Stop Neg Repping People For No Reason

[Marijuana Ranch]

ROFL dude for real? The mods here are all very cool people and I have seen no reason to negative rep a single one of them since I have been coming here..They are all very helpful and not only that, they all get involved in the movement and try to make real change..Negative repping a MOD on here would be the most ridiculous a person could do.....

 

 

420Peace itssortalegall,

 

The mods R dedicated very cool people...

But what about when the3ma membership has no recourse for the rare occasion a mod makes a mistake.?

Repping mod's may not be wise...

However is it not good to have some type of open dialog between different types of members?

[Kingdiamond]

Dude ive been asking for the last year for them to add the beating the dead horse smilie and actually tried that same phrasing from my other boards i mod at but it would previously not work here .

 

 

[Guest OxXGarfieldXxO]

So why can't the mods be repped then? Seems strange that the "higher ups" can run around ranking everyone else but there is no way to keep THEM in check.

 

Would make no sense to allow Moserators to be rep'ed. First off they could change their rep making it a futile effort. Secondly they have access to who would be rep'in them. Not that the current bunch of mods would use this information, but it has the potential to cause problems.

 

So bottom line: Mods can not be rep'ed

 

 

420Peace All,

 

Members and Mods need open dialog to beter serve our community..

Why?

Because...

Absolute power corrupts Absolutely

Why not a Membership Steering Committee so members have a voice in the adminstration of the 3ma?

 

The mods are elected from the membership. No need for members to over see members. Where would this end? Members that watch members that watch members, that watch mods, that watch the administration? Pointless.

 

This is why there are moderators and administrators. If you have a problem with a mod, go to a admin. I can't speak for Joe or Michael, but I know as for myself I have no problem telling member/mod/admin something can't be done or could of been handled different. This new site is light years beyond the old system and moderators are able to do their jobs now. But know we have a system of checks and balances. Mods and Admins can't permanently delete things. If the members are mistreated....It can be seen.

 

It is reasonble for Dentures Lost to ask "So why can't the mods be repped then?

Seems strange that the "higher ups" can run around ranking everone but there is no way to keep THEM in check."

I have addressed this issue many times with no response...

 

I have replied to this many times and above. You're free to ask questions....wonder how things are done...complain if you wish. But in the end...as I always say

• Mods aren't getting rep'ed
• Reputation system isn't going anywhere.

Despite what people in this thread have said, a rating system exist on most every site around. It may not be a plus or a minus, but be it stars, thumbs, likes and dislikes, karma...whatever. It's all a ratings system. And the people that complain the most are usually the people that get in the most trouble. Take Ron for example. Reading his moderation notes makes him sound like a terrorist. Mods have given him all kinds of vacations and reprimands. But he's still here right all? So obviously we have a system of checks and balances or Ron would of just been gone at his first infraction.

 

I can't see the MMMA board electing a group to oversee mods. Not saying it wont happen. But it's just redundant supervision by a group that can't impose any restrictions on the mods in the first place.

 

And I'll chime back in another 3 months from now when this topic resurfaces....

[Guest drcanna-pest]

okay well im done here. no more wasting time with this thread. i came here to give and get good info when it comes to growing medicinal cannabis in our lovely state of Michigan. im going to check on my girls in their splendid flowering glory...and come back and only stick to meaningful threads. thank you all for the entertainment...caio

[Kingdiamond]

okay well im done here. no more wasting time with this thread. i came here to give and get good info when it comes to growing medicinal cannabis in our lovely state of Michigan. im going to check on my girls in their splendid flowering glory...and come back and only stick to meaningful threads. thank you all for the entertainment...caio

Dude its an open forum theres always going to be fluff in an open forum take what you want leave what you don't want.

[Guest drcanna-pest]

Dude its an open forum theres always going to be fluff in an open forum take what you want leave what you don't want.

 

 

oh okay i guess i didn't realize. thank you.

[Guest thequietone]

Thanks Garfield for explaining everything for you did it better then I could have. We have started restructuring the mods and we now have a chain of command. If anyone has a problem with a mod they can contact me as I have been elected as the head mod. Any complaints will be dealt with and if a mod gets way out of line then they lose their mod privileges.

 

In my opinion we have a great set of mods here and we all work together to give members a forum they can be proud of. We will continue to try and improve what we have now and maintain a professional atmosphere on the forums.

