New Mod - Logroller

[jimnyc]

Logroller will be part of our staff team going forward! :beer:

I've known him for quite some time now and have always admired certain qualities, starting with his intelligence and debate skills. I have no doubt at all that he wants what is best for the board, wants better discussions, and will be more than fair with everyone.

Hopefully with a few more staff members we can more proactively keep threads from going off track, move things faster and help more.

Welcome, Log! :salute:

[hjmick]

At this rate, we'll all be mods by July 4th...

[jimnyc]

At this rate, we'll all be mods by July 4th...

I think that's it, just want bases covered! :)

But that reminded me of this:

http://imageshack.us/a/img89/3644/37962510151495921976909.jpg

[fj1200]

Logroller will be part of our staff team going forward! :beer:

...

Hopefully with a few more staff members we can more proactively keep threads from going off track, move things faster and help more.

Reminds me of an old Romulan saying, "may you live in interesting times." Or maybe that was, "only Nixon could go to China." Either way, I could suggest a couple of threads that are in serious need of moderation. ;)

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Reminds me of an old Romulan saying, "may you live in interesting times." Or maybe that was, "only Nixon could go to China." Either way, I could suggest a couple of threads that are in serious need of moderation. ;)

I just bet you could..
Old guard to the rescue eh?? Been a blast folks.. -Tyr

[aboutime]

I just bet you could..
Old guard to the rescue eh?? Been a blast folks.. -Tyr


Only a matter of time Tyr. Mention a different "PERSPECTIVE" and the Foxes take charge of the Hen house.

[fj1200]

I just bet you could..
Old guard to the rescue eh?? Been a blast folks.. -Tyr

Who needs rescue? Just moving some OT posts to the cage works for me. Lord knows I've made plenty of posts these past couple of days that deserve to be there. Are you man enough to admit the same?

[jimnyc]

I just bet you could..
Old guard to the rescue eh?? Been a blast folks.. -Tyr


Only a matter of time Tyr. Mention a different "PERSPECTIVE" and the Foxes take charge of the Hen house.

This is not perspectives. I think both of you have been members here long enough to know I run a fair board. This carries on to the staff. Ask any of the old timers, I still run the place the way I did my old board when I started in 2003. No one is going to go after anyone or take charge of the house. We simply need new mods to HELP, not to harm the place. All I ask is to give things chances when I make changes, and at least make your decisions based on reality and not what you perceive may happen.

[Marcus Aurelius]

This is not perspectives. I think both of you have been members here long enough to know I run a fair board. This carries on to the staff. Ask any of the old timers, I still run the place the way I did my old board when I started in 2003. No one is going to go after anyone or take charge of the house. We simply need new mods to HELP, not to harm the place. All I ask is to give things chances when I make changes, and at least make your decisions based on reality and not what you perceive may happen.

It's your board. If people don't like the way you run it, they are free to find one more to their liking.

[Marcus Aurelius]

Reminds me of an old Romulan saying, "may you live in interesting times." Or maybe that was, "only Nixon could go to China." Either way, I could suggest a couple of threads that are in serious need of moderation. ;)

'Only Nixon could go to China', was an 'old Vulcan proverb', according to Spock in 'Undiscovered Country'.

My inner geek required I set the record straight on that.

[Thunderknuckles]

Good choice Jim. Logroller is solid and has his head screwed on straight.

Congrats/Condolences to Logroller!

[Little-Acorn]

Welcome, Logroller.

Is everything your fault yet?

[revelarts]

sarcasm alert

Weeeellll, looks like the board has just gone all LIBERAL now.
Windsong will be mod next i guess.

[aboutime]

Actually. I'm prepared for Gabby to be announced as the next Mod.

I've seen this kind of stuff before. Nothing new. Guess Jim will just have to learn the hard way.

[jimnyc]

Actually. I'm prepared for Gabby to be announced as the next Mod.

I've seen this kind of stuff before. Nothing new. Guess Jim will just have to learn the hard way.

What is the WORST case scenario? I think that would be a moderator banning people for no reason at all. Or even moderating regularly for no reason at all. A moderator running wild.

But this won't happen. I have every bit of faith in Logroller and am more than extremely confident that he will be fair in moderating. I can also personally assure everyone that this board would never turn in that manner and it simply won't be happening.

I understand there might be bad blood between a few. But hell, I don't think he even reported others posts, and certainly never got overtly personal with others. I see absolutely no reason to believe that this will change now. I give my guarantees as I know personally I would never allow unfairness to take over here, and I think Log and the rest of staff will echo me in saying that this isn't an interest of staff. Our sole interest is helping the board grow and get better.

Judge my decisions should you want to, I'm used to it, but at least give Logroller a chance to moderate for awhile before judging. :)

[aboutime]

What is the WORST case scenario? I think that would be a moderator banning people for no reason at all. Or even moderating regularly for no reason at all. A moderator running wild.

But this won't happen. I have every bit of faith in Logroller and am more than extremely confident that he will be fair in moderating. I can also personally assure everyone that this board would never turn in that manner and it simply won't be happening.

I understand there might be bad blood between a few. But hell, I don't think he even reported others posts, and certainly never got overtly personal with others. I see absolutely no reason to believe that this will change now. I give my guarantees as I know personally I would never allow unfairness to take over here, and I think Log and the rest of staff will echo me in saying that this isn't an interest of staff. Our sole interest is helping the board grow and get better.

Judge my decisions should you want to, I'm used to it, but at least give Logroller a chance to moderate for awhile before judging. :)


I fully understand what you are saying Jim. Not trying to diminish your decisions here in any way.
But...it's no accident that I....and possibly several other members here. Have heard the very same words spoken by others in the past.
We were given all the same reassurances. Then... You'll see.
POLITICS and Internet Forums are so similar. GOOD LUCK.

[revelarts]

Good choice Jim. Logroller is solid and has his head screwed on straight.
Congrats/Condolences to Logroller!

:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:




Welcome, Logroller.
Is everything your fault yet?

:thumb:

[fj1200]

'Only Nixon could go to China', was an 'old Vulcan proverb', according to Spock in 'Undiscovered Country'.

My inner geek required I set the record straight on that.

Oh snap. :laugh: Don't know where my head was on that one.

[Drummond]

My most immediate reaction to this decision was astonishment.

Jim, I will persevere with this forum - to an extent, anyway - to see how this pans out. But I'll be honest enough to make it very clear that I see this as Aboutime does.

We shall see where this new status quo leads. And ... even FJ has made a point I can take on board (!). We do, indeed, 'live in interesting times'.

I absolutely have to say this, even if I earn censure for it ... I remain stunned by this decision.

[fj1200]

But...it's no accident that I....and possibly several other members here. Have heard the very same words spoken by others in the past.


Jim, I will persevere with this forum - to an extent, anyway - to see how this pans out. But I'll be honest enough to make it very clear that I see this as Aboutime does.

Perchance it isn't the board that was at issue. Considering all this uproar over 1 mod addition.

[Marcus Aurelius]

What is the WORST case scenario? I think that would be a moderator banning people for no reason at all. Or even moderating regularly for no reason at all. A moderator running wild.

But this won't happen. I have every bit of faith in Logroller and am more than extremely confident that he will be fair in moderating. I can also personally assure everyone that this board would never turn in that manner and it simply won't be happening.

I understand there might be bad blood between a few. But hell, I don't think he even reported others posts, and certainly never got overtly personal with others. I see absolutely no reason to believe that this will change now. I give my guarantees as I know personally I would never allow unfairness to take over here, and I think Log and the rest of staff will echo me in saying that this isn't an interest of staff. Our sole interest is helping the board grow and get better.

Judge my decisions should you want to, I'm used to it, but at least give Logroller a chance to moderate for awhile before judging. :)

any unfair (opinion of coures) bannings by anyone can by appealed to Jim directly. it's his board. if he thinks someone oversteps, he'll say so.

[Drummond]

Perchance it isn't the board that was at issue.

OK, I'll bite.

What - exactly - do you mean ?

[fj1200]

OK, I'll bite.

What - exactly - do you mean ?

Sorry, my edit to the above post.


Considering all this uproar over 1 mod addition.

What other parties are involved?

[Drummond]

Sorry, my edit to the above post.



What other parties are involved?

Your reply is far from clear. And besides, what does the number of mods have to do with anything ? If this forum had one more mod, or ten, why would that matter ?

[Marcus Aurelius]

the end result is that it is Jim's board. Not mine, yours, or anyone elses.

If Jim chooses to add 50 mods, his board.

If Jim chooses to shut the board down, his board.

No amount of whining, bitching, moaning, pleading, begging, or posting can change the over-riding fact... it is JIM'S BOARD, AND HE CAN DO WHATEVER HE PLEASES WITH IT.

[jimnyc]

My most immediate reaction to this decision was astonishment.

Jim, I will persevere with this forum - to an extent, anyway - to see how this pans out. But I'll be honest enough to make it very clear that I see this as Aboutime does.

We shall see where this new status quo leads. And ... even FJ has made a point I can take on board (!). We do, indeed, 'live in interesting times'.

I absolutely have to say this, even if I earn censure for it ... I remain stunned by this decision.

Are you astonished because I made a decision that you think is harmful to the board, or because I chose someone that you don't particularly have a lot of love for?

What "I" want out of this board, and the freedoms I've afforded without crazy moderation, will NOT be changing. Even if between the worst of enemies, staff is not allowed to do anything I wouldn't do myself. To put it bluntly, I have ideas of where I would like to see the board go and how I would want it ran - and staff is an extension of that, to basically do what I would do.

People have been telling me for 10 years now how my patience and dedication to freedom of speech won't last. But it has. And it's not going to change. The day I become overbearing and more interested in moderating than provoking good discussion, I'll sell off or give the board away.

If I thought for a NYC second that Logroller would ever moderate unfairly, I wouldn't have asked him to come aboard. With that said, it can't fail. For starters, I wouldn't allow it too, as I love this place and will always stick to my principles. Secondly, and more important, give him a chance outside of a debate to see how he moderates. He's proved his fairness and maturity to me for a few years. Being polar opposites on some heated topics doesn't mean you guys can't agree on what is best for the board.

[fj1200]

Your reply is far from clear. And besides, what does the number of mods have to do with anything ? If this forum had one more mod, or ten, why would that matter ?

The number of mods doesn't matter, a big deal is being made over this particular addition that wasn't made over another recent additions. Unfounded, IMO, speculative statements are being made.

[Thunderknuckles]

Damn, I didn't know some people had issues with logroller?
Always seemed like a straight shooter to me. He's always been civil even in disagreement - at least with me.

[jimnyc]

Damn, I didn't know some people had issues with logroller?
Always seemed like a straight shooter to me. He's always been civil even in disagreement - at least with me.

I'm sure we all have a few people that wouldn't mind if we tripped and hit our heads! Believe it or not, I think there are a few here that don't particularly care for me. Yeah, I know, I know, but it's true! And the best part is, although I think a handful of them hate me, they are still more than free to post here and have fun. :)

[aboutime]

the end result is that it is Jim's board. Not mine, yours, or anyone elses.

If Jim chooses to add 50 mods, his board.

If Jim chooses to shut the board down, his board.

No amount of whining, bitching, moaning, pleading, begging, or posting can change the over-riding fact... it is JIM'S BOARD, AND HE CAN DO WHATEVER HE PLEASES WITH IT.


Absolutely. Don't think anyone disagree's with that.
This should be Jim's theme music for this forum.
Just a little humor....

http://youtu.be/V6Uo1nNt6LU

[jimnyc]

I remember growing up with that song, endlessly on Mom's radio. I had hoped that it disappeared back in the 70's! LOL

"There's no crying in baseball" - Tom Hanks

And no crying at DP either. :)

[aboutime]

I remember growing up with that song, endlessly on Mom's radio. I had hoped that it disappeared back in the 70's! LOL

"There's no crying in baseball" - Tom Hanks

And no crying at DP either. :)


Thought you'd like this one too!
http://youtu.be/25Eh9ZuAPTA

[Drummond]

Are you astonished because I made a decision that you think is harmful to the board, or because I chose someone that you don't particularly have a lot of love for?

What "I" want out of this board, and the freedoms I've afforded without crazy moderation, will NOT be changing. Even if between the worst of enemies, staff is not allowed to do anything I wouldn't do myself. To put it bluntly, I have ideas of where I would like to see the board go and how I would want it ran - and staff is an extension of that, to basically do what I would do.

People have been telling me for 10 years now how my patience and dedication to freedom of speech won't last. But it has. And it's not going to change. The day I become overbearing and more interested in moderating than provoking good discussion, I'll sell off or give the board away.

If I thought for a NYC second that Logroller would ever moderate unfairly, I wouldn't have asked him to come aboard. With that said, it can't fail. For starters, I wouldn't allow it too, as I love this place and will always stick to my principles. Secondly, and more important, give him a chance outside of a debate to see how he moderates. He's proved his fairness and maturity to me for a few years. Being polar opposites on some heated topics doesn't mean you guys can't agree on what is best for the board.

Your reply contains certain assurances. I thank you for them.

The fact of 'enmity', or even the extent of it, is not an issue as such. Granted, one could look at such an issue and be constrained in judgments according to their shallowness ... as much as anything else. But let me put these thoughts to you.

Firstly (and as Marcus has been at pains to point out, in his own way), this forum is understood to be yours, to run as you choose, as you see is best. Noted - accepted - none of that is the basis for quarrel.

Now, this following viewpoint you may regard as overly subjective if you wish ... but I happen to think I'm making a very valid case.

It is this: Left-wing thinking has never struck me as being particularly based in logic or fairness. It's about the acquisition of power, and, once acquired, how you apply it.

As an experiment, years ago, I contributed to a Left-wing discussion forum run out of the UK. It was not too dissimilar to this one, except of course that its debating directions were very firmly Left wing. So, what did I experience ? Apart from contention taken to a pitch that few would believe ... judgments, controls, were pitched to strongly favour Left-wing views. In essence, it was part-rational, but for the most part it was 'if you don't see things a certain way, there has to be something wrong with you'.

Its version of 'moderation', in the short time I was there, included PM's from no less than three Mods, each requiring me to argue a certain way. One of them kept up a dialogue with me for weeks on end, designed to deconstruct my arguments BEFORE I fully presented them.

Appearance of fairness evidently mattered to them. So long as it was heavily controlled along the way, of course.

[I feel a certain pride in my durability there. Yes, I actually lasted there for SIX entire weeks, before I was turfed off of there.]

Jim, I'm telling you this for a reason. My view is that the greater the opportunities given to those of a Left-persuasion to exercise control, so the greater the manifestation of its following a set agenda will be. I don't just believe that because I THINK I'm right .. I believe it because I've experienced it for myself.

You may believe in freedom of debate and of its being fairly balanced throughout. Jim; I absolutely promise you, those of the Left do NOT.

'Enmities' aren't really the issue. My view and belief is that the more a forum, ANY forum, is opened up to those from the Left, so the greater the incidence of agenda-setting will be as a consequence.

You say you've known Logroller for years, and it seems clear that you trust him to do a good job for you. OK, we'll see.

But I also believe I have legitimate concerns, Jim. And I do speak from experience.

[aboutime]

Your reply contains certain assurances. I thank you for them.

The fact of 'enmity', or even the extent of it, is not an issue as such. Granted, one could look at such an issue and be constrained in judgments according to their shallowness ... as much as anything else. But let me put these thoughts to you.

Firstly (and as Marcus has been at pains to point out, in his own way), this forum is understood to be yours, to run as you choose, as you see is best. Noted - accepted - none of that is the basis for quarrel.

Now, this following viewpoint you may regard as overly subjective if you wish ... but I happen to think I'm making a very valid case.

It is this: Left-wing thinking has never struck me as being particularly based in logic or fairness. It's about the acquisition of power, and, once acquired, how you apply it.

As an experiment, years ago, I contributed to a Left-wing discussion forum run out of the UK. It was not too dissimilar to this one, except of course that its debating directions were very firmly Left wing. So, what did I experience ? Apart from contention taken to a pitch that few would believe ... judgments, controls, were pitched to strongly favour Left-wing views. In essence, it was part-rational, but for the most part it was 'if you don't see things a certain way, there has to be something wrong with you'.

Its version of 'moderation', in the short time I was there, included PM's from no less than three Mods, each requiring me to argue a certain way. One of them kept up a dialogue with me for weeks on end, designed to deconstruct my arguments BEFORE I fully presented them.

Appearance of fairness evidently mattered to them. So long as it was heavily controlled along the way, of course.

