# ASF Moderation



## iSPI (23 September 2006)

Sails, 
Well done for injecting some sense into this discussion.

Joe, 
I think we need some consistency if you are going to censor posts like Bud's for being argumentative then there is alot more here by others that need scrubbing.


----------



## doctorj (23 September 2006)

I've shifted this from the 'Trading the SPI' thread.

In the last 3 - 4 pages of that thread there was little, if any discussion of the SPI.  I think it's fair to request that threads stay on topic as it helps prevent them degenerating into flame wars which it seemed the above thread was becoming very quickly.

I'm sure Joe will agree with me that ASF is about being a positive environment where people can learn, discuss ideas and become better traders.  For this to happen, its important we all have a level of respect for others, are willing to support our ideas with evidence and we're willing to listen to the well documented thoughts of others.

That wasn't happening in that particular thread, which is why it was moderated a little more heavily than most.  Threads will naturally evolve from the original topic to follow a line of thought or conversation and that's fantastic.  When they degenerate into arguements and flaming then expect us to do what's necessary to bring it back on topic.


----------



## sails (23 September 2006)

I see iSPI's post has been moved over here from the SPI thread.  Haven't received a reply from doctorj to my question, so will post it again:



			
				doctorj said:
			
		

> ...In the mean time, this thread shall be used for posting forward looking SPI trades (as opposed to historical since no one learns anything from hindsight) and discussion of specific methods used to trade the SPI...



doctorj, Does this (policy of only posting forward looking trades) also now apply to all the other stock threads on ASF? If not, why not?


----------



## doctorj (23 September 2006)

Certainly not.

I was just questioning the merits of 30 pages of posts saying "here's what i did last week, I'm awesome!".


----------



## doctorj (23 September 2006)

I don't see how where I live is relevant or anyone else's business and I'm certainly not going to post it on a public forum.


----------



## iSPI (23 September 2006)

doctorj said:
			
		

> I've shifted this from the 'Trading the SPI' thread.
> 
> In the last 3 - 4 pages of that thread there was little, if any discussion of the SPI.  I think it's fair to request that threads stay on topic as it helps prevent them degenerating into flame wars which it seemed the above thread was becoming very quickly.
> 
> ...




Dr, I agree with you. 




			
				doctorj said:
			
		

> I want to be clear that much of what happened to this thread is your fault Bronte.  You post historical trades, you dodge direct questions on the basis that you 'don't understand' and 99.99% of your posts have no value what so ever.
> 
> You would do well to take a leaf out of Yogi's book.  He's a highly respected contributor of many online communities and is willing to take the time to explain his ideas to those that show an interest and for years he has openly posted his analysis of many stocks and indicies.




Doctor I think you would have been better sending this as a PM to Bronte.
If you differed in opinion, posting on a public thread looks like flaming to me
heck now I'm doing it   
I don't see your post as encouraging people to share ideas or fostering a positive environment. There a lot of lookers on the Trading the SPI thread most likely because they are too nervous to say anything.

Bud's posts flew pretty close to the edge and I understand why they were pulled however Trading the SPI looks like it turns into a bag Bronte and seems to me some of them should have pulled as well.

I haven't learned anything from Bronte's posts (no offence Bronte) however Sails said she found them of interest and I have seen others asking questions and getting snippets of info so just because YOU find novalue in 99.99% doesn't give you the right to imply her posts are of no value.

I don't know how someone becomes a moderator for ASF but you ladies and gents need to make sure if you are going to do the job be fair impartial and leave personal opinion out it.


----------



## sails (23 September 2006)

doctorj said:
			
		

> Certainly not.
> 
> I was just questioning the merits of 30 pages of posts saying "here's what i did last week, I'm awesome!".



Sorry -  I can't remember seeing 1 page of "what I did last week" on that thread - let alone 30 pages of it - but then I actually find Bronte's posts interesting.  Obviously trash to you but of value to me.

Your statement of "_this thread *shall be used * for posting forward looking SPI trades (as opposed to historical since no one learns anything from hindsight_)" sounded more like policy than a question.  

So are you saying that different rules apply for the SPI thread than the rest of ASF?

Perhaps Joes does need to clarify before we lose anymore SPI posters...


----------



## Sean K (23 September 2006)

Perhaps the thread title should be changed to:

'Trading the SPI retrospectively'

Case closed.


----------



## wayneL (23 September 2006)

iSPI said:
			
		

> Dr, I agree with you.
> 
> 
> 
> ...





Hi folks

First let me say what a difficult job moderating is.

A moderator is firstly a contributer to the discussion just like any other poster, next in line is moderating, which I might add is a completely voluntary thing. We moderate because we were asked to do so.

When moderating becomes necessary, *someone* is going to be upset and the moderator *will* have his integrity questioned. Moderators really try to do whats best but sometimes we #### up. Heck I deleted 2000 posts by accident trying to clean up 5 or 6 off-topic posts  

So we ain't perfect. So what, get over it.

Ever seen someone try to stop a fight only to get pummeled themselves? Same thing here.

Moderators are not androids, we have personalities, biases, foibles as well as anyone else.

What I'm saying is please cut us some slack, we try to do the right thing and I'm afraid that because of the nature of forums, it's often in a very arbitrary way. Sometimes it might not seem fair. But in the end there you go.

The second thing I want to say is with the exception of myself, I think this site has the best moderating anywhere in the financial forums universe and the tone of that is of course set by the the administrator, Joe. A more fair minded person I have never met.

I stand by those comments wholeheartedly and the doc is doing a great job here in a very tense situation.

We are not beyond reproach of course and by your queries we learn to do this better, but please; understand that we have to get right in the middle and try to keep the forum running smoothly.

*****all the while trying to be a contributer as well*******

It's a tightrope folks


----------



## sails (23 September 2006)

kennas said:
			
		

> Perhaps the thread title should be changed to:
> 
> 'Trading the SPI retrospectively'
> 
> Case closed.



...but then that would limit it the other way   

"Trading the SPI" is a general enough title - allows for a broad range of discussions and trading styles.


