Want to be a WWP Moderator ?

Discussion in 'Support Questions' started by sue, May 23, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Anonymous Member

    Re: Want to be a WWP Moderator ?

    I agree with this, but the simple fact is despite being a total dick, Herro was right quite a lot of the time.
    Not alienate, educate. Newfags are gentle creatures that can be shaped and formed by your own actions. I believe there exists a happy medium between allowing the moonbats who have no sense of perspective to go on unchallenged like we more or less have now, and the spiteful anger of Herro. We just need a little help bringing people down to earth by gently suggesting they actually think about what they are saying and cool their jets.
  2. Re: Want to be a WWP Moderator ?

    Having worked with the mentally challenged before, I have to say....I fear retard strength irl...having to deal with it here would just be overwhelming. I'd do it but I don't have the stats/history to apply. So you f'n orangutans are going to have to choose for yourself.
  3. Re: Want to be a WWP Moderator ?

    I'll speak for myself.

    I think a clear discussion on what that actually means needs to be explored. It's a fine line between moonbattery and the actual truth when you are dealing with Scientology. Everyday, we hear another story of total mindfuck. We are talking about a group that has a front group which promotes each anon is paid $150,000 to help the evil psychiatrists from trying to rule the planet. I don't want to sound condescending and it's not my intention, but people here have to get use to it. I am not talking about unknowns. There are hundreds, if not thousands of stories of people who are attacked for criticizing the cult. It is written in their policy. Likewise, everyday we see those stories on these boards. The second proposition is that they are very insidious about what they do. A lot of protesters have experienced this. We here all the other stories daily as well.

    So, rather than trying to draw a conclusion from the above two propositions, perhaps I am suggesting, that people think about it and put the context of their discussion within "knowns".

    So we know this is what Scientology does and we know anon are the biggest force that they have ever had to face with the probable exception of the FBI in the Mary Sue days. I therfore propose that it is not moonbattery to at least suggest that CO$ has an active plan of insidious attack, infiltration and influence, especially here on WWP. There's no dox, there's no proof, but using the power of assumption we can almost guarantee it. Or am i missing a vital piece of evidence that has not been presented yet? If anyone disagrees with the above can you please state your reasoning. Please use actual evidence and propositions that join together otherwise, it will be ripped apart and deservedly so.

    The next proposition is that they have a set of policies they can't change so their modus operandi will almost always be the same. We have these policies available to us. Just one example for instance is "attack the attacker".

    I am amazed that a board which is against the dangerous and damaging cult of Scientology is so profoundly eager to worry itself over wether someone calls someone OSA or not and has a "rule" for that, yet totally lets a situation where a teenager trying to come to help because their parents are scientologists get thrashed and called troll. It's this kind of hypocrisy, however innocently applied, which is begging to be ridiculed. Everybody likes to know the rules in the game they are playing. My personal stance is that i can play by the rules presented and i take that on a case by case situation. In other words if you are polite to me, i'll be polite back. If you use proper argumentation and structure then i will respond accordingly. The way i see it, If you ridicule me and then i ridicule you back then why so butthurt? Maybe you should look at your own rules that you have applies to yourself or at least take some responsibility if this is the case at hand? Rather than digress, the point I am trying to make here is maybe the rules should be looked over?

    Herro was too actively into dissension to offer valuable input at least towards the end when s/he chose to get some space. This clogged up WWP just as much as any other clog. Not that clogging is always bad.

    As far as i read it there is no community other than a group of individuals who are seeking to place their input into a means of their own value. As far as i can see Sue, your biggest task, if you have any problems, is to look at the community of moderators. We have the case of the Sparrow thread wherby some moderators openly admitted trolling because they wanted to bring salvation to the "call OSA" rule. If we are talking about "community" can we go back to the propositions presented in the first paragraph here and at least get feedback to what extent this trolling took place so as to give some clarity. I personally don't mind being trolled and agree it comes with the territory however, its a confusing mindfuck which really does little to give confidence when it stops us from fully utilizing our services towards our objective, especially when coming from a mod. Also, to those who play these games don't get butthurt when you get trolled back. It's one thing playing a game by your own rules as espoused by your own actions but it is another baaawing about it after you get the same action back. The mods using their privileges in order to troll? I suppose thats up the administrators to decide wether that is cool or not. Hypocrisy is not an attribute i personally like. Perhaps the administrators are unaware of the full extent to which that is happening in which case maybe they should examine it a bit more??

    This year has without a doubt been a roller coaster of wins after wins perhaps culminating so far with the australian enquiry. I know a lot of Scientologists and am lucky to be in a position where I get a lot of feedback. They are digging in and preparing for war. They are focusing almost all attention on keeping those in Scientology in. The rest is on attack. That is their game plan and we are starting to see this surface. That is what is happening. Take what you want out of it. I trust the hive will surpass.
  4. Anonymous Member

    Re: Want to be a WWP Moderator ?

    This doesn't mean that OSA is peeking around every corner and sitting in every bush, and it certainly doesn't mean that people can't have disagreements without being an infiltrator.

