Mods who are SOOOOO smart they don't even have to read the guidelines

[WebSlave]

So Rich you are telling me then that there is no correlation between the increased number of views on threads when certain individuals are in question. Look at the length of time this thread has been on and it already has over 1000 views. Only you can tell us how many of them viewings over the total would be by moderators. How many by the same moderator? How many different moderators view the thread? Shouldn't these numbers be publicized also? Then we can see if there is a relationship to certain moderators possibly out to get certain members on here. Just food for thought.....Because we know there have been ongoing fueds on here and now some of those people involved in the fueds have the over those they were fueding with

Nope, I can't tell you that at all, The system (and neither do I) does not care which member is viewing a thread and keeps no log of that. As for controversial threads, or ones where certain individuals may be participating, certainly more people will view such a thread than something much more mundane. How is that any different from what is published in a newspaper or viewed on TV?

As for certain moderators "out to get" someone, well even if that is the case, so what? I have offered them the power to change this site, so I am certainly not going to stand in the way if they are enforcing MY rules to do so.

Perhaps it is just time for those "certain someones" to pay a bit more attention in how they post here. Perhaps everyone should try hard to not piss off someone else, because you never know when THEY might wind up deciding to get the power to issue warning points.

If someone wants to classify this as an "inquisition", well go right ahead if it makes you feel any better about the change here. But it would be a pretty stupid person during a believed inquisition who would run around in public trying hard to attract the attention of the inquisitors. Basically trying their darnedest to make their prophecy self fullfilling by their own actions. To what purpose? Is there some cub scout badge out there for people who will finally gain that lofty goal of 500 warning points? Well if that is the goal, have at it. It's there in reach if you try hard enough, and quite certainly enough people here now who would be VERY willing to help you along to your goal.

 

[ravensgait]

Rich don't your remember not all that long ago that some Gecko folks were trying to play lemmings going off the cliff here IE doing their utmost to get themselves banned like you needed to get your ticket punched to join the banned on Fauna club.

Now I'm not saying Wes or anyone else is trying to start a new club, though I wonder after some comments made on Fauna such as Matt's new thread.

 

[hhmoore]

I am not real sure why you would not be tempted UNTIL NOW. Could it be I actually asked questions that may need to be answered? May shed light on a bigger problem? May actually give us lowly members and actual account of what the moderators are doing or what they may not be doing? How many threads are there on this site that we need such heavy moderation on one or two threads that have large viewer response? Or does it just come back to what I have always said in the beginning. Bloody waters bring plenty of sharks

Actually, the until now was not capitalized when I wrote it. I edited my post to include that phrase because it seemed silly for me to say that I had neither posted nor even been tempted to issue a warning, when in fact I WAS posting. I stuck it at the end of the phrase, instead of splitting it (and saying that I hadn't posted until now) because it was easier at the time and I was hurriedly trying to tie up a loose end so I could log off the computer. As such, I will agree that my phrasing was a bit off, and could have been confusing. As for the majority of your other questions - no. (except the blood in the water thing, that one is obvious) It's that simple. But just for you, I will make a log of every page that I view, how many times, and what my thoughts are on each of them for the next 12hrs...you can analyze it, and post your interpretations. If it proves to be as useless as I suspect, I hope you have the good sense to admit it

 

[Griz]

Most here know my thoughts with regards to the "pay to play" rules. So, I won't rehash those.

Wes, you're playing their game. Eventually, you will end up hitting the ban mark, with regards to points, and then what? You're gone? That's exactly what some of them (Christopher666 and Dand) want. They win and unfortunately, some of us lose.

You're well respected and liked by the majority of us and we prefer to continue to have your wit interjected as needed. Instead of playing by their rules, why don't you create your own?

I know your thoughts is that if you modify your behavior that they win since those are their rules. I prefer to think of it in a different light. Your intelligent enough to get your points across without needing to come out and call someone an idiot. While at times it may be fitting it is also.....well, boring. Think of a better way to get your points across while still addressing the stupidity part. I can challenge someone's IQ without needing to call them an idiot. Afterall, even the individuals on here, of whom you question their intelligence, know what the word idiot means. So why speak their language?

Long story short, you can still have fun and not get kicked off. You can still call those out that you need to in such a manner that we can all enjoy. You can still call a spade a spade even if the offending party does not quite follow your point. Rest assured some of us do....

Griz

 

[Wilomn]

Yeah, but Griz, it's ONLY $50.00. Think of all the time guys like dand and ol 66 spend hunting and sniffing and hoping through EACH AND EVERY POST I MAKE.

