New Secret Mods

SavageOne · Nov 30, 2010

In a recent thread of the WI forum it was posted that The Administrators of this site have decided to once again have certain members "police" their fellow posters by promoting them to the level of Moderator. The Administrators, however, believe it would be best if these individuals and there new status were kept "secret". See thread here.

http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/showthread.php?83707-Gleason-Banned/page2

I have said many times I believe that the members of this ,privately owned, forum should be allowed to moderate the threads, I just didn't know they would be so hand picked and secretive. So, I guess the joke's on me. Be careful what you wish for, right?

I just wanted to let everyone know to be on your best behaviour(which I believe the majority always are and since someone may be secretly reporting you to the Owners).

eye95 · Nov 30, 2010

I have no earthly idea what the first post says, however I can comment on the title.

There is at least one moderator (besides the one who was outed as a result of a recent banning) who does not carry that title publicly. I'd rather not say how I accidentally came by this bit of information or who the mod is, but he was an excellent choice.

I don't know about having secret mods, though. I hope John and Mike abandon the practice.

wrightme · Nov 30, 2010

SavageOne said:
I just wanted to let everyone know to be on your best behaviour(which I believe the majority always are and since someone may be secretly reporting you to the Owners).

That is typically how sites such as this "work." Expecting something different is not logical.

In fact, prior to this "secret mod" thing, it worked that way. Now, during this "secret mod" thing, it still works that way.

EVERY TIME a person posts in a forum such as this, they should have the following reasonable expectations:

1) What they say will get read and repeated, and attributed to them.
2) What they say may get deleted or hidden, at the whim of the owner of the forum.

ANY other expectations are not rational. Once the "enter" key (or submit button) is hit, the text may take on a life of its own on the Internet, whether the original writer intended or not. I suggest that each person posting in a forum such as this type as if the words being typed WILL be presented against them in a court of law at some point.

eye95 · Nov 30, 2010

Wrightme: I still think it is a good idea for folks given special policing powers over the general populace should be known to them. It just somehow seems more American.

Anyway, this is still the best moderated site I have ever posted on. Good job to Mike and John (and to the secret mods). I really wish, though, that you'd have open mods or no mods.

*throws dos centavos into the pot*

Beretta92FSLady · Nov 30, 2010

Who gives a crap whether the moderators are known or not, well, aside from maybe a few people. This type of nonsense is...well, I should have not clicked on this thread.

If you don't like their policies on this page, there are plenty of pages that have commies running then and do not have as large a regular base going through here every day.

Tweety · Nov 30, 2010

So how does one know what they can post and what they can not? I mean I have read the rules, but obviously there must be specifics on what you can and can not post right?

eye95 · Nov 30, 2010

Tweety said:
So how does one know what they can post and what they can not? I mean I have read the rules, but obviously there must be specifics on what you can and can not post right?

Nope, the rules pretty much cover it. John and Mike aren't notoriously quick on the trigger. You pretty much have to run roughshod over the rules to get a reaction. They are a lot more tolerant of the foibles of the members than the admins at most sites. It works well.

Gray Peterson · Nov 30, 2010

eye95 said:
Wrightme: I still think it is a good idea for folks given special policing powers over the general populace should be known to them. It just somehow seems more American.

After what happened in the brouhaha involving the person who was banned, you'd realize that secret moderation is a better idea. As soon as I was outed, the person who was banned actually threatened a statewide gun rights organization if I didn't apologize to him publicly on the forum. I posted this:

As far as I'm concerned, Mr. Gleason committed the crime of extortion towards myself and to WCI. He stated in private messages if I didn't cease my moderation of his posts and apologized to him publicly on forum, he would A) Go the police and file charges of "intimidation" against me and B) He would go the media and make false accusations towards WCI.

