turning into Big Bobo.

evercloserunion wrote:

Cookie, haven't you repeatedly criticised me for "whining" about moderation on P.ie?

I think you're in danger of turning into Big Bobo.

You're just upset because he has you pegged.

Care to explain how he has me pegged, or are you just saying that because you know that if I took it seriously I'd be pissed off.

I don't think it's acceptable here to bring up issues that occur on p.ie.

cookiemonster wrote:

ibis wrote:

cookiemonster wrote:

ibis wrote:

cookiemonster wrote:

That, of course, makes perfect sense. The group you can support can be criticised with gay abandon, but you have no right to reply least your reply drag the thread off topic. Well that's fair enough.

It wouldn't be, but then it's not what I said. You had right of reply, and should have exercised that instead of bitching. At the very least you should have said what your gripe was, instead of complaining that the thread "wasn't Libertas-free".

Tripe. Had I replied Cactus Flower would be in like a light with the first paragraph all boldy ready to fuck me from a height.

Whereupon you would no doubt have ably defended your position until someone stepped in and called both of you off. On that subject, though, attacking CF isn't a particularly attractive habit. I have my own disagreements with her, and I appreciate she can be quite maddening, but I don't follow her around snarking at her.

I don't find her ability to ignore the glaringly obvious subjectivity of her moderation while futhering her own blatant anti-Ganley agenda a particularly attractive habit either.

When did she moderate you?

ibis wrote:

cookiemonster wrote:

ibis wrote:

cookiemonster wrote:

ibis wrote:

cookiemonster wrote:

That, of course, makes perfect sense. The group you can support can be criticised with gay abandon, but you have no right to reply least your reply drag the thread off topic. Well that's fair enough.

It wouldn't be, but then it's not what I said. You had right of reply, and should have exercised that instead of bitching. At the very least you should have said what your gripe was, instead of complaining that the thread "wasn't Libertas-free".

Tripe. Had I replied Cactus Flower would be in like a light with the first paragraph all boldy ready to fuck me from a height.

Whereupon you would no doubt have ably defended your position until someone stepped in and called both of you off. On that subject, though, attacking CF isn't a particularly attractive habit. I have my own disagreements with her, and I appreciate she can be quite maddening, but I don't follow her around snarking at her.

I don't find her ability to ignore the glaringly obvious subjectivity of her moderation while futhering her own blatant anti-Ganley agenda a particularly attractive habit either.

When did she moderate you?

Oh we have to get into this again, do we. It's not what she did moderate, it's what she didn't while engaging in a nice little "where did the funding come from" rant and ignoring issues which should have been addressed. Leaving me to have to go and complain to other moderators about them leaving them to take action.

cookiemonster wrote:

ibis wrote:

cookiemonster wrote:

I don't find her ability to ignore the glaringly obvious subjectivity of her moderation while futhering her own blatant anti-Ganley agenda a particularly attractive habit either.

When did she moderate you?

Oh we have to get into this again, do we. It's not what she did moderate, it's what she didn't while engaging in a nice little "where did the funding come from" rant and ignoring issues which should have been addressed. Leaving me to have to go and complain to other moderators about them leaving them to take action.

No - it was just that I think you took up a moderating edit I made as being CF - probably because I failed to delete the post, of course.

ibis wrote:

No - it was just that I think you took up a moderating edit I made as being CF - probably because I failed to delete the post, of course.

Now I have no idea what you are talking about.

cookiemonster wrote:

ibis wrote:

No - it was just that I think you took up a moderating edit I made as being CF - probably because I failed to delete the post, of course.

Now I have no idea what you are talking about.

I'm not convinced I do either now.

Regardless, if you are alluding to your own presumption that I took some of the moderator comments in the Lisbon discussion thread as being from Cactus Flower, you are incorrect. I did not presume such. I am refering to an entirely different incident some time back in one of the Anticoalition threads.

cookiemonster wrote:

Regardless, if you are alluding to your own presumption that I took some of the moderator comments in the Lisbon discussion thread as being from Cactus Flower, you are incorrect. I did not presume such. I am refering to an entirely different incident some time back in one of the Anticoalition threads.

I am indeed alluding to my incorrect presumption. Ah well - anyway, CF is a moderator here, and she may well not moderate things you think should be moderated. In general, the intention is that moderation should only apply to excessively off-topic content or potential defamation. If you're referring to things you feel are slighting of Libertas, it's up to you to challenge them.

ibis wrote:

cookiemonster wrote:

Regardless, if you are alluding to your own presumption that I took some of the moderator comments in the Lisbon discussion thread as being from Cactus Flower, you are incorrect. I did not presume such. I am refering to an entirely different incident some time back in one of the Anticoalition threads.

