When will my imprisonment end?

[Nym90]

Dave is the only one with any control whatsoever over Mod Review. I have no ability to put anyone on it, remove anyone from it, or otherwise have any insight into how it works. I'm not sure how I can be any more clear about that.

[opebo]

I have to say I'm quite disappointed that none of my supposed forum friends have posted anything about this affair.

The censorship, control, and disallowing of most political speech we have all come to expect, but when the rules are not even enforced 'as written', but simply in a completely arbitrary manner, you would think some might object.  If this is to be a game at all - even it is just a game of 'pleasing the moderators' - we still need some rules to play by.

[opebo]

Btw, the 30 day thing dropping down to 8 days, is one of those things one might try to avoid. Just a thought. A extra 25 day lockup perhaps because the warden is on vacation, is just not the same thing as 3 extra days is it?

I have no idea what you are talking about here.  The rule is - five days moderator review for 50 death-points, and again another five day moderator review at 75 death points.  I believe the rule is you are banned at 100 death points.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

I have to say I'm quite disappointed that none of my supposed forum friends have posted anything about this affair.

If you are referring to BRTD, then the word you are searching for is "groupie", not "friend".

---

The censorship, control, and disallowing of most political speech we have all come to expect, but when the rules are not even enforced 'as written', but simply in a completely arbitrary manner, you would think some might object.  If this is to be a game at all - even it is just a game of 'pleasing the moderators' - we still need some rules to play by.

keep your powder dry

[Grumps]

I didn't even know you were on but will certainly be glad when the glitch is resolved.  I need a damn dinner update

[Mr. Morden]

The Big Board of Death on the mod board no longer lists opebo as being on mod review, so I guess it's time to call off the hunger strike.

[Grumps]

The Big Board of Death on the mod board no longer lists opebo as being on mod review, so I guess it's time to call off the hunger strike.

[Dave Leip]

Looks like some bug - I've remove the mod review...

Thanks,
Dave

[opebo]

The Big Board of Death on the mod board no longer lists opebo as being on mod review, so I guess it's time to call off the hunger strike.

Can you clarify the rules?  Is it correct that I will be banned at 100 points?

Also, one final message to all moderators - please, please, do not infract me for the posts which you yourselves made in my name during my period of full-moderator-control.  That is, don't go back weeks from now and forget that you yourselves reviewed, approved, and posted said messages. 

[opebo]

keep your powder dry

I don't think that really has any meaning here, but the attitude is admirable.

[Californian Tony]

Can you clarify the rules?  Is it correct that I will be banned at 100 points?

Of course not. You're an Old One.

[opebo]

Can you clarify the rules?  Is it correct that I will be banned at 100 points?

Of course not. You're an Old One.

But I was under the impression that there was a rule, and that this rule was at 100 death-points one was permanently banned.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Can you clarify the rules?  Is it correct that I will be banned at 100 points?

Also, one final message to all moderators - please, please, do not infract me for the posts which you yourselves made in my name during my period of full-moderator-control.  That is, don't go back weeks from now and forget that you yourselves reviewed, approved, and posted said messages.  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2bCwyzT0Z6E&#t=0m43s

[Nym90]

A couple of points to clarify:

Receiving 100 points is not a guarantee of being banned, nor is a failure to reach 100 points a guarantee of not being banned. It is ultimately a decision that is made based on several factors. Past history, ratio of posts that contribute to positive intellectual discourse to those that detract from it, etc. are all taken into account, not merely the total volume or content of "negative" posts.

I attempt to weigh all these factors against each other, but it is ultimately a subjective decision on my part, and one that certainly can be appealed to Dave (regardless of whether I banned someone that you think that I shouldn't have, or if I didn't ban someone that you think that I should have). Dave's a pretty reasonable guy in my experience, and if you can make a good argument, he'll certainly take it into consideration.

It's important to keep in mind that all of us are guests on Dave's private property. So there are no "rules" other than those he chooses to establish, which can be modified or changed by him at any time.

