Mods Gone Wild

[Tiassa]

You need her to be evil; that's the only way you can justify yourself ... to yourself

I am 100% sure that many of the moderators here have given S.A.M more leeway than has been allowed other posters.

Actually, that's exactly not true. Indeed, when it comes to the record to substantiate their charges from December, people are now looking for examples in current and future posts. And, as I've gone 'round with a couple of my colleagues on the subject, we've encountered at least two charges that were causing some consternation among the staff at least until they were contradicted by the evidence on record.

Do your homework before you make false claims of her not getting the benefit of the doubt. She's had the benefit of the doubt for more often than any other poster to date. Unfair to the others who don't get the same treatment, mind you.

I think perhaps there's some advice in there for yourself, as well.

 

[Bells]

Actually, that's exactly not true.

Bullshit.

I did when I was a mod. Most of us did. I believe some (ie. you) continue to do so. Much to my shame, I allowed her to get away with stuff I never allowed others to get away with. Why? Because she was Sam. A protected species. I considered her detractors to be racists and I still do. But that does not mean that she should get special treatment because she is Sam.

 

[S.A.M.]

Bells, could you give me an example of a post which you allowed me to get away with?

I am interested in your allegation of bigotry, for which I was treated special.

 

[Tiassa]

If I was paranoid ....

Bullshit.

I did when I was a mod. Most of us did. I believe some (ie. you) continue to do so. Much to my shame, I allowed her to get away with stuff I never allowed others to get away with. Why? Because she was Sam. A protected species. I considered her detractors to be racists and I still do. But that does not mean that she should get special treatment because she is Sam.

If I was paranoid, I would wonder about that post. After all, the irony isn't lost on me, though you may not be aware of it. Given the special protection we've given a certain political class around here—apparently nobody saw the bigoted, anti-"Muslem" threads, or the denigration of members' families, or the denigration of members themselves with belittling pet names; maybe they thought that bigotry was a valuable contribution to the community; maybe the offender was just a friend of the moderator?—it seems strange to me that we should finally worry about accusations of protection because it's the Muslim

I'm reminded of your hissy-cow back in December:

"At present, the very same standards applied to those you hate on this forum and have been very vocal in your desire and demands they be banned have been applied to Sam. As you are well aware. That you do not acknowledge that is dishonest on your part."​

Is this another of your bizarre standards whereby if we start something today, it means the very same standards have been applied in the past, and will be applied fairly in the future, even though both are, thus far, demonstrably untrue?

 

[Neverfly]

Ok, I'm a total nube here. And the toe stomping kind, at that.

What I was doing even reading this thread is ... Ok well it speaks volumes for how I have too much time on my hands. What I'm doing replying to it is even more goofy.

I have no clue who Sam is what that particular issue is.

But ignorant nubie wants to step up and put out a couple bits here...

Preferential treatment may or may not have occurred on this forum, among people who I have no idea about and no history with.

But what if it did?

It strikes me that if a poster is receiving preferential treatment on a forum, that poster must have some kind of value to the forum. It may be comic relief or insightful input or a knack to keep things on topic- whatever.
Rules and regulations are imperfect. That is an inevitability that can never be overcome. And if a poster is valuable enough to bend the rules for- Then Have At It.

That's part of what makes forums interesting. Without it, with blanket moderation and conclusive hammering with no regard to mitigating factors, posters become ruled by fear, hampered and restricted in expression and over-all, a forum loses value.

A person that complains about the Unfairness Of It All just puts an image in my head of a child kicking his feet on the floor.
Maybe they dislike that person and wish to seek out a reason to exclude them.
Maybe they have made a legitimate observation.
Either way, complaining about it only succeeds in making that person look less honorable.

In law- The basic principle here is, "Presume innocent until proven guilty."
Assuming the motives of another and stating them as knowing what that person is up to speaks of a bias.

It's easy to question or examine another person. And common- we all do it. But in conflict, it's equally important to be self aware and examine ones own motives. (In saying this, I admit I struggle with this myself...)

 

[Captain Kremmen]

Now its hate speech to compare German citizens living around concentration camps to Israeli Jews living near Gaza.

Were all German citizens Nazis? Isn't that "hate speech"?

Sam, stop bringing up Nazi Germany all the time. It doesn't help at all.
You've got Nazis on the brain.
All it does is get people's backs up, particularly if they are Jewish.

It also clouds the issue. You begin talking about two subjects instead of one.
Then there is a third issue, because some people will disagree that the two are comparable at all.

Do you expect a dog to bark, a cat to meow?

Something are just in people's natures. When you have 65k+ posts, it's not hard to judge the nature and intent of someone's posts.

Really. Weak. Argument.

But if you are going to allow that person to post at all, you should at least read their posts before condemning them.

 

[S.A.M.]

