Unique Spoon Ring *Please Help!*

Every time I allow this sort of thing to start, as I did with the initial
post
from "lgreene", it ends up escalating, and I end up feeling like I've stepped
in
something nasty that I didn't see coming in time.

What is the one common denominator every time this happens? It'd be easier
to see this kind of thing coming if you'd take your blinders off. I saw this
train wreck coming from Abrashas first post.

In this case, Mr. Greene (?) does use a munged reply address, and Abrasha
specifically asked, in his post, for an exception so that he could answer an
email he says he got from the fellow in private, which was, he says, more
vitriolic than what Mr. greene sent to the group. Probably against my better
judgement, I allowed it on the thought that letting Abrasha reply seemed
somehow
fair.

Does the charter address "fair" insulting? I'll bet MY reply, if worded
similarly, would not have been allowed. No matter how many disclaimers I added.

On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 18:38:49 -0800, in rec.crafts.jewelry
(NE333RO) wrote:


What is the one common denominator every time this happens? It'd be easier
to see this kind of thing coming if you'd take your blinders off. I saw this
train wreck coming from Abrashas first post.



Does the charter address "fair" insulting? I'll bet MY reply, if worded
similarly, would not have been allowed. No matter how many disclaimers I added.


Abrasha's first post contained nothing that even remotely would have barred it
from inclusion, and Mr. Greene's reply, though it commented on Abrasha's
attitude, just didn't seem to cross any lines of incivility. So, in my place,
just when would you have stopped this? Abrasha's most recent post? Perhaps.
As I noted, I came close. As with all of these situations, it's a judgement
call. In the same situation, had you been the one feeling attacked, I'd have
allowed your reply too. I know, "nero" that you feel I play favorites. I
really try not to. I don't, for example, recall any of your posts in the past
that I've rejected unreasonably. I CAN recall a fair number of Abrashas that I
have had to reject

The charter is fairly simple. It says personal attacks are not allowed. But it
also gives the moderator pretty much free reign to make the decisions. That
leaves you pretty free to snipe all you wish at my decisions after they're made,
without having to make them yourself. I do, as I've said, try to be fair and
impartial. But heck. I'm human. In Abrasha's case, I've met the man several
times, one of which was a chance to visit his shop, and of course I know his
work both in person and on his web site. So he's a real person for me, with
"credentials" and an identity, and as i've said before, in person I've found him
to be interesting and friendly. For many of you in the group, all I know of
you is your cyber name, your email address. In your case, ne333ro, for
example, I don't know your real name, where you're from, what you do, or even
if you're male or female, young or old, or really anything else about you. It
doesn't or at least shouldn't matter, really, in the context of whether to
allow your posts, but it does mean I've got less information to go on. Could
that in some situations, affect the decisions I might make if you're involved in
some conflict in the group? Perhaps, even if I don't intend it to. As I've
admitted before, I'm all too human. I have to make these decisions fairly
quickly as the posts come in, and cannot be sure before hand where things will
lead. That's the nature of being the moderator. I've learned that things
tend to go more smoothly the less I interfere, and that tends to sometimes lead
me to wait too long, or to be too lenient in allowing some posts. So be it. I
do the best I can.

If you'd like to help improving this sort of situation, then feel free to offer
to help out with the moderation of the group. I'll be happy to set it up.
Frankly, there are lots of times when having this job be shared among several
people would be a good thing. Some groups are moderated by teams. One software
setup requires a majority vote from team moderators, while another simply takes
the first approve/reject vote recieved, regardless of which moderation team
member sends it. Or, if you'd like, I'd be quite happy to pass the baton
entirely to you, if you want the job and feel you could do better. I've been
doing this long enough now that the glamour has sort of worn off... And either
passing this on, or making it a moderation team would be helpful too, if only in
making it so I can now and then take a vacation without needing to try and lug a
laptop along. It would also ensure that should something dire happen to me,
and someday it will, of course, as it does to everyone, the group would then be
able to continue without interruption. As it now stands, if I quit, or am
suddenly unable to continue without having the time to set up alternative
moderation provisions, it might be cumbersome or even difficult for you readers
to correct the situation. Some moderated groups in that situation have simply
ceased to exist. A moderation team avoids that potential, but of course then it
introduces it's own problems, and perhaps increases the time delay in post
approval with some setups (those requireing multiple votes to approve an
article.)

