1  2  3  4  5  Next

I have heard, through the grapevine, suggestions that some members of this site are being given carte blanch and are being allowed to circumvent the rules laid down for proper conduct and behaviour at CKA because they regularly support the site financially. Since I am the only active moderator here right now I feel this is therefore directed at me and it greatly saddens me to think there are some people here who would think this to be true. I have absolutely no idea who supports this site financially aside from what is occasionally posted here, and since I do not benefit in any way from this I truly really don't care. I try not to show ANY favouritism when dealing with different members who may have run afoul of the site rules or in some way caused other members to take offense by comments or actions taken by other individuals. I don't know how other mods or Trevor handled things, but to the best of my knowledge they also treated everybody here on a fair and equal basis, without exemptions being made for those who may contribute more or more often than others.

   

We may differ on our views about alot of things but, you've earned my respect for being the voice of reason and a fair moderator for "everyone" on this forum.

Hopefully you'll get some help in the near future because, you just might have the shittiest job on the internet.

   

Good enough for me.

   

Same. You're a great job Hyack, in some unfortunate circumstances no less. I hope you get some help too.

   

I certainly don't think that to be true at all Hyack. Whether or not anyone in here makes contributions to Trevor is completely irrelevant to how members conduct themselves in threads.

You have always had my respect as a moderator in here and under the difficult circumstances you are doing an awesome job keeping things going.

   

   

Keep fighting the good fight.

   

First off let me say about all the machinations behind the scenes, I only know what I read on the forum. And I haven't read the rules carefully, so don't really know what constitutes breaking them, except common sense.

I've always felt there was a certain bias on this site, there do seem to be favored posters. No idea if it has anything to do with donating to the site, or if my perception is accurate in the first place. Also I don't really know what moderator favored what, since my perception goes back to when Regina and QBC were still around.

But I'll take the Count as an example. Again, going only by what I read on the forum, and I avoided reading most of the real shit fests that involved him, my impression is that he's being held to a different standard than long term posters. This may not come down to Hyack's bias but more the bias and culture of the site as a whole, he's just playing his part in it. But since by Hyack's post, there was a lot of behind the scenes stuff, I don't really know. I have the impression some members are too quick with the report button, at least from my pov. And all the p-m-ing just creates little cliques instead of having it out on the forum.

But this site is what it is. I think only a robot could be totally unbiased in moderating, and even then it would depend on how it was programmed. This site feels like a disfunctional family to me, and you either deal with it or leave.

And again, who knows what the Count was doing with pm's or what have you, so...carry on.

I said before, thanks for moderating Hyack, it's a thankless task, and without it this site would disintegrate even faster than it seems to be doing anyway. Anicca, Anicca.

   

What Strutz said

   

What Louise said.

Happy Sunday!

   

My support of the site is a pittance compared to what it costs to run it and I doubt like hell that I get any sway from Hyack or Trevor because of it.

I'd also stop supporting the place if I did because that kind of thing would ruin the reasons why I'm here.

   

I'm going to ask straight out - are you the guy that caused a member to leave because of perceived threats? You've certainly made what could be seen as threats on the forum.

   

Thanos informed me of something I had posted to Zip that was about dropping artillery on a target - I used a rhetorical "you" but I most certainly did not mean Zip and I can't imagine that he'd think such a thing because I've liked this guy for over ten years now.

To be clear, if Hyack were to determine it was ban-worthy or warn-worthy I'd abide the decision and continue to donate to the site to help keep it going.

   

I'm very surprised because you and Zip seemed to have a bit of bromance going. And Zip didn't' strike me as being all that reactive. Maybe he just got tired of the place.

But again, you've made some comments, including directed at me, that sound an awful lot like threats. I don't know why you do that, do you think you'll intimidate people into agreeing with you? Losing Zip is a shame, maybe you should consider how you express yourself in future, since you seem to care for the site.

   

Sometimes you folks read far too much into what I say. It's long been a form of confirmation bias on the part of some people who confuse actual freedom of expression with a university speech code which is anything BUT freedom of expression.

If someone is seeking to be offended, outraged, wronged, or threatened then that's what they're going to find in even the most innocuous of statements.

And I don't pussy-foot around with innocuous statements. Life is too short.

***

For the record: If I ever really intended harm to anyone the last thing I'd do is given them a heads-up of what's to come.

Therefore anything that could be interpreted as a threat from me is not.

   

1  2  3  4  5  Next