----------



## iSPI (23 September 2006)

sails said:
			
		

> Sorry -  I can't remember seeing 1 page of "what I did last week" on that thread - let alone 30 pages of it - but then I actually find Bronte's posts interesting.  Obviously trash to you but of value to me.
> 
> Your statement of "_this thread *shall be used * for posting forward looking SPI trades (as opposed to historical since no one learns anything from hindsight_)" sounded more like policy than a question.
> 
> ...




Ditto, don't remember seeing any post saying "heres what I did last week"
or "I'm awesome" by anyone in the Trading the Spi thread.

I could be wrong but from what I can gather the thread Trading the SPI
was never started as "heres my trades live" nor "heres my trading system"

Bronte I congratulate you on how you always welcome new comers
to the thread. You foster a environment that encourages new comers and have been respectful of others which ASF is about.

Maybe Joe should make you the moderator !!

There is plenty to be learned from hindsight, if I had not reviewed my trades
I would have crashed and burned looooooooooong ago.
Of course reviewing you own trades is alot easier then trying to reverse engineer a trade from a couple of figures and a basic bar chart with a couple of lines on it.

Re the live trade issue Bronte has done live trades and should not be feel obliged to do all trades or in fact any further trades live just recently
Bronte made the call of 19th of Sept before the day was established.

I actually did it the day before !!   I'm awesome   

Funny, nobody said.... how did you do that?


----------



## professor_frink (23 September 2006)

Afternoon, 

it's very heated for a weekend folks! 

WayneL,doctorj, other moderators,

You're all doing a great job  



			
				iSPI said:
			
		

> There a lot of lookers on the Trading the SPI thread most likely because they are too nervous to say anything.




At various times, there have been many contributors to Battman's thread. Most get tired of his antics pretty quickly and leave, myself included. They aren't too scared to say anything, they just choose to let Battman have his thread, and carry on trading


----------



## iSPI (23 September 2006)

wayneL said:
			
		

> Hi folks
> 
> First let me say what a difficult job moderating is.
> 
> ...




Wayne,

You have made some fantastic contributions to this forum and I *sincerely* thank you for efforts.

You said the moderating job is difficult, and it's also voluntary
Wayne since it doesn't put milk in the fridge and bread on the table
any moderator who is having trouble doing it should step away from it.

I never asked for perfection, didn't say be an android, never said Joe or ASF
is unfair.

I said.....
"I don't know how someone becomes a moderator for ASF
but you ladies and gents need to make sure if you are going to
do the job be fair impartial and leave personal opinion out it." 

I thought the good Drs post "blaming" Bronte was out of line

This latest post from you seems a little out of character.
For someone who usually tells it like it is it sounds a bit
Boo Hoo us poor moderators  we have a hard job
especially those of us who contribute as well.

You guys are like referees, no you won't please everyone
yes you will make mistakes (and deleting 2000 posts was a ripper 
*Please note I said that very much tongue in cheek 
  none of those posts were mine *

However !
If being consistently fair and impartial is too hard, if having your decision questioned seems like you are being victimised then
Can't stand the heat ?   Get out of the Kitchen!


----------



## Sean K (23 September 2006)

iSPI said:
			
		

> Wayne,
> 
> You have made some fantastic contributions to this forum and I *sincerely* thank you for efforts.
> 
> ...




Well, this is all just your opinion ispi. I'm 100% behind Dr J and Wayne here. Their comments are all fine, correct, warranted, measured, appropriate, blah blah. 

The SPI thread needs some substance and Joe has intervened several times on other threads to get it back on track or to stop posters simply ramping their own stock, or themselves.


----------



## iSPI (23 September 2006)

professor_frink said:
			
		

> At various times, there have been many contributors to Battman's thread. Most get tired of his antics pretty quickly and leave, myself included. They aren't too scared to say anything, they just choose to let Battman have his thread, and carry on trading




Fair enough Professor, 

I have read your posts, you seem like a pretty switched on trader
and you have shared some great ideas. Why don't you simply ignore 
Battman/Brontes post and keep contributing.

I still don't get what antics are so repulsive it causes traders to 
leave. I talk to traders and investors all the time and most of them are
golfers and fishermen that makes them the biggest exaggerators on the planet
doesn't upset me.


----------



## doctorj (23 September 2006)

I stand by my comments directed at Bronte.

He was as much the cause of the problems as anyone else and his incessant use of the 'report post' function was too much.  He reported 4 this morning alone even though he was more to do with the problem than the solution.  I think we'd all prefer a strong warning in favour of some of the other alternatives.

If you don't like it, that's fine.  Let's move on.


----------



## iSPI (23 September 2006)

kennas said:
			
		

> Well, this is all just your opinion ispi. I'm 100% behind Dr J and Wayne here. Their comments are all fine, correct, warranted, measured, appropriate, blah blah.
> 
> The SPI thread needs some substance and Joe has intervened several times on other threads to get it back on track or to stop posters simply ramping their own stock, or themselves.




Thats right Kennas thats my opinion
and your opinion is "Their comments are all fine, correct, warranted, measured, appropriate, blah blah. "

Yes the SPI Threads needs some to have substance not disputing that.


----------



## iSPI (23 September 2006)

doctorj said:
			
		

> I stand by my comments directed at Bronte.
> 
> He was as much the cause of that as anyone else and his incessant use of the 'report post' function was too much.  He reported 4 this morning alone even though he was more to do with the problem than the solution.  I think we'd all prefer a strong warning in favour of some of the other alternatives.
> 
> If you don't like it, that's fine.  Let's move on.




No Problem Dr, didn't mean to offend you or any other moderator.
Certainly did not either intentionally or unintentionally personally attack
you, any moderator or infact anyone at all.