What makes you so sure I'm not playing my own game now?

 

[Chameleon Company]

Some amazing parallels today. We have a vindictive Matt Graybeal hoping against hope that a Dennis Hultman in AZ, who had a brush with a civil fine, is the same Fauna Dennis H. in CA, so that Matt can make his label of "scum" stick to Fauna Dennis.

Here, we have a ________ Wes hoping against hope that 3 PM's that he got about a warning were indicative of Chris 66 being in a ding frenzy aimed at Wes, and not Wes's mistake, so that Wes can make the labels of "hubris, stupid, fool" stick to 66.

While there are condemnations of Matt, and requests if not demands for apologies from him to Dennis, many are probably not surprised that there has been no apology there, and in fact more antagonism from him in related threads. Don't see too many requests for an apology here though, but that is probably to be expected .... huh ? Don't see an apology either. Takes character to apologize, and I guess neither 66 of Dennis should lose sleep expecting one.

Well, there's only one thing to do ! I'm going to have to put in a post to Matt and plead with him not to "play their game".

................... not.

 

[DaveyFig]

Yeah, but Griz, it's ONLY $50.00. Think of all the time guys like dand and ol 66 spend hunting and sniffing and hoping through EACH AND EVERY POST I MAKE.

What makes you so sure I'm not playing my own game now?

Wes, I know you aren't saying it, but to me (and I am only speaking for myself)...Man, it is hard to type a response to someone who is going to tip toe and twist everything you say...Anyway, back on track, It sounds like you might be implying that you disrespect people (I know you only speak respectfully when you think someone deserves it) as part of a game. You are doing it, not for the thrill of the hunt, but to watch someone you feel is beneath you chase you. Fun Times!
Seriously though, if the new "mods" can only ding you once a day, how much "hunting and sniffing" really has to be done to find you belittling someone, Antagonizing someone, using profanity or otherwise being Wes, to ding you ONCE A DAY!

I thought you were above that, but if you are indeed "playing your own game", perhaps I was wrong. This bothers me man, but you're probably going to get a kick out of reading that too. After all, we are all your pawns.

You know what makes me think you are not "playing your own game?" I could hear your chest thumping all the way up here in Exeter when you thought you had "stuck it to the man" making this post about Chris. The arm flailing in the middle was a little over-dramatic if you were playing a part too. And the end..."It's only $50"...For only double that you could be you could be swinging the sword that you seem to think a few are swinging wrong. You could have a lot more fun with a game that way. SO why not?

I don't think this was a game. I THINK you were wrong.

 

[brucestephenson]

Well, I have done some digging around, and here is what I have come up with.

I asked several of the mods to ding a test account I set up and attempt to do so several times in succession. NONE of them were able to issue a second or subsequent warning point to my test account. Further, this test account only had a SINGLE PM for each of the valid warning points issued in the private message INBOX, and in NO case at all were multiple PMs received for those failed attempts.

I checked the log of warning points that has an entry for EVERY warning point anyone makes here. There is only ONE from christopher66 to Wilomn on 02/26/07 for profanity. There were no other warnings FROM christopher66 TO Wilomn logged in that log file.

Further I queried Christopher about issuing those warning point(s) and he was not aware that he got a PM sent to his SENT folder for each warning point issued to anyone. As such, I asked him to send me copies of all PMs concerning those warning points that Wes claims were attempted against him once he located them.

The following are those PMs that Christopher has in his SENT folder:







As can PLAINLY be seen here, there WERE three PMs, but only the FIRST one was actually the result of issuing a warning point. The subsequent two were the result of replies being made between Wes and Christopher about that warning point.

I also got a PM from Wes in reference to my request for copies of those private messages, and here is the reply I got:



So apparently Wes can provide NO evidence at all to substantiate his claim as he is saying that those notices ONLY came via email.

Note that during the testing using my test account, there were NO emails received for those failed subsequent dings from the mods. All I got were email notices alerting me of a PM for each warning received in my private message inbox.

