What exactly do you define as 'favouritism' ? Not banning somebody because one member thinks that they're just spamming? We're here for the good of all the members, not just a select few. My 'IMO attitude' is exactly that - my own opinion. There were four threads originally, each containing one post by the OP, and as they were all by Yeshua, it made perfect sense to group them altogether. Indeed, the OP has PM'd me his thanks for doing that. What do you constitute as something 'better to do' ?
How exactly am I abusing my priveleges here? I'm simply grouping four posts here, so they all merge into one thread and are easier to read. If I was to delete all the threads in the Soap Box for example, or ban innocent members for no reason, then that would be abusing my privileges.
If there are many complaints about this thread, then the staff will have a discussion about it, but as there's only been one so far by weirdo_ripper - and you're not actively complaining about the thread, merely my moderating abilities, then I'm content to let this thread run as it is.
So, essentially, you're complaining that the OP has posted these posts, just because you don't agree with them? There is nothing wrong whatsoever with these posts - they're not insulting, don't break any rules at all. This is a thread of the OP, so let him go with it.
The 'we' is the voice of the staff. As we work as a team on this forum, one staff member's voice is the voice of the whole staff.
I in
no way complained about the OP making several posts, In fact, I'd mentioned that I was glad that they'd
finally decided to post within an
appropriate section - as their posts Re: this subject matter had
consistently been moved previously, due to their inability (or unwillingness) to grasp that it would inevitably end up here anyway.
And whether I agree with them or not is utterly immaterial - that was not my point at all - but because
you deemed them 'inspirational' (biased, I'd say), took it upon
yourself to merge the threads (which I perceive as favouritism). I also said that the OP could well have taken this upon
himself - to make the effort to keep his own thread alive. But because
you deemed them "worthy", took the time which I can only assume would be better spent elsewhere in this vast forum, with many other far more
important issues. But the OP's have been singled out (whereas I have
yet to see anyone else arbitrarily "decide" to merge threads, unless it were a request by an OP).
Nor did I at ALL mention or infer banning anyone, or deleting 'disagreeable/controversial' posts (I honestly don't know where you got that notion, unless it were for rhetorical effect). In the context of this forum, and perhaps especially Re: the Soap Box, it is not 'gross' misuse, but misuse nevertheless of your abilities - and I find objectivity/impartiality (which I would deem necessary for such a position) lacking in this regard.
As for the "we", I understand & appreciate your jobs are challenging & trying at times, given the nature of this forum, and the seeming unity of the staff needs be apparent. However, to suggest that "we" recommend not reading controversial posts is rather a moot and futile point - and again, perhaps
especially Re: The Soap Box (nor have I yet seen you point this out regarding
other posts - which again implies that you seem partial to this particular thread).
I do not believe I'm the only one who feels this way - as someone else has already shortly thereafter replied with a succinct ":dry:" You may of course "defend/justify" yourself however you wish, but the 'appearance' of your lack of impartiality remains...
