Free Web Hosting Provider - Web Hosting - E-commerce - High Speed Internet - Free Web Page
Search the Web

Welcome!

Close

Would you like to make this site your homepage? It's fast and easy...

Yes, Please make this my home page!

No Thanks

  Don't show this to me again.

Close

Click to scroll to commentary.

Moderator By Proxy

Posted on 02/26/2002 3:37 PM PST by Admin Moderator

click here to read article

I defer to the beleaguered Expert. =)

251 posted on 02/26/2002 6:45 PM PST by Askel5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 248 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Can you guys bump "The Geniuses at Free Dem" from Breaking News?

252 posted on 02/26/2002 6:46 PM PST by Interesting Times
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 247 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

You are the moderator tonight- are you making that call? ;-)

Tim

253 posted on 02/26/2002 6:48 PM PST by Admin Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 244 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

I have gay friends that don't like being called "queer" by straight people, so I chose not to do so.

The (3rd-grader) poet in me still hates the way homosexuals stole "gay" from the lexicon. And now some think to dictate how the Breeders will refer to Them.

How is it some groups have so much control over the language and get to set the rules Society itself will follow?

254 posted on 02/26/2002 6:48 PM PST by Askel5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 250 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

You are the moderator tonight- are you making that call? ;-)

Tim

255 posted on 02/26/2002 6:49 PM PST by Admin Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 244 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

NEW AR (came in via Freepmail):

Just an FYI; noticed this new name. Not a pretty name and I am waiting for him to say something....

http://www.freerepublic.com/pe rl/profile?u=78644

256 posted on 02/26/2002 6:50 PM PST by Admin Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 244 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

You are the moderator tonight- are you making that call? ;-)

Yep.

257 posted on 02/26/2002 6:51 PM PST by Interesting Times
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 253 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Let's say you were a moderator. You are in this position. Would you think, "Ah ha! I have all this power to ban people, they will succumb to my bidding?" or, would you feel, "I hope I make the right decision, Jim has asked me to do this job, I hope I don't screw it up."

Just rememeber, we are you, we are freepers, and we for the most part didn't ask to do this. We were approached. If you were asked, and you accepted, would you be on a power trip? I remember, the first time I was given the ability to ban someone, I was scared shitless.

Sandy

258 posted on 02/26/2002 6:51 PM PST by Admin Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 214 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Done. Tim

259 posted on 02/26/2002 6:52 PM PST by Admin Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 252 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Its quite an unfortunate sitatuation, not to mention logically absurd to say the meaning of word is strictly dependent upon the attriubtes of the person speaking it.

Of course, I don't think groups like QueerNation represent most Gay people. The ones I know just want to go about their business and be left alone, rather than have a big parade and perform acts in public that no Hetero-Sexual would be permitted to perform.

When I was at a large well known university working, my boss thought it was "cool" that the Gay/lesbian whatever society wanted to come in to Phyllis Shafly speech and "make-out." Of course no hetero-sexual couple would ever be permitted to do such a thing. Needless to say, there was no same sex couples making out during her speech.

260 posted on 02/26/2002 6:55 PM PST by diotima
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 254 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Sandy, I am heading out. I am not copying over any more ARs tonight. Good night everyone. Tim

261 posted on 02/26/2002 6:57 PM PST by Admin Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 259 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Just rememeber, we are you, we are freepers, and we for the most part didn't ask to do this. We were approached. If you were asked, and you accepted, would you be on a power trip? I remember, the first time I was given the ability to ban someone, I was scared shitless.

A commendable response.

I on the other hand am suffused with a new sense of dazzling power. Truly, those who have long tormented me will now pay a terrible price. Behold the stern, vengeful visage of I.T., all ye freepers, and tremble, for I now hold your pitiful destinies in my hand. Watch and marvel as great host of festering inequities is set to rights. And it all starts this very night.

So what do you think? Am I moderator material?

262 posted on 02/26/2002 6:58 PM PST by Interesting Times
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 258 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Like I said earlier, Russian Roulette with Forum's head.

I don't think you are on a power trip, this is a tremendous job with many consequences.

Do you guys have "shifts" or are you around whenever you can be?

263 posted on 02/26/2002 6:58 PM PST by diotima
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 258 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

I promise never to use the world -al-d in my future posts, -al-d or not.

264 posted on 02/26/2002 6:59 PM PST by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 232 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

LOL. Got eight for me?

Sandy

265 posted on 02/26/2002 7:01 PM PST by Admin Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 240 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

So what do you think? Am I moderator material?

I'm looking forward to the answer to this question.

266 posted on 02/26/2002 7:04 PM PST by Askel5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 262 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Elitist.

267 posted on 02/26/2002 7:06 PM PST by diotima
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 262 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Note also the remarkable restraint I'm showing by not vaporizing Askel5 and Dio...

268 posted on 02/26/2002 7:09 PM PST by Interesting Times
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 261 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

STT, I was simply expressing my opinion. That doesn't mean that the subject goes my direction by default. You expressed your opinion and I think you made some interesting points.

269 posted on 02/26/2002 7:11 PM PST by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 234 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Goodnight Tim, I'll be leaving shortly. Sandy

270 posted on 02/26/2002 7:18 PM PST by Admin Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 261 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Thanks Sandy! ***applause applause***

271 posted on 02/26/2002 7:19 PM PST by diotima
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 270 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Yes, I'd think ah ha, I now have all the power. I've got lists after lists after lists of people who done me wrong... Grin.

No I wouldn't get a kick out of running people unless they had crossed the line, then I'd have no problem with it. Some would be gone without a second thought. Other's might get a note asking them to please consider the rules when they posted. But when the time came, I'd have no problem with it.

I think the real problem for me would be trying to be as fair as possible with people I've know to be a problem, especially if I've had a run-in with them. I'd probably give them a little more latitude than other to be sure I'd treated them reasonably.

272 posted on 02/26/2002 7:19 PM PST by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 258 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

We're generally have a 'schedule'. There are 9 moderators. Right now, 2 are on a personal time off for various reasons. Between us we are able to cover all the hours. I'm a very early morning person. Others come on later in the afternoon. A couple work the graveyard shifts. There are enough of us to have the 24 hours covered. Then, we have a couple who seem to never sleep. They float in an out whenever. I don't know how Jim survived before he got help. One person can not possibly do it.

273 posted on 02/26/2002 7:27 PM PST by Admin Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 263 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Note also the remarkable restraint I'm showing

Well, save for whooping it up with the magic wand and all.

But who can blame you? Pretty cool, actually, we get to see the FAB in action. We should definitely do this more often. Puts a little punch in all the opinionatin' around here.

I'll see if I can't broach words I'd like deleted -- before my eyes -- from the Forum without actually mentioning them next time.

274 posted on 02/26/2002 7:28 PM PST by Askel5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 268 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

STT, I was simply expressing my opinion. That doesn't mean that the subject goes my direction by default. You expressed your opinion and I think you made some interesting points.

Fine, but, in the meantime, Dio epressed the same opinion as you did (re: the word Queer) and someone's reply on a thread tonight was deleted by the Admin Moderator.

That's my primary objection. The increasing moderation of FR. The increasing "PCing" of FR.

It is beginning to remind me of all those conservatives who win primaries running as a conservative and then snatch defeat from the jaws of victory by becoming moderates.

My fear is that mindset is now firmly rooted here on FR.

Your refusal to even spell out the word queer makes me think some pod out there in CA has taken you over!