So, without making any accusations, here is what the evidence appears to me:

1. christopher66 issued a single warning to Wilomn on 02/26/07. Three PMs were generated by that event, two of which were replies sent back and forth between the two parties.
2. Testing with my own test account, using mods here to attempt to issue multiple warnings within minutes of each other, FAILED.
3. Further, these failed attempts did not generate either subsequent PMs nor emails to my test account.
4. I tried issuing warning points myself to this test account, and in the process clicked the button several times in rapid succession in order to try to issue duplicate warnings. Only the SINGLE warning registered and the subsequent clicks were ignored.
5. christopher66 was able to provide copies of the three PMs that were in his SENT folder that had been sent to Wilomn concerning that SINGLE warning point issued. This evidence indicates that only a SINGLE warning was issued.
6. Wilomn is unable to provide any evidence to substantiate that he did in fact receive three discreet warnings from christopher66, two of which would have been rejected by the system via the rules for the issuing of warning points within a 24 hour period.
7. The warning points for Wilomn shown in that original warning point from christopher66 are the same as those warning points on Wilomn's record at the start of this investigation, indicating that NO additional warning points had been added to his total from those supposed subsequent warnings from christopher66
8. christopher66 was apparently unaware (as were several other mods) that PMs for each warning point are placed in their SENT folders, which indicates that they probably were not deleted by christopher66 to try to cover up anything. Regardless, the log files would have shown those additional warnings anyway, which they do not.
9. In the original post made in this thread, the text that was cut and pasted in that post are consistent with what one would see if they simply tried to cut and paste from private messages. I believe those statements were meant to be evidence of christopher66 trying to issue three separate warnings to Wilomn. Further, Wilomn quotes that those three separate warning attempts had been made within 30 minutes. The single warning and subsequent replies were made at 12:11, 12:23, and 12:37, a span of 26 minutes.

I think the evidence here is sufficient for you all to come to your own conclusions.......

There is only one conclusion: Wes Pollock is one of the biggest liars in the reptile industry.

 

[Chameleon Company]

For only double that you could be you could be swinging the sword that you seem to think a few are swinging wrong. You could have a lot more fun with a game that way. SO why not?

Yeah, and Wes could ding his ding dong once a day, every day of the year. The only person who would bitch would be Wes on the day he dung himself. Then we'd get a thread about how he had been singled out by himself, it wasn't fair, mods were stupid even in the mirror, blah .... blah ..... blah.

It ain't a sword. Its barely a pea shooter. To those who will whine all the way to their grave, it will always be a cannon.

 

[shrap]

There is only one conclusion: Wes Pollock is one of the biggest liars in the reptile industry.

Better than being a deadbeat scammer by any measurement.

 

[Chameleon Company]

Yup. Wes is sure holding his head high.

 

[SoulSmilen]

I am not real sure why you would not be tempted UNTIL NOW. Could it be I actually asked questions that may need to be answered? May shed light on a bigger problem? May actually give us lowly members and actual account of what the moderators are doing or what they may not be doing? How many threads are there on this site that we need such heavy moderation on one or two threads that have large viewer response? Or does it just come back to what I have always said in the beginning. Bloody waters bring plenty of sharks

You didn't ask questions that need to be answered; you asked questions that are absolutely irrelevant to any complaints you are bringing up, and I can't for the life of me figure out where your mind is that you think Rich should be keeping track of who's viewing what threads. Get real!!!

Of course those mods are here reading this thread; just like you and me. Not only is it a popular thread right now, it has many replies and as such, it shows up on the "New Posts" page from these new replies. Logistically, it will be opened many times because of that. Is that really hard to figure out? Refer to the base word in 'logistically.'

Not only is it LOGICAL for these mods to be opening the thread because it is popular right now, but it is LOGICAL for these same mods to open the thread simply because they were regularly posting, active board members long before they had the mod status. It's a no-brainer!

As much as I voiced my opinion when this transition first happened, and even though I ragged on Rich in the extreme, you are barking up the wrong tree on this one. It is close to insanity to think that views should be monitored for anything other than total count.

 

[WebSlave]

Gee, and here I was thinking that virtual time clocks on each thread that everyone would have to "punch" would be a nifty idea..... Not!

 

[Wilomn]

Wes, I know you aren't saying it, but to me (and I am only speaking for myself)...Man, it is hard to type a response to someone who is going to tip toe and twist everything you say...Anyway, back on track, It sounds like you might be implying that you disrespect people (I know you only speak respectfully when you think someone deserves it) as part of a game. You are doing it, not for the thrill of the hunt, but to watch someone you feel is beneath you chase you. Fun Times!
Seriously though, if the new "mods" can only ding you once a day, how much "hunting and sniffing" really has to be done to find you belittling someone, Antagonizing someone, using profanity or otherwise being Wes, to ding you ONCE A DAY!

