Charles Anthony

Guys, Just a point of order. Avoid re-copying the entirety of your fellow member's posts in quotes. That is not necessary. Please review the following thread: Trim Your Posts and Quotes to understand more of what is expected in how you format your replies. If you need help, just ask. Ask openly in the forum or send a Personal Message to the moderating staff. Ch. A.

I think it would be a good idea to be more accomodating to the posting of images and perhaps this could be achieved technically without requiring extra work on the part of the poster. My thought is to have all images appear in a small thumbnail or perhaps an auto-generated link that only says [iMAGE] in a post so that it can not distract nor distort the display of a thread. If a reader wishes to view the image in full detail, then the reader may click on it. The image would appear in full form to only the reader. This is how many social media sites now deal with images.

No. What you should do is report it, ignore it and please move on.

Yes --- if they violate any of the forum rules and guidelines which contain the words "will be deleted without warning." ...and I am pretty sure that I have not paid attention to your Status Updates in a long time. Nobody reported any of your status updates in a while. What was the content of your Status Update?

You did not get anything wrong ---- quite the opposite. What you described is exemplary. How you deal with your own blog and your participation is a perfect example of how to respect the cross-posting rule here on MLW. You were tricked with sly thread drift to manipulate a debate. Do not feel bad about it --- that happens here all of the time. The only thing that you conceivably did "wrong" would be to have let yourself get trolled in this thread. So you get away with breaking the rules huh?No. What MH described of his actions is EXACTLY what Betsy (or anybody else with the same intentions) are expected to do.

No.

Your query is peculiar. We were talking about cross-posting and copy-pasta stuff. We were not talking about original ideas, rules nor philosophical differences in opinion on the topic du jour. I do not see it as a problem nor as a pattern. If you disagree, report it. Neither are the rules and guidelines of this forum. However, you would be amazed! Patterns of behavior can be very original here at MLW particularly when there is a clear intention to circumvent the rules and guidelines of the forum. Regardless, I see very little of that nowadays. You are right, very few ideas are original in any objective sense. Alas, disagreement seems to arise incessantly on nearly everything here! How so? The same as before: moderator discretion leaving you all a wide range of flexibility. I am confident in my abilities to discern when Sam I Am is cross-posting from when he is posting original content. If you do not trust my discretion, fine. If you see cross-posting as a problem here in the forum, point it out.

Perhaps Charles can clarify - I don't see anything on there that would raise a flag. As Charles said, don't second-guess your posts. The type of post that gets flag is nothing like that. It seems like you are conflating 2 issues. First, no. That post is not cross-postable. You should not be cross-posting with your MLW threads. Nothing is cross-postable here. Second, the personal or impersonal nature of the post is irrelevent to the issue of cross-posting. Then do not cross-post. Like I said before, if it happens once or twice, we will warn you and perhaps tell you to re-create an original thread. If those warnings are ignored and a pattern of trying to circumvent the rules develops, then we nix it. Thank you for respecting the forum rules. Me neither. I do not see it as a problem here because nobody does that! By consistently discouraging cross-posting, we do not get people cross-posting much at all here at MLW. People naturally come here to post their original thoughts. The people who cross-post are few and far between. That seems like a good thing! The people who cross-post are generally not interested in cordial debate. Indeed. So, here is my re-evaluting of the rules: Enforcing that rule worked!

If nobody ever told you anything about your posts, then I recommend that you stop second guessing your posts. Just keep doing what you have been doing until somebody (either from a moderator or from your fellow members) suggests otherwise. I am sorry a few members have led you to fear that you will be censored without warning.

