250 replies to this topic

[Galadriel]

No, that's not my duty.

 

 

I will rather wait for confirmation from admins- thanks though

 

xoxo

[Waser Lave]

I appreciate the fact that you're not speaking on behalf of the admins, and that their take on the situation will only be known once they comment- but I know that I speak for more members beyond myself in saying that having a mods participate in childless ego driven antics DOES reflect badly on the rest of the staffing team, and the site itself.
 
A mod, as you said, ought to enforce the rules, and should lead by example. If any of the mods are unable to lead by example should they be a mod? No, they shouldn't- effectively all they are then is a member with privileges waiting to be abused.

The best way to raise concerns such as those would be the engage the administrators directly by either PM or by email. No rules have actually been broken by anybody in this thread so while the discussion has been slightly animated it's not the place for moderators to deal with that. It's also important to remember that moderators are also members of the forum and are not merely staff members (they are also, in the main, humans) so they are also entitled to engage in discussion within the rules. If the discussion were to stray over into rule breaking territory then I'm confident that the moderators would deal with that as normal.

[Sweeney]

Hey, did you know that it's against the rules to complain about members or staff in public?

5.3 - Public complaints about members will not be tolerated. It is expected that any problems with specific members or staff will be reported to a superior of that member, such as a moderator or an administrator.

[artificial]

Hey, did you know that it's against the rules to complain about members or staff in public?
 

 

So basically rather than publicly air our grievances with someone, we're encouraged to snicker and gossip behind their backs? 

 

Can't beat that highschool logic.

[Waser Lave]

So basically rather than publicly air our grievances with someone, we're encouraged to snicker and gossip behind their backs? 
 
Can't beat that highschool logic.

Common sense would suggest that discussing your grievances with somebody should be done privately with that person rather than publicly.

[Sweeney]

So basically rather than publicly air our grievances with someone, we're encouraged to snicker and gossip behind their backs? 
 
Can't beat that highschool logic.

No, you're encouraged to report concerns to the appropriate member of staff, which is considerably different from gossiping. If you don't want to do it behind their back, include them in the PM, or send them a message separately.

[artificial]

Common sense would suggest that discussing your grievances with somebody should be done privately with that person rather than publicly.

 

Wow way to be patronising. I'm going to go mass PM my circle of friends just to tell them what a massive dick you are.

[Waser Lave]

Wow way to be patronising. I'm going to go mass PM my circle of friends just to tell them what a massive dick you are.

You have a circle of friends to PM? Also, you probably wouldn't have to PM them about it, I think it's something that most people are already aware of. Oh, you said 'are', rather than 'have'. That hurts.

[luvsmyncis]

Wow way to be patronising. I'm going to go mass PM my circle of friends just to tell them what a massive dick you are.

 

Then we can all accuse him of reading it and publicly air our outrage! BRILLIANT.

[Mishelle]

The best way to raise concerns such as those would be the engage the administrators directly by either PM or by email. No rules have actually been broken by anybody in this thread so while the discussion has been slightly animated it's not the place for moderators to deal with that. It's also important to remember that moderators are also members of the forum and are not merely staff members (they are also, in the main, humans) so they are also entitled to engage in discussion within the rules. If the discussion were to stray over into rule breaking territory then I'm confident that the moderators would deal with that as normal.

 

Wait, I thought you were a robot? I'm so confused.

[Blippety]

Wait, I thought you were a robot? I'm so confused

 

Sexing up your town...

Edited by Frankrin, 19 February 2013 - 07:19 AM.

[Mishelle]

[Yung]

So would stating that we dislike another member be a violation of rule 5.3? Because that is something the bulk of us are guilty of if that is the case...

 

Most of you have blatantly stated you dislike certain other members.

 

...and if you want to deny it I should defer you to the entire Kami incident.

 

We're pretty much all guilty of violating this rule at least once or twice.

[Elindoril]

I also voted Elindoril for Least Popular Person Who Never Wins Any Codies.

 

Damn how did I miss this? 'Twas funny.

[Waser Lave]

So would stating that we dislike another member be a violation of rule 5.3? Because that is something the bulk of us are guilty of if that is the case...

If it was getting towards harassment then yes. Just saying that you don't like somebody wouldn't really be in violation of that rule.

[shrouded]

I don't like Waser...
jk.

His damn avatar reminds me of Freaky from neofreaks. Badger AB was OP in 2005-2006.

[Drakonid]

So would stating that we dislike another member be a violation of rule 5.3? Because that is something the bulk of us are guilty of if that is the case...

 

Most of you have blatantly stated you dislike certain other members.

 

...and if you want to deny it I should defer you to the entire Kami incident.

 

We're pretty much all guilty of violating this rule at least once or twice.

I liked Kami, that kid had balls.

[ZERO]

Speaking of the past.. I don't think there was ever this much tension between members...........

 

 

Right?.....

 

 

Nevermind

[Waser Lave]

We butted heads a lot on the forums but when he came into TC we got along famously. He was much different outside the forums.

If he wasn't determined to be such a fucktard on the forums then he could have stayed.

[Waser Lave]

He was a twit.

You spelled it wrong.

[Scot]

Agreed.
He was a twit. 

Lets change his title to twit

 

hurr hurr