I simply brought Carl in to it, because his "flowery post" implies he sees nothing in this thread that needs to change either. Didn't mean to sit you both on the same seat of the bus.

As for logic, this does not apply. Moderators comments are taken to apply to everyone in the thread, even if they were clearly directed to specific individuals. You tell person "A" not to use that word and person "B" says "My post was deleted, and I was told that if I don't use that word it wouldn't be deleted".

And as for supporting my assertions against your hypothetical moderation... that seems to not apply either. Many of you have made vague references to events and posts, and implied you were mistreated... (NONE of it in the moderators contact thread where it belongs by the way) My reference to the insults of Saenger's avitar turns out to be misstated here as it was in another thread... don't you read all the threads? You should have KNOWN there were two people knocking each other elsewhere on the boards and PREVENTED them from carrying that forward in to this thread of purity you have going here.

Please go to the USENET where there is no moderation, have it out with each other. The system here is well established, and involves annonymous moderator handles. It by no means implies that moderators are not monitored or supervised. On the contrary. We're monitored and supervised on two ends, the project team on one, and the participants on the other.

---

Rosetta Moderator: Mod.Sense

I simply brought Carl in to it, because his "flowery post" implies he sees nothing in this thread that needs to change either. Didn't mean to sit you both on the same seat of the bus.

As for logic, this does not apply. Moderators comments are taken to apply to everyone in the thread, even if they were clearly directed to specific individuals. You tell person "A" not to use that word and person "B" says "My post was deleted, and I was told that if I don't use that word it wouldn't be deleted".

And as for supporting my assertions against your hypothetical moderation... that seems to not apply either. Many of you have made vague references to events and posts, and implied you were mistreated... (NONE of it in the moderators contact thread where it belongs by the way) My reference to the insults of Saenger's avitar turns out to be misstated here as it was in another thread... don't you read all the threads? You should have KNOWN there were two people knocking each other elsewhere on the boards and PREVENTED them from carrying that forward in to this thread of purity you have going here.

Please go to the USENET where there is no moderation, have it out with each other. The system here is well established, and involves annonymous moderator handles. It by no means implies that moderators are not monitored or supervised. On the contrary. We're monitored and supervised on two ends, the project team on one, and the participants on the other.

I have to admit you tried your best to get me angry. Your best was not enough.

At least, your true self has been shown. That is progress.

We're monitored and supervised on two ends, the project team on one, and the participants on the other.

And by your reaction we know how you feel when participants monitor and supervise you.


BTW You have shown in a way that is so pristine and clear that leaves no doubts the anger and the disruption an overzealous moderator can bring to a thread. What saved the day, was the fact that I basically chose to ignore you and let you play your hypothetical mind game.

A good moderator annonymous or not has to learn not to inject into a debate as to become the subject matter of it or worst to deflect the attention to him. You failed here.

Now that your veneer of civility towards me has washed off any act of moderation against me on your part is without a doubt a reflection of your bias and not the reality of what is posted. Sad, I thought you had some good sense and intentions but, alas You proved me wrong. This is the only negative part of the whole experience: a person I respected , showed to me I had no reasons to respect him.

Tony: there is one big problem: I don't trust you. A sad consequence of your ( and your teams) history but, a reality nonetheless

I realize that. Unfortunately, It appears you just don't like what I say, even though you can't really disprove any individual point I've brought up. Face it, you just don't like being confronted with facts that go against you're theory or percieved reality.

People learn in many ways. Through schooling and through experience. I have been here for every post of every thread at Seti since the inception of Boinc. I have the benefit of seeing how every single move has transpired and in most cases, why they transpired. You haven't been around that long and are limited to understanding that which you have seen. I was here when Ned Slider first developed the linux optimized apps, I was here throughout the entire development of all forms of optimized apps and clients. I know who made them, why they were made, the intent of their use, and even the misapplication of implementation. Can you say the same? I don't think so. You know what you've seen and been told since you started (same as I), Unfortunately, you lack the experience that I do. I wish you could have been here then.

Let me help. I belong to Boinc Synergy for the signature, because I think it's cool. If you'd bother to look, You'll see I'm not even registered at their fora and have never posted there. Not that there's anything wrong with their fora. My efforts to disprove every falsehood presented by you is solely my doing. As far as I know I have no "followers", although it wouldn't surprise me to find out that others feel the way I do. Just as it appears there is a handful of people who feel the way you do. So please stop associating your hatred of me with the team I'm on. Just hate me for me. I'm OK with that.

