BillyBob Wants to Kill the Pretty Girls Thread

[engatwork]

it was a single moderator that decided it was a violation?

This is inaccurate but I just noticed that you posted it as a question. The answer is no, it was not a single mod that decided it was a violation.

Looking back I would have done it a little differently. Like I said, I learned something regarding this incident and will use what I have learned to improve my moderation skills. Thanks for the support.

[Billybob]

Originally Posted by engatwork

This is inaccurate but I just noticed that you posted it as a question. The answer is no, it was not a single mod that decided it was a violation.

Looking back I would have done it a little differently. Like I said, I learned something regarding this incident and will use what I have learned to improve my moderation skills. Thanks for the support.

Hey I was just try to make sense of the two different versions of events, yours from a couple days ago and Tyler's from this evening where he stated:

Originally Posted by TylerH860

...The post was reported by the former moderator that wrote the enhanced TOU and another moderator acted based on the current TOU setup....

[Local2ED]

Billy, Billy, Billy, give it a rest already.

[Billybob]

Originally Posted by Local2ED

Billy, Billy, Billy, give it a rest already.

You can be sure I'll treat your suggestion with the same level of consideration and appreciation I reserve for all your utterings!

[Local2ED]

Originally Posted by Billybob

You can be sure I'll treat your suggestion with the same level of consideration and appreciation I reserve for all your utterings!

Much obliged.

[engatwork]

Well, now you know.

[TylerH860]

Originally Posted by engatwork

Thanks for the support.

Yes much appreciated.

[Billybob]

Just an observation on something that was revealed earlier this evening. I’d have posted it in the original thread but it’s been locked and this thread is related.

Sometime earlier on Oct 10 before 11:15 PM when the first mention of it remains, sjh started deleting and altering his postings after having moderators find him in violation of the TOU copy right provisions. Early the next morning at 05:42 AM the person who the day before instigated the TOU copy right complaint had read the posts that had been going on about it including Kerry’s “All recent posts or just posts on this thread?” which he quotes and posted this:

RNC heckes thread post #770

“My observation is that Mr. SJH's threads had become increasingly trollish lately. He tries very hard to come off as reasoned and reasonable but it seems difficult to walk that line.

Taking your toys or posts and leaving may be a reaction in frustