Where can you post a complaint about a moderator?

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.

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.

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.

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

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...

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

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

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?

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

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