Bitcoin Forum

Meh, this is a discussion forum. If no one replies, his threads will drop off the bottom. I would think that hurling abuse at the moderators would be a more serious offense.

have you noticed the boatload of threads that get moved?  how are those decisions made?  i would think mods should be impartial and not just keep threads they philosophically agree with.  that's what's happened here.

I don't understand the point you are trying to make.  That mods move threads to forum topics that better suit the discussion at hand?  And this is somehow a bad thing?

allowing 5-6 threads on the same topic simultaneously, by a guy like Atlas, bashing the devs and BF is inappropriate.  that's my opinion.

I disagree that bashing the devs and/or BF is inappropriate. What is this, the catholic church? 5-6 threads on the matter may be out of line though.

And yet you state "i would think mods should be impartial".  You don't see my confusion about the point you are trying to make?

On the one hand you state that the mods should not be impartial, that they should remove threads by Atlas that they disagree with.  On the other hand you state that mods should be impartial and imply that they should keep all threads and "not just keep threads they philosophically agree with".

Perhaps you are experiencing a bout of cognitive dissonance?

cypherdoc,

If you are not happy with the way I fulfill my responsibility to the administrator of this forum as a moderator you are more than welcome to post a complaint in this appropriate section of the forum. Also in case you didn't know this, I'm not the only one moderating Bitcoin Discussions and I am not the only one receiving reports and if there is a dilemma, ultimately the forum administrator gets to decide how moderation is applied.

All I do is what I promised the forum administrator I would do and I follow his guidelines to the letter. I'm sorry if that doesn't make you happy, but then that isn't my problem, it's your problem with the forum administrator.

So I ask you for the sake of keeping the section I moderate clean and for the sake of solving inefficiencies or moderator abuse as fast and as efficient as possible, please, in the future, present your complaints directly to the administrator instead of attacking me as an off topic reply to a random post of mine.

Thank you.

Best regards,
hazek

dude, i just responded to your agitated post above.  it seems you're the one who can't handle it.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=117997.msg1266943#msg1266943

hazek, do u have any idea what you're doing censoring this forum like this?

my original response to your comment got censored by hazek so let me repost:

i don't have a problem with Atlas putting up one post expressing his opinion on the topic but what he did, and was allowed to do, is put up 5-6 threads all on the same subject with slight variation which bashed the devs and BF.  don't make me go back and dig them up all posted on essentially the same day that the BF was announced.

Show us the evidence.

we've been banished to a section of the forum where no one visits which is why the topic was moved in the first place.  don't waste my time.

you know full well what threads i'm talking about since you're the one who put them up.

save me the time.  you pull them up.

I remember covering many subjects that day. I think you're just mad that the Bitcoin Foundation hasn't risen to total power yet.

see, its comments like those that make ppl like me reject what you have to say.  all those threads had a similar tone to them.  i could care less about the BF.  what i don't like is your trolling.  

and as far as hazek is concerned i'm really disappointed b/c i thought he was intelligent.  censoring mild criticism like mine shows a deep insecurity.  after all the BS he spews about democracy, elitists, corporatocracy;  its all just bull to me now.

There's no censorship here. Your criticism was offtopic.

he actually deleted a few of my posts.  and the immediacy of the actions clearly indicates a desire to hide criticism.  hazek should be ashamed.

cypherdoc,

It is true, I did delete a few of your off topic posts, only because they were off topic and posted after I had already split the thread and moved your initial off topic posts and after I notified you about that with a PM. Unfortunately this forum doesn't, at least not to my knowledge, allow me to merge threads. If I could do that I would have split your posts from that original thread and moved them into this one. Since I couldn't and your posts were off topic, and I wasn't going to create new threads and move those, I opted to delete your posts.

You are more than welcome to repost all of them here.


