Pujo

He does have a bit of a point there, Patters. But it wouldn't take much to change that behavior. Could you commit to being more consistent with how you moderate? You've definately been more touchy on certain subjects than others, even when the objective level of offense is about the same.

Patters

I don't understand your point, and raised the issue in this thread:

Are people like the Pope in a special category?

I think you did not respond because you didn't have a good response, and not Harry Boy backs you on this one.

QuiGon

Pot, kettle, black. And while I don't mind (and don't disagree with) being called "unfriendly", I think that it is hypocritical to give Patters a free pass for calling the Pope a Nazi.

See, here's one of our problems. I think an attack on an entire religion or group of people is much more reprehensible than name-calling to an individual. Someone can call me whatever name they want and it just rolls off my shoulder and gets little or no attention. But if someone insults an entire religion, then I consider that a much more grievous offense. However, it seems in this forum, insulting religion is a perfectly acceptable behavior.

The message is quite clear: It's OK to call the Pope a Nazi but just don't call Patters a scumbag. Sorry, but I consider the former infinitely more insulting than the latter.

Furthermore, there has been some extreme hypocrisy... insulting religion in the most heinous way imaginable is perfectly OK... but once I dared to insult the homosexual lobby and I got rebuked with a stern warning that(paraphrasing) "This behavior will not be tolerated because some members here may be homosexual and they should not feel persecuted or insulted in this forum..."

I don't think such a thing would be terribly long lasting by either of us. My personal opinion is that moderators shouldn't be allowed to post on contentious topics because, ideally, a moderator should be above the fray.

Real World

Not if it's art, or "thought provoking".

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


"The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him."
Leo Tolstoy, 1897

Pujo

The only thing I agree with you on is that Patters shouldn't censor anti-homosexual posts any more than he would censor anti-Catholic posts. Talking about world issues - whether homosexuality or the pope's character - is what this forum's here for. Directly attacking each other, however, is clearly against the rules.

Patters is very entitled to his opinion that the Pope is a nazi, and people like Fogbuster are entitled to their opinion that homosexual behavior should be a crime.

Real World

For the record, I don't agree with either!

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


"The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him."
Leo Tolstoy, 1897

Patters

I did screw up once with QuiGon and I apologized. As moderator I rarely censor, but can show examples where I've closed anti-Christian threads as well as threads that seemed to stereotype people of color. QuiGon's posts have been deleted because he posts a string of insults, and like I said, he can contact FTW if he thinks his post should be restored.

Now there are some issues, like gay rights and the war in Iraq, that I'm more vocal on, but I am sure, with the exception of that one mistake, you will not find examples of me using my moderator rights to censor discussion.

This link will show you most of threads that I have closed or issued warnings in.

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-...searchid=21134

As far as deleting posts, which I seldom do, QuiGon is the only one who has objected, but for some reason he won't take his case to FTW.

QuiGon

Gee, either that or because I was in Australia for most of January and made something like 5 posts to this forum the entire time I was down there and didn't exactly follow every single thread

I remember making a few remarks here about how wonderful it was to be in an English speaking country for a change and how pleasant a surprise it was to see billboards wishing me a Merry Christmas... so I am sorry if it disappoints you that I really wasn't following the goings-on in this forum

Pujo

I don't agree with either, either, but I wouldn't be here if everyone thought like me.

Pujo

Thanks, Patters. Seems like a closed issue for now. Should there be either any unnecessary censorship, or personal attacks directed at people in this forum, we'll deal with it as it happens.

As it stands, Ian has shown that people who break rules eventually get tossed out. None of us want that.