We're monitored and supervised on two ends, the project team on one, and the participants on the other.

And by your reaction we know how you feel when participants monitor and supervise you.


BTW You have shown in a way that is so pristine and clear that leaves no doubts the anger and the disruption an overzealous moderator can bring to a thread. What saved the day, was the fact that I basically chose to ignore you and let you play your hypothetical mind game.

A good moderator annonymous or not has to learn not to inject into a debate as to become the subject matter of it or worst to deflect the attention to him. You failed here.

Now that your veneer of civility towards me has washed off any act of moderation against me on your part is without a doubt a reflection of your bias and not the reality of what is posted. Sad, I thought you had some good sense and intentions but, alas You proved me wrong. This is the only negative part of the whole experience: a person I respected , showed to me I had no reasons to respect him.

What the heck are you talking about???
I really do not have the faintest idea what could be percieved hostile to you personly.
Could you please explain it in a way others can understand it as well?

Tony: my first act as a moderator would be to ban you, so I don't think this would work . :)

That's the funny part of moderation, there is no banning feature. ;-)

---

I am a forum moderator! Am I?

Tony: my first act as a moderator would be to ban you, so I don't think this would work . :)

That's the funny part of moderation, there is no banning feature. ;-)

There is to the project Dev's just not plain old nameless mods :D

---

Join us in Chat (see the forum) Click the Sig


Join UBT

There is to the project Dev's just not plain old nameless mods :D

Hey UBT, what are you doing here still?
And why are you here, and not over @SAP to get your #1 against BS ;)

Tony: my first act as a moderator would be to ban you, so I don't think this would work . :)

That's the funny part of moderation, there is no banning feature. ;-)

Ah, but there could be easily enough. See below post to "boinc Projects" mail list:

David Anderson to boinc_projects
More options Aug 8

In the past few months, some of the SETI@home message boards
have been overwhelmed by "trolls": people who write large numbers
of insulting and irrelevant messages.
There aren't that many of these people - maybe a dozen or two -
but their effect is to make the message boards very unpleasant,
which (according to many reports) causes lots of people
to stop running SETI@home.

I've added a new feature that lets moderators "banish" users;
this prevents them from posting for 2 weeks.
I hope this feature, used wisely by S@h moderators,
will solve the problem.

If your project has similar problems, you might want to
deploy this feature, and instruct your moderators to use it.
It's in the latest PHP code; you'll need to do a minor
database update (in html/ops/db_update.php).

-- David

Dear David Anderson
From Boinc User

The banish tool does not work, if a user chooses to be stubborn he resigns up in a fresh user name and if IP is banned uses a proxy !;-)

It`s not hard for stubborn people to thwart that methodology. The delete tool is the major tool.

---

Not all Czech`s bounce but I`d like to try with Barbar ;-)

Make no mistake This IS the TEDDIES TEAM.

Yes the banning feature is developed though not in use here. The prospect of having you and Jose as moderators though _without_ banning possibilities and is so entertaining, that I vote for that solution rather than to have the banning feature. :-)

---

I am a forum moderator! Am I?

Dear David Anderson
From Boinc User

The banish tool does not work, if a user chooses to be stubborn he resigns up in a fresh user name and if IP is banned uses a proxy !;-)

It`s not hard for stubborn people to thwart that methodology. The delete tool is the major tool.

It's combined with a minimum RAC for posting in the Cafe (if necessary probably elsewhere a well), so I'm not allowed to post there any longer, as my Seti RAC is 4 and falling.
New account won't let you post, only after some WUs crunched and granted, so at least some days rest.

Tony: You don't even know , if what you have stated is true. Jose the name may have not been @ Seti from the beginning. You don't know under what other name or names I have participated. And to be honest with you, I wont bother illustrating you on that part.

You don't even know my position on your facts. As flimsy (in my opinion) as your statistical analysis is and was ( There is something about small sample analysis that I don't like) I did use some of your data in my research on the TRUE over-claimers. You were one of the leads I followed.

