Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion
Two classes of membership here?
vrgrrl:
I don't know...yours sounds pretty reasonable to me! Well, written, etc.
Paul Keith:
That's what the lapdogs are for: nice senior cop, bad sub-cops: the work is done, and that's what counts.
-clean (November 17, 2012, 01:07 PM)
--- End quote ---
Actually... not. I actually totally agree with a lot of the bad sub-cops and think that certain things should be regulated. In every case (not just a few that come to light because of dissenters), Mouser chimes in on the side of let it slide, no matter what happens. That's why everyone jumped in on mouser's side- no matter if you agree or disagree on his policies, etc., he won't censor nor jump in, except in the case of spam, and won't even really defend, other than the most passive of ways. People that lead by example like that, and don't take offense tend to garner support as they don't cross the line even to defend themselves.
Sorry if your experience has made you assume otherwise, but he's very much always been the voice of reason. I've found myself on the other side of some of his opinions, and found myself less for that- mostly because in the end, reason used well is more than a match for any sort of righteous indignation.
-wraith808 (November 17, 2012, 02:39 PM)
--- End quote ---
Can't blame him. It's common in the internet and if he felt passionate about his posts being removed, even more so.
I think one thing to keep in mind for the future is the idea two posts hurts more than one.
Everyone keeps bringing up first post but someone who was banned for their 1st post is more likely to be pissed and contact mouser or leave forever with no comment.
Someone who has one of their post enter circulation and then get banned after their 2nd post would much more likelier feel corruption/censorship was afoot.
I think another flaw with this being a public topic is that it can cross the line between explaining the situation and defending the admin as more personality enters the thread.
It's not like we're acting any better.
Without getting into specifics (of details I don't know of)
The whole established community is typical of a sub-cop behaviour and it's typical of many forums. There used to be a time when this card isn't pulled here/and there were less mouser defenders. We let mouser do his job and we share our personal stake. Nowadays, we're more groupthinky but then we don't get enough troubles to really be a "we" but anyone who sees us saying something nice about mouser is likely to think that we're a "we" since they don't have any idea of who the troublesome posters are. They have to rely on certain established usernames they follow until they actually post.
The only position we're slightly above of is that we don't gangbang on users but that still doesn't change the times we may make a joke inside a topic where the thread maker may be feeling the strains of serious drama.
Equally, mouser is not really as reasonable as many of us are depicting him with our words. This is typical behaviour for forum admins:
can't say I get the warmest feeling from the posts you have made recently
--- End quote ---
It's a common boss admin power statement and mouser's not above this.
The only difference is that mouser is really a reasonable admin who can admit his mistakes and is willing to converse with us beyond the normal levels of reasonable admin. That doesn't change the reality that any newcomer who hears words like this wouldn't immediately expect forum admin corruption or at least expect that only forum sycophants can get away with saying anything controversial.
It doesn't mean mouser should never use these words nor was he wrong/I'm morally against him stating these words. It's just the bare reality, we're not a 100% rational forum community. This is still one of the best forums out there and mouser is a reason for that but we're not a group of people that is above hypocrisy such as the Bartelsmedia statement may have applied back when DC didn't have a The Basement section but not anymore or the idea of group of friends when many of us argue within our community all the time and it was these heated arguments that made us respect mouser's way of being an admin. Not the fact that we're posters that are similar to many forums where we get along because we always share the same ideas or we're smart enough to avoid being banned everytime we say something controversial. Even the first post rule, the mere suggestion of it, shows given a chance we'd rather abide by the same hypocritical and irrational idea of raising a rule as events were forecoming rather than let this situation play out and only after do we establish a rule in order to avoid making the victim sound like it's their fault for being dumb at not being a rule/forum veteran when they first signed up.
40hz:
@PaulKeith - quick question. Did you read this entire thread and the one that this one emerged out of?
worstje:
Equally, mouser is not really as reasonable as many of us are depicting him with our words. This is typical behaviour for forum admins:
can't say I get the warmest feeling from the posts you have made recently
--- End quote ---
It's a common boss admin power statement and mouser's not above this.
...
It doesn't mean mouser should never use these words nor was he wrong/I'm morally against him stating these words. It's just the bare reality, we're not a 100% rational forum community.
...
-Paul Keith (November 18, 2012, 12:25 AM)
--- End quote ---
(Bolding courtesey of me, so I can keep PaulKeith's words in context rather than focus on one snippet that serves my point. Snipping the rest though; it's too long a post! ;D)
So, PaulKeith, after reading that I am somewhat puzzled. On one hand, you are against mouser speaking out with his thoughts and impressions, which imo are as valid as anyone elses, simply because he is an admin and is easily misunderstood as him throwing his 'weight' around. On the other hand, you praise him for speaking along with all of us, in-depth and taking the time to involve himself as opposed to a more hands-off style of moderating and administering a forum. There is no perfect solution for something like this, and I don't think there ever will be either.
I myself have not read any of the other relevant topics, so I do not know who this 'clean' is on his normal account, nor do I need or want to know. However, from what I have seen, the negativity in this thread has not come from mouser or the moderators, but rather from the tone set at the beginning where all kinds of bad things are implied and suggested, thus basically putting mouser in a position where he either bows his head in apology, or slams down the hammer of the law and is called the not-so-benevolent dictator. (The apology happened, for those too lazy to read back.)
Or in other words: in my eyes, the way this topic started blocked off any kind of civilized discussion, pushing it towards the extremes of either defending or attacking, apologizing or punishing. Likewise, there are those who should have tried to avoid the 'protect mouser' mindset that PaulKeith referred to; it just reinforces the appearance of an established order that keeps newer members out. Neither 'side' contributed to having a discussion we can be proud of to have on this board. To summarize: politics season is over, and we can go back to normal now. :tellme:
We are all civilized people. Let's respect one another as fellow people, and discuss matters like equals. Because that is where our strength, both as humans as well as the Donationcoder community, lies. If we can't do that, haven't we failed the purpose of this forum? (In which case I wish that there'd be some hope left for humanity as a whole still... :))
Paul Keith:
@PaulKeith - quick question. Did you read this entire thread and the one that this one emerged out of?
-40hz (November 18, 2012, 01:14 AM)
--- End quote ---
I read this entire thread but am unsure of which thread emerged out of this thread so probably not.
I think worstje demonstrated that either is unnecessary and it can be confined into a general statement.
As for the puzzling aspect: it can be easily distinguished into, I'm not overtly praising nor overtly against what mouser is doing. Doing so would be counter to my statement that if there's any notable moral merit to why clean is reacting with the lap dog statement, it would be because we are not above the general characteristics of what a forum is and the general characteristics of most forum are bad: new comers who don't know group rules if not blamed outright are being told to excuse their emotions because these are the so and so limits of forums, mods/admins not only throwing their weight around and inserting bias between admitted mistakes/calls for decorum on both sides, calls for brotherhood in cases where there might be a singular enemy found but then individual as individual when the idea of a group is no longer beneficial to establish a defense against newcomers.
Essentially we're the same breed as most forums. Just a milder and less biased extreme that at times can forget that and step closer to the average forum attitude expressed in most forums across the internet. As a consequence, certain new comers who find themselves receiving that treatment can easily assume we're no better than the forums and we can't blame them since they don't have much experience or information to serve as reference for mouser's attitude/ our experiences/beliefs with mouser. It doesn't even matter if it turns out this time the poster was a troll or this time the poster was extremely rude or this time it's some other exception to the rule. The principle of the statement remains true that any new comer exposed to a hint of a nice senior cop-bad subcop can't be blamed for calling out an observation whose hints are common all across forums.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version