Is this the worst post in the history of Atlas?

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

No (normal).

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Could the mods get their mind together and ban oldies for once?
We banned Link for similar antics. Yet, mods don't even seem to want to infract him enough than he goes mute.

He posted much more insanity than King, yet, he wasn't muted yet.

King was never muted.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Could the mods get their mind together and ban oldies for once?
We banned Link for similar antics. Yet, mods don't even seem to want to infract him enough than he goes mute.

He posted much more insanity than King, yet, he wasn't muted yet.

King was never muted.

He reached 50 points, which put him under mod control, the result being pretty much the same (we don't hear them anymore for a moment).

Please point out to me the time that King made no posts for 5 days straight.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Could the mods get their mind together and ban oldies for once?
We banned Link for similar antics. Yet, mods don't even seem to want to infract him enough than he goes mute.

He posted much more insanity than King, yet, he wasn't muted yet.

King was never muted.

He reached 50 points, which put him under mod control, the result being pretty much the same (we don't hear them anymore for a moment).

Please point out to me the time that King made no posts for 5 days straight.

Because it was removed/his posts were approved after he came back to himself.

No; the mods (including myself) approved his posts as they came in... all during his mod review.  There's a big difference between mod review and muting.  Mod review enabled the us to stop his spamming of the forum with sexually oriented material while he was intoxicated.  A muting would have been an overstep, but I think mod review was entirely appropriate, especially considering the content of what he was posting while under the influence.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

I'm not disapproving with putting King under mod review (I'm not part of the Lief crowd), I'm disapproving Oldies not being under mod review.

Going back to October (I stopped there), there have been 2 legitimate reported posts of his (I'm excluding the general, "Oldiesfreak is banned from posting in __X__ mine thread", which I don't honor... same goes for BRTD; I don't infract for what people consider a "good" or "bad" post and don't plan on doing so).  So in 6 months, he's had 2 reported posts.  There's no such thing as a 25-point infraction, so I don't see how you have the right to complain when you (and anybody else for that matter) haven't even made sufficient reports to get him to 50 points.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

I don't infract for what people consider a "good" or "bad" post and don't plan on doing so

rofl

To my knowledge, I've never deleted a direct quote in a "good post" or "bad post" goldmine unless it dealt with a PM or was a repost of something that was subsequently infracted and deleted (or edited) in another thread.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

And no, we didn't ban Link for similar antics.  We banned Link for defending (and even "jokingly" advocating) domestic abuse of women; he even admitted to domestically abusing his significant other.  When he was given a warning, he continued to make inappropriate posts directed at females on the forum.  He was finally banned after ignoring multiple warnings and continuing to post blatantly misogynistic posts and advocating physical abuse of women.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Your entire "infractions for trolling" policy is entirely based on what you consider good and bad posts.

That has nothing to do with what I said.  I was talking about posts in Goldmines.

I don't infract for what people consider a "good" or "bad" post and don't plan on doing so

rofl

To my knowledge, I've never deleted a direct quote in a "good post" or "bad post" goldmine unless it dealt with a PM or was a repost of something that was subsequently infracted and deleted (or edited) in another thread.

We aren't talking of goldmines, we are talking about Oldies posts.

I know.  Lief got me off on a tangent by taking my quote out of context thinking it applied to other things.

Anyway, I've explained why he's not on mod review... because nobody reports his posts, other than this latest incident, and I agree with the mod of that board that what Oldiesfreak said isn't infractible.  I certainly don't agree with his post, but I don't think it's crossed the line into what the mods should take action on.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

And no, we didn't ban Link for similar antics.  We banned Link for defending (and even "jokingly" advocating) domestic abuse of women

Aren't Olides posts defending rape? If you want to follow Link precedent, you can give him a clear warning about stoping that kind of post, if you prefer.

No, I don't think his posts are defending rape.  If I thought they were, I'd certainly think they're infractible and say he deserves a warning.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

I'm not disapproving with putting King under mod review (I'm not part of the Lief crowd), I'm disapproving Oldies not being under mod review.

