1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThefourBs. Show ThefourBs's posts

    Re: Post your moderator related comments here

    In response to Bill-806's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThefourBs' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to S5's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThefourBs' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BosoxJoe5's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to RigatoniT's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I will do it for free - just call me Mod3

    [/QUOTE]

    No, you have to identify yourself. You can be RigaMod. 

     

    [/QUOTE]

    How about RigaModis

    [/QUOTE]

    LOL

    Good one.

    Frankly, if the mods are worried that they'll take some abuse if they reveal who they are, I don't see that they'd take more than they already have.

    The whole concept has been overthought,

    ...as usual.

    As for the "If you think you can do better, do it yourself" comment, that "choice" was never really given to anyone else but to the folks that either wrote to Dottie, or some other BDC admin, or is buddies with someone who did.

    If the job is turning out to be that tough, it's because the mods are making it tough on themselves.

    It ain't that complicated...

     

    [/QUOTE]

    You may very well be right when you say that this job wouldn't be any tougher if they identified themselves, but it certainly wouldn't be any easier.  They'd still have a few factions sniping at them from the sidelines, the difference is that the people doing the sniping would have more ammunition and their target would be bigger.  

    To the best of my very limited knowledge no limit has been set on the number of moderators we can have, so if someone wants to be a 3rd possibly they could have their wish if they contacted one of the current mods and indicated an interest.  But be careful what you wish for here - you could wind up with Bill and his Dad.  They've already expressed an interest.  

    The benefits are obvious.  No pay and all the abuse and second-guessing you can handle!  
    [object HTMLDivElement]

    [/QUOTE]

    With all due respect, I think you and J-Bay know a lot about how this was set up.

    It's just a guess on my part, but I think it was discussed at length in the chat you all participate in.

    Which is fine, but the whole cloak and dagger stuff is just silly.


    No thanks to working with the current mod(s).

    One thinks it's a no-show job and the other makes things way harder than they should be.

    If the unthinkable happens and Bill is a mod, I'll find another forum to participate in.

    [/QUOTE]Hold on there SON......  If DAD & BILL-806 become MOD's 3 & 4 you will see that we will be the most TRANSPARENT evaaa  !!!


    [/QUOTE]


    Not even BDC is that dumb.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from S5. Show S5's posts

    Re: Post your moderator related comments here

    In response to ThefourBs' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    If the unthinkable happens and Bill is a mod, I'll find another forum to participate in.

    [/QUOTE]

    You'll have a lot of company there.  It'll be just Bill and his two-woman posse left here.


    [object HTMLDivElement]

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedSoxKimmi. Show RedSoxKimmi's posts

    Re: Post your moderator related comments here

    In response to S5's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    It's very well moderated and civil because the TOS are very simple "No bashing or general negativity will be allowed", and the mod enforces it.  I find that to be a bit restricting in that it prevents the normal good-natured back and forth that can occur, but at the same time it avoids the slippery slope of trying to decide what's good-natured and what's mean-spirited.  

    [/QUOTE]


    That is what my main concern has been all along.  When things are left to the discretion of the mods, personal bias becomes a factor.  You can't deny that.

    You either have a rule and enforce it the same for everyone, or you don't have the rule.  Why are some people allowed to call others names and get away with it, and other posters aren't?  Why are some posters allowed to flame with not so much as a warning, and others aren't?

    Don't get me wrong.  I am not advocating for stricter moderation or for anyone to be banned.  I am just looking for some consistency in moderating, which I have not seen yet.

     

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedSoxKimmi. Show RedSoxKimmi's posts

    Re: Post your moderator related comments here

    As for the "If you think you can do better, do it yourself" comment, that "choice" was never really given to anyone else but to the folks that either wrote to Dottie, or some other BDC admin, or is buddies with someone who did.

    With all due respect, I think you and J-Bay know a lot about how this was set up.

    It's just a guess on my part, but I think it was discussed at length in the chat you all participate in.

     

    You are on a roll 4Bs. 

     

     

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from S5. Show S5's posts

    Re: Post your moderator related comments here

    In response to RedSoxKimmi's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    As for the "If you think you can do better, do it yourself" comment, that "choice" was never really given to anyone else but to the folks that either wrote to Dottie, or some other BDC admin, or is buddies with someone who did.

    With all due respect, I think you and J-Bay know a lot about how this was set up.