275 posted on 02/26/2002 7:32 PM PST by Seeking the truth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 269 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

I know this seems like 20 questions, but do you prefer that people sign their names (rather...uh..type) when they put in an abuse request?

Also, do you know who are "serial" flame war starters, is that kept track of in any way. Some posters always seem to be in the middle of a flame war.

276 posted on 02/26/2002 7:33 PM PST by diotima
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 273 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

You could leave a couple letters here and there out of the actual spelling. :)

277 posted on 02/26/2002 7:34 PM PST by Seeking the truth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 274 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

I promise never to use the world -al-d in my future posts, -al-d or not.

Oh, you can certainly pull it off. One has to have a certain doughty quality, which I completely lacked at the time...Posters of substance such as yourself have much more leeway.

Carry on. It's valid.

278 posted on 02/26/2002 7:37 PM PST by M. Thatcher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 264 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

If we are friends with someone, and that someone is over the line, we just ask to not make any decisions regarding that thread or poster. No one questions the motives. We realize we all have our circle of friends and that's as far as it goes. It's not real hard to seperate the moderating issues from the regular freeping stuff. It's similar to being on the FAB. FABer's have many friends that are not on the board, yet you don't go telling your friends what happens on these threads. It's being professional with the jobs we hold.

279 posted on 02/26/2002 7:38 PM PST by Admin Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 272 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Queer is the mildest word I would use. Call me old fashioned.

280 posted on 02/26/2002 7:41 PM PST by Registered
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 275 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

We don't know who makes AR reports. If you want a reply please post your screen name. Using the AR system is the fastest way to contact us. It's our 'home' page. We share mail, and sometime if you mail and expect a fast reply we may not see it. Sidebar and Admin moderators have seperate mail, so that makes it even harder.

We know the serial flame war people only by reviewing their posts and their history. We have no way of knowing who is posting AR's. It's pretty obvious who reports when they say "post 67 is an attack on me".

Sandy

281 posted on 02/26/2002 7:45 PM PST by Admin Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 276 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

I'm calling it a night. Looks as if I'm the last mod replying to any questions. I'll be back in the morning. Goodnight all.

Sandy

282 posted on 02/26/2002 7:47 PM PST by Admin Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 281 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

You could leave a couple letters here and there out of the actual spelling. :)

HEY ... that solves ALL the problems with my proposal!

A "Hangman" chalkboard motif would be ideal for my proposed List of Words Folks Find Offensive.

I'll begin recrafting my Modest Proposal post haste!

283 posted on 02/26/2002 7:49 PM PST by Askel5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 277 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

To all of you Admin Moderator's: As usual I come a bit late for the party...but looking thru the leavings has been quite an eye opener. I can only thank you for your services and my deepest appreciation and sympathy go to you all. I have laughed and I have cried over the examples on this thread. You are brave and must have a great sense of humor to stick with it. I'm glad yer here. JimRob done good.

284 posted on 02/26/2002 8:33 PM PST by amom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 281 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Thanks very much for this fun and informative thread. I am impressed.

285 posted on 02/26/2002 8:34 PM PST by M. Thatcher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 282 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

What would you do if you were a moderator? How would you handle these complaints?

I agree with diotima in comment #34 where she suggested pulling the individual comment. Everyone is right about the nazi comment...it is the second comment on the thread and immediately sends the discussion off topic from the original article.

That comment, #2, in my opinion is racist. A brief guideline for posting is already in place: NO profanity, NO personal attacks, NO racism or violence in posts. Whatever is deleted, locked or censored must meet one of those criteria...oh, and the much-loathed tin foil threads. This poster lumped together a group of people who he obviously detests, and likened them to a despised group of people who killed for sport. It is blatantly racist and should be deleted and the poster should be warned.

In all of the threads, except the dumb one about censorship, the subject has discussion/debate value, however, some ignorant comment can take it way off topic.

As for the post about the man saying the offenders should be tarred and feathered, I don't think he was promoting violence. He didn't exactly say, "meet me at the Dairy Queen at 5:00 and we'll go after these guys." He thought this was a serious offense and he was trying to come up with a punishment to fit the crime.

My 2 cents, and thank you for bringing this discussion to the FAB.

286 posted on 02/26/2002 8:40 PM PST by PistolPaknMama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Thanks for the comments. When someone figures out what that substance is, I hope they email me. I know what I'd like it to be, but don't always feel that I hit the mark. Grin.

287 posted on 02/26/2002 8:45 PM PST by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 278 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Sorta give the term Podner a whole new meaning. Talk to you later.

288 posted on 02/26/2002 8:46 PM PST by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 275 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Maybe it might be possible to put togther some guildlines for posting that are cumulative as possible.

Also, do you inform people why something they wrote was pulled? Or a thread they started was yanked?

This is a good idea. It should be posted as a "terms and agreeemnt" on the sign up screen for newbies. Shoot, make all the oldies re-up so they can click "yes" on the terms and agreement.

Or do we have that already? I don't remember my sign up experience at FR, might be due to the post traumatic stress. heheheh

289 posted on 02/26/2002 8:54 PM PST by PistolPaknMama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

All it does is make us look like a bunch of red-necks.

Hey!!!! I'm a red neck!! And *I* don't like the Q word! You are labeling! Ain't that the very thing we're discussing here? :-)

290 posted on 02/26/2002 9:05 PM PST by PistolPaknMama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Use of the word Queer will result in your post getting pulled.

Ok,sorry, I have to ask. How does that fall into "NO profanity, NO personal attacks, NO racism or violence in posts." Again we have deviated from any continuity.

Should we also have criteria for using "negro, black, colored, or African-American"? Which is the most friendly term for referring to the targeted group? I know a black lady who is offended to be called African-American...insists she is an American who has black skin.

How about referring to women as chics or babes?

I don't like the word and don't use it. The homosexuals call *themselves* queer. They even have a website called Us Queers. It is an acceptable term, even in the homosexual circles.

Besides, if posting rules are so stringent, posters must check the list of acceptable (or unacceptable) words before posting. That doesn't sound desireable to me.

291 posted on 02/26/2002 9:23 PM PST by PistolPaknMama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

You got it. I don't want to publish a rule book. Keep it simple. Hell, I don't want any rules at all other than the Golden Rule and that would automatically rule out most of the trash.

292 posted on 02/26/2002 9:35 PM PST by Jim Robinson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 291 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

I'm a red neck!

That's "neck of color," please.

293 posted on 02/26/2002 9:42 PM PST by M. Thatcher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 290 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

other than the Golden Rule

I think that went the way of the Ten Commandments and the Constitution and a few other archaic, living, breathing documents.

294 posted on 02/26/2002 9:54 PM PST by PistolPaknMama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 292 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

"neck of color,"

LOL! That might make me a minority and I might can get some of those entitlement things they been talking about!

295 posted on 02/26/2002 9:58 PM PST by PistolPaknMama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 293 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

"How does that fall into "NO profanity, NO personal attacks, NO racism or violence in posts."

I seem to remember at one time you had these on the posting page, but they are no longer there. Maybe they need to be back there.

Are we going to join the PC crowd now with rules on who, what, where, why, when and how we post? The majority of people that are posters are ladies and gentlemen and know how to conduct themselves on the threads. They are aware of the current terminology for this, that and the other.

Why must we give in to minority groups? Isn't that exactly what the democrats have been doing for years? Are we going to fall into that trap and allow the door to snap closed behind us? Are we going to give them the ammunition to say that we are no better or worse then they are? How can we, as Conservatives and Constitutionalists, stand up and say our way is better when we do the same things they do?