[Marijuana Ranch]

Would make no sense to allow Moserators to be rep'ed. First off they could change their rep making it a futile effort. Secondly they have access to who would be rep'in them. Not that the current bunch of mods would use this information, but it has the potential to cause problems.

 

So bottom line: Mods can not be rep'ed

 

 

 

 

The mods are elected from the membership. No need for members to over see members. Where would this end? Members that watch members that watch members, that watch mods, that watch the administration? Pointless.

 

This is why there are moderators and administrators. If you have a problem with a mod, go to a admin. I can't speak for Joe or Michael, but I know as for myself I have no problem telling member/mod/admin something can't be done or could of been handled different. This new site is light years beyond the old system and moderators are able to do their jobs now. But know we have a system of checks and balances. Mods and Admins can't permanently delete things. If the members are mistreated....It can be seen

 

I have replied to this many times and above. You're free to ask questions....wonder how things are done...complain if you wish. But in the end...as I always say

• Mods aren't getting rep'ed
• Reputation system isn't going anywhere.

Despite what people in this thread have said, a rating system exist on most every site around. It may not be a plus or a minus, but be it stars, thumbs, likes and dislikes, karma...whatever. It's all a ratings system. And the people that complain the most are usually the people that get in the most trouble. Take Ron for example. Reading his moderation notes makes him sound like a terrorist. Mods have given him all kinds of vacations and reprimands. But he's still here right all? So obviously we have a system of checks and balances or Ron would of just been gone at his first infraction.

 

I can't see the MMMA board electing a group to oversee mods. Not saying it wont happen. But it's just redundant supervision by a group that can't impose any restrictions on the mods in the first place.

 

And I'll chime back in another 3 months from now when this topic resurfaces....

 

420Peace Garfield,

 

You just do not get it I think..

This is the first I have heard about the elections of mods by membership

When have these elections taken place?

I take exception to terrorist inference...

The reason I know mods make a mistake once and a while is through pratical experience...

I see no reason why you hesitate in letting the members have a voice?

There is a reason this topic resurfaces

With all due respect I feal caviler condensation in parts of your post.

Still the 3ma is getting better everday in every way thanks to you and the mods!

Common let us in the mix...

[budpuffer]

silly silly kids....,reps.are for people that care about them..lol...leaves me out...on the eariler thread i suggested that we only be allowed to leave pos.reps..no one could get mad about that..or to get rid of it, so that people who disagreed with a post would have to post their objections rather than just hitting the neg.button.....i do feel that anyone should be able to voice anything they want within the forum rules,and that no one Mod.or Admin.should have the ability to block a member,it should take at least two..i saw a post from a Admin.saying that he was going to go after the folks leaving unjustified Neg.Reps.(blocking and banning)and it looked to me like the start of a witch hunt...now i don't know if anything ever became of it,but it seems not....not having the ability to pos.or neg. the Mods./Admin is a whole nother thread that would surely see me banned...lol...i've been a pain in the posts more than one time, but its guys like me that help keep things on the up and up around here..lol..peace all...zzb

[Guest OxXGarfieldXxO]

420Peace Garfield,

 

You just do not get it I think..

This is the first I have heard about the elections of mods by membership

When have these elections taken place?

I take exception to terrorist inference...

The reason I know mods make a mistake once and a while is through pratical experience...

I see no reason why you hesitate in letting the members have a voice?

Still the 3ma is getting better everday in every way!

 

Lets answer this stuff:

 

You Said: You just do not get it I think..

Reply: then feel free to explain it to me. I have my doubts it's me with a lack of understanding, but fire away.

 

 

You Said: This is the first I have heard about the elections of mods by membership

Reply: Your reading things into it that I never said. I said

"The mods are elected from the membership. "

I never said mods are elected by the membership. They are elected by the current group of moderators. Personally I remove myself from all these "elections" as the mods have a far better understanding of the members personalities and stability. But I have to say your interjection of your own interpretation of what people say is probably the reason you have problems.

 

You Said: When have these elections taken place?

Reply: Anytime you see a new mod ( Like I believe Peanutbutter is the most recent) you can bet it's been discussed in the forum section you members have no privy to.

 

 

You Said: I take exception to terrorist inference...

Reply: Tough. I never ever candy coat things. That's why I stay out of politics...Your mod notes of you attacking and terroizing members is exactly what I expressed. You don't have to like it.

 

 

You Said:The reason I know mods make a mistake once and a while is through pratical experience...