    It's just a guess on my part, but I think it was discussed at length in the chat you all participate in.

     

    You are on a roll 4Bs. 

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Why would that be?  Just because I don't engage in this witch-hunt and keep stating the obvious - that they're doing a good job?  

    Believe what you need to.  I'm good with it.  


    [object HTMLDivElement]

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThefourBs. Show ThefourBs's posts

    Re: Post your moderator related comments here

    In response to S5's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to RedSoxKimmi's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    As for the "If you think you can do better, do it yourself" comment, that "choice" was never really given to anyone else but to the folks that either wrote to Dottie, or some other BDC admin, or is buddies with someone who did.

    With all due respect, I think you and J-Bay know a lot about how this was set up.

    It's just a guess on my part, but I think it was discussed at length in the chat you all participate in.

     

    You are on a roll 4Bs. 

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Why would that be?  Just because I don't engage in this witch-hunt and keep stating the obvious - that they're doing a good job?  

    Believe what you need to.  I'm good with it.  


    [object HTMLDivElement]

    [/QUOTE]

    It's an accumulation of reasons.
    At least you didn't insult me by flat out denying it.

    I do appreciate that.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThefourBs. Show ThefourBs's posts

    Re: Post your moderator related comments here

    In response to RedSoxKimmi's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to S5's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    It's very well moderated and civil because the TOS are very simple "No bashing or general negativity will be allowed", and the mod enforces it.  I find that to be a bit restricting in that it prevents the normal good-natured back and forth that can occur, but at the same time it avoids the slippery slope of trying to decide what's good-natured and what's mean-spirited.  

    [/QUOTE]


    That is what my main concern has been all along.  When things are left to the discretion of the mods, personal bias becomes a factor.  You can't deny that.

    You either have a rule and enforce it the same for everyone, or you don't have the rule.  Why are some people allowed to call others names and get away with it, and other posters aren't?  Why are some posters allowed to flame with not so much as a warning, and others aren't?

    Don't get me wrong.  I am not advocating for stricter moderation or for anyone to be banned.  I am just looking for some consistency in moderating, which I have not seen yet.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    I don't think one can do the job without a little subjectivity.

    There's nothing wrong with saying "you're an idiot", if that's what you think of someone's post.

    I get and dish out that particular compliment from my friends and co-workers all the time.

    I don't think it's that tough to tell when someone goes over the line and a mod needs to step in.

    But, it is subjective.

    I don't think "one size fits all" rules or "democratic" approach works very well in forums.

    The tough part would be letting a member you don't like have as much free rein as someone you do like.

    But, it still isn't rocket science.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from slasher9. Show slasher9's posts

    Re: Post your moderator related comments here

    In response to RedSoxKimmi's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to S5's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    It's very well moderated and civil because the TOS are very simple "No bashing or general negativity will be allowed", and the mod enforces it.  I find that to be a bit restricting in that it prevents the normal good-natured back and forth that can occur, but at the same time it avoids the slippery slope of trying to decide what's good-natured and what's mean-spirited.  

    [/QUOTE]


    That is what my main concern has been all along.  When things are left to the discretion of the mods, personal bias becomes a factor.  You can't deny that.

    You either have a rule and enforce it the same for everyone, or you don't have the rule.  Why are some people allowed to call others names and get away with it, and other posters aren't?  Why are some posters allowed to flame with not so much as a warning, and others aren't?

    Don't get me wrong.  I am not advocating for stricter moderation or for anyone to be banned.  I am just looking for some consistency in moderating, which I have not seen yet.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    RSK...the whole point of having mods is so that they can enforce policy at their discretion.  not everything is black and white.  not on any forum i am on.  the general rule of thumb on ALL forums is...if you act like a Richard and intentional try and ruin the forum you get punished.

    as for name calling......you all voted in another thread 2 months ago to have the forum go back to the wild west days.  can't have it both ways.....

    other names i have posted under:  none

     

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Mod2. Show Mod2's posts

    Re: Post your moderator related comments here

    In response to RedSoxKimmi's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to S5's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    It's very well moderated and civil because the TOS are very simple "No bashing or general negativity will be allowed", and the mod enforces it.  I find that to be a bit restricting in that it prevents the normal good-natured back and forth that can occur, but at the same time it avoids the slippery slope of trying to decide what's good-natured and what's mean-spirited.  