    Who cares if OSA posts here? If you can't stand up to their criticism on our home turf what good can you possibly be doing elsewhere?

    The simple fact you're missing is that people can disagree with you and it doesn't mean they're ridiculing you. It doesn't mean that they're an infiltrator. It just means they disagree. Or they're trolling you.

  5. Ann O'Nymous Member

    Re: Want to be a WWP Moderator ?

    My 2 cents:
    - Having enough staff is critical for any forum. Overworked, unhappy, reluctant staff is more likely to make brisk and unadapted decisions.
    - The rational thinking vs. moonbattery debate is meaningful, but keep in mind it also served and probably will serve again as a mean in more "political" debates.
    - Trolling has many different faces.
  6. Anonymous Member

    Re: Want to be a WWP Moderator ?

    Weird, I think the tinhattery issue has been improving over time, and the OSA-OSA-OSA wails are the only form of common tinfoil I ever notice around here anymore (outside the Dome, perhaps). This place has come a long way since the old Enturb days of running around screaming "SCIENTOLOGY KILLED MUDKIPS THE CAT!!" without proof.

    Now when there's speculation, you at least get a debate, as happens whenever there's a big current event. There are also random other things, like the LRH racism quotes, that get called under scrutiny. Even in something like the AnonSparrow thread, a bunch of people were laughing and saying y'all getting trolled. Speculation rarely goes unchallenged around here now.

    If anything, I feel the community cracks down on outright tinfoil pretty hard now. Look at what happened in the Boris Korczak "puppy murder" thread. Stuff like that just can't persist here anymore.
  7. Anon3Mouse Member

    Re: Want to be a WWP Moderator ?

    Woo momma, this is gonna be one long as hell post.

    I never actually expect you to agree or disagree, it was just the opening line to the rest of my post, and much more tongue-in-cheek. But, since you delve further into it, I'll happily pretend it was much more serious commentary.

    I absolutely agree, much of it does have to do with people desperately trying to fit in with "Anon culture", but not taking the assimilation route that repeated "Lurk Moar' responses provides. Instead, they learn some memes and be silly/rude, and so they miss the more complex parts.

    Maybe a variation of the Dome Lock, if they want to post in the important sections of the Forum, they have to demonstrate that they have something of value to contribute to the greater discussions, and when/if they do, then they'll be let out of Chit Chat.

    I think question being missed is "Why are people reluctant when the unwanted behavior is greater than before?" You would imagine people would be reporting more, unless either they approve of the behavior, or in the more likely scenario, they don't feel that reporting it will bring about any kind of useful result. To me, that's a plea from the community for harsher moderation.

    I don't disagree so much as think that the Mods won't go near the line anymore out of fear of crossing it. All this erring on the side of caution in moderating the boards' content has led us to this position we're now in, and maybe it's time to move that line a little bit and let the Mods get more harsh.

    If people want to just bullshit, there's places for that not only in the rest of the Internets, but even here. In the parts of the Forum that are used for the Scientology War, I think the moderation needs to be harsh and brutal. If people wanna call each other OSA or theorize that some blip on a television show is really connected to some retardedly complex theory about Scientology, let 'em do it in YSOSRS or the Dome. The second that shit gets pulled in a srs bznz section of the Forum, a mod should put their foot up that poster's ass. I think that will help breed the thought of "I should really think about this before I post, because it might get me banned or locked for stupidity."

    I don't think the mods took sides deliberately so much as I feel that by the inaction of the mods, they favored a side. Herro frequently had an excellent point that for all the bemoaning and crying about the terrible things the Scientologists do, they are tactics that we ourselves employ (not all of them, but certainly some of the fair game tactics fit quite nicely in the /i/ playbook), and we have to reconcile ourselves with that hypocrisy. An uncomfortable truth for many of the ex-culties that have come here, but it being uncomfortable doesn't excuse the cries of OSA that would flock to Herro's posts, and it certainly doesn't excuse the lack of action on the Mods to keep the discussion on the content of the posts, and not who's posting it or even the wording it's posted in.

    I don't disagree with your reasons, they're pretty spot on, but how do you keep it from dragging down other threads? I hate to sound like a broken record, but I think harsher moderation would help curb some of the speculation. The people most likely to speculate are also the people most likely to really become invested in their account, and so will be most susceptible to changing their behavior out of account preservation.

    I never said nor do I think you guys are trying to poison things, I just think you guys are a little too soft, and the boards suffer for it. I think WWP could use a little W.T. Snacks form of moderating for awhile.
  8. genxanon Member

    Re: Want to be a WWP Moderator ?

    Anyone who asks to be a mod doesn't deserve to be one. Just my opinion. Power trips and all that. I've modded on a few boards. The users that begged to be a mod, and then were given the power, ultimately abused it.
  9. Re: Want to be a WWP Moderator ?

    Yes of course it doesn't mean that. What made you think that?

    world clear propositions.