Alas, Tony had the firestorm re credits started de novo in Rosetta , then one could even argue it was the product of a major misunderstanding. But, this fight has been fought and is still being fought in other projects before and after the flare up here. As a matter of fact, an administrator of another project had to stop the same type of attacks hurled at XS here in his projects MB after XS was out of here . (Correction as the largest part of XS left: some people at XS are still crunching and some have been recognized as late as today.)

Tony: I read the public areas of Boinc Synergy MB. I know what has been stated, when and by whom.

So lets say I don't buy the victim-hood of your team. And yes, I know people of your team enter in our Forum and see the angry reaction of the team members to you. Including the choice name I have for Boinc Synergy.

So both our teams have glass ceilings. :( The relative positions have hardened as nothing that have said since the flare up can lead to a peaceful resolution.

Alas, and very sad, people that are dedicated to a proposition that sharing computing resources can bring benefits to the world cannot work in harmony. But that is what is going to be. I dont hold hope for a positive change.


Sad

You cannot delete a Boinc account, it would be a foolhardy approach easily rectified by a new sign up.

Post deletion is the harshest methodology available which is why it should be used wisely, which imho it hasn`t here in all cases. Yes I agree some of my post`s were deleted that deserved it but others....hmmmmm You have never seen me whinge about a deleted post where I was just having a go at someone cos that`s life !

New account won't let you post, only after some WUs crunched and granted, so at least some days rest.

There is a way round that which I shall keep to myself.

---

Not all Czech`s bounce but I`d like to try with Barbar ;-)

Make no mistake This IS the TEDDIES TEAM.

Tony: my first act as a moderator would be to ban you, so I don't think this would work . :)

That's the funny part of moderation, there is no banning feature. ;-)

Ah, but there could be easily enough. See below post to "boinc Projects" mail list:

David Anderson to boinc_projects
More options Aug 8

In the past few months, some of the SETI@home message boards
have been overwhelmed by "trolls": people who write large numbers
of insulting and irrelevant messages.
There aren't that many of these people - maybe a dozen or two -
but their effect is to make the message boards very unpleasant,
which (according to many reports) causes lots of people
to stop running SETI@home.

I've added a new feature that lets moderators "banish" users;
this prevents them from posting for 2 weeks.
I hope this feature, used wisely by S@h moderators,
will solve the problem.

If your project has similar problems, you might want to
deploy this feature, and instruct your moderators to use it.
It's in the latest PHP code; you'll need to do a minor
database update (in html/ops/db_update.php).

-- David

Do you really believe the use of banning would solve anything?

And the silly girls still like pressing the little minus sign ....Why ?

Have you succeeded in doing anything with it ? Is it a fetish thing ?

---

Not all Czech`s bounce but I`d like to try with Barbar ;-)

Make no mistake This IS the TEDDIES TEAM.

Yes the banning feature is developed though not in use here. The prospect of having you and Jose as moderators though _without_ banning possibilities and is so entertaining, that I vote for that solution rather than to have the banning feature. :-)

You would noty be entretained after I moderate your posts . :P

Tony: my first act as a moderator would be to ban you, so I don't think this would work . :)

That's the funny part of moderation, there is no banning feature. ;-)

Never underestimate me :P

You cannot delete a Boinc account, it would be a foolhardy approach easily rectified by a new sign up.

Post deletion is the harshest methodology available which is why it should be used wisely, which imho it hasn`t here in all cases. Yes I agree some of my post`s were deleted that deserved it but others....hmmmmm You have never seen me whinge about a deleted post where I was just having a go at someone cos that`s life !

New account won't let you post, only after some WUs crunched and granted, so at least some days rest.

There is a way round that which I shall keep to myself.

Well I still remember our game when I deleted a post of you which you then 40 times reposted. In the end you won and I capitulated. With the banning feature I would have at least a temporary victory. ;-)

What is really missing here is a private messaging function since it seems most people don't read our reasons which are emailed to them when we delete or move a post or they read it the next day - and can't remember what they posted ;-).

A lot is solved and many anger is gone if you can talk to someone without others listening.

---

I am a forum moderator! Am I?

I have never ever received one message of deletion or other from here.

Mod.De, I am alway`s prepared. ;-)

---

Not all Czech`s bounce but I`d like to try with Barbar ;-)

Make no mistake This IS the TEDDIES TEAM.