Moderator Visits

[BobDylan]

For some reason I started looking at the last times some of the members here have visited. And then I looked at the last time Moderators have visited and discovered something that I think is interesting:

The last time the FECC Moderator was here was on March 17. Moderator 3 checked in 2 days ago and Moderator 5 was last seen here on February 6! And that Mod has been a member for a little over a year.

Not trying to start anything or stir the pot but how they can Moderate when they haven't been here in almost 3 weeks (FECC Mod) and 2 months ago (Mod 5)?

[Rob]

I'm here and I'm watching all of you bastards!

Don't make me open this.

[Cryogenic]

For some reason I started looking at the last times some of the members here have visited. And then I looked at the last time Moderators have visited and discovered something that I think is interesting:

The last time the FECC Moderator was here was on March 17. Moderator 3 checked in 2 days ago and Moderator 5 was last seen here on February 6! And that Mod has been a member for a little over a year.

Not trying to start anything or stir the pot but how they can Moderate when they haven't been here in almost 3 weeks (FECC Mod) and 2 months ago (Mod 5)?

I have a few questions of my own:

- Who are these "moderators" and why don't they show their faces?

- Are they really separate people or one person with multiple accounts?

- Where do they get off on arbitrarily erasing post content, typically deleting entire replies that members have made (and sometimes poured great effort into) -- for alleged "insults" -- wholesale?

- Why do they never engage people and issue warnings/reminders in threads first? Why do they just pounce on members without warning and erase their input?

- Why do they indulge the monomania of a certain individual who constantly rubbishes other people's opinions and posts glib retorts and then runs to the moderators asking for other people to be censored; and where is the right to appeal their decisions?

[pmp]

For some reason I started looking at the last times some of the members here have visited. And then I looked at the last time Moderators have visited and discovered something that I think is interesting:

The last time the FECC Moderator was here was on March 17. Moderator 3 checked in 2 days ago and Moderator 5 was last seen here on February 6! And that Mod has been a member for a little over a year.

Not trying to start anything or stir the pot but how they can Moderate when they haven't been here in almost 3 weeks (FECC Mod) and 2 months ago (Mod 5)?

Moderators don't patrol the boards as far as I'm aware. They respond to messages and reports. That's certainly the way it happens on the Facebook groups I'm admin of. I'm pretty certain taking the time to check this place every day for possible problems would be a full time job for multiple people...

[pmp]

For some reason I started looking at the last times some of the members here have visited. And then I looked at the last time Moderators have visited and discovered something that I think is interesting:

The last time the FECC Moderator was here was on March 17. Moderator 3 checked in 2 days ago and Moderator 5 was last seen here on February 6! And that Mod has been a member for a little over a year.

Not trying to start anything or stir the pot but how they can Moderate when they haven't been here in almost 3 weeks (FECC Mod) and 2 months ago (Mod 5)?

I have a few questions of my own:

- Who are these "moderators" and why don't they show their faces?

- Are they really separate people or one person with multiple accounts?

- Where do they get off on arbitrarily erasing post content, typically deleting entire replies that members have made (and sometimes poured great effort into) -- for alleged "insults" -- wholesale?

- Why do they never engage people and issue warnings/reminders in threads first? Why do they just pounce on members without warning and erase their input?

- Why do they indulge the monomania of a certain individual who constantly rubbishes other people's opinions and posts glib retorts and then runs to the moderators asking for other people to be censored; and where is the right to appeal their decisions?

You've been a member sixteen years and not read the guidelines?

[Cryogenic]

- Why do they indulge the monomania of a certain individual who constantly rubbishes other people's opinions and posts glib retorts and then runs to the moderators asking for other people to be censored; and where is the right to appeal their decisions?

Case in point:

You've been a member sixteen years and not read the guidelines?

[pmp]

- Why do they indulge the monomania of a certain individual who constantly rubbishes other people's opinions and posts glib retorts and then runs to the moderators asking for other people to be censored; and where is the right to appeal their decisions?

