will be prosecuted

Moo-Crumpus · 2006-09-26 20:02:04

quiz - what was my first post? mention group dynamics is a provocation? is this what you meant? I can't see that at all, I beg your pardon.

dtw · 2006-09-26 20:03:22

tlaloc wrote:

Useless discussion - too many personaly feelings obviously hurt - please lock!

There are three mods posting in this thread - we can't lock it and you are not helping. Please resist the urge to keep posting

We have to go through this process in public or we get accused of covering things up. Sad, eh?

Moo-Crumpus · 2006-09-26 20:06:10

I would prefer public, as it already is there - and I think has to be there. Wether I am wrong or right, wether phrakture is wrong or right, I think this process is necessary. At least for me.

phrakture · 2006-09-26 20:07:00

Moo-Crumpus wrote:

quiz - what was my first post? mention group dynamics is a provocation? is this what you meant? I can't see that at all, I beg your pardon.

I am not talking about your first post. Let's stay on topic. You claimed I sent you an unpolite[sic] and harsh PM. I have posted a screenshot above - screenshots do not lie. Here is the second PM I had sent you, after you responded calling me a gestapo:

Again, I am at a loss to figure out where i was "unpolite and harsh" - please explain.

As for your first post being moved, it was not done because I didn't like you - it was done because, and this is important, there was a question as to the rationale behind your second posting towards Dusty. dtw has already said that that action was warranted. If you wish to call me "a taliban" and look like a fool for that, I suggest you say that to the other moderators as well.

dtw · 2006-09-26 20:11:26

Moo-Crumpus wrote:

quiz - what was my first post? mention group dynamics is a provocation? is this what you meant? I can't see that at all, I beg your pardon.

It looked that way to me to begin with yes! It looked like you were either attacking the mod team or the general forum population!

After reading Dusty's post I realized he was confused too. Then it looked like you "attacked" Dusty:

Thanks for the proof, dusty.

BUT YOU DIDN'T ATTACK HIM! You were saying "look, people misunderstand! My point is proved." Phrakture didn't get that! He thought, as I did that you were attacking the mod team/forum posters and critcising Dusty's response! He reacted appropriately, thinking you were trolling and now you are running around screaming blue murder about a simple misunderstanding!

He thought you were trolling, he acted appropriately but now understands the confusion which was not his fault.

You are acting entirely inappropriately. Please stop calling people names and calm down.

Moo-Crumpus · 2006-09-26 20:12:10

phrakture wrote:

Moo-Crumpus wrote:
You moved a harmless thread. You lost any sense in where it is necessary to act and where not.
You sent me an unpolite and harsh pm after removing the thread. You could - if it was necessary at all - complain first, react then after hearing what me or dusty would say. You act like a taliban.
My first posting here was a sign that at least I think you are ruling absolutely immoderate.
I wish to clarify. I moved a thread deemed harmless after I moved it.
As for the "unpolite and harsh" PM. Here's a screenshot:

For my taste, this was very unpolite. You voted my answer to dusty as kind of revenge. I told you you gotta do what you gotte do, and startet a new thread complainig about the ruling in general - in no relation to the other topic. Unless you named me ass and told me I should shut the fuck up, I did not adress or offend you in public, personally.

Moo-Crumpus · 2006-09-26 20:14:53

I am going to have a beer. Smoking something, get my head clear. Back in minutes.

phrakture · 2006-09-26 20:19:53

Moo-Crumpus wrote:

For my taste, this was very unpolite. You voted my answer to dusty as kind of revenge. I told you you gotta do what you gotte do, and startet a new thread complainig about the ruling in general - in no relation to the other topic

Firstly, "starting a thread complaining about the ruling" is the definition of retaliatory posting. This is, flat out, not allowed in these forums. You can complain to the moderators themselves. Retaliation is counterproductive, and as such, is removed. See my first post in this thread.

Secondly:

Moo-Crumpus wrote:

. Unless you named me ass and told me I should shut the fuck up, I did not adress or offend you in public, personally.

I call shenanigans on that. You did, in fact, insult me, in public, numerous times. Here's a choice one:

Moo-Crumpus wrote:

You sent me an unpolite and harsh pm after removing the thread. You could - if it was necessary at all - complain first, react then after hearing what me or dusty would say. You act like a taliban.

Moo-Crumpus · 2006-09-26 20:20:48

My apologizes for the over-reaction, phrakture, dusty and dtw - and all the others. It seems I am part of group dynamics too.

All I tried to mention was, try to understand how and why people act before react. There has been to much angry and frustrated mood lately. In the end, as I have demonstrated, this includes me.

dtw · 2006-09-26 20:20:50

Moo, for crying out loud, what do you expect? A perfumed letter on pink paper? He thought you were trolling - we don't waste time being nice to trolls.

And, sorry to be childish, but he called you an ass after you called him gestapo, which, I am certain, was intended as an insult.

Moo-Crumpus · 2006-09-26 20:22:06

ah, nono, I never told *him* gestapo. Lemmie review.

dtw · 2006-09-26 20:26:15

Moo-Crumpus wrote:

ah, nono, I never told *him* gestapo. Lemmie review.

Technically, you described the whole mod team as the forum gestapo, which includes him and was obviously aimed at him. Either way it looks bad for you.