I thought you were above that, but if you are indeed "playing your own game", perhaps I was wrong. This bothers me man, but you're probably going to get a kick out of reading that too. After all, we are all your pawns.

You know what makes me think you are not "playing your own game?" I could hear your chest thumping all the way up here in Exeter when you thought you had "stuck it to the man" making this post about Chris. The arm flailing in the middle was a little over-dramatic if you were playing a part too. And the end..."It's only $50"...For only double that you could be you could be swinging the sword that you seem to think a few are swinging wrong. You could have a lot more fun with a game that way. SO why not?

I don't think this was a game. I THINK you were wrong.

Interesting perspective.

 

[mcgrath5860]

Who is minding the store

Denise if everyone is out on the sidewalk gawking at the policeman who just pulled someone over, who is minding the store. According to Rich, and I believe this to be true, but if the 4 moderators were overwhelmed with the output of posts before, don't ya think good management would be to delegate responsibilities in other area so there wouldn't be to many overlaps and areas not being watched. Thats what I was questioning. How many moderators came into this thread to view these and when they did this what other areas were being neglected. I probably could spend hours searches through all the threads and find rule breaking that wasn't enforced. Have already done this in the past and got dinged for it. Good managers make sure all the sections of the store are being monitored and when a fire starts in one area bring others over from their sections to help put it out. I was asking to see if all 41 (not sure if this is still the number) come running to this thread because "ole Wes" had stirred it up again and we need to see what he said so we can all spank him real hard." It also refers back to a previous analogy I used earlier. I know on Rich's other site he has the moderator listed and I assume that person is responsible for that area. I was just asking to see if that was the case here and how many moderators came running into this area because it was a "hot" spot. Denise don't fault me for being inquisitive.

 

[Wilomn]

Actually, there are just a few who are looking to spank me. Some are genuinely curious, some have opinions, some care, some just want to look.

I make a lot of noise but a fair bit of sense too so you can't fault them for coming.

This is also something they do out of the goodness of themselves. rich has no policeforce, no organization, neither form nor function as far as who should do what and when.

It's never going to be fair. You'll just have to get over it.

Until there are team beanies for the mods, there is no team. If there is no team, how can you expect a unified front?

It's just not gonna happen.

 

[Seamus Haley]

Wes, I find myself concerned for you personally.

These things you've done of late are not the doings of someone is his right mind.

What has happened to you? You can pm or email me if you'd like to discuss whatever it is that's bothering you, providing you have not simply gone insane, which I just don't think has happened.

I KNOW the Wes I knew would NEVER stoop so low, but this NEW Wes is really a scumbag and I don't like it. YOU need to get it together.

YOU, by your actions are making ALL those who profess to believe as you do look terrible.

IF you ever cared, and didn't just use busting bad guys as an IN, then you need to STOP this crap. As a man of integrity, which you seem to be sorely lacking of late, you need to STOP this crap.

You've seen self destructive behaviour before and know how much pain can be involved in hurting yourself and how that pain can be, in theory, less than what you think the pain of the truth being known could be, but really Wes, whatever it is that's changed you, you NEED to deal with it.

You can't be happy this way. You KNOW better Wes, you really do. Stop acting like such a turd, there's NO excuse for it.


I uh... stole all that. Changed a name here and there. It kinda seems to make sense to me here though.

 

[Wilomn]

Seamus, thank you. I think. While it was not clear to many, I had some things I was working on. Some proved out, some didn't.

I suspect a change is in the air, unless you've been eating those special killer burritos again.

 

[Seamus Haley]

Seamus, thank you. I think. While it was not clear to many, I had some things I was working on. Some proved out, some didn't.

I suspect a change is in the air, unless you've been eating those special killer burritos again.

/shrug

I've certainly had my time periods of angry ranting and misplaced righteous indignation... picking fights with the world and swinging blindly. The trick is to reccognize when you're starting to land punches on targets that don't really deserve it and apply a little perspective to the importance you place on whatever's got you yelling. Step outside of it if possible and decide if the likely outcome is worth whatever potential side effects might come with it.

Sometimes... life turns out to be a warner brother's cartoon and you've just hit yourself between the eyes with a hammer while trying to kill a fly that landed on your forehead. Metaphorically of course but there it is.

 

[Seamus Haley]

Oh and... the roughest part of any kind of self analysis is all the overly helpful jackasses that come along and throw advice at you after you've already looked at everything and come to a decision (to change or stay the course, as the case may be). Keeping it stifled while they point out the obvious or bulldog the redundant and rejected...