[I feel a certain pride in my durability there. Yes, I actually lasted there for SIX entire weeks, before I was turfed off of there.]

Jim, I'm telling you this for a reason. My view is that the greater the opportunities given to those of a Left-persuasion to exercise control, so the greater the manifestation of its following a set agenda will be. I don't just believe that because I THINK I'm right .. I believe it because I've experienced it for myself.

You may believe in freedom of debate and of its being fairly balanced throughout. Jim; I absolutely promise you, those of the Left do NOT.

'Enmities' aren't really the issue. My view and belief is that the more a forum, ANY forum, is opened up to those from the Left, so the greater the incidence of agenda-setting will be as a consequence.

You say you've known Logroller for years, and it seems clear that you trust him to do a good job for you. OK, we'll see.

But I also believe I have legitimate concerns, Jim. And I do speak from experience.


Thank You Sir Drummond. You managed to say, almost exactly what I was at a loss for saying. Probably due to my past experience where attempting to deal with others in explaining the UNFORSEEN consequences of certain actions.. is often ignored.
Of course. Those who always oppose making such statements based on experience. Always seem to find that invisible, but workable tact of pretending to be something, or someone they really are not. To achieve their ultimate goal.
Personally. Like you. I have experienced the betrayal, and guaranteed promises too many times to just shrug them off, and pretend they aren't real here.
Guess Jim will just have to learn, on his own. As I have stated before.
Since I, and WE are not capable, or knowledgeable enough to just enjoy the promised STATUS QUO being offered up.

[Thunderknuckles]

Isn't Logroller more of a Libertarian?

[jimnyc]

Your reply contains certain assurances. I thank you for them.

The fact of 'enmity', or even the extent of it, is not an issue as such. Granted, one could look at such an issue and be constrained in judgments according to their shallowness ... as much as anything else. But let me put these thoughts to you.

Firstly (and as Marcus has been at pains to point out, in his own way), this forum is understood to be yours, to run as you choose, as you see is best. Noted - accepted - none of that is the basis for quarrel.

Now, this following viewpoint you may regard as overly subjective if you wish ... but I happen to think I'm making a very valid case.

It is this: Left-wing thinking has never struck me as being particularly based in logic or fairness. It's about the acquisition of power, and, once acquired, how you apply it.

As an experiment, years ago, I contributed to a Left-wing discussion forum run out of the UK. It was not too dissimilar to this one, except of course that its debating directions were very firmly Left wing. So, what did I experience ? Apart from contention taken to a pitch that few would believe ... judgments, controls, were pitched to strongly favour Left-wing views. In essence, it was part-rational, but for the most part it was 'if you don't see things a certain way, there has to be something wrong with you'.

Its version of 'moderation', in the short time I was there, included PM's from no less than three Mods, each requiring me to argue a certain way. One of them kept up a dialogue with me for weeks on end, designed to deconstruct my arguments BEFORE I fully presented them.

Appearance of fairness evidently mattered to them. So long as it was heavily controlled along the way, of course.

[I feel a certain pride in my durability there. Yes, I actually lasted there for SIX entire weeks, before I was turfed off of there.]

Jim, I'm telling you this for a reason. My view is that the greater the opportunities given to those of a Left-persuasion to exercise control, so the greater the manifestation of its following a set agenda will be. I don't just believe that because I THINK I'm right .. I believe it because I've experienced it for myself.

You may believe in freedom of debate and of its being fairly balanced throughout. Jim; I absolutely promise you, those of the Left do NOT.

'Enmities' aren't really the issue. My view and belief is that the more a forum, ANY forum, is opened up to those from the Left, so the greater the incidence of agenda-setting will be as a consequence.

You say you've known Logroller for years, and it seems clear that you trust him to do a good job for you. OK, we'll see.

But I also believe I have legitimate concerns, Jim. And I do speak from experience.

Thanks for the well thought out post. I'll try to reply the best I can.

This board has never been about me, and my way or the highway. I've done my best over the years to include staff on decisions AND the entire community on some decisions. Yes, it is my board, but I try to always do what is best for the community as a whole. None of the shenanigans you endured elsewhere will be applied here, whether it may feel that way or appear that way at times.

There will always be fairness in moderation here and NO ONE will ever tell others how they should post. Take away the individuality and I'm not surprised boards that employ that crap will fail.

While things aren't perfect here, do you think I've been anything but fair to you guys? And I believe you broke the 6 week barrier here too! Nothing is going to change. The rules remain the same. The debates will be the same. No one is going to be unfairly moderated or eaten alive because Log became a moderator. :)

We could have 19 leftie moderators and then me - and things still wouldn't change. The board is what it is, so long as I own it, and won't be changing.

Oh, and I don't think Log is a leftie! :)

[Kathianne]

Isn't Logroller more of a Libertarian?

I think so, at least he has been. Yes, I've noticed changes in the last months, but am unsure if that is real change or just pissing some off. I've no doubt he'll be a fair moderator.

He's smart and I've known him many times to agree with part of something I said and disagree with others. He doesn't feel the need to agree in toto or slam because of one or two points.

He bothers to read what others write. That's very important, IMO.

[jimnyc]

Thank You Sir Drummond. You managed to say, almost exactly what I was at a loss for saying. Probably due to my past experience where attempting to deal with others in explaining the UNFORSEEN consequences of certain actions.. is often ignored.
Of course. Those who always oppose making such statements based on experience. Always seem to find that invisible, but workable tact of pretending to be something, or someone they really are not. To achieve their ultimate goal.
Personally. Like you. I have experienced the betrayal, and guaranteed promises too many times to just shrug them off, and pretend they aren't real here.
Guess Jim will just have to learn, on his own. As I have stated before.
Since I, and WE are not capable, or knowledgeable enough to just enjoy the promised STATUS QUO being offered up.

Couldn't you guys perhaps stop judging my board based on past bad experiences?

I think I've been nothing but fair with all of you, even those that disagree with this decisions. You're all still here posting. The worst anyone has seen has been a small handful of thread bans, and maybe some posts clipped and moved to the cage. At least save your ammo and let me have it when you actually see anything unfair. :)

[Kathianne]

Couldn't you guys perhaps stop judging my board based on past bad experiences?

I think I've been nothing but fair with all of you, even those that disagree with this decisions. You're all still here posting. The worst anyone has seen has been a small handful of thread bans, and maybe some posts clipped and moved to the cage. At least save your ammo and let me have it when you actually see anything unfair. :)

I agree. With the ability to 'thread ban' one really has to work at being 'banned' for even 24 or 48 hours. I've not seen any thread bans being issued without cause. We all know the rules, we all know the requests made over and over again.

On another board I visit, the original poster can actually thread ban other members, those that often derail for instance. While I can see a very good app for such, as a fair minded person I don't think other voices should be silenced without earning it. Each time.

[Drummond]

Isn't Logroller more of a Libertarian?

Strangely enough, I don't find that to be very reassuring !

I can't speak for America, but where the UK is concerned, Libertarianism is seen as at least broadly Socialist. Granted, there has been debate about that. But, in the main at least, Libertarianism is perceived in that way.

One of the more notably Left-wing leaders the Labour Party ever had, described himself as a Libertarian. I refer to Michael Foot.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Foot


... Foot became a journalist, working briefly on the New Statesman, before joining the left-wing weekly Tribune when it was set up in early 1937 to support the Unity Campaign, an attempt to secure an anti-fascist United Front between Labour and the parties to its left. The campaign's members were Stafford Cripps's (Labour-affiliated) Socialist League, the Independent Labour Party and the Communist Party of Great Britain (CP). Foot resigned in 1938 after the paper's first editor, William Mellor, was fired for refusing to adopt a new CP policy of backing a Popular Front, including non-socialist parties, against fascism and appeasement. In a 1955 interview, Foot ideologically identified as a libertarian socialist ...

[revelarts]

Isn't Logroller more of a Libertarian?

Wait, isn't he a pot head conservative too? or is that just me and FJ?
seriously , Log , if i can try to generalize your political POV.
ummm
I'd say moderate conservative/libertarian with a good dollop of environmental globalist governance wedged in there in some freaky way somehow.

I'm sure not the way you'd put it, but is that fair?

[Thunderknuckles]

Libertarians in the US are different. They are fiscally conservative and socially liberal - which is where Log probably runs afoul with conservatives. Most importantly, however, they believe in small government. Government that does not intervene in people's lives and allows them to live their lives as they see fit.
I suppose when you consider that last part, Logroller might turn out to be the most useless Mod this board has ever had :laugh:

[Thunderknuckles]

Logroller's member interview for anyone who wants to freshen up on his background:
http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?35673-Interview-with-quot-Logroller-quot

In it he clearly states he is fiscally conservative and socially liberal.

[Drummond]

Thanks for the well thought out post. I'll try to reply the best I can.

This board has never been about me, and my way or the highway. I've done my best over the years to include staff on decisions AND the entire community on some decisions. Yes, it is my board, but I try to always do what is best for the community as a whole. None of the shenanigans you endured elsewhere will be applied here, whether it may feel that way or appear that way at times.

There will always be fairness in moderation here and NO ONE will ever tell others how they should post. Take away the individuality and I'm not surprised boards that employ that crap will fail.

While things aren't perfect here, do you think I've been anything but fair to you guys? And I believe you broke the 6 week barrier here too! Nothing is going to change. The rules remain the same. The debates will be the same. No one is going to be unfairly moderated or eaten alive because Log became a moderator. :)

We could have 19 leftie moderators and then me - and things still wouldn't change. The board is what it is, so long as I own it, and won't be changing.

Oh, and I don't think Log is a leftie! :)

Thanks for your assurances. I'm going to take you at your word and see what happens.

Bear in mind this, though. I gave you one example of how a Leftie forum operated. I could cite you another of a further forum - yes, that one American - that, in the name of freedom of speech, exercised very little moderation. It was joined by, and became 'dominated' by, a large contingent of Right-wing contributors.

I was recommended to that site by an American lady, and debated there, quite happily, for a couple of years. Then ... WHAM !! ... along came 2004, US election year, and suddenly a mass of Left-wing trolls descended on to the site. Their activities were disgusting. Debate became nearly impossible. Whole threads became nothing but cesspits of abuse. Many of us Right-wingers battled on, but eventually jumped ship. We felt we had to.

The Left does have its agenda, and once it digs its heels in to a site, it either 'terraforms' it into something it can use for itself, or, it goes on a wrecking spree.

So, that all said .. I thank you for your assurances, Jim (... and if you doubt that my account is accurate, I'll happily identify the site to you in a PM ..).

[Drummond]

Logroller's member interview for anyone who wants to freshen up on his background:
http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?35673-Interview-with-quot-Logroller-quot

In it he clearly states he is fiscally conservative and socially liberal.

OK, I'll take a look ...

[Bbcoop]

Just accepted Log's invitation to join DP. I will try and be a testament to his ability to be moderator. Libertarian, him... That's funny! I guess I would say that he believes in the doctrine of free will part of the definition, but he's no omniscient. :laugh:

[Kathianne]

Just accepted Log's invitation to join DP. I will try and be a testament to his ability to be moderator. Libertarian, him... That's funny! I guess I would say that he believes in the doctrine of free will part of the definition, but he's no omniscient. :laugh:

Welcome!

[logroller]

Can a mod change the title of this thread to whine about staff...:dance:

[revelarts]

Just accepted Log's invitation to join DP. I will try and be a testament to his ability to be moderator. Libertarian, him... That's funny! I guess I would say that he believes in the doctrine of free will part of the definition, but he's no omniscient. :laugh:

Welcome BBcoop!

do you know anything about terraforming by chance? :tinfoil:

[Drummond]

Just accepted Log's invitation to join DP. I will try and be a testament to his ability to be moderator. Libertarian, him... That's funny! I guess I would say that he believes in the doctrine of free will part of the definition, but he's no omniscient. :laugh:

Hello, Bbcoop - welcome. Hope you enjoy the forum.

I see that you say you've accepted Logroller's invitation to join this forum ? Interesting.

What would you say particularly recommended the invitation ? Are you and he friends ? Comrades ? Do you know each other from other forums or mutual interests ?

[aboutime]

Strangely enough, I don't find that to be very reassuring !

I can't speak for America, but where the UK is concerned, Libertarianism is seen as at least broadly Socialist. Granted, there has been debate about that. But, in the main at least, Libertarianism is perceived in that way.

One of the more notably Left-wing leaders the Labour Party ever had, described himself as a Libertarian. I refer to Michael Foot.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Foot


Sir Drummond. You may not be aware of this but. We had a talk-radio personality named Neil Boortz who was a Die-hard Libertarian...to some extent. On his webpage, he also had a test visitors could use to determine their political leanings...so to speak.
I took that test three times, and with very little variation. I came up as a Libertarian as well.
Boortz and I disagree on the legalization of MJ and drugs. Which many Libertarians still believe is the right answer.
Otherwise. As a Libertarian. I found myself being labeled by others, much like conservative, republicans are always labeled. And I deny having any Liberal ideology to claim. WHICH is why I find myself in such disagreement with people like Logroller, and other members who claim to be somewhat conservative...to their own limitations.
Unlike many of them. I stand behind, and demand FULL compliance with our Laws, and Constitution. Which I have also discovered, isn't totally in agreement with many Libertarians...to many extents, or stretches of their Liberal Idiological claims as Libertarians.
Therefore. I find myself in disagreement with Log, fj, and several others whom..in the long run...are actually disguised RINO's.
(Republicans In Name Only) here in the USA.

[Kathianne]

Sir Drummond. You may not be aware of this but. We had a talk-radio personality named Neil Boortz who was a Die-hard Libertarian...to some extent. On his webpage, he also had a test visitors could use to determine their political leanings...so to speak.
I took that test three times, and with very little variation. I came up as a Libertarian as well.
Boortz and I disagree on the legalization of MJ and drugs. Which many Libertarians still believe is the right answer.
Otherwise. As a Libertarian. I found myself being labeled by others, much like conservative, republicans are always labeled. And I deny having any Liberal ideology to claim. WHICH is why I find myself in such disagreement with people like Logroller, and other members who claim to be somewhat conservative...to their own limitations.
Unlike many of them. I stand behind, and demand FULL compliance with our Laws, and Constitution. Which I have also discovered, isn't totally in agreement with many Libertarians...to many extents, or stretches of their Liberal Idiological claims as Libertarians.
Therefore. I find myself in disagreement with Log, fj, and several others whom..in the long run...are actually disguised RINO's.
(Republicans In Name Only) here in the USA.

Not being snarky. Can you explain what you mean by the bolded? 'die hard' and 'somewhat' confuse me.

From what I know of libertarians, you don't fit into the definition, I hope that's a comfort.

[jimnyc]

Thanks for your assurances. I'm going to take you at your word and see what happens.

Bear in mind this, though. I gave you one example of how a Leftie forum operated. I could cite you another of a further forum - yes, that one American - that, in the name of freedom of speech, exercised very little moderation. It was joined by, and became 'dominated' by, a large contingent of Right-wing contributors.

I was recommended to that site by an American lady, and debated there, quite happily, for a couple of years. Then ... WHAM !! ... along came 2004, US election year, and suddenly a mass of Left-wing trolls descended on to the site. Their activities were disgusting. Debate became nearly impossible. Whole threads became nothing but cesspits of abuse. Many of us Right-wingers battled on, but eventually jumped ship. We felt we had to.

The Left does have its agenda, and once it digs its heels in to a site, it either 'terraforms' it into something it can use for itself, or, it goes on a wrecking spree.

So, that all said .. I thank you for your assurances, Jim (... and if you doubt that my account is accurate, I'll happily identify the site to you in a PM ..).

Oh, I believe you! Anyone wanting an idea of what a left wing kook ran site looks like, simply go to democraticunderground! All you need do there is introduce yourself as a republican and they will ban you. They WANT voices from only one side. My old board, which went from like 500,000 posts to about 7 million since I sold it, is infested with chaos and fighting. Great, threads are 20 pages long an hour after you start them, but they are useless. I know what you speak of.

But one man is not an infestation, and he's not the type you would ever find schmoozing over at DU either. I know you may not want to hear it, but he's WAY more conservative than he is a leftie - just not entirely right wing cool nutcases like you and I. :)

The only thing I would like to get overrun by is good discussions. If what you saw at that old board ever happens here - remind me - I'll pay the fees for a new domain and hosting and start us a new website myself!