    [/QUOTE]


    That is what my main concern has been all along.  When things are left to the discretion of the mods, personal bias becomes a factor.  You can't deny that.

    You either have a rule and enforce it the same for everyone, or you don't have the rule.  Why are some people allowed to call others names and get away with it, and other posters aren't?  Why are some posters allowed to flame with not so much as a warning, and others aren't?

    Don't get me wrong.  I am not advocating for stricter moderation or for anyone to be banned.  I am just looking for some consistency in moderating, which I have not seen yet.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Kimmi, with all due respect, this is a naive opinion. Moderation is not black and white job. Someone has to decide which posts are over the top and need to be blocked; someone needs to decide which posters are more offensive than others and need correction. No law here (or in society either-that is why we have judges to differentiate) covers all possibilities unless you are a digital being. Much of it is subjective. There is no way to eliminate bias completely. I believe that what you mean is that bias is not OK if it does not align with your own personal bias. Hence, your "hypocrite" and "biased" accusations. Despite your dissatisfaction I will keep doing the best I can here, as will Mod 1 I am sure. You will never be satisfied with it, and I accept that.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedSoxKimmi. Show RedSoxKimmi's posts

    Re: Post your moderator related comments here

    In response to slasher9's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    RSK...the whole point of having mods is so that they can enforce policy at their discretion.  not everything is black and white.  not on any forum i am on.  the general rule of thumb on ALL forums is...if you act like a Richard and intentional try and ruin the forum you get punished.

    as for name calling......you all voted in another thread 2 months ago to have the forum go back to the wild west days.  can't have it both ways.....

    other names i have posted under:  none

    [/QUOTE]


    Slash, as I stated above, I am not advocating for stricter moderation.  I'm fine with the leniency.  I'm just asking for consistency.

    I agree, things may not always be black or white.  But,  posters that are liked are never given so much as a warning.  Posters that are disliked have a lot less rope given to them.

    Most people aren't seeing a problem with this because they don't like the posters that are being targeted.

     

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedSoxKimmi. Show RedSoxKimmi's posts

    Re: Post your moderator related comments here

    In response to Mod2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     


    Kimmi, with all due respect, this is a naive opinion. Moderation is not black and white job. Someone has to decide which posts are over the top and need to be blocked; someone needs to decide which posters are more offensive than others and need correction. No law here (or in society either-that is why we have judges to differentiate) covers all possibilities unless you are a digital being. Much of it is subjective. There is no way to eliminate bias completely. I believe that what you mean is that bias is not OK if it does not align with your own personal bias. Hence, your "hypocrite" and "biased" accusations. Despite your dissatisfaction I will keep doing the best I can here, as will Mod 1 I am sure. You will never be satisfied with it, and I accept that.

    [/QUOTE]


    As I said when I first brought up my concern about bias, I have no dog in this fight.  I am not trying to get anyone banned.

    I am going to use Zac as an example, because he is a dear friend and he knows I am not trying to call him out.  Zac flames all the time.  He admits it.  In fact, he takes great pleasure in inciting Sox fans, and has admitted to that as well.  He has a history of doing this.  He has been banned by BDC too many times to count.  He has not so much as been warned one time.   I like Zac, so your favorable bias towards him does not go against my personal bias.

    So my question is, what's the difference between Zac and Babe?   The only difference I see is that you like Zac and you don't like Babe.  There are other similar examples.

     

    Anyway, I'm done here.   Carry on.

     

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedSoxKimmi. Show RedSoxKimmi's posts

    Re: Post your moderator related comments here

    In response to RigatoniT's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I have not really understood anything kimmie has said on the Mod threads, not any of it... I jsut did not say anything because I did not want her to think I  had something against her... kimmie has always been  decent poster

    [/QUOTE]


    No worries Rig.  It's all good.   Thanks, and I'll get back to talking baseball.  

     

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: Post your moderator related comments here

    In response to RedSoxKimmi's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I am going to use Zac as an example, because he is a dear friend and he knows I am not trying to call him out.  Zac flames all the time.  He admits it.  In fact, he takes great pleasure in inciting Sox fans, and has admitted to that as well.  He has a history of doing this.  He has been banned by BDC too many times to count.  He has not so much as been warned one time.   I like Zac, so your favorable bias towards him does not go against my personal bias.