I was simply questioning "the umpires call" if I can't do that
then easy I leave this "ball park", doesn't bother me

Just for those who are jumping to the rescue of our moderators let me again stress *didn't mean to offend you or any other moderator.
Certainly did not either intentionally or unintentionally personally attack
you, any moderator or infact anyone at all.*

If I can't express an opinion (keeping in mind there was nothing personal)
then this forum is a waste of time


----------



## iSPI (23 September 2006)

doctorj said:
			
		

> He was as much the cause of the problems as anyone else and *his incessant use of the 'report post' function was too much.  He reported 4 this morning alone * even though he was more to do with the problem than the solution.  I think we'd all prefer a strong warning in favour of some of the other alternatives.




That would be extremely annoying...


----------



## doctorj (23 September 2006)

ISPI, your comments are fine and I've not said anything about me being personally attacked.  Keep it coming.  Remember, I started this thread by splitting off the first post.  I knew that in doing so, I was opening myself up to a thread of flack.  I'm a big boy and can live with that (your comparison to umpires is quite apt as I happen to be one - so copping a bit is nothing new) as long as people continue to show the level of maturity they have so far in this thread.

All I was saying is that I stand by my actions and would do the same again.


----------



## professor_frink (23 September 2006)

iSPI said:
			
		

> Fair enough Professor,
> 
> I have read your posts, you seem like a pretty switched on trader
> and you have shared some great ideas. Why don't you simply ignore
> ...




Thanks iSPI. Appreciate it.

From my point of view, posting in web forums like this is something to entertain myself during the day if I don't have a trade on. It's always good to have contact with other people who do what I do(I only know 1 person in real life that trades), but if it annoys me, then I won't post.

Battman generally avoids direct questions about his trading, which means I don't find anything of use in his posts, and most of the other people that have contributed in the past have left, so there isn't much interest there for me at the moment.


----------



## wayneL (23 September 2006)

iSPI said:
			
		

> This latest post from you seems a little out of character.
> For someone who usually tells it like it is it sounds a bit
> Boo Hoo us poor moderators  we have a hard job
> especially those of us who contribute as well.
> ...




iSPI,

See, even diplomacy desn't work! ROFL

The point of my post was not to complain.

It was to point out that we are human too. We are tryng hard, learning as we go along......

......and developing very thick skins  

You liken us to referees... well... yes! And who's the person on the footy field who doesn't have a clue, is biased toward the other team, lost the match for us etc.... the ref! 





Don't expect perfection.


----------



## iSPI (23 September 2006)

doctorj said:
			
		

> ISPI, your comments are fine and I've not said anything about me being personally attacked.  Keep it coming.  _Remember, I started this thread by splitting off the first post._  I knew that in doing so, I was opening myself up to a thread of flack.  I'm a big boy and can live with that (your comparison to umpires is quite apt as I happen to be one - so copping a bit is nothing new) as long as people continue to show the level of maturity they have so far in this thread.
> 
> All I was saying is that I stand by my actions and would do the same again.




Absolutely, I apologise for not acknowledging that  (starting the thread)earlier.

Big thumbs up for that and standing by your actions


----------



## iSPI (23 September 2006)

wayneL said:
			
		

> iSPI,
> 
> See, even diplomacy desn't work! ROFL
> The point of my post was not to complain.
> ...




Snicker doesn't sound to hard to me !

I won't expect perfection , as long as you don't expect to please everyone.

Hey  DrJ ... good on you for being an umpire (as you mentioned earlier)
don't no what you umpire in or at what level but I have a great deal
of respect for umpires and I mean that sincerely sports is lost without you... moderators well different story


----------



## wayneL (23 September 2006)

Time for a group hug?


----------



## Bronte (23 September 2006)

Battman is happy to meet doctorj to give him a hug 
This is my fourth attempt at this post.....
Someone keeps deleting them.
Send me a PM doctorj


----------



## iSPI (23 September 2006)

wayneL said:
			
		

> Time for a group hug?



wellllllllll ok.... everyone give your monitor a big squeeze


----------



## Bronte (23 September 2006)

We are pleased to have you back Wayne


----------



## Bronte (23 September 2006)

iSPI said:
			
		

> Doctor I think you would have been better sending this as a PM to Bronte.
> If you differed in opinion, posting on a public thread looks like flaming to me
> heck now I'm doing it
> I don't see your post as encouraging people to share ideas or fostering a positive environment. There a lot of lookers on the Trading the SPI thread most likely because they are too nervous to say anything.
> ...



No offence taken iSPI  
The first 2000 were better.


----------



## Bronte (23 September 2006)

iSPI said:
			
		

> Ditto, don't remember seeing any post saying "heres what I did last week"
> or "I'm awesome" by anyone in the Trading the Spi thread.
> 
> I could be wrong but from what I can gather the thread Trading the SPI
> ...



Thank you for your support iSPI and of course Margaret.


----------



## Bronte (23 September 2006)

Bronte said:
			
		

> Battman is happy to meet doctorj to give him a hug
> This is my fourth attempt at this post.....
> Someone keeps deleting them.
> Send me a PM doctorj



Why do you keep deleting my posts?


----------



## doctorj (23 September 2006)

Bronte said:
			
		

> Why do you keep deleting my posts?



Because you keep posting off-topic.


----------



## Sean K (23 September 2006)

doctorj said:
			
		

> Because you keep posting off-topic.




I think the PM facility and chat area needs to be more liberally used to cope with this.


----------



## Smurf1976 (23 September 2006)

kennas said:
			
		

> I think the PM facility and chat area needs to be more liberally used to cope with this.



Or just start another thread on whatever it is you wish to discuss. 

If a thread on stock XYZ turns into a discussion about who's going to win the AFL Grand Fianl then, rather than deleting posts or otherwise upsetting anyone, just start a thread on AFL football and move the posts there. That way everyone should be happy.  

Obviously this doesn't apply in cases of personal abuse etc. Such posts ought to be removed from the relevant thread(s).


----------



## Joe Blow (23 September 2006)

Sorry about getting into this thread so late but I have been at a get together all afternoon and evening and have just come across this thread now.

