Jobs!
I was on a field trip. But if Space honestly doesn't understand her hypocrisy, then what more can be said? Space likes censorship until Space gets censored.Space admitted to reporting posts that oppose her 'liberal' ideology and all the 'liberals' who say I shouldn't call out 'liberals' for squashing free and open discussions, because real 'liberals' aren't like that, say nothing about it.
Quote from: Davey on October 23, 2015, 02:20:29 AMQuote from: johnny russian on October 22, 2015, 12:15:03 PMTaeyang and Davey are by far the two worst moderators on here and should have been removed a long time ago. Both of them also seem to be extremely sensitive to criticism, and will just indiscriminately lock any threads that criticise the mods. If they can't handle the criticism of the terrible job they're doing, they can give up their moderator positions and post here as normal users. This is why i proposed a voting system for mods a while back. I doubt either of them would have retained their positions under a voting system, and they're extremely lucky to still be mods. Warning or banning users and/or locking threads because the mods don't like the criticism is nothing short of childish.Yet, this thread isn't locked. Threads are locked/removed when they become seriously off-topic; it would be too cumbersome to individually remove off-topic posts.I've never sent you a warning, but you a history of infractions. Makes sense that there appears to be a direct correlation between dissatisfaction of the mods and the number of TOS violations. Perhaps not the violations were just, but many, many others posters on this forum post without getting warned. Quite frankly, if you're continually dissatisfied with the moderation of this site, perhaps you should look elsewhere since you appear to interpret the TOS differently than the mods do (it isn't just one particular mod who's issued you warnings).so you basically admit it's pure laziness on the part of the mods that threads are locked.i don't care if you've sent me warnings or not, but the fact is that you have locked many threads that really shouldn't have been locked, plus you've shown by your posts in the past that you are unable to be objective. that's why i said you were a bad mod.I'm not the only one who has a problem with you mVIII. there are quite a few people who have had it out with you on here.
Quote from: johnny russian on October 22, 2015, 12:15:03 PMTaeyang and Davey are by far the two worst moderators on here and should have been removed a long time ago. Both of them also seem to be extremely sensitive to criticism, and will just indiscriminately lock any threads that criticise the mods. If they can't handle the criticism of the terrible job they're doing, they can give up their moderator positions and post here as normal users. This is why i proposed a voting system for mods a while back. I doubt either of them would have retained their positions under a voting system, and they're extremely lucky to still be mods. Warning or banning users and/or locking threads because the mods don't like the criticism is nothing short of childish.Yet, this thread isn't locked. Threads are locked/removed when they become seriously off-topic; it would be too cumbersome to individually remove off-topic posts.I've never sent you a warning, but you a history of infractions. Makes sense that there appears to be a direct correlation between dissatisfaction of the mods and the number of TOS violations. Perhaps not the violations were just, but many, many others posters on this forum post without getting warned. Quite frankly, if you're continually dissatisfied with the moderation of this site, perhaps you should look elsewhere since you appear to interpret the TOS differently than the mods do (it isn't just one particular mod who's issued you warnings).
Taeyang and Davey are by far the two worst moderators on here and should have been removed a long time ago. Both of them also seem to be extremely sensitive to criticism, and will just indiscriminately lock any threads that criticise the mods. If they can't handle the criticism of the terrible job they're doing, they can give up their moderator positions and post here as normal users. This is why i proposed a voting system for mods a while back. I doubt either of them would have retained their positions under a voting system, and they're extremely lucky to still be mods. Warning or banning users and/or locking threads because the mods don't like the criticism is nothing short of childish.
Deal with it or leave; Cheers.
Quote from: Davey on October 24, 2015, 02:41:12 PM Deal with it or leave; Cheers.I can't see how this is helpful.How about starting a new "Moderated" Forum. Every time a poster is moderated the Mod will post on that forum their name, the person moderated, what specific section of the TOS was violated, the degree of moderation and a specific reason for it.Then, perhaps every 3 months or so, all of the posters can vote on the moderators, and those who get less than a 50% approval rating have to relinquish their role as a Mod. You could have a minimum number of voting posters to make a vote acceptable. For example, 30. If less than 30 posters vote, the vote is disregarded whatever the percentages may be. I can't see anyone having a problem with this. If I were a Mod I would welcome it. As a poster I would most certainly welcome it.
Quote from: tamjen on October 24, 2015, 03:28:35 PMQuote from: Davey on October 24, 2015, 02:41:12 PM Deal with it or leave; Cheers.I can't see how this is helpful.How about starting a new "Moderated" Forum. Every time a poster is moderated the Mod will post on that forum their name, the person moderated, what specific section of the TOS was violated, the degree of moderation and a specific reason for it.Then, perhaps every 3 months or so, all of the posters can vote on the moderators, and those who get less than a 50% approval rating have to relinquish their role as a Mod. You could have a minimum number of voting posters to make a vote acceptable. For example, 30. If less than 30 posters vote, the vote is disregarded whatever the percentages may be. I can't see anyone having a problem with this. If I were a Mod I would welcome it. As a poster I would most certainly welcome it.Fair enough...I'm open to it. Incidentally, nice jobs on taking excerpts from my post. Point was, he's had a long history of warnings. .none of which were issued by me but various other mods...is the issue moderation or the poster himself ? I would deduce the latter.