[jimnyc]

Just accepted Log's invitation to join DP. I will try and be a testament to his ability to be moderator. Libertarian, him... That's funny! I guess I would say that he believes in the doctrine of free will part of the definition, but he's no omniscient. :laugh:

Welcome, Coop! I was going to call you BB, but we have a BillyBob here and I would be confused. Or maybe I can type out the entire 6 characters? :)

Welcome to DP :salute:

[revelarts]

Hello, Bbcoop - welcome. Hope you enjoy the forum.

I see that you say you've accepted Logroller's invitation to join this forum ? Interesting.

What would you say particularly recommended the invitation ? Are you and he friends ? Comrades ? Do you know each other from other forums or mutual interests ?
Drummond sorry to go here but..

the main letters in his screen name abbreviate to B-B-C.
That should tell you something right there.:tinfoil: :tinfoil:

[aboutime]

Not being snarky. Can you explain what you mean by the bolded? 'die hard' and 'somewhat' confuse me.

From what I know of libertarians, you don't fit into the definition, I hope that's a comfort.


Kathianne. Really? A learned woman like yourself, not knowing what the expression 'die-hard' would be used for? If that confused you. You may just be a Libertarian who endorses, and agree's with legalizing drug usage. Is that close?

[revelarts]

Drummond sorry to go here but..

the main letters in his screen name abbreviate to B-B-C.
That should tell you something right there.:tinfoil: :tinfoil:

BbCoop

CO-OP = ???!!:tinfoil:

[Kathianne]

Kathianne. Really? A learned woman like yourself, not knowing what the expression 'die-hard' would be used for? If that confused you. You may just be a Libertarian who endorses, and agree's with legalizing drug usage. Is that close?

I'll answer after you do. Really, how can one be a 'die hard' anything, while also qualifying for 'somewhat?'

It's not my intelligence that is questionable, it's the English language perchance? We all know you would never make a mistake, at least in the last 50 years or so.

[hjmick]

WTF? Four pages of kvetching just because Log was made a moderator?

Here's a tip...


Don't be a dick and you'll have nothing to worry about...

[Drummond]

Drummond sorry to go here but..

the main letters in his screen name abbreviate to B-B-C.
That should tell you something right there.:tinfoil: :tinfoil:

I'd rather our newcomer answered for himself, thanks, Revelarts ...

[Drummond]

Oh, I believe you! Anyone wanting an idea of what a left wing kook ran site looks like, simply go to democraticunderground! All you need do there is introduce yourself as a republican and they will ban you. They WANT voices from only one side. My old board, which went from like 500,000 posts to about 7 million since I sold it, is infested with chaos and fighting. Great, threads are 20 pages long an hour after you start them, but they are useless. I know what you speak of.

But one man is not an infestation, and he's not the type you would ever find schmoozing over at DU either. I know you may not want to hear it, but he's WAY more conservative than he is a leftie - just not entirely right wing cool nutcases like you and I. :)

The only thing I would like to get overrun by is good discussions. If what you saw at that old board ever happens here - remind me - I'll pay the fees for a new domain and hosting and start us a new website myself!

It's tempting to try and join up there, just to aggravate the hell out of them (it's a knack ..) ...

As for any rerun of ruined, cesspitted forums ... happy to hold you to your promise ! But anyway, I was making a serious point - - Left-wingers DO work to either take over, or ruin, forums which they recognise as being anti-their interests. Don't be surprised if, someday, you suddenly find a great upsurge in membership interest which, when realised, turns out to be an enemy working from within.

[Drummond]

Sir Drummond. You may not be aware of this but. We had a talk-radio personality named Neil Boortz who was a Die-hard Libertarian...to some extent. On his webpage, he also had a test visitors could use to determine their political leanings...so to speak.
I took that test three times, and with very little variation. I came up as a Libertarian as well.
Boortz and I disagree on the legalization of MJ and drugs. Which many Libertarians still believe is the right answer.
Otherwise. As a Libertarian. I found myself being labeled by others, much like conservative, republicans are always labeled. And I deny having any Liberal ideology to claim. WHICH is why I find myself in such disagreement with people like Logroller, and other members who claim to be somewhat conservative...to their own limitations.
Unlike many of them. I stand behind, and demand FULL compliance with our Laws, and Constitution. Which I have also discovered, isn't totally in agreement with many Libertarians...to many extents, or stretches of their Liberal Idiological claims as Libertarians.
Therefore. I find myself in disagreement with Log, fj, and several others whom..in the long run...are actually disguised RINO's.
(Republicans In Name Only) here in the USA.

We are very much on the same page, Aboutime. For myself, I identify Conservatism with strong pro-Law and Order application. After the UK's Winter of Discontent, when our Unions were running riot, it was Mrs Thatcher's passing of stringent legal controls which saved our bacon ..

Any passing Libertarians might be 'amused' to note that I've zero tolerance for drugtaking (except when medically prescribed, of course) and for legalisation attempts. No .... Libertarianism is just one rather small step away from anarchy, in my book. I will always oppose it.

[red states rule]

I have a lot on my plate tonight so this will be quick. Lord knows LR and myself have had our differences but I am not the least bit worried about him becoming a mod. While he is a lib - he is a nice guy for the most part. While he has had a short fuse recently he has been a decent guy. Why not wait and see how he moderates - if anyone gives him reason to. LR - congrats. Jim - good call.

[aboutime]

I have a lot on my plate tonight so this will be quick. Lord knows LR and myself have had our differences but I am not the least bit worried about him becoming a mod. While he is a lib - he is a nice guy for the most part. While he has had a short fuse recently he has been a decent guy. Why not wait and see how he moderates - if anyone gives him reason to. LR - congrats. Jim - good call.


red states rule. Actually. We really have no choice but to do exactly as you suggested. Time, as it normally does. Will tell.

[hjmick]

Oh, I believe you! Anyone wanting an idea of what a left wing kook ran site looks like, simply go to democraticunderground! All you need do there is introduce yourself as a republican and they will ban you. They WANT voices from only one side. My old board, which went from like 500,000 posts to about 7 million since I sold it, is infested with chaos and fighting. Great, threads are 20 pages long an hour after you start them, but they are useless. I know what you speak of.

But one man is not an infestation, and he's not the type you would ever find schmoozing over at DU either. I know you may not want to hear it, but he's WAY more conservative than he is a leftie - just not entirely right wing cool nutcases like you and I. :)

The only thing I would like to get overrun by is good discussions. If what you saw at that old board ever happens here - remind me - I'll pay the fees for a new domain and hosting and start us a new website myself!

What's currently happening at USMB is a joke. A fucking joke. Over moderated horseshit, vile and disgusting posts, constant arguing, no serious discussion, no respect. It is really not worth trying to start an honest, serious discussion over there...

[jimnyc]

red states rule. Actually. We really have no choice but to do exactly as you suggested. Time, as it normally does. Will tell.

That's all I ask of you guys, to give it time before you jump off the cliff. Like stated earlier, so long as rules don't get broken, no one has a thing at all to worry about. I see no reason to believe that the way you guys are treated now, won't be the same way going forward. No moderation will happen unless someone is deserving of it. And considering I think everyone in this thread are honorable adults, I think we can all admit when we might have went over the line. I know I've done it hundreds of times! :)

[Kathianne]

What's currently happening at USMB is a joke. A fucking joke. Over moderated horseshit, vile and disgusting posts, constant arguing, no serious discussion, no respect. It is really not worth trying to start an honest, serious discussion over there...

Yep, I confine myself to education related and some political threads. I pretty much ignore responses to my posts, unless they are 'spot on.'

[Kathianne]

That's all I ask of you guys, to give it time before you jump off the cliff. Like stated earlier, so long as rules don't get broken, no one has a thing at all to worry about. I see no reason to believe that the way you guys are treated now, won't be the same way going forward. No moderation will happen unless someone is deserving of it. And considering I think everyone in this thread are honorable adults, I think we can all admit when we might have went over the line. I know I've done it hundreds of times! :)

Yeah and I certainly threatened to ban you! ;)

[jimnyc]

What's currently happening at USMB is a joke. A fucking joke. Over moderated horseshit, vile and disgusting posts, constant arguing, no serious discussion, no respect. It is really not worth trying to start an honest, serious discussion over there...

Yeah, it's sad to look at it and think back to what it once was. It's proof that sheer volume and numbers won't produce quality. Open any good subject, it's 102 pages long and 102 different subjects and 102 different arguments going on. Our problems here are tame in comparison! I still dare anyone that thinks we aren't fair to go and join DU and attempt to be reasonable. I wouldn't ask people to troll elsewhere as I wouldn't want it done here. But you'll be absolutely reasonable and gone real quick. Just tell them you're a Ronald Reagan fan from way back!

[jimnyc]

Yeah and I certainly threatened to ban you! ;)

At DP alone, not counting my old digs, there were at least 30x I was deserving of being given a timeout. I think there might have been a handful of things I did that warranted even longer. :( Sometimes heated discussions get the best of us, it happens. Now I think the worst we generally see might be a thread ban, and it won't happen unless someone is deserving. Oh man, probably a lot of threads I should have been banned from too! :laugh:

[aboutime]

Yeah, it's sad to look at it and think back to what it once was. It's proof that sheer volume and numbers won't produce quality. Open any good subject, it's 102 pages long and 102 different subjects and 102 different arguments going on. Our problems here are tame in comparison! I still dare anyone that thinks we aren't fair to go and join DU and attempt to be reasonable. I wouldn't ask people to troll elsewhere as I wouldn't want it done here. But you'll be absolutely reasonable and gone real quick. Just tell them you're a Ronald Reagan fan from way back!


Jim. Many years ago. While Bush was still in office. I tried to join DU. Never got past the first couple of questions. So that didn't happen. They even managed to create a Cookie with my IP address that even stopped me from viewing anything there.
Probably a good thing. For me. Now I can safely laugh at them all the time, and they have no idea what is going on.

[jimnyc]

Jim. Many years ago. While Bush was still in office. I tried to join DU. Never got past the first couple of questions. So that didn't happen. They even managed to create a Cookie with my IP address that even stopped me from viewing anything there.
Probably a good thing. For me. Now I can safely laugh at them all the time, and they have no idea what is going on.

I got banned once and just never went back, but it's fun to peek in every now and again and get a giggle out of the wackos posting there.

[Drummond]

Yeah, it's sad to look at it and think back to what it once was. It's proof that sheer volume and numbers won't produce quality. Open any good subject, it's 102 pages long and 102 different subjects and 102 different arguments going on. Our problems here are tame in comparison! I still dare anyone that thinks we aren't fair to go and join DU and attempt to be reasonable. I wouldn't ask people to troll elsewhere as I wouldn't want it done here. But you'll be absolutely reasonable and gone real quick. Just tell them you're a Ronald Reagan fan from way back!

I'd enjoy somehow, by some miracle, managing to get myself on that site. Then offering to sell members copies of a recording of Margaret Thatcher reciting the Gettysburg Address .... :laugh::laugh:

She actually did record that, you know ... I genuinely once owned a cassette tape of her reciting it. She did a great job.

[Gaffer]

It's tempting to try and join up there, just to aggravate the hell out of them (it's a knack ..) ...

As for any rerun of ruined, cesspitted forums ... happy to hold you to your promise ! But anyway, I was making a serious point - - Left-wingers DO work to either take over, or ruin, forums which they recognise as being anti-their interests. Don't be surprised if, someday, you suddenly find a great upsurge in membership interest which, when realised, turns out to be an enemy working from within.

The liberal trolls usually show up close to election time. We have had a good number of them here but they don't stay long. They get slammed with truth and facts and can't twist and turn things the way they like. Libs don't like it here.

LR is an okay guy. He'll be fine as a mod. He's not a liberal as everyone paints him. He just has a different point of view. And if we get some true liberals daring to test the water here you will see LR go after them right beside you.

[tailfins]

This is not perspectives. I think both of you have been members here long enough to know I run a fair board. This carries on to the staff. Ask any of the old timers, I still run the place the way I did my old board when I started in 2003. No one is going to go after anyone or take charge of the house. We simply need new mods to HELP, not to harm the place. All I ask is to give things chances when I make changes, and at least make your decisions based on reality and not what you perceive may happen.

I don't care who the mods are as long as I get left alone.

[tailfins]

I got banned once and just never went back, but it's fun to peek in every now and again and get a giggle out of the wackos posting there.

I'm surprised they haven't been defaced or hit by a denial of service.

[gabosaurus]

I don't care who the mods are...

Oh yeah? Just wait until you see who the next mod is... :eek: :cool:

[tailfins]

Oh yeah? Just wait until you see who the next mod is... :eek: :cool:

I've never had any problems with Little-Acorn.

[red states rule]

red states rule. Actually. We really have no choice but to do exactly as you suggested. Time, as it normally does. Will tell.

Do not sweat it AT. About 18 months ago I stepped down as a mod over my feud with Conman. The reason was Jim holds his staff members to a much higher standard then he does regular members. The feud with Conman was down and dirty and being a staff member Jim did not want me getting that dirty with him

So the same will apply to LR - as it does with every staff member

Bottom line is. just follow the rules and you will not even know LR is a mod. \

Hey it is not like Jim made FU or Gabby a mod. Jim picked the best liberal we have here for the job

[taft2012]

Isn't Logroller more of a Libertarian?

Christopher Hitchens was a liberal puketard who became a libertarian puketard.

Libertarianism is closer to liberalism than conservatism.

Regardless, I welcome the new pothead conservative aspiring authoritarian fascist overlord. I'll stick around until Jimmy opens his FEMA re-education camps.

[red states rule]

Christopher Hitchens was a liberal puketard who became a libertarian puketard.

Libertarianism is closer to liberalism than conservatism.

Regardless, I welcome the new pothead conservative aspiring authoritarian fascist overlord. I'll stick around until Jimmy opens his FEMA re-education camps.

Taft, get over yourself - this is a message board for god sakes

PLEASE stop your damn whining

[tailfins]

Taft, get over yourself - this is a message board for god sakes

PLEASE stop your damn whining

I think he's trying to be funny. And I guess to some extent he is.

[taft2012]

Taft, get over yourself - this is a message board for god sakes

PLEASE stop your damn whining

Sorry, I must have missed this alleged "whining".

But already it starts. Like the Obama administration, one harmless comment sets off repercussions. How long until the DP IRS shows up?

[red states rule]

Sorry, I must have missed this alleged "whining".

But already it starts. Like the Obama administration, one harmless comment sets off repercussions. How long until the DP IRS shows up?

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-urtJMguZEbw/UEVflc5BlYI/AAAAAAAABZ8/pwiQWjD0W7I/s1600/pity-party.jpg

[tailfins]

Sorry, I must have missed this alleged "whining".

But already it starts. Like the Obama administration, one harmless comment sets off repercussions. How long until the DP IRS shows up?

What animal is that in the background of your avatar?

[taft2012]

What animal is that in the background of your avatar?

That's Lorenzo the Llama.

I see where this board is heading... been there before.

Time to find a new one. Enjoy Jimmy's FEMA camp everyone. Bye.

[tailfins]

That's Lorenzo the Llama.

I see where this board is heading... been there before.

Time to find a new one. Enjoy Jimmy's FEMA camp everyone. Bye.

I'm as guilty as anybody about this getting mad and demanding a refund. However, running a message board takes work and some sacrifices are necessary to acquire free labor. It means being managed by people dumb enough to give away free labor. Unless you're willing to pay a monthly subscription fee to be managed by true professionals, you should happily accept what you get for the price you are paying.

[jimnyc]

I see where this board is heading... been there before.

Time to find a new one. Enjoy Jimmy's FEMA camp everyone. Bye.

Please tell me you're kidding?

[jimnyc]

Is it actions of a person? Perception? Just not liking someone?

I find it odd that simply making Logroller a moderator has made some/one leave and others contemplating the same. He hasn't even made a single decision or moderated anything yet. We are not these other boards. I would like to assume, that if people thought we or I were unfair here, they would have left prior to this. Now just simply making the choice is enough to have one want to bail? I don't get it, I really don't. I understand that people dislike one another, and that will never change. But to leave, or want to leave, based on the reasons I've seen thus far, is just plain silly.

IF Logroller goes cuckoo and starts moderating unfairly, toss it in my face and then leave.

IF the board goes the way of "other boards", toss it in my face and then leave.

IF my assurances don't pan out, toss it in my face and leave.

Some that I have been nothing but respectful, friendly and fair with - are treating me and this decision like I just killed their first born child. I thought I had "earned" a little respect, and to be taken at my word, based on my past experiences.

If anyone wants to leave, so be it. I made a decision that I think is great for the board. Not a single bit of harm has been done. Save the chastising for when something actually happens. If my word isn't good enough, and my past fairness not a good enough indicator, then I have failed you, and those who feel that way probably are better off elsewhere.