Reply: And like I said "You're still here". So obviously you had someone you could go to. All Mods and all Admins watch each other. And personally (Joe and Michael can confirm this) if I talk to someone outside this forum in relation to this forum, say through an email, I send both the email or I post it in the Admin only section. I want people to see how I conduct myself when I'm representing the face of the MMMA. So your argument is a moot point. You and all members have others they can go to. If Im having a problem with DR.T, I can go to MIke. If Mike and Dr.T are in cahoots, I can go to Blueberry. A group to watch those being watched is redundant.

 

You Said: I see no reason why you hesitate in letting the members have a voice?

Reply: You're attacking a straw man. No ones taken your voice away. Your very existence on this forum is proof of this. In your case, I know I wouldn't of been as forgiving as Joe. Once you've caused the moderation staff even half of the write ups I see, I would of personally banned you at a server level and been done with it. Personally I find it really self centered when a members disconduct commands so much time from more then one person. Like I always say:

If row 4029 (your member id) is causing the other 15000+ rows a problem....delete row 4029...problem solved

 

 

You Said: Still the 3ma is getting better everday in every way!

Reply: I think it is too Ron. I think you've done a lot better. Looking at your rap sheet I can even say I removed some of your warning points at one time.

OxXGarfieldXxO Note Added 10 June 2010 - 08:15 PM Removed from warn level He's been fine. I only took off 2 points. More time and someone can remove them all.

 

....And I haven't seen anything lately, which is great. You've quit wasting my time. Good for you, and me.

 

Best

[Marijuana Ranch]

Lets answer this stuff:

 

You Said: You just do not get it I think..

Reply: then feel free to explain it to me. I have my doubts it's me with a lack of understanding, but fire away.

 

 

You Said: This is the first I have heard about the elections of mods by membership

Reply: Your reading things into it that I never said. I said I never said mods are elected by the membership. They are elected by the current group of moderators. Personally I remove myself from all these "elections" as the mods have a far better understanding of the members personalities and stability. But I have to say your interjection of your own interpretation of what people say is probably the reason you have problems.

 

You Said: When have these elections taken place?

Reply: Anytime you see a new mod ( Like I believe Peanutbutter is the most recent) you can bet it's been discussed in the forum section you members have no privy to.

 

 

You Said: I take exception to terrorist inference...

Reply: Tough. I never ever candy coat things. That's why I stay out of politics...Your mod notes of you attacking and terroizing members is exactly what I expressed. You don't have to like it.

 

 

You Said:The reason I know mods make a mistake once and a while is through pratical experience...

Reply: And like I said "You're still here". So obviously you had someone you could go to. All Mods and all Admins watch each other. And personally (Joe and Michael can confirm this) if I talk to someone outside this forum in relation to this forum, say through an email, I send both the email or I post it in the Admin only section. I want people to see how I conduct myself when I'm representing the face of the MMMA. So your argument is a moot point. You and all members have others they can go to. If Im having a problem with DR.T, I can go to MIke. If Mike and Dr.T are in cahoots, I can go to Blueberry. A group to watch those being watched is redundant.

 

You Said: I see no reason why you hesitate in letting the members have a voice?

Reply: You're attacking a straw man. No ones taken your voice away. Your very existence on this forum is proof of this. In your case, I know I wouldn't of been as forgiving as Joe. Once you've caused the moderation staff even half of the write ups I see, I would of personally banned you at a server level and been done with it. Personally I find it really self centered when a members disconduct commands so much time from more then one person. Like I always say:

 

 

You Said: Still the 3ma is getting better everday in every way!

Reply: I think it is too Ron. I think you've done a lot better. Looking at your rap sheet I can even say I removed some of your warning points at one time.

 

 

....And I haven't seen anything lately, which is great. You've quit wasting my time. Good for you, and me.

 

Best

 

[Guest Marywanna]

Herman Munster is right. And that what your IGNORE THIS USER button is for. (And I noticed the first guy bites the horse twice)

[Guest Medicinal Patient]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJ5aNftth5I

 

Frickin Hysterical Dude!

 

Lets cut him a break, its gettn a lil nippy out! Buck, you can wear a kilt, but don't forget your bag and pipe!

[Guest Medicinal Patient]

 

[Guest Medicinal Patient]

I am UP! But I am dressed today so stop trying to peek!

 

Deal! Heyyy...whats that over there--->

 

 

[Marijuana Ranch]

Lets answer this stuff:

 

You Said: You just do not get it I think..

