It could have been clearer, so I made it so. Why is it such a big deal for you? It's only a title, and your original title was merely transferred to the content of your opening post. Be thankful that your discussion wasn't deleted for low quality, as was under consideration. The only reason it wasn't was because by that time there were some quality replies that we didn't want to delete.

See the Site Guidelines on starting a new discussion.

Why is it such a big deal for you? — Sapientia

It's not that big a deal but I tend to think that a catchy title (as long as it is relevant and not misleading) is likely to pull in more interest.

That's a fair point. It's also fair to say you need to put a bit more effort into your OPs. Everyone would benefit from that including you. @Sapientia is right to point out it was nearly deleted.

I accept that the actual post was too short, yes.

(Y)

In my opinion I would rather have a post of mine deleted than changed. If you don't like what I write, delete me or ban me. But don't change my words. The original title was perfectly clear and refers to a quote of Einstein. And the moderators of this site are clearly no Einsteins.

In my opinion I would rather have a post of mine deleted than changed. If you don't like what I write, delete me or ban me. But don't change my words. — fishfry

No. You don't get special treatment, and if that's what you're after, then insulting the moderators is not the best tactic.

And the moderators of this site are clearly no Einsteins. — fishfry

Is anyone (except Einstein)?

insulting the moderators is not the best tactic. — Sapientia

Maybe he has "fish to fry". They would go well with those .. ahem ... chips on his shoulder!

*only joking* :)

:D

Anyway, since I think it's such a minor issue, and I agree with Baden that you made a fair point in reply, I'll change your title back to the original. (I also like that you've taken it on the chin and have a sense of humour, so brownie points for that).

Cool! :)

No. You don't get special treatment, and if that's what you're after, then insulting the moderators is not the best tactic. — Sapientia

I expressed an opinion. I have no idea what you're talking about. I'm always up for a little friendly squabble but I can't understand your point enough to disagree with it.

I expressed an opinion. I have no idea what you're talking about. I'm always up for a little friendly squabble but I can't understand your point enough to disagree with it. — fishfry

Your first sentence expressed a preference. The following sentences in the quote were in the form of an instruction. I denied the instruction, then explained why. What's not to understand? Perhaps the following will help:

If you don't like what I write, then delete what I write or ban me. But don't change my words.

That's an instruction.

If you don't like what I write, then I'd rather you delete what I write or ban me, instead of changing my words.

That's stating a preference.

If you don't like what I write, then I think you should delete what I write or ban me, instead of changing my words.

That's an opinion.

If you don't like what I write, then can you please just delete what I write or ban me, rather than change my words?

That's a polite request.

And the moderators of this site are clearly no Einsteins.

That's an insult.

If you don't like what I write, then delete what I write or ban me. But don't change my words.

That's an instruction. — Sapientia

That's a preference. "If you don't like me, ban me." That expresses my preference. If you're deliberately misunderstanding that in order to stir up trouble, knock yourself out. If you have reading comprehension issues I'll try to use simpler grammatical constructions.

And the moderators of this site are clearly no Einsteins.

That's an insult. — Sapientia

It's a joke. And a commentary on my opinion of their actions in this instance.

Look I'd love to fight with you but you need much better material.

That's a preference. "If you don't like me, ban me." That expresses my preference. If you're deliberately misunderstanding that in order to stir up trouble, knock yourself out. If you have reading comprehension issues I'll try to use simpler grammatical constructions. — fishfry

I'm not going to teach you grammar, but I would advise you to teach yourself, since you've demonstrated that you don't know how preferences should be expressed, or the difference between what a preference should look like and what an instruction should look like.

His family I guess. But I suppose you could still correctly say of a dull family member of Einstein, "He's no Einstein" (which would probably confuse him for obvious reasons).

In attempting to insult our collective intelligence you ironically made a basic error of reasoning by engaging in a hasty generalization. Clearly the only demonstrably dumb mod here is @Sapientia.

*Pulls knife out from between Sapientia's shoulder blades*

Sorry mate, had to happen. Poland is mine. >:)

Jokes aside, @Sapientia is right on the semantics, and no-one took the apparent insult personally, but it's just common sense not to upbraid someone (mod or not) and ask for a favour in the same breath.

No. You don't get special treatment, and if that's what you're after, then insulting the moderators is not the best tactic. — Sapientia

So, how we treat you affects your decisions about our posts? It's not the quality of the posts themselves. It's your personal feelings. Even if that's true, you shouldn't admit it. It makes you look petty and vindictive. It's about reason - not your pride.

Even if that's true... — T Clark

It's not.

My remarks might have given the wrong impression to some, so I'll clarify. The important part was the part where I said that you don't get special treatment. The latter part consisted in a common sense criticism of the way in which special treatment was sought, but didn't really need to said, and, in hindsight, perhaps would have been better left unsaid. But what's done is done.

That doesn't mean that I'm not open to reconsideration. In this case, after reconsideration, and in light of the feedback received, I took the decision to reverse the action I took. That's not something I'll do at the drop of a hat, but if I think it's the right thing to do, I'll do it.

It's not — Sapientia

As I've said before, I value the role of the moderators. In general, it works well on this forum. I do have this image in my mind of mother ducks herding their ducklings into the water and out into the pond, which may or may not be what you have in mind.

I do have a recommendation. Say whatever you want in your own posts, but when you are acting as moderators and if you want your authority to be respected, you should maintain more professional detachment. You have authority but you also have a responsibility to be even-handed and appear, let's see...., moderate. You should also make sure that you don't mix moderation and argumentation in the same post. It would make sense, if you are heavily involved in a discussion or with a poster, that a different moderator make the final decision on closing a thread or banning a poster. One more thing specifically relevant to this thread - unilaterally changing the name of a thread that is not offensive or misleading is particularly petty. I spends your credibility capital when you should save it for when you really need it.

The important part was the part where I said that you don't get special treatment. The latter part consisted in a common sense criticism of the way in which special treatment was sought, but didn't really need to said — Sapientia

(Y)

You have authority but you also have a responsibility to be even-handed and appear, let's see...., moderate. — T Clark

(Y)

No one should expect special treatment including us. In other words, no one has to be any nicer to us than to any other poster. It's not going to make a difference re moderation.

Your pugnacity is immoderate. I always love to have a chance to use "pugnacity."

Ok, I'll give you the last word on that.

I do have this image in my mind of mother ducks herding their ducklings into the water and out into the pond, which may or may not be what you have in mind. — T Clark

That image ^^^^^^^^^ is of ME and is the exact reason why I would never make a good moderator. ;)

Aw :) I think you'd be good.

I've seen the job and I have no desire to take on that key of responsibility. 8-)

Fair enough. (Y)

I've seen the job and I have no desire to take on that key of responsibility. 8-) — ArguingWAristotleTiff

When I raise concerns about the moderators, I try hard to be friendly because, lord knows, I don't want the job and I know they are needed.

Makes me think of an old talk song by U. Utah Phillips. "Moose Turd Pie." It takes place among railroad workers. There is no cook assigned, so they make the person who complains most about the cooking do it. No one likes to cook. The person stuck with the job decides to do what he can to pass it off to someone else, so he goes out in the forest and finds moose manure and bakes it in a pie. Here's the final part, which expresses my feelings about moderation:

Well, this big guy come into the mess car, I mean, he's about 5 foot forty, and he sets himself down like a fool on a stool, picked up a fork and took a big bite of that moose turd pie. Well he threw down his fork and he let out a bellow, "My God, that's moose turd pie!"

"It's good though."