[tailfins]

Is it actions of a person? Perception? Just not liking someone?

I find it odd that simply making Logroller a moderator has made some/one leave and others contemplating the same. He hasn't even made a single decision or moderated anything yet. We are not these other boards. I would like to assume, that if people thought we or I were unfair here, they would have left prior to this. Now just simply making the choice is enough to have one want to bail? I don't get it, I really don't. I understand that people dislike one another, and that will never change. But to leave, or want to leave, based on the reasons I've seen thus far, is just plain silly.

IF Logroller goes cuckoo and starts moderating unfairly, toss it in my face and then leave.

IF the board goes the way of "other boards", toss it in my face and then leave.

IF my assurances don't pan out, toss it in my face and leave.

Some that I have been nothing but respectful, friendly and fair with - are treating me and this decision like I just killed their first born child. I thought I had "earned" a little respect, and to be taken at my word, based on my past experiences.

If anyone wants to leave, so be it. I made a decision that I think is great for the board. Not a single bit of harm has been done. Save the chastising for when something actually happens. If my word isn't good enough, and my past fairness not a good enough indicator, then I have failed you, and those who feel that way probably are better off elsewhere.

If that Abraham Lincoln is inaugurated we will secede from the Union!

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Hey, hey what is the beef here? So log is a mod now. Its not like godhood will be bestowed upon him. He is still the same guy and still wrong about so many issues. I must admit to taking a couple days to see how things would change but Jim gives his word it will not suddenly become a Gestapo party around here,

so bat 'er up lets play ball!!

1200 × 1146 - 123rf.com (http://www.google.com/imgres?q=baseball+cartoon&lr=&sa=X&as_qdr=all&biw=1005&bih=609&tbm=isch&tbnid=WbrBaxKC8AV7VM:&imgrefurl=http://www.123rf.com/photo_13135191_baseball-cartoon-player-with-bat-and-ball-vector-illustration.html&docid=z3CEZMqNbDrsoM&imgurl=http://us.123rf.com/400wm/400/400/chromaco/chromaco1204/chromaco120400022/13135191-baseball-cartoon-player-with-bat-and-ball-vector-illustration.jpg&w=1200&h=1146&ei=CQyqUcnPOJPO9ASfj4DIDA&zoom=1&ved=1t:3588,r:1,s:0,i:165&iact=rc&dur=1049&page=1&tbnh=176&tbnw=185&start=0&ndsp=13&tx=134&ty=113)



Log, you still need my old dog teachings so I've decided to continue my education process that I began so generously in the recent past.;)---Tyr

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

That's Lorenzo the Llama.

I see where this board is heading... been there before.

Time to find a new one. Enjoy Jimmy's FEMA camp everyone. Bye.

Hope you are joking Taft. Hell, if not I have to ask. Why leave when the battle hasn't even started yet. You surely were joking .. right?

I know the feeling about "been there before" but Jim gives his word its not like that. At least wait too see.
I just post my assurances to Log that I will continue to generously teach him a few things. So get into the spirit of things amigo. The liberals here and elsewhere still need to have to face reading the truth presented to counter their dumbass crap.
Jim ain't Jethro my friend... ok? -Tyr

[jimnyc]

I'm glad to see you posting, Tyr. :) :beer:

[gabosaurus]

I'm glad to see you posting, Tyr.

:slap:

[jimnyc]

:slap:

:buttkick::fu:

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

:slap:

^^^ ABOUT YOUR SPEED ALRIGHT..



http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT80J4Cx9vXBDX1z9NGpeHVATQ1QTz9I CGWN17vLT1VNfkstxWCKw

[logroller]

Sorry, I must have missed this alleged "whining".

But already it starts. Like the Obama administration, one harmless comment sets off repercussions. How long until the DP IRS shows up?
Your pothead conservative meme is hardly a singular occurrence. As for fascist governing, you got any tips?

[aboutime]

Do not sweat it AT. About 18 months ago I stepped down as a mod over my feud with Conman. The reason was Jim holds his staff members to a much higher standard then he does regular members. The feud with Conman was down and dirty and being a staff member Jim did not want me getting that dirty with him

So the same will apply to LR - as it does with every staff member

Bottom line is. just follow the rules and you will not even know LR is a mod. \

Hey it is not like Jim made FU or Gabby a mod. Jim picked the best liberal we have here for the job


:laugh:

[fj1200]

It's tempting to try and join up there, just to aggravate the hell out of them (it's a knack ..) ...

As for any rerun of ruined, cesspitted forums ... happy to hold you to your promise ! But anyway, I was making a serious point - - Left-wingers DO work to either take over, or ruin, forums which they recognise as being anti-their interests. Don't be surprised if, someday, you suddenly find a great upsurge in membership interest which, when realised, turns out to be an enemy working from within.

Oh for Pete's sake. There are no LEFTIES here. The only one is Gabbie and she can't/won't even string a coherent argument together. All the other ones have been run off. I for one hope an actual leftist DOES show up.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Oh for Pete's sake. There are no LEFTIES here. The only one is Gabbie and she can't/won't even string a coherent argument together. All the other ones have been run off. I for one hope an actual leftist DOES show up.

Ha, at least one in disguise that I know of ....and a couple more far too damn sympathetic to those that would destroy our nation and turn it into a damn third world hellhole. You being one of them pedro.. Fact.. Truth and reality are both a bitchhh sometimes , get used to it.. -Tyr

[fj1200]

Ha, at least one in disguise that I know of ....and a couple more far too damn sympathetic to those that would destroy our nation and turn it into a damn third world hellhole. You being one of them pedro.. Fact.. Truth and reality are both a bitchhh sometimes , get used to it.. -Tyr

Maybe if you could tell the difference between truth and reality.

[aboutime]

Ha, at least one in disguise that I know of ....and a couple more far too damn sympathetic to those that would destroy our nation and turn it into a damn third world hellhole. You being one of them pedro.. Fact.. Truth and reality are both a bitchhh sometimes , get used to it.. -Tyr


Tyr. FJ is partially right. But then. RINO's always think they are right about everything.

[hjmick]

Okay...

What the fuck am I missing? FEMA camps? People quitting the board? Has this thread been Godwined yet?

Is logroller some sort of a huge dick? What the hell is going on around here?

[Kathianne]

Tyr. FJ is partially right. But then. RINO's always think they are right about everything.

How is he 'partially right?' That begs the question of how he's wrong. Yet, you conclude, without justification that he's a RINO and he thinks he's right about 'everything.' Good lord!

AT, yes I am a teacher. Yes, you need to be re-taught. There were reasons that your teachers tried to educate you on how to construct a sentence and paragraph. They tried to teach you about themes. Either you were out of class or you somehow thought that fragments were more persuasive than complete sentences. If the later is true, you thought wrong. If out of class and need help:


http://youtu.be/5grQbhEIPfU

[gabosaurus]

Hey it is not like Jim made FU or Gabby a mod.

Perhaps Jim hasn't finished selecting mods yet. :p

[aboutime]

How is he 'partially right?' That begs the question of how he's wrong. Yet, you conclude, without justification that he's a RINO and he thinks he's right about 'everything.' Good lord!

AT, yes I am a teacher. Yes, you need to be re-taught. There were reasons that your teachers tried to educate you on how to construct a sentence and paragraph. They tried to teach you about themes. Either you were out of class or you somehow thought that fragments were more persuasive than complete sentences. If the later is true, you thought wrong. If out of class and need help:


http://youtu.be/5grQbhEIPfU


Teach yourself first Kathianne. Isn't that what teachers are told before they enter the classroom?
And you just admitted you ARE the GRAMMAR COP here.
This is a public forum. When you understand how not everyone is as perfect as you. Then we can talk.
Who'da thunk it????

[hjmick]

Me, I already understand no one is as perfect as I...

It's a burden I bear...

For many decades now...

[gabosaurus]

Teach yourself first Kathianne. Isn't that what teachers are told before they enter the classroom?
And you just admitted you ARE the GRAMMAR COP here.
This is a public forum. When you understand how not everyone is as perfect as you. Then we can talk.
Who'da thunk it????

Give it up, Kathianne. You can't teach the the stupid how not to be stupid.

[aboutime]

Give it up, Kathianne. You can't teach the the stupid how not to be stupid.


Take gabby's word for that Kathianne. The voice of experience has spoken above.

[Kathianne]

Take gabby's word for that Kathianne. The voice of experience has spoken above.

You were determined to prove the point. You succeeded. A+

[tailfins]

How is he 'partially right?' That begs the question of how he's wrong. Yet, you conclude, without justification that he's a RINO and he thinks he's right about 'everything.' Good lord!

AT, yes I am a teacher. Yes, you need to be re-taught. There were reasons that your teachers tried to educate you on how to construct a sentence and paragraph. They tried to teach you about themes. Either you were out of class or you somehow thought that fragments were more persuasive than complete sentences. If the later is true, you thought wrong. If out of class and need help:


http://youtu.be/5grQbhEIPfU

I post here to get away from things similar to what's illustrated below. Your diagram above is the exact opposite of recreational:

Any Newbie posting please include the following if applicable, this will help the forum aid in swift resolution of you problem:

QTP Version
Addins Loaded
Application Protocol Testing
Any non-standard controls involved
Problem details
What searches you have tried
Solutions you have tried

Here's an example:
================================================== ==
QTP V8.2.
Web, ActiveX.
Web through IE6, SP2.
No non-standard controls.
Trying to get the contents of a weblist into an array amd verify a value present in the list.
Searched on validate weblist.
Tried GetROProperty all items as found in search, using that and Split I got the items into an array but the validate didn't find a match, I can see the value in the array.

The Moderators.

[red states rule]

Perhaps Jim hasn't finished selecting mods yet. :p

I am sorry Gabby but I do not have enough time to be a mod again.

[Voted4Reagan]

Personally...I think Logroller is a pretty good choice.... I see him as a more center Left Libertarian type, not a pure Liberal.

And we need Mods that will be able to understand both positions LEFT and RIGHT, Liberal and Conservative.

The Board needs Liberal Posters... if all the Mods are Conservative and all the Members posting are conservative the board will stagnate and falter.

we conservatives need to be a little less hostile to the Liberals who post here. By doing so we'll attract new members and the board will grow.

and certain unnamed liberals need to stop trolling and start debating.

We also need to cut down the Islam attacks... Are their problems in Islam? Certainly.

But if every thread is an attack against Jafar, nobody will want to join the board.

so lets dull our tongues and sharpen our debate skills.... I stand behind NUKE/TRIGG and LOGROLLER.

Good Choices Jim...

Wiccan Liberal approved of this message.... we stand together on this.

[gabosaurus]

I am sorry Gabby but I do not have enough time to be a mod again.

But I do... :slap:

[red states rule]

But I do... :slap:

That is great Gabby. Now that you have additional time on your hands you will stop being the drive by poster that you are famous for and actually answer questions and defend your posts

[aboutime]

That is great Gabby. Now that you have additional time on your hands you will stop being the drive by poster that you are famous for and actually answer questions and defend your posts


red states rule. Like the story today about Obama and Clinton making a deal for Hillary in 2016; which I feel is nothing but an attempt at the Clinton kinds of tactics directed at Reverse psychology. Making claims Obama and Bubba aren't getting along, and in turn. That will make people feel so sorry for Hillary...they WILL, and MUST vote for her.

I see that kind of tactic being used eventually....by making Gabby a Mod...as a means to drive away every member who disagree's with such an appointment.

Do you see what I mean???

[aboutime]

red states rule. Like the story today about Obama and Clinton making a deal for Hillary in 2016; which I feel is nothing but an attempt at the Clinton kinds of tactics directed at Reverse psychology. Making claims Obama and Bubba aren't getting along, and in turn. That will make people feel so sorry for Hillary...they WILL, and MUST vote for her.

I see that kind of tactic being used eventually....by making Gabby a Mod...as a means to drive away every member who disagree's with such an appointment.

Do you see what I mean???


I found a link Obama was pushed by Clintons into endorsement of Hillary in 2016: book (file:///C:/Users/fausa/Desktop/EXCLUSIVE%20%20Obama%20was%20pushed%20by%20Clinton s%20into%20endorsement%20of%20Hillary%20in%202016% 20%20book%20-%20NYPOST.com_files/EXCLUSIVE%20%20Obama%20was%20pushed%20by%20Clinton s%20into%20endorsement%20of%20Hillary%20in%202016% 20%20book%20-%20NYPOST.com.htm)

By EDWARD KLEIN
Last Updated: 10:43 AM, June 2, 2013
Posted: 11:07 PM, June 1, 2013

EXCLUSIVE

President Obama made a secret deal to support Hillary Clinton when she runs for president in 2016, campaign sources say, payback for the support her husband gave him in 2012.
Bill Clinton’s animosity toward Obama is legendary. A year before the last election, he was urging Hillary to challenge the sitting president for the nomination — a move she rejected.
According to two people who attended that meeting in Chappaqua, Bill Clinton then went on a rant against Obama.
“I’ve heard more from Bush, asking for my advice, than I’ve heard from Obama,” my sources quoted Clinton as saying. “I have no relationship with the president — none whatsoever. Obama doesn’t know how to be president. He doesn’t know how the world works. He’s incompetent. He’s an amateur!”
file:///C:/Users/fausa/Desktop/EXCLUSIVE%20%20Obama%20was%20pushed%20by%20Clinton s%20into%20endorsement%20of%20Hillary%20in%202016% 20%20book%20-%20NYPOST.com_files/02.1n005.obama2--300x200.jpgAP
HUB-BUBBA: “The Amateur” says Bill Clinton’s animosity toward the president cooled only with a promised endorsement and a fawning January spot on “60 Minutes” with Hillary.

file:///C:/Users/fausa/Desktop/EXCLUSIVE%20%20Obama%20was%20pushed%20by%20Clinton s%20into%20endorsement%20of%20Hillary%20in%202016% 20%20book%20-%20NYPOST.com_files/02.1n005.obama1--300x300.jpgGetty Images
Obama and Bill Clinton


BLOOMBERG'S VISIT ALL 'FORE' NOTHING (http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/mike_visit_all_fore_nothing_87zzlp7MI0Y9waJdeuxctN )
For his part, Obama wasn’t interested in Bill Clinton upstaging him during the presidential campaign. He resisted giving him any role at the convention.
But as last summer wore on, and Democrat enthusiasm waned, chief political strategist David Axelrod convinced the president that he needed Bill Clinton’s mojo.
A deal was struck: Clinton would give the key nominating speech at the convention, and a full-throated endorsement of Obama. In exchange, Obama would endorse Hillary Clinton as his successor.
Clinton’s speech was as promised; columnists pointed out the surprising enthusiasm in which he described the president. It also lived up to Obama’s fears, as more people talked about Clinton’s speech in the weeks following than his own.
But after his re-election, Obama began to have second thoughts. He would prefer to stay neutral in the next election, as is traditional of outgoing presidents.
Bill Clinton went ballistic and threatened retaliation. Obama backed down. He called his favorite journalist, Steve Kroft of “60 Minutes,” and offered an unprecedented “farewell interview” with departing Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
The result was a slobbering televised love-in — and an embarrassment to all concerned.
It is just one of the debacles that have marked Obama’s second term, from Benghazi to the IRS scandal. While he was effective on the campaign trail, once in the Oval Office, he becomes a different person, one who derives no joy from the cut and thrust of day-to-day politics and who is inept in the arts of management and governance.
Obama has made a lot of promises — and nothing ever happened.
He once boasted that he’d bring the Israelis and Palestinians to the negotiating table and create a permanent peace in the Middle East. Nothing happened.
He said he’d open a constructive dialogue with America’s enemies in Iran and North Korea and, through his special powers of persuasion, help them see the error of their ways. And nothing happened.
He said he’d solve the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression and put millions of people back to work. And nothing happened.
He may yet try to back out of his promise to Hillary Clinton. But as Obama’s presidency sinks deeper into scandal and inaction, the question is — will Clinton even still want his endorsement?
Adapted from the new paperback edition of Edward Klein’s “The Amateur: Barack Obama in the White House” (Regnery Publishing), out this week.

[Thunderknuckles]

Even if Gabby sent a real life photo of her boobies to Jim, she will still never be made a Mod.
Take it to the bank.

[tailfins]

Even if Gabby sent a real life photo of her boobies to Jim, she will still never be made a Mod.
Take it to the bank.

