Re: Where can you post a complaint about a moderator?

[[email protected]]

Just like Talk.origins. Even if a charter is devised, a moderator does
not need to follow it. that particular group moderator practice content
moderation. In all, that is his universe and the moderator rules.
simple
they can even moderate un moderated groups by filtering out and
blocking replies to certain specified group.

the same occurs with NSP and ISP adminsitrators homegrown an abroad.
some in the interest of money, will take a known ECP spammer. writing
to an abuse email address is like pushing the cross traffic life in
manhattan.
normally they can be block listed. such NSP is shared-secrets.com

In the end those in high chair win. The best you can do is increase
noise level until you tire, an move on. However you will find the
casual nincompoop
that for the sake of argument, just have to reply to a post to say you
are wrong, even if the evidence is staring them in the face. Just like
Iraq eh?

Bill Cole wrote:

>
> Here's why: moderators have no bosses. There is no mechanism for them
to
> be changed against their will and no way to punish a moderator. In
the
> Big 8, every attempt to form a process for moderator discipline has
been
> defeated.
>
> --
> Clues for the blacklisted:
<http://www.scconsult.com/bill/dnsblhelp.html>
> Current Peeve: "This page was written to render correctly in any
standards
> compliant browser" on pages with hundreds of HTML
errors.

[John Vreeland]

wrote:
> Just like Talk.origins. Even if a charter is devised, a moderator
does
> not need to follow it. that particular group moderator practice
content
> moderation. In all, that is his universe and the moderator rules.
> simple
> they can even moderate un moderated groups by filtering out and
> blocking replies to certain specified group.

Why that is outrageous. I won't stand for it. So what did you try to
post that got rejected by the software but did not violate the
cross-posting rules? If you are right we'll have to replace the script
with one that can actually count.

[[email protected]]

I posed comments to various unmoderated support groups about the
negative aspects of evolution, and the ramification and legal issues
that could be risen from such. The T.O moderator put a block on all
support groups from their on. He claims that their was a protest from
these group that ask for such a filter. But he never presented any.
most of the complaints came from inside the talk.origins NG, in
particular from an individual named Boikat. Who tried to run me off
internet because of comments.
when this failed, the famous JABFILTER went into effect. It is not in
perview from the charter to moderate unmoderated support groups in this
fashion. At that time he demostrated to be biased, and my participation
in the NG went down to practicly zero. which was his intent, I send a
post there from time to time to remind the newbies of the bias and
content moderation. But I personally lost interest in a group that
practice content moderation and censorship.

John Vreeland wrote:
> wrote:
> > Just like Talk.origins. Even if a charter is devised, a moderator
> does
> > not need to follow it. that particular group moderator practice
> content
> > moderation. In all, that is his universe and the moderator rules.
> > simple
> > they can even moderate un moderated groups by filtering out and
> > blocking replies to certain specified group.
>
> Why that is outrageous. I won't stand for it. So what did you try
to
> post that got rejected by the software but did not violate the
> cross-posting rules? If you are right we'll have to replace the
script
> with one that can actually count.

[Bob Casanova]

On 13 Apr 2005 19:45:08 -0700, the following appeared in
talk.origins, posted by :

>I posed comments to various unmoderated support groups about the
>negative aspects of evolution, and the ramification and legal issues
>that could be risen from such. The T.O moderator put a block on all
>support groups from their on.

Wrong. He blocked *crossposts* to those groups if t.o was
one of the groups (which he has a perfect right to do).
You're perfectly free to post your garbage directly to the
groups in question with no intervention by DIG.

<snip>

--

Bob C.

"Evidence confirming an observation is
evidence that the observation is wrong."
- McNameless

[[email protected]]

Bob Casanova wrote:
> On 13 Apr 2005 19:45:08 -0700, the following appeared in
>
> Wrong. He blocked *crossposts* to those groups if t.o was
> one of the groups (which he has a perfect right to do).

As mentioned a moderator can do whatever he wants. which is the point
of the thread. It is nice to know, that you admit that their is content
moderation. thanks...