Reply: then feel free to explain it to me. I have my doubts it's me with a lack of understanding, but fire away.

 

 

You Said: This is the first I have heard about the elections of mods by membership

Reply: Your reading things into it that I never said. I said I never said mods are elected by the membership. They are elected by the current group of moderators. Personally I remove myself from all these "elections" as the mods have a far better understanding of the members personalities and stability. But I have to say your interjection of your own interpretation of what people say is probably the reason you have problems.

 

You Said: When have these elections taken place?

Reply: Anytime you see a new mod ( Like I believe Peanutbutter is the most recent) you can bet it's been discussed in the forum section you members have no privy to.

 

 

You Said: I take exception to terrorist inference...

Reply: Tough. I never ever candy coat things. That's why I stay out of politics...Your mod notes of you attacking and terroizing members is exactly what I expressed. You don't have to like it.

 

 

You Said:The reason I know mods make a mistake once and a while is through pratical experience...

Reply: And like I said "You're still here". So obviously you had someone you could go to. All Mods and all Admins watch each other. And personally (Joe and Michael can confirm this) if I talk to someone outside this forum in relation to this forum, say through an email, I send both the email or I post it in the Admin only section. I want people to see how I conduct myself when I'm representing the face of the MMMA. So your argument is a moot point. You and all members have others they can go to. If Im having a problem with DR.T, I can go to MIke. If Mike and Dr.T are in cahoots, I can go to Blueberry. A group to watch those being watched is redundant.

 

You Said: I see no reason why you hesitate in letting the members have a voice?

Reply: You're attacking a straw man. No ones taken your voice away. Your very existence on this forum is proof of this. In your case, I know I wouldn't of been as forgiving as Joe. Once you've caused the moderation staff even half of the write ups I see, I would of personally banned you at a server level and been done with it. Personally I find it really self centered when a members disconduct commands so much time from more then one person. Like I always say:

 

 

You Said: Still the 3ma is getting better everday in every way!

Reply: I think it is too Ron. I think you've done a lot better. Looking at your rap sheet I can even say I removed some of your warning points at one time.

 

 

....And I haven't seen anything lately, which is great. You've quit wasting my time. Good for you, and me.

 

Best

 

With respect I think your indiference on this issue is why there is a problem..

it's not the reg thing

it is the green line between the mods and membership

There needs 2B a member group to help the mods beter understand us...

Why is it not good for us working together to solve a issue important to the members?

If I was the one calling a member/mod a terroist like U did me; is that OK?

Would it be considered a personal attack or not???

It is to me and it is just fine with you.

Why?

Some people can dish it out but use there power when they decided they do not like being treated as they treat others.

Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely!

Call me I can explain!

313-422-5281

[phaquetoo]

Would make no sense to allow Moserators to be rep'ed. First off they could change their rep making it a futile effort. Secondly they have access to who would be rep'in them. Not that the current bunch of mods would use this information, but it has the potential to cause problems.

 

So bottom line: Mods can not be rep'ed

 

 

 

 

The mods are elected from the membership. No need for members to over see members. Where would this end? Members that watch members that watch members, that watch mods, that watch the administration? Pointless.

 

This is why there are moderators and administrators. If you have a problem with a mod, go to a admin. I can't speak for Joe or Michael, but I know as for myself I have no problem telling member/mod/admin something can't be done or could of been handled different. This new site is light years beyond the old system and moderators are able to do their jobs now. But know we have a system of checks and balances. Mods and Admins can't permanently delete things. If the members are mistreated....It can be seen.

 

 

 

I have replied to this many times and above. You're free to ask questions....wonder how things are done...complain if you wish. But in the end...as I always say

• Mods aren't getting rep'ed
• Reputation system isn't going anywhere.

Despite what people in this thread have said, a rating system exist on most every site around. It may not be a plus or a minus, but be it stars, thumbs, likes and dislikes, karma...whatever. It's all a ratings system. And the people that complain the most are usually the people that get in the most trouble. Take Ron for example. Reading his moderation notes makes him sound like a terrorist. Mods have given him all kinds of vacations and reprimands. But he's still here right all? So obviously we have a system of checks and balances or Ron would of just been gone at his first infraction.

 

I can't see the MMMA board electing a group to oversee mods. Not saying it wont happen. But it's just redundant supervision by a group that can't impose any restrictions on the mods in the first place.

 

And I'll chime back in another 3 months from now when this topic resurfaces....