You can not do this: In this forum, we avoid re-copying stuff available on other places on the internet. Your writing here must be unique to this forum regardless of where you post it first. This is what I recommend: Start a new thread discussion and take out the letter. Talk about your challenges and your experiences but make it directed to the general public. or Make sure that the other posts that you make in the other forums do not contain the same text that we see here at MLW. Make it very different. Thanks! Ch. A. mod

Correct. You should not be doing that with your MLW threads. I realize this opens up an arbitrary wedge because next week, the question will be "Well, what if I post the same thing next month? or next year?" or "What if Sock Puppet posts my material? does that mean I am breaking the cross-posting rule?" and any other permutation. We had a member here who seemed to pop up sporadically to post the exact same thing over and over and over again. Most people thought he was a nut. Unfortunately, he was banned and the reason was because of repetition and cross-posting. The banning had nothing to do with the merit of the content he posted. Here is the key: Cross-posting is very rare here in the forum and when it occurs, most often it is borderline and vague enough that I let it slide. Whereas, what you describe runs counter to the forum rules and guidelines. Greg's explanation is it. PRACTICAL VERSION: If it becomes a habit, we will nix it. I can understand the desire to cast as wide a net as possible in your attempt to stir up discussion on a topic that you believe merits public scrutiny. I also understand that most members here put A LOT of work into their writing and their writing is unique. Very few members start new discussions but nearly all of you put a lot of creative effort with a clear intention of capturing a specific audience. MOD BIAS: Casting a wide net by copy-pasting stuff is disrespectful to most members of the forum, in my opinion. MORE BIAS: As a reader, it is painful when it pops up. I come here for original writing that transcends the pettiness of differences in political opinion. Cross-posted topics are like having to sit through a cover band in the middle of a festival line-up of original performers. Regardless of any unintended or perceived offense, the objective effects of the action are the same. Here is a hint: When you start a discussion, answer the following question: "Why should anybody HERE care?" I know that can sound like a harsh threshold to attain but please consider it a guide for how you create original content here in the forums.

Ahem: "The same thing you did yesterday and the day before when you got off with just a warning." Just ask him. Send him a PM and let him explain. No. It was image trolling. I opened it up again for all to see. It was taken down for the same reason your previous image was taken down: obvious image trolling. Whatever message you were trying to convey, you could have more aptly conveyed in the written word. That HUGE photgraph is distracting and obviously ambiguous. Sure, the picture is funny --- I will grant you that but to the detriment of encouraging other members to respond in kind. Why remove the topic without even giving the poster an explanation? Or better yet, why not go to the original poster and tell them what the problem is, give them a chance to fix it first.We do. In fact, we do so multiple times until we detect a pattern that smells fishy. After this same thing happens multiple times with the same poster who received the same message multiple times, then we act much differently. Of course, we do not have to intervene. All members who copy-paste cross-posting stuff are treated with the same leniency until they develop a defiant pattern. Most members who get caught up in this sort of thing stop doing so after being told once or twice privately to stop. What is painted as a one-time fly-off-the-handle moderator intervention is nothing of the sort. MODERATOR BIAS: Pretending that this is a one-time biased unfair intervention when it is one in a long string of repeat offenses disrespects the other forum members who follow the forum rules humbly and politely. Sure. Here it is: http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums/topic/22743-earth-a-cocakamamie-story/ --- now open for further on-topic discussion if you want. This other thread has always been open: http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums/topic/23105-nasas-tetrad-and-the-coming-four-blood-moons/ Compared with: http://www.gracecentered.com/christian_forums/apologetics-forum/questions-criticisms-objections-etc-thrown-at-christians/msg1054836609/#msg1054836609 where the thread died on its own without modeerator intervention (Is that what this is all about?) and or: http://www.gracecentered.com/christian_forums/end-times-forum/the-coming-four-blood-moons-and-nasa%27s-tetrads/60/ Excerpts from the forum rules and guidelines:

You may be right. Report it, ignore it and move on..... or not.

Putting them on ignore should solve that problem. HOWEVER, you are expected to be open to receive messages from the moderator. If you block a moderator's message, DO NOT complain that you did not receive notice. EDITED TO ADD: Sending abusive messages through the PM function is not acceptable any more than if it was posted publicly. If any member receives abusive messages from a fellow member, feel free to Report it if you want a moderator intervention