[Lt. Kizhe Catson]

wrote:
> Bob Casanova wrote:
>
>>On 13 Apr 2005 19:45:08 -0700, the following appeared in
>>
>>Wrong. He blocked *crossposts* to those groups if t.o was
>>one of the groups (which he has a perfect right to do).
>
>
> As mentioned a moderator can do whatever he wants. which is the point
> of the thread. It is nice to know, that you admit that their is content
> moderation. thanks...
>

Regulating crossposts is *not* content-moderation, no matter how many
times you say so, you pathological liar.

-- Kizhe

[[email protected]]

There was no WMD in Iraq neither, So yet the USA invaded anyway to
bring democracy to that country, while Saudi Arabia, Women can't go to
a decent university and the constitution is the Koran.. And the saudis
are american allies. 90 mile from the american peninsula of florida
lies Cuba, and yet they are not free.. but Iraq and Afhganistan is..

Justification is wonderful eh?

Lt. Kizhe Catson wrote:
> wrote:
> > Bob Casanova wrote:
> >
> >>On 13 Apr 2005 19:45:08 -0700, the following appeared in
> >>
> >>Wrong. He blocked *crossposts* to those groups if t.o was
> >>one of the groups (which he has a perfect right to do).
> >
> >
> > As mentioned a moderator can do whatever he wants. which is the
point
> > of the thread. It is nice to know, that you admit that their is
content
> > moderation. thanks...
> >
>
> Regulating crossposts is *not* content-moderation, no matter how many

> times you say so, you pathological liar.
>
> -- Kizhe

[VoiceOfReason]

wrote:
> Bob Casanova wrote:
> > On 13 Apr 2005 19:45:08 -0700, the following appeared in
> >
> > Wrong. He blocked *crossposts* to those groups if t.o was
> > one of the groups (which he has a perfect right to do).
>
> As mentioned a moderator can do whatever he wants. which is the point
> of the thread. It is nice to know, that you admit that their is
content
> moderation. thanks...

Does it ever occur to your feeble mind that every time you post this
silly claim, you're proven to be a liar?

[Lt. Kizhe Catson]

wrote:
> There was no WMD in Iraq neither, So yet the USA invaded anyway to
> bring democracy to that country, while Saudi Arabia, Women can't go to
> a decent university and the constitution is the Koran.. And the saudis
> are american allies. 90 mile from the american peninsula of florida
> lies Cuba, and yet they are not free.. but Iraq and Afhganistan is..
>
> Justification is wonderful eh?

I gather you think (and I use the term very loosely) there is some
parallel between US geo-political propaganda, and t.o moderation rules?
You're a loon AND a liar. But we already knew that.

-- Kizhe

> Lt. Kizhe Catson wrote:
>
wrote:
>>
>>>Bob Casanova wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>On 13 Apr 2005 19:45:08 -0700, the following appeared in
>>>>
>>>>Wrong. He blocked *crossposts* to those groups if t.o was
>>>>one of the groups (which he has a perfect right to do).
>>>
>>>
>>>As mentioned a moderator can do whatever he wants. which is the
>>
> point
>
>>>of the thread. It is nice to know, that you admit that their is
>>
> content
>
>>>moderation. thanks...
>>>
>>
>>Regulating crossposts is *not* content-moderation, no matter how many
>
>
>>times you say so, you pathological liar.
>>
>>-- Kizhe
>
>

[Lt. Kizhe Catson]

Damn. I keep forgetting I'm reading/replying to this JabberSpew in
rec.ponds, not t.o. Apologies to fellow ponders for continuing it in
the former group. I'll be more careful from now on.

Lt. Kizhe Catson wrote:
> wrote:
>
>>Bob Casanova wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On 13 Apr 2005 19:45:08 -0700, the following appeared in
>>>
>>>Wrong. He blocked *crossposts* to those groups if t.o was
>>>one of the groups (which he has a perfect right to do).
>>
>>
>>As mentioned a moderator can do whatever he wants. which is the point
>>of the thread. It is nice to know, that you admit that their is content
>>moderation. thanks...
>>
>
>
> Regulating crossposts is *not* content-moderation, no matter how many
> times you say so, you pathological liar.
>
> -- Kizhe
>

[Bob Casanova]

On 14 Apr 2005 14:57:45 -0700, the following appeared in
talk.origins, posted by :

>
>Bob Casanova wrote:
>> On 13 Apr 2005 19:45:08 -0700, the following appeared in
>>
>> Wrong. He blocked *crossposts* to those groups if t.o was
>> one of the groups (which he has a perfect right to do).
>
>As mentioned a moderator can do whatever he wants. which is the point
>of the thread. It is nice to know, that you admit that their is content
>moderation. thanks...

