Vote of Confidence in DMD as a moderator

This is the only board where you will find anyone who supports the name change, and even then they are a small vocal minority.

 

You're just contrary for its own sake. Sad.

 

The mods get discussed, because as in this case, a few posters will whine no matter what. Craig didn't like another posters comment, so, despite me not agreeing, I changed it. The person whose post it was hasn't complained, but despite getting what he wanted, Craig still isn't happy. How do you please someone like that?

As far as impartiality goes, we're impartial with the moderating, so still have an opinion. This thread alone is testament to that. Some people seem to have a strange idea of the moderators roll. We're more cleaners than anything, the users (not just posters) dictate how that's done.

 

There was no mention at all of race or colour in Steweys reply. By your standards, as YOU have brought race into it, should you be banned?

 

I don't see it like that any more. Certainly that was the issue but now the division is more Anti-name change vs. Pro-Allam.

I know there are posters on here who are anti-name change AND still pro-allam but CTID and Dr Allam himself are forcing this to be the choice for Hull City fans.

 

What does that have to do with moderating though? If you're aware of both on here, doesn't that mean they've been given the same right of reply no matter what their stance?

 

There was no mention or race in my post and you know it. The post is still viewable. You owe me an apology, and you owe the whole forum one for boring everyone to tears with your absurd, childish, petty, whingeing, not very bright, dull, monotonous, pompous, self-righteous tantrum.

 

So you would be happy for Craig, Happy and Tiger to be "cleaning" as mods whilst also expressing their views?

 

Yes I've challenged racists on here more than most and it's a lonely job because there's no backing from moderators.
As far as reporting them to you is concerned, I remember having a long debate with you about the Lee Bowyer racial attack, and I couldn't even get you to admit that racism exists even though I put the question to you in it's simplest form repeatedly. So no, I wouldn't see any point in reporting racial posts to you.

 

If they did it in the same way, yes. The opinion is irrelevant to the moderating.

 

I've voted for Dutch to stay, although I could understand him saying it's not worth the hassle. I have had my fair share of disagreement with him over his style, but that is a part and parcel of the chosen framework of this site. I have posted previously that I believe some change to how moderation is made should be considered, just as I think a mod post should be labelled as such. Better the Dutch you know IMO.

 

So basically, you haven't reported any of these posts you can't find, to ANY of the mods or supermods, but these posts you can't produce are somehow MY fault?

 

Yes please, he's ****ing irritating.

 

As a recent observer of the Board, posters look to moderators as to what they can get away with.
If the see a mod ridiculing a pro-Allam supporter, then they know they can also do the same without fear of consequences.

Don't be so naive to believe that people are not influenced by moderators actions.

 

You've reminded me of something I thought of when you mentioned it before, I thought we could use the Policeman type smiley if we were posting as mods? Problem comes with ones like this, where I honestly don't know if I'm a poster or a mod replying.

 

God this is so ****ing boring.

 

Americano?

 

If a comment's defensible, why would it matter? If people can't see an opinion for being just that no matter what's under the username, I think it's them that's naive to be fair.

 

As I said, you would think differently if the mods on here had the opposite viewpoint on the name change, and you saw the mods ridiculing a poster who shared the same opinion as yourself.

 

Ok it was a ****y thing to say.