- Posts: 1039
Editing Rights Question
-
Topic Author
- Visitor
-
-
- Visitor
-
12 Jan 2018 14:25 #311919
by Avalon
Replied by Avalon on topic Editing Rights Question
I could be wrong, but I believe you've missed the point of Opie's post, John.
That is to say, it wasn't to call to attention whether or not the facts on your site were accurate or not.
Rather, the point of his post was to question the legitimacy of the moderating that was being conducted. That is to stay, instead of enforcing the rules as they're posted on the site (no external links), you instead allowed a personal bias to impact your moderation against a single link. I say personal bias because you have made, and continue to make, your opinion against Jones plainly obvious across this site.
If the issue had been with the links themselves, then the appropriate action would have been to do as MadHatter did, which is to have removed both links entirely. The fact that all you did was change one link from the actual site being referenced to a site of your own creation only enforces the impression that the moderation was done out of a personal bias rather than a legitimate enforcement of the rules of the site, which thus makes the moderation illegitimate.
Such questioning falls into line with current discussion at TOTJO, which is the moderation of posts and when it's done legitimately and illegitimately has been called to question as of late. Sure, Opie called out your action, but that's because it is just the most recent example.
So the real discussion here isn't about the site you redirected the link to, but if the redirection was a legitimate or appropriate form of moderation (it wasn't) and what TOTJO considers a legitimate and appropriate form of moderation.
Just my two cents. I could be wrong.
[hr]
On a bit of a site note, I'd caution not to take Opie's questioning personally, which it seems you have.
I also wonder... Have you considered the fact that your constant actions regarding Jones and his site only help to bring attention to him while conversely delegitimizing your position. That is to say, the more you comment negatively against Jones, the more attention people pay to him and the more you make it look like a personal vendetta. In turn, your actions in instances such as this look illegitimate because you appear to have been acting from a point of personal biases rather than actual legitimate enforcement of community rules.
I know I've commented to you about it in the past regarding other issues, but as the proclaimed president and a member of the council, you have an obligation to consider how your actions reflect upon TOTJO. Meaning, by using an official act (moderation of a post) to push that apparent personal agenda (your dislike of Jones resulting in you changing a link in a post to a site of your own creation), you make it appear as though that that is the official stance TOTJO takes towards the issue. And as has been stated in both the original thread in question, and in multiple other threads about multiple other issues, such an official stance doesn't actually exist
You could have simply said in a separate post "I don't approve of Jones, and this is why (link to your site)" and left it at that (the appropriate course of action). Instead you turned it into an official matter through the use of moderation, and thus this entire conversation began.
Leadership isn't above scrutiny... even from guests
Again, just my two cents. I could be wrong. I'll see my way out now.
That is to say, it wasn't to call to attention whether or not the facts on your site were accurate or not.
Rather, the point of his post was to question the legitimacy of the moderating that was being conducted. That is to stay, instead of enforcing the rules as they're posted on the site (no external links), you instead allowed a personal bias to impact your moderation against a single link. I say personal bias because you have made, and continue to make, your opinion against Jones plainly obvious across this site.
If the issue had been with the links themselves, then the appropriate action would have been to do as MadHatter did, which is to have removed both links entirely. The fact that all you did was change one link from the actual site being referenced to a site of your own creation only enforces the impression that the moderation was done out of a personal bias rather than a legitimate enforcement of the rules of the site, which thus makes the moderation illegitimate.
Such questioning falls into line with current discussion at TOTJO, which is the moderation of posts and when it's done legitimately and illegitimately has been called to question as of late. Sure, Opie called out your action, but that's because it is just the most recent example.
So the real discussion here isn't about the site you redirected the link to, but if the redirection was a legitimate or appropriate form of moderation (it wasn't) and what TOTJO considers a legitimate and appropriate form of moderation.
Just my two cents. I could be wrong.
[hr]
On a bit of a site note, I'd caution not to take Opie's questioning personally, which it seems you have.
I also wonder... Have you considered the fact that your constant actions regarding Jones and his site only help to bring attention to him while conversely delegitimizing your position. That is to say, the more you comment negatively against Jones, the more attention people pay to him and the more you make it look like a personal vendetta. In turn, your actions in instances such as this look illegitimate because you appear to have been acting from a point of personal biases rather than actual legitimate enforcement of community rules.
I know I've commented to you about it in the past regarding other issues, but as the proclaimed president and a member of the council, you have an obligation to consider how your actions reflect upon TOTJO. Meaning, by using an official act (moderation of a post) to push that apparent personal agenda (your dislike of Jones resulting in you changing a link in a post to a site of your own creation), you make it appear as though that that is the official stance TOTJO takes towards the issue. And as has been stated in both the original thread in question, and in multiple other threads about multiple other issues, such an official stance doesn't actually exist
You could have simply said in a separate post "I don't approve of Jones, and this is why (link to your site)" and left it at that (the appropriate course of action). Instead you turned it into an official matter through the use of moderation, and thus this entire conversation began.
Leadership isn't above scrutiny... even from guests
Again, just my two cents. I could be wrong. I'll see my way out now.
Not all those who wander are lost
Studies Journal | Personal Journal
Studies Journal | Personal Journal
Please Log in to join the conversation.
-
- Visitor
-
- OB1Shinobi
-
- Offline
- Banned
-
-
- Visitor
-