Firstly let me just say that moderating a forum is a difficult, thankless job. It is a volunteer position and is taken on by those who care about the site enough to want to help maintain a certain level of order and civility. It doesn't make their jobs easier that they are also participants in the discussions. In any large community you are always going to have situations where people do not agree with the decision of a moderator. It only natural. I happen to think that our moderators here at ASF are extremely even handed considering how emotional some threads get. The umpires decision doesn't always go your way and talk about "consistency" of moderation is pointless when you have many differing points of view and ideas of what is "consistent" and what isn't. Sometimes you've just got to cop the decision on the chin and move on. It's a reality of forum life and will happen to everyone from time to time.

I think there is better moderation on this site than most forums and unfortunately a lot of their work goes unseen and largely unappreciated. Spam threads are deleted, threads are merged, split, renamed or moved from one forum to another. None of us sit around waiting for forum drama. Personally I dread it and I'm sure the moderators do too. We do out best to stop it from happpening in the first place but unfortunately it is inevitable. 

The best way to help out the moderators is by treating other ASF members with politeness and respect whether you agree with them or not. Then there would be fewer fights for them to break up in the first place. And in the end it really isn't worth getting all worked up over an argument with someone on an internet forum.


----------



## iSPI (23 September 2006)

Joe Blow said:
			
		

> Sorry about getting into this thread so late but I have been at a get together all afternoon and evening and have just come across this thread now.
> 
> .



Too late Joe we already had a group hug !


----------



## Joe Blow (23 September 2006)

iSPI said:
			
		

> Too late Joe we already had a group hug !




I have been at a bachelor party so I've already had my male bonding experience for the day. Count me in for the next group hug though.  

I have also had a bit to drink. That last post took me an hour to type out. LOL!  :alcohol:


----------



## Bronte (23 September 2006)

Bronte said:
			
		

> Battman is happy to meet doctorj to give him a hug
> This is my fourth attempt at this post.....
> Someone keeps deleting them.
> Send me a PM doctorj



Hi Joe,   
Welcome back.
No PM as yet.


----------



## Joe Blow (23 September 2006)

Bronte said:
			
		

> Hi Joe,
> Welcome back.
> No PM as yet.




Why does doctorj need to PM you?


----------



## Bronte (23 September 2006)

Battman asked where doctorj lived in Perth
doctorj said he wouldn't post that sort of information...fair enough
We said North or South...PM us
Did he want to meet up on behalf of ASF/Joe
No reply...just kept deleting our posts
We assume he doesn't. No problem.


----------



## Joe Blow (23 September 2006)

Bronte said:
			
		

> Battman asked where doctorj lived in Perth
> doctorj said he wouldn't post that sort of information...fair enough
> We said North or South...PM us
> Did he want to meet up on behalf of ASF/Joe
> ...




Bronte, doctorj is not a representative of either myself or ASF, he is just a moderator doing his job. I don't think there should be any talk of meeting up. Lets keep forum related issues to the forum.


----------



## Bronte (23 September 2006)

Bronte said:
			
		

> Battman asked where doctorj lived in Perth
> doctorj said he wouldn't post that sort of information...fair enough
> We said North or South...PM us
> Did he want to meet up on behalf of ASF/Joe
> ...



As I posted...no problem Joe  
We were just looking for a reply.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (23 September 2006)

I give my support to the moderators who have been quite good recently.

Retrospective trades don`t add much to the forum. From a point of analysis if you study retrospectively then how does one trade?


----------



## Bronte (23 September 2006)

We certainly agree with you there SP  
Just out of interest what was the last retrospective trade you observed?


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (23 September 2006)

Bronte said:
			
		

> We certainly agree with you there SP
> Just out of interest what was the last retrospective trade you observed?




I can`t remember- I can`t even remember what I had for dinner yesterday most of the time - but I am just stating my opinion. No attack or direction at the SPI thread.


----------



## BentRod (24 September 2006)

Wayne....is that you in the shorts?? :


----------



## Bronte (24 September 2006)

Snake Pliskin said:
			
		

> I can`t remember- I can`t even remember what I had for dinner yesterday most of the time - but I am just stating my opinion. No attack or direction at the SPI thread.



OK Thanks SP


----------



## Macquack (11 August 2016)

*Re: The West has lost its freedom of speech*

Do the honourable thing Wayne and resign from being a "Mod". 

Then you will be on the same level as everyone else and your bull**** (precisely constructed statements) will be the same as everybody else's bull**** and have no authority.


----------



## wayneL (11 August 2016)

*Re: The West has lost its freedom of speech*

Okay , how about this Macquack:

If you can find a single incidence of where I have used my mod status in this thread, or the climate thread for that matter, in any way shape or form, either negatively, or even positively, I will immediately resign.

Fair?


----------



## explod (11 August 2016)

*Re: The West has lost its freedom of speech*



wayneL said:


> Okay , how about this Macquack:
> 
> If you can find a single incidence of where I have used my mod status in this thread, or the climate thread for that matter, in any way shape or form, either negatively, or even positively, I will immediately resign.
> 
> Fair?




During my professional career I could never comment on or be involved in public discussion,  politics etc.,  for good reason.   People we protected needed to feel us as impartial.   

If you understand ethics you will either stand off from discussion or resign your position as a mod.   This is the only area where I have felt uncomfortable with Joe Blow's overall standing.   Unfortunately WayneL you are far too emotional and veheement.   And I very much conceed the same problem as there are many shades of grey in all discussion and blood can run high sometimes.  But on a percieved level playing field we can learn off each other without feeling the system itself has one locked out.


----------



## wayneL (11 August 2016)

*Re: The West has lost its freedom of speech*

Big difference Plod.

Yours was a paid, public position. I'm just a member of a forum, lending a hand when I can.

If forum mods can not function as an ordinary member, why would one ever volunteer.

It doesn't worry me mate, Joe can sack me anytime, and frankly Im sick of you guys pulling the same thing out of your backside when you're losing an argument.


----------



## SirRumpole (11 August 2016)

*Re: The West has lost its freedom of speech*



wayneL said:


> Big difference Plod.
> 
> Yours was a paid, public position. I'm just a member of a forum, lending a hand when I can.
> 
> ...