 

 

Garf If i could give you reps id give you a ton on negs lol Jus kidding nothing but poss for you!

How you doing? did you miss me in chat breaking code lol!

Peace

FTW

Jim

[Wired4Success]

I like how we had a thread about this 3wks ago and now we got another. (5 pages long.) Haha, I told you. You guys are gonna chase this forever.

 

Rep systems need to be positive only. Hahahhahahah you guys r dumb. I'll come chime in on the next thread about the same subject in a month. I will do my best to give you some more bunny muffin again.

[Guest OxXGarfieldXxO]

OK, I guess we'll try this again, but I'm begining to become board with this....

 

 

You said: With respect I think your indiference on this issue is why there is a problem..

it's not the reg thing

Reply: Fine. I see no problem with that.

 

 

You said: it is the green line between the mods and membership. There needs 2B a member group to help the mods beter understand us...

Reply: Why? The mods are members. They are all volunteer. They were all recruited and voted in from the membership pool. You're not showing us any thing that would suggest some rift between the moderation staff and the members other then your opinion which I've demonstrated is incorrect due to your even posting on this forum.

 

 

You said: Why is it not good for us working together to solve a issue important to the members?

Reply: The only one that's ever suggested this is you. And to be honest, you've proven yourself to be a problem member in the past. We can forgive easy enough, but we'd be fools to forget. And thanks to the moderation notes accessible to all staff we can keep on each member, we don't have to forget.

 

 

You said: If I was the one calling a member/mod a terroist like U did me; is that OK?

Reply: Well again I said "Makes you sound like", and it's true. Who was it making sock accounts to pester and attack other members? It was you. So when I've said something untrue, feel free to go to my superiors and they will reprimand me. I understand you may not like this being said publicly, and you want to disassociate yourself from your past actions, but that's not how the world works.

 

 

You said: Would it be considered a personal attack or not??? It is to me and it is just fine with you. Why?

Reply: Again when I've said something that can't be backed up with sources like your moderation notes coming from multiple staff members, it might be a personal attack. In this case, since we know your history and your attempts to be sneaky and underhanded by making sock accounts to attack members, it's merely stating a truth. You may not like the statement, but it's as good as any to describe your actions.

 

 

 

You said: Some people can dish it out but use there power when they decided they do not like being treated as they treat others.

Reply: You've failed to prove there are no checks and balances within the moderation staff. I've said how many times now that you're being allowed to post these forums is proof that we have checks and balances. Cause believe me, when you were being discussed...I was as open and straight forward as I am here. It was my suggestion to delete you and be done with the problems the moderation staff had. I was over ruled by the others. You keep beating the same dead horse. You're attacking a straw man. A cause that's not there. Is any of this making it through?

 

 

You said: Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely!

Reply: Just counting, I think it's funny that there are 12 people actively moderating this forum. Almost sounds like a Jury huh? There's actually a few more mods then that, but some of them aren't real active. But I think 12 people is a fine number to watch his/her brothers in moderation. Again making a statement like " Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely!" is a straw man. No one has "absolute power" It should seem to even the casual user there's more then one person behind the curtain around here.

 

 

You said: Call me I can explain!

Reply: I don't see a need. Even if the board deemed it necessary to have a moderation watchdog group set up, I have my doubts you would ever be included in it. (matter a fact I'd argue heavily against any mention of your account being brought into such a group). You'll take this as an offense, but I don't trust you. You've shown who you are, and on the internet I'd be a fool to think you've actually changed and aren't just putting up a front. Any attempt to change at this point would most likely be a ruse. We know your deceptive and malicious ( making false accounts to attack members) and the members don't have your best interest at heart (since you seen no problem with attacking them under a false account). I see no reason at all to call you to discuss this matter. This all goes back to the "checks and balances". I'd rather people see what I have to say. To be honest, as bad as you mangle things that are said and put your own spin to them.....public post are just fine with me...

 

 

Before we hijack this thread anymore, if you'd like to continue MR, why don't you start a thread about this watchdog group. Get it it's own title and topic and you may even be able to garner a little interest in this. It's kind of hidden within this "rep" thread. Who knows. You may get all kinds of people backing your suggestion. You make the topic and I'll move our post over to it.

 

Best

[DenturesLost]

Would make no sense to allow Moserators to be rep'ed. First off they could change their rep making it a futile effort. Secondly they have access to who would be rep'in them. Not that the current bunch of mods would use this information, but it has the potential to cause problems.