You are right but that is not why Waldo was suspended. Ergo, I see no special need to remove that post. My writing was misrepresented to bring down the debate in a pattern that has appeared before. I consider it to be a grave infraction to misquote a fellow member in an online forum ---- I realize you guys try to sneak those under the radar on occasion to be funny. However, when it becomes a pattern that twists a debate, I believe it warrants moderator intervention of some sort. Based on the Reports we get, I am confident that many of you guys agree. Here is the key: I would not tolerate ANY of you forum members applying that same tactic to eachother and I do my darnedest to reign in that sort of nonsense. I believe misrepresenting a member's writing is worse than a personal attack. Maybe that is up to debate. I also believe that each one of you deserves some privacy when it comes to warnings. Most of you appreciate it, I believe because most of you do NOT need to be warned multiple times for the same things. I have a thick skin. I do not care if you believe I am stupid. However, I do not want you to believe I am stupid for the wrong reasons. I also do not like repeating myself --- however, when the need arises, it gives me an inkling as to whether the request is genuine or not. Regardless, that sort of behavior in an online forum will attack each one of you and bring down the discussions. Well that's it, really. Your statement reflects a view that there's no value in what he does IMO. Which also explains a culture where people are owed an explanation why someone was given a certain penalty, why wasn't a post removed etc.Meh. I do not care. Like GH said, you are all volunteer posters. This place would not exist without you guys. I agree with Cyber. I do not want to hear any of that either. Anybody can do this job. I am quite certain that 99% of you would agree with me if you only read the Reports and saw the patterns of each one of your fellow members. Many times you guys dismiss something as trolling but at its core is a disagreement of fact or of preference. If the alleged trolling can be resolved WITHOUT moderator actions --- i.e., by you guys ignoring it or by responding politely --- then I would encourage you all to apply that strategy. <<La politesse est une forteresse.>> --- Mel, the cook on Alice

Uh.... no. That is not what happened. However, it sure looks that way because I kept my conversation with Waldo private as I would do so for you and the rest of your fellow members. Ask Waldo to send an EXACT and COMPLETE transcript of the PMs that were sent to him and to us. Make sure you pay close attention to the sequence of communication. I do not have his permission to do so and even if I did, I would still refer you to him for the chain of evidence so that you can be at peace about this nonsense once and for all. You have my permission to forward the exact and entire message (with links) that I sent to you wherein lies the explanation of your warning to anybody you want. I refuse to discuss your issue openly in public because my written word has been misrepresented. No. Forget about me. Discuss it with the person who actually said it. If I had the power/authority to command the English language, I would call it Something-To-Ignore or Sti, for short. If nobody ever asked me that question, it would never occur to me to give it a label. Your (less than comprehensive) snapshot example shows "IT IS NOT GOING AWAY" if you "ENGAGE" it. Unless it is a rhetorical trick, your question makes no sense to me because the act of ignoring is not represented by the actions you recount. Ignoring is not the same as engaging. This has already been addressed clearly before in this thread. Your threads were tossed because you were copy-pasting after being warned multiple times to refrain from that. I see nothing insulting in those terms. [MODERATOR BIAS PERHAPS: There are few Christians like me who confidently believe the Bible is errant and filled with man-made creative, political and legal writing. From my perspective, virtually everybody who picks up a Bible is thumping it one way or an other --- usually unwittingly. I am at peace with that.] Be that as it may, the title paraphrases a quote from the main character on the set of a television show who used those exact terms. I consider that quote to be a degree of separation away from discussing something George Jefferson hollers as he storms out of Archie Bunker's living room. Incidentally, that thread died quick in the same dignified manner in which it started. From your perspective Betsy, there was trolling in that thread and you ignored it. Good. Other people ignored it too and what happened? It went away until you brought it up again. SHORT VERSION: The speech was menat to be inflammatory and the inflammatoriness was inherent to the topic of discussion. You are referring to this post. Yes. I can see how you may find that offensive. You should have reported it. Had you reported it, we would have seen it. I would have likely sent the member a message like: "Please tone down the rhetoric and avoid making insults. Calling a group of people "crazies" only brings down the level of debate. Please rephrase that statement in a more cordial manner. Thanks!" despite the fact that you demand no moderator action. ... if you had reported that post, we would have looked at it. You did not report the post. Nobody reported it. What are you expecting of a moderator if you are not going to report posts you perceive to be trolling? We can not read your minds and we can not read every single post in the forum. That is not an accurate representation of what transpires. Maybe those other members can forward the warning messages to you so that you can read them yourself. People get suspended for repeatedly violating the forum rules after being warned or told to stop. Usually, the violation is responding in kind. Often the person reporting the alleged-troll is an agent provocateur in the discussion and starts the flame-war --- Oh, how life imitates art! No, they do not. They get suspended for responding in kind and other things which happen when flame-wars escalate and usually after being told to stop. However, feel free to aks those many people to forward the messages that were sent to them. --- because some of you folks disagree with the forum rules and guidelines. Some of you are belligerent. Now we are getting somewhere. Uh... no. What you described is objectively no different than you trolling that unSaid member and the unSaid member is following the directive to "Report, Ignore and Move On." Nobody is obligated to respond to you. You are not entitled to a response nor an audience from anybody. The "Report it, ignore it and move on." sign runs on a two-way street. I would ignore them. Back-slash. We disagree on what constitutes a troll and or the act of trolling. ... is a no-no but "...beating their twelve year old wives, and killing anyone who suggests they might do things differently." is a legit statement. Uh... OK. Maybe I am too politically correct to see the difference. I apologize. You changed my mind on this one. I disagree. This thread is leading to a better understanding of the problems of communication and differences in opinion.