Case in point:

You've been a member sixteen years and not read the guidelines?

It was a serious reply.

[Moderator3]

- Who are these "moderators" and why don't they show their faces?

We could be you. You could be we. We stand behind bland names with numbers behind them so we can moderate fairly and justly. We are all active on the forum in one way or another more with our real names than the moderator names. That's a good thing, right? If all we did was moderate we wouldn't have the time to have fun and talk about the latest releases. Thankfully everything has calmed down over the last year or so and we are not needed as much. But we are always on alert.

- Are they really separate people or one person with multiple accounts?

Gosh I hope we are different people. Otherwise there's some 'splanin' to do with our wives and husbands and girlfriends and boyfriends and all that jazz.

- Where do they get off on arbitrarily erasing post content, typically deleting entire replies that members have made (and sometimes poured great effort into) -- for alleged "insults" -- wholesale?

We don't "get off" erasing content. We wish we didn't have to erase content in the first place. Especially in todays world. Really. I see you shaking your head. No we really don't. If everybody would be kind to each other we wouldn't be needed.

- Why do they never engage people and issue warnings/reminders in threads first? Why do they just pounce on members without warning and erase their input?

We never do? Those are two different reactions for two different types of guideline violations.

You've been a member sixteen years and not read the guidelines?

Anything is possible.

[Cryogenic]

- Why do they indulge the monomania of a certain individual who constantly rubbishes other people's opinions and posts glib retorts and then runs to the moderators asking for other people to be censored; and where is the right to appeal their decisions?

Case in point:

You've been a member sixteen years and not read the guidelines?

It was a serious reply.

Sure it was.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/glib

glib (adjective)
\ ˈglib \
glibber; glibbest

Definition of glib

1a: showing little forethought or preparation : OFFHAND
// glib answers
b: marked by ease and informality : NONCHALANT
c: lacking depth and substance : SUPERFICIAL
// glib solutions to knotty problems

2: marked by ease and fluency in speaking or writing often to the point of being insincere or deceitful
// a glib politician

3 archaic : SMOOTH, SLIPPERY

[pmp]

- Who are these "moderators" and why don't they show their faces?

We could be you. You could be we. We stand behind bland names with numbers behind them so we can moderate fairly and justly. We are all active on the forum in one way or another more with our real names than the moderator names. That's a good thing, right? If all we did was moderate we wouldn't have the time to have fun and talk about the latest releases. Thankfully everything has calmed down over the last year or so and we are not needed as much. But we are always on alert.

- Are they really separate people or one person with multiple accounts?

Gosh I hope we are different people. Otherwise there's some 'splanin' to do with our wives and husbands and girlfriends and boyfriends and all that jazz.

- Where do they get off on arbitrarily erasing post content, typically deleting entire replies that members have made (and sometimes poured great effort into) -- for alleged "insults" -- wholesale?

We don't "get off" erasing content. We wish we didn't have to erase content in the first place. Especially in todays world. Really. I see you shaking your head. No we really don't. If everybody would be kind to each other we wouldn't be needed.

- Why do they never engage people and issue warnings/reminders in threads first? Why do they just pounce on members without warning and erase their input?

We never do? Those are two different reactions for two different types of guideline violations.

You've been a member sixteen years and not read the guidelines?

Anything is possible.

You've quoted the above as Bob Dylan but it was actually Cryogenic - just to save confusion!

[Moderator3]

Whoops!

[Cryogenic]

You've quoted the above as Bob Dylan but it was actually Cryogenic - just to save confusion!

I actually appreciate you for pointing that out. It seems that BobDylan also posted it in the wrong location and it has now been moved.

To err is human; to forgive, divine.

- Who are these "moderators" and why don't they show their faces?