    So my question is, what's the difference between Zac and Babe?   The only difference I see is that you like Zac and you don't like Babe.  There are other similar examples.

    [/QUOTE]

    Personally I do see a pretty big difference between Zac and Babe.  Zac, who I am on friendly terms with like yourself, certainly likes to take some pokes at the Red Sox and their fans.  But I don't think he crosses the line into trolling like Babe has.  Babe would go on the game threads and say things just to irritate, like 'Go Cards!' if that's who we were playing.  He would also get into fights with a lot of Sox fans here and call them names, like 'moonpie'.  That's trolling. 

     

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Flapjack07. Show Flapjack07's posts

    Re: Post your moderator related comments here

    Mod(1) is dead. Mod(1) remains dead. And we have killed him. Yet his shadow still looms.

    -Flapzsche

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from slasher9. Show slasher9's posts

    Re: Post your moderator related comments here

    In response to RedSoxKimmi's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to slasher9's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    RSK...the whole point of having mods is so that they can enforce policy at their discretion.  not everything is black and white.  not on any forum i am on.  the general rule of thumb on ALL forums is...if you act like a Richard and intentional try and ruin the forum you get punished.

    as for name calling......you all voted in another thread 2 months ago to have the forum go back to the wild west days.  can't have it both ways.....

    other names i have posted under:  none

    [/QUOTE]


    Slash, as I stated above, I am not advocating for stricter moderation.  I'm fine with the leniency.  I'm just asking for consistency.

    I agree, things may not always be black or white.  But,  posters that are liked are never given so much as a warning.  Posters that are disliked have a lot less rope given to them.

    Most people aren't seeing a problem with this because they don't like the posters that are being targeted.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    RSK...this is a good discussion.

    i take it from your post after this one that you think babe was the one targeted.  and used zac as a comparison.

    there is no hiding the fact that i have had "heated" discussions with both of them and that there is no love lost between us.  but even i can see a HUGE difference between the 2.  as much as i cannot stand zac sometimes (ok, most times) IMO he has not crossed the line often enough to warrant permanent banning.  Babe OTOH crossed that line daily.  Zac make a baseball point and then tweaks the Sox.  Babe only tweaks the sox.  Zac is here to sometimes talk baseball and sometimes incite.  Babe was here to ONLY incite.

    obviously i do not agree with you that these 2 are the same.

    do you have any other examples of mod1 or mod2 acting particularily "biased"?

    other names i have posted under:  none

     

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThefourBs. Show ThefourBs's posts

    Re: Post your moderator related comments here

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to RedSoxKimmi's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I am going to use Zac as an example, because he is a dear friend and he knows I am not trying to call him out.  Zac flames all the time.  He admits it.  In fact, he takes great pleasure in inciting Sox fans, and has admitted to that as well.  He has a history of doing this.  He has been banned by BDC too many times to count.  He has not so much as been warned one time.   I like Zac, so your favorable bias towards him does not go against my personal bias.

    So my question is, what's the difference between Zac and Babe?   The only difference I see is that you like Zac and you don't like Babe.  There are other similar examples.

    [/QUOTE]

    Personally I do see a pretty big difference between Zac and Babe.  Zac, who I am on friendly terms with like yourself, certainly likes to take some pokes at the Red Sox and their fans.  But I don't think he crosses the line into trolling like Babe has.  Babe would go on the game threads and say things just to irritate, like 'Go Cards!' if that's who we were playing.  He would also get into fights with a lot of Sox fans here and call them names, like 'moonpie'.  That's trolling. 

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Zac isn't exactly above that sort of thing.

    Just tell him Jeter plays SS like Ted Williams statue...

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from kimsaysthis. Show kimsaysthis's posts

    Re: Post your moderator related comments here

    In response to RedSoxKimmi's comment:





    In response to Mod2's comment:


     


    Kimmi, with all due respect, this is a naive opinion. Moderation is not black and white job. Someone has to decide which posts are over the top and need to be blocked; someone needs to decide which posters are more offensive than others and need correction. No law here (or in society either-that is why we have judges to differentiate) covers all possibilities unless you are a digital being. Much of it is subjective. There is no way to eliminate bias completely. I believe that what you mean is that bias is not OK if it does not align with your own personal bias. Hence, your "hypocrite" and "biased" accusations. Despite your dissatisfaction I will keep doing the best I can here, as will Mod 1 I am sure. You will never be satisfied with it, and I accept that.


