OT Rules of pissy behaviour...

[Captain Ewok 1,932]

You also closed a ticket today, several days after I submitted it, without addressing it.

I did not address it to your satisfaction -- maybe. I did however address it. I read your concern about a mod, looked at specific posts, if required messaged them to get perspective. I did not run back to you talking about what I was doing -- that is not my job nor should I need to status everything I do back to you. I want you to know though that I DO read what you say and look into your concerns. If I close a ticket as "resolved" then I did look at it and make some action behind the scenes to try and resolve it. If I close it as "unresolved" then I was unable to take any action.

[Captain Ewok 1,932]

I had a previous action to create a TOS addendum for the Off Topic forum on what "Anything (well almost) that you need to say you can say here" means. I will work on that today.

[john & jean 37]

I had a previous action to create a TOS addendum for the Off Topic forum on what "Anything (well almost) that you need to say you can say here" means. I will work on that today.

We, the OT regulars are sensitive to others. There are people there that need policing, however for the most part we police ourselves!!

To create a policy, to serve the needs of one whiner, would be a disservice to the majority

[Captain Ewok 1,932]

We, the OT regulars are sensitive to others. There are people there that need policing, however for the most part we police ourselves!!

To create a policy, to serve the needs of one whiner, would be a disservice to the majority

That is a valid point. I am only going to create a small set of text that gives a little better guidance, as much for the mods as anything. Don't expect anything to really change other than to help remove some ambiguity.

[john & jean 37]

Personal attacks are dealt with, without the needs of the mods. We have a couple of mods, that are regulars, in the ongoing OT topics.

These mods are there, as welcomed participants, not as MOds!!!

[Captain Ewok 1,932]

My draft on an OT addendum:

Don't Exist Only in the Off Topic Forum! Venture out into the general forums and contribute when you can (especially if you have personal experience or knowledge that may help others)!

Spewing pointed rants against a particular race, country, religion, or political group is not allowed. If you would like to discuss items regarding a specific group then keep it civil and constructive. When the main purpose of the topic or post is to attack or belittle a group (for personal beliefs or reasons) then this is a "no no" and it will be shut down -- VisaJourney is a diverse community and respecting each other and their cultures is a critical part of what we stand for.

When talking it is not necessary to have have every other word a four letter word. Casual and infrequent use of foul language is common in the real world and not prohibited (in context). Using foul language "just to use it" or to be a "jerk" begins to cross that gray Off-Topic line. Be sensible!

Be Kind! No one here is or needs to be Mr. Rogers, but there is a difference between a disagreement and just being a jerk. Constructive criticism is expected on public forums -- try to be respectful.

No nudity or sexual photos. If it is more risky (or illegal) than something you would see on a typical beach in the US then it is probably not allowed.

[Jenn! 918]

Spewing pointed rants against a particular race, country, religion, or political group is not allowed. If you would like to discuss items regarding a specific group then keep it civil and constructive.

Hmmmm, this is going to be a nightmare for the mods to try to enforce in OT.

[john & jean 37]

seems that one member, is not considering the best for the community. but, trying to have another member ousted, from a perceived

position of superiority....

[Captain Ewok 1,932]

"Simply another example" of a moderator doing a "bad job" implies a trend.

I see a trend as well. That is that you are complaining about them a lot. Frankly I do appreciate that you do not like them. I told Charles NOT to interact with you. I am leaving that to other mods and me. You not only do not like Charles but find it best to chastise him at every opportunity. You are the #1 anti-Charles person (and that is ok) but a trend would imply many many members are messaging me. If this was the case I would be very concerned that something is amiss. Maybe you are right and everyone else simply is not alerting me. I just do not see it the same way as you. You may post all day what you feel. I will read it. It is my pleasure to address your concerns but I do not simply make decisions because I am being bullied -- sorry.

That was after I posted the incident publicly

Actually not true, I have talked to many moderators including Charles when I thought a member made a valid point. Yours included. You honestly have no way to know when I have or have not. If you do know this then you are able to read the digital 101010's that you should not be. I am being a little sarcastic (and I probably should not be) but seriously mox, you are making very large assumptions and stating them as facts when they are not.

I expect your ticket system to function like a ticket system, and that when my ticket is closed that I'm at least told that it was handled.

Your tickets would never be closed if I had to keep back-and-forthing because there is a very likely chance my decision would not be something you agreed with. This is not a "fix my problem" ticket system in all cases. In those cases I do reply back when a fix was made. Your reports are "look at this example of how Charles is bad". I may take a look and talk to the moderator if needed, but it is not likely that I will reply back to you every time. I will close the ticket as resolved (you get an email) once I take note of your concern and any actions I take behind the scenes.

I tried to reply to that PM, and got a message back that the Mod has me blocked

In the case of charles and you specifically, I will go on record. You two do not get along. There is a conflict of interest for him to mod you and simply I have asked that he avoid you. I would ask the same of you engaging him. If you have a TOS concern please consult any other moderator or myself.

he even had a member suspended

If you think a TOS enforcement mistake was applied incorrectly let me know. Charles btw can not suspend people. If that was done incorrectly it was another mod or myself. Regardless any appeals (read the TOS) should be made to me directly.

...I will not cycle this for hours on end. We do not agree. That is each of our rights but I am trying to express my thoughts and I DO care what you think even though I may not agree with you on this topic.

Hmmmm, this is going to be a nightmare for the mods to try to enforce in OT.

Yeah, revisions or ideas welcome. This is not final (not even close)!

[Captain Ewok 1,932]

On a serious moderation note, lets get this back on topic to the Off Topic forum. I do not want to drag this OT (ironic).

[Captain Ewok 1,932]

Fair enough mox. Lets both take a chill pill for now and enjoy some of our weekends . We each voiced our sides. Back to "On" Topic!

[Ban Hammer 14,635]

regarding the pm block, i'd forgotten that i'd placed mox on that over a year ago to prevent any issues from arising over pm exchanges. it's now removed. my apologies for that being in place.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

In one particular case (which I reported), he even had a member suspended because he didn't like what she said to his wife. IN OFF-TOPIC. And what was this terrible horrible thing that Charles' wife was subjected to? Turns out Nessa had said she doesn't give a flying #### about the Haiti earth quake, and the member who is now suspended took her to task as being insensitive. Now sh*t like this happens ALL THE TIME in off-topic, but it was Charles' wife, and that just will not do.

I didn't read anything after that initial post by Nessa. I agree with the characterization that it was a heartless and insensitive thing to say but am skeptical that the poster who said that was banned for merely saying that. That just doesn't sound like William or Charles. It must have escalated beyond that, no?

[StillThePrettiest 4]

I didn't read anything after that initial post by Nessa. I agree with the characterization that it was a heartless and insensitive thing to say but am skeptical that the poster who said that was banned for merely saying that. That just doesn't sound like William or Charles. It must have escalated beyond that, no?

"you'd like to think that, wouldn't you?"

[English Muffin 59]

I didn't read anything after that initial post by Nessa. I agree with the characterization that it was a heartless and insensitive thing to say but am skeptical that the poster who said that was banned for merely saying that. That just doesn't sound like William or Charles. It must have escalated beyond that, no?

erm, NO!