The bottom line is this. I do what I can. Sometimes that will include
mistakes.

Deal with it, or offer to actually help, instead of just complaining.

And for the record, even though I'm unhappy with the wording of Abrashas most
recent posting, I still feel that I made the correct call in approving it. Just
barely, perhaps, but there it is. If you don't like that, then I'm sorry.
Such is life.

And hey. This isn't anything as serious as going to war over non-existant
weapons of mass destruction. In newsgroups, nobody dies. This, like every
other argument the group has endured, will pass quickly enough and we'll all be
back to our normal bland and civil banter...

cheers

Peter

Marilee J. Layman wrote:
................
That's the same kind of ring, just a different style. The TV show
Witchblade had similar hand-armor.

Well, I dunno, Marilee. If you were a finger, and
another finger challenged you to a toothpick duel
you might want the 'real' armor.
--
cheers, m

Perhaps it's timely to say thankyou to Peter for being the moderator. I do
not envy him the job and appreciate all the time he puts in. So, thankyou
Peter.
Marisa (AU/NZ)

Gee you type good Peter !

I'm a black and white kind of guy, charter says no flames. So to me that
means all put downs dont get posted.
If folks dont see there post, they know they should reword it.
I like a moderated group, your making the job too hard on your self.
And I feel you should never ever nohow noway edit a post, that would tick me
off. Just dont post it!

Thanks for doing the moderating, I would help some, but feel I'm too new
here to be trusted yet; and thats OK.

Les Saunders

Paladin Iron Works
Yorktown VA

Male
6'2"
220 lbs
Dark hair
Blue eyes
Fair skin
Likes Tequila and good cigars
Wants to know how to pronounce Periodot

On 11-Jan-2004, m wrote:

Well, I dunno, Marilee. If you were a finger, and
another finger challenged you to a toothpick duel
you might want the 'real' armor.
--
cheers, m

I would just call in my thumb to take care of the light work

Les

Abrasha's first post contained nothing that even remotely would have barred
it from inclusion,

Agreed, but you had to see that there would be a serious amount of
backlash. Might be the blinder thing. Still, ABSOLUTELY no reason to bar the
post.

and Mr. Greene's reply, though it commented on Abrasha's
attitude, just didn't seem to cross any lines of incivility.

Again agreed. This is not where the disagreement stems from (at least from
my viewpoint).

So, in my place, just when would you have stopped this?

Well first off, I wouldn't have hopped in right away to defend Abrasha.
Igreene made an amazingly nice response to him, and you jumped in with a
lengthy retort, defending him.
I would have probably stopped it he "And oh yes, he claims to be a
lawyer who does a lot of "pro bono" work, which
based on the tone of his note to me does not surprise me, because he cannot
possibly find any paying customers." That sounds a bit like a personal attack
to me. I have to admit though, it's not quite as bad as "You are a slimy worm.
And a common street hustling coward. Actually a street hustler has more style
than you have". As insults go, that's a damn good one.

Abrasha's most recent post? Perhaps. As I noted, I came close.
As with all of these situations, it's a judgement call.

"You are a slimy worm. And a common street hustling coward. Actually a
street hustler has more style than you have." Judgment call?

In the same situation, had you been the one feeling attacked, I'd have
allowed your reply too.

Well actually, if everyone was playing by the same rules, I would hope that
you didn't allow me to respond in the same vein. If you (the charter) are going
to disallow personal attacks, I think that's great. I would just like to see
that flail applied equally.

I know, "nero" that you feel I play favorites.

Not favorites. Favorite. I haven't seen the same level of forgiveness shown
for anyone else. Friend or foe.

I really try not to.

And as much crap as I give you, I honestly believe that you really DO try
not to show favorites. I just feel that you have a huge blind spot where
Abrasha is concerned.