I have been around long enough to know people don't always behave as expected. She might go out of her way not to harass people she doesn't agree with when acting in an official capacity. Part of my "secret sauce" of solving "unsolvable" problems is not to rule out the absurd.

[darin]

ugh. there goes the neighborhood.:(

(sigh)

LORD OF THE FLIES!!

[logroller]

ugh. there goes the neighborhood.:(

(sigh)

LORD OF THE FLIES!!
"Serve you right if something did get you, you useless lot of cry-babies!"
- William Golding, Lord of the Flies, Ch. 5

[SassyLady]

Welcome Logroller!!! I am extremely pleased to see that you are one of the new mods here. I know you'll be fair and help Jim and the others keep this place on track.

However, I would like to point out that you have been sorely lacking in spreading the rep!!!!

:bow3:

[SassyLady]

Personally...I think Logroller is a pretty good choice.... I see him as a more center Left Libertarian type, not a pure Liberal.

And we need Mods that will be able to understand both positions LEFT and RIGHT, Liberal and Conservative.

The Board needs Liberal Posters... if all the Mods are Conservative and all the Members posting are conservative the board will stagnate and falter.

we conservatives need to be a little less hostile to the Liberals who post here. By doing so we'll attract new members and the board will grow.

and certain unnamed liberals need to stop trolling and start debating.

We also need to cut down the Islam attacks... Are their problems in Islam? Certainly.

But if every thread is an attack against Jafar, nobody will want to join the board.

so lets dull our tongues and sharpen our debate skills.... I stand behind NUKE/TRIGG and LOGROLLER.

Good Choices Jim...

Wiccan Liberal approved of this message.... we stand together on this.

I couldn't agree with you more ... all the attacks are getting boring ... whether they are about Jafar, Gabby, or anyone that disagrees .... BORING!!! Which is why I don't spend as much time here as before. It seems every single thread degenerates into who can outdo the other with the most vile thing to say about the topic or a poster in the thread. Sometimes people will even bad mouth a poster that hasn't posted in the thread yet ... very immature.

[SassyLady]

Oh for Pete's sake. There are no LEFTIES here. The only one is Gabbie and she can't/won't even string a coherent argument together. All the other ones have been run off. I for one hope an actual leftist DOES show up.

If we had more liberals then this board wouldn't be stagnating so much.

[SassyLady]

Is it actions of a person? Perception? Just not liking someone?

I find it odd that simply making Logroller a moderator has made some/one leave and others contemplating the same. He hasn't even made a single decision or moderated anything yet. We are not these other boards. I would like to assume, that if people thought we or I were unfair here, they would have left prior to this. Now just simply making the choice is enough to have one want to bail? I don't get it, I really don't. I understand that people dislike one another, and that will never change. But to leave, or want to leave, based on the reasons I've seen thus far, is just plain silly.

IF Logroller goes cuckoo and starts moderating unfairly, toss it in my face and then leave.

IF the board goes the way of "other boards", toss it in my face and then leave.

IF my assurances don't pan out, toss it in my face and leave.

Some that I have been nothing but respectful, friendly and fair with - are treating me and this decision like I just killed their first born child. I thought I had "earned" a little respect, and to be taken at my word, based on my past experiences.

If anyone wants to leave, so be it. I made a decision that I think is great for the board. Not a single bit of harm has been done. Save the chastising for when something actually happens. If my word isn't good enough, and my past fairness not a good enough indicator, then I have failed you, and those who feel that way probably are better off elsewhere.

Jim, I believe the 80/20 rule applies here. 80% of the problems are generated by 20%. Let the 20% leave and you'll have 80% less problems.

Perhaps this is what happened at the last board these people belonged ... someone was made a mod that they didn't agree with so they left and came here. I say good riddance if they leave for this reason. I'll bet that your oldest members have less of a problem with Log than some of the newer ones.

Log has never disrespected me as some of the newer members have and we don't always agree. Log can be exasperatingly (is this a word, Kath?) pragmatic, however, I see him as being more of a devil's advocate by not always participating in "group think".

Once again, I welcome Log as a balance to our mod team. Excellent choice, Jim.

[SassyLady]

We are very much on the same page, Aboutime. For myself, I identify Conservatism with strong pro-Law and Order application. After the UK's Winter of Discontent, when our Unions were running riot, it was Mrs Thatcher's passing of stringent legal controls which saved our bacon ..

Any passing Libertarians might be 'amused' to note that I've zero tolerance for drugtaking (except when medically prescribed, of course) and for legalisation attempts. No .... Libertarianism is just one rather small step away from anarchy, in my book. I will always oppose it.

I do not hang out on a regular basis with "druggies", but I have friends that smoke pot. Do they do it around me? Absolutely not. Just because I don't agree with someones political philosophies doesn't mean I don't like or respect them for other contributions they make. I prefer to not be that narrow minded.

Am I a libertarian? No. But I do agree with some of their ideas, just not enough to actually think of myself as a libertarian. I would never see myself as an anarchist, but I would fight the government if I felt they were taking away my rights. Just not as radically as most.

[SassyLady]

Perchance it isn't the board that was at issue. Considering all this uproar over 1 mod addition.

For those of us who have been around since the beginning, we've seen a shift in this board over the last year. We have far less lefties posting here due to the vile way they are treated when they join. I, for one, welcome opposing views because it give me a chance to research my position more thoroughly. I find it hard to debate with those that just repeat the same, old, tired witticisms like they were private talking points.

Why would anyone want to participate in "group think" by throwing a hissy fit about getting someone in here to moderate so there is more balance. I am a conservative and I'm even getting bored with the same old crap being posted from thread to thread.

It feels to me like school yard clique tactics ... we don't want you to be a part of the group because you aren't like us, so go away. Narrow minded thinking. For crimminy sakes!!! Grow up people. If you don't like the decisions made around I'm sure there are a ton of other boards for you to visit and share your political ideology. I believe it's the fact that Log debates more logically than passionately which is hard for some to wrap their heads around.

[SassyLady]

I have noticed, Jim, that those complaining the most have not made donations to the board. Sounds like they are pretty liberal themselves .... they want something (a say so in the decisions made around here) for nothing and are not willing to contribute to the general welfare of the endeavor.

[red states rule]

I have been around long enough to know people don't always behave as expected. She might go out of her way not to harass people she doesn't agree with when acting in an official capacity. Part of my "secret sauce" of solving "unsolvable" problems is not to rule out the absurd.

and that is absurd as it gets

Unless you count Obama's previous promises made on the economy, debt, and budget

[Drummond]

I do not hang out on a regular basis with "druggies", but I have friends that smoke pot. Do they do it around me? Absolutely not. Just because I don't agree with someones political philosophies doesn't mean I don't like or respect them for other contributions they make. I prefer to not be that narrow minded.

Am I a libertarian? No. But I do agree with some of their ideas, just not enough to actually think of myself as a libertarian. I would never see myself as an anarchist, but I would fight the government if I felt they were taking away my rights. Just not as radically as most.

There isn't much that I can disagree with in your post.

I would say, though, that the amount of harm that can be done from the successful application of Left-wing policies is something to always be borne in mind .. and that, BEING creatures of the Left, those enacting that harm aren't going to care about it.

Could I feel 'fondly' towards anyone of that ilk ? Well, it would certainly be difficult.

[Drummond]

If we had more liberals then this board wouldn't be stagnating so much.

I can agree with that one !!! More Lefties would keep the place 'hopping' ...

Trouble is, though, that I've seen where it leads, Sassy. I've seen a forum ruined by an invasion of Left-wingers, whose intent was very clearly that of smashing up the forum so that it became impossible to decently, coherently, debate anything at all.

Having experienced that once, I'm not in favour of seeing it happen again. Ever.

I've never heard of Right-wingers ever trying that with Leftie-oriented sites, much less succeeding. But those of the Left aren't above such tactics. I do KNOW this to be true.

[SassyLady]

I can agree with that one !!! More Lefties would keep the place 'hopping' ...

Trouble is, though, that I've seen where it leads, Sassy. I've seen a forum ruined by an invasion of Left-wingers, whose intent was very clearly that of smashing up the forum so that it became impossible to decently, coherently, debate anything at all.

Having experienced that once, I'm not in favour of seeing it happen again. Ever.

I've never heard of Right-wingers ever trying that with Leftie-oriented sites, much less succeeding. But those of the Left aren't above such tactics. I do KNOW this to be true.

We have had "invasions" in the past that were handled very appropriately by the staff. Putting Logroller in a position of mod is clearly not an invasion. Also, we have enough conservatives on this board that will speak up if things get a little too liberal ... which, unfortunately does not happen so much in real life. When liberal policies take over something it's generally because conservatives sat back and didn't speak up. It is always easier to complain than to create change. Jim is creating change and it is up to us to give him feedback if those changes are incompatible. However, this board definitely needs some changes.

Veterans of this board felt like we had an "invasion" of narrow minded posters over the last year or so and we are the ones leaving the board ... so liberals are not the only reason for leaving ... conservatives can be just as nasty and vile to those they disagree with.

Everyone is saying that this board is conservative and should not have a liberal as mod. This board, for me, has always been a place to come and get information and debate what's happening in the world on a daily basis. However, without opposing viewpoints, there is no debate. Just vile accusations, intimidation and bullying.

And, Drummond (and others afraid this board will go the way of the last), if this board should start looking/feeling like the last board you belonged to I'm sure that you can find another board, just as you did this one, and feel more comfortable.

Once again, you should trust that Jim will not let an "invasion" of lefty trolls to stay here for very long. However, liberals who can debate logically and respectfully will always get my thanks and support over any conservative that continues to only post negatives about other posters.

OK ... now I'll get down off my soapbox.

Oh, one more thing. I think Jim also asked two conservatives (Nuke and Trigg) to be mods so Log is already outnumbered!!! :2up:

[fj1200]

Trouble is, though, that I've seen where it leads, Sassy.

And all of this from one mod addition whom you PERCEIVE to be a "leftie." I, for one, don't doubt my abilities to challenge any actual "leftie" that comes along. :)

[jimnyc]

Oh, one more thing. I think Jim also asked two conservatives (Nuke and Trigg) to be mods so Log is already outnumbered!!! :2up:

That's why they were brought on, to solely keep an eye on that filthy bastard named Logroller! :)

In the past, during our "transition years", I had a few FAR left liberals as staff members. I liked them, or they wouldn't have been asked to come on board. But some fears were realized and a few things got out of hand, not as much on the board as it was within staff (turmoil). The problem was fixed. End of issue.

People can accuse me of being a dick for 10 years, and I may even admit to some of it! :dunno: - but when it comes to moderating? I fired my brother, Sir Evil, at least like 10x. My sister at one point was banned for life. Jeff, who now posts, took a hiatus at one point because I wouldn't allow certain things. In other words, I held my own family to certain standards. That should be enough assurance that I won't let any person or group to ruin what we have here. Whether all liberal staff, or all conservative staff - decisions will always be handled maturely and fairly.

[Drummond]

We have had "invasions" in the past that were handled very appropriately by the staff. Putting Logroller in a position of mod is clearly not an invasion. Also, we have enough conservatives on this board that will speak up if things get a little too liberal ... which, unfortunately does not happen so much in real life. When liberal policies take over something it's generally because conservatives sat back and didn't speak up. It is always easier to complain than to create change. Jim is creating change and it is up to us to give him feedback if those changes are incompatible. However, this board definitely needs some changes.

Veterans of this board felt like we had an "invasion" of narrow minded posters over the last year or so and we are the ones leaving the board ... so liberals are not the only reason for leaving ... conservatives can be just as nasty and vile to those they disagree with.

Everyone is saying that this board is conservative and should not have a liberal as mod. This board, for me, has always been a place to come and get information and debate what's happening in the world on a daily basis. However, without opposing viewpoints, there is no debate. Just vile accusations, intimidation and bullying.

And, Drummond (and others afraid this board will go the way of the last), if this board should start looking/feeling like the last board you belonged to I'm sure that you can find another board, just as you did this one, and feel more comfortable.

Once again, you should trust that Jim will not let an "invasion" of lefty trolls to stay here for very long. However, liberals who can debate logically and respectfully will always get my thanks and support over any conservative that continues to only post negatives about other posters.

OK ... now I'll get down off my soapbox.

Oh, one more thing. I think Jim also asked two conservatives (Nuke and Trigg) to be mods so Log is already outnumbered!!! :2up:

Sassy, I'm absolutely fine with your comments, and thoroughly respect your viewpoint. I'd go so far as to say 'well said'. I especially agree on your point concerning information-gathering and free debate .. I could wish that my opposition was as well disposed towards such debate as I am.

As for Logroller specifically .. well, OK. We shall see what the future brings. If forebodings aren't proven to be well placed, then how can that not be fine ?

And that's how I'll leave this. For now. Besides, your last sentence is most encouraging !! :mm:

[Nukeman]

That's why they were brought on, to solely keep an eye on that filthy bastard named Logroller! :)

In the past, during our "transition years", I had a few FAR left liberals as staff members. I liked them, or they wouldn't have been asked to come on board. But some fears were realized and a few things got out of hand, not as much on the board as it was within staff (turmoil). The problem was fixed. End of issue.

People can accuse me of being a dick for 10 years, and I may even admit to some of it! :dunno: - but when it comes to moderating? I fired my brother, Sir Evil, at least like 10x. My sister at one point was banned for life. Jeff, who now posts, took a hiatus at one point because I wouldn't allow certain things. In other words, I held my own family to certain standards. That should be enough assurance that I won't let any person or group to ruin what we have here. Whether all liberal staff, or all conservative staff - decisions will always be handled maturely and fairly.Ohh don't worry we will keep Log in check..... :beer:

[Drummond]

And all of this from one mod addition whom you PERCEIVE to be a "leftie." I, for one, don't doubt my abilities to challenge any actual "leftie" that comes along. :)

FJ, I don't doubt your ability to challenge anyone at all. You've certainly challenged my patience, after all .. and only recently.

Having the ability to challenge, and being inclined to .. these can be two very different things. So, tell me .. can you offer me an example of where you've challenged any Leftie, anywhere on this forum ? Because I can't think of one !

[fj1200]

FJ, I don't doubt your ability to challenge anyone at all. You've certainly challenged my patience, after all .. and only recently.

Having the ability to challenge, and being inclined to .. these can be two very different things. So, tell me .. can you offer me an example of where you've challenged any Leftie, anywhere on this forum ? Because I can't think of one !

I'm pretty sure you won't accept your own leftie tendencies as example so show me A leftie on the board (that actually engages in debate that is). The only actual lefties that used to be around are long gone save for Bingster who hasn't been back in awhile.

[logroller]

Clearly my filthy leftie bastard postings have been so egregious that making me a moderator was the only avenue available to admin. I've been muzzled with authority, rather than by it. Well- played Jim. Ne'er saw it coming. :clap:

[jimnyc]

Clearly my filthy leftie bastard postings have been so egregious that making me a moderator was the only avenue available to admin. I've been muzzled with authority, rather than by it. Well- played Jim. Ne'er saw it coming. :clap:

Something about keeping your enemies close? I can keep a keen eye on you this way.

http://i.myniceprofile.com/482/48269.jpg

[Drummond]

I'm pretty sure you won't accept your own leftie tendencies as example so show me A leftie on the board (that actually engages in debate that is). The only actual lefties that used to be around are long gone save for Bingster who hasn't been back in awhile.

Ah, you ducked my challenge .. thought you would. Not ONE example, eh ... not from the recent past, not even from the more distant past.

I have no 'Leftie tendences' at all - that's pure fiction on your part. And as I understand your post, you're claiming that, currently, there are NO Lefties here on this forum, NONE, and who debate anything ??

Do you expect that claim to be taken seriously ??

I can always rely on you to give me a good laugh ! :laugh2:

[Drummond]

Something about keeping your enemies close? I can keep a keen eye on you this way.

http://i.myniceprofile.com/482/48269.jpg:thumb:

[fj1200]

Ah, you ducked my challenge .. thought you would. Not ONE example, eh ... not from the recent past, not even from the more distant past.

I have no 'Leftie tendences' at all - that's pure fiction on your part. And as I understand your post, you're claiming that, currently, there are NO Lefties here on this forum, NONE, and who debate anything ??

Do you expect that claim to be taken seriously ??

I can always rely on you to give me a good laugh ! :laugh2:

Your big government demands are well known. Besides, I've been taking down you "righties" so much that it's keeping me in practice. Since you've denied that you are a leftie, as expected, and have not been able to identify an actual "leftie" posting here currently, which is true anyway, try searching for Palin Rider and Psychoblues; they were fun when posting.