Sam, stop bringing up Nazi Germany all the time. It doesn't help at all.
You've got Nazis on the brain.
All it does is get people's backs up, particularly if they are Jewish.

It also clouds the issue. You begin talking about two subjects instead of one.
Then there is a third issue, because some people will disagree that the two are comparable at all.

Are you saying that German citizens who believed they lived in the greatest country on earth were all Nazis?

I'd refrain from bringing up the Nazis if the Israelis quit acting like them.

But there is an additional reason I bring them up. Were the Nazis not humans?

Or is it bigoted to intimate they were? After all they refused to wateroard as too inhumane, they put people to sleep instead of beating them on their legs as they hung suspended from the air until their lower half resembled something a truck had run over. They didn't steal skin and cornea from their victims or boil their skulls and mail them as trophies to their girl friends. Why hold them to a different standard?

 

[Tiassa]

The goals of communication?

Or is it bigoted to intimate they were? After all they refused to wateroard as too inhumane, they put people to sleep instead of beating them on their legs as they hung suspended from the air until their lower half resembled something a truck had run over. They didn't steal skin and cornea from their victims or boil their skulls and mail them as trophies to their girl friends. Why hold them to a different standard?

You know, it's sixty-five years later, and I'm not sure German Lutherans have stopped arguing with themselves about whether or not they did enough for the Jews. Or, rather, whether or not they feel guilty enough for their failures.

I would propose that when Emir Ali Khan wrote of challenging the underlying prejudices and presuppositions of a society, there was some tacit recognition of the futility in playing head meet wall.

The world abounds with other examples that don't make people panic and pray to Godwin. Were all Soviets willful Stalinists? for example. Not everyone who reported their neighbors, or their parents, or their siblings, or whomever, wanted to be part of it.

Yes, someone like Yosef Lapid might invoke the Shoah, but for the general audience, it has more authority coming from him. And it's not just because it's you that people get all itchy-assed about it. They would and do from me, even when the comparison is legitimate.

One would think, for instance, that the infamous Goering quote would be a reminder of what to avoid, and not a playbook to follow. Yet it really upset people to hear it used in the context of the Iraqi Bush Adventure. In the end, I would suggest that it is more important to change people's minds about tyranny and atrocity than it is to change their mind about Nazi metaphors. Hell, you can call someone the goddamn Devil and it doesn't tweak them out as much as invoking the Nazis.

 

[S.A.M.]

Hell, you can call someone the goddamn Devil and it doesn't tweak them out as much as invoking the Nazis.

What I find most amusing about James diatribe on unproductive comparisons, is that he is incapable of communicating without using them. I've lost count of the times I've been an antisemite and a bigot. Even my grandmother has been demoted to a bank robber. But calling people who throw a different "race" into a ghetto, starve and bomb them and insist on being recognised as a race bent on lebensraum and special recognition of the reinrassig and deportation and elimination of the untermensch as Nazis? Thats unproductive. Why do we tiptoe around the psycho in the room?

Can I complain if that "bank robber" is shot? She should know better than to wear a mask, right?

 

[Liebling]

But if you are going to allow that person to post at all, you should at least read their posts before condemning them.

Do you think that S.A.M is giving the moderators the same unbiased treatments she is demanding now? Think about that.

She wants people to forget her 65k+ posts and treat her fairly.

But she's not extending the same courtesy. She's now (and has been for over a year in the case of the Religion forum) avoiding posting threads in forums where she doesn't like the moderator. Claiming bias, she will not post in forums where she thinks the moderators will treat her with a heavier hand. In fact, when one she didn't expect to moderate her AND DO HIS JOB, she berated him for it. And you think that's okay, and not hypocritical bullshit?

This whole thing reeks.

 

[Bells]

Bells, could you give me an example of a post which you allowed me to get away with?

I am interested in your allegation of bigotry, for which I was treated special.

Where would I start Sam? I defended you until you went off the deepend.

If I was paranoid, I would wonder about that post. After all, the irony isn't lost on me, though you may not be aware of it. Given the special protection we've given a certain political class around here—apparently nobody saw the bigoted, anti-"Muslem" threads, or the denigration of members' families, or the denigration of members themselves with belittling pet names; maybe they thought that bigotry was a valuable contribution to the community; maybe the offender was just a friend of the moderator?—it seems strange to me that we should finally worry about accusations of protection because it's the Muslim

Oh.. here we go..

Should we mention your complete and utter lack of respect for the moderators who are, to put it bluntly, more right leaning? Your demands that they crack down on members you happened to hate because of their right leanings? How about the simple fact that they did act on the bigoted and anti-Muslim rhetoric, but for some reason, it just was never good enough for you.. I never once supported or agreed with the way that Sam's detractors spoke to her or treated her. As you well know.

And what do you mean, "if you were paranoid"? You are paranoid. I swear you search for her posts daily just to check that your little pet is not getting picked on. Maybe someone should warn Sam that if she ever disagrees with you on something you fundamentally believe in, that you'll start calling her hysterical and a liar too.