I don't, for example, recall any of your posts in the
past that I've rejected unreasonably.

Agreed. My argument has never been that you reject our posts unreasonably.
My argument has always been that you ALLOW posts from Abrasha, that the rest of
us would never be allowed to get away with.

I CAN recall a fair number of Abrashas that I
have had to reject

You mean he called someone something worse than "a slimy worm. And a
common street hustling coward" ?

The charter is fairly simple. It says personal attacks are not allowed.

And as much as that irks me on occassion, I'm willing to live by that rule
as long as it is applied equally. Should I reprint the above again?

But it also gives the moderator pretty much free reign to make the decisions. That
leaves you pretty free to snipe all you wish at my decisions after they're
made, without having to make them yourself.

Granted.

I do, as I've said, try to be fair and impartial. But heck. I'm human.
In Abrasha's case, I've met the man several times,

Which should really have nothing to do with the price of tea in Chna.

snip

For many of you in the group, all I know of
you is your cyber name, your email address. In your case, ne333ro, for
example, I don't know your real name, where you're from, what you do, or
even if you're male or female, young or old, or really anything else about you.
It doesn't or at least shouldn't matter, really, in the context of whether to
allow your posts, but it does mean I've got less information to go on.

Maybe you need to judge those you know, the same as you judge those you
don't. There's a bunch more of us you dont know.

snip

If you'd like to help improving this sort of situation, then feel free to
offer to help out

Thats what I'm attempting to do here.

with the moderation of the group.

Not in this lifetime.

Or, if you'd like, I'd be quite happy to pass the baton
entirely to you, if you want the job and feel you could do better.

At no time have I ever said anything resembling that.

The bottom line is this. I do what I can. Sometimes that will include
mistakes.

And thats fine. Just don't expect me to refrain from pointing out when I
feel that you are making some of those mistakes.

Deal with it, or offer to actually help, instead of just complaining.

Was I complaining, or pointing out what I considered to be inconsistancies
in the way our charted is enforced?

And for the record, even though I'm unhappy with the wording of Abrashas most
recent posting, I still feel that I made the correct call in approving it.

I disagree. It was a direct personal attack with no redeeming qualities.

And hey. This isn't anything as serious as going to war over non-existant
weapons of mass destruction.

Big difference between non-existant and non-found. To early to call that
one IMO. But WAY OT.

On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 11:56:31 -0800, in rec.crafts.jewelry
(NE333RO) wrote:


"You are a slimy worm. And a common street hustling coward. Actually a
street hustler has more style than you have." Judgment call?

You are correct that the referenced post contained direct attacks and insults.
The thing is, it also contained a direct request to me asking me to make an
exception to the rules and approve the posting, on the grounds that it was a
reply to a direct attack sent him in email, to which, due to a munged reply
address, he had no other way to respond. This seemed to me to be reasonable
grounds to consider making an exception to the rules, even though the post he
wished to send would otherwise have been instantly rejected.


Well actually, if everyone was playing by the same rules, I would hope that
you didn't allow me to respond in the same vein. If you (the charter) are going
to disallow personal attacks, I think that's great. I would just like to see
that flail applied equally.

.....
Not favorites. Favorite. I haven't seen the same level of forgiveness shown
for anyone else. Friend or foe.

.....

And as much crap as I give you, I honestly believe that you really DO try
not to show favorites. I just feel that you have a huge blind spot where
Abrasha is concerned.

.....

Agreed. My argument has never been that you reject our posts unreasonably.
My argument has always been that you ALLOW posts from Abrasha, that the rest of
us would never be allowed to get away with.