As a moderator you are supposed to be setting an example Wayne, not slanging off fellow members. 

Moderators should be able to express an opinion, but in a way that elevates the standard of debate, not drag it down.


----------



## explod (11 August 2016)

*Re: The West has lost its freedom of speech*



wayneL said:


> Big difference Plod.
> 
> Yours was a paid, public position. I'm just a member of a forum, lending a hand when I can.
> 
> ...



No champ,  can't squirm away like that.   I am an active volunteer with tbe Red Cross and take care to never devulge or enter into discussions that may reveal the inner personal issues of others or business of the service.  Great care is taken to ensure the people I interact with see me as just an impartial ear and to offer alternative ways of seeing an issue. .  A Mod could in fact operate in this way, take part and be impartial but you do not seem to understand this. 

And I would be most happy to catch up with you later in the year here in Melbourne for a hats off down to earth discussion.


----------



## Joe Blow (11 August 2016)

I've moved the last four posts from "The West has lost its freedom of speech" thread into this one because it seemed like a more appropriate place for them.

About moderation I'll just say this, moderators are ordinary ASF members who help out with administrative tasks when the situation calls for it. It is a volunteer position, not a paid one. Most moderation is deleting spam, merging threads or moving them from one forum to another. I cannot recall an instance where moderators at ASF have abused their position.

Everyone is held to the same standards. At the same time, everyone has good days and bad days. All I ask is that people do their best to get along with others. I know it's difficult sometimes, but it's worth striving for.


----------



## trainspotter (11 August 2016)

*Re: The West has lost its freedom of speech*



Macquack said:


> Do the honourable thing Wayne and resign from being a "Mod".
> 
> Then you will be on the same level as everyone else and your bull**** (precisely constructed statements) will be the same as everybody else's bull**** and have no authority.








Welcome to the hypocrisy zone .....


----------



## cynic (11 August 2016)

I noticed a complaint in relation to the inability of some members to place another on ignore due to their status as moderator. 

Much as I hate to see anyone feeling the need to resort to such measures whilst participating in this community, (I sincerely hope that the plaintiff will reconsider), I cannot help but recognise a small issue regarding fairness.

The need for an exemption whilst posting in the moderator capacity is perfectly understandable. The exemption does, however, appear to extend beyond the scope of moderation, and is having the unfortunate side effect of leaving some members with a sense of inequality during general participation.

Is there some way that a member's exemption may be limited to only those posts made for the specific purpose of moderation?


----------



## Logique (12 August 2016)

Joe Blow said:


> I've moved the last four posts from "The West has lost its freedom of speech" thread into this one because it seemed like a more appropriate place for them.
> About moderation I'll just say this, moderators are ordinary ASF members who help out with administrative tasks when the situation calls for it. It is a volunteer position, not a paid one. Most moderation is deleting spam, merging threads or moving them from one forum to another. I cannot recall an instance where moderators at ASF have abused their position.
> Everyone is held to the same standards. At the same time, everyone has good days and bad days. All I ask is that people do their best to get along with others. I know it's difficult sometimes, but it's worth striving for.



As you say Joe, Wayne is after all, a volunteer. Those objecting to his Moderation have the opportunity to step up, and offer to take over the role themselves.


----------



## dutchie (12 August 2016)

Logique said:


> As you say Joe, Wayne is after all, a volunteer. Those objecting to his Moderation have the opportunity to step up, and offer to take over the role themselves.




Or prove that he is abusing his position.


----------



## pixel (12 August 2016)

Logique said:


> As you say Joe, Wayne is after all, a volunteer. Those objecting to his Moderation have the opportunity to step up, and offer to take over the role themselves.




Having been there myself, I know what an unrewarding job it is to volunteer as a moderator.
At no stage have I seen Wayne orate for or against an argument or person in his official capacity as a mod. That doesn't mean I find all of his posts "moderate". Another moderator might well be asking for a little less vitriol. But I don't have to resort to an "Ignore" button either. 

A number of members on this Forum continue to express views that I find extremely objectionable. Depending on how much (or little) time I have, I may put my own opinion up against theirs, but trying to re-educate someone on a hard-line subject is futile. As Lazarus Long put it:







> Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time, and it annoys the pig.


----------



## Ves (12 August 2016)

*Re: The West has lost its freedom of speech*



wayneL said:


> If forum mods can not function as an ordinary member, why would one ever volunteer.



Agree with this.

I find a lot of the stuff that you post objectionable/disagreeable,   but I don't really think any of it has ever made me question your role as a moderator.

Hmm,  as you've put it in other contexts:   "apology industry" in full force in this case.

Posters on this site have a long history in making moderators relinquish their roles for the most minor reasons IMO.  I guess people love the scent of blood / defeat of a "superior" too much.


----------



## wayneL (12 August 2016)

The thing is, we are a broad church, we should expect disagreement and we should expect robust debate.

Some of my best life lessons are from being worked over in debate.

I make no apologies for my views, but at the same time, reserve the right to change them. I see my opinions as an evolution of ideas.

This is part of the reason I debate the way I do, akin to the scientific principle of falsification. I'm testing my views as I defend them.

In the other thread, I stated that I'd have a beer with any of my adversaries, even basilio.

Ironically this all blew up in the freedom of speech thread. I think we should all be very carefull about trying to silence opinions we dont agree with. Voltaire had something to day about this and I think thr phenomenon of Trump in the US election is symptomatic of though policing, likewise the schmozle  in our senate.

If you find my views objectionable, good, make your case why you disagree. Don't hate me if I do likewise, that is hypocrisy.

Just some rambling thoughts.


----------



## luutzu (12 August 2016)

wayneL said:


> The thing is, we are a broad church, we should expect disagreement and we should expect robust debate.
> 
> Some of my best life lessons are from being worked over in debate.
> 
> ...





People don't hate you Sifu. 

They'd have to love you first. ha ha  jk.

