Jeff may have blood in his hands if there is another zoo shooting next year

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Jeff, here's something I don't understand. You delete posts with racial undertones (sometimes overreacting, I'd say, but that's a different discussion), arguably in the name of civic discourse, yet here you are making fun of neighbors who have experienced two violent incidents in a week.

What's about non-nonchalantly telling folks to take Valium after there are at least two confirmed shootings and zoo closings and the police finds spent bullets near a crowded hotel and an elementary school?

Under what kind of moral compass are you operating? I am a minority, and would happily take a harsh comment (heck, someone just mistook me for a delivery man because of my skin color) over a bullet every single day of the week.

The people that I suggested should take a valium would have you stop and frisked if they had their way. As long as you are good with that, I'll accept your admonishment. But, I think it is perfectly fine to be upset when multiple posters attack me for something I did not say. That is especially true when those posters are making statements that simply aren't true. I think the poster who started this thread accusing me of having blood on my hands is way, way, out of line. I think making fun of such a person is a lot better than some of the alternatives I considered. The same goes for those posters who appear to support the original poster. And, yes, a great number of posters in this thread could use a sedative. You don't create good public policy through hysteria and inciting mobs.

Jeff, I am 99.9% certain that someone had responded to this post of yours, pointing out that the OP has not created hysteria or incited mobs. The PP invited you to explain why you feel entitled to make fun of people affected by actual harassment and shots.

That response has now vanished. Did you delete it? If so, why?

Deleting a legitimate and respectful post simply because it questions what you say is a clear abuse of a moderator's role. You're apparently not just moderating a discussion. You're manipulating it.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Jeff, here's something I don't understand. You delete posts with racial undertones (sometimes overreacting, I'd say, but that's a different discussion), arguably in the name of civic discourse, yet here you are making fun of neighbors who have experienced two violent incidents in a week.

What's about non-nonchalantly telling folks to take Valium after there are at least two confirmed shootings and zoo closings and the police finds spent bullets near a crowded hotel and an elementary school?

Under what kind of moral compass are you operating? I am a minority, and would happily take a harsh comment (heck, someone just mistook me for a delivery man because of my skin color) over a bullet every single day of the week.

The people that I suggested should take a valium would have you stop and frisked if they had their way. As long as you are good with that, I'll accept your admonishment. But, I think it is perfectly fine to be upset when multiple posters attack me for something I did not say. That is especially true when those posters are making statements that simply aren't true. I think the poster who started this thread accusing me of having blood on my hands is way, way, out of line. I think making fun of such a person is a lot better than some of the alternatives I considered. The same goes for those posters who appear to support the original poster. And, yes, a great number of posters in this thread could use a sedative. You don't create good public policy through hysteria and inciting mobs.

Jeff, I am 99.9% certain that someone had responded to this post of yours, pointing out that the OP has not created hysteria or incited mobs. The PP invited you to explain why you feel entitled to make fun of people affected by actual harassment and shots.

That response has now vanished. Did you delete it? If so, why?

Deleting a legitimate and respectful post simply because it questions what you say is a clear abuse of a moderator's role. You're apparently not just moderating a discussion. You're manipulating it.

I like to think I have a lot of patience. But, when someone comes along and posts at the end of a 17 page thread titled "Jeff may have blood in his hands if there is another zoo shooting next year" that they think I am manipulating discussion, I just about lose it. I believe the post to which you refer is here:

http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/210/379497.page#5046530

I will look forward to your apology as well as an explanation as to why -- being the manipulative person that I am -- I should even allow this thread to remain on the website in the first place.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Jeff, here's something I don't understand. You delete posts with racial undertones (sometimes overreacting, I'd say, but that's a different discussion), arguably in the name of civic discourse, yet here you are making fun of neighbors who have experienced two violent incidents in a week.

What's about non-nonchalantly telling folks to take Valium after there are at least two confirmed shootings and zoo closings and the police finds spent bullets near a crowded hotel and an elementary school?

Under what kind of moral compass are you operating? I am a minority, and would happily take a harsh comment (heck, someone just mistook me for a delivery man because of my skin color) over a bullet every single day of the week.

The people that I suggested should take a valium would have you stop and frisked if they had their way. As long as you are good with that, I'll accept your admonishment. But, I think it is perfectly fine to be upset when multiple posters attack me for something I did not say. That is especially true when those posters are making statements that simply aren't true. I think the poster who started this thread accusing me of having blood on my hands is way, way, out of line. I think making fun of such a person is a lot better than some of the alternatives I considered. The same goes for those posters who appear to support the original poster. And, yes, a great number of posters in this thread could use a sedative. You don't create good public policy through hysteria and inciting mobs.