There is one thing that has always brought us down and that is the in-fighting. We never seem to make any progress because of it.

296 posted on 02/26/2002 9:59 PM PST by dixie sass
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 292 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

No we are not going to have a rule book. The existing rules are fine. But, yes, we are going to continue to be mindful of others. We do not use racial slurs and we do not bash homos, etc. If that's what you mean by being P/C and minorities, etc.

And I do not know what happened to the "No" line on the reply form. I believe that it is still on the article posting form. John must've accidentally knocked it off.

297 posted on 02/26/2002 10:13 PM PST by Jim Robinson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 296 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

I seem to remember at one time you had these on the posting page, but they are no longer there.

Dixie, I've notice that sometimes they are there and sometimes they aren't. It's the FR gremlins again!

This thread has been a fun discussion. Thanks to you all....especially the moderators who put up with us! Nytol!

298 posted on 02/26/2002 10:13 PM PST by PistolPaknMama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 296 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Oops. Foot-n-mouth strikes again...

299 posted on 02/26/2002 10:13 PM PST by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 290 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Night.

300 posted on 02/26/2002 10:16 PM PST by dixie sass
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 298 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Hmmm.... interesting. Sometimes you get the "Loose lips" line and other times the "No profanity..." line. Hadn't noticed that before.

301 posted on 02/26/2002 10:16 PM PST by Jim Robinson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 298 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

I do think we need to be careful about using the term "red-neck" since it's so offensive to use terms that might cast a poor light on Native Americans. Please forgive me. I'm trying to be sensitive.

302 posted on 02/26/2002 10:17 PM PST by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 293 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Well, that's valid.

303 posted on 02/26/2002 10:18 PM PST by M. Thatcher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 302 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Hmmmmmmmm.

304 posted on 02/26/2002 10:20 PM PST by dixie sass
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 302 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Going out for a walk. Maybe I can find the answers to some of my questions out there somewhere.

305 posted on 02/26/2002 10:23 PM PST by dixie sass
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 302 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

I haven't read through all the responses yet, but I have two suggestions.

If this is done, then it would be very helpful if:

1. The FAB had some sort of pop-up box like the ones to notify us we have FR messages, when this process is invoked; and

2. It would be great if a mechanism were in place to remove the subject from the rotation on Latest Posts on the FAB when a determination is made, so we aren't beating a dead horse.

306 posted on 02/27/2002 12:28 AM PST by GretchenEE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

"do you know who are "serial" flame war starters, is that kept track of in any way."

We keep track of things, and it would be impossible to do this job and not know who is involved in flame wars often. How to handle them is generally a challenge though. Tim

307 posted on 02/27/2002 1:54 AM PST by Admin Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 276 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

People who use "Negro" in writings tend to be serial racists. I have yet to be wrong on this.

308 posted on 02/27/2002 3:30 AM PST by AppyPappy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 291 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

John must've accidentally knocked it off.

Or maybe you barked "Knock it off!" at him. ;^)

309 posted on 02/27/2002 4:40 AM PST by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 297 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Should we also have criteria for using "negro, black, colored, or African-American"? Which is the most friendly term for referring to the targeted group? I know a black lady who is offended to be called African-American...insists she is an American who has black skin. How about referring to women as chicks or babes?

My chick insists on it. ;^)

310 posted on 02/27/2002 4:42 AM PST by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 291 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Queer is the mildest word I would use. Call me old fashioned.

That's not PC enough.

You are a 'person of aged values'.

311 posted on 02/27/2002 4:43 AM PST by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 280 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

We don't know who makes AR reports.

I knew the abuse button was anonymous to the forum, but I had no idea it was anonymous to the management. I assumed that my screen name identity would be revealed when I hit the abuse button. Personally, I think it should be.

I have probably hit the abuse button about 7-10 times since its inception. I will sign my screen name in the future, but I still think it would help the moderators' judgment if they knew who was reporting the abuse. Just MHO.

Sorry, but I've only skimmed this thread because of its length and my schedule.

312 posted on 02/27/2002 5:06 AM PST by Fred Mertz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 281 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Abuse reports are anonymous to the moderators, but if there is a valid reason, Jim or John can let us know who made the report. This is rarely used unless someone appears to be abusing the abuse button.

313 posted on 02/27/2002 5:36 AM PST by Sidebar Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 312 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Good Morning all. Sandy

Here's a new AR

Regarding #300

Please delete this thread which has degenerated into an intellectually bankrupt and absurd insult fest, where BoPepper and DWSUF trade (sometimes violently) insults and threaten each other with consultations to their rspective attorneys and other physical abuse. It is truly a violent, abusive and disgusting thread. Thank you.

314 posted on 02/27/2002 5:41 AM PST by Admin Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 313 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

They are in love now and swapping kid pics. I'd leave it.

315 posted on 02/27/2002 5:54 AM PST by AppyPappy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 314 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Thanks, will do. I thought there may be interest in this type of AR. Now, I have to leave for awhile. Sandy

316 posted on 02/27/2002 6:07 AM PST by Admin Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 315 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Hello. I am new to this discussion and do not expect to stay long. The other moderators have done a fine job of speaking for all of us.

I just want to comment on a few things that I've observed regarding this discussion.

The AR's posted here have not included:
- multiple AR's on the same complaint
- obscenities (for example, I pulled a post yesterday, mild compared to most obscenities we see, that simply said "Eat Sh*t and die!")
- requests to have items moved into and out of Breaking News, Front Page, Humor, Your Opinions/Questions, etc.
- requests to edit posts. LOL, we always laugh about that one because we do not edit posts!
- requests to pull a thread that didn't post correctly, or to change a title, or to fix the remove a url that posted where the title should have been
- hate mail received by all of us as Admin Moderator, Sidebar Moderator, Jim Robinson
- freepmails asking why we did this or that. SPAM freepmails that get excessively abusive depending on the poster
- bumps to the moderators on threads.
- threatening freepmails between users - some of them very serious
- articles posted from the LAT or WP
- software requests/suggestions
- personal information posted

These are just some examples of what we get on a daily basis. I am certain I've omitted some.

Now consider the time it takes to review each of these. We do not like to ban anyone, so we spend a good amount of time researching a user's posting history before even suggesting a ban on someone.

Look how much time you have spent here discussing whether or not the word QUEER should have been pulled from a single post. Multiply that times 100 and you might come close to the time we spend researching, discussing and deciding on our actions.

Then are are the full moon days when the disruptors make their concerted attacks...

I have so many names I can't keep up with them all. Just call me "Anything". I'll answer.

Anything.

317 posted on 02/27/2002 7:00 AM PST by Admin Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 316 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Dear Anything:

Whew! What a list. I REALLY wouldn't want your job. It seems not enough to say thank you. How's this?

318 posted on 02/27/2002 7:15 AM PST by WillaJohns
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 317 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

That is just fine! You are welcome! We do it because we love freerepublic.com.

Anything

319 posted on 02/27/2002 7:24 AM PST by Admin Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 318 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

I have a suggestion, I have no way of knowing if this would be effective, but how about something in red above the AR forum saying "the abuse button is not a toy to sanitize the views here, nor is it a way to get back at your debating opponents," the same way that the "Loose Lips Sink Ships" comes up when you post.

320 posted on 02/27/2002 7:53 AM PST by diotima
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 319 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Look how much time you have spent here discussing whether or not the word QUEER should have been pulled from a single post.

The "discussion" took place ex post facto.