Best regards,
hazek

p.s.: Moved posts are not censorship. Most issues have their appropriate sections of the forum, for example forum & and moderator discussion belongs in Meta.

natives are restless today

pitchforks

get your pitchforks here

cypherdoc, my opinion on the matter is the Bitcoin Foundation was a special case.

Technically, the announcement of it belongs in Service Announcements/Discussion, yet it remains on the main forum. I think this inconsistency is tolerable given the significance of TBF. The community reacted strongly to it, in more than one way. So complaining about moderation inconsistency over that announcement is understandable, but I think a bit rigid.

understood.  a few things though:

1.  I was logged in that whole day of the announcement.  Atlas put up no less than 5-6 threads bashing devs and the BF. i was not the only one who noticed either.  hazek moved many other threads that day except these.  i brought my concerns up in one of Atlas's threads and he told me hazek agrees with him fundamentally as a reason for his behavior.  i believe this to be true.  ok fine, i'm all for different opinions.  but that many threads and such blatant favoritism?

2.  I thought the matter was over but yesterday when I started bringing it up again in the Hammer thread, hazek inexplicably starts deleting and moving my comments over here.  and i mean instantly within seconds under the guise of "off topic".  i even put up a post in the Hammer thread with a link to this thread and even that was deleted.  WTF?!@!  if off topic is his criteria for moving comments to Meta, this would be the new Discussion forum.  i've never had that happen to me and its clear he is censoring any criticism of his actions.  he knows hardly anyone comes over to Meta.

The only reason why I moved some threads discussing what ever aspect of Bitcoin Foundation with whatever opinion and not others is a time difference.

Specifically I moved all treads in the initial time period after the announcement when I thought I'd eventually move the announcement as well, I did so regardless of who started the thread and what it was about. And I now leave all threads in the time period after I was instructed to leave the announcement in Bitcoin Discussion and that I can do the same with threads commenting on it, and again I do so regardless of who started the thread and what it was about.

The inconsistency is a result of me trying to be consisted in the beginning and me being given my instructions and readjusting my moderation so that it could again be consistent. Anyone reading anything more than this into my actions is seeing motives or actions that just aren't part of reality.

is that yellow ignore button of yours not reality also?

is the fact that you used the stupid "off topic" excuse to censor/delete my critical comments within seconds of posting to avoid embarassment also not reality?

I didn't censor anything, I split the topic and moved your off topic posts to the appropriate section and deleted the few other off topic posts that you kept posting in the initial thread only because I couldn't split those and merge with the split thread as I've explained myself here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=118086.msg1267686#msg1267686
and here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=118086.msg1268026#msg1268026

continuing to use the "off topic" excuse as a reason to banish my comments over here to the Meta forum is not helping your case but in fact illuminating your hypocrisy.  most threads are filled with off topic posts and i don't see you censoring/deleting/banishing those posts to Meta.  you would have been best served by meeting my moderator criticisms head on in the original threads and explaining your position as you have here in this thread open for all to see.  censoring post after post of mine yesterday within seconds clearly showed a panic to avoid iluminating criticism and i'm guessing embarassment. it didn't have to be that way.

the real conundrum, as i stated previously, is that i thought you were a champion of free speech and opinion as was my impression from you in past posts.  i am greatly disappointed.

This certainly would have been off-topic. The replies of both of you would then have needed to have been deleted.

No, because if your posts were really critical for the forum discussion, they would not stand out to the attention of the moderators. Moreover, you seem to ignore what censorship really means:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship


I am very skeptical about Wikipedia, but the above quote shows that you are complaining over accepted moderation, not over censorship. By accepted moderation I mean the mutual agreement you accepted once you created an account in this forum. Do not forgot this forum is a private institution and as such it can moderate whatever it regards as necessary for its private matters.