We could be you. You could be we. We stand behind bland names with numbers behind them so we can moderate fairly and justly. We are all active on the forum in one way or another more with our real names than the moderator names. That's a good thing, right? If all we did was moderate we wouldn't have the time to have fun and talk about the latest releases. Thankfully everything has calmed down over the last year or so and we are not needed as much. But we are always on alert.

I don't know. It tends to lend a more personal touch if people can have a tangible sense of who they're dealing with. Look at Rob. He's definitely one of a kind. Hiding behind pseudonyms makes it all rather bland and anemic and joyless. Maybe you're trying to spare yourself the aggravation of people trying to lean on you, pro or con, if they knew your real forum names? 'Cos then the whole moderating thing would be a real chore? I've just never seen this anywhere else that I've posted to. Moderators tend to be more... approachable. But thanks for the response here, at least.

(Cryogenic secretly hopes he can get through the rest of this post without the power disappearing due to crap weather right now).

- Are they really separate people or one person with multiple accounts?

Gosh I hope we are different people. Otherwise there's some 'splanin' to do with our wives and husbands and girlfriends and boyfriends and all that jazz.

Sure, you might be different people, and humour is always appreciated -- but where's the proof? It's trivially easy for people to duplicate themselves in a digital space. Being so anonymous brings a cloak-and-dagger dimension: a situation that naturally lends itself to suspicion.

Suspicion, Moderator3, torments my heart
Suspicion keeps us apart
Suspicion...
Why torture me?

- Where do they get off on arbitrarily erasing post content, typically deleting entire replies that members have made (and sometimes poured great effort into) -- for alleged "insults" -- wholesale?

We don't "get off" erasing content. We wish we didn't have to erase content in the first place. Especially in todays world. Really. I see you shaking your head. No we really don't. If everybody would be kind to each other we wouldn't be needed.

Sure. But here's the thing:

From an insider-outsider perspective (i.e., as someone who has had an account for sixteen years, but has had long periods of observing and not posting), many blusterous things are said on here all the time; and nothing happens. Other times, seemingly at random, there is an intervention. It seems so arbitrary; and just a tad petty. This forum plays host to many, many arguments; or for a slightly blunter word: pissing matches. But half the time, these arguments just play out on their own, and no one truly seems to get their panties in a bunch. Why, then, is people's post content suddenly removed on certain occasions? Why not just leave it unless they post illegal material, get insanely insulting, or start blatantly harassing other forum members at obvious length?

- Why do they never engage people and issue warnings/reminders in threads first? Why do they just pounce on members without warning and erase their input?

We never do? Those are two different reactions for two different types of guideline violations.

Right. But in a very recent intervention of a few days ago, five or six posts were completely deleted on a single page of a single thread. No warning from any of the mods; and no sense of proportion or nuance applied. Just everything in those posts, because some parts were apparently deemed offensive/insulting, completely erased. That's like using a hammer and chisel to file down a chipped fingernail. Should we not have FTD because Elvis swears on some recordings and sometimes performs in a tired, angry, or edgy fashion? Why not leave human beings to be human beings and for conversations and interactions to find their own equilibrium? I've seen some pretty terrible things said about Elvis by some members of this forum, whom this forum is meant to be in celebration of; but I've never demanded their input be erased or taken pleasure when it has been.

[pmp]

Right. But in a very recent intervention of a few days ago, five or six posts were completely deleted on a single page of a single thread. No warning from any of the mods; and no sense of proportion or nuance applied. Just everything in those posts, because some parts were apparently deemed offensive/insulting, completely erased. That's like using a hammer and chisel to file down a chipped fingernail. Should we not have FTD because Elvis swears on some recordings and sometimes performs in a tired, angry, or edgy fashion? Why not leave human beings to be human beings and for conversations and interactions to find their own equilibrium? I've seen some pretty terrible things said about Elvis by some members of this forum, whom this forum is meant to be in celebration of; but I've never demanded their input be erased or taken pleasure when it has been.