Besides, it's relatively easy discussing the issues with liberals because truth is always on the side of conservatism, not that you would know anything about that.

[Drummond]

Your big government demands are well known. Besides, I've been taking down you "righties" so much that it's keeping me in practice. Since you've denied that you are a leftie, as expected, and have not been able to identify an actual "leftie" posting here currently, which is true anyway, try searching for Palin Rider and Psychoblues; they were fun when posting.

Besides, it's relatively easy discussing the issues with liberals because truth is always on the side of conservatism, not that you would know anything about that.

WHAT 'big government demands' .. ?

Governments have a role in society. If they didn't, nobody would have any need of Governments. But, what 'demands' are you talking about ?

Feel free (.. as of course, you will ..) to duck that one, as well ...

As for ...
Besides, I've been taking down you "righties" so much that it's keeping me in practice.

.. well, this rather sounds like you singled us out for 'taking down', doesn't it ?

Who would be more motivated to do this, than a ... LEFTIE .. ??

[Feeling the urge to start crossing out my text .. again, Fj ?]

I see your memory is becoming selective again, Fj. Did I not ask you ...


So, tell me .. can you offer me an example of where you've challenged any Leftie, anywhere on this forum ?

... and it was YOU who ducked MY challenge.

But still, I can end this post on a positive note. You have said ...


" ... because truth is always on the side of conservatism"

Very well said ! Now, you know why I win my arguments with you ... :laugh::laugh::mm::buttkick:

[fj1200]

Only you can split a four sentence post five different ways. :rolleyes:


WHAT 'big government demands' .. ?

Governments have a role in society. If they didn't, nobody would have any need of Governments. But, what 'demands' are you talking about ?

Feel free (.. as of course, you will ..) to duck that one, as well ...

As for ...

Your big government demand that torture and killing occur in your name of course. Do I need to find a post... or a whole thread... for you?


.. well, this rather sounds like you singled us out for 'taking down', doesn't it ?

Who would be more motivated to do this, than a ... LEFTIE .. ??

[Feeling the urge to start crossing out my text .. again, Fj ?]

I see your memory is becoming selective again, Fj. Did I not ask you ...

No, didn't single you out; just the inevitability of our discussion and your failure in identifying "leftie" from mere disagreement.


... and it was YOU who ducked MY challenge.

But still, I can end this post on a positive note. You have said ...

So... too lazy to search?


Very well said ! Now, you know why I win my arguments with you ... :laugh::laugh::mm::buttkick:

False assumption.

[Drummond]

Your big government demand that torture and killing occur in your name of course. Do I need to find a post... or a whole thread... for you?

Can you show me where I've 'demanded' that 'big governments' do this, and in MY name, as you claim ?

Torture is sometimes necessary, when applied to terrorist trash. It is not a matter of my 'demanding' it be done, rather, that the freedom to take that course of action be available when it's deemed appropriate.

One does what one must to defeat terrorism.


No, didn't single you out; just the inevitability of our discussion and your failure in identifying "leftie" from mere disagreement.

You've forgotten (and so quickly, too ..) that you posted ...


I've been taking down you "righties" so much that it's keeping me in practice

You are the one who failed to identify any Lefties you'd disagreed with.


So... too lazy to search?

... for the answer to a challenge I set for YOU ?


False assumption.

Lefties can never admit when they're wrong. I find it rather sad. Funny ... but also sad ...

[fj1200]

Can you show me...

In the interest of not rehashing old news. Does the search function not work?

[Drummond]

In the interest of not rehashing old news. Does the search function not work?

YOU tell ME .... since it was I who set YOU a challenge ...

[fj1200]

Does the search function not work?


YOU tell ME .... since it was I who set YOU a challenge ...

Advanced Search (http://www.debatepolicy.com/search.php?search_type=1)

It works for me, have at it.

[Drummond]

Advanced Search (http://www.debatepolicy.com/search.php?search_type=1)

It works for me, have at it.

Try proving that it works, by - finally - answering my challenge.

Or, rather .. by failing to ....

[fj1200]

Try proving that it works, by - finally - answering my challenge.

Or, rather .. by failing to ....


So... too lazy to search?

So up for vote is too lazy or too scared of what you'll find. It's a tossup.

[Drummond]

So up for vote is too lazy or too scared of what you'll find. It's a tossup.

Another display of ducking the challenge I'd set.

This is too tiresome for words. You can never admit you're wrong.

[fj1200]

Another display of ducking the challenge I'd set.

This is too tiresome for words. You can never admit you're wrong.

When it happens, I will. Even then, not quite sure what I'm even supposed to be wrong about. :dunno:

Besides, I'm still waiting for you to own up to being wrong about my liberal tendencies and your constant "leftie" drivel. I've asked for examples countless times and the challenge is still open.

[red states rule]

Another display of ducking the challenge I'd set.

This is too tiresome for words. You can never admit you're wrong.

The more FU posts the more he proves Burger King is NOT the home of whopper.

[fj1200]

:littlegirlrunning:

qft

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

So up for vote is too lazy or too scared of what you'll find. It's a tossup. HA, the day that my friend Drummond is scared of you in anyway is the day hell freezes over. Guy is as principled as they come and as solid as a rock!

[aboutime]

HA, the day that my friend Drummond is scared of you in anyway is the day hell freezes over. Guy is as principled as they come and as solid as a rock!


Tyr. Just another obvious reason for my description of the letters 'fj', and their meaning as "f'in joke".
People like that need to feel powerful, and in control of others. So after the threats, and being beaten with truth.
They have nothing else. Which brings them to reverting back to their lack of honesty, and principles. The definition
of a Leftist.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Tyr. Just another obvious reason for my description of the letters 'fj', and their meaning as "f'in joke".
People like that need to feel powerful, and in control of others. So after the threats, and being beaten with truth.
They have nothing else. Which brings them to reverting back to their lack of honesty, and principles. The definition
of a Leftist. HA, FJ is likely to get very damn little agreement here if he tries to seriously greatly tarnish the integrity and character of Drummond . I think by now big D has put forth enough posts to have shown that he is a man of firm principles and not lacking in the courage to always stand his ground. In fact, that was exactly what prompted me to first pm at the other forum . I found him to be without any doubt the most honorable man posting there, not that there were not a couple others there as well. However they lacked the iron discipline I see in big D 's dedication to the things in which he believes. At the risk of inflating my own image here I say he (at least to me) seems a damn lot like myself in his determination to stand as solid as a rock. Hope that does not come off as too damn self-promoting..as its intended to reflect my admiration for the guy. Damn sure wish to someday meet him in person and buy the man a few beers. I find it amazing that with the huge differences in our backgrounds we are so much alike. Ok, except for his command of the English language and much, MUCH better writing skills..-;)-Tyr

[fj1200]

HA, the day that my friend Drummond is scared of you in anyway is the day hell freezes over. Guy is as principled as they come and as solid as a rock!

I don't have to tarnish at all, pointing out his positions does it well enough. His failure, and yours btw, at pointing out actual lefties is legendary.


HA, FJ is likely to get very damn little agreement here if he tries to seriously greatly tarnish the integrity and character of Drummond .

That's just the slathering praise he can expect from his daisy chain crew.

[Marcus Aurelius]

this thread was much funnier when you were all bitching about Logroller instead of each other.:poke:

[Voted4Reagan]

Okay...

What the fuck am I missing? FEMA camps? People quitting the board? Has this thread been Godwined yet?

Is logroller some sort of a huge dick? What the hell is going on around here?

You reminded me of this movie Clip....


http://youtu.be/ZDaDEi9KF0E

[Drummond]

HA, the day that my friend Drummond is scared of you in anyway is the day hell freezes over. Guy is as principled as they come and as solid as a rock!:clap::clap::clap:

Strangely, I agree !

Typical of an egotist to suppose that anyone could/must be 'scared' of debating him. Also typical is the belief that debates with such a person are even worthwhile.

[Drummond]

I don't have to tarnish at all, pointing out his positions does it well enough. His failure, and yours btw, at pointing out actual lefties is legendary.


That's just the slathering praise he can expect from his daisy chain crew.

Do you crave praise yourself ?

... awww ...

[aboutime]

You reminded me of this movie Clip....


http://youtu.be/ZDaDEi9KF0E



V4R. Thanks for that really funny, but also very sad video.

That seemed to represent what our society has become. Based on ONE WORD that identifies the Intellect, and Intelligence challenges we all face. IN YOUR FACE every day.
And those who practice it. Have nothing else to work with.

[Drummond]

HA, FJ is likely to get very damn little agreement here if he tries to seriously greatly tarnish the integrity and character of Drummond . I think by now big D has put forth enough posts to have shown that he is a man of firm principles and not lacking in the courage to always stand his ground. In fact, that was exactly what prompted me to first pm at the other forum . I found him to be without any doubt the most honorable man posting there, not that there were not a couple others there as well. However they lacked the iron discipline I see in big D 's dedication to the things in which he believes. At the risk of inflating my own image here I say he (at least to me) seems a damn lot like myself in his determination to stand as solid as a rock. Hope that does not come off as too damn self-promoting..as its intended to reflect my admiration for the guy. Damn sure wish to someday meet him in person and buy the man a few beers. I find it amazing that with the huge differences in our backgrounds we are so much alike. Ok, except for his command of the English language and much, MUCH better writing skills..-;)-Tyr

... er'm, wow !

Greatly appreciated ! Yes, I hope we do manage to meet someday. And the first round's on me !:wine:

[fj1200]

Strangely, I agree !

Typical of an egotist...

And I have an ego? Wow. And FWIW, I didn't say you were scared of debating me I said you were scared of what you would find; What you would find is that all of your assumptions are wrong. :)


Do you crave praise yourself ?

... awww ...

From your pals? Not so much.

[fj1200]

... firm principles and not lacking in the courage to always stand his ground. ... inflating my own image... like myself in his determination to stand as solid as a rock.

Your ego aside. :rolleyes: The problem being when one stands his ground in the face of being wrong principles become stubbornness which is not as worthy as a character trait.

[aboutime]

Your ego aside. :rolleyes: The problem being when one stands his ground in the face of being wrong principles become stubbornness which is not as worthy as a character trait.


fj and his never ending tribute to impressing himself. Here with more double-talk, designed to impress others about his credibility that just never seems to impress anyone else unless fj says so.

[red states rule]

fj and his never ending tribute to impressing himself. Here with more double-talk, designed to impress others about his credibility that just never seems to impress anyone else unless fj says so.

Liberal FU pretending to be a conservative is like a straight person pretending to be gay to get greater acceptance.

Being the lib that he is, FU is the most intelligent and fascinating person he has ever met

[fj1200]

Liberal FU...

:laugh: You can't even ignore well. The only talent you have is running like a little girl... that and being wrong of course.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

That's Lorenzo the Llama.

I see where this board is heading... been there before.

Time to find a new one. Enjoy Jimmy's FEMA camp everyone. Bye. Ok Taft, its been 4 weeks since you have replied here. If you have been reading here you have seen no Gestapo action has occurred. How about contributing ? I for one enjoyed your brutally honest way of hitting back. --Tyr

[jimnyc]

Ok Taft, its been 4 weeks since you have replied here. If you have been reading here you have seen no Gestapo action has occurred. How about contributing ? I for one enjoyed your brutally honest way of hitting back. --Tyr

I'd like to see him return too, but he was off the mark on this one. And while I understood any concern from others, and it has only been a month, things are going basically about as I expected, which is minimal change. In fact, not even a single moderation has been done by Logroller as of yet.

[Marcus Aurelius]

I think log is doing fine.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I'd like to see him return too, but he was off the mark on this one. And while I understood any concern from others, and it has only been a month, things are going basically about as I expected, which is minimal change. In fact, not even a single moderation has been done by Logroller as of yet. Well Jim, I admit to having had the same thoughts back then. Some of us immigrants from the other board saw how piss poor moderating and bias against us as a group went there. Taft was in that group and was mistreated by some lefty mods and admin -THERE! My hope is that he sees that has not been the case here and accepts your word on it is not ever going to be the case here. I have seen nothing bad coming from Log ,just being himself which is to be expected. No power mad abuse that we've seen at other sites. Hopefully Taft will start posting again. You have to admit that the man stood his ground come hell or high water and didn't mind broadsiding anybody that got too smartass with him. Some people respect that.. -Tyr

[red state]

Forgive the late participation but I had to address a few things that I've noticed from reading all the posts. My intent is not to make enemies or open old wounds. I would, however, like to address what has been posted but I'd like to specifically address those that I've had much respect for in the past. To be honest, I'm shocked at some of the more aggressive posts but to start off with the more civil, well written posts, I'd like to address V4R & Drummond.

V4R, I strongly disagree with the comment you made early on and Drummond, it may be the very first time I've ever disagreed with you but, fortunately, this is a partial disagreement as you explained the nature of liberal posters and on that, I agree entirely. Time and time again, I have tried to reach some sort of an understanding between the left and my Conservative views. They are closed minded and far too childish to carry on a conversation (much less debate or come to any reasonable conclusion to areas where we may possibly come together). Besides, there are far too many "pretenders" within the so-called Conservative/Republican ranks to argue or simply differ with to prevent (as Sassy put it) boring. And as for "donations" I post throughout many different boards and if donations were a requirement, I'd only consider donating to those whom I've been treated with the utmost regard. my posting or reading posts is not a news source or even the best way for one to spend one's off time so your attempt or attack is invalid but nice try. I donate in matters that actually count...not in matters where steam or "hot air" is released or even where we can converse with friends or affiliates. That can be done in so many places (including EMAIL) but getting back to my reply to V4R; we have no need of liberal madness, rude comments and outright detest of LIGHT, TRUTH and GOODNESS we know how, what and why they believe the way they believe and we've all been at this long enough to know not to expect any common sense or change in them. Personally, I've seen only ONE liberal switch over. At least SOME of those who pretend to be Conservative offer some sort of an adult dialog.....not many, mind you, but enough. The attacks are what they are good at and we've learned to roll with the punches and give some back. I personally do not have the need to argue with an idiot and the older I get the less likely I am to do so....a mosquito isn't easy to ignore but they are often times not worth the energy in swatting them away. It is wiser to have them think all is well and when they think they'll get some sort of free meal....SWAT!!!

I suppose log is doing OK (if Jim keeps the muzzle on). Still, I see a curve in the road and the speed may be too fast. This site has already proven to have all kinds of "certain groups" but when a 'group' makes decisions in favor of those they have known the longest, it is never a good thing and if those folks wish to think they're better than (say P.com) or some of the other sites mentioned within this thread.....well, they're simply foolin' themselves. I have found that liberal mods conduct themselves differently than Conservative ones. The lib, regardless of position or the type of integrity that should come from such a position, usually conduct themselves just as poorly as when they were simply a liberal spouting off ignorant, childish attacks. A true Conservative minded mod is a much better choice (whether we have 20 or 200 Conservative mods). They simply conduct themselves fairly and more logically because they use fact and deeply thought out scenarios that weigh their beliefs and convictions with that of opposing views. Libs (even lib mods) usually think/post with aggression, bias and ignorance with little regard to others.

As for About Time posting the way he does, I couldn't resist the opportunity in addressing this off-topic remark because posting styles is something that I've also been singled out for various reasons. Kathian, it is quite puzzling to me how one can pick and choose whom is up for grammatically correct criticism and I do hope my postings have little to no mis-spelled words or is received with any hostility. I'd simply like to know why one's style of posting is important or why only a select few seem to annoy others or face scrutiny for the way they post. No one is perfect but we all have our own writing styles. I prefer to use RED within my posts (have done so for YEARS) to signify the RED ALERT that our Nation is under. It also is in honor of RED STATES....the last stand of true FREEDOM. Lastly, RED is in memory of my heritage but it was so offensive to some here at DP that I'm only allowed to do so within more liberal sites who realize that they can simply ignore my posts (if they don't like RED). Amazing how critical or agitated folks are on THIS site just because posts (of SOME) are this way or that. I personally find GABBY boring or agitating; yet she still posts her same one-liners filled with ignorance, hatred and immaturity. Look, I'm not perfect and I'm not one to make enemies simply to make them but if I'm willing to overlook shortcomings of others and/or give second chances...anyone should be willing to do so. Tyr is correct, this is a test to see if Conservative Mods truly do have more integrity and I'm going to actually enjoy the outcome (possibly).