I'm reminded of your hissy-cow back in December:

And I am reminded of your "Leave Britney Alone" behaviour...

The standards were applied fairly. Remember how many times her detractors were banned, for insulting her? Or do you prefer to forget that?

Lets face it Tiassa, if it were up to you, everyone on this forum would be to the left and everyone would agree with you. Because anyone who dares disagree with you or have a different political leaning to you is dishonest, etc. That is the way it is and has always been, ever since I first joined this forum nearly 10 years ago.

 

[S.A.M.]

Where would I start Sam? I defended you until you went off the deepend.

Any one example would be fine. Just one. Where you defended me until I went off the deep end.

 

[Bells]

Any one example would be fine. Just one. Where you defended me until I went off the deep end.

Ask your little lacky to look it up in the mod forum.

 

[S.A.M.]

No I'm asking you. I want you to support your assertion. Will you do that? Or will you simply continue to make unsupported claims and accusations?

 

[Captain Kremmen]

Are you saying that German citizens who believed they lived in the greatest country on earth were all Nazis?

I'd refrain from bringing up the Nazis if the Israelis quit acting like them.

But there is an additional reason I bring them up. Were the Nazis not humans?

Or is it bigoted to intimate they were? After all they refused to wateroard as too inhumane, they put people to sleep instead of beating them on their legs as they hung suspended from the air until their lower half resembled something a truck had run over. They didn't steal skin and cornea from their victims or boil their skulls and mail them as trophies to their girl friends. Why hold them to a different standard?

If you just discuss the events that are happening in Israel, then those facts should speak for themselves.

For example, bulldozing Palestinian houses to build a tourist park.
That speaks for itself doesn't it.

Not only is dragging Nazi Germany into the argument an annoying cliche, but it detracts from your argument.

Just talk about the issue you are discussing.
If you can't see why that is a good idea, then just carry on doing what you are doing. It doesn't work.

 

[S.A.M.]

If you just discuss the events that are happening in Israel, then those facts should speak for themselves.

For example, bulldozing Palestinian houses to build a tourist park.
That speaks for itself doesn't it.

Not only is dragging Nazi Germany into the argument an annoying cliche, but it detracts from your argument.

Just talk about the issue you are discussing.
If you can't see why that is a good idea, then just carry on doing what you are doing.

The comparison is unavoidable.

On TV I saw an old woman rummaging through the ruins of her house looking for her medication, and it reminded me of my grandmother who was thrown out of her house during the Shoah . . . We look like monsters in the eyes of the world . . . This makes me sick.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A49787-2004May23.html

Sir Gerald Kaufman said the Israeli government was 'ruthlessly and cynically' exploiting the guilt over the Holocaust as justification for the assault on Gaza.

'My grandmother was ill in bed when the Nazis came to her home town... a German soldier shot her dead in her bed,' he told MPs.

'My grandmother did not die to provide cover for Israeli soldiers murdering Palestinian grandmothers in Gaza.'

http://www.metro.co.uk/news/world/483107-jewish-mp-says-israeli-soldiers-are-like-nazis

 

[Captain Kremmen]

The comparison is unavoidable.

Bad cat!

 

[S.A.M.]

No just experience. Recently while chatting with an Israeli expat online, he told me that he felt betrayed because he found out that the pine trees planted by the JNF were used to eliminate signs of Palestinian dispossession. Villages and graveywards were made into parks in a movement advertised as pioneer tree planting. American Jews were also inveigled into it.

Then he visited Sobibor, where the Nazis planted trees to conceal a death camp. It was an epiphany. When you walk in JNF parks you're walking on Palestinian graveyards. When you walk in Nazi parks, you're walking on Jewish ashes. When you look into an abyss, the abyss also looks into you

He doesn't live in Israel anymore.

These are stories you hear from Jews. Are they unproductive?

 

[quadraphonics]

The IDF wear uniforms.

The SS wore uniforms.

Netanyahu is teh Hitlar!

 

[WillNever]

But she's not extending the same courtesy. She's now (and has been for over a year in the case of the Religion forum) avoiding posting threads in forums where she doesn't like the moderator. Claiming bias, she will not post in forums where she thinks the moderators will treat her with a heavier hand. In fact, when one she didn't expect to moderate her AND DO HIS JOB, she berated him for it. And you think that's okay, and not hypocritical bullshit?

I place threads in forums where the moderators behave better too. Placing a thread in a forum where the moderator is acting on their own biased expectations of you makes no sense. When a moderator becomes an enemy of the users of the forum, that that moderator is no longer worthy of being recognized or respected. If you aren't going to moderate fairly, then don't expect threads to be appropriately placed in your forum. If you want threads to be appropriately placed in your forum, then moderate fairly. Surely that isn't difficult.