Honestly, your arrogance and condescending attitude continue to amaze me, especially as a "retired" moderator participating in this thread.
I think you're pretty hung up on this and it's fascinating to see it get under your skin. My status is neither here nor there, but I have to remind some people occasionally what 'emeritus' means, lest they mistake my posts for 'official' ones, as has happened before.
Wiser people would read between the lines of what I've written and realise that while current moderators are constrained to some extent as to what they can say, those who know the score yet are free from representing the site, are not.
"Dirty laundry"? You mean my post history over almost eight years?
You now have it. Ill leave the dissection of it for others, although I note with interest that they've been lenient with you, in their opinion. If someone wrote that about me, I'd heed those words fairly carefully, but onwards...
Perhaps they may wish to check also how many times I, as a longtime member, have constructively responded and provided advice to countless requests for assistance from other members - do you qualify that as "dirty laundry" as well?
No. But it doesn't make you some form of a hero, to whom the rules do not apply, needing some form of exceptional treatment. Im not entirely sure why you think this counts as a mitigating factor, especially as youve already expressed annoyance at not being paid for it.
I have been a moderator for a good amount of time in a different Mac-related forum - no need to lecture us on how things work or whether "Brlawyer" is going to feel shocked by such a "formidable demonstration" of timestamping. This is the kind of fearmongering we don't need to hear about now.
If youre a moderator elesewhere, then Im surprised that youd even create this thread, ignoring the guidelines and reading some of the views youve expressed. Besides, unless I'm quoting or responding to you, Im writing for people who may not understand what is going on here and whoever else wants to read my posts... or I may just be posting for myself, because I'm bored and feel like writing, just to flex my fingers.
I'm genuinely amused at your presumption that my post was written just for you and that you think that since this thread is about you and is in the public domain, that some people need to be restricted from posting in it. This is the chance you took when you created this thread about yourself. No one else bears that responsibility.
Besides, my impulse was charitable and not knowing what your record held, was out of concern for you and your reputation
but that instantly evaporated upon seeing your response, which spurs me to continue my amusement.
once more, in response to your personally and directly offensive question that implied exactly what you ironically meant to imply ("Are you eight?"): you do NOT need to contribute to this discussion on possible double standards and moderation excesses by resorting to ad personam attacks
Perhaps as a droidtard, as you so nicely put it, someone needs to take you down a peg or two.
at least try to use your moderation "experience" for something more constructive in this policy debate, instead of expressing such a constant admiration for yourself.
I dont admire myself, youd be surprised how little I do. Its just that you mistake a certain deliberate style as self-regard, and is the lens through which you perceive yourself and others, but what I
do admire is the gall of someone who thinks this thread constitutes a policy debate.
No, this is not a policy debate, Ive seen and contributed to plenty of those before. This petulant trainwreck of a thread is the work of someone who feels that the rules and being moderated should not apply to them, so much so, theyre prepared to argue at length in public about a relatively minor issue which has inconvenienced them while a crowd gathers.
It's understandable that people chafe against restrictions, rules and punishments, I've done it myself and will be the first to admit it. But to elevate your relatively minor punishment into a grand public gesture on the grounds of your own special qualities, makes this one for the ages. Who can resist?
But since youre determined to make this about policy, Ill note again that I (and others) have already addressed your policy suggestions, to which your initial response has been to ignore them and get upset about my status. At length.
However, lets tackle your most recent attempts to recast your suggestions:
1) I have the impression that word-specific "censorship" is the rule now; you may wish to publish, on a regular basis, all those terms you may find offensive enough to warrant further measures such as suspension or banning - in my view, the generic term "droidtards" was not at all over that threshold; likewise for "fanboys" or the like. So a list might be especially useful to those with a different level of language tolerance
Note that the problem is, once again, not with you. Funnily enough, it lies with everybody else and youd like others to do the work of compiling a list. Heres a better and much more simple idea: Why dont you take people's advice, mind your conduct and express yourself in a manner that doesnt cause more work for others?
2) When heated exchanges take place and a suspension or another measure is adopted, one has no idea as to whether the other party has also received some sort of sanction. For the sake of transparency and fairness, you may wish to at least inform that all involved parties have received the same or similar kind of treatment.
This has been addressed multiple times in this thread already. Its none of your business how others are treated. Besides the privacy issues, do you honestly think the team want to start getting into debates with people about how unfairly theyve been treated compared to another member? Honestly, Im staggered that you as a supposed moderator elsewhere, that you think this would be a useful and productive use of staff time.
3) You may ALSO wish to consider having a mod talking to the member concerned so that he can edit/curate the post himself - or at least envisage that possibility for those who are decidedly active longtime contributors and are clearly used to a certain writing style...in other words, those who are not here to just advertise Viagra tablets.
Now youre suggesting that a special group is created that takes peoples writing styles into account and somehow create and maintain a list or tags of these untouchables? Not only is it impossible to monitor each thread, youre requesting that moderators carefully comb through each forum members posting history in order to determine that they possess a vaguely-undefined certain writing style, which will presumably grant them extra consideration? This is folly.
Obviously, my suggestion above goes exactly against that, on the grounds/presumption that longtime users DO deserve some additional consideration given their commitment and contributions to this forum (which wouldn't exist without its users anyway).
Your presumption is misplaced. The only group of people who get temporarily let off lightly for trivial offences, are those with a spotless record.
This could have all been so different. Instead of taking this public, you could have returned from your time-out and engaged in a productive and private dialogue with the admins to have the time-out stricken to some degree if you feel it was unwarranted. As
eric/ stated, it is possible to appeal those decisions and the channels of commuication do exist, despite you not using them.
Finally, Id like to come back to the point that you seem to belabour...
To be blunt, which is the way you seem to like it (for yourself at least), in my opinion, there is nothing special, particularly incisive or interesting about your contributions to MacRumors based on my reading of news threads and the like.
Many of your posts seem quite superficial, slanted and predictably partisan, as well as dismissive and contemptuous I learn very little from them and to my way of viewing the commentary on MacRumors, are part of the problem, not the solution. I only mention this in passing, because the very basis of this thread is your claim to being an outstanding contributor, your claims to specialness and the rule changes youve suggested in order to accomodate you and your specialness, which is really what this thread is about, after all.
Thanks for giving me and others the opportunity to contribute. Ive enjoyed it.