The problem here is that you think I've allowed postings from Abrasha that I
would have rejected from you or others in the group. While I certainly have
bent the rules on occasion with Abrasha's posts, I challenge you to give me any
examples where I've not done so with any of your posts. Therein lies the rub.
You guys don't ask me to bend the rules. That's good for me, of course. But
how can you know I've made exceptions for Abrasha that I would not have made for
you. You've never asked me to do so. Had the post I allowed come from someone
else, AND under the same circumstances, both claiming a valid reason for
replying in the group rather than in email, AND specifically asking me to make
an exception, I would have let you do so, even if, as did Abrasha's post, your
post went over the top. The bit about his asking to be allowed to send that
message, and giving a reason why he should be allowed to do so, counts for a lot
with me. I'm more likely to make an exception when the poster shows that
he/she does indeed know the rules, and that the post breaks them, but asks for
an exception and gives what he/she feels is a good reason. I really would have
made the same call with any of your posts, had you done the same. I would, of
course, prefer that you find more civil ways to respond than did Abrasha. But
I'm not an editor. Just a gate keeper.

By the way, Abrasha is NOT the only poster for whom I've bent the rules in this
group upon request. Just the only one where the exception involves language of
this sort. The others have all been with regard to the advertising rules
There have been a number of occasions where I'd reject an ad, then get an email
from the advertiser requesting information on why, etc. Sometimes I've just
then reconsidered, and allowed a one time post, once it became clear the post
wasn't just spam, and other times, suggested minor changes to the post that
would allow me to see my way clear to allowing it.

The charter is written in black and white, of course. But it gives me a lot of
leeway. At ANY time I disallow any of your posts, please feel free to contact
me about my decisions. I'm always willing to reconsider if you feel I've made
the wrong choice in rejecting a post of yours. Remember that the whole
moderation thing is to make the group more useful to you. It's not my group,
it's yours. By having me here to filter posts, you avoid seeing a LOT of off
topic stuff and things that clearly are abusive to the nature of this group. I
simply don't feel that an occasional exception to the rules, made upon specific
request, change the utility of the group. And if I disallow everything that
even smacks of any faint violation, the group would become even blander than it
is now. I'm not sure that would be a good thing. And the various private
posts some of you send me, supporting my moderation practices, suggest to me
that in general, I'm following the right track. When the feedback I get from
all of you, in the group or in email, suggest I'm not following the group's
will, I'll be happy to change the way I do it.


Maybe you need to judge those you know, the same as you judge those you
don't. There's a bunch more of us you dont know.


see above. I believe that I DO judge you all by the same standards, as best I
can. This would be easier to demonstrate to you if Abrasha were not quite so
unique... (grin)


If you'd like to help improving this sort of situation, then feel free to
offer to help out

Thats what I'm attempting to do here.

And don't get me wrong, I really DO appreciate your feedback, as well as that of
others in the group.


And thats fine. Just don't expect me to refrain from pointing out when I
feel that you are making some of those mistakes.


I look forward to it (grin)


cheers

Peter

I politiely asked a supply question for a group project I am doing,
twice in the last week or so and it is not posted. It is ON topic.
WHat gives?

Nned

[[moderator's response:

Ned, I've gotton no such posts from you. yet this one reached me just fine.
Did you cross post the requests to more than this group? Sometimes that messes
things up. Otherwise, resend your request, and to be safe, cc: it to me
directly, at , just in case something is odd again. That
way I should at least get the direct emailed copy, and it will serve as a
crosscheck on the news posted copy. Mostly it will let me check to see if your
news server is correctly forwarding the message. It did, with this one.
Otherwise, I've no idea why your posts didn't reach me. Sometimes that just
happens... PWR ]]

In article ,
(NE333RO) writes:

Abrasha's first post contained nothing that even remotely would have barred
it from inclusion,

Agreed, but you had to see that there would be a serious amount of
backlash. Might be the blinder thing. ...

Why should there have been any backlash? The original request was not asking
for "charity", but for "professional" service(s). Abrasha is in the proper
location (at least during work days/hours), is a professional, and was willing
to take on the task. His reply was polite, and to the point-- business like...
professional. Professionals get paid, one way or another-- "pro bono" work by
lawyers/doctors is usually deductable come tax-time, and thus a financial gain
of sorts, but I doubt that jewelers could get the same for their "donated"
services.
Kaytee
"Simplexities" on
www.eclecticbeadery.com