I think we all have days when the fuse is short and the thesaurus weren't around... 

alright, peace be with you.


----------



## wayneL (12 August 2016)

luutzu said:


> People don't hate you Sifu.
> 
> They'd have to love you first. ha ha  jk.
> 
> ...




Ahhh lets hold hands and say ommmm.

I need one woman to love me.... Together nearly 40 years, so doing alright there.

I need roughly 100  horse owners and two or three veterinarians to love me to make a business. Doing really well there too, my books are closed.

I need a very few rednecked colleagues to talk shop, hammer hot steel and drink beer with to love me. We feel comfortable enough with each other to challenge ideas and call each other c###, all while having a laugh.

Perhaps 125 people from 9 billion. Not many eh?

The rest can choose.


----------



## basilio (12 August 2016)

Interesting Wayne...Robust debate ? Honest discussion ? Open to evolving your opinions ?

I'd agree that in some threads you offer these qualities.  But frankly I totally jack up when :

1) You gratuitously insult me (and others) in discussions.  Just not cool

2) Then when you are called out on said insults just refuse to acknowledge the fact and create a web of fanciful "logic" to hide your lapse/error. Really you convinced no one and simply dug yourself into bedrock.

3) You use quite breath taking  verbal gymnastics to excuse/explain your language.  For example calling Hilary Clinton a worse choice than Hannibal Lector and a Stalinist totalitarian is simply character assassination.  Trying to saying it was "hyperbole" is absurd  - regardless of your protestations and verbal gymnastics. A simple test of that statement is to show the exchanges to a few people and invite their responses.  

Finally Wayne it is also not cool to stand on your soap box and say you never used your role as Mod to manipulate/chill discussions in this Forum.  I can say with certainty that your actions on some of my posts in CC in the past have been designed to have that effect. 

Now no doubt you will deny that like you deny every other example I have outlined. But I know the facts and you should too (unless you have forgotten.) And no doubt Joe has all the correspondence on file doesn't he ?

So are you open to evolving your views?  Can you see different perspectives ? Can you acknowledge new evidence ? Are you open to genuine doubt and then deciding that risk management may be the better part of valour ?

Who knows. I somehow think we have been at this point in previous "intense disagreements"  and it seems as though little has changed.  I do remember that when you came back from an extended  break there was the thought you might have some new reflections.  Maybe .. maybe not.


----------



## wayneL (12 August 2016)

Okay lets start with your 1/,  basilio, the accusation of "gratuitous" insult. I would like to examine that. If we take that gratuitous means without valid reason, then I would like you to go ahead and justify that accusation.

For instance, I could also accuse you of the same thing; can I even count the number of times you have ingraciously and gratuitously insulted me, because of a different interpretation of available research.

I hasten to add that I can take your insults like a man, I only mention it yo highlight your monumentally megalithic hypocrisy on this point.

We can then go through your other points and test them for validity.


----------



## wayneL (12 August 2016)

Forgot to add, as this is a thread on in moderation, can you please link this point with any moderation actions involving you or anybody else.

I mean, my making some accurate cutting observations have notihing to do with moderation, unless in the course of moderation.


----------



## SirRumpole (12 August 2016)

wayneL said:


> Forgot to add, as this is a thread on in moderation, can you please link this point with any moderation actions involving you or anybody else.
> 
> I mean, my making some accurate cutting observations have notihing to do with moderation, unless in the course of moderation.




Insulting fellow posters is an action inconsistent with moderation where even handedness should be the watchword.

No one minds you expressing an opinion civilly, but surely part of the job is to encourage [moderation] ?


----------



## trainspotter (12 August 2016)

Good GOD !





If you don't like the opinions you read on line then it is time to get off the keyboard 

I was walking past the mental hospital the other day, and all the patients were shouting ,'13....13....13'
The fence was too high to see over,but I saw a little gap in the planks and looked through to see what was going on.

Some b@stard poked me in the eye with a stick.

Then they all started shouting '14....14....14'...


----------



## SirRumpole (12 August 2016)

trainspotter said:


> Good GOD !
> 
> 
> If you don't like the opinions you read on line then it is time to get off the keyboard




Yeah, and if you don't like the lack of service in fast food restaurants, then it's time not to go there any more and quit bitching about it.

Follow me ?


----------



## Boggo (12 August 2016)

The demand for these seem to be growing


----------



## trainspotter (12 August 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Yeah, and if you don't like the lack of service in fast food restaurants, then it's time not to go there any more and quit bitching about it.
> 
> Follow me ?




Oh Touche' Rumpy .. I had my mouth open on that one and everything :




Just to clarify .. it was not a fast food restaurant. It was purported to be a fine dining experience. I will not go there ever again no matter how good the reviews may or may not be. I was not "bitching" about it, I was merely pointing out "Standards are slipping" - afterall that was the title of the thread 

But I digress, I am picking up what you are putting down Horace me old tart but I have seen this site wax and wane (pun intended) over the years and I must say wayneL has been batting at 100 percent. Not changed one bit. Not a ZOT. Neither even a skerrick. Has not shown fear or favour towards anyone. In case you haven't noticed he LIKES to challenge you into a thought provoking experience and then when the going get's tough ... well you know the rest.


----------



## SirRumpole (12 August 2016)

No problem with thought provoking experience as long as it doesn't descend to abuse.


----------



## trainspotter (12 August 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> No problem with thought provoking experience as long as it doesn't descend to abuse.




You started it


----------



## wayneL (12 August 2016)

Abuse?


----------



## wayneL (12 August 2016)

Just piecing together the psychological jigsaw that is basilio and his unrelenting and uncompromising malevolence, despite my peaceful overtures....

Politicians have always been fair game... Dubya, 'Bama, Trump, Abbott, whoever. Yet more than anything, despite my pointing his participation in Lampooning some of the above, it is my hyperbolic assessment of Hillary that bas is most bent out of shape about...  her dubious character proven beyond any reasonable doubt.

It is this which he seems incapable of getting past.

Would you care to explain that basilio?