But that would take a great deal of time. That's never been the case to my knowledge- and, as an admin elsewhere - it takes up a great deal of time and often with no thanks and certainly no compensation!

And, again, please stop stating I demanded anything. Despite denying this endless times now (and despite having been suspended for two months last year), you still think I wrote to a moderator and demanded or magicked the removal of certain posts. Members do not decide what gets removed or what is seen as contrary to the guidelines or not. Decisions are made by the moderating team which I am most certainly not a part of (and wouldn't wish to be). And, I might add, I have not taken pleasure in input erased.

In fact, I have pleaded with you tonight to start writing in such a way, and about the topics at hand, that makes sure YOU don't end up getting erased. Ask the moderator what my message to him said on Sunday night if it makes you feel any better!

I really and truly have no idea why you are acting in the way you are since your return. These kinds of posts we have seen over the last week are so unlike what you have written in the past. I even went back and checked to make sure you I hadn't mistaken you for someone else (it wouldn't be the first time). So, this is a complete mystery to me.

But you keep tossing away the obvious olive branch, and just start off again,accusing me of the same things I have already denied multiple times.

But hey, I've tried, and been remarkably patient.

[Cryogenic]

Right. But in a very recent intervention of a few days ago, five or six posts were completely deleted on a single page of a single thread. No warning from any of the mods; and no sense of proportion or nuance applied. Just everything in those posts, because some parts were apparently deemed offensive/insulting, completely erased. That's like using a hammer and chisel to file down a chipped fingernail. Should we not have FTD because Elvis swears on some recordings and sometimes performs in a tired, angry, or edgy fashion? Why not leave human beings to be human beings and for conversations and interactions to find their own equilibrium? I've seen some pretty terrible things said about Elvis by some members of this forum, whom this forum is meant to be in celebration of; but I've never demanded their input be erased or taken pleasure when it has been.

But that would take a great deal of time. That's never been the case to my knowledge- and, as an admin elsewhere - it takes up a great deal of time and often with no thanks and certainly no compensation!

Well, whether one receives thanks and compensation or not, it's very possible. In fact, I've seen it done at plenty of other places. You mean to tell me the moderators, who also claim to be regular forum members, have never heard of the "edit" button?

And, again, please stop stating I demanded anything. Despite denying this endless times now (and despite having been suspended for two months last year), you still think I wrote to a moderator and demanded or magicked the removal of certain posts. Members do not decide what gets removed or what is seen as contrary to the guidelines or not. Decisions are made by the moderating team which I am most certainly not a part of (and wouldn't wish to be). And, I might add, I have not taken pleasure in input erased.

You steamed into the very thread where the censorship was applied, prior to it being applied, and outright stated you had "reported" several posters, including material you deemed by me to be "abusive ravings", directly to the moderators -- if that's not having your hand in censorship, what is?

In fact, I have pleaded with you tonight to start writing in such a way, and about the topics at hand, that makes sure YOU don't end up getting erased. Ask the moderator what my message to him said on Sunday night if you feel any better. I give my permission for him to tell you.

I don't particularly care what your message was. You already indicated prior to this moment -- and, obviously, again just now -- that you reported my posts; and then they were duly erased by the person/team you reported them to. The above is therefore a gross shirking of personal responsibility and blatant denial of procedural involvement on your part; even as you otherwise admit you reported me and others. If you entice someone to drink a poisoned beverage and they drink it and die, are you going to say you had nothing to do with their expiration because they chose to drink it?

I really and truly have no idea why you are acting in the way you are since your return. These kinds of posts we have seen over the last week are so unlike what you have written in the past. I even went back and checked to make sure you I hadn't mistaken you for someone else (it wouldn't be the first time). So, this is a complete mystery to me.

I write and respond as I find. You need to familiarise yourself with my first return-post on this forum. Here, I'll help you:

https://www.elvis-collectors.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=112546&start=100#p1880632

Now, where in any of that, is a garbage perspective, bonkers argumentation, abusive ravings, etc.?

