|
Nominations and Campaigning for the 2024 RationalWiki Moderator Election are now open |
RationalWiki talk:All things in moderation/Archive65
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
This is an archive page, last updated 25 April 2023. Please do not make edits to this page.
Archives for this talk page:
<1>, <2>, <3>, <4>, <5>, <6>, <7>, <8>, <9>, <10>, <11>, <12>, <13>, <14>, <15>, <16>, <17>, < List>, <18>, <19>, <20>, <21>, <22>, <23>, <24>, <25>, <26>, <27>, <28>, <29>, <30>, <31>, <32>, <33>, <34>, <35>, <36>, <37>, <38>, <39>, <40>, <41>, <42>, <43>, <44>, <45>, <46>, <47>, <48>, <49>, <50>, <51>, <52>, <53>, <54>, <55>, <56>, <57>, <58>, <59>, <60>, <61>, <62>, <63>, <64>, <66>, <67>, <68>, <69>, <70>, <71>, <72>, <73>, <74>, <75>, <76>, <77>, <78>
, (back)
Hey mods[edit]
Sorry to interrupt your busy schedule but one of your mod pals is acting like a jackass and throwing their weight around in a fairly "I'm a mod and I say so" manner. Long story short - I made some edits to the Beer page which apparently wasn't received well by someone. I took it to talk. It devolved until I pretty much had enough of the conversation and explained how disappointing an exchange it was. LGM comes along, decides "the conversation is over!", reverts the edits, blocks me over it. To which I re-added the talk-page edit (it wasn't abusive, disruptive nor trolling) and asked LGM to maybe not do that. Her response, revert, lock the page and boiled it down to "I'm a mod, fuck you". All the relevant edit history's are easy to see - just follow my recent, and her recent, contribs. LGM - stop being a fuckwit. There is nothing here to mod and you can't just, by fiat, decide when discussions are over. Any of you lovely people wanna weigh in here? Acei9 03:47, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- Hum, I see your point here, Ace. However, while I agree that your comment was harmless,[1] it came after LGM said that the discussion was over.[2] I assume that's why she reverted your post. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 03:55, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- Mods don't just swing in and go "this discussion is over" and start blocking and reverting over trivial shit. I had left alone until big swinging dick LGM came along with her mod hat on. Mods are just users with powers to prevent the site devolving into chaos. There was none of that here until she showed up with his shiny badge. Acei9 03:58, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- Do mods now have the power to just decide when conversations must cease by fiat? Don't remember that being a thing. Then to block and revert with the explanation (on LGM's talkpage) being "I'm a mod". Acei9 04:09, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- LGM’s actions seem to be motivated by her personal grudge towards Ace. I mentioned this as a problem of her’s during mod campaigning but no one took me seriously. I think this is a concerning instance of mod overreach.
Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 04:37, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- It is overreach, I wouldn't have deleted the comment on the talk page. But, this is really a tempest in a teapot I think. The page is not very important and the deleted comment didn't really add anything. The original citation to The Conversation is not very good but neither is the New York Times citation. The Conversation is Eurocentric, and both citations have been superseded by newer analyses of the origins of fermented beverages. The origins of of fermented beverages (beer and wine) appear to have coincided with the origins of agriculture — not civilization as it is normally conceived — going back 11,000 years or more in the Old World.[3][4] Bongolian (talk) 05:41, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- 100% agree it is a tempest in a teapot and would have remained so until LGM became a dick. I was happy to leave it until she was a dick about it. LGM - mod better, you grimace goblin. Acei9 05:44, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- I don't know if I'm supposed to add to this or not, so pardon me if I should be staying out. I would like to point out (without necessarily supporting or opposing LGM) that Ace's recounting of events is, shall we say, a bit selective? I was the user who didn't "receive" the edits "well". I only straight up undid things that Ace had straight up deleted. I didn't restore the cross-outs, which I understand that Ace is particularly opposed to. I didn't remove the item that Ace had added to the intro. That seemed like the diplomatic path forward to me. Ace reverted my edits and started the new talk section, okay, I talked to Ace. Ace says the conversation on the talk page devolved until Ace had had enough. Yes, it did devolve, I tried to have a good faith argument with Ace but Ace didn't want to do that. It devolved into Ace pretending to not understand what I was talking about and me (under the burden of assuming good faith) trying to explain to Ace that a disagreement about the intro should be resolved by the pair of us presenting our arguments and then talking about those arguments. After LGM weighed in Ace decided that they would rather call the exchange retarded than respond to any arguments. SolPyre (talk) 06:04, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- my case: ace made edits. solpyre made a case against him. ace