= there have been 2 legitimate reported posts of his (I'm excluding the general, "Oldiesfreak is banned from posting in __X__ mine thread", which I don't honor

Just throwing this out there, nothing to get offended about...

How are Oldies' posts in the Deluge/GPG different from NewYorkExpress's Off-Topic spam? I don't see a difference between the two, besides the fact that Oldies limits his minespam to two threads.

I don't like getting into second-guessing what someone thinks is a "good" or "bad" post; that's not my job, and while you could make a good trolling argument for a lot of the reports, doing so would generally lead to a lot of drama and debate that I'd just rather avoid, and it's a lot harder to prove that someone legitimately doesn't think something is a "good" or "bad" post.  NYE's off-topic spam clogs up a whole board; you can easily just skim past Oldiesfreak's posts in those posts.  I use the same standard for when there was the no BRTD rule for whatever goldmine it was (comedy, maybe?).  That being said, most of the spam from NYE is on Torie's board now, so why he does or doesn't delete it is a question for him.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

I'm not disapproving with putting King under mod review (I'm not part of the Lief crowd), I'm disapproving Oldies not being under mod review.

= there have been 2 legitimate reported posts of his (I'm excluding the general, "Oldiesfreak is banned from posting in __X__ mine thread", which I don't honor

Just throwing this out there, nothing to get offended about...

How are Oldies' posts in the Deluge/GPG different from NewYorkExpress's Off-Topic spam? I don't see a difference between the two, besides the fact that Oldies limits his minespam to two threads.

I don't like getting into second-guessing what someone thinks is a "good" or "bad" post; that's not my job, and while you could make a good trolling argument for a lot of the reports, doing so would generally lead to a lot of drama and debate that I'd just rather avoid,

From what I heard around me, that's not stopping you when it's about other posters than Oldies.

What are you talking about?  Do you have a specific post in mind?  I've looked through the reported posts, and the only mine-related posts I've deleted/modified had to do with profanity, making a threat, or posting something that was deleted by a mod elsewhere.

EDIT: I did delete one thread because someone was unhappy that someone else started the new comedy goldmine, but that was a one-time thing and not related to the issue with Oldiesfreak's posts there.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

I'm not disapproving with putting King under mod review (I'm not part of the Lief crowd), I'm disapproving Oldies not being under mod review.

= there have been 2 legitimate reported posts of his (I'm excluding the general, "Oldiesfreak is banned from posting in __X__ mine thread", which I don't honor

Just throwing this out there, nothing to get offended about...

How are Oldies' posts in the Deluge/GPG different from NewYorkExpress's Off-Topic spam? I don't see a difference between the two, besides the fact that Oldies limits his minespam to two threads.

I don't like getting into second-guessing what someone thinks is a "good" or "bad" post; that's not my job, and while you could make a good trolling argument for a lot of the reports, doing so would generally lead to a lot of drama and debate that I'd just rather avoid,

From what I heard around me, that's not stopping you when it's about other posters than Oldies.

What are you talking about?  Do you have a specific post in mind?  I've looked through the reported posts, and the only mine-related posts I've deleted/modified had to do with profanity, making a threat, or posting something that was deleted by a mod elsewhere.

EDIT: I did delete one thread because someone was unhappy that someone else started the new comedy goldmine, but that was a one-time thing and not related to the issue with Oldiesfreak's posts there.

I mean, there is at least one person each week complaining they received infraction points from you.

What does that have to do with what me and Sawx were talking about?

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

You said than you don't infract trolling because you wan't to create debate and drama, when it's plain false.