[Californian Tony]

Can you clarify the rules?  Is it correct that I will be banned at 100 points?

Of course not. You're an Old One.

But I was under the impression that there was a rule, and that this rule was at 100 death-points one was permanently banned.

Was Jmfcst banned ?

[opebo]

Was Jmfcst banned ?

Depends on what you mean, and we can never really know anyway.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Was Jmfcst banned ?

Depends on what you mean, and we can never really know anyway.

well played!

[Nym90]

Also, being on mod review doesn't absolve you of responsibility for the content of your posts. If you make a post while on review that otherwise would be infracted, you cannot expect to escape infraction simply because you're on review.

[Nym90]

Can you clarify the rules?  Is it correct that I will be banned at 100 points?

Of course not. You're an Old One.

But I was under the impression that there was a rule, and that this rule was at 100 death-points one was permanently banned.

Was Jmfcst banned ?

For 30 days, much to the consternation of both those who felt that I should have been more lenient and those who felt that I should have treated him more harshly.

[opebo]

Also, being on mod review doesn't absolve you of responsibility for the content of your posts. If you make a post while on review that otherwise would be infracted, you cannot expect to escape infraction simply because you're on review.

But in that case, what does the word review in 'moderator review' mean?  A moderator already reviewed and approved it Nym. 

[Inks.LWC Supports Chuck Hagel]

IIRC, I actually spent 6 days in the hole at 50 and at 75...and, of course, a month of solitary when I hit 100.  

Yes, those are the precise rules - five days at 50, five days at 75, and a month at 100.

So, moderators, why am I still under moderation?

You are failing to do your jobs.

Well I know it's not a month at 100... I have no clue where you got that from.

[Inks.LWC Supports Chuck Hagel]

Btw, the 30 day thing dropping down to 8 days, is one of those things one might try to avoid. Just a thought. A extra 25 day lockup perhaps because the warden is on vacation, is just not the same thing as 3 extra days is it?

I have no idea what you are talking about here.  The rule is - five days moderator review for 50 death-points, and again another five day moderator review at 75 death points.  I believe the rule is you are banned at 100 death points.

Again, your interpretation of what happens at 100 points is incorrect.  Instead of complaining about us being unfair in our application of the rules and accusing us of failing to do our job, I suggest you actually re-read what Dave has said.  THEN (and only then) if you think we're failing to do our job, come back and feel free to complain.

[So the Heroes Fall]

I have to say I'm quite disappointed that none of my supposed forum friends have posted anything about this affair.

The censorship, control, and disallowing of most political speech we have all come to expect, but when the rules are not even enforced 'as written', but simply in a completely arbitrary manner, you would think some might object.  If this is to be a game at all - even it is just a game of 'pleasing the moderators' - we still need some rules to play by.

I actually didn't see this until now. I did throw a fit in the IRC upon hearing you were mod reviewed in the first place (not on the forum for fear of the same for me, I was only about 10 points away), but didn't know it hadn't been lifted.

While it's nice to see that this injustice has finally be corrected, I must ask how ridiculous it is to have a system where Nym can ban people (and thus presumably unban them) but not remove people from mod review.

[Vasall des Midas]

As to the oq... you will be released from captivity on the Atlas Forum when Nym decides in his mercy to release you.
 At least, you lucky sod have some hope that you may eventually be released from the Forum... that doesn't go for some of us who know they'll be posting here for life.
But I hope to have you with me for the duration.

[Badger]

Also, being on mod review doesn't absolve you of responsibility for the content of your posts. If you make a post while on review that otherwise would be infracted, you cannot expect to escape infraction simply because you're on review.

But in that case, what does the word review in 'moderator review' mean?  A moderator already reviewed and approved it Nym. 

That's actually a very good point. While a mod might exercise discretion to modify/delete a post on their board even after it was mod reviewed, but assessing points for such a post sounds highly 'bait and switch'-ish.