Moo-Crumpus · 2006-09-26 20:26:53

I generally mentioned gestapo methods, but not him. He started calling names. Don't mix the sequence. After that I wrote he acts like a taliban, right.

phrakture · 2006-09-26 20:27:00

Moo-Crumpus wrote:

A little issue between me and dusty, kindly cleared between both of us, has become made the BIG thing by phracture, who was never adressed since I named him gestapo...

What?

Moo-Crumpus · 2006-09-26 20:27:53

Moo-Crumpus wrote:

My apologizes for the over-reaction, phrakture, dusty and dtw - and all the others. It seems I am part of group dynamics too.
All I tried to mention was, try to understand how and why people act before react. There has been to much angry and frustrated mood lately. In the end, as I have demonstrated, this includes me.

Moo-Crumpus · 2006-09-26 20:29:47

phrakture wrote:

Well, I debated troll binning this, as this is a retaliatory post. But i will leave it here. Your topic was removed because you were being an ass. Try being nice, and your topics will remain. Optionally, you can cry about it.

See post number 2, and see who started personal offence.

dtw · 2006-09-26 20:30:15

As long as it is all sorted I am happy.

phrakture · 2006-09-26 20:33:45

Ok, all in favor of deleting this thread, now that it is cleared up, and restoring the old?

dtw · 2006-09-26 20:34:16

dtw wrote:

Moo-Crumpus wrote:
ah, nono, I never told *him* gestapo. Lemmie review.
Technically, you described the whole mod team as the forum gestapo, which includes him and was obviously aimed at him. Either way it looks bad for you.

Moo-Crumpus wrote:

... I feel increasingly like beeing observed and ruled by a kind of forum gestapo.

That's pretty conclusive. There is very little arguement left in this topic, please can we bring this to a close with apologies rather than face saving.

Moo-Crumpus · 2006-09-26 20:34:18

I sill can't see how mention group dynamics can be offending. Maybe, someday, someone could explain it to me. Is it a "don't mention the war" thing??

Moo-Crumpus · 2006-09-26 20:36:00

Moo-Crumpus wrote:

Moo-Crumpus wrote:
My apologies for the over-reaction, phrakture, dusty and dtw - and all the others. It seems I am part of group dynamics too.
All I tried to mention was, try to understand how and why people act before react. There has been to much angry and frustrated mood lately. In the end, as I have demonstrated, this includes me.

Again my offer. Shall I creep to lourdes, and light a candle?

dtw · 2006-09-26 20:41:19

Moo-Crumpus wrote:

Moo-Crumpus wrote:
Moo-Crumpus wrote:
My apologies for the over-reaction, phrakture, dusty and dtw - and all the others. It seems I am part of group dynamics too.
All I tried to mention was, try to understand how and why people act before react. There has been to much angry and frustrated mood lately. In the end, as I have demonstrated, this includes me.
Again my offer. Shall I creep to lourdes, and light a candle?

Ok, apology accepted! YOU did then post another jibe!

As far as your original post - we want to put that back. Maybe you can re-read it and see if you can see why people might have misunderstood?

Moo-Crumpus · 2006-09-26 20:43:12

No. I would prefer to keep this debate as a sign. It is all sorted. Almost.

dtw · 2006-09-26 20:48:15

You misunderstood. I want this thread to stay as an example of how it sucks to be a moderator when things go too far. But I also want to restore your old thread too.

Moo-Crumpus · 2006-09-26 20:56:08

How ... it ... sucks ... to ... be ... a ... moderator...? This is your resume? Nothing to learn for the moderator? No apologies for all that from *him*? Shall we really herald a new round?
Ok. "You gotta do what you gotta do"...

This is absurd!

No more posts from me to this topic. I am done. We are far apart.

Arch Linux

#26 2006-09-26 20:02:04

Re: will be prosecuted

#27 2006-09-26 20:03:22

Re: will be prosecuted

#28 2006-09-26 20:06:10

Re: will be prosecuted

#29 2006-09-26 20:07:00

Re: will be prosecuted

#30 2006-09-26 20:11:26

Re: will be prosecuted

#31 2006-09-26 20:12:10

Re: will be prosecuted

#32 2006-09-26 20:14:53

Re: will be prosecuted

#33 2006-09-26 20:19:53

Re: will be prosecuted

#34 2006-09-26 20:20:48

Re: will be prosecuted

#35 2006-09-26 20:20:50

Re: will be prosecuted

#36 2006-09-26 20:22:06

Re: will be prosecuted

#37 2006-09-26 20:26:15

Re: will be prosecuted

#38 2006-09-26 20:26:53

Re: will be prosecuted

#39 2006-09-26 20:27:00

Re: will be prosecuted

#40 2006-09-26 20:27:53

Re: will be prosecuted

#41 2006-09-26 20:29:47

Re: will be prosecuted

#42 2006-09-26 20:30:15

Re: will be prosecuted

#43 2006-09-26 20:33:45

Re: will be prosecuted

#44 2006-09-26 20:34:16

Re: will be prosecuted

#45 2006-09-26 20:34:18

Re: will be prosecuted

#46 2006-09-26 20:36:00

Re: will be prosecuted

#47 2006-09-26 20:41:19

Re: will be prosecuted

#48 2006-09-26 20:43:12

Re: will be prosecuted

#49 2006-09-26 20:48:15

Re: will be prosecuted

#50 2006-09-26 20:56:08

Re: will be prosecuted

Board footer