[Zephyr]

I would like to know why it is OK for a Moderator to divide a discussion up, and attach someone's name to a thread at any time, without asking that person first?

-- Zephyr

By the way, this is not just for future reference. Your answers will be a major factor I need in making a decision on whether to remain or to remove myself from UT.

 

[ShonTron]

There have been a few forumers who wanted to separate the construction and photo updates from the debate on the architecture and on Robert Stern, which really took a life onto its own and often went off-topic.

It is very common for most construction threads to have photo updates, and usually, these people take pictures because they like the building, or frequent the area.

As I have said, it is relatively easy to revert the split. These splits of threads happen quite often, and there are usually few complaints. It is mostly to make the forum more useful to more people. Your posts (which I may not always agree with, but at least were long and with lots of effort and thought) remain.

If we get enough feedback asking to revert, we will gladly do so.

 

[Zephyr]

If it needs to be said, I will say it.

Sean - I've already seen these remarks before, so they are not enough for me. I am bitterly outraged at the way this debate has been handled from above. And this final element has indeed taken me to the realisation that what I thought this forum was all about, is not what it is all about.

I need a more direct answer, one without the confusion I still have with this answer.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

The Stern/faux debate was separated from the 1 St. Thomas construction updates in several blocks. Your name was on one 'version' of the evolving thread because one of your posts was, at the time, the earliest post that had been transferred over. This means you were the "author" of one spliced block of posts that was transferred over, not the final thread.

 

[Zephyr]

I am perfectly aware at this point of the history of the evolving thread. You will note I have used the phrasing "...at any time...." The remarks were also directed to the Moderators, although this is never explicitly stated.

.​

 

[scarberiankhatru]

Lighten up, Zephie: don't have a cow.

edit - hmm, if the pic's not showing up - it is a hot air balloon shaped like a cow.

 

[Urban Shocker]

Two threads on 1 St Thomas! This is the most exciting news since the introduction of New Coke in 1985 backfired and they brought back the original Coca-Cola formula and sold it in tandem as Classic Coke.

 

[Zephyr]

Based on what has happened both publicly, and behind the scenes, over the last two days, it looks as though we can all go forward again with subsided anger.

I consider the issues raised as being resolved. Thanks.

 

[CDL.TO]

Mods are people too. And gosh-darn, they're just trying their best to balance the competing needs of coherent organisation and organic discussion flow.

The mods are nice, plain folks. Salt of the earth. You could come to the Xmas party and meet them in person and discuss philosophies of internet discussion management. Seriously.

 

[Zephyr]

Mods are people too. And gosh-darn, they're just trying their best to balance the competing needs of coherent organisation and organic discussion flow.

The mods are nice, plain folks. Salt of the earth. You could come to the Xmas party and meet them in person and discuss philosophies of internet discussion management. Seriously.

I thought they were gods...

I will be in Chicago with my immediate family this time tomorrow. Thanks for the offer however. Not too long before my tasks will be over here in Toronto and I will be posting from somewhere beyond the city limits.

 

[Zephyr]

I thought this matter a non-issue going forward, but yesterday I experienced yet another variation of this problem of 'Authoring a New Thread' on this forum regarding the actions of Darkstar416.

A change in wording to a thread to suit that Moderator's belief rather than those of the thread starter, which happened to be me. (I am beginning to think I am a target in a shooting gallery of late.)

Let me suggest that you take the common courtesy of first sending a Private Message offering the reason why you think you must make a change. This will give the person a chance to respond privately. Who knows, maybe you are right or maybe that person will have a valid response. Why continue in this mode of laundering in public view unless you are instituting a type of Mount Olympus on this board.

This is maddening the way this continues and often seems arbitary even when done with good reason. You correct the grammar of one person, and ignore that of another. You make a minor change in a thread title in one case, and ignore an offensive thread title in another. And I am being kind in not listing the rest that I have noticed.

Just because you offer sometimes an explanation, after the fact - publicly or privately - this is not a good approach to the responsibility that rests in your hands.

If I am being lectured to publicly in a thread, I will respond in kind if I feel I have a just position on that same matter. If you take it offline, I would keep it offline on my part. I don't see why that cannot be the modus operandi. But now, put plainly, I don't trust the Moderators as a collective group of individuals, to be consistent in their execution of whatever policy that may exist on this thread.

.

 

[JasonParis]

This is a moderated forum and sometimes the moderators will change the name of the thread title in order to make it more easy to understand and/or for it to be more techically correct. In fact, sometimes we change and delete and move entire threads too! If you post on this forum, you need to be prepared that this may happen. We don't have the time to message everyone to get their opinion first. I'd suggest we sometimes make 25+ changes a day to the forum (collectively). However, that being said, you are certainly welcome to message us if you have any issue with any changes after the fact.

I changed the name of your thread as Iowa is almost always refered to as a Caucus and because there was no reason to initialize all of Obama's last name. It's important to me and the mods that thread titles be as clear as posisble. I've been to journalism school and I use some of that to guide me through this. Titles should be clear, correct and concise. You entire message was left as you wrote it. For the record, I change thread titles almost every day and have never received any such response before. To suggest I/we have a beef with you and/or are targetting you is quite ridiculous. I actually changed the thread title before even reading the content if you must know.

Look, we are just being mods and are doing the best job we can. Yes, sometimes we miss something offensive or a spelling mistake, but this isn't a full-time job for any of us. As I said, we do the best we can and it's probable you may not always agree with it, but that's the way it is. The changes we do make are always with the betterment of the forum in mind.

 

[Prometheus The Supremo]

darkstar, from your avatar, you appear to be looking down upon us with an authoritative pose ready to proclaim - behold! for i am the moderator! caps lock, i will reduceith ye to subscript and all characters shall tremble by my mighty edit button!