    Well i for one would enjoy their pathetic little posts because of their inability to argue their own case and only be able to use ridicule, misinformation and changing people's intentions, quite ironically, like your doing here.

    disagreement is fine, i have no problem with that. I don't think that makes someone an infiltrator if they disagree but if they show tactical responses known to be employed then i think they can be called on it. I mean, the tactics in any argument that repressive groups use are just naturally lame anyway- see the Sparrow Vids.

    If its a troll then good on troll. I will be the first to laugh at myself having being properly trolled. It keeps you on your toes.

    Oh its very disturbing isn't it? So terrible.

    No i don't think that but thanks for trying to double guess me.

    Word clear community.

    Yes it does...

    Hicks. Is this^^^ one of you 90% IRC buddies or one of the 10% your not sure about?
  10. Re: Want to be a WWP Moderator ?

    I agree. I've seen it on boards and in life amny times: it human nature I believe. it's the same reason as to why politicians want to run for office and subsequently get elected. It's not because of their natural altruism, that's for sure! Cynical perhaps, but yet practical and observable methinks.
  11. Anonymous Member

    Re: Want to be a WWP Moderator ?

    why don't you prove my point some more

    What tactical responses are you such an expert at identifying? Disagreeing with you is not a "tactical response."

    and yet you still didn't come up with a reason for why dissent is bad.

    This board has THREE off topic boards i the "Community" section. Chit Chat is third biggest forum section. Tell me how this means there isn't a community.
  12. Re: Want to be a WWP Moderator ?

    You don't make points, you make assertions. More word checking on those please, just so we can at least be informed on what we are actually doing.

    OSA handbooks are all over the net. It doesn't take an expert t find them. Try Google.

    disagree all you want, that is fine. Just because you disagree doesn't mean anything. If you use proper notational arguments i may even change my mind if you reasoning and evidence is solid. I see no evidence of that.

    dissent is itself not bad as you imply but rather, If you are trying to say that in context of where i wrote that word, it is in terms of value in argumentation.

    This board has THREE off topic boards i the "Community" section. Chit Chat is third biggest forum section. Tell me how this means there isn't a community.[/QUOTE]
  13. Anonymous Member

    Re: Want to be a WWP Moderator ?

    and another thing!
    You insinuated that I'm OSA twice in one post. You seem to use that whenever you come up against something you want to admit. You seem to think that you can dismiss any, even well intentioned, criticism by convincing yourself that your critic is trying to trick you. You think that other opinions can be rationalized away by dismissing anything they have to say by telling yourself that the person saying it is an enemy spy. You do this because it is easier to do that than to change your behavior.
  14. Anonymous Member

    Re: Want to be a WWP Moderator ?

    what makes YOU SPECIFICALLY so good at identifying these techniques better than anybody else?

    You said you supported Herro's domelock because he spread dissent. I said what's so bad about spreading dissent. Ask yourself: "What is there to dissent against?"
  15. Re: Want to be a WWP Moderator ?

    Thanks for telling me what i am thinking... For a moment there i thought i had a mind of my own. I have not insinuiated you are OSA at all. I think you have persecution complex. Or you seem to like to argue just for the sake of arguing. I'm not sure.
  16. Re: Want to be a WWP Moderator ?

    hai again

    I'm no better than your average anon who has read the files. So nothing SPECIFICALY.

    was hero domeolocked? Why?

    Look, i don't see why we need do fag up this thread. Start a new one. I will be more than happy to keep this discussion up.
  17. anonsoulless Member

    Re: Want to be a WWP Moderator ?

    wat's going on in this thread?
  18. Anonymous Member

    Re: Want to be a WWP Moderator ?

    Faggotry, mostly.
  19. Anonymous Member

    Re: Want to be a WWP Moderator ?

    This is an appropriate place to have this discussion because you specifically are part of the problem we are talking about here. I don't see any reason to beat around the bush about it.
  20. Ann O'Nymous Member

    Re: Want to be a WWP Moderator ?

    I am quite sure I am not the only one thinking that, if staff took sides, it is in favor of Herro. The fact is that Herro started well, but became mainly a troll after its (first ?) ban. I do not mind, but please stop presenting it as a hero.
  21. Hicks Member

    Re: Want to be a WWP Moderator ?

  22. bAnon Member

    Re: Want to be a WWP Moderator ?

    I LUV U?
  23. Re: Want to be a WWP Moderator ?

    I'm happy, if op agrees with you.
  24. Re: Want to be a WWP Moderator ?

  25. Anonymous Member

    Re: Want to be a WWP Moderator ?

  26. Anonymous Member

    Re: Want to be a WWP Moderator ?






  27. Re: Want to be a WWP Moderator ?

  28. Hicks Member

    Re: Want to be a WWP Moderator ?

    Ima close this thread for now, feel free to send applications as stated in the OP.

    Also feel free to start a discussion thread about topics that were so intellectually debated in this thread if you wish so.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Customize Theme Colors


Choose a color via Color picker or click the predefined style names!

Primary Color :

Secondary Color :
Predefined Skins