I banned him just a couple of days after being alerted to his behaviour and giving him a warning, so I don't think that's a fair assessment.

I was hoping to quietly ignore that one. In all seriousness though, it's a fair and honest opinion. I don't agree as I appreciated the option of feedback when I was a member at old PF even though I understand that feedback discussions can often be counter-productive.

Thanatos Sand, for example, was banned despite holding many views that I'm pretty sure most (if not all) of the mods found extremely congenial to their own. — Erik

Ironically, Thanatos was banned after a complaint about him by a member who afterwards left in protest at our moderation. Go figure. TGW was banned for refusing moderation (see above). He is a loss, but the fact that accepting to abide by the site guidelines is a prerequisite for being a member here should be a no-brainer. Also, some of our most vociferous complainants are among our least-moderated members. There may be legitimate grievances, of course, but sometimes there is a lack of nuance in complaints that makes them difficult to address.

Okay, but what should I it them with? — Sapientia

But me no buts. It me no its >>> It them with your but. :P

Fair enough, although to achieve balance and give members a chance to complain a bit more, I propose a new poll, the Poll of Standard Moderation Standards Poll as follows:

The moderation on this site is:

1) Preposterous
2) Preposterous
3) Preposterous

Maybe this one needs to go in the Philosophy of Science category. :B

Don't want to be the spoilsport but Buffy the vampire slayer is slightly off-topic. Maybe take it to the Shout box?

Hmm...

Is that an instruction? :)

Maybe. Although I was hoping "Love Story" would be showing next.



As long as it's not teachers, I'm good with it.

From "The Hunger Games" to "Analyze This". As long as everyone's happy...

Fair criticism and solid advice.

Thank you, Michael.

Another question that it suggests would be: "Which fellow participant should we eat next?" — Pierre-Normand

Let the TPF Hunger Games begin!

I didn't agree with @SophistiCat and then "run off" and make a poll, but, of course, I didn't tell him to "beat" it either. He's entitled to complain and you're entitled to disagree. Other mods are also free to agree or disagree with either side. It's disappointing that you feel unfairly treated but there is no evidence you were in my view.

@Postmodern Beatnik helped us out for a while and was great. I didn't get to know Incision that well. I'll take your word for it though.

The only certain result of whatever approach we take to this is that someone will hate it. We are listening though.

8-)

(I don't want this to be confrontational by the way. The main point is for us to listen to you.)

There are only a few moderators and we don't all share the same view.

An odd comment. This is the most strictly moderated popular philosophy forum out there. Anyway, I've started a discussion on general moderation standards. Feel free to make your case.

We're growing not dying and have been doing a good job of that since the start. In any case, this is largely irrelevant to your complaint. And as I said in another discussion, our job is not to please any one individual but the community as a whole. There will always be complaints. We take them on board in the larger context.

If you read the discussion just before yours, you'll see we've also been accused of being too strict in our standards for the science category and therefore suppressing free debate on scientific topics. As well as that, the mod team are largely the same as the previous forum and the moderation standards for science haven't been changed in any explicit way. So, nothing happened except we maybe need to keep a closer eye on things there, so fair criticism, but maybe @Hachem and others would like to defend themselves against the charge of idiocy/crackpottery.

Well, I don't think this is how it works with transgender people.

They "feel" like they should be something else, but next week those emotions could change. — Lone Wolf

And the whole analogy with feeling too fat etc. seems like naive folk psychology. If you listen to transgender people talk, it's not a matter of fleeting emotion or whim but, for example, being stuck in the wrong body for years on end.

Military technology has moved on a bit since muskets.

I'm afraid I'm going to have to institute strict punishment for anyone who posts another of these wonderful limericks, which are much better than regular jokes and god only knows why T Clark doesn't like them but...Where was I going with this?

Hopefully, @Michael's solution will work. In any case, I would tend to take you at your word unless I had reason to believe otherwise.

Just click on someone's name and then press "Send a message".

Haha, no, not mate as in partner, mate as in friend. Sorry, it's my Australianess coming through, where all friends are referred to as mate — StreetlightX

I picked that one up from a year in Aus and still use it. I grew up in a town where we call everyone "boy"* (pronounced "by" in the local accent).

*(Or "girl", and yes, those are the only two choices...)

Yes, people get pissed at us when we delete their OPs. We know. But the onus is on you to make an OP that is fit for purpose. It's unrealistic to expect extra personal attention from volunteers who have lives outside TPF. It has nothing to do with arrogance. It has to do with the nature of the work. Our job is to maintain quality for the community as a whole not to try to please every individual. Anyhow, of course you can try again but if you are going to revise your OP, it would make sense to PM it to a mod to check before posting it as you may get annoyed if it's again deleted.

That was sarcasm, Mike.

+None of the mods mentioned anything about academic qualifications being necessary for writing any OP.

Perhaps it will fall like a lead balloon, especially now, but I thought this Forum was to promote the free exchange of ideas. — MikeL

It would likely have caused a lot of confusion. I agree with @StreetlightX's suggestion. And I would add maybe try to be a little less ambitious. Pick a specific problem with scientific orthodoxy and pick a hole in it. You're trying to present too many unusual or obscure ideas together here in my view and it really does come across as bizarre as @Michael said. That shouldn't be taken as an insult but honest criticism.

Au contraire, I meant replying to me should not be a priority. Yet you persist in repeating the same mistake!

Serves you right for getting your priorities wrong. :)

Cheque's in the post. ;)

Can moderators or administrators see our PMs? — Agustino

Haha, not as far as I know. Thanks for the idea though. I'm pretty sure it's impossible not to mention unethical.

You can repost it here if you like as long as it is exactly as it was when removed. (We also have a version).

(Apart from the 10 minute wedding prep. I bet you 50 bucks that's hyperbole).

What makes you believe I really believe it was unbelievable, kind lady? I think we really need to take this step by step.

That was the only part I believed. :D