It appears you are making a special pleading. This indicates that your true concern is where the posts are and by who they are being read. If is that so, I suggest you become a donator or VIP member. The colourful coins below the user name offers what you are demanding: special attention for your posts.

so if all you guys and hazek insist that my posts were moved/deleted/censored solely b/c they were off topic, then you wouldn't mind me starting a thread in the Discussion Forum titled:  Moderator Bad? ::)

let me make one other point.  what you see at the beginning of the thread is everything i said.  i only had to repost one comment and its clear which one that was.  so what you're seeing now is a complete picture of everything.  just how bad is it?  i'd say except for the "shitty" comment, not too bad at all.  what you see is what was banished here to Meta solely b/c hazek can't take the slightest bit of criticism.

Cypherdoc, why does it matter so much?

b/c i've never had comments here censored initially, then "moved" only after i complained about the censorship, and then had those actions defended with an ad hominem argument about being off topic.  what this is about is no one wants the moderators criticized even mildly.

you'll recall on the day you made those 5-6 troll threads i made only one critical comment in one of your threads about the # of troll threads and you didn't even refute my argument.  you simply responded that your threads weren't being taken down b/c hazek agreed with you philosophically.  i didn't like that answer at the time but i let it go.  

Is it possible to merge threads? When Atlas starts up a bunch of threads, or when something big happens and ten people all start identical threads, could the moderators merge the threads? That way there would not be any censorship, just organization.

The thing is the threads weren't all the same.

i'm sorry.  but it is very clear to me now that hazek is bad news:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=118273.0

Could you at least put similar topics in the same thread? I know there is a rule against posting off-topic to the thread at hand, but there is some leniency. Plus, most of your posts are about four words long (you got a whole 9 words in that last post), it is a total waste of a thread to have such a short post taking up the OP.

Here is a great idea: Start a new thread, name it "Topics of interest to Atlas" and post all your one line musings there so they do not crowd the forum.

my gaud man, its so refreshing to have someone posting reasonable shit here.  i've never ventured into these part of the woods until i got banished here and man is it depressing.

You got banished to Meta? Whoa, that's deep.

yeah, i feel like i'm on Mars or somethin'.   oops, better get back "on topic" bashing hazek or else i might get my comments "split off" and moved to somewhere i can't find myself. ;)

It is very bad. You do not have appropriate arguments to support your endless ranting. E.g., since you have this crave for attention, you have to spam useless posts in another thread:


You fail to comprehend why moderation is necessary and you do not know the meaning of "ad hominem":

http://plover.net/~bonds/adhominem.html




You sound quite pathetic and your English writing skill is terrible.

(This is not an "ad hominem". I am not trying to undermine any argument... You have none.)

you are insulting.  what does this have to do with getting attention?  hazek has been caught red handed deleting/censoring posts on two occasions; once directly to me and the other to stan.distortion. read thru the posts from the beginning here.  as i said, the only comment that could be construed as "bad" is the "shitty" comment but that was in reaction to an insult hurled at me by hazek.  it seems you're just as sensitive as he.  if this is your definition of bad you'd better stay away from the Internet otherwise i will continue to hurt your fragile feelings.  


i do understand why moderation is necessary but i don't think it applies to what i said.  btw, here's someone who agrees with my original complaint just so ppl don't think i'm exaggerating when it comes to what Atlas did.  this was in a pm to me:






now you're resorting to lame criticism?  who's pathetic?  you, i'd say, by bragging about your little VIP and colored coins.

i think that definition is spot on the way i'm using it.  if English writing skills are so important to you, how's this?:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=118086.msg1269864#msg1269864

now go criticize him.  you're just a little apologist.

this is an example of your tunnel vision apologist attitude.  you can't even recognize when someone resorts to slang.

Just to say, I think I've seen people merge threads on other boards using this software so there may be a way.

Oh? I need to check into that! Thanks.

Staff/mods can't merge threads.

Here is a new one a person has posted the same copy and past thead in 4 spots. I reported to move 3 of the 4 threads and I am ignored........ it belongs in 1 spot Why? its been 2 days since I started reporting it.

You may not be able to merge threads, but could we lock one thread after posting a link to the other thread?