No, I didn't say that.  I'm assuming you meant to say "because you don't want to create debate and drama", but that still misses the point.  I'm talking about the mine threads exclusively, where I have (as far as I know, and going through the moderated posts, I seem to be correct) chosen not to infract placement of posts into the mines as "trolling" because it is so subjective that it's not worth it.  I'm not saying I don't infract trolling.  I'm not even saying I don't infract trolling in those threads.  I'm simply saying that I don't second guess placements into the mines.  For example, if someone puts the quote "FDR was the worst president" in the Bad posts mine, and some Republican reports it for trolling, I don't infract stuff like that.  It's way too subjective for my liking.  I apply that standard for every poster.  Now, I have infracted stuff in the mines, but not placement of posts into the mines for trolling.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

IIRC you have jurisdiction on OT too, and you can just click Page 2 to get to NewYorkExpress's posts. I understand and even applaud the fact that you don't delete subjectively good or bad posts in your forum.

I've given up OT in all but name only; Dave just hasn't acted on it yet.  And let's be clear about "good" and "bad" posts.  I'm talking about mines only, not what I consider a "good" and "bad" post.  I just want to make sure we're discussing the same thing, because my words have already been taken out of context.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That may be true, and I don't think anyone goes on a partisan witchhunt when they report those posts.  I'm simply saying that I don't want to get into second-guessing stuff like that.  It's far too subjective for me.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It's not inconsistent.  When it comes to the mine threads, I'm not going to infract placements of posts into those threads for trolling under almost any circumstance, regardless of the poster.  Like I've said, I've applied the same standard to BRTD and Oldiesfreak in that regard, and if NYE started making placements in the mines, I'd do the same for him.

But there's a big difference in my opinion between posting arguably "incorrect" things in the mines and starting dozens of threads that nobody ever replies to (note, I'm not saying that nobody ever replies to NYE's threads, but that he's created dozens of threads that nobody has replied to--many of which have since been deleted).

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Interesting, but it has nothing to do with that sickening rape post (which are worse than Link and domestic violence).

OK, well I disagree with your argument that he was defending rape, and from what I can tell, Torie disagrees as well.  I'm not sure how the duty of ensuring that Oldiesfreak ends up on mod review has fallen on me... the original post was on Torie's board, and he chose not to infract it.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

It's not a matter of subjectivity with Oldies, though. As far as the GPG goes, it's not a matter of the post's value, but where he is posting them. I have no qualms with him posting the type of stuff he posts in the Silver Mine. However, multiple people post in the GPG, but he doesn't.

As far as the Deluge goes, it's either denying facts or not getting sarcasm. It's an established fact that Carter appointed Volcker, who ended stagflation, not Reagan. It's a fact that PPP is considered more accurate than Rasmussen. And, it's a fact that Al Franken won the election fair and square. A solid half of those posts that I linked to aren't debatable. They aren't subjective. They're straight up misconceptions on Oldies' part.

I was about to make a "Let's talk about Oldiesfreak" thread a few months ago about this, but then I was too much of a softie to create one. My view on the whole moderation argument is that as long as Dave Leip assigns you to a board, you have a responsibility to us to moderate that board until he moves you off. You can't just "give up in all but name only". You're there until you're off, and you have a responsibility to enforce consistent terms of service. If someone's cluttering Atlas like Oldies occasionally has (and NYE still does), you delete them, no matter how big or small the scale is. I'd love for Torie to weigh in on this situation, because he's different about it, but you two definitely aren't on the same page when it comes to spam.

There are a lot of factors into what ended stagflation, and the some argue that Volcker's actions worsened stagflation in the late 1970s.  There's at least an argument that Franken didn't win the election fair-and-square (not one that I agree with, but the argument is there).

I don't find the lack of ability to sense sarcasm as worthy of infracting something.  I'm not sure why you find the Koch brothers one to be trolling.  None of those posts referenced PPP, and again, while I disagree with his labeling of the Rasmussen posts as bad, it's not so severe that I think it deserves second-guessing.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

And I don't have a responsibility to moderate anything.  It's a volunteer position.  As long as the board has an active moderator, I don't see a need to do anything.  If someone posted something that needed to go ASAP, I'd remove it, but otherwise, I see no problem in leaving the board to Torie.  That's what Torie wants, and that's what I want.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

It's not a matter of subjectivity with Oldies, though. As far as the GPG goes, it's not a matter of the post's value, but where he is posting them. I have no qualms with him posting the type of stuff he posts in the Silver Mine. However, multiple people post in the GPG, but he doesn't.

