Abuses of Power

[Lemur, The Kool-Aid Guy]

I've been noticing a trend over my time here, about abuse of power, as you may have guessed from the thread title. There have been two incidents that come to my mind.

The first was quite a while ago. I posted a gif file in a pointless argument and someone changed the word filter to change the link into a different link insulting me. Today I noticed that when I told a member who left that I understand his reasons, Dutch edited out that portion of my comment.

Normally I wouldn't bring this up, but I think someone has to. Mods and/or admins can't run around doing whatever they wish. Ordinary members have rights too.

[Jenno]

What was the content of this edited post? Because I know Dutch doesn't just edit content out unless he believes there's reason to.

Given the nature of the thread and the general impression I'm getting, I'm assuming it involved some sort of comment regarding the staff. In which case it was likely edited because of a negative tone/nature to it that might offend some of the staff to some manner. However, if this was the case, Dutch should have left an edit tag explaining why it was edited or, ideally, PMed you. If he didn't then that is something he will have to remember to do if he has to edit someone's post again.

Talking negatively about the staff does still fall under the rule of offending folks on the forums. If there are constructive ideas, suggestions or comments regarding the staff then they should be on this board, like this thread. Not in the thread of someone who has left and deleted their profile, which typically signifies that they will not be returning to read anything else on the board.

~Jenno

[Apillis]

I'm going to be exceedingly candid here. I understand, the need to be diplomatic--especially when one is staff, but there comes a time for one to be blunt as well. As that can be the best thing to clear the air.

Now, here's the deal. Lmr, you have an incredible tendency to be passive-aggressively backhanded, dismissive, and get on your high-horse and generally be condescending toward some people either consciously or unconsciously (sometimes it's very difficult to tell which with you). But the problem is the moment someone decides to reply in kind to you--we get stuff like what you're posting here. It's somewhat like the boy who cried wolf, only in this case the boy lip-smacks a wolf, then gets mauled by it--and starts complaining and wondering why the wolf attacked them. The gif for what you say was a "pointless argument", well... funny how you don't delve into the context of it. Arguments at times exist because those participating often don't find what they're arguing about to be "pointless", it's a matter of perspective. But, let's say for your sake it was trivial, let's give that to you, when someone posts a gif to interject into such things, what's the purpose of it? A few things, typically to be dismissive, mock, or troll--often all of the above. So, you do such a thing, and someone (apparently a staffer in this case) decides to tease you in kind. And now you're crying foul.

Now, for the person's farewell thread, you did a classic passive-aggressive, sweeping back-handing statement and general complaint, which as Jenno stated--such things should be regulated to this board here and thread like this. But, your comment was edited into what is now minus the passive-aggressive addition of "Editing this because staff decided to censor my opinion." So, here, we're getting a trend. You make some sort of back-handed, passive-aggressive action or statement, you get called on it or given as good as deal out yourself, annnnnd suddenly the entire damn site is hearing complaints from you crying foul. Thereby constantly placing yourself in this victimized role of blaming others but taking no responsibility for your own actions. Ignoring that while you have the freedom to say what you want, you have no freedom of consequence or freedom from others to respond to your commentary (speaking of rights, that's how the 1st Amendment works. Enjoy.). Something people need to keep in mind when posting on the interwebz.

I mean, another example. You make a comment completely objectifying a woman--an actress, then some splendid person belittles you in turn, and suddenly you're crying foul. You see how this cycle keeps going on and on? And even after you read this, after you've just accused people of "abusing" their perceived "e-power", and then my calling you out for your own actions--you're going to jump right back into your passive aggression and complain to others in a heightened hyperbolic victimized disposition. Now, I can acknowledge that I can be--and often am a loud, blunt, jerk of a troll, and I may be fulfilling that role right now. But, I can acknowledge that about myself. And when I'm trolling and then staff gives me guff for trolling, I concede to it (typically, some times the troll within is just too strong for me to contain).

All in all, the point being, while--certainly perceived "abuses of e-power" is something to look at, understand--that the past and present actions of the accuser gets looked at in turn. And while, sure, I may not be staff anymore and I may be friends with one of those you accused, nevertheless I have to say it's very difficult to take your accusations seriously given your trends and history on the site.

[Lemur, The Kool-Aid Guy]

Frankly I'm going to ignore Apillis' wall of text. It's probably just criticism in a less-than-polite fashion.

I'll address Jenno instead. When the member said he was leaving after two weeks without a review, I told him "I don't blame you."

I didn't say "The staff sucks," or "Man those mods are tools."

It's a bit aggravating when you give me the "well you probably deserved it" argument first of all without saying anything about inappropriate conduct. That really doesn't surprise me one bit of course, as it's precisely what I'm used to and what I expect.

[Poludnica]

Well,I will just say that when one starts to wonder if someone abuses imaginary power over something like the internet, they may just go look for some more productive hobby instead.

Because, well, it's internet. You don't pay SWU taxes to be treated like a citizen that just got peed on by an internet law enforcer. If you don't like the rules, don't play the game.

[Apillis]

Apr 19, 2013 15:04:28 GMT -5 Lemur, The Kool-Aid Guy said:

Frankly I'm going to ignore Apillis' wall of text.

[Jenno]

Apr 19, 2013 15:04:28 GMT -5 Lemur, The Kool-Aid Guy said:

Frankly I'm going to ignore Apillis' wall of text. It's probably just criticism in a less-than-polite fashion.

I'll address Jenno instead. When the member said he was leaving after two weeks without a review, I told him "I don't blame you."

I didn't say "The staff sucks," or "Man those mods are tools."

It's a bit aggravating when you give me the "well you probably deserved it" argument first of all without saying anything about inappropriate conduct. That really doesn't surprise me one bit of course, as it's precisely what I'm used to and what I expect.

Actually you'll find I did address what would have been inappropriate conduct given the context. I also used a basic literary technique where I put it the second half of the paragraph in order to stress it more than the first half.

And 'I don't blame you' wasn't the only thing you put.

It's really great that you were able to quietly insult me at the end there.

Thank you,

~Jenno

[Lemur, The Kool-Aid Guy]

I think I know what I put Jenno. I'm the one who wrote it.

And you are all hearing exactly what you want to.

[Jenno]

I'm simply stating that those four words were not the only thing you put.

And you know, maybe when a lot of people are saying the same thing you should consider listening. When you don't simply disregard what someone is saying a compromise and/or understanding can be achieved. Progress is good.

Speaking of progress, Sparrow has spoken to Dutch so hopefully one of the admins will be PMing you rather soon.

~Jenno

[Lemur, The Kool-Aid Guy]

I know what I put. I said I didn't blame the member, and that I understood where he was coming from. So stop insinuating I said anything else.

[Jenno]

So what you're saying is... you did put more than those four words. That was the only point I was making there...

[Lemur, The Kool-Aid Guy]

So you're honestly trying to call me a liar because I paraphrased what I originally said?

That's a new low.

[Dutch]

Gonna go ahead and lock this. The issue has been discussed, and anything else will just exacerbate it.

[Dutch]

Dutch has deleted this message