You barely paid it any heed, save from quoting a tiny snatch and essentially ridiculing it:

https://www.elvis-collectors.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=112546&start=125#p1880637

The aggression and the disdainful posturing began with you, not me.

But you keep tossing away the obvious olive branch, and just start off again,accusing me of the same things I have already denied multiple times.

But hey, I've tried, and been remarkably patient.

LOL. Olive branch, patience...

Maybe the sky will turn bright yellow and I'll see Elvis down my local supermarket tomorrow.

[pmp]

I tried.

You moan about Will Smith breaking the law of the land. You broke the guidelines of FECC. Repeatedly.

You can't argue that people should keep within the law if you can't keep within the rules here yourself.

[Cryogenic]

I tried.

Your "trying" is very half-hearted, glib, and disingenuous -- and you know it.

You moan about Will Smith breaking the law of the land. You broke the guidelines of FECC. Repeatedly.

Says you. BTW: "Guidelines" aren't the same as laws. Will Smith committed a criminal act on live television. But that's fine, apparently; because he was just being a good manly man and protecting his wife (who cheated on him and showed great indifference about it -- building up anger and resentment in her husband he has obviously been in denial of for a while).

You can't argue that people should keep within the law if you can't keep within the rules here yourself.

See above. And yes, I can argue that. Will Smith is a successful man in his fifties. He's a very popular movie star and a role model to millions. He broke the laws of civilisation by resorting to primal instincts and assaulting another person at a televised event and then making a loud and aggressive verbal threat against him for all to hear (ironically: when he himself was about to receive a major award at the same event). If that's not a person in deep trouble, I don't know what is.

[pmp]

I tried.

Your "trying" is very half-hearted, glib, and disingenuous -- and you know it.

Ah yes. And you're trying so hard to stop with the endless angry comments.

But what will be will be. Life is too short to keep trying to engage with you.

[Rob]

Look at Rob. He's definitely one of a kind.

Yeah, everybody, look at me.

[Cryogenic]

Look at Rob. He's definitely one of a kind.

Yeah, everybody, look at me.

I just look at the big, flashy ELVIS sign.

It's big. And flashy.

[drjohncarpenter]

Look at Rob. He's definitely one of a kind.

Yeah, everybody, look at me.

[rickeap]

Just wondering if the moderators also post under other names?

[Moderator3]

BTW: "Guidelines" aren't the same as laws.

This is a point that needs to be touched upon again. If you go to your best mates house and the rules of his house are clearly given to you before entering with full understanding, and two of those rules are not to drink his Guinness and not to shag his girlfriend. The consequences are also clearly given to you then: you will get thrown out and beat up.
After breaking those rules will you yell back at him (with a black eye) and say "Well they aren't the same as laws so......"

Effectively the "law of the land" here at the FECC house are the Guidelines. You agreed to them before entering. If at any time you feel like you don't agree with them you can go to your other mates house down the street or stay home. The choice really is yours. We don't like making the choice for others because we want everyone to get along and have a good time at "our house" that is FECC.

Yeah, everybody, look at me.

We love to. Every day. But those jeans. And cinccinati?

Just wondering if the moderators also post under other names?

We do.

Maybe you're trying to spare yourself the aggravation of people trying to lean on you, pro or con, if they knew your real forum names?

That is exactly why. The self proclaimed only royal mountie in town before us was a perfect example. This lead to a lot of the problems some members and former member have to this day with trusting the moderators. I'm sure if he could have worn an "I'm the FECC Moderator(and what can I get if I promote your book?)" T-shirt every time he left the house, he would have.

We take a completely different approach. We want everyone to get along with each other. With NO STRINGS ATTACHED. IF everyone knew who we were I'm sure we would get lots of PM's asking for favors and things like that. We don't want that. So we stay behind our bland names as moderators.

[BrianTCB]

Look at Rob. He's definitely one of a kind.

Yeah, everybody, look at me.