----------



## basilio (12 August 2016)

wayneL said:


> *Just piecing together the psychological jigsaw that is basilio and his unrelenting and uncompromising malevolence, despite my peaceful overtures....*
> 
> Politicians have always been fair game... Dubya, 'Bama, Trump, Abbott, whoever. Yet more than anything, despite my pointing his participation in Lampooning some of the above, it is my hyperbolic assessment of Hillary that bas is most bent out of shape about...  her dubious character proven beyond any reasonable doubt.
> 
> ...




Love - 30. Two service faults.


----------



## SirRumpole (12 August 2016)

> her (Hilary) dubious character proven beyond any reasonable doubt.




Probably the wrong thread for this, but is it(her character) ?

Are we comparing her to Trump or just trying to denigrate without evidence ?

Trump today said he believed that Obama literally started ISIS. That appears to be criminal defamation without evidence. I'd like to see him back that up in court. 

So, who has the more dubious character out of Trump and Clinton do you think ?


----------



## trainspotter (12 August 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Probably the wrong thread for this, but is it(her character) ?
> 
> Are we comparing her to Trump or just trying to denigrate without evidence ?
> 
> ...




Posted same thing in other thread 

Trump would win in a landslide - of defamation that is.


----------



## explod (12 August 2016)

wayneL said:


> Just piecing together the psychological jigsaw that is basilio and his unrelenting and uncompromising malevolence, despite my peaceful overtures....
> 
> Politicians have always been fair game... Dubya, 'Bama, Trump, Abbott, whoever. Yet more than anything, despite my pointing his participation in Lampooning some of the above, it is my hyperbolic assessment of Hillary that bas is most bent out of shape about...  her dubious character proven beyond any reasonable doubt.
> 
> ...



"peaceful overtures" you are jocking surely. 

To knock those down who do not follow your bent you will pull quotes from your a..... S to ensure your case. 

In many arguments,  particularly climate there are countless arguments and scientific facts either way.   It is not resolved but there is suffiecient visible change to at least concede we should do something about it. 

Is tha not so ole Pal?


----------



## CanOz (12 August 2016)

Interesting how its always the ones posting alarmist, non-factual or anecdotal rubbish that are complaining about WayneL....hmmm, maybe you lot need a bit of tough love...


----------



## SirRumpole (12 August 2016)

CanOz said:


> Interesting how its always the ones posting alarmist, non-factual or anecdotal rubbish that are complaining about WayneL....hmmm, maybe you lot need a bit of tough love...




I'd be interested to see anything factual that Wayne has posted on climate change.


----------



## cynic (12 August 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> I'd be interested to see anything factual that Wayne has posted on climate change.




You'll find plenty in the climate thread rumpy! 

There's no point looking for it in the moderation thread, now is there?!


----------



## SirRumpole (12 August 2016)

cynic said:


> You'll find plenty in the climate thread rumpy!
> 
> There's no point looking for it in the moderation thread, now is there?!




I have looked there cynic and what I saw was mostly attacks on scientists by someone with no qualifications in the field. That's basically why I stopped reading the thread, you can't argue with people who think they know better than the experts.


----------



## wayneL (12 August 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> I have looked there cynic and what I saw was mostly attacks on scientists by someone with no qualifications in the field. That's basically why I stopped reading the thread, you can't argue with people who think they know better than the experts.




Can you name **anyone** in that thread with qualifications in field?

Puleez Horace. There are biases, then there is bias blind spot. Then there is outright BS. My most recent post was from lomborg and have quoted extensively from Curry, the Pielkes, and others.

Jesus!!! Lets stick to factual comment shall we?


----------



## wayneL (12 August 2016)

explod said:


> "peaceful overtures" you are jocking surely.




No, I am not joking.







> To knock those down who do not follow your bent you will pull quotes from your a..... S to ensure your case.




Oh come on Plod. We all give as good as we get in that discussion.  That is just another example of hypocrisy. 



> In many arguments,  particularly climate there are countless arguments and scientific facts either way.   It is not resolved but there is suffiecient visible change to at least concede we should do something about it.
> 
> Is tha not so ole Pal?




My view has been reapeated time and time again in that thread. Unfortunately you, bas, Horace, et al refuse to acknowledge it.


----------



## wayneL (12 August 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> I have looked there cynic and what I saw was mostly attacks on scientists by someone with no qualifications in the field. That's basically why I stopped reading the thread, you can't argue with people who think they know better than the experts.




You might want to check my posts 8394 and 8395, citing several studies on sea level.

Then you might like to retract the above "inaccuacy"


----------



## trainspotter (13 August 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> I have looked there cynic and what I saw was mostly *attacks* on scientists by someone with no qualifications in the field. That's basically why I stopped reading the thread, you can't *argue* with people who think they know better than the experts.




There is THAT language again Horace. Nobody attacked anyone in the thread. It is called robust debate at worst and was not even close to an argument. If you comprehend what has actually been written by the "deniers", they are actually in agreeance with you and basilio and explod and luutzu and every other tree hugger mutha IPCC sprouting "expert". There is no doubt the climate is changing. Been said a gigajillion times by both sides. What is being said is to curb the HYSTERIA.

basilio quoted some rag of a newspaper screaming how permafrost is melting and ANTHRAX started "ravaging" the human population. Upon checking the FACTS it turned out ONE and ONE only boy died from ANTHRAX. Are you following this information correctly now Rumpy?

Now back to ASF moderation - MacQuack likes to feed the ducks, explod is a bleeding heart with bad spelling, noco is set in his ways, cynic is way too smart to be posting in here, smurf1976 should work for NASA, Tisme needs to write a book, CanOz is a straight shooter, D8008 needs to post more, drsmith for parliament, basilio requires a BEX and a lie down, shall I go on?

There used to be about 30/40 more people that posted regularly in here (Julia, $20shoes, doctorJ, Miner, againsthegrain, medicowallet, Mr. Z to name a few)  and also self moderated many in the group. Sadly they have moved on to other fixations. And you want to complain about wayneL ????