Source: http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/s...eason-Banned&p=1411213&viewfull=1#post1411213

This is the kind of crap I've had to deal with in the Wisconsin forum, which I was specifically tasked to deal with. There are many other moderators who are not known, but keep in mind that all moderation decisions are subject to the oversight of Administrator (John Pierce), who has the authority to overturn their decisions. To my knowledge, only one of my posts have even been edited and none of my moderation decisions have been overturned.

Anyway, this is still the best moderated site I have ever posted on. Good job to Mike and John (and to the secret mods). I really wish, though, that you'd have open mods or no mods.

*throws dos centavos into the pot*

After what happened with James Gleason, the opposite point is proven. The internet is filled with crazy people who focus on someone and blame them for all of their own problems, and a lot of them don't appreciate being hounded and cyberstalked by internet tough guys like Gleason.

eye95 · Nov 30, 2010

I wouldn't make the mistake of thinking that the dysfunction that is the Wisconsin sub-forum is representative of this site. Most of us do just fine avoiding all the in-fighting that goes on there.

A few bannings and a some follow-through on the threats of flounce-and-pout will result in a vast improvement there.

Anyway, my comments weren't intended to address the personal battles and horrible behavior in the Wisconsin area.

jimd_21 · Nov 30, 2010

I have to agree with the mods being kept secret.......basically for their protection.

I have learned valuable information from this forum, and have had run ins with some undesirables here.
Some people i would be grateful to meet in person.....and some i would hope i was never in the same state.

With that being said, their has to be some form of moderation to keep the goal insight.

"Thats all i have to say about that"

Forest Gump

Tomas · Dec 1, 2010

Public mods or stealth mods is a legitimate choice by the Admins. Whichever they are happy with.

The only problem I have with stealth mods is their not taking responsibility for their actions.

When I post my name is on that post, and I stand by it.

Should some third party, ANY third party, change what I said in a post, they should leave their mark on the post so that it is known that what is said is no longer completely mine.

If they wish to remain stealth, state that changes were made, and remain hidden, but please, please, when you change what a person has said take the responsibility for your use of that authority, and make it publicly known that a third party change was made, without exception.

Personally, on all my sites, the software is optioned to leave a notation that a third party edited the post, and there is no way to quietly sneak around that notation.

When I write something, I put my name on it and stand behind it. When someone changes what I wrote, they need to stand behind their changes.

Anything less is simply not acceptable.

(Disclaimer: I do not believe any of my posts here have ever been third party edited.)

since9 · Dec 1, 2010

I'm sorry, but I don't see any evidence of "secret mods." I do see evidence of a desire on the part of the owners/admins that all of us do our best to police ourselves, and to the best extent we can, one another.

Given the overall quality of this site (quite high, actually), and its cost to use (free), I think that's a fair trade.

Tomas · Dec 1, 2010

Whether or not you see 'evidence' of secret mods, there are mods appointed by the Admins here, and they are not identified publicly, therefore are "secret."

One such was recently outed in the carrying-ons in the Wisconsin forum, and has publicly acknowledged that he is an active mod editing posts, etc.

1245A Defender · Dec 1, 2010

uhhuh,,,

some secrets havent been kept very secret.
mike and john supposedly approve of all the moderating that gets done
by all the secret or not so secret mods that they have to help police the board.
i agree, any changes that happen to a post should always be annotated as such.

SavageOne · Dec 1, 2010

Could Grey, perhaps, inform me of what rule I broke to warrant my posts being deleted both in the WI forum and here when I reported that deletion. Even the police inform you of what you're being charged with when they ticket or arrest you.

I reported a possible misstep by a mod and his post is immediately cleansed and my post disappears along with any that quoted it. Is this the only purpose of Rule #2? Also when did sarcasm become a personal attack? I called no one a name, I only used sarcasm to address issues with another member and it disappears as well.

Mlutz · Dec 1, 2010

Gray Peterson said:
internet tough guys like Gleason.