On the basis of one FAB member to have the post deleted, it was removed.

There was no discussion. You just deleted it.

IMHO, that was totally wrong - on so many levels.

321 posted on 02/27/2002 7:55 AM PST by Seeking the truth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 317 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

You are so correct on so many levels.

322 posted on 02/27/2002 8:07 AM PST by Askel5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 321 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

On the basis of one FAB member to have the post deleted, it was removed.

There was no discussion. You just deleted it.

IMHO, that was totally wrong - on so many levels.

Excellent idea, accept the globalist elite have infiltrate the Israeli leadership and won't allow Sharon to do the obvious.

There are many competitive agendas in the world today: the Vatican's EU fourth Reich, the freemason's globalist antichrist world government, international communism, the 'rouge' nature of the Islamic world, the soon establishment of the reign of 'the King of the Jews' from mount Zion. Only one scenerio will ultimately be played out. Check your Bible for future details.

Michael's rapid ascent to national prestige possibly be for the express purpose of shielding the freemasons from exposure.

"I don't know how anyone could possibly deal with a bunch of guys who look like this and not suspect that something fishy was going down."

Was there any 'black muslim' connection here?

""You're not saying that Mr. Hammad had anything to do with Katherine Smith's death, are you?" Erwin asked Nash. "No, not at this time," she replied. "You're not saying he had anything to do with the World Trade Center attack, are you," he asked again. "No, not at this time," she repeated. "

ARM YOURSELF, BE VIGILENT & DON'T TRUST ARABS...........PARTICULARY YOUNG MALES.

"US Seeking to Stop Israeli Sale of Military Technology to India"

WHY?

This can only be explained by the influence of the pro-Arab, big-oil, CFR-related conspiracists. The mis-direction of the 'illuminists', at this time, are effectively turning the disaster of the WTC attack into a global war.

323 posted on 02/27/2002 8:19 AM PST by Admin Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 321 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

To: dixie sass

No we are not going to have a rule book. The existing rules are fine. But, yes, we are going to continue to be mindful of others. We do not use racial slurs and we do not bash homos, etc. If that's what you mean by being P/C and minorities, etc.

And I do not know what happened to the "No" line on the reply form. I believe that it is still on the article posting form. John must've accidentally knocked it off.

297 posted on 2/26/02 11:13 PM Pacific by Jim Robinson

I believe the use of any word in a derogatory manner directed at another individual is not being "mindful of others".

Anything

324 posted on 02/27/2002 8:23 AM PST by Admin Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 321 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Being that I am at work, I can't take the time to do what I did last night. However, last night was very slow and not very representative. Just to give a further snapshot of things, the following AR just came in:

Regarding this thread:

Regarding #361

More nasty name calling and personal attacks. I come to this site to learn and be informed--not to read this stuff.

To: William Wallace

This is an accomplishment for you Joe. One consecutive post without a misspelling!

Oh, you want get personal with me? That's OK.

We love reading post like yours here in the southwest, as your just another immigration expert from Pennsylvania that's going to tell all of us out here that's its no problem. Were just all bigots and racist.

Let me tell you asshole, you don't have an f-ing clue. We are being overrun with *millions* criminal illegal aliens while American chicken sh*ts from Pennsylvania like you, point out spelling errors from the side lines and attempt to minimize this titanic invasion.

People like you remind me of places far away, in a place where it wasn't the ememy that created your concern, as much as the people standing next to you.

361 posted on 2/27/02 12:05 PM Eastern by Joe Hadenuf

325 posted on 02/27/2002 8:25 AM PST by Admin Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 323 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

"On the basis of one FAB member to have the post deleted, it was removed.

There was no discussion. You just deleted it."

Actually, there was discussion, and two FAB members suggested to pull.

Your point is a good one though. When I pull something, I have to make sure that it is not just my opinion. I have to try to reflect Jim's desires, and I have to try to apply the cumulative experience and wisdom of the other moderators.

That did not happen there, because the keys were turned over to "here". The decision was made and I followed it. Is that passing the buck? Yes, to some degree. As I stated above, it was done for a demonstration purpose, and it was also done with me checking the context a bit behind the scenes. Tim

326 posted on 02/27/2002 8:33 AM PST by Admin Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 321 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

OK, you have typed a lot and I don't have a lot of time to "research" everything.

My take is that use of the word "Queer" is contingent on the Freepers previous posts, political beliefs, born on date and miscellaneous and sundry other subjective matters relating to possible future posts by said freeper.

While this is somewhat tongue in cheek, that is how it sounded to me.

If another Freeper passes the above "litmus tests", that Freeper is free to use the word "Queer"

I must have missed the * in Jim's Rules.

Please: NO profanity, NO personal attacks, NO racism or violence in posts*

327 posted on 02/27/2002 8:41 AM PST by Seeking the truth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 326 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

As I stated above, it was done for a demonstration purpose

As was Interesting Times's deletion of my only somewhat satiric request for list of Forbidden Words to be posted where all can see them?

Exactly what did that demonstrate? You never answered his question on whether or not he was good moderator material.

What sort of warning should I have received for posting thus?

328 posted on 02/27/2002 8:45 AM PST by Askel5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 326 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

No, closer to it would be: "Let's see what happens if we let the FAB make a few calls. I will tell them that if I hear two of them agree, then I will do what I was told. However, to make sure I am not letting anything really bad happen, I will check the context first and slow it down if it appears to be a major mistake". Tim

329 posted on 02/27/2002 8:54 AM PST by Admin Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 327 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

I think that if one of us made decisions like that without the buyin of the other moderators, that one of us would quickly end up on an island and probably out. Tim

330 posted on 02/27/2002 8:56 AM PST by Admin Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 328 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

By the way, here is the post of yours that was removed. Again, it was removed to show that when someone makes a call, it has real results.

I understand that you are directing your question at me, as to "why did I do it", but actually, IT made the call.

Were we to make arbitrary calls like that, we would face the questioning of each other, and of Jim. We also have an observer who pops in every once in a while to question us.

That was a demonstration. Just as you are questioning why I (actually he) decided to pull that post, we have to answer to each other, and more importantly, to Jim.

And he watches, and he watches pretty well.

To: diotima

Either way, whatever the policy is, it should hold across the board: all posts with it are pulled or no posts with it are pulled.

Consistency is key.

I move that we post a list of offending words so that no one loses a post by using in a correct (but benign) slang context a word some might consider inflammatory.

Naturally, the more the Moderators have in the way of TOS specifics to back them up, the better. Folks will know up front where they stand.

Perhaps we could just outlaw slang altogether. Frankly, while I might let it fly at the computer or when I can't find my keys, I see no reason for the words Piss or Shit or Fuck to appear on the forum. Takes the polish of a person and takes the polish off this Forum.

Likewise, having gotten in trouble for it myself by FReepmail once, I know for a fact that many find the use of Christ's name as a swear word or in a "Chrissakes" or "Oh God .. " or "Ohmi-Gawd" colloquialism offensive. I think we should rule that out too.

Ideally, we'd just have some kind of spider that could roam the forum and zap replies containing any such words in the Defamatory Database. (But let's wait on asking John about that until the Search function returns by Poster or Date.)

238 posted on 2/26/02 7:39 PM Pacific by Askel5

331 posted on 02/27/2002 9:06 AM PST by Admin Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 238 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

No, closer to it would be: "Let's see what happens if we let the FAB make a few calls. I will tell them that if I hear two of them agree, then I will do what I was told. However, to make sure I am not letting anything really bad happen, I will check the context first and slow it down if it appears to be a major mistake".