I am indeed alluding to my incorrect presumption. Ah well - anyway, CF is a moderator here, and she may well not moderate things you think should be moderated. In general, the intention is that moderation should only apply to excessively off-topic content or potential defamation. If you're referring to things you feel are slighting of Libertas, it's up to you to challenge them.

They were, i recall, potentially defamatory. Not that it matters now, raising such issues here is akin to pissing into the wind.

OK guys... we've had three pages of this now. I have been watching the thread for moderation purposes and there are some things which are abundantly clear. First, the pair of you do not get along, clearly, and none of us expect you to kiss and make up. However, we cannot have this thread continue on ad infinitum. Second, there has been a clear breakdown of communication and/or moderation from the content team. For that, I apologise to cookiemonster and to any other posters who feel aggrieved.

As I said, this thread cannot continue forever and the time is now ripe to bring it to a head. I am going to ask the pair of you to bury it. Cookiemonster, on a personal note, I have said again and again that I appreciate your contributions on this website. I have recognised your grievances, done what I can to address them and have apologised on behalf of the content team for them as well as personally for any oversight on my behalf. However, this must be brought to an end. You are welcome, in fact more than welcome, to continue debate on Lisbon or contribue to any other thread on this website and I would encourage you to do so. We will discuss the moderation of the thread you had a problem with and the necessary changes, if any, will be made.

Let's put this matter to rest.

johnfás wrote:

OK guys... we've had three pages of this now. I have been watching the thread for moderation purposes and there are some things which are abundantly clear. First, the pair of you do not get along, clearly, and none of us expect you to kiss and make up. However, we cannot have this thread continue on ad infinitum. Second, there has been a clear breakdown of communication and/or moderation from the content team. For that, I apologise to cookiemonster and to any other posters who feel aggrieved.

As I said, this thread cannot continue forever and the time is now ripe to bring it to a head. I am going to ask the pair of you to bury it. Cookiemonster, on a personal note, I have said again and again that I appreciate your contributions on this website. I have recognised your grievances, done what I can to address them and have apologised on behalf of the content team for them as well as personally for any oversight on my behalf. However, this must be brought to an end. You are welcome, in fact more than welcome, to continue debate on Lisbon or contribue to any other thread on this website and I would encourage you to do so. We will discuss the moderation of the thread you had a problem with and the necessary changes, if any, will be made.

Let's put this matter to rest.

Thanks, Johnfas. However, Ibis put it more succinctly, "You can move on, or you can move off".

I don't mean to butt in folks.

It might be an idea to hide this type of thread from the general readership, to avoid needlessly embarrassing those involved.

OK. It's been a weird night Hermes - a downright weird night for more than just these fellas.

Maybe sometimes it's good to get it out. Do ye want to continue the discussion in a private room lads ?

Auditor #9 wrote:

OK. It's been a weird night Hermes - a downright weird night for more than just these fellas.

Maybe sometimes it's good to get it out. Do ye want to continue the discussion in a private room lads ?

Why?

Auditor #9 wrote:

OK. It's been a weird night Hermes - a downright weird night for more than just these fellas.

Maybe sometimes it's good to get it out. Do ye want to continue the discussion in a private room lads ?

I'm sure I speak for both of us when I say "eww". Seriously though, I'm pretty much done here - Cookie hates me, which I knew. I'm occasionally less than perfect, which people may not have known, but should.

May I propose that moderation of Lisbon stuff be 'double-locked'? In other words, no action be taken without the agreement of another mod, ideally a balancing one...

toxic avenger wrote:

May I propose that moderation of Lisbon stuff be 'double-locked'? In other words, no action be taken without the agreement of another mod, ideally a balancing one...

Moderation is usually done by consensus across the board. Occasionally people are trigger-happy. Occasionally that's me...

ibis wrote:

Seriously though, I'm pretty much done here - Cookie hates me, which I knew.

Hate is a very strong word, I won't be sending you a christmas Poinsettia for sure, but "hate you"? Far from it.

ibis wrote:

toxic avenger wrote:

May I propose that moderation of Lisbon stuff be 'double-locked'? In other words, no action be taken without the agreement of another mod, ideally a balancing one...

Moderation is usually done by consensus across the board. Occasionally people are trigger-happy. Occasionally that's me...

Well, as a relative 'newbie', I'll leave it to wiser counsel than myself...

Could be time to lock this one. Any objections to that ?

cookiemonster wrote:

ibis wrote:

Seriously though, I'm pretty much done here - Cookie hates me, which I knew.

Hate is a very strong word, I won't be sending you a christmas Poinsettia for sure, but "hate you"? Far from it.

Ah well - that's something to cherish, so. Apart from not getting the poinsettia, obviously, which is a damn shame.

Auditor #9 wrote:

Could be time to lock this one. Any objections to that ?

Indeed, or hide it which is another worrying trait of this here board and was also suggested.