Major DV announcement mods WANT you to see

[ummmm]

 I buried my regular DV name long time ago.  Back in the days when my DV innocence was shattered by all the dramas and trolls/

Those were the days, when I actually take the time to post intelligent replies and topics



You do not have to answer Raging Poodle,  I just wondered what you wanted to achieve


   

[Moolah!]

forum swinger wrote:
This just in:

 Thanks for the paste. You got in before me. Must've been the high bandwidth advantage. [A onclick="addImg('icon/icon_smile_cool.gif')" href="jvascript:void(0)"][/A]
 


 

[u know who]

One of those newfangled DV thread topic tags got stuck in the middle of my screen for a while and followed me all the way to DS.  Thought I was getting stalked by the thread tag.  

 

[ForShure]

.

[tenkani]

From now on, unless otherwise announced, there will be no deletions or banning for harrassing, stalking, insulting, flaming posts.
...
I will tell you why I went there... this issue was about stalking, not real life of course, but harrassing posts in multiple threads every single day, many posters follow others into multiple threads whenever they post, change the subject, and insult every day continually... that is what I was trying to stop, maybe I was wrong in thinking that was a problem.
...
What I was trying to point out was that in your initial policy anouncement you lump flaming in with harassment/stalking. That was a mistake. Flaming can be a beautiful thing. When it comes to "harassment", a mod should be able to differentiate between a case where a user acts like a f*cktard and makes a lot of enemies who then go to war, and a case where, for instance, a woman is being stalked online by a single angry man because she turned down his advances. Trying to apply a set policy to such a thing is not wise, especially if said policy is created without the consensus of the mods or the knowledge of management.

[mr pomegranate]

I made it very clear that stalking that crosses over into a real-life situation was not at all acceptable and was not what was meant by this. To even bring that kind of real life thing into THIS issue is just completely muddying my original point, and is a convenient way to end the discussion before it even started. This whole disagreement was based on online, non real life, harrassment and flaming. The only thing that mattered the most to me, was consistency. If one poster was to be admonished for a specific behaviour, I expected the next poster to be held to the same standard... nothing more, nothing less.... the fact that a consistent application of such a rule depending on personalities became a difficult judgement call, made it seem to me that the only way to be fair to all would be to allow everyone equal access to the ability to flame.  

  This was only based on flaming harrassment online between online personas, nothing more.

  And on another note, and to make this clear to any that care and may still be confused, my resigning has nothing to do with this policy issue itself, either way that it was chosen to apply a rule would have been fine with me (although I am still uncomfortable with a purely subjective flaming rule). One thing that I always operate on, in real life and as a mod, is from a position of loyalty. This is one of the most important virtues I believe in. I hold others to the same standards, and when it becomes clear to me that saving face or self promotion is more important to someone, I find it impossible to consider myself to being on a team with such a person. I will thus choose to remain resigned from modding for the foreseeable future.    

[tenkani]

I think people know you had the best intentions.
That's what makes it so tragic.
This isn't my business so I should really STFU about it.
Letting go of DV is so damn hard but it's really time.
 

[FoShure]

tenkani wrote:
I think people know you had the best intentions.
That's what makes it so tragic.
This isn't my business so I should really STFU about it.
Letting go of DV is so damn hard but it's really time.
 
 

[TehBorken]

"Trying to apply a set policy to such a thing is not wise, especially if said policy is created without the consensus of the mods or the knowledge of management."

Rule #1: Never make a policy or rule you can't enforce.

[Drama Continues!]

 [TABLE id=Table2 style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: midnightblue; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=10 width="100%" border=0] [TBODY] [TR bgColor=whitesmoke] [TD style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold" vAlign=top align=left]X[/TD] [TD colSpan=2][img title="" height=15 alt="" hspace=3 src="http://www.discovervancouver.com/forum/icon_posticon.gif" width=15 border=0][FONT size=1]Posted - 3/27/2007 9:07:24 AM[/FONT]  [HR noShade SIZE=1] If he is so much of an a**hole to be speaking behind my back, and making decisions about me without extending the courtesy to let me know of them

What decisions? There was never a rule to delete posts or threads that hate on people. I delete what needs to be deleted and I have no favorites when I make those deletions. This has nothing to do with you as a single poster, this has to do with every poster. So why would you feel you need to be personally informed? DV never worked that way anyway. I don't know if other mods show this favortism you talk about, but I don't.

That sounds like an obfuscation.
A catch-all bullshit.

[FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffff66"]You either have a guideline or you don't have a guideline.
You either delete hate posts or you don't delete them[/FONT].
You can't be half pregnant. It's either a yes or no.

Ya I never delete them unless it breaks rules. A poster hating on a poster was never against the rules. I don't know where this "new rule" came from. It gets deleted when unwanted pictures or addresses etc etc are posted. I did it like that from the beginning and it always worked.

Again if there are deletes that I don't know about then that is different, but I am speaking only for myself right now.

[FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffff66"]No one knows what to do.
[/FONT][FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffff66"]That's when you have preferential treatment [/FONT]where some members' hate posts get deleted, and some other members' are left to rot and fester. [img alt="" src="http://www.discovervancouver.com/forum/icon/icon_smile_dead.gif" border=0]

I sound like a broken record, speaking for myself I treat every poster equally. How do I do that? If there is a flaming war I leave all posts up no matter who the poster, until it crosses the line and leads to racism or breaks any other rule.

In terms of flaming yes perhaps you can take it as well as dish it out, but what usually happens is mods take sides. So the mod(s) start deleting YOUR comments, however your flamers comments are left.

[FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffff66"]Why aren't both deleted?
[/FONT]
[FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffff66"]"Oh it's a fk'ing judgement call" the idiots will tell you... [/FONT][img alt="" src="http://www.discovervancouver.com/forum/icon/icon_smile_tongue.gif" border=0]

NONE should be deleted. And again, where did you ever hear that any of these should be deleted?? And who's taking sides? I never took sides with anyone, so I have no clue what you are talking about.

And don't try to twist my words against me. When I say judgement call I'm talking extreme measures. Like the prime example of posting another posters personal info as a defense or an attack. If a poster is making fun or trashing another poster, I have always left it, because this is a frickin forum, and people can either fight back or walk away.

My point is, deleting these posts was never a rule. If someone showed some sort of favortism that I don't know about, I appologise for that, but otherwise don't expect anybody's flaming posts to be deleted. At least not by me.
[/TD][/TR][/TBODY][/TABLE]

[Lise]

X is the only mod with a level head.  Honestly, I don't understand why the mods on DV still hang around, as if they have to explain their actions over and over again. It's like trying to scold five year olds for putting their fingers in the cookie jar.

  Ah well. If anything, it makes for great entertaintment.

[Adam_Fulford]

As I understand it, DV mods are unpaid volunteers, working hard to enrich Mike, while anybody who has the audacity to harness DV's considerable traffic to promote good things such as important cultural events (and, God forbid, even make a buck or two) is treated like a leper and a pariah.  Typical mentality of corporate servitude.  I remember the shrieks of protest when I promoted the excellent William C. Martell Script Secrets Screenwriting seminar in Vancouver, which was a great success with a with big turn-out.

[tenkani]

rofl

[purelife]

Oh good gawd, Adam is always out promoting his stuff.

[ForShure]

purelife wrote:
 Oh good gawd, Adam is always out promoting his stuff.[/DIV]
 When isn't he?