Question to moderators

The thread was titled "Question to moderators" This is not an active disagreement, your implying that with your aggressive rebuttal, of which I don't like the tone. It was me sharing my opinion. I should not have to write private PMs over an issue that doesn't warrant it. I write PMs when appropriate. I am merely giving him some advice from my past experience.

I'm sure the veterans of ET will agree with me, if a person starts to moderate to the point he thinks he knows what a persons post "intent" was, and does not let the thought develop, that is not moderation it becomes selective censorship. Similar to the ideas to habeas corpus. This in turn creates a confirmation bias of the content and limits the free exchange of ideas.

Once you do that you can easily alienate a large percentage of potential active content contributers. Whereas these kinds of actions will trickle down and be will also be felt on the bottom line of the site itself.

Thats all I have to say about the matter. Now that you moved these threads and have allowed others to remain with a lesser level of potential contribution, It seems you have opened pandoras box and now have a problem of no standard by which to pick and choose. I'll sit back and watch what stays and what you delete for a few days, I need a break anyway.

"So maybe someone new with a fresh mindset was needed, eh?"

FYI the patriot act started out as a fresh new mindset as well. *yawn*

Quote from Ivanovich:

Well, chaos - since we're both mods, it probably would have been better and more respectful to PM me that so we could discuss it in private. But since you've decided just to discuss it in front of everyone...

I didn't target Cutten, nor do I have anything against him. I've gotten a lot of PMs praising my moderation as of late in trying to "Clean up" a forum that has, in the past, been generally useless because of all the noise. Lots of people claim that the old way the forum was just to let people have at one another.

So maybe someone new with a fresh mindset was needed, eh?

Regardless, I do not move anything that has to do with trading. But a quote, however eloquent, was more of a psychology or chit-chat conversation. Again, nothing against Cutten personally. I don't know why he got so upset, it's not THAT big a deal.

Lastly, if Joe or Baron wishes for me to back off completely and return to the old "wild west", it sure would save me more time. But I was operating under the impression this was a professional site. And usually, professional sites tend to be moderated pretty heavily. Additionally, and this is just my 2 cents, moderators who disagree with each other's style should have those discussions in private.
More...
 
Quote from ChaosNSX:

The thread was titled "Question to moderators" This is not an active disagreement, your implying that with your aggressive rebuttal, of which I don't like the tone. It was me sharing my opinion. I should not have to write private PMs over an issue that doesn't warrant it. I write PMs when appropriate. I am merely giving him some advice from my past experience.
More...
You were out of line, you criticized him and that should have been done "in house"

I'm completely objective here, Ivan and I disagree fundamentally and philosophically on what constitutes correct behavior and netiquette.. but we both understand the concept of loyalty
 
That opening thread serves its purpose well and is cited in many complaints for me and other mods to isolate a reason to interfere with threads. Its also used as a set of abridged ground rules to those who would ignore the Conduct Rules page. It was devised out of necessity and has served ET well.

Quote from Lucrum:

First, I have no particular opinion on the specific threads moved to CC that precipitated this thread.

I also have nothing personal against ChaosNSX.

I do, in general, agree with Ivanovich's
more active moderation style.

http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?threadid=87304

The above thread is, for reasons known only to him, frequently ignored by the mod that posted it. Meaning it's largely just taking up space. In my opinion (not that it's worth much) there are WAY too many threads started in the Trading forum that have absolutely nothing to do with trading and I personally welcome any efforts to "encourage" members to post in the appropriate forums. Even though obviously there will be from time to time differences of opinion as to what belongs where.

And Ivan's right, the mods should have discussed this between them selves through PM's.
More...
 
And Ivan's right, the mods should have discussed this between them selves through PM's.
More...

reminds me of hitler when he was in his last days. baron is the hitler and the mods are his generals. the generals are now fighting for power because the madman is off the deep end. as evidenced by the allowed run a muck of jack hershey and his other multiple names like tums, spydertrader on and on etc. sad times on et.

mb
 
Quote from ChaosNSX:

The thread was titled "Question to moderators" This is not an active disagreement, your implying that with your aggressive rebuttal, of which I don't like the tone. It was me sharing my opinion. I should not have to write private PMs over an issue that doesn't warrant it. I write PMs when appropriate. I am merely giving him some advice from my past experience.

I'm sure the veterans of ET will agree with me, if a person starts to moderate to the point he thinks he knows what a persons post "intent" was, and does not let the thought develop, that is not moderation it becomes selective censorship. Similar to the ideas to habeas corpus. This in turn creates a confirmation bias of the content and limits the free exchange of ideas.

Once you do that you can easily alienate a large percentage of potential active content contributers. Whereas these kinds of actions will trickle down and be will also be felt on the bottom line of the site itself.

Thats all I have to say about the matter. Now that you moved these threads and have allowed others to remain with a lesser level of potential contribution, It seems you have opened pandoras box and now have a problem of no standard by which to pick and choose. I'll sit back and watch what stays and what you delete for a few days, I need a break anyway.

"So maybe someone new with a fresh mindset was needed, eh?"

FYI the patriot act started out as a fresh new mindset as well. *yawn*
More...

You're comparing my moderation to the Patriot Act? :)

If you took what I said as aggressive, I apologize. It was defensive, that's for sure, because I did not expect you to criticise my moderation style in public. But it was not meant to attack you in all and I hope you will accept my apology on that point.

To your points, however...

I am not moderating to a person's "intent". As you say, there is no way I could know what this would be. I am moderating in an unbiased manner - regardless of poster - based on the direction of the thread. If the OP makes 5 posts that say a slightly different version of "market dropping like a rock - bullz gettin the shaft", it doesn't take much to go "and what does this have to do with specific trading"?

The level of contribution of one post - the quote called by Cutten - is not greater than any post that I've left in the trading forum, nor can I understand how you can claim it is. It was one post, one quotation. If Cutten meant to expand greater into specific trading styles based on that quote, then I can only request that he'd have done it in the first post.

While I recognize that you believe certain posters are detractive by nature and others are contributors (and I'm inclined to agree with you) moderation must be unbiased to be successful. By jumping all over someone who has, in the past, been detractive is exactly believing you know what their intent is in the first place, which is what you're accusing me of doing. That's the main argument that the Hatfields and McCoys of this forum (Trader##/Hershey supporters) are throwing out.

Each post must be viewed individually without regard to bias on the username. If the user doesn't belong on the forum, then that is a decision that is above my pay grade.

It is certainly not my intent to disrupt you or anything else here. It is just my intent to do my job as I've done in the forex forums for a while now. We have very relevant info there (and spammers/arguments/detractors) are dealt with swiftly. I also recognize that the volume of forex posters here is much less, which makes that easier.

Cheers,

Ivan
 
Quote from Ivanovich:

I can only do my best. I am human.
More...

i wasn't talking about you i was thinking of other mods - maybe you can spread some ethics around.

mb
 
Quote from Ivanovich:

Well, chaos - since we're both mods, it probably would have been better and more respectful to PM me that so we could discuss it in private.


Lastly, if Joe or Baron wishes for me to back off completely and return to the old "wild west", it sure would save me more time. But I was operating under the impression this was a professional site. And usually, professional sites tend to be moderated pretty heavily. Additionally, and this is just my 2 cents, moderators who disagree with each other's style should have those discussions in private.
More...

I for one love the Wild West, and think that all all communication between mods, including all of Joe's and Baron's PMs should be posted in a new "Mods Throwdown" forum. The mods fighting out in the streets = a surge in clicks bigger than the Rubberbird lynching.

Oh the ratings, think of the ratings Baron.:)


Rennick out:cool:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top