What is wrong with attracting some of us men? In short, yes. That is how the search engines work. Thus, your idea would likely attract more women. Great idea!!! Here is some moderator bias: This is the best idea! Try to beat this one, guys!

Start a new thread. --- I agree. Most of the warnings are sent out for having responded in kind. It is the responding in kind part is the main problem. This may help: We are telling you that you should not engage what you perceive to be trolling. GH would have me stifle a comment that you believe is legitimate. Frankly, it is not a concern that certain members take apoplectic exception to multiple postings of the same facts and opinions. Personal attacks over the posting of facts is a violation of forum rules. It's not like we're going to stop reading about "Iraq" and "lies" about "WMD" around here anytime soon either.No that's not a troll comment!I agree. If you believe a comment is perfectly legitimate, go ahead and engage it. We will not stop you --- unless we believe you are mistaken. Incidentally, that is very rare. The fact that you/anybody engages the comment further tells us moderators that you deem the comment has some legitimacy. If you believe a comment is trolling, do not engage it. If everybody is in agreement with you, then everybody SHOULD ignore it and then the moderator does not have to take sides and you will be proven right. You have the power to prove yourself right in the court of public opinion without needing a moderator's help. I disagree and not just a little bit. I disagree with you 100% a lottle bit. However, nobody has to be in political agreement with me over anything if you all ignore what you perceive to be trolling. My opinion does not matter if you all ignore stuff. If you refuse to ignore stuff that disagrees with your senses, then start a thread discussion and challenge your fellow member to explain that side issue. That is the proper strategy. Point final! as my school teachers used to say. I am perplexed that none of you do that any more. You have been a member here loooonnng enough to know that is what you all did in the past. I have some curious hypothetical follow-up questions to further my point: If somebody came here claiming to be a geologist and posted a thread about how the Earth is flat, what would you do? If somebody came here and posted a thread claiming that underwater basket weaving is a skill that all political activists should maintain, what would you do? Yeah but then there is the guy who insists that thread drift is fine and dandy because it is a natural flow of conversation. He is right --- it is the natural flow of conversation but then I get you folks who insist on engaging what you perceive to be thread drift while simultaneously complaining about thread drift. The greater problem with thread drift is exactly what JBG said up above. Now what? The bottom line is that you are insisting that the moderator takes a biased stance by passing judgement over disputes between yourselves. How convenient..... then you get to blame moderators for being biased and re-directing the puck when it does not go your way. Possibly. What would you do then? Engage or ignore what you perceive to be trolling? Please tell us. The fact that you and I disagree on what constitutes trolling or a violation of the rules is irrelevent ----- if you follow the instruction: "Report it, ignore it and do not respond in kind." Forgive me but I do not understand how it is difficult to ignore what you find annoying. Please enlighten me, folks: Why do some of you refuse to ignore what you perceive to be trolling? Why do you engage what you perceive to be trolling? What motivates you to participate in a forum in such a manner? I ask partly because I used to do that and I do not have an answer. It is kind of creepy to witness too. I think people who ignore what they perceive to be trolling and refrain from responding in kind are people who care the most. That describes the majority of active members. You should be thankful that I do not automatically act upon every petty accusation of trolling. REASON: The vast majority of you have all been reported as trolling by your peers. Can you believe it? I disagree with many of those accusations because they are unfair. I tell the accuser to ignore it and move on. You have all benefitted from that policy. Uh.... no. Unfortunately, I do not know how to explain that the word ignore is not synonymous with engage. Quoting a purveyors own words ad nauseum openly in the forum is a direct violation of the instruction to "Report it, ignore it and do not respond in kind." is trolling. Net result is.....................nothing.Your comments are astounding given that you consistently and repeatedly insist upon violating the "...and ignore it." part of that instruction. To what form of logic are you trying to appeal here? Help me. I am trying to understand how you can make the rhetorical leap from engaging trolling demonstrates that ignoring trolling does not work. I think that would be a great but unpopular idea. Logistically, it would work.I would like to see it tried. It can always be scrapped if it proves unworkable.Your plan can not fail. Leastways, any perception of it devolving into an "unworkable" condition would be indistinguishable from an OP in which nobody responds. The forum is already filled with lots of dead-end threads and there is nothing disruptive about that --- save for instances of repetition in topics. Repetition in thread topics is generally an objective violation of the forum rules and guidelines. It requires little discretionary judgement compared to dealing with violations such as trolling. Whereas, starting a thread discussion, deleting select responses and being ignored as a result seems like a very "workable" way of handling moderation that requires very little work on the part of the moderator or on the part of anybody else for that matter. Thank you! I will take the credit for that. Your post did not derail the thread because I hid it right away. You said so yourself, remember? I only opened it up again recently because you questioned my judgement. I figured it would only be fair to make the post visible. Had I left it open, I am convinced that it would have degraded the quality of discussion or encouraged other people to post drive-by flame-bait in the future. That is why I acted. Your fellow member asked a question and you dismissed his question with your rant that we have all heard for at least umpteen times. I think the only difference is that you forgot to summarily dismiss the entire culture as nothing more than a bunch of backwards goat-herders. I reckon the best way to understand my "politically correct" criteria as you like to put it would be for me to walk up to any man from Afghanistan who now lives in Canada. Tell him to his face what you wrote here and guess how things work out for me. Pragmatism trumps politics, I guess.