Okay, now that I know this is the movitation -- to make some sort of demonstration or point to us -- I am completely opposed to Moderation By Proxy.

FAB mostly supports you and we don't need any 'lessons' or 'points' made. If you have any problems, I think it is with the at-large forum. Not us.

332 posted on 02/27/2002 9:12 AM PST by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 329 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Anything did a fine job of listing some of the other things we do as moderators, but I'd like to clear up one thing about what powers we DON'T have.

We CAN NOT edit the wording in anyone's replies to a thread, nor can we edit the text of the article at the top of the thread.

We CAN change the title, author, classification (eg. news. editorial, announcement, your opinion....etc). But none of us can go beyond that.

Red

333 posted on 02/27/2002 9:19 AM PST by Sidebar Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 317 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

So would you rather be called a "Nazi" or "ineffective"? I lean toward Nazi on my sites because I don't have time to be ineffective. If I don't like it, I delete it. I find the people who whine the most are usually there to disrupt.

334 posted on 02/27/2002 9:24 AM PST by AppyPappy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 333 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

So would you rather be called a "Nazi" or "ineffective"?

I think most of us pretty much ignore the insults aimed at us on the threads, but we take Jim's comments to us in the background very seriously.

335 posted on 02/27/2002 9:27 AM PST by Sidebar Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 334 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

By the way, here is the post of yours that was removed. Again, it was removed to show that when someone makes a call, it has real results.

I understand that you are directing your question at me, as to "why did I do it", but actually, IT made the call.

Here's my actual post:

**Abuse report: Would you please delete post #238 on this thread, based on its own internal logic?**

All other moderating decisions made by FAB members on this thread were only implemented after checking to see if this was the member's "final answer." Since no such question was asked of me, and since Askel5's post remained untouched last night, I thought that you had correctly understood that I was just highlighting the self-contradicting nature of that post.

Were we to make arbitrary calls like that, we would face the questioning of each other, and of Jim. We also have an observer who pops in every once in a while to question us.

Had I been serious, I could easily refute that comment by pointing out the "no profanity" clause of Jim's posting guidelines.

That was a demonstration. Just as you are questioning why I (actually he) decided to pull that post, we have to answer to each other, and more importantly, to Jim.

And not a particularly valid one. Obviously if I had the ability to delete the post myself, nothing would have happened.

I thought the original exercise of having the FAB act as moderators was interesting and useful, but now this is getting silly.

336 posted on 02/27/2002 9:57 AM PST by Interesting Times
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 331 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Agreed.

And I think I demonstrated another thing, which is that sometimes we make mistakes, as I did there.

337 posted on 02/27/2002 10:03 AM PST by Admin Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 336 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

I think that if one of us made decisions like that without the buyin of the other moderators, that one of us would quickly end up on an island and probably out. Tim

Please. You set up a situation where a single comment leads to the deletion of a post, then complain that I failed to build a consensus?

338 posted on 02/27/2002 10:04 AM PST by Interesting Times
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 330 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

You are right. I made a mistake. I am sorry.

339 posted on 02/27/2002 10:08 AM PST by Admin Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 338 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

You are right. I made a mistake. I am sorry.

I've been known to do that myself -- thanks for the quick correction.

Regards
I.T.

340 posted on 02/27/2002 10:11 AM PST by Interesting Times
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 339 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Fair enough.

I particularly liked hearing about the Effect of the Observer. (There's just something pleasing about the math ... =)

I've always maintained that's it Jim's prerogative to do whatever the hell he wishes with his property and it's your job to respect his wishes. But I think the independence and objectivity of a trusted observer is an excellent resource for those of you who've obligated yourselves to the mission of maintaing the integrity of the site.

In fact, I've always figured that sort of objective and independent opinion was the purpose behind this Advisory Forum. It was my original understanding that in addition to the executive-level board, this was a place where the regular joes could be polled for their opinions or offer up topics for discussion. I'm not big on titles but I was both pleased and proud to become a Charter Member of the FAB.

That's one reason I wonder if we shouldn't retool the FAB somewhat so that the Forum Advisory Board is comprised strictly of regular-issue posters with no particular obligations, duties, offices, responsiblities or other conflicts of interest. We're literally a microcosm of the Forum at large that way and in no way unduly prejudiced by the opinions of the Inner Ring within our midst.

For example, I'd find it disingenuous if the Moderators posted in as Moderators on this thread only to turn around and offer their two cents as FAB Members. Clearly, that would be a conflict of interest and a failure to disclose one's very critical bias regarding the subject at hand.

Likewise, I think there are some natural divisions (more apparent with every thread) that should be made formal within the FAB. This way we would preclude absolutely the temptation to ascribe to others any motive besides what's best for the Forum.

One thing I've always liked about this forum is that we're NOT privy to the duking it out backstage that may or may not transpire among the Moderators or executive-level advisory members or even Jim's own opining.

We make our petition or offer advice as asked and things happen or they don't. 'Nuff said.

I suggest strongly that the officers of the .Net consider recusing themselves not only for purposes of leaving the Forum Advisory Board a strictly Forum affair but also to protect themselves from exposing more of their decision-making, personal biases and discerning than folks need or care to know. I think that this would be a step in the right direction where the professionalism and discretion so necessary to such a public organization is concerned.

For that reason, I'm hopeful we can return the FAB to its original profile ... sans executive-level advisors, moderators or office-holders of either the Forum or the Net save for Bob J's supervisory capacity, of course.

341 posted on 02/27/2002 10:35 AM PST by Askel5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 330 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

I trust you understand my use of "bias" is in no way a perjorative as used above.

I think we're all "biased" in favor of Free Republic, for example. And a good thing, too.

342 posted on 02/27/2002 10:37 AM PST by Askel5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 341 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

When an abuse report comes in, we will copy it and post it here on this thread with a link to the thread in question. We will let the FAB decide. Obviously, there will be cases where there are differences of opinions, so we will play it by ear on how to handle it.

That sounds as if it might be the source of more fun around hereabouts than I've had since Jim posted the bells a whistles to mark Cli'ton's impeachment!

I'm a starter!

Bring 'em on!

343 posted on 02/27/2002 10:41 AM PST by Brian Allen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

That's one reason I wonder if we shouldn't retool the FAB somewhat so that the Forum Advisory Board is comprised strictly of regular-issue posters with no particular obligations, duties, offices, responsiblities or other conflicts of interest. We're literally a microcosm of the Forum at large that way and in no way unduly prejudiced by the opinions of the Inner Ring within our midst.

STELLAR idea, Askel! FAB is (well, with one mole of an exception) vetted and trusted users, all. Thusly it is truly a microcosm of "good" FR users.

344 posted on 2/27/02 11:45 AM Pacific by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 341 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Please translate.

345 posted on 2/27/02 11:47 AM Pacific by M. Thatcher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 341 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

(well, with one mole of an exception)

It has occurred to me that FAB threads might not be the hot black-market commodity they've been of late if we'd left FAB at it's original level of Man-on-the-Street input and resisted the urge to delve into more critical and purely private matters among those with real responsibilities and obligations that should be protected.

346 posted on 2/27/02 11:48 AM Pacific by Askel5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 344 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Okay, since you understood that, what do these mean:

Likewise, I think there are some natural divisions (more apparent with every thread) that should be made formal within the FAB. This way we would preclude absolutely the temptation to ascribe to others any motive besides what's best for the Forum.

