Thank You Strife Onizuka

Do you think long standing members of the community should be given a free pass to break the rules?

I believe if you ask the following question of Taco, "Why did you post about books on UFOs in the ResMod volunteer forum?" and assuming a truthful answer, you will have the answer to your question "Why was the thread locked?". It is safe to assume that from Taco's ability to string together words into sentances then coherent paragraphs and doing so on almost as regular a basics as myself, that he is no idiot. Taking this into consideration; can you honestly say his intentions were saintly in posting in the wrong forum?

So I ask again, Do you think long standing members of the community should be given a free pass to break the rules?

I had a conversation with MadamG inworld (IM) after and about the closing of her thread. To put it mildly I do not think MadamG and I will ever be friends. I will not say more on the topic as it is tainted by our conversation and would definitly be a Private Discussion violation. There is a good thread on Anti-Texture theft messures that Canimal started; it gives an indepth look into the core debate (one side says, we want more; the other side says, more is bad).



List the issues in a nice numbered list so i may answer them in turn, I'm having alot of difficulty finding the issues in question; I thought I already answered them?

Criticism is not always saintly. If you can't deal with that without turning into a SPOT (Secret Police Officer in Training), then you shouldn't put yourself in the position to be criticized.

Taco was critizing you, and you were too fragile to allow it to stand so you silenced it.

Can I start calling you SPOT? I think it is cute.

On what grounds was it ADVERTISING? That's the problem here. You're stretching the interpretation of rules to justify removing something based upon thinking it's made in bad faith. If you moved it to 'Off-Topic', that'd have at least been a far more reasonable expectation and really, very few would have questioned it.

You instead, took a rule that did not apply, tried your best to stretch and twist it to make it apply and then locked a thread.



Do you think perhaps it had anything to do with your commentary when you closed a thread? Just a little? More than a little? A lot?



Gee, I think Lo provided a rather nice list at the top of things people are questioning, however, why don't we go into one that irked me enough into actually posting a thread about it.

/274/17/120455/1.html

I would link specifically to the posts in question, however, Elle had removed half of the posts that were relevent and only saved the part where you admit there was no specific rule guiding this issue:

/108/31/120650/1.html#post1137628

Specifically, the problem is that after having MANY and plentiful reasons to deal with Eep, much like perhaps you did with Taco's thread, you take another rule that doesn't apply and wrap it around the issue as a justification for dealing with it.

To summarize in case you don't even feel like reading anything:

If someone closes a thread belonging to Person A, then Person A goes and posts a new thread linking to the old -- then you'd have a reason. The mere act of linking to a thread that was locked is not in itself reposting a thread and may have been on topic or somehow valid and worth discussing. If the thread was never to be discussed again or looked at, it shouldn't be there at all -- just because a thread has been locked does not mean it never contained useful, on-topic information .

To think otherwise is to create a rather unfortunate censorship scenario, especially if people begin exploiting such a rule to have valid threads locked.

You need to stop twisting rules and embellishing.

How much clearer does this need to be made? Do I need to make a flow chart or perhaps an interpretive dance?

Yes pls

now I'm being presumed not to be an idiot? You DON'T EVEN KNOW ME

Even that, however -- Strife could have chosen to move it into the Sandbox. Rather than close it.

I am not attacking you. I am criticizing you. I am offering you a chance to explain your actions -- you may take it or leave it, but by leaving it I do not think you will gain any points.

Do I have a right to criticize you? Oh yes.

Now. As for these mysterious issues:

1) You closed Taco's thread about UFOs when it clearly belonged in the Sandbox. It contained no personal attacks, nor did it advertise anything. You appeared to have chosen (not to put too fine a point on it) a bullshit reason for the closing.

2) MadamG Zagato's thread still has not been addressed. Yes, it contained personal attacks. Yes, it had devolved into a bunch of flame posts. However, you chose to add, at the end, when you closed it, that you felt that one build surpassed the other (the one by the alleged copier). Why? Spite?

3) You closed another thread, reasoning that one could not link to a closed thread. 'Nuff said.

4) You hid this thread within minutes of its posting (No need to explain this one, I can guess why).

I have broken them down neatly for easy reading and perusal, but they are not complete, nor can they lead one to draw patterns from them if one is specifically not looking for them. So this is just my opinion: cool it. You're being a bit overzealous and not a little vindictive.

Belaya - that is blatent advertising.

This thread is now about interpretive dance. Thank you Belaya, for finally pulling this around to something that we can all agree on. Something that binds us together as members of that crazy species called...the human race.

私は私が理解しないものを恐れるべきである。

Personally I'm still a little miffed that my Mario Kapuskas thread got moved to MAC DISCUSSION. Gawd. The point of the thread was about him being an asshat, not the fact that he can't read blatantly printed instructions.

When I put this in babelfish, I got:

私達はほしければ踊ってもいい。 私達はあなたの友人を後ろ残してもいい。 あるので友人は踊らない。 そして踊らなければ私の友人でない。

UFOs についての私の本を買いなさい!

*rolls out the ddr machine*

Great news, as of tomorrow, I won't be moderating.

All this has been getting to me. Eep always gets the blood preasure up. Tried to treat him with respect; tough considering his personality and that we never got along. Though I don't know anyone who was his friend (and disagreed with him). *sigh*

I was looking for a post to full fill Lo's #3 and started reading some of my old posts; remember how fun it was then. Realizing i was no longer in touch with my fun loving dancing cabbit forum avatar. So....

I've decided to take a few days off to cultivate the soul.

bet you thought you were rid of me.

I hope they find a replacement for you, one that actually does hir job, rather than sit there ignoring a holocaust-denying bigot.

Ordinarily, I don't mind resmods, but you take the cake.

Do you think it could be just a lack of cultural references? I mean not getting a thread composed of Husker Du lyrics is one thing, but with that latest one, once it was explained, Strife locked it. Maybe Strife just doesn't have a lot of cultural background, and thus doesn't get some stuff that's posted? I dunno, just a thought.

*wikipedia's Husker Du*

^^' i think i just proved your point.

I try to follow the trends but I don't watch much TV. When I do it's nothing too exciting; I don't like it when they shout. I dont' spend large amounts of time just conversing with others.

As to todays moderation, I didn't want to do anything too drastic; that why this thread was created.

Glad to see the ResMod program's working well.

Maybe people you have problems with (everyone has some) should be avoided. Step aside and let another resmod handle it.

As to the other misunderstandings, how about "when in doubt, ask"? If not publically in the thread, then in PM? Maybe knowing that Juani was amused rather than offended might have clued you in that the thread was a parody rather than an attack on him.

As far as criticizing someone personally (Madame G) in the process of executing your resmod duties,...

umm...

okay, I got nothing. Someone else pick up that ball.

How about just don't do it? I'm pretty sure being harshly critical of other residents is not anything you should do as an "impartial" moderator.

There ya go! Pass completed. Thanks, Joy.

hey strife

would you mind sucking me off while a flick ashes on your head?

seriously, why would you make "Strife" a peacemaker?

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/strife

1. Heated, often violent dissension; bitter conflict. See Synonyms at discord.
2. A struggle, fight, or quarrel.
3. Contention or competition between rivals.

I haven't seen the posting in question, but if this *were* the case, it would be simply an example of corruption. By using his position of power to criticise a resident and be safe from any come-backs, a resmod would be abusing his position to gain personal advantage.

When you give residents power without adequate transparency and scrutiny you get corruption. That is as inevitable as night follows day.

We are talking about a piddly resmod program here. Can you imagine what the situation would be if we had a resident-run government in Second Life?

This is why I have always opposed it.