     


    As I said when I first brought up my concern about bias, I have no dog in this fight.  I am not trying to get anyone banned


    I am going to use Zac as an example, because he is a dear friend and he knows I am not trying to call him out.  Zac flames all the time.  He admits it.  In fact, he takes great pleasure in inciting Sox fans, and has admitted to that as well.  He has a history of doing this.  He has been banned by BDC too many times to count.  He has not so much as been warned one time.   I like Zac, so your favorable bias towards him does not go against my personal bias.


    So my question is, what's the difference between Zac and Babe?   The only difference I see is that you like Zac and you don't like Babe.  There are other similar examples.


     


    Anyway, I'm done here.   Carry on


    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




    Kimmie, I've never been more impressed with a poster. You hit the nail on the head. Someone who constantly flies under the radar because of his friends here is a PERFECT example of what you're trying to say. I understand you're friends, but it totally portrays the bias that goes on depending on who the mods are here. They even talk about how many times a poster has been banned as a way of judging their behavior and how much tolerance they have. Here's a friend of theirs banned 30+ times, and a rival team's fan to boot, who likes to go after posters who say anything positive about the Sox or anything negative about the Yankees. And he's never even in the conversation.


     


    I think, if the mods aren't going to reveal themselves, then at least we should know how many of them are on the side board created and specifically, which of the mods are there. At least we would know if the decisions about posters are all coming from the same place. (Although I think we probably already know.)


    A secret "we don't talk about fight club" alliance would be the worst thing to happen to this board. No offense S5, but you weren't willing to talk about the proverbial "fight club" and that pretty much says it all.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from S5. Show S5's posts

    Re: Post your moderator related comments here

    ---Deleted & moved ----


    Any owners who sign previously suspended PED abusers to a big $$ contract are as guilty of perpetuating the PED problem as are the players.


    And I have never posted here under any other names.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from BosoxJoe5. Show BosoxJoe5's posts

    Re: Post your moderator related comments here

    Looks like Bill has been given a little much "freedom" with his political one liners.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Mod2. Show Mod2's posts

    Re: Post your moderator related comments here

    Apparently, according to Adrienne, it is the contract mods who have been blocking some pretty innocent posts. She said she will handle it, but would like examples of posts that have been inappropriately blocked. Please send me (here) the link to the page where any posts of yours  have been blocked inappropriately and I will forward it to her. Thanks.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from joepatsfan111111. Show joepatsfan111111's posts

    Re: Post your moderator related comments here

    Here's a comment..

    Why does this board get TWO mods that actually do things around here while the Patriots board is pretty much in shreds with not one mod and every thread turns into a blood bath.....? Cmon BDC

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Mod2. Show Mod2's posts

    Re: Post your moderator related comments here

    In response to joepatsfan111111's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Here's a comment..

    Why does this board get TWO mods that actually do things around here while the Patriots board is pretty much in shreds with not one mod and every thread turns into a blood bath.....? Cmon BDC

    [/QUOTE]


    Why not petition the management to have mods on your forum too. You will need some volunteers. But the management has indicated a willingness to have on site mods. We are not allowed to moderate other forums. Good luck!

     
  24. This post has been removed.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from miscricket. Show miscricket's posts

    Re: Post your moderator related comments here

    In response to Bill-806's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Mod2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to joepatsfan111111's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Here's a comment..

    Why does this board get TWO mods that actually do things around here while the Patriots board is pretty much in shreds with not one mod and every thread turns into a blood bath.....? Cmon BDC

    [/QUOTE]


    Why not petition the management to have mods on your forum too. You will need some volunteers. But the management has indicated a willingness to have on site mods. We are not allowed to moderate other forums. Good luck!

    [/QUOTE]Could it be that the PATRIOTS board are for BIG BOYS & GIRLS, and this board has to cater to 5 or 6 CRY BABIES  ????    Just wondering !!


    [/QUOTE]


    Bill...enough...please. You make it really hard to defend you ( as I have on many occasions) when you stir the pot. My guess is the war of words is going to continue as long as you keep firing rockets at the opposition.

    Can we please just agree on cease-fire for a few days...for humanitarian reasons ( you know the sanity of the rest of us)?

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share