OK, I am extremely bored and since i am awaiting the staff's next demand regarding my e-mails to them I think I'll settle down and dissect some posts aimed at Cait for awhile...
Whether she likes it or not.
waterpanther said:
A few points, 'cause there's more smoke blowing here than in a West Texas kicker bar.
Assmaster.
1. The idea that Shal might abuse her "authority" over Cait is a reach. The great preponderance of Cait's posts are here in AQG, where the mods are Josh and eryn. (And very find mods they are. )
First of all... ass kisser...
The mods are so "find" that they drop everything to ban Cait for posting a link that was requested by another member. A link that Shalamar kept in her profile and one that does not even qualify as another board.
EI board guidelines said:
7. Ex Isle is an independent discussion board. Members of Ex Isle who have disputes on, or with members of, other boards are asked not to conduct their disputes here. This includes discussing such disputes or copying posts regarding such disputes from other boards. (Example: Ex Isle Member A and B are both also members at board Omega and have a dispute at board Omega. Ex Isle Members A and B are prohibited from bringing that dispute to Ex Isle, including referring to the dispute and reposting the content of that dispute.) Posts containing such disputes will be removed by staff, and members who post such information will be reminded by staff of the board policy. Staff will take corrective actions consistent with board policy toward any member who repeatedly (more than twice) violates this guideline.
This specifically states that the dispute must be copy/pasted, which was not done, only a link was provided. Cait did mention the dispute in passing, but she did not do it repeatedly, nor was she given a kindly non-official warning and then have the link edited out as has been done in the past... even in that same thread. Someone saw that Cait mentioned that she knew she would likely be banned, did some quick math on her previous warnings and decided that it would be a grand idea to put her out of action for awhile. The rules don't support that, but it is obviously what the staff wanted.
EI board guidelines said:
Members' posting privileges will rarely be suspended. If a poster violates the guidelines spelled out above, the staff will try to resolve the situation amicably, and will treat suspension only as a last resort if all else fails to correct the poster's behavior.
Oh? When does that kick in? In my case it was a first resort... In Cait's she was not treated in the kindly manner described, but was instead rushed out at the earliest opportunity.
waterpanther said:
All three of Cait's warnings were handed out in AQG--Shal had nothing whatsodamnever to do with them. The only place Shal might have any "authority" over Cait is in OT, where Cait very seldom posts.
LOL, you act as if there is not a secret room on the board or that staff don't do favors for one another. Get with the real world already.
Despite the ever-more-complicated rules, I've seen a real effort to ease up on warnings in OT, with lots of "cool it's" and attempts to defuse heated-up situations before they get out of hand. Shal's been involved in a lot of those pre-warnings. I've seen fewer and fewer calls I thought were questionable and much to indicate that the staff is taking the need for fairness very seriously.
What was the last call you thought questionable? Did you post that you thought something was questionable... ever?
I won't bother with the research because I can't use the search function over at EI due to my ban... However, given what I have seen of your posts, you're a staff wannabe or you need a crowbar to dislodge your head from their tight asses before you choke. Shalamar's moderating style is not in question here, instead we question her bashing of members of the board and possibly the string pulling and/or staff bias that was used to get Cait that third warning.
2. The only legitimately offended parties in this affair are Cait and Shal, and possible G.
This is where I start to get pissed at you...
You are a royal fucktard of the highest order, in a long line of distinguished fucktards, you stand head and shoulders above the rest. Everyone on the board should be outraged that members of the board were treated so shabbily by a moderator of EI. Now don't get me wrong, I love the idea of being able to post such things about members, even as a member of the staff
if it's done openly and on the board in question. Since EI prohibits such behavior and language however that's just not applicable there. As a friend of Cait's you're damned right it matters to me when she is shat upon,
anywhere. If you don't comprehend this concept than you don't have any friends. That too is beside the point given that I would take umbrage with the treatment G got at Shal's hands as well even though I don't much care for the squirrelly little geek, either on the boards or in real life.
Whenever a wrong is done it is our duty and our right to protest that wrong whether we were directly aggrieved or not.
Try telling all those white people that were fighting for civil rights back in the day that they need to fuck right off because they weren't personally harmed by the lynchings.
(BTW the length of my posts and the extent of my rambling is indicative of the depth of my boredom so strap yourselves in boys and girls, it's gonna get messy)
From what Shal's posted, appropriate apologies and amends are being offered in private. That's good.
If by good you mean completely insincere, you are correct. Who are you to judge what is an appropriate apology? Only the aggrieved party can determine that right? Well the apology proffered in this case is exactly the same that occured when a similar incident took place hyears ago. Tell me what does that speak of Shalamar's sincerity. If someone is truly sorry their next action is usually to make amends, or failing that not staging a repeat performance. Neither of these things were done or attempted to my knowledge. If Shalamar was truly sincere and she truly regretted her actions... for the second time... then she would quit her post as moderator because whether what she did was against the rules or not, what she did was WRONG for a member of staff at EI to do. A staff member has a duty to the members of the board to be as fair and level headed as possible, especially when the rules dictate such behavior. That duty does not end when they're posting somewhere else. What does it tell you of a staff member's fairness when they're name calling and belittling those very same people in private? I really don't give a shit if it was at some shitty journal site or in the back room of EI.
Beyond that, it's none of anyone else's business. Repeat: it's none of anyone else's business. This is a message board, not the Midnight Globe.
Uhh, yeah... I assume that's some sort of gossip rag or something? Point has already been defeated, moving on...
3. This whole thing is giving me a really bad case of deja vu. The posters who raised hell when Specs was named a watchdog and didn't let up for a moment until she resigned are among the same little clique of half-a-dozen who are presently squawling for Shal's head on a plate. I am not persuaded they have the good of the board at heart.
It's simpering little ass licking turds like you that don't have the best interest of the board at heart.
Going along with any wrong doing just because it's a member of the staff that does it all the while piling on anyone that crosses the staff in any way has got to be the most pathetic stance anyone on any message board can take. You suck ass so well you should be the next watchdog... er pussy... whatever...
Fighting injustice is one of the best things one can do for their fellow man. You ass lickers can go to OT and argue your views in theory all you want, but all the while the very views that you espouse and fight for so passionately when it comes to real life political issues take a 180 degree turn when they are applied to EI. The thing I find so damned amusing in that is that you will NEVER effect change on a national level by bitching and moaning on a message board as insignificant as EI... but when you have a chance to effect your board, to make it the utopia you envision for the world you back the oppressors.
You hippy fuckheads can't ever get anything right.
How many of you were on Bush's jock for his off mic comment of a few days ago? What if Bush had said that James Carville was some sort of fucking idiot and he should be taken out back and shot? (or perhaps deported in keeping with the ban theme.)
Inappropriate, no?
I love a man who is so forceful and manly. . .footnote me again.