 

So bottom line: Mods can not be rep'ed

 

 

 

 

 

 

That's the scary part. The mods have access to who is handing out the reps. You said the current bunch of mods wouldn't "use" that info but scroll up. Someone posted info regarding who neg repped marijuana ranch. Shouldn't that be confidential? Sure they didn't give the actual handle of the person but they gave out general info that could help narrow down who it was. On top of that a mod posted someone's IP address a couple weeks ago because the mod was mad about something they did. There is no reason in the world to out someone like that. It's dangerous and that kind of info should be kept confidential. To some mod's credit, however, they apparently deleted the IP address posted by a different mod. This site should be 100% confidential. If there is a problem with a member then delete their account and/or block their IP access. You don't just go and out someone because yo udon't agree with what they said or did especially when you have the power to limit their access anyway.

[Guest OxXGarfieldXxO]

Yes mods can give rep points out however they feel like weather it be neg or pos. The person who gave the neg to Ron is not a regular poster to this forum anymore, but is still a member. This thread has been an interesting read.

 

 

That's the scary part. The mods have access to who is handing out the reps. You said the current bunch of mods wouldn't "use" that info but scroll up. Someone posted info regarding who neg repped marijuana ranch. Shouldn't that be confidential? Sure they didn't give the actual handle of the person but they gave out general info that could help narrow down who it was. On top of that a mod posted someone's IP address a couple weeks ago because the mod was mad about something they did. There is no reason in the world to out someone like that. It's dangerous and that kind of info should be kept confidential. To some mod's credit, however, they apparently deleted the IP address posted by a different mod. This site should be 100% confidential. If there is a problem with a member then delete their account and/or block their IP access. You don't just go and out someone because yo udon't agree with what they said or did especially when you have the power to limit their access anyway.

 

You Said: That's the scary part. The mods have access to who is handing out the reps. You said the current bunch of mods wouldn't "use" that info but scroll up. Someone posted info regarding who neg repped marijuana ranch. Shouldn't that be confidential?

Reply: Are you serious? Come on man. No name was even stated. But even if it was, this is the discretion of the moderator. I have before said

"User such-and-such only gave out 1 rep point, the others came from other members so you're not being attacked."

There is no problem with this. The reason they're hidden from you members is to stop any retaliation. Not saying you would. But some would. So mods can see if a member is being abused.

 

 

You Said: Sure they didn't give the actual handle of the person but they gave out general info that could help narrow down who it was.

Reply: Not really. Theres 16,000 users registered here. Tell me if you can confirm who gave MR the neg rep on his video post. I'll narrow it down to 15,999....it wasn't me..

 

You Said: On top of that a mod posted someone's IP address a couple weeks ago because the mod was mad about something they did.

There is no reason in the world to out someone like that. It's dangerous and that kind of info should be kept confidential. To some mod's credit, however, they apparently deleted the IP address posted by a different mod.

Reply: Sure. We all make mistakes. Who was the mod that corrected him? It was me wasn't it? I went in there and made every post with the IP invisible till the moderation staff cleaned it up. So where wasn't there a system of checks and balances in place? I corrected a darn Admin. Put my self on the line for the users to know there is always someone watching even if an admin makes a mistake.

 

You Said: This site should be 100% confidential. If there is a problem with a member then delete their account and/or block their IP access. You don't just go and out someone because yo udon't agree with what they said or did especially when you have the power to limit their access anyway.

Reply: I totally agree. And when I explained that saying the information regarding the ISP location would of gotten the same message across as posting the IP, they joked and said "Well why didn't you tell me that in the first place" (consenting a mistake was made). We all make mistakes at times. I happen to catch that one. The error of it was realized and I was told to "Just keep doing what your doing Eric...You were just sticking up for the members".

 

So again. A watchdog group is a redundant direction. We all watchdog each other.

[+RevThad]

Some folks will complain about anything, just to have something to complain about. Some folks will complain so that they can get the attention that they don't get in other parts of their lives. Some folks will complain because of "other side of the keyboard syndrome". The point is people are gonna complain even if they get everything they want handed to them on a silver platter, and balancing requests with other issues is a difficult task.

 

The administrators and mods around here have a pretty thankless and difficult job, keeping up with the number of posts, members, and other issues they are helping juggle in this community. They do this on a strictly volunteer basis, meaning they don't get paid and usually go unnoticed when things are running smoothly. It is the same on any site with a decent sized membership.

