 |
| |
|
|
|
In the OT, Dookie (Nimrod) recently made a thread arguing that when religious people do good deeds it can actually just be a selfish act trying to get to heaven. I found this to be an intelligent commentary on morality. Ming said it "demonstrated ignorance" and closed it. It is my opinion that it is not the moderator's job to judge whether a thread is right or not, only whether it is disruptive and violates the rules of this site. Would anyone important reading this please look into that? Thanks.
EDIT: Complaint 2: There were 83 posts on a thread continuing an old tradition, that of the Apolyton Elections. Last year, we held some elections just for fun (NOT to get someone to overthrow the mods or anything). People put a lot of work into this year's elections, and they were just closed under the pretense that "Apolyton is not a democracy". While this may be true in leadership, I don't think even the Communist Chinese have a problem with people holding mock elections for nothing, especially when they're already half done.
Please remember that both of these threads were the only threads the poster was allowed to post for a good part of a day, that they both saw nothing wrong with them, and that they were both made useless.
PS: Don't yell at me, I'm SUPPOSED to post OT moderation stuff here 
<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by Giant Squid (edited September 06, 2000).]</font>
|
|
| |
|
|
|
I know nothing of the sort. The elections preceded micronations by a long time, and many people who participated in the elections have flatly refused to join micronations when I have asked. What is more, you allow one micronation thread on the front page anyway. Fine...count this as the one thread and re-open it if you insist on misunderstanding the meaning of micronationalism.
As for Dookie's thread, I have no clue how you can construe that to be an insult. Personally, I think threads that say religious people are evil because they're responsible for the Crusades, etc. blah blah are far more insulting, but those have been left open. The thread makes a very valid point, and, in fact, I happen to agree with it. I strongly doubt it was only to insult religious people; there would be much easier ways.
PS: Just out of curiousity, when was the last time you reversed one of your decisions?
|
|
| |
|
|
Ming
|
|
As far as Dookies thread being insulting... it is a matter of opinion. And while we both disagree on whether it was insulting or not, the point is, I thought it was insulting, and it is my job to monitor this stuff.
And your memory must be failing you... Even mock elections have been off limits for a long time. Yes there were some elections attempted a long time ago, and that is why they aren't allowed now. Again, if you want to hold elections, go to a micronation and vote all you want. Your point that some people don't want to be involved in micronations is not relevant.
And to your point that this should be allowed if you call it a micronation thread is a joke. I don't care what you want to call it... but an election is an election. Any such threads in the future will be deleted without comment. And if it continues, people will get restricted.
And yes, I have reversed myself in the past... but neither of the cases you mention here warrent it. Yeah, it's just an opinion. But you are welcome to yours, and I am welcome to mine 
------------------
Ming
CivII & Off-Topic Forum Moderator
Ming@Apolyton.net
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Murgatroyd
|
|
95 South, 113 West
Feb 2000
time: 21:13
|
|
Ming: I have already PMed you on this topic, but I will make my position public here. To put it bluntly, I think your decision to shut down the elections was a blatant abuse of power.This was a fun little thing that had been going on for a full week. No one thought that the election would lead to an actual shift in the balance of power, and over the course of the week, it did not get out of hand. We do not expect you to be perfect all the time, but we do expect you to be reasonable. Please reopen the thread.
Murgatroyd
p.s. I consider your threat to "restrict" anyone who posts a thread like this in the future to be unreasonable.
----------------
Repeal the 1 Thread/8 Hour Limit!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ming: Sure. SSOM, for example. And while the rest of us have our opinions, we tend not to force them onto others. And if everyone's so different, why is yours the only opinion that counts in the closing of threads. (PS: I'm not too mad about the elections, but I really think that morality thread was legitimate)
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Murgatroyd
|
|
95 South, 113 West
Feb 2000
time: 21:13
|
|
<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src=/forums/"/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font><font size=1>Originally posted by reismark on 09-07-2000 02:48 PM</font>
(Translation: Elections turn to revolutions and flame war. Soon-after result: Moderation).
<img src=/forums/"/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>
This is a classic example of the logical fallacy known as "hasty generalization." As any scientist or mathematician could tell you, you cannot draw valid conclusions from one data point.
Murgatroyd
----------------
Repeal the 1 Thread/8 Hour Limit!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Murgatroyd
|
|
95 South, 113 West
Feb 2000
time: 21:13
|
|
However, because of changed conditions (now there are two moderators, and people know about the potential problems), the previous elections cannot be treated as a valid precedent. There is no way you can claim that you know that there would be problems with new "elections" based on your knowledge of the previous ones.
No, I wasn't here for the previous elections. Did people actually take them seriously?
Murgatroyd
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:13.
Apolyton Time is 00:13. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
07-09-2000 09:45
|