This should probably be posted in the What do you all want? thread but I want us to be able to pay closer attention to your responses and it may just be easier to keep them focussed in a separate thread. There have been previous discussions like this. Feel free to refer to them if you want. 1) Which sub-forums interest you the most? 2) Which sub-forums interest you the least? 3) Make a request. Which sub-forums would you like to see added to the forums? 4) Would you recommend a different division of sub-forums among the entire forum? I typed the list of headings below for those of you who may find it easier to copy and paste as you edit your list. [b]Canadian Politics[/b] Federal Politics Provincial Politics Local Politics -- [b]International Politics[/b] United States Politics Canada / United States Relations The Rest of the World -- [b]Moral, Religious and Political Philosophy[/b] Moral & Ethical Issues Religion & Politics Political Philosophy -- [b]Off-Topic Discussions[/b] Arts and Culture Health, Science and Technology Business and Economy Travel, Leisure and Sports Media and Broadcasting -- [b]News and Help[/b] Support and Questions News and AnnouncementsMe first.I want to accomodate folks who have a tendency to use the forum as a ticker-tape breaking news announcement site. I am thinking of Opening Posts or replies that are just links to outside sources and break the forum rules because the poster did not write any of his own commentary to accompany it. This old thread comes to mind. It had a lot of good discussion but it was filled with link-only posts which led to an eventual disorganized discussion towards the end. As a moderator, it is disappointing to have to delete a new thread that just has a link when my gut tells me that it could certainly stir a focussed discussion. However, I have to nix it and tell the Opening Poster to re-write it or add some commentary. I have to intervene to prevent it from becoming a habit. I would like to see an extra sub-forum perhaps titled Breaking News, Unaccompanied Links and Outside Sources or some such. Members would be discouraged from discussing the links in any depth. However, members would be encouraged to post rejoinders links as replies. For example: OPENING POST by Charming Anarchist: "Here is a link about the recent false flag event..... I started a thread about it there." REPLY from L'Ol: "Yeah, well, here is a link to the official story for all those who want to know the truth...." This discussion was inspired by:

It is a bit more than that. It is more like: "If the message you want to transmit through an image is more accurately and reliably conveyed by typing it out, then type it out. If you post an image that can be misconstrued without text and you refuse to accompany your image with text to pre-emptively avoid any misunderstanding, then it will likely be tossed by a mod." I will speak to that: I have 100% confidence in MH's discretion in this capacity. For a while now, MH has been recommending certain images be deleted. We discuss them aforehand before acting. Sometimes we agree. Sometimes we do not. That was the past. Now, he has the authority to toss images on his own accord and he reports his actions.

Guys, GH is right. Stop derailing this thread with the CBC distraction, please. There is more than enough for us to deal with here as it is. We do not need to be publishing slews of speculation or hearsay about mountainous mole-hill expeditions through other people's frivolous legal hobbies. If everyone here did that, wouldn't that make the moderating much more difficult?No --- quite the opposite. If everybody ignored what they thought was inappropriate, there would be nothing to moderate. The number of trolling-comments would decline, yes. We are talking about trolling here and what some people perceive to be trolling. If everybody ignores trolling, then the trolling goes away and the moderator never has to use any discretion. If everybody ignores what-they-perceive-to-be-trolling, then whatever it is goes away too and the moderator never has to pass judgement on whether the action is trolling or just a difference in perception. Not me. However, if you derail a thread by making a rude, foul, obnoxious and insulting reference to the whatever for the umpteenth time then yeah, you run the risk of getting suspended for having derailed a thread. For example, this is the post in question. I opened it up again.

Wow! I love this idea of yours! I can support that. What is happening, Argus?!? Soon people will think there is moderator bias in your favor! That is the fault of your browser. I will take a wild guess and say that you are using a Microsoft product to render this forum. Internet Explorer notoriously does not support PNG graphics. The Invision software has had PNG support for some time now. Here is an old PNG image that still appears fine: I bet $10 that reality is more accurately described thusly: A small minority of posters are clamoring for public floggings to continue until morale improves. Far be it from me to read the minds of other folks but I bet $100 that there are a lot MORE posters who appreciate that most public humiliations are unwittingly self-imposed and they appreciate private moderator action in this regard. Everybody is given multiple chances to continue to have full unfettered posting privileges if only they STOP violating the forum rules in the future. Given that my very first post in this thread discussion addressed his exact concern, I interpret Guyser's post as one more dramatic demonstration of what I routinely observe here in the forum: Some people do not pay attention or choose to purposely ignore what other people write and consequently they misrepresent what other people write.

What other sites?Answered here.

What other sites?I post intermittently on Greg's blog ThePolitic.com where you can get a taste of my philosophy. Try to pidgeon-hole me with a label if you can. I have trouble doing so beyond calling myself an anarcho-capitalist counter-Roman Catholic communo-primitivist with patriarchal tendencies who believes "money" is the root of all evil. If you want to understand more about my opinions, send me a PM and ask. You can read some of the nonsense I wrote here in the forum in days of yore before I started facilitating the moderation. However, I disagree with some of what I wrote in the past. Nowadays, I defend my philosophy differently from how I did before. That is largely thanks to you guys through your discussions directly with me long ago and with your discussions now amongst yourselves. I am grateful to many of you for having helped me shake off illusions I once held and strengthening some of my articles of faith. Enough about me. It does none of you any good to infer political bias on my part because nearly 99% of what you all write disagrees with my own personal philosophy. If you are a righty, then you will think I am a lefty. If you are a lefty, then you will likely think I am a righty. I do not see an interesting difference between those labels nor between the members of their common camps. Get over it and focus on your own posting style in the forum.

Folks, Stop the thread drift. Anybody who carries on with off-topic (as decided by moderator discretion) discussion will be suspended. I am locking this thread temporarily so that we can all be sure that everybody has had a chance to take heed and contemplate how they wish to continue participating in this thread after it is re-opened in the future. Ch. A.