 

This site seems to be better than most with the way things are handled, with the various levels of oversight. While I am all for unifying the community in one place for sharing info and making it more readily available, the old adage still applies: If you don't like the rules, you know where the door is...

[Wired4Success]

All this useless banter over neg reps. Neg reps are great. Haha

 

sorry I know I'm a douche.

[Marijuana Ranch]

OK, I guess we'll try this again, but I'm begining to become board with this....

 

 

You said: With respect I think your indiference on this issue is why there is a problem..

it's not the reg thing

Reply: Fine. I see no problem with that.

 

 

You said: it is the green line between the mods and membership. There needs 2B a member group to help the mods beter understand us...

Reply: Why? The mods are members. They are all volunteer. They were all recruited and voted in from the membership pool. You're not showing us any thing that would suggest some rift between the moderation staff and the members other then your opinion which I've demonstrated is incorrect due to your even posting on this forum.

 

 

You said: Why is it not good for us working together to solve a issue important to the members?

Reply: The only one that's ever suggested this is you. And to be honest, you've proven yourself to be a problem member in the past. We can forgive easy enough, but we'd be fools to forget. And thanks to the moderation notes accessible to all staff we can keep on each member, we don't have to forget.

 

 

You said: If I was the one calling a member/mod a terroist like U did me; is that OK?

Reply: Well again I said "Makes you sound like", and it's true. Who was it making sock accounts to pester and attack other members? It was you. So when I've said something untrue, feel free to go to my superiors and they will reprimand me. I understand you may not like this being said publicly, and you want to disassociate yourself from your past actions, but that's not how the world works.

 

 

You said: Would it be considered a personal attack or not??? It is to me and it is just fine with you. Why?

Reply: Again when I've said something that can't be backed up with sources like your moderation notes coming from multiple staff members, it might be a personal attack. In this case, since we know your history and your attempts to be sneaky and underhanded by making sock accounts to attack members, it's merely stating a truth. You may not like the statement, but it's as good as any to describe your actions.

 

 

 

You said: Some people can dish it out but use there power when they decided they do not like being treated as they treat others.

Reply: You've failed to prove there are no checks and balances within the moderation staff. I've said how many times now that you're being allowed to post these forums is proof that we have checks and balances. Cause believe me, when you were being discussed...I was as open and straight forward as I am here. It was my suggestion to delete you and be done with the problems the moderation staff had. I was over ruled by the others. You keep beating the same dead horse. You're attacking a straw man. A cause that's not there. Is any of this making it through?

 

 

You said: Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely!

Reply: Just counting, I think it's funny that there are 12 people actively moderating this forum. Almost sounds like a Jury huh? There's actually a few more mods then that, but some of them aren't real active. But I think 12 people is a fine number to watch his/her brothers in moderation. Again making a statement like " Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely!" is a straw man. No one has "absolute power" It should seem to even the casual user there's more then one person behind the curtain around here.

 

 

You said: Call me I can explain!

Reply: I don't see a need. Even if the board deemed it necessary to have a moderation watchdog group set up, I have my doubts you would ever be included in it. (matter a fact I'd argue heavily against any mention of your account being brought into such a group). You'll take this as an offense, but I don't trust you. You've shown who you are, and on the internet I'd be a fool to think you've actually changed and aren't just putting up a front. Any attempt to change at this point would most likely be a ruse. We know your deceptive and malicious ( making false accounts to attack members) and the members don't have your best interest at heart (since you seen no problem with attacking them under a false account). I see no reason at all to call you to discuss this matter. This all goes back to the "checks and balances". I'd rather people see what I have to say. To be honest, as bad as you mangle things that are said and put your own spin to them.....public post are just fine with me...

 

 

Before we hijack this thread anymore, if you'd like to continue MR, why don't you start a thread about this watchdog group. Get it it's own title and topic and you may even be able to garner a little interest in this. It's kind of hidden within this "rep" thread. Who knows. You may get all kinds of people backing your suggestion. You make the topic and I'll move our post over to it.

 

Best

 

 

you r just plain wrong on this one.

but don't let facts get in the way...

[rope-a-dope]

you r just plain wrong on this one.

but don't let facts it in the way...

 

ranch man should be left on his own - he wants 2 things and we should give him neither: your $ and your attention.

 

creating false accounts to attack members? no surprise there. is there such a thing as "too low" for ranch man?