doesn't engage with any of the points being brought up. solpyre continues pointing this out. ace refuses to have a productive conversation. i made a comment agreeing with solpyre. ace drops this nice and pleasant comment. solpyre then says the discussion is over and this is the exact point where the discussion went completely to shit so i also say drop. ace doesn't heed what i said, so i reverted, blocked him for an hour and told him to stop. he unblocked himself and reverted my comment, prompting me to modlock for a brief hour because he's not gonna listen and i don't want a rollback war on a talk page against a moderator; then i get this inane conservation by him on my talk page blowing this way out of proportion. this is not overreach. i don't want ace stepping over what i just said; why have moderators otherwise. it's easy, guys: in most other places in the internet, when a moderator says to drop an especially sour discussion for the sake of keeping conflict to a minimum, listen to them. --It's-a me,
LeftyGreenMario! 06:17, 4 March 2023 (UTC) - also calling my action a personal grudge when i just went in and dropped a simple comment agreeing with solpyre and ace goes full unhinged aggressive comeback "this is the most retarded exchange on this site" in response, conveniently when i started to weigh in may i add, just called me a "grimace goblin", "fuckwit", all sorts of flaming, and the takeaway is that i'm the issue here? this isn't excusable behavior. we've berated users for less. in terms of civility why am i being held to a far higher standard than ace. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 06:30, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- my recollection? I referred to specific edits here. My recollection is the logs. Nice modding LGM. Gold star, good job. Acei9 07:04, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- my case: ace made edits. solpyre made a case against him. ace doesn't engage with any of the points being brought up. solpyre continues pointing this out. ace refuses to have a productive conversation. i made a comment agreeing with solpyre. ace drops this nice and pleasant comment. solpyre then says the discussion is over and this is the exact point where the discussion went completely to shit so i also say drop. ace doesn't heed what i said, so i reverted, blocked him for an hour and told him to stop. he unblocked himself and reverted my comment, prompting me to modlock for a brief hour because he's not gonna listen and i don't want a rollback war on a talk page against a moderator; then i get this inane conservation by him on my talk page blowing this way out of proportion. this is not overreach. i don't want ace stepping over what i just said; why have moderators otherwise. it's easy, guys: in most other places in the internet, when a moderator says to drop an especially sour discussion for the sake of keeping conflict to a minimum, listen to them. --It's-a me,
- I don't know if I'm supposed to add to this or not, so pardon me if I should be staying out. I would like to point out (without necessarily supporting or opposing LGM) that Ace's recounting of events is, shall we say, a bit selective? I was the user who didn't "receive" the edits "well". I only straight up undid things that Ace had straight up deleted. I didn't restore the cross-outs, which I understand that Ace is particularly opposed to. I didn't remove the item that Ace had added to the intro. That seemed like the diplomatic path forward to me. Ace reverted my edits and started the new talk section, okay, I talked to Ace. Ace says the conversation on the talk page devolved until Ace had had enough. Yes, it did devolve, I tried to have a good faith argument with Ace but Ace didn't want to do that. It devolved into Ace pretending to not understand what I was talking about and me (under the burden of assuming good faith) trying to explain to Ace that a disagreement about the intro should be resolved by the pair of us presenting our arguments and then talking about those arguments. After LGM weighed in Ace decided that they would rather call the exchange retarded than respond to any arguments. SolPyre (talk) 06:04, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- 100% agree it is a tempest in a teapot and would have remained so until LGM became a dick. I was happy to leave it until she was a dick about it. LGM - mod better, you grimace goblin. Acei9 05:44, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- It is overreach, I wouldn't have deleted the comment on the talk page. But, this is really a tempest in a teapot I think. The page is not very important and the deleted comment didn't really add anything. The original citation to The Conversation is not very good but neither is the New York Times citation. The Conversation is Eurocentric, and both citations have been superseded by newer analyses of the origins of fermented beverages. The origins of of fermented beverages (beer and wine) appear to have coincided with the origins of agriculture — not civilization as it is normally conceived — going back 11,000 years or more in the Old World.[3][4] Bongolian (talk) 05:41, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- LGM’s actions seem to be motivated by her personal grudge towards Ace. I mentioned this as a problem of her’s during mod campaigning but no one took me seriously. I think this is a concerning instance of mod overreach.