As far as the Deluge goes, it's either denying facts or not getting sarcasm. It's an established fact that Carter appointed Volcker, who ended stagflation, not Reagan. It's a fact that PPP is considered more accurate than Rasmussen. And, it's a fact that Al Franken won the election fair and square. A solid half of those posts that I linked to aren't debatable. They aren't subjective. They're straight up misconceptions on Oldies' part.

I was about to make a "Let's talk about Oldiesfreak" thread a few months ago about this, but then I was too much of a softie to create one. My view on the whole moderation argument is that as long as Dave Leip assigns you to a board, you have a responsibility to us to moderate that board until he moves you off. You can't just "give up in all but name only". You're there until you're off, and you have a responsibility to enforce consistent terms of service. If someone's cluttering Atlas like Oldies occasionally has (and NYE still does), you delete them, no matter how big or small the scale is. I'd love for Torie to weigh in on this situation, because he's different about it, but you two definitely aren't on the same page when it comes to spam.

There are a lot of factors into what ended stagflation, and the some argue that Volcker's actions worsened stagflation in the late 1970s.  There's at least an argument that Franken didn't win the election fair-and-square (not one that I agree with, but the argument is there).

I don't find the lack of ability to sense sarcasm as worthy of infracting something.  I'm not sure why you find the Koch brothers one to be trolling.  None of those posts referenced PPP, and again, while I disagree with his labeling of the Rasmussen posts as bad, it's not so severe that I think it deserves second-guessing.

I never said I wanted Oldies to be infracted. At that point I thought he was antagonizing the forum liberals, but apparently I see now that that isn't the case. I'm just saying, it may not be infract-worthy, but it definitely should be deleted.

So what makes something deletion-worthy but not infract-worthy to you?

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

The first instance of spam and thread clutter I saw after I helped him. Like I said, I've tried showing him what genuinely belongs there, and he's decided to not listen to that help. I have tried telling him which posts are bad.  I have been kind. I have been, admittedly, an ass at times. But at this point, I've given up, and I nearly made this appeal to you after my rant on Oldies in the Deluge, but I decided to wait it out. It hasn't ended.

Other posters have tried to get him to stop spamming. It hasn't worked. It's time for you to step in

And I don't consider it spamming.  If I did, it'd be infract-worthy in my book.  But if there's an arguable point for the post to be there, which I think there is, I'm not going to do anything.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

The mod team isn't on the same page on a lot of stuff, and quite honestly, NYE's thread creation and Oldiesfreaks's posts in the mines are probably not even in the top 10 of "important" issues.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

The mod team isn't on the same page on a lot of stuff, and quite honestly, NYE's thread creation and Oldiesfreaks's posts in the mines are probably not even in the top 10 of "important" issues.

Well, how about the aformentioned post, the one this thread is about? Shouldn't it at least be infracted or deleted?

I've already given my thoughts on that post somewhere in this thread.  I don't care to go through it all again, so if you can't find it here, I know it's within the first page of my recent posts in my profile.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Do you guys honestly want the moderators to curate the GPG and similar threads? That strikes me as an awful idea.

I'm not advocating that at all. I just don't see why NewYorkExpress is being infracted while Oldies isn't for (essentially) the same thing. And since apparently Torie's the one who's doing the deleting in that case, I'd like to see his point of view on it.

I don't know about you all, but I just want consistent moderation. Either infract both or don't infract either of them. It's all I'm asking.

Doing the deleting in what case?

In the case of NewYorkExpress's threads on OT. I'm assuming it's you, considering Inks has resigned (in all but name only) as an OT mod and Mikado is barely active. Since apparently Inks has stated his case, I'd like to hear your point of view on how similar Oldies' mine spam here is to NYE's thread spam on OT.

I deleted quite a few of NYE's posts before I resigned, but I have no clue if Torie has deleted any since.