Resmods: Gimme a Break

"All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others" - George Orwell, Animal Farm

I remember well, it was you who suggested residents become moderators long ago, in hopes of silencing those with whom you disagreed.

If the moderators truly "would focus on personal attacks and general cruelty instead of determining what residents can and can't discuss" then you wouldn't ever be allow to post here again. You take personal attacks to a new level.

As a moderator in the N'burg forums you would silence those with whom you disagreed (but only if whey were winning a debate with you). You think everyone should agree with you, and if they don't, you attack them personally. Fortunately, most who read these forums see right through the facade you have created.

This is pretty much the case now except (as Cybin noted), mistakes can be made.

It's obviously a bit of a judgement call.

Like how does a resmod judge a thread made on a controversial topic made by a resident with a long history of personal attacks and cruelty? And what if some of their history of abuse is centred around discussions of this very same topic?

That's a tuffie!

I agree that the moderation could be a little more even handed though, the rules are always being "bent," but only for some people.

Certain individuals can be so intimidating that even when they violate the rule regarding making threads about closed threads, they get clean away with it because the resmods are to scared, to do anything about it.

I love you too Briana .

Anyway, like Cybin said, its a damned if you do and you're damned if you don't situation. The first thread certainly did warrent closing, it wasn't being respectful of other peoples beliefs. The second one wasn't as far along, but it was headed down the same path and wasn't getting any better.




Zap

Personal attacks are a hard one. Not being able to edit out the personal attacks in a thread means we have to decide to close a thread, or leave it open. So you have to weigh up the positive discussion thats going on, against the personal attacks. Obviously if a thread was created as a personal attack, it would be locked.

As for the rules being bent and threads being created about locked topics, please report said threads, it makes it a lot easier to find them. I'm on at very weird times, theres no pattern to it at all , so having threads reported really helps.

Zap

According to the Dewey Decimal System, religion is in the 200s. Fiction is shelved alphabetically by the last name of the author.

P2

I think you would have to shelve it by editor/translator; being that it's a collection writen by multiple authors.

Besides, the dewey decimal system is being phased out.

Really? what are they replacing it with?

BTW, I agree with Zap, Cybin & Torley.
Must be a slow day; all the AR's are for this thread.

Well, maybe its a regional/situational thing. I know almost all "institutional" libraries, like college libraries for example, use the Library of Congress system. Which was a PITA to learn at first.

In the Soviet gulag of the Stalinist era, the zeks were often harder on the prisoners than the official jailors were. Happened in the same way among the camps across Europe during the Second World War. A familiar feature of "institutional" life, the inmates on top are usually the cruelest and most supportive of the regime....

Cybin I got that you think it might have been a mistake to close that thread and I'm really not jumping on the bandwagon here to give you shit about that.

However I saw this in your response and I had to bring this up. When you make pre-emptive moves against something that <i>might</i> turn bad, then you become the thought poice and not resmods. Either religious threads, in jest or seriousness, are ok, or they are not. If they are ok, then they are ok and in the interest of consisitency, must be left alone until and unless there is an actual problem. Pre-emptive strikes are not ok and will breed the kind of backlash against the resmods that we've seen already.

Yeah, even and consistent censorship. You may be concerned about trying to be even and consistent, Cybin (and I'm willing to give you, and all the resmods, the benefit of the doubt; it's a tough job that I wouldn't ever want), but we all know LL isn't. If LL were concerned about being even and consistent, they would ban all hate-based symbols and discussion, not just one. Their policies in such areas have led to an atmosphere of distrust in regards to free speech.

Just because a few hyper-sensitive people out there consider any intelligent discussion of religion to be belittling, shouldn't prevent the rest of us from engaging in said conversation. Nobody is ever forced to read a thread, as is often pointed out. If a conversation is too offensive to them, they can guess what? Not read it. It's just that simple.

I'm not saying we should let utter chaos reign, but discussion isn't necessarily belittling. I understand that sometimes the resmods might close a thread out of fear it's trending in the belittling direction more than anything else, but that's really not fair to the rest of us.