I suggest strongly that the officers of the .Net consider recusing themselves not only for purposes of leaving the Forum Advisory Board a strictly Forum affair but also to protect themselves from exposing more of their decision-making, personal biases and discerning than folks need or care to know. I think that this would be a step in the right direction where the professionalism and discretion so necessary to such a public organization is concerned.

Sorry, but what is being proposed?

347 posted on 02/27/2002 10:51 AM PST by M. Thatcher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 344 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

It has occurred to me that FAB threads might not be the hot black-market commodity they've been of late if we'd left FAB at it's original level of Man-on-the-Street input and resisted the urge to delve into more critical and purely private matters among those with real responsibilities and obligations that should be protected.

Again, your conclusions are flawless. If we are to be an advisory-only board, then let us be that.

348 posted on 02/27/2002 10:52 AM PST by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 346 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Sorry, but what is being proposed?

In the interest of not misquoting Askel5, I'll ask(el5) her to restate her proposal herself.

349 posted on 02/27/2002 10:55 AM PST by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 347 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

I think that the taking on of an executive-level obligation affords folks executive-level input on all pertinent affairs.

I think the FAB is rightly an organization of Regular Joes whose focus should be strictly on the Forum and not distracted and camaraderie despoiled by the airing of affairs, decisions and private business to which they are not and should not be privy.

This way all concerned not only have a voice but have their voices weighted in relation to the responsibilities to which they've obligated themselves.

It also provides a much-needed extra measure of confidentiality for the decision-making and handling of critical affairs by those entrusted to do just that.

350 posted on 02/27/2002 10:55 AM PST by Askel5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 345 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

I'll ask(el5) her to restate her proposal herself.

Because executive-level members have executive-level opportunities for the voicing of opinion, I'd like to see the FAB returned to its original profile of "regular Joe" posters only.

This precludes the mixing of Moderator and FAB functions, the ascribing of ulterior motives to those whose obligations necessarily are a part of their decision-making, and provides an extra level of protection and privacy for the more critical issues best handled by those entrusted to do so.

I think in threads of late, we've gone outside our Charter and not only are discussing subjects not rightly our business but contemplating influencing the exercise of power that should remain solely in the hands of the Moderators and Jim.

351 posted on 02/27/2002 11:00 AM PST by Askel5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 349 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

I respectfully disagree.

It seems to me the executives already know what should remain private and probably keep it so by speaking privately; conversely, they should always feel comfortable in bringing something to the FAB when they believe it is the right thing to do.

352 posted on 02/27/2002 11:00 AM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 350 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

they should always feel comfortable in bringing something to the FAB when they believe it is the right thing to do.

Or just take it straight to the Forum, as they've done in the past.

I'd say more but the fact that all evidence of the event and subsequent discussion has been erased suggests that the executive-leadership has decided this is not a topic for general or FAB discussion after all.

353 posted on 02/27/2002 11:04 AM PST by Askel5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 352 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

It seems to me the executives already know what should remain private and probably keep it so by speaking privately

One would normally expect this behavior, correct.

354 posted on 02/27/2002 11:05 AM PST by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 352 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Ya know? I have never done one damn thing in my life that I have some conflict of interest. I refuse to let you give conflict of interest bad name. I also refuse to not do one thing to save my country, beause it conflicts with another thing I'm doing to save my country, because it conflicts with the 3rd, 4th , 5th, etc., etc., etc., etc., I am doing to try to save my country.

355 posted on 02/27/2002 11:11 AM PST by BADJOE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 341 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

I think that the taking on of an executive-level obligation affords folks executive-level input on all pertinent affairs. I think the FAB is rightly an organization of Regular Joes whose focus should be strictly on the Forum and not distracted and camaraderie despoiled by the airing of affairs, decisions and private business to which they are not and should not be privy. This way all concerned not only have a voice but have their voices weighted in relation to the responsibilities to which they've obligated themselves. It also provides a much-needed extra measure of confidentiality for the decision-making and handling of critical affairs by those entrusted to do just that.

Okay, well you may think this is clear but I have no idea what you're referring to. Obviously you have some sort of unstated point or agenda, but not being familiar with the ins and outs of what you're talking about, I'll leave you to it.

356 posted on 02/27/2002 11:12 AM PST by M. Thatcher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 350 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Perhaps, and in my view - it is executive discretion because they alone are legally responsible.

357 posted on 02/27/2002 11:13 AM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 353 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Indeed. The pain of a trusted friend's betrayal is very much like the grief of a loved one's untimely death.

358 posted on 02/27/2002 11:18 AM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 354 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Agreed.

359 posted on 02/27/2002 11:27 AM PST by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 358 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Legally responsible?

To be honest, Alamo-Girl, until I read a bootleg copy of the Keyes thread, I'd assumed that thinly veiled threats to get powerful people to help wreck Connie's career was a bit of stupidity safely confined to the FAB Board.

That's just one example that could have had very real legal consequences. The rest generally fall under the category of making it appear Jim and the moderators are "under the sway" of some all-powerful cabal. Given that this site is funded by donations and is the original source of the activism, interest, education and chapters which the .Net has assumed and is proferring to other conservative causes I should think that .Net officers would wish to err on the side of complete integrity and avoid at all costs the appearance of exercising undue influence over the Forum.

It's a very tricky thing we're doing here. I didn't quite realize the extent of my reservations in this regard until I read Bob J telling Kristinn that the Cruise (which won out in direct competition with a Forum event) had paid for the booth and he -- key member of the DC Chapter and voted Most Valuable FReeper more than once -- would be welcome to be a part of the gang again once he became a member of the .Net.

With that kind of exclusivity operational at the ground level, I see no reason not to keep the .Net exclusive at the decision-making and advisory levels. The fact that Jim is ultimately personally responsible for this site is just another reason I think we need to ratchet down the scope and security clearance of the FAB.

360 posted on 02/27/2002 11:27 AM PST by Askel5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 357 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

I respectfully disagree.

It seems to me the executives already know what should remain private and probably keep it so by speaking privately; conversely, they should always feel comfortable in bringing something to the FAB when they believe it is the right thing to do.

Well said.

FReegards

Brian

361 posted on 02/27/2002 11:29 AM PST by Brian Allen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 352 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

I have no doubt I'd raise my voice along with the rest of the FAB in begging that you, Bob J, Alamo-Girl, Angelwood and perhaps a few others PLEASE be allowed to stay on regardless the fact that your diligence, personal investment of time, money, effort, sweat, worry and your absolute devotion to this place merit you a grandfathering in as a permanent FAB member regardless your obligating yourself to the .Net as well.

I realize I'm going to be taking a lot of heat for what I'm saying but I can't help but be discomfited by this thread and the direction in which the FAB's been going of late.

We're not an executive-level body and I didn't think we ever were intended to be so.

362 posted on 02/27/2002 11:32 AM PST by Askel5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 355 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

they should always feel comfortable in bringing something to the FAB when they believe it is the right thing to do.

This is what I'd always understood was Bob J's capacity as supervisor and liaison.

I don't think that a Group Discussion is best carried over for consideration by the Group. Rather, I see no reason a point man like Bob J can't proffer an item and cut and paste or summarize the FAB's response for the execs.

I'm just looking to make it clean and protect absolutely all individuals involved ... particularly Jim's personal stake in the Forum.

363 posted on 02/27/2002 11:33 AM PST by Askel5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 352 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Here is one (actually, now three all in a row) that just came in. Ones like this trouble me. We recently had a long time, active Freeper leave (no public opus, a private one) due to posts like this. I put it out for discussion.

