Who, precisely, are we not permitted to criticize on this board?

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

Language too harsh for your sensitivities?

You miss the entire concepa fundamental 'burst disk' that keeps this board what it is. Any mod can take his/her hat off and participate in a thread. Once done, that person is no longer forevermore a mod in that thread.
No, not the language, the hypocrisy.

As for your idea about me missing something, I didn't miss this post, which makes much more sense as a solution:
Who, precisely, are we not permitted to criticize on this board?
 
Hypocrisy? A mod does one's best. (Hopefully) There have been really bad mods who seemed to last forever and really good mods who just gave up early due to the crap they had to endure.

You paint them all with a single brush.

There are some great moderators, but there are a few who quite frankly suck. They cannot differentiate between their own opinions and their responsibilities as moderators. That is who the backlash is against. If you want us to start naming names we will.
 
Works for me...

I have no association with SB other than being a current supporter. Oh, I'm not RED yet. I know when I paid my last dues. Oh well. We wait.

Name them, then. I'll start. I got one of the most amazingly scathing PM's from r.o.t.u.r.n.e.r, so what?

HOLY SHEET! I can't even type his name???
 
Hypocrisy? A mod does one's best. (Hopefully) There have been really bad mods who seemed to last forever and really good mods who just gave up early due to the crap they had to endure.

You paint them all with a single brush.

OK, it would be bad if I was doing that. Where are the good ones who should supposedly be cleaning up this thread?

Also, why do you suppose there's anything good or necessary about moderating threads at all? Usenet generally did fine either without moderation, or with minimal moderation. SB could be moderated with a very small handful of people who just get rid of the spam and the occasional insane person. Instead, they're taking broad scrub brushes to innocuous posts, instead of staying out of people's faces and letting free speech work. Now, those mods aren't bad people, they're just people with priorities I don't think are ideal. However, the ones who are letting the bullies run free while vigorously scrubbing away imagined stains elsewhere, seem like hypocrites, and I do have a hard time viewing egregious hypocrites as good people. To try to be clear, I don't actually care if someone blathers on in a thread about someone else needing their mommy. It is when this community claims to have standards, but enforces them in an at best arbitrary but often capricious manner that it bugs me to see the bullies running free, while innocuous posts are censored willy nilly if we'd done something bad. But I am willing to listen and learn. Free speech is good for that.

Why do I smell a corporate overlord somewhere?
 
...//... Also, why do you suppose there's anything good or necessary about moderating threads at all? ...//...
Seriously, are you that simple?

Edit:
Ok, maybe too harsh. I suggest you read the TOS for any forum that you post in. -The rules change to accommodate the intended audience. This is a 'gloves off' forum.
 
It is his own actions and words that make him look bad - not me.

Apparently they do that to you. I don't think that'd be the majority impression. It seems you didn't consider the testimony of his own account ('words') adequate enough to make the point, so you added your input (which I take it was judged objectionable by some).

and (f) whether a person who holds themselves out on this board as an expert on the appropriate standard for safety in the dive industry, and is treated as such, is actually quite reckless, endangered passengers for years, and concealed from them an extraordinarily serious safety problem.

I think he's been quite on the table as to his experience, sources of info., the basis for his views and what are his opinions. No one is an expert on everything, nor did he claim to be. He's been informative to the discussion. Others can respectfully disagree with his points. That last bit is very accusatory. I don't think the mod.s could let that stand.

I used no derogatory terms and made no unfounded accusations.

All I did was repeat the actions that someone in the forum had taken, and the words they used.

You also added your judgmental subjective interpretation.

Or warn the owners of other boats with a virtually identical design, including the Conception.

I don't think it's incumbent upon a captain who notes some theoretical issue to call around warning owners of similar boats about it (particularly when they can see and judge for themselves in the operation of their own boats). He may mention it to some, but how far does this go?

Also, why do you suppose there's anything good or necessary about moderating threads at all? Usenet generally did fine either without moderation, or with minimal moderation.

Have you spent time on rec.scuba? I heard about it on this forum and went to check it out...once. I've seen a moderated environment (Scuba Board) for comparison, and much prefer it. Yes, if you're here long enough, you may get fussed at about something (I have), get banned from a thread (done that, too) and see perceived inconsistencies in enforcement. I'm not attacking rec.scuba...just saying it's out there for those who want to see what less moderation looks like, and make their own decision.

Richard.
 
In that case, I apologize for mischaracterizing his position here. Apparently I made a big mistake in that regard.
IF they show the staff badge, they're on this list. Note that I don't but I am one.
Notable Members | ScubaBoard
 
Seriously, are you that simple?
Apparently. Thank you. Do you have a peace fellowship article for us to read about calling people simple? I'm learning a lot about religion from you.

I've been on the internet since 1994. Since WAIS, Gopherspace, Lynx, et al. When it was a tool of universities and the military, and AOL hadn't come along yet and certainly hadn't flooded the net with masses of people. And you know what? Free speech did just fine. We didn't need a mass of nannies. When you ask why anyone would question your desired nanny state approach, I just turn around and question why you feel a need to govern others. A question you still haven't answered, opting instead to fling off an insult.

I sure hope your post doesn't get moderated, because it needs to remain associated with your name. o_O

P.S. Regarding the post made about rec.scuba, that's certainly a good point, but I'd note that no one uses Usenet anymore to speak of, so it's probably not a good comparison at present, but back in the day I was on rec.backcountry a lot, and you just had to ignore the trolls and the resident mountain biker lunatic, and pick the gold from the dross instead of assuming you needed someone else to do it for you. The mass of proles storming the group certainly gave the resident NASA scientist pause, but what can you do? Oh, yeah. Censor.
 

Back
Top Bottom