Jeff, I am 99.9% certain that someone had responded to this post of yours, pointing out that the OP has not created hysteria or incited mobs. The PP invited you to explain why you feel entitled to make fun of people affected by actual harassment and shots.

That response has now vanished. Did you delete it? If so, why?

Deleting a legitimate and respectful post simply because it questions what you say is a clear abuse of a moderator's role. You're apparently not just moderating a discussion. You're manipulating it.

I like to think I have a lot of patience. But, when someone comes along and posts at the end of a 17 page thread titled "Jeff may have blood in his hands if there is another zoo shooting next year" that they think I am manipulating discussion, I just about lose it. I believe the post to which you refer is here:

http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/210/379497.page#5046530

I will look forward to your apology as well as an explanation as to why -- being the manipulative person that I am -- I should even allow this thread to remain on the website in the first place.

Nope, it’s not there. I’ll accept your apology when you find the post and share it here for DCUM readers to see what you have been deleting.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Jeff, here's something I don't understand. You delete posts with racial undertones (sometimes overreacting, I'd say, but that's a different discussion), arguably in the name of civic discourse, yet here you are making fun of neighbors who have experienced two violent incidents in a week.

What's about non-nonchalantly telling folks to take Valium after there are at least two confirmed shootings and zoo closings and the police finds spent bullets near a crowded hotel and an elementary school?

Under what kind of moral compass are you operating? I am a minority, and would happily take a harsh comment (heck, someone just mistook me for a delivery man because of my skin color) over a bullet every single day of the week.

The people that I suggested should take a valium would have you stop and frisked if they had their way. As long as you are good with that, I'll accept your admonishment. But, I think it is perfectly fine to be upset when multiple posters attack me for something I did not say. That is especially true when those posters are making statements that simply aren't true. I think the poster who started this thread accusing me of having blood on my hands is way, way, out of line. I think making fun of such a person is a lot better than some of the alternatives I considered. The same goes for those posters who appear to support the original poster. And, yes, a great number of posters in this thread could use a sedative. You don't create good public policy through hysteria and inciting mobs.

Jeff, I am 99.9% certain that someone had responded to this post of yours, pointing out that the OP has not created hysteria or incited mobs. The PP invited you to explain why you feel entitled to make fun of people affected by actual harassment and shots.

That response has now vanished. Did you delete it? If so, why?

Deleting a legitimate and respectful post simply because it questions what you say is a clear abuse of a moderator's role. You're apparently not just moderating a discussion. You're manipulating it.

I like to think I have a lot of patience. But, when someone comes along and posts at the end of a 17 page thread titled "Jeff may have blood in his hands if there is another zoo shooting next year" that they think I am manipulating discussion, I just about lose it. I believe the post to which you refer is here:

http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/210/379497.page#5046530

I will look forward to your apology as well as an explanation as to why -- being the manipulative person that I am -- I should even allow this thread to remain on the website in the first place.

Nope, it’s not there. I’ll accept your apology when you find the post and share it here for DCUM readers to see what you have been deleting.

Since you are the one who seems to believe in some sort of conspiracy, why don't you cut to the chase? I just linked to a message very similar to the one you describe. In fact, I notice now that message is even quoted here, as is my response. So, given that I obviously have no problems with posts of the type you describe, why do you think I deleted similar posts? What would I gain from doing that? What do you believe I am trying to hide?

Basically, what the hell is your problem? I am allowing anonymous people to criticize me -- unfairly in many cases -- by name while they remain anonymous (with my consent). Yet, somehow I am the bad guy. Can you tell me why I shouldn't just delete this thread, delete all of your posts, and block you from this website? If I were the horrible person you think I am, isn't that what I would do?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:Could you guys maybe trim your quotes a bit?

How DARE you suggest they trim their quotes?! You are infringing on their free speech.
Also, I'm kind of curious now to see just how tiny it can get. Jeff, have quotes ever gotten smaller than a pixel and just winked out of existence?

No, but that Malaysia flight 370 certainly did -- wink out existence.

[Anonymous]

I haven't read all these pages. Don't want to. Just mad that the discussion has even gone on this long. If I were an admin on this site I don't think I would even respond to some of these posters, and I might delete you all, every time. Don't like the rules get your own forum.