In the long run, it really doesn't matter if log remains muzzled or proves a few of us SPOT ON cuz these types of sites are really just to blow off some steam or voice an opinion to faceless individuals (unless strong friendships have been established for a few of us). For others, the many sites such as this one, are a way to, in some KraZy way, fix stupid but It ain't happening folks. I've also come to the conclusion that we have enemies; stupid, puppet-like enemies. My definition of enemy includes enemies such as B.O. and ALL the other leftists, who would allow our our rights to be taken away or those who would love to TAKE the freedoms and heritage we've enjoyed and prospered under for so long. This prosperity came through the sacrifice of REAL Americans and I'm in no mind set to treat them as anything but an enemy. Such people are also those under the cult of iSLUM or the GREEN RED & WHITE waving border invaders looking for special treatment. They deserve no respect because THEY come into OUR house and rob us of what is OURS and would have OUR Nation become a failed state similar to the ones they left. They are all truly are greatest enemies because they are accomplishing things that OBL could only dream of doing. the Fairness/Equality/PC mentality is exactly why we find ourselves in the mess we're in and discussion sites are making the same mistake (in my opinion).

I'm not here to intentionally make enemies but I'm not here to get along or pretend either....I'm here to draw a line and voice my opinion. Whether any of us, be it any particular leftist mod, my posting or the site itself works out, I can live with it or without it. It is the other person's responsibility of deciding which side of the line they are on (and live with it)....bottom line.

[taft2012]

Red States, nice post. However, it's been my experience that this all goes well beyond mere ideology. A forum moderating staff's group-think unites liberals and conservatives, in an almost paranoid us-vs-them group-think mentality.

I made a small joke and RSR instantly jumped into my shit telling me to shut up and stop whining. It was at that point that I recognized this increasingly expanding moderator pool was developing that very group think I've seen over and over. The staff becomes very defensive about their work, and when anyone dares to complain about it they bipartisanly descend upon them en-masse and deliver Soprano-level e-beatings to ensure complainers don't open their mouths again.

Not long afterwards, Billy Bob made a comment about Trigg's moderating. Now, I had no use for Billy Bob from the moment he arrived. I quickly recognized him as a crank and tossed him into my ignore bin. IMO, that's pretty much the extent of moderating a forum needs - an ignore feature. But I digress...

Jimmy immediately rushed to Trigg's defense, and somehow, for some reason I didn't quite catch, Billy Bob got banned. IMO, the moderators circling their wagons were responsible. Billy Bob was annoyance from the moment he arrived, but he hit the moderator trip-wire and "BOOM!", he got banned.

Then there are the moderator wannabes.... the e-marmaluke Sopranos. They made a thread mocking Billy Bob's expulsion. That's something that's always irked me. Trashing and mocking somebody who is incapable of defending themselves. Billy Bob didn't have much in the way of defenders, probably rightfully so... but next time it may very well be a more worthwhile poster. This precedent is already underway and the group think is rapidly developing.

The e-marmalukes defended the staff, applauded them, kissed their collective asses... all in hopes of becoming one of the in-crowd. One of kewl kids who gets to eat lunch at the kewl kids' table. This faction becomes the moderators' support base. When I made a comment in one of the "Hooray for the new Moderator" threads, I pointed out that a particular member was an e-marmaluke ... and that comment was quickly removed from the thread. Heaven forbid the ass kissers of the group-think masters of DP get a dig thrown at them.

Then there are those, like me, who sit around watching and saying, "Hey, wait a minute, what the hell's going on here? Was that really fair?" Only to get instantly slammed by moderators and e-marmalukes.

I've seen all of this before, and it's quickly evolving here. I've tried to fight it elsewhere, only to discover it's not worth the effort. Nor is it worth dedicating my time to a forum that just placed itself on a downward trajectory towards extinction.

Tyr, you say it's been a month and nothing bad's happened. I disagree. This is rapidly unfolding and developing.

I'm sure you've noticed that P.com is now essentially a liberal echo chamber with hardly any dissenting opinion. But the real underlying problem there was not liberalism vs. conservatism. It was the collective group-think of the moderating staff that "we're always right" and "complaints are always meritless."

When you start seeing comments from the moderating staff and their supporters that say things like "This site is free," "you have nothing to complain about," "you're free to leave," etc., they are an omen that more egregious abuses are coming, and that you either have to live with the abuses or leave.

I already see it coming in the month that just went by. This moderating staff is too big for the amount of participants and they'll all be jockeying for status within their group. And the e-marmalukes will be supporting every abuse. Normal posters will be victimized and departing. This is a normal development process for internet forums, which is why they all grow, peak, and decline.

It's like how if a government program is working OK, liberals simply can't leave it alone. They have to tweak and perfect it, to the point it becomes a total wreck. DP was going along fine, but now it's on the path to its own demise.

Sad.

And now the moderating staff can be expected to appear and rip this post to shreds, the e-mamalukes will applaud their every comment, but none of that will alter the path DP is now tracking...

[Marcus Aurelius]

Not long afterwards, Billy Bob made a comment about Trigg's moderating. Now, I had no use for Billy Bob from the moment he arrived. I quickly recognized him as a crank and tossed him into my ignore bin. IMO, that's pretty much the extent of moderating a forum needs - an ignore feature. But I digress...

Jimmy immediately rushed to Trigg's defense, and somehow, for some reason I didn't quite catch, Billy Bob got banned. IMO, the moderators circling their wagons were responsible. Billy Bob was annoyance from the moment he arrived, but he hit the moderator trip-wire and "BOOM!", he got banned.

Then there are the moderator wannabes.... the e-marmaluke Sopranos. They made a thread mocking Billy Bob's expulsion. That's something that's always irked me. Trashing and mocking somebody who is incapable of defending themselves. Billy Bob didn't have much in the way of defenders, probably rightfully so... but next time it may very well be a more worthwhile poster. This precedent is already underway and the group think is rapidly developing.

First, you realize BillyBob's ban was temporary right? HE has now 'chosen' to remain away, although he does come in to Pos rep a certain unnamed Whitless poster, he no longer posts.

Second, you really don't know the whole story behind his temporary ban. Calling me the n-word on the open board repeatedly was certainly part of it (I'm white, btw). The racial and disgusting things he said in PM's to me was certainly part of it (I will not be specific, as that is against the board rules). His posting actions were certainly part of it.

To make it out like his ban was the action of moderators run amok is ridiculous.

[taft2012]

And, as predicted, the first of the e-marmalukes appears.

No, I didn't know or realize that Billy Bob was doing that. He could have been saying the same things about me for all I know, or care, but I wouldn't have noticed because I put him on ignore.

Very simple actually. That's the sort of self-reliance that conservatism teaches, as opposed to running and crying to the house Nazis.

But, I'm done here. Have at me all youse e-marmalukes.

[jimnyc]

And now the moderating staff can be expected to appear and rip this post to shreds, the e-mamalukes will applaud their every comment, but none of that will alter the path DP is now tracking...

Good to see you back, taft! I have no desire at all to shred your post. The community has been here long enough to know what is reality and what is imagined. Have a great day!! :laugh:

[jimnyc]

But, I'm done here.

Didn't you tell us that, like over a month ago? :dunno:

[Voted4Reagan]

Didn't you tell us that, like over a month ago? :dunno:


:poke::slap:

[red state]

And, as predicted, the first of the e-marmalukes appears.

No, I didn't know or realize that Billy Bob was doing that. He could have been saying the same things about me for all I know, or care, but I wouldn't have noticed because I put him on ignore.

Very simple actually. That's the sort of self-reliance that conservatism teaches, as opposed to running and crying to the house Nazis.

But, I'm done here. Have at me all youse e-marmalukes.

Taft, I could agree more, which is why I post within the Con/Rep board (when such an area is available). I've found that when you get the better of a liberal (through truth, logic and mental judo they QUICKLY tuck tail and RUN to daddy moderator or mommy moderator. (especially Cautionary Tail). Of all the dispicable things for a grown man to do, tattle tailing is one of the top MOST unmanly things that one can do and it always makes me cringe.

I"m not really sure why you responded to be with an "I agree....BUT" since I thought I had addressed the very points that you've spelled out. You say it is coming soon here at DP but I'd have to say (personally) that I've experienced it here as well. I'm sure most of them have placed me on ignore as you have with Billy and others....and that's your right but I've never placed anyone on an all out ignore. Sometimes I read their posts (especially the one-liners with very little substance....as usual) and sometimes I simply scroll past them to more intelligent, mature posters and as you well know, this site is full of the one-liners or immature posters who rather ask a ridiculous question than answer a legitimate one.

Still, this is a pretty good site (mostly because of all the bells and whistles within the programming that other sites leave out) but there are so many talk forums that I fully enjoy and when this site "turns" I still have friends and great posters elsewhere to vent or release some political steam.....or, as some would say, hot air. HA! I truly don't care if they see my posts as "Straw Man Posts" or not and the worse thing that one with no power such as myself can do on any particular site is to have those who are in power realize that you don't need them. Glad you were joking about leaving but I do understand the necessity in stepping away for however long it takes to get over bad news, biased rulings or redundant posters.

Well, Taft, I've got to get busy....up late last night after the huge celebration and FAR too much home-made ice cream and I've much to do in getting caught up. The fireworks were exceptional but the young man in the wheelchair was the true blessing last night after he presented his testimony via video to our youth. God Bless AMERICA!!!

[jimnyc]

I find this thread has turned comical. Everyone went nuts over Log being made a moderator, and some still whine, and yet after all of this time he has yet to moderate a single person. Further whining about "liberal" staff members, of which we have none. Some want to erroneously call Logroller a liberal moderator. Even if he was, which is laughable, he STILL hasn't moderated anyone, so either complaint falls flat. Then there is just general complaints about moderation, which is rarely the case. We've had maybe 2 outright bans in the past 6 months? And both were quite deserving. Then instead of heavy handed moderation outside of that, we have moved threads to the cage area, or removed a handful of participants that were consistently fighting in threads. And of course, those complaining are still here, and aren't even moderated.

Yep, 'ol horrible DP, filled with the liberal staff and nazi moderators, who go out of their way not to ban anyone. The horror of it all! :lol: :coffee:

[Voted4Reagan]

I find this thread has turned comical. Everyone went nuts over Log being made a moderator, and some still whine, and yet after all of this time he has yet to moderate a single person. Further whining about "liberal" staff members, of which we have none. Some want to erroneously call Logroller a liberal moderator. Even if he was, which is laughable, he STILL hasn't moderated anyone, so either complaint falls flat. Then there is just general complaints about moderation, which is rarely the case. We've had maybe 2 outright bans in the past 6 months? And both were quite deserving. Then instead of heavy handed moderation outside of that, we have moved threads to the cage area, or removed a handful of participants that were consistently fighting in threads. And of course, those complaining are still here, and aren't even moderated.

Yep, 'ol horrible DP, filled with the liberal staff and nazi moderators, who go out of their way not to ban anyone. The horror of it all! :lol: :coffee:

Youre all a bunch of authoritarian overlords that dont exercise any of your authority....:slap:

[fj1200]

I find this thread has turned comical.

I was thinking the same thing. All of the self-righteous indignation over what they just know will happen only adds to the comedy.

[Marcus Aurelius]

I find this thread has turned comical. Everyone went nuts over Log being made a moderator, and some still whine, and yet after all of this time he has yet to moderate a single person. Further whining about "liberal" staff members, of which we have none. Some want to erroneously call Logroller a liberal moderator. Even if he was, which is laughable, he STILL hasn't moderated anyone, so either complaint falls flat. Then there is just general complaints about moderation, which is rarely the case. We've had maybe 2 outright bans in the past 6 months? And both were quite deserving. Then instead of heavy handed moderation outside of that, we have moved threads to the cage area, or removed a handful of participants that were consistently fighting in threads. And of course, those complaining are still here, and aren't even moderated.

Yep, 'ol horrible DP, filled with the liberal staff and nazi moderators, who go out of their way not to ban anyone. The horror of it all! :lol: :coffee:

I find that generalization disturbing, and an indicator of future aggressive acts towards innocent posters. You should remove your moderation privileges for a period of 1 week. Should said offense be repeated, 2 weeks, and so on. If it continues, then you should ban yourself.:poke:

[jimnyc]

I find that generalization disturbing, and an indicator of future aggressive acts towards innocent posters. You should remove your moderation privileges for a period of 1 week. Should said offense be repeated, 2 weeks, and so on. If it continues, then you should ban yourself.:poke:

You know what, you're correct, I did generalize and state everyone! The software won't allow me to ban myself, unfortunately. But as punishment, I just gave my Chihuahua a cookie, and purposely tried to immediately take it back from him. He then bit me. Consider it a spanking of sorts, and I did it just for you.

But maybe I can just leave for 24, and consider it a ban? Or should we choose a thread of your liking, and I will never post in it again, and we can call it a thread ban? What works for you?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Red States, nice post. However, it's been my experience that this all goes well beyond mere ideology. A forum moderating staff's group-think unites liberals and conservatives, in an almost paranoid us-vs-them group-think mentality.

I made a small joke and RSR instantly jumped into my shit telling me to shut up and stop whining. It was at that point that I recognized this increasingly expanding moderator pool was developing that very group think I've seen over and over. The staff becomes very defensive about their work, and when anyone dares to complain about it they bipartisanly descend upon them en-masse and deliver Soprano-level e-beatings to ensure complainers don't open their mouths again.

Not long afterwards, Billy Bob made a comment about Trigg's moderating. Now, I had no use for Billy Bob from the moment he arrived. I quickly recognized him as a crank and tossed him into my ignore bin. IMO, that's pretty much the extent of moderating a forum needs - an ignore feature. But I digress...

Jimmy immediately rushed to Trigg's defense, and somehow, for some reason I didn't quite catch, Billy Bob got banned. IMO, the moderators circling their wagons were responsible. Billy Bob was annoyance from the moment he arrived, but he hit the moderator trip-wire and "BOOM!", he got banned.

Then there are the moderator wannabes.... the e-marmaluke Sopranos. They made a thread mocking Billy Bob's expulsion. That's something that's always irked me. Trashing and mocking somebody who is incapable of defending themselves. Billy Bob didn't have much in the way of defenders, probably rightfully so... but next time it may very well be a more worthwhile poster. This precedent is already underway and the group think is rapidly developing.

The e-marmalukes defended the staff, applauded them, kissed their collective asses... all in hopes of becoming one of the in-crowd. One of kewl kids who gets to eat lunch at the kewl kids' table. This faction becomes the moderators' support base. When I made a comment in one of the "Hooray for the new Moderator" threads, I pointed out that a particular member was an e-marmaluke ... and that comment was quickly removed from the thread. Heaven forbid the ass kissers of the group-think masters of DP get a dig thrown at them.

Then there are those, like me, who sit around watching and saying, "Hey, wait a minute, what the hell's going on here? Was that really fair?" Only to get instantly slammed by moderators and e-marmalukes.

I've seen all of this before, and it's quickly evolving here. I've tried to fight it elsewhere, only to discover it's not worth the effort. Nor is it worth dedicating my time to a forum that just placed itself on a downward trajectory towards extinction.

Tyr, you say it's been a month and nothing bad's happened. I disagree. This is rapidly unfolding and developing.

I'm sure you've noticed that P.com is now essentially a liberal echo chamber with hardly any dissenting opinion. But the real underlying problem there was not liberalism vs. conservatism. It was the collective group-think of the moderating staff that "we're always right" and "complaints are always meritless."

When you start seeing comments from the moderating staff and their supporters that say things like "This site is free," "you have nothing to complain about," "you're free to leave," etc., they are an omen that more egregious abuses are coming, and that you either have to live with the abuses or leave.

I already see it coming in the month that just went by. This moderating staff is too big for the amount of participants and they'll all be jockeying for status within their group. And the e-marmalukes will be supporting every abuse. Normal posters will be victimized and departing. This is a normal development process for internet forums, which is why they all grow, peak, and decline.

It's like how if a government program is working OK, liberals simply can't leave it alone. They have to tweak and perfect it, to the point it becomes a total wreck. DP was going along fine, but now it's on the path to its own demise.

Sad.