No, moron, there *isn't* content moderation; there are
restrictions on crossposting. You can post any sort of
garbage you want *here*. And you can post any sort of
garbage you want *elsewhere*. You just can't combine the two
if you're too lazy or too stupid to click a mouse twice
instead of once. If you're too dim to understand the
difference that's *your* problem.

And I notice you failed to address my main point, which you
carefully snipped unmarked:

"You're perfectly free to post your garbage directly to the
groups in question with no intervention by DIG."

--

Bob C.

"Evidence confirming an observation is
evidence that the observation is wrong."
- McNameless

[Bob Casanova]

On 14 Apr 2005 19:09:23 -0700, the following appeared in
talk.origins, posted by :

And now the JabbersMonkey makes a 90-degree turn at high
speed and loses his lunch all over his monitor...

>There was no WMD in Iraq neither, So yet the USA invaded anyway to
>bring democracy to that country, while Saudi Arabia, Women can't go to
>a decent university and the constitution is the Koran.. And the saudis
>are american allies. 90 mile from the american peninsula of florida
>lies Cuba, and yet they are not free.. but Iraq and Afhganistan is..

This was in response to (from Kizhe)...

>> Regulating crossposts is *not* content-moderation, no matter how many
>> times you say so, you pathological liar.

Ain't incomprehension wonderful?

--

Bob C.

"Evidence confirming an observation is
evidence that the observation is wrong."
- McNameless

[Mickey]

Ok here you go I am complaining, this is your proof quit posting your off
topic crap in this newsgroup.

> wrote in message
oups.com...
> Just like Talk.origins. Even if a charter is devised, a moderator does
> not need to follow it. that particular group moderator practice content
> moderation. In all, that is his universe and the moderator rules.
> simple
> they can even moderate un moderated groups by filtering out and
> blocking replies to certain specified group.
>
> the same occurs with NSP and ISP adminsitrators homegrown an abroad.
> some in the interest of money, will take a known ECP spammer. writing
> to an abuse email address is like pushing the cross traffic life in
> manhattan.
> normally they can be block listed. such NSP is shared-secrets.com
>
> In the end those in high chair win. The best you can do is increase
> noise level until you tire, an move on. However you will find the
> casual nincompoop
> that for the sake of argument, just have to reply to a post to say you
> are wrong, even if the evidence is staring them in the face. Just like
> Iraq eh?
>
> Bill Cole wrote:
>
>>
>> Here's why: moderators have no bosses. There is no mechanism for them
> to
>> be changed against their will and no way to punish a moderator. In
> the
>> Big 8, every attempt to form a process for moderator discipline has
> been
>> defeated.
>>
>> --
>> Clues for the blacklisted:
> <http://www.scconsult.com/bill/dnsblhelp.html>
>> Current Peeve: "This page was written to render correctly in any
> standards
>> compliant browser" on pages with hundreds of HTML
> errors.
>

[Gustavo]

In article >
"Mickey" > wrote:
>
> Ok here you go I am complaining, this is your proof quit posting your off
> topic crap in this newsgroup.
>

Yawn.



..

[Earle Jones]

In article >,
Gustavo > wrote:

> In article >
> "Mickey" > wrote:
> >
> > Ok here you go I am complaining, this is your proof quit posting your off
> > topic crap in this newsgroup.

*
I'll volunteer to translate the above sentence into English:

OK, here you go. I am complaining -- this is your proof. Quit
posting your off-topic crap in this newsgroup.

Note proper use of comma, periods, capitalization, and the
hyphenation of a compound modifier.

earle
*
"You can fool some of the people all of the time
and those are the ones you want to concentrate on."

--President Bush, Gridiron Dinner, Washington, DC March 31, 2001