[Anonymous]

I find it funny. It presumes that the OP has some urgent information that could save a life.

[Anonymous]

I think this thread should be deleted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I haven't read all these pages. Don't want to. Just mad that the discussion has even gone on this long. If I were an admin on this site I don't think I would even respond to some of these posters, and I might delete you all, every time. Don't like the rules get your own forum.

What rules? Where are they, and who do they apply to? Those who post well-presented opinions, but oppose admin's opinions? If admin is selectively deleting only opposing opinions, isn't it only ethical to be clear about it?

[Anonymous]

Jeff , seriously, delete this thread. This poster is deranged.

I may or may not agree or disagree with every decision you make, but I understand moderation. It's fundamentally imperfect. It's always going to be a judgement call, and your judgement on a sunny mOnday morning may be different than your judgement on a rainy Thursday afternoon, or at midnight some night you can't sleep. If there were 5 moderators on this board, they'd make the same decision probably 95% of the time, but make different decisions sometimes. There's no bright white line of what flies and what doesn't fly. And if the poster can't understand that, well. Well, probably a good thing they're not the moderator of a hugely successful message board, you know?

This is just beyond offensive at this point (hell, it was beyond offensive when it was posted). I get that deleting it only feeds into their crazy (that you are an unfair deleter), but why keep this crap up? Blood on your hands? Seriously?! That is insane.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I haven't read all these pages. Don't want to. Just mad that the discussion has even gone on this long. If I were an admin on this site I don't think I would even respond to some of these posters, and I might delete you all, every time. Don't like the rules get your own forum.

What rules? Where are they, and who do they apply to? Those who post well-presented opinions, but oppose admin's opinions? If admin is selectively deleting only opposing opinions, isn't it only ethical to be clear about it?

Anyone is always welcome to ask why a post has been deleted. The Website Feedback forum is full of such questions. All of them have received responses. The OP of this thread made no allegation that posts presenting opinions -- opposing or otherwise -- were deleted. The posts removed contained uninformed speculation that negatively impacted the discussion. They were removed after I made a number of requests to posters to refrain from such posts. I continue to wonder just how brain dead you have to be to post a message regarding "selectively deleting" posts in a thread with the topic, "Jeff may have blood in his hands if there is another zoo shooting next year". You apparently did not notice that the OP of this thread has a viewpoint in opposition to mine. Whether her opinion is well-presented is certainly debatable.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:Jeff , seriously, delete this thread. This poster is deranged.

I may or may not agree or disagree with every decision you make, but I understand moderation. It's fundamentally imperfect. It's always going to be a judgement call, and your judgement on a sunny mOnday morning may be different than your judgement on a rainy Thursday afternoon, or at midnight some night you can't sleep. If there were 5 moderators on this board, they'd make the same decision probably 95% of the time, but make different decisions sometimes. There's no bright white line of what flies and what doesn't fly. And if the poster can't understand that, well. Well, probably a good thing they're not the moderator of a hugely successful message board, you know?

This is just beyond offensive at this point (hell, it was beyond offensive when it was posted). I get that deleting it only feeds into their crazy (that you are an unfair deleter), but why keep this crap up? Blood on your hands? Seriously?! That is insane.

Thank you for understanding the challenges presented by moderating this sort of forum. I also appreciate your suggestion to delete the thread. I've considered removing it. But, frankly, it is sort of fun.

[Anonymous]

Speculation is only uninformed when it's not going your way. Just like negative impact on the discussion.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:Speculation is only uninformed when it's not going your way. Just like negative impact on the discussion.

Please explain what it is that I did that you thing was so terrible. Do you honestly believe that a poster stating things that were factually not true is helpful to a discussion? You are doing nothing to suggest that the poster who described you as "deranged" was wrong.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Speculation is only uninformed when it's not going your way. Just like negative impact on the discussion.

Please explain what it is that I did that you thing was so terrible. Do you honestly believe that a poster stating things that were factually not true is helpful to a discussion? You are doing nothing to suggest that the poster who described you as "deranged" was wrong.

I believe that every time we see a post with incorrect information, we have the option of correcting it, with or without supporting evidence. Hence, the mommy fight site. If you will now delete posts that we think have incorrect information, you deny interested posters the opportunity to debate opposing opinions. This should reduce traffic. Not sure if that's a goal.
Why would I care how some random poster wishes to describe me? I simply don't.