And now the moderating staff can be expected to appear and rip this post to shreds, the e-mamalukes will applaud their every comment, but none of that will alter the path DP is now tracking... Taft, there is some truth to what you say about how moderating usually goes. Lord knows we've seen it go like that elsewhere but my friend I truly believe that's not the case here. Now you know damn well I'm not butt-kissing when saying that. I voluntarily left the other forum because they wrongly banned my friend and that's how I came to be here. I always saw you as a stand your ground kind of guy that wouldn't just give up or give in. And now it looks like you are doing both. Billybob was an azzhat from the word go so do not use what happened to that character as it is a great error IMHO. And you know that all admin's and mods work together, play together -bond and defend each other. Its the natural order of things Hoss. Happens at all boards my friend. I tell ya that this board is not liberal and we have far more freedom to post here than elsewhere. Now I will agree with you if log and I in the future get into a heated exchange and a gang suddenly descends upon me and beat me senseless. I SIMPLY DO NOT SEE THAT HAPPENING. Call it faith, call it experience or call it intuition but I've been at over a dozen sites and this by far is the best one. Did I ever do you wrong or not be honest with you? Think about it and know IF you do not play here anymore I'll damn sure miss both your intelligent comments and your tendency to blast anybody that blasts you. I always really admired that about you. Guess I've said enough now . PM me if you'd like to discuss this more my friend. -Tyr

[Marcus Aurelius]

You know what, you're correct, I did generalize and state everyone! The software won't allow me to ban myself, unfortunately. But as punishment, I just gave my Chihuahua a cookie, and purposely tried to immediately take it back from him. He then bit me. Consider it a spanking of sorts, and I did it just for you.

But maybe I can just leave for 24, and consider it a ban? Or should we choose a thread of your liking, and I will never post in it again, and we can call it a thread ban? What works for you?

I think the Chihuahua bite is sufficient chastisement. You may consider your slate clean... but don't let it happen again, or I may have to get Taft to rip you a new one again.;)

[Little-Acorn]

I find this thread has turned comical.
This one too, eh?


Everyone went nuts over Log being made a moderator,

Everybody?

[jimnyc]

This one too, eh?



Everybody?

Hey, wasn't my Chihuahua bite enough? Should I let him bite my leg now too? :beer:

[Voted4Reagan]

Hey, wasn't my Chihuahua bite enough? Should I let him bite my leg now too? :beer:

Pug Farts are worse then Chihuahua bites...

[Little-Acorn]

Hey, wasn't my Chihuahua bite enough? Should I let him bite my leg now too? :beer:

No. As I said earlier, everything is Logroller's fault now.

[Marcus Aurelius]

No. As I said earlier, everything is Logroller's fault now.

I thought everything was still Bush's fault!

[fj1200]

Well, the verdict is in; DP is now a bastion of liberal groupthink with any hint of conservative opinion now pounced upon and ridiculed with all the fervor that should meet similar ignorant twaddle. I would like to publicly apologize to all of those who correctly predicted the demise of this fine virtual institution; any hint of opposition that I proffered is hereby withdrawn.
































































;)

[Jeff]

Well, the verdict is in; DP is now a bastion of liberal groupthink with any hint of conservative opinion now pounced upon and ridiculed with all the fervor that should meet similar ignorant twaddle. I would like to publicly apologize to all of those who correctly predicted the demise of this fine virtual institution; any hint of opposition that I proffered is hereby withdrawn.
































































;)


LIBERAL :laugh::laugh:

[aboutime]

LIBERAL :laugh::laugh:


Jeff:laugh:. It now appears OBAMACARE has finally infiltrated DP.

My apologies go out to jimnyc for being unable to stop the Liberal cluster, about to take over.

[jimnyc]

Don't kill me for necroposting!!

I saw a bot visiting this thread and decided to take a peek. Didn't even remember the saga of all of this but was also cool to just re-read some POV's and some names I miss!

And it's been 8 years since this thread and curious between how we all looked at things compared with today!


I fully understand what you are saying Jim. Not trying to diminish your decisions here in any way.
But...it's no accident that I....and possibly several other members here. Have heard the very same words spoken by others in the past.
We were given all the same reassurances. Then... You'll see.
POLITICS and Internet Forums are so similar. GOOD LUCK.

Looking back, I still see and understand where many opinions came from and why they were valid. But I hope time will be nice to me and folks will see what my thinking was over the years. As you can see, the one thing learned was that no way any one member was going to do anything to the vision of the board and how it went forward. And so long as everyone agreed with freedom of speech and freedom to really discuss anything within mature limitations, so long as the few rules weren't violated/abused. That was the vision in 2003 and still stands today. Not everything was quite that right and I made plenty of mistakes though that have us where we are today.

But I hope my word and reassurances came to fruition. In real life, when I give someone my word, I was told it should be treated as gold. Not told actually, but rather raised that way. So I always took my word serious and that's carried over to online. If I say or declare something, I do my utmost best to honor that throughout. But not really hard since the things I say are who I am and what I do myself. So easy on that one. But takes more than just following principles of freedoms.


My most immediate reaction to this decision was astonishment.

Jim, I will persevere with this forum - to an extent, anyway - to see how this pans out. But I'll be honest enough to make it very clear that I see this as Aboutime does.

We shall see where this new status quo leads. And ... even FJ has made a point I can take on board (!). We do, indeed, 'live in interesting times'.

I absolutely have to say this, even if I earn censure for it ... I remain stunned by this decision.

No matter any differences with Drummond, and especially with him not here right now, only want to say that I understand where his feelings came from - but again I hope even he from afar and others will see that the astonishment and concern about a 'liberal' infiltrating and harming somehow - didn't and wasn't going to happen. Again, with it seen elsewhere, I understand. But wasn't and didn't happen here.


Are you astonished because I made a decision that you think is harmful to the board, or because I chose someone that you don't particularly have a lot of love for?

What "I" want out of this board, and the freedoms I've afforded without crazy moderation, will NOT be changing. Even if between the worst of enemies, staff is not allowed to do anything I wouldn't do myself. To put it bluntly, I have ideas of where I would like to see the board go and how I would want it ran - and staff is an extension of that, to basically do what I would do.

People have been telling me for 10 years now how my patience and dedication to freedom of speech won't last. But it has. And it's not going to change. The day I become overbearing and more interested in moderating than provoking good discussion, I'll sell off or give the board away.

If I thought for a NYC second that Logroller would ever moderate unfairly, I wouldn't have asked him to come aboard. With that said, it can't fail. For starters, I wouldn't allow it too, as I love this place and will always stick to my principles. Secondly, and more important, give him a chance outside of a debate to see how he moderates. He's proved his fairness and maturity to me for a few years. Being polar opposites on some heated topics doesn't mean you guys can't agree on what is best for the board.

I know I screwed up in many areas, but I am of the hope that my intention of freedom of speech always did last and never did waver.


Thank You Sir Drummond. You managed to say, almost exactly what I was at a loss for saying. Probably due to my past experience where attempting to deal with others in explaining the UNFORSEEN consequences of certain actions.. is often ignored.
Of course. Those who always oppose making such statements based on experience. Always seem to find that invisible, but workable tact of pretending to be something, or someone they really are not. To achieve their ultimate goal.
Personally. Like you. I have experienced the betrayal, and guaranteed promises too many times to just shrug them off, and pretend they aren't real here.
Guess Jim will just have to learn, on his own. As I have stated before.
Since I, and WE are not capable, or knowledgeable enough to just enjoy the promised STATUS QUO being offered up.

I hope I also proved this to AT and others that I wasn't going to allow myself or staff as a whole to be duped or infiltrated or changed the idea of freedom of speech and what was allowed on the board and what wasn't allowed.


Thanks for the well thought out post. I'll try to reply the best I can.

This board has never been about me, and my way or the highway. I've done my best over the years to include staff on decisions AND the entire community on some decisions. Yes, it is my board, but I try to always do what is best for the community as a whole. None of the shenanigans you endured elsewhere will be applied here, whether it may feel that way or appear that way at times.

There will always be fairness in moderation here and NO ONE will ever tell others how they should post. Take away the individuality and I'm not surprised boards that employ that crap will fail.

While things aren't perfect here, do you think I've been anything but fair to you guys? And I believe you broke the 6 week barrier here too! Nothing is going to change. The rules remain the same. The debates will be the same. No one is going to be unfairly moderated or eaten alive because Log became a moderator. :)

We could have 19 leftie moderators and then me - and things still wouldn't change. The board is what it is, so long as I own it, and won't be changing.

Oh, and I don't think Log is a leftie! :)

I tried my best to engage staff members in any changes to the community, and the community itself many many engagements for feedback before changes as well. I always thought it best that the community itself determined the road ahead for that very community, and did my best to apply that. Not perfect but we all did pretty well I thought!!


Couldn't you guys perhaps stop judging my board based on past bad experiences?

I think I've been nothing but fair with all of you, even those that disagree with this decisions. You're all still here posting. The worst anyone has seen has been a small handful of thread bans, and maybe some posts clipped and moved to the cage. At least save your ammo and let me have it when you actually see anything unfair. :)

Not sure if I was cranky or what back then! But not only didn't Logroller come aboard and apply non-stop liberal agendas, or ban anyone, he's not even been around here for ages. Contrary to some opinions back in the past, I thought he was pretty cool, just like many others, even if not a card carrying member of the Chicken Hawk Club I belong to filled with psycho conservatives wanting to bomb anyone who wrongs us. :laugh:


Oh, I believe you! Anyone wanting an idea of what a left wing kook ran site looks like, simply go to democraticunderground! All you need do there is introduce yourself as a republican and they will ban you. They WANT voices from only one side. My old board, which went from like 500,000 posts to about 7 million since I sold it, is infested with chaos and fighting. Great, threads are 20 pages long an hour after you start them, but they are useless. I know what you speak of.

But one man is not an infestation, and he's not the type you would ever find schmoozing over at DU either. I know you may not want to hear it, but he's WAY more conservative than he is a leftie - just not entirely right wing cool nutcases like you and I. :)

The only thing I would like to get overrun by is good discussions. If what you saw at that old board ever happens here - remind me - I'll pay the fees for a new domain and hosting and start us a new website myself!

8 years later and DU is still a liberal shithole that will ban anyone for even thinking in their head about conservatism. Seriously, they have some device that follows your thoughts constantly to ensure you aren't one of those disgusting righties! And our old hangout still grows and grows in posts - pushing at the 27 million mark now!! And worse than ever, in my humble and biased opinion. But insults disrupting threads isn't difficult to find, many 20-50 pages long, and just filled with non-stop of that. But hey, in all seriousness, some are all for that kind of action. So be it and great for them and good luck! Just simply not my cup of tea, even if I do enjoy a good debate disagreement. But every single thread in every single forum and endless pages long? So in 8 years.....


What's currently happening at USMB is a joke. A fucking joke. Over moderated horseshit, vile and disgusting posts, constant arguing, no serious discussion, no respect. It is really not worth trying to start an honest, serious discussion over there...

Can't speak to inner workings, just looks like mass confusion to me and I wouldn't join after reading as a guest. Not where I would have brought it, but they also created a place with a ton of members. So..... not sure what folks would want.


That's all I ask of you guys, to give it time before you jump off the cliff. Like stated earlier, so long as rules don't get broken, no one has a thing at all to worry about. I see no reason to believe that the way you guys are treated now, won't be the same way going forward. No moderation will happen unless someone is deserving of it. And considering I think everyone in this thread are honorable adults, I think we can all admit when we might have went over the line. I know I've done it hundreds of times! :)

I hope everyone still believes this true for all of us!


Yeah, it's sad to look at it and think back to what it once was. It's proof that sheer volume and numbers won't produce quality. Open any good subject, it's 102 pages long and 102 different subjects and 102 different arguments going on. Our problems here are tame in comparison! I still dare anyone that thinks we aren't fair to go and join DU and attempt to be reasonable. I wouldn't ask people to troll elsewhere as I wouldn't want it done here. But you'll be absolutely reasonable and gone real quick. Just tell them you're a Ronald Reagan fan from way back!

Still referring old joint and then DU - and both still suck as pointed out. And we're still fairer than DU! :laugh:


Do not sweat it AT. About 18 months ago I stepped down as a mod over my feud with Conman. The reason was Jim holds his staff members to a much higher standard then he does regular members. The feud with Conman was down and dirty and being a staff member Jim did not want me getting that dirty with him

So the same will apply to LR - as it does with every staff member

Bottom line is. just follow the rules and you will not even know LR is a mod. \

Hey it is not like Jim made FU or Gabby a mod. Jim picked the best liberal we have here for the job

Yeps, was true then and still true today. Only just without Log, :) :(


I'm as guilty as anybody about this getting mad and demanding a refund. However, running a message board takes work and some sacrifices are necessary to acquire free labor. It means being managed by people dumb enough to give away free labor. Unless you're willing to pay a monthly subscription fee to be managed by true professionals, you should happily accept what you get for the price you are paying.

NO REFUNDS!! Although Psychoblues complained to Paypal once and got his own refund - and stayed too. :laugh2:


Give it up, Kathianne. You can't teach the the stupid how not to be stupid.

And yet for whatever frustrating reason, I tried with you for years and years. :)


Personally...I think Logroller is a pretty good choice.... I see him as a more center Left Libertarian type, not a pure Liberal.

And we need Mods that will be able to understand both positions LEFT and RIGHT, Liberal and Conservative.

The Board needs Liberal Posters... if all the Mods are Conservative and all the Members posting are conservative the board will stagnate and falter.

we conservatives need to be a little less hostile to the Liberals who post here. By doing so we'll attract new members and the board will grow.

and certain unnamed liberals need to stop trolling and start debating.

We also need to cut down the Islam attacks... Are their problems in Islam? Certainly.

But if every thread is an attack against Jafar, nobody will want to join the board.

so lets dull our tongues and sharpen our debate skills.... I stand behind NUKE/TRIGG and LOGROLLER.

Good Choices Jim...

Wiccan Liberal approved of this message.... we stand together on this.

First, I miss Mark aka V4R. And looking back he was so so spot on, even if I didn't fully agree at the time. Mark should have been made "manager" here, as he could have made the tough organizational decisions and maybe brought in new folks and been the one in charge of member retention. He could have been successful in the many areas I failed or was incompetent at.


Even if Gabby sent a real life photo of her boobies to Jim, she will still never be made a Mod.
Take it to the bank.

They would have helped, no doubt in my mind. But takes more than boobies to infiltrate staff. But absolutely no doubt that boobies would help avoid bans and give you favoritism. Just being honest here guys! Boobies and you guys get the crappy end of the stick, no doubt in my mind. :coffee:


That's why they were brought on, to solely keep an eye on that filthy bastard named Logroller! :)

In the past, during our "transition years", I had a few FAR left liberals as staff members. I liked them, or they wouldn't have been asked to come on board. But some fears were realized and a few things got out of hand, not as much on the board as it was within staff (turmoil). The problem was fixed. End of issue.

People can accuse me of being a dick for 10 years, and I may even admit to some of it! :dunno: - but when it comes to moderating? I fired my brother, Sir Evil, at least like 10x. My sister at one point was banned for life. Jeff, who now posts, took a hiatus at one point because I wouldn't allow certain things. In other words, I held my own family to certain standards. That should be enough assurance that I won't let any person or group to ruin what we have here. Whether all liberal staff, or all conservative staff - decisions will always be handled maturely and fairly.

Told you all! Brought him on to keep a keen eye and then utilized my mind skills and he bailed. :dunno:


Clearly my filthy leftie bastard postings have been so egregious that making me a moderator was the only avenue available to admin. I've been muzzled with authority, rather than by it. Well- played Jim. Ne'er saw it coming. :clap:

Yup, played you like a fiddle! Sent you into the stratosphere never to be seen again!


this thread was much funnier when you were all bitching about Logroller instead of each other.:poke:

This whole board was much funnier when you were still posting here and calling everyone dumbasses!


Well Jim, I admit to having had the same thoughts back then. Some of us immigrants from the other board saw how piss poor moderating and bias against us as a group went there. Taft was in that group and was mistreated by some lefty mods and admin -THERE! My hope is that he sees that has not been the case here and accepts your word on it is not ever going to be the case here. I have seen nothing bad coming from Log ,just being himself which is to be expected. No power mad abuse that we've seen at other sites. Hopefully Taft will start posting again. You have to admit that the man stood his ground come hell or high water and didn't mind broadsiding anybody that got too smartass with him. Some people respect that.. -Tyr

Why I always loved Tyr so much. Speaks his mind when not happy and the first to jump in when he saw I was standing by what I said. :saluting2:


I thought everything was still Bush's fault!

And 8 years later perhaps more so - and now we have a new Bush called "Trump's fault". Point being that leftists never ever take responsibility, whether that be personally or within government.

Hope it isn't wrong to have repointed all this out, but I saw it all in a positive manner! Still learning from other myself, and even better looking back sometimes and seeing some folks I miss. :thumb:

[Abbey Marie]

I must admit I didn’t remember any of this. At least we had some passion, right?

[SassyLady]

I liked logroller because he brought a different perspective. I don't come here to hear an echo. I want robust discourse.