Personal Attack?

eye95 · Dec 1, 2010

since9 said:
I'm sorry, but I don't see any evidence of "secret mods." I do see evidence of a desire on the part of the owners/admins that all of us do our best to police ourselves, and to the best extent we can, one another.

Given the overall quality of this site (quite high, actually), and its cost to use (free), I think that's a fair trade.

One of the secret mods was outted and admitted to being a secret mod when a high-profile member was recently banned and floated the accusation that the person was a secret mod. I discovered another secret mod quite by accident, when he failed to take into account a feature of the software.

There is no doubt that they exist.

The Don · Dec 1, 2010

Gray Peterson said:
After what happened in the brouhaha involving the person who was banned, you'd realize that secret moderation is a better idea. As soon as I was outed, the person who was banned actually threatened a statewide gun rights organization if I didn't apologize to him publicly on the forum. I posted this:

As far as I'm concerned, Mr. Gleason committed the crime of extortion towards myself and to WCI. He stated in private messages if I didn't cease my moderation of his posts and apologized to him publicly on forum, he would A) Go the police and file charges of "intimidation" against me and B) He would go the media and make false accusations towards WCI.

Source: http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/s...eason-Banned&p=1411213&viewfull=1#post1411213

This is the kind of crap I've had to deal with in the Wisconsin forum, which I was specifically tasked to deal with. There are many other moderators who are not known, but keep in mind that all moderation decisions are subject to the oversight of Administrator (John Pierce), who has the authority to overturn their decisions. To my knowledge, only one of my posts have even been edited and none of my moderation decisions have been overturned.

After what happened with James Gleason, the opposite point is proven. The internet is filled with crazy people who focus on someone and blame them for all of their own problems, and a lot of them don't appreciate being hounded and cyberstalked by internet tough guys like Gleason.

No disrespect intended Gray, but that's untrue and you are aware of it. The post of mine quoted below was originally hidden by you in the "Weapons license fee increases" thread in the WI forum. I asked John to explain why it was hidden since 4/5 of it were a legitimate point about fee increases and 1/5 was about how there is validity to the argument that a moderator is secret if his/her member status doesn't say moderator. About 15 minutes late my post returned, with only the "offending" 1/5 edited out and the other 4/5 intact. I know you know this because 1, you should have received my question to John too, and 2, you later replied to my post, and 3, you were the one who edited my post to remove the "offending" part.

The Don said:
Fees and permits are a very bad idea. take an example based on something that happened here at my work just the week before last...say an abused wife who's been forced to be a stay-at-home mother by her husband can manage to scrape together 250 or 300 bucks for a handgun because she's left her husband and he's harassing and threatening her, despite a restraining order.

now say concealed carry goes through but she can't afford to get another 200 bucks together (and/or the time necessary) to go to training and get a permit...so does she not carry and not be protected or does she carry anyway and risk being caught and prosecuted as a criminal and perhaps have her kids taken away?

fees and permits in order to exercise our rights is NOT the way to go. like someone else said, if you need to pay a fee and get a permit, then it's not a right, it's a privilege.

...

eye95 · Dec 1, 2010

As an admin and a mod on other boards, I can assure you that it is common practice to hide or temporarily remove a post while it is, if possible, salvaged by editing, and then returned to full view. Such is not necessarily an indication that a mod's decision has been overturned.

The Don · Dec 1, 2010

eye95 said:
As an admin and a mod on other boards, I can assure you that it is common practice to hide or temporarily remove a post while it is, if possible, salvaged by editing, and then returned to full view. Such is not necessarily an indication that a mod's decision has been overturned.

i understand that, but it was doesn't take from around 4pm when i posted to it to around 9 or 10 am the next day when i questioned John about it to remove one paragraph of about 3 lines.

New Secret Mods

Regular Member

Well-known member

Regular Member

Well-known member

Regular Member

Banned

Well-known member

Founder's Club Member - Moderator

Well-known member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Campaign Veteran

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Well-known member

Guest

Well-known member

Guest