Quote from: Davey on October 24, 2015, 04:53:58 PMQuote from: tamjen on October 24, 2015, 03:28:35 PMQuote from: Davey on October 24, 2015, 02:41:12 PM Deal with it or leave; Cheers.I can't see how this is helpful.How about starting a new "Moderated" Forum. Every time a poster is moderated the Mod will post on that forum their name, the person moderated, what specific section of the TOS was violated, the degree of moderation and a specific reason for it.Then, perhaps every 3 months or so, all of the posters can vote on the moderators, and those who get less than a 50% approval rating have to relinquish their role as a Mod. You could have a minimum number of voting posters to make a vote acceptable. For example, 30. If less than 30 posters vote, the vote is disregarded whatever the percentages may be. I can't see anyone having a problem with this. If I were a Mod I would welcome it. As a poster I would most certainly welcome it.Fair enough...I'm open to it. Incidentally, nice jobs on taking excerpts from my post. Point was, he's had a long history of warnings. .none of which were issued by me but various other mods...is the issue moderation or the poster himself ? I would deduce the latter.Davey, I wasn't cherry picking, I don't care who gets moderated or for what reason. My point was twofold: it's never helpful to say "if you don't like it leave", and large corporations I have worked for in Canada always had a system in place whereby the workers (underlings) at every level filled out questionnaires/surveys on their direct superiors twice a year (mostly - sometimes it was annually). We, as the underlings were checked by our supervisors, but it was a 2-way street, and that was fair for all. It worked to everyone's advantage and everyone was satisfied. I think it would work well here. As a Mod on Waygook, I would wonder why posters dumped on me and questioned my motives. No one I know likes getting dumped on, it's a drag. Sometimes those posters have a personal vendetta or are simply childish, other times their gripes are legitimate. It's one of those "who's watching the watchers" scenarios. I salute you for thinking it's an acceptable notion. That tells me you're open-minded.
Quote from: Davey on October 23, 2015, 02:20:29 AMYet, this thread isn't locked. Threads are locked/removed when they become seriously off-topic; it would be too cumbersome to individually remove off-topic posts.Bullsh*t.You claim threads are only locked because they have gone off topic but you yourself are notorious for killing threads that discussed MERS, then discussed you, then discussed the repeated locking of threads then discussed the need to get some new blood to replace , well basically, you. The conclusion form the higher ups must have been that we were right and you were wrong as we saw a new crop of people being made into mods shortly after.And now it has happened again. One of you has had a little "that'll teach them" moment. The Korean parenting thread was relevant, based on a news article that itself was based on a OECD survey and was consistent.Even funnier, a ranting thread was shut down. People were ranting about mods It was not off topic. What the hell is a relvant rant?So that person had a little rage episode and now you are trying to defend yourself as a collective. Well done, by the way. I see you have embraced the us-against-them Uri Nara mentality. My personal gripe is that I got a 20 percent warning level (whatever that signifies) fro a mild crack about mods being porn watchers or neo-cons (one is statistically likely and the other fits the bill) I get 20% warning. Another of you geniuses decides that Irish people and Russians are a race (Why not?) and I was being racist so I got the same level of warning. So making fun of you guys is just as bad as racial discrimination. Nice standards!Look, we all get angry and lash out from time to time. I suspect the way the site is usually run is an acknowledgement that some of you are competent with people and some of you are better with filing. Just be adults and admit that occasionally you screw up or your colleagues screw up. Stop hiding behind your schoolyard omerta and point fingers when needed. No one expects all you mods to agree.If you want to be dictators then have the stones to admit it. Openly state that any challenge or criticism of the mods is forbidden. I'd still despise you lot but at least I wouldn't have any contempt.
Yet, this thread isn't locked. Threads are locked/removed when they become seriously off-topic; it would be too cumbersome to individually remove off-topic posts.
I think it should be open nomination. If enough regular users don't like a mod enough to openly express this, the mods can decide for and among themselves. Having polls is like allowing the patients to run the asylum, besides I can rarely get the vote function to work.If you get modded, take the time off waygook to experience the other pleasures the Internet has to offer and consider changing your attitude. No big deal. Sure some people like your humor and 'banter'. Except those of us from North America, it annoys us to no end . It appears intolerably crude and unsophisticated, so it is hard for us to bear (please understand).
Author
Topic: I don't think I have ever been more disappointed with waygook.org than right now (Read 7579 times)
