Um, excuse me Clyde.....Pt II

I'm still waiting for the identification of the personal attack I made on Dayton and Captain X in my Media Central thread. Both you and Lanzman have locked my other Help Desk thread, yet I never got a direct answer to this question.

Why?

What was the personal attack?

I have two thoughts on this. First, Uncle Albert needs to be warned for flaming in the helpdesk via rep comment. Second, El Chup needs to be warned for trolling Dayton and CaptainX in Media Central. I mean, Clyde jumped in to close things down before they got out of hand, but clearly there was trolling in the thread, otherwise it wouldn't have needed closing. Time to warn the offender. Sorry chup, but it's the only way.

Warning to Albert for flaming in the Help Desk.

Cool. Lemme buy a second one while you're at it. No hard feelings.

Gul and El Chump are sniveling, attention whoring douchetards who need to grow the fuck up and find something other than "annoying people" to entertain themselves.

Totally worth it.

Congratulations. You felt better for being an interwebz warrior.

Go back to tbbs already.

Ok, this is what I can tell you. Clyde closed the thread because it seemed like a call-out thread, with the same two members named. After he had closed it, there were similar threads in the Red Room, which is why he decided not to reopen the Media Central one.

Tamar doesn't agree with the closing, and neither do I, and Lanzman is going to trust Clyde's judgement on this, and keep it closed due to there already being similar threads still open.

This is probably not the answer you are looking for, but hopefully this explains things better.

Unless you are asking one of the mods and admins or the owner to overrule the decision and reopen the thread, your issue is probably with the moderator himself (Clyde) and it might be better handled via PM as this seems like a calling out thread to make public what you believe to be a wrong decision. (A belief shared by more than one here.) Personally, I don't think Clyde likes calling out threads and you would probably get a better response if you PMed him and told him how you feel about this than to try and publicly embarrass him here.

Clyde should be able to defend his decisions out in the open, not hide behind PMs.

Well that is week sauce indeed. If Clyde makes decisions that impact public areas of the board, and sees fit to publicly say that a member is trolling, he needs to step up and answer the questions that follow. I think Clyde knows he made an indefensible call but is too smug to acknowledge the error. El chup deserves an explanation, and as it's already a public matter, the explanation should be public. Chup shouldn't have to agree with brushing his concern into the realm of secretive PMs.

Actually I think Clyde was taking the moderating protection of Dayton to its logical extreme to demonstrate its absurdity. A mod trolling the mods.

It's good. I approve.

I'm not trying to publicly embarrass him. The opinions of the other mods are no longer at issue since the thread closing has been discussed. However, I believe, and was told a whole ago, that mods should be accountable for their actions. If mod is going to accuse me of making personal attacks then it is the responsibility of that mod to explain himself when asked, surely? Whether or not you, Lanzman, Tamar and so on thought it was a bad decision is no longer at issue. I simply want my accuser to tell me what the personal attacks were.

Why is that so fucking hard?

Your question was answered truthfully over a week ago -

Complaining about the answer is irrelevant. Might as well chafe about 2+2=4. But hey, you asked, again.

Oh and $corp, while I appreciate the intent, please don't speak for me.

In the absence of any word from the errant moderator, I think it was quite responsible and correct for an admin to address the question. Good to see you posting again Clyde, I was worried you might have been lost in the Huntington Beach surf riots. But I'm sure if you read chup's question again, you'll realize that you didn't answer it.

Is this shit still going?

It isn't irrelevant. "I made a judgement call" does not tell me what the personal attacks you accused me of were. You think when a judge hands down his judgment he does so without an explanation of his reasoning? I appreciate this is not a court but it is entirely reasonable to ask one's accuser for proof of the accusation.

Why is it so hard to tell me?

This is all you people have to do with your lives?

I think he's implying that in his view a "calling out" is a personal attack...either that or he assumed the complaint was accurate without watching the video himself and mistakenly said there was a personal attack when there wasn't one because there was a complaint.

I dunno. I never saw a personal attack in this situation. Even so..how long are we going to drag this out? What is there left to gain from this now?

While I appreciate the help, please allow me the courtesy of speaking for myself.

You are far from alone.

The insight into character is sorta entertaining but you're right, The Help Desk isn't the proper forum.

Refusal to answer a straight question is extremely grating.

Either point out where the personal attack was or admit you got it wrong.

Or else what? Your limitation of options is silly. In fact this entire affair is tired. El Chup I closed your thread for the reasons I stated. There is no more.

Or else you should be de-modded. If you want to go around making accusations and sticking to them without being able or willing to back them up, then you're trolling and that's not appropriate. Particularly when it's in regards to Dayton - we've already been around the houses about him using moderators and rules as weapons.

This act might play in the Red Room, but it's not on here.

I see. So if I make up an additional comment you'd carry the "Clyde is an awesome mod" banner? Please. There is nothing sincere about this outrage.

nm

If there is no personal attack then Clyde needs to say so and reopen the thread. His refusal is telling. It's clear he would rather troll the HD than perform his actual mod responsibilities (nice of you and $corp to cover for him). Maybe the admins should cut him loose and give him what he wants?

Lanzman really needs to ask himself whether he wants this to be a place where the staff not only troll (fine by me) but also use their mod powers to do so (not remotely fine). When a mod appears to act capriciously, rather through a logical interpretation of the rules, the board risks a crisis of confidence in the staff. Clyde should explain himself, or admit he made a mistake. Otherwise, he can no longer hold the authority to effectively moderate these forums.

Anc, you've pointed out that you gave RickDeckard your password so he could rep himself. And apparently he is using your account for his impotent negrep jihad against Clyde. But I'm curious? Is he sucking himself off in posrepping this post? Or is he sucking you off?

You demonstrate once again your complete and utter failure to grasp rep. It isn't impotent any more than any other form of communication is. And the pen (or rep) is mightier than the sword.

Need proof of it's effectiveness? Are you not watching Clyde's breakdown over it? Fucking hilarious. And all it takes is a little disagreement with his bullshit posts (he's flat out lying when he says I've been negging old posts or ones that aren't him being a little bitch).

That other thread isn't being re-opened regardless of what Clyde says or does, another one is active that serves the same purpose.

And no one is covering for Clyde...that is a crazy observation when it is clear that both $corp and I disagree with his actions. Lanzman has chosen to support Clyde's decision, that means there is nothing else $corp or I can do about it.

And Clyde...

This is passive-aggressive trolling at it's very best, if I've ever seen any.

I must not have been clear. The 'covering' was in both you and $corp attempting to explain his position when he refused to. I wasn't saying you believed his initial closure or refusal to address it were correct.