You should have been around for a full on attack from medicowallet.


----------



## SirRumpole (13 August 2016)

> Now back to ASF moderation




Wayne or anyone else is entitled to throw mud at people actually qualifies in climate science, that doesn't mean anyone else has to take notice of him, but others have a right to correct the record.

As for "hysteria", that is a matter of opinion. Reporting facts may be described by some as "hysteria". People have attacked the ABC's factual reporting of the live export trade as "hysteria", it doesn't make those reports any less factual.

Imho the facts on climate change are disturbing enough. If wayne et al acknowledge that the facts indicate that the climate is warming , and that it's driven by man made emissions of CO2 then we obviously have a responsibility to do something about it, just as we solved the ozone hole problem and the lead in petrol problem. 

The science on the latter issues seems to have been accepted, as will climate change science in the years ahead, so why wait until it's too late ?


----------



## trainspotter (13 August 2016)

Rumpy ... one person died from ANTHRAX. Let me repeat that ONE. 37 people die from licking a 9 volt battery. You figure it out.


----------



## SirRumpole (13 August 2016)

trainspotter said:


> Rumpy ... one person died from ANTHRAX. Let me repeat that ONE. 37 people die from licking a 9 volt battery. You figure it out.
> 
> View attachment 67731




Thanks for that factual report. One only hopes that medical specialists in the area are taking measures to prevent anyone else being affected. That's what you do about potential epidemics or climate change, stop it from getting worse.


----------



## explod (13 August 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Wayne or anyone else is entitled to throw mud at people actually qualifies in climate science, that doesn't mean anyone else has to take notice of him, but others have a right to correct the record.
> 
> As for "hysteria", that is a matter of opinion...
> 
> ... The science on the latter issues seems to have been accepted, as will climate change science in the years ahead, so why wait until it's too late ?




Off topic here but spot on as I see it also.


----------



## explod (13 August 2016)

wayneL said:


> My view has been reapeated time and time again in that thread. Unfortunately you, bas, Horace, et al refuse to acknowledge it.




To me it is vague and ambiguous.   It has given me a view that a messure of intelligence from your point is to speak in a type of long/short hand.   To some it may be funny taking out the mickey.   It is ignorance personified in fact. 

Lets make it simple and clear of ambiguities.   Do you believe in man made co2 climate change,  yes or know?


----------



## Macquack (13 August 2016)

trainspotter said:


> Now back to ASF moderation - MacQuack likes to feed the ducks, explod is a bleeding heart with bad spelling, noco is set in his ways, cynic is way too smart to be posting in here, smurf1976 should work for NASA, Tisme needs to write a book, CanOz is a straight shooter, D8008 needs to post more, drsmith for parliament, basilio requires a BEX and a lie down, shall I go on?




You forgot to include yourself, trainspotter - biggest ego known to mankind.


----------



## wayneL (14 August 2016)

explod said:


> To me it is vague and ambiguous.   It has given me a view that a messure of intelligence from your point is to speak in a type of long/short hand.   To some it may be funny taking out the mickey.   It is ignorance personified in fact.
> 
> Lets make it simple and clear of ambiguities.   Do you believe in man made co2 climate change,  yes or know?




I have replied in the appropriate thread


----------



## DB008 (14 August 2016)

trainspotter said:


> Now back to ASF moderation - MacQuack likes to feed the ducks, explod is a bleeding heart with bad spelling, noco is set in his ways, cynic is way too smart to be posting in here, smurf1976 should work for NASA, Tisme needs to write a book, CanOz is a straight shooter, D8008 needs to post more, drsmith for parliament, basilio requires a BEX and a lie down, shall I go on?




Great run-down.

I would like to post more but have been very busy working interstate and am about to start FIFO work again, so l'll be gone for a little while. Can't seem to add attachments on mobile either.


----------



## Tisme (14 August 2016)

trainspotter said:


> Now back to ASF moderation - MacQuack likes to feed the ducks, explod is a bleeding heart with bad spelling, noco is set in his ways, cynic is way too smart to be posting in here, smurf1976 should work for NASA, Tisme needs to write a book, CanOz is a straight shooter, D8008 needs to post more, drsmith for parliament, basilio requires a BEX and a lie down, shall I go on?
> 
> And you want to complain about wayneL ????
> 
> .




I resemble those remarks..... I never complain about wayneL. He's a closed minded larrikin bigot, who speaks his mind .... can't get any more ol' skool Oz than that ... my kinda moderator


----------



## trainspotter (14 August 2016)

Macquack said:


> You forgot to include yourself, trainspotter - biggest ego known to mankind.




Wrong bait Macquack ...


----------



## wayneL (14 August 2016)

Tisme said:


> I resemble those remarks..... I never complain about wayneL. He's a closed minded larrikin bigot, who speaks his mind .... can't get any more ol' skool Oz than that ... my kinda moderator




Hmm... I always thought I was an open minded larrikin bigot.


----------



## Wysiwyg (24 August 2017)

Looks like the dude with the DOW Index e-mail service got terminated. Or mentally displaced after a Tech/A spray.


----------



## Joe Blow (24 August 2017)

You'd think that these guys who come here with some product or service to flog could offer up something more impressive than some generic trading tips and generic "analysis".

Apparently not.


----------



## Boggo (24 August 2017)

Joe Blow said:


> You'd think that these guys who come here with some product or service to flog could offer up something more impressive than some generic trading tips and generic "analysis".
> 
> Apparently not.




They come here expecting the same rabbit in the spotlight crowd that they get on some other forums, a tougher and more educated audience on here thankfully.

Funny item regarding moderation. On a 4wd forum that I have a look at every so often they had an issue with gambling and online casino etc spruikers.
They put up a notice that the account of anyone mentioning gambling or casino would automatically be suspended.

Unfortunately a few few people got done when they mentioned the town of Casino in their travel posts


----------



## pixel (24 August 2017)

Boggo said:


> Unfortunately a few few people got done when they mentioned the town of Casino in their travel posts



I bet they would


----------