Regarding this thread

Regarding #169 Orion is quoting parts of what happens in the LDS temple. I hold these things sacred and not appropriate for a public forum.

Regarding #169

offensive attack on religion, desecration of the sacred

Regarding #1

Whole thread has deteriorated into Mormon bashing

To: Grig

Their personal opinions are not doctrine. It was Jonas's opinion that a certain city should be destroyed even after they repented, God had other plans. Being a prophet doesn't make you perfect and it doesn't make your every idea the gosple truth. When they acted in their role as prophet then they are acting on God's behalf, so if you want to establish something as doctrine, cough up the official documentation.

So, JS2 and BY must be speaking "ex cathedra" when speaking for the church? I guess it makes it easy for you to cut and paste what you want and what embarrasses you. When Brigham Young teaches that JS2 holds the keys to the celestial kingdom, you don't believe that? When JS2 says he achieved a greater work than Christ, you don't believe that either? Adam is God, God had physical sex with Mary to conceive Jesus, and that polygamy is essential for entrance into the celestial kingdom are taught by your prophets speaking in the capacity to clarify doctrine. Absent that, they are false prophets, and your entire belief structure is collapsing.

Your pick, I'll take it either way.

BTW, when you took your oath to have the "power and priesthoods be upon me and my posterity through all generations of time and all eternity..." at the LDS endowment, whose priesthoods and powers were you invoking? Hint: what green garment were you wearing? Earlier in the endowment, who identified that as a symbol of his "power and priesthoods?" Did you discuss any other power and priesthoods, or just Lucifer's?

Pretty spooky stuff...

169 posted on 2/27/02 12:24 PM Pacific by Orion

364 posted on 02/27/2002 11:38 AM PST by Admin Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 361 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

The rest generally fall under the category of making it appear Jim and the moderators are "under the sway" of some all-powerful cabal.

Only to the paranoid. Get a grip.

365 posted on 02/27/2002 11:45 AM PST by M. Thatcher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 360 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

We're not an executive-level body and I didn't think we ever were intended to be

Nope! We're just individual, executive level, patriotic, God Fearing, Americans, driven to succeed.

See. I can demonstrate a propensity to a magnificient quanity of verbosity too.

However, in the interest in getting the most accomplished as quickly as possible, I just say it like it is.

366 posted on 02/27/2002 11:45 AM PST by BADJOE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 362 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

We recently had a long time, active Freeper leave (no public opus, a private one)

I'm leaving Free Republic.

If people leave without those entertaining Opus's, that is reason enough to leave.

PS: He or she will be back. They always come back. We are like the Mob -- you cannot leave. And you .... you guys are our 'mechanics'. We call on youse guys when we need a hit, knowwhudeyemean?

367 posted on 02/27/2002 11:46 AM PST by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 364 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

I don't know what you are talking about in #360 and I don't want to find out either. Keeping up with the facts v. theories on the DSL is about all I can handle these days.

Nevertheless, I trust the executives here to make the best decisions that they can.

368 posted on 02/27/2002 11:48 AM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 360 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

We're not an executive-level body and I didn't think we ever were intended to be so.

Gotta agree with this. There are way too many folks on FAB for it to function in any kind of executive manner, and it generally resembles an exclusive social club as opposed to a board.

369 posted on 02/27/2002 11:49 AM PST by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 362 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Thank you! Hugs!!!

370 posted on 02/27/2002 11:49 AM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 361 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

That's a tough call. It doesn't appear to explicitly violate Jim's criteria, though.

Perhaps a behind-the-scenes warning would be appropriate.

371 posted on 02/27/2002 11:51 AM PST by Interesting Times
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 364 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Agreed.

372 posted on 02/27/2002 11:53 AM PST by M. Thatcher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 371 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

B/S.

373 posted on 02/27/2002 11:54 AM PST by Jim Robinson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 360 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

The user requested us to delete the account so that mind changing would not be possible. Sort of like someone did recently, except without the theatrics of requesting all the posts be removed.

374 posted on 02/27/2002 11:54 AM PST by Admin Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 367 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

So's youse whacked the guy good, hah?

Admin Moderator on far left of photo, Jim Robinson on right.

;^)

375 posted on 02/27/2002 11:57 AM PST by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 374 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

I'd raise my voice along with the rest of the FAB in begging that you, Bob J, Alamo-Girl, Angelwood and perhaps a few others PLEASE be allowed to stay on regardless

That's noble.

But who wants them to go anywhere?

376 posted on 02/27/2002 11:59 AM PST by M. Thatcher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 362 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

I believe that the FAB should concern itself with forum business.  As such the unfortunate debate that took place on the Keyes thread was outside the bounds of the FAB.  With regard to such issues, I would agree that business should be conducted elsewhere.

As for .net officers participating here on issues pertinant to FAB business, I don't have a problem with it.  That being said, I have a somewhat obvious bias.

I would also ask that we not get into a debate on the merits of the .net vs the .com issue again.  Let's drop it here and now.  Why was it necessary to interject that into a topic totally unrelated?  This thread was started to discuss the issue of deleted comments and threads, and elighten FAB members to the forces that figure into such matters.  When did the .net vs .com issue become germane?

If .net officers are here discussing FAB issues, fine.  If they're here discussing other matters of the type that caused the blowout, then it obviously isn't.  At least it's obvious to me.

If someone, anyone, comes here to post non-FAB related threads in order to start an off FAB topic, I say delete it immediately.  And if the person that does it, can't live with that, then regardless of their position, they should have their FAB posting privileges removed for a short period of time.

Can we get back to the topic of thread and post evaluation?

377 posted on 02/27/2002 12:04 PM PST by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 362 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Tim had to leave for the day, and I'm much too busy to stay with this thread. I'm not the better spokesperson for us either, so please don't assume you're are being ignored if we don't reply to you immediately.

It is very strange trying to speak as one for a host of personalities. (^:

378 posted on 02/27/2002 12:04 PM PST by Admin Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 376 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

But I thought all those personalities were you....or are they just voices in my head....LOL

Joshing in fun. Get back to doing what you do. Keep the forum safe for children, old people and me.

Have a nice evening.

379 posted on 02/27/2002 12:10 PM PST by ReaganGirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 378 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Thanks. Have a good one.

380 posted on 02/27/2002 12:10 PM PST by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 378 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

A few of us moderators were discussing things and thought that there might be some value in doing some FAB "moderation by proxy".

I think your intentions are noble but you are making a difficult job even more so by opening up the process to moderation by committee. I think it's wise to involve FAB in crafting moderator guidelines, but once those guidelines are in place, the process should be the sole domain of the moderators and JimRob. If there is a particular stink about a given decision by moderators, that should be taken care of by private freepmails between the concerned parties.

381 posted on 02/27/2002 12:11 PM PST by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

It is very strange trying to speak as one for a host of personalities. (^:

Now you know my daily struggle. All those voices in my head.... auuuugh.... (icepicks his own temple over and over again)

382 posted on 02/27/2002 12:12 PM PST by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 378 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

I think the exercise has been very educational. Now any such decisions you mention can be approached with a greater understanding and a more complete context.

(Pause for a Kum By Ya moment.)

383 posted on 02/27/2002 12:15 PM PST by M. Thatcher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 381 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Kum By Ya, Kum By Ya...  What am I doing????  "M. Thatcher!"

384 posted on 02/27/2002 12:18 PM PST by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 383 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Kum By Ya

I thought we were trying to keep porn off the forum!