- Do mods now have the power to just decide when conversations must cease by fiat? Don't remember that being a thing. Then to block and revert with the explanation (on LGM's talkpage) being "I'm a mod". Acei9 04:09, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- Mods don't just swing in and go "this discussion is over" and start blocking and reverting over trivial shit. I had left alone until big swinging dick LGM came along with her mod hat on. Mods are just users with powers to prevent the site devolving into chaos. There was none of that here until she showed up with his shiny badge. Acei9 03:58, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- Giving this all a read mostly leaves me to conclude that Ace can't drop the stick and insisted on getting a last word in. Personally I'd not have removed Ace's comment cuz yada yada not worth any arguments with Ace, but do keep in mind that mods telling users to drop a discussion that's going nowhere is part of their duties ("Moderators are allowed to take actions to curb destructive conduct or discourse and those actions should not be undone by non-moderators.") -- Techpriest (talk) 14:08, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- After reading through myself I generally agree with Techpriest.-Flandres (talk) 15:33, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- Me too. Ace wouldn't let it lie. Spud (talk) 15:58, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, Techpriest's interpretation is reasonable. Just end this thing. It's not worth the effort. Bongolian (talk) 16:23, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- I’m not a fan of mods ordering established users to shut up and then locking the page to force them to comply. And then refusing to justify the decision. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 19:53, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- That’s my point. I’m not worried at about the page but LGM asshole behaviour which amounted to “in a mod, shut the fuck up”. Acei9 20:09, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- No offense Ace, but you're the one who is described as being as approachable in a discussion as and I quoth "trying to squeeze water from a stone". I think you steeping to insults is a good point for a mod to call off the argument for reasons that are pretty much blatantly visible. -- Techpriest (talk) 22:34, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- That’s my point. I’m not worried at about the page but LGM asshole behaviour which amounted to “in a mod, shut the fuck up”. Acei9 20:09, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- I’m not a fan of mods ordering established users to shut up and then locking the page to force them to comply. And then refusing to justify the decision.
- Yes, Techpriest's interpretation is reasonable. Just end this thing. It's not worth the effort. Bongolian (talk) 16:23, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- Me too. Ace wouldn't let it lie. Spud (talk) 15:58, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- After reading through myself I generally agree with Techpriest.-Flandres (talk) 15:33, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- Now, Ace, I see your point, but why not let this slide on account of you and SolPyre have been around for a while, eh? And their interests seem like they could be coherent with your own: looking at their recent edits, its a lot about beer, religion and masturbation. I can't help thinking that there should be more about whiskey in there. That would interest me a lot more than this.UncleKrampus (talk) 23:23, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- I did leave it alone until Super Mod LGM decided to lock, ban and revert over something almost entirely and tame compared to other conversations in this very wiki. She was just being a dick and using mod powers to do so. Acei9 00:26, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
- What a surprise, Ace is pissing people off and misrepresenting himself as the victim. Where have I seen that behavior before?? Hey Ace, you don't seem to mind when mods threaten to ban people on your behalf. Hypocritical much? FairDinkum (talk) 10:24, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- both of you stop arguing ←§ Edward the eight (talk) 17:14, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- What a surprise, Ace is pissing people off and misrepresenting himself as the victim. Where have I seen that behavior before?? Hey Ace, you don't seem to mind when mods threaten to ban people on your behalf. Hypocritical much? FairDinkum (talk) 10:24, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- I did leave it alone until Super Mod LGM decided to lock, ban and revert over something almost entirely and tame compared to other conversations in this very wiki. She was just being a dick and using mod powers to do so. Acei9 00:26, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
I’ve got nothing further to add…[edit]
…so this can probably be seared into history and relegated to the archives. Unless someone else has anything to this whole stupid thing? I, for one, am pleased our mods are sharp enough to see that a a couple of comments relating to posters frustration about the situation could easily spiral into site wide chaos, destabilising the whole community - creating a localised quantum phase transition which would remake the entire site. Up would be down, time would be backward - you start as a tech and a mod and leave as a BoN. Acei9 05:44, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
- —cosmikdebris talk stalk 06:38, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
FairDinkum[edit]
- This discussion was moved to RW:COOP.
They clearly won't stop their pointless feud with Ace and others, still continuing with unsubstantiated accusations of doxing. And since LGM said to take it here if FairDinkum continued to pick fights, well here we are. How do we get them to back off? Perhaps a temp ban from talk namespaces could help, although that could have problems as well. Plutocow (talk) 13:33, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- That's someone else who wouldn't let it lie. No doubt about that. Well, interaction bans come to mind. Spud (talk) 14:03, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- He's literally acting like a big fucking manchild right now. Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 17:06, 6 March 2023 (UTC)