385 posted on 02/27/2002 12:22 PM PST by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 383 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

< Muzak >

"we are the world, we are the children"

"I'd like to teach the world to sing...in perfect harmony"

</ Muzak>

386 posted on 02/27/2002 12:23 PM PST by M. Thatcher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 384 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

* sorry *

How DOES one spell that song title, anyway?

387 posted on 02/27/2002 12:27 PM PST by M. Thatcher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 385 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

< Muzak >

The day I put a bullet in my brain is the day I get on an elevator and the Muzak version of Aerosmith's 'Walk This Way' is on the speakers.

Then it's, turn around, toddle home, load the handgun, by the temple goes the muzzle, and BOOM.

388 posted on 02/27/2002 12:27 PM PST by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 386 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

"Queuemne Bieghe Yaugh"

389 posted on 02/27/2002 12:29 PM PST by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 387 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Oh Lord, kumbaya. Also spelled kum ba yah, cumbayah, kumbayah, and probably a few other ways. If you look in a good songbook you'll find the word helpfully translated as "come by here," with the note that the song is "from Angola, Africa." The "come by here" part I'll buy. But Angola? Someone's doubtin', Lord, for the obvious reason that kumbaya is way too close to English to have a strictly African origin. More likely, I told my assistant Jane, it comes from some African-English pidgin or creole--that is, a combination of languages. (A pidgin is a linguistic makeshift that enables two cultures to communicate for purposes of trade, etc.; a creole is a pidgin that has become a culture's primary language.) Sure enough, when we look into the matter, we find this conjecture is on the money. Someone's grinnin', Lord, kumbaya.

390 posted on 02/27/2002 12:35 PM PST by Senator Pardek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 387 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

When did the .net vs .com issue become germane?

I'm happy to start a fresh thread on the topic if you wish. I think it is something we need ironed out in advance.

My original point was that this thread unduly muddies the distinctions between FAB and Moderators. I don't think it's our place to be weighing on specific posts and accustoming ourselves to exercising a power and influencing a discretion that is the Moderators' and Jim's alone.

Where we've had problems -- general and specific -- we think need to be brought to their attention, we've fulfilled our purpose and offered our opinion (on which they may or may not act).

A consensus of the FAB Board has never been grounds for forcing Jim to make a change. I think we're setting ourselves up for a disappointment that could turn into serious disillusionment and rancor if we continue on this course.

I think an understanding of what the Moderators deal with is not only valuable but vital in that it only makes us better advocates and defenders of the Moderators as a rule. (Even if we may bring up a point of dissent here in private from time to time.)

But I don't like seeing FAB Members exercising, by proxy or by way of demonstration, a power that isn't theirs.

Perhaps it's the alacrity with which some and not others have taken to the opportunity which put me in mind of the other critical potential for conflict of interest.

If I were a .Net member and soliciting money from heavy-hitters premised on my ability to deliver the activism, interest, publicity and numbers this Forum can deliver, I know I would have a vested interested in seeing to it that the Forum was not only free from fistfights and the abuses that are already against the rules but perceived by interested parties in the conservative policial action movement as ALREADY solidly in favor of their agendas.

It's for this reason the Moderator's exhortation to "go work on CFR" bothered me so, if truth be told. There again, it was a muddying of the distinctions between simply moderating and offering the editorial-style comments regarding "mission" that only Jim should offer off the cuff.

391 posted on 02/27/2002 12:54 PM PST by Askel5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 377 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

B/S.

Fair enough. I've said my piece.

392 posted on 02/27/2002 12:56 PM PST by Askel5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 373 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

If I were a Mormon, I would be more upset that Mormons responded. These "Mormon secrets" are pulled from websites and cannot be verified. Sometimes they are made up. I'm surprised they responded as if they were the truth.

393 posted on 02/27/2002 12:58 PM PST by AppyPappy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 364 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

..... offensive attack on religion, desecration of the sacred -- and: Whole thread has deteriorated into Mormon bashing -- says it all.

Too bad.

The author of the piece used a Good analogy and made a great -- and sadly, too often these days -- and not only by O'Riordan -- ignored and/or neglected point; that -- given a choice between a Democrat and a "democrat" -- American voters, every time, will elect the Democrat! [Republicans really do prefer Principles to personalities!]

I have to admit having developed some animus toward the #169 poster, though. I've had some beautiful experiences at the hands of LDS members and used to live about 50 yards FRom the back door of the Temple at Westwood in LA. What impressive folk they are! And he ticked me off by his offhanded contempt for another institution that is very close to my heart.

That said I'da let my objectivity overwhelm me -- and woulda pulled the #169 poster's contributions to the thread. <]:^)~<

FReegards

Brian

394 posted on 02/27/2002 1:06 PM PST by Brian Allen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 364 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

I think the thread was pulled.

395 posted on 02/27/2002 1:49 PM PST by AppyPappy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 394 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Nobody owns my vocabulary. My speech is my own, and expresses MY intentions, not someone else's. If I allow anyone else to dictate the words I use, I allow them to dictate (post facto, no less) the thoughts I think. No PC movement is ever going to be that powerful.

Thus, I will call a queer a queer if I feel like, and if it expresses the sentiment I choose to express. I will call a liar a liar and a spade a spade. And if the respective parties (dirt-moving instrument exempted) take offense where none was intended, that says more about them than about me.

Read Noam Chomsky if you want to see what this socio-linguistic approach to thought control is all about. Don't fall for it. Own your thoughts and speak your mind.

396 posted on 02/27/2002 3:24 PM PST by IronJack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 260 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

the Moderator's exhortation to "go work on CFR" bothered me

Why? There are many ways to "go to work on CFR." The Network offers one path, but there are many others. I didn't interpret the mod's "exhortation" as an endorsement of the Network, but a call to arms. That's what FR is all about, nicht wahr?

397 posted on 02/27/2002 3:31 PM PST by IronJack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 391 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

I didn't say it was endorsement of the Network.

You may be confusing two different points I made.

I think the Moderators' integrity is best preserved with an appearance of objectivity. Any editorializing on the mission of the forum or Jim's desires (as explanation of why one and not another thread was locked or deleted) is best left to Jim. The moderators may well be acting on Jim's behalf but I'm not sure they should be speaking for him absent a restating of the rules and mission he himself has posted.

Likewise, this same distinction of roles and authority should apply to keeping the Moderators' function separate from the FAB's and possibly should apply to erring on the side of keeping the Forum separate from the Net.

I think it's in everyone's best interest. If we're to keep all these balls in the air, folks need to stay focused on whatever is their particular priority or responsibility.

I'm not looking to destroy what is an essential sense oif teamwork between Moderators and the FAB or the Forum and the .Net -- I just think that it's important we not risk tripping each other up simply because we're too entangled together.

I think this sort of Order and these sorts of distinctions should be particularly necessary for .Net which is a professional organization wishing to deal in real money with real players. Where the Forum is one man's hobby that's mushroomed thanks to sundry individuals who've gotten involved or supported the place as they saw fit and therefore can be excused for too many cooks spoiling the broth on occasion, the .Net and its officers should strive for the utmost in professionalism from the get-go.

398 posted on 02/27/2002 4:30 PM PST by Askel5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 397 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

the .Net and its officers should strive for the utmost in professionalism from the get-go.

I think we can all agree on that.

Sorry about the confusion.

399 posted on 02/27/2002 4:37 PM PST by IronJack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 398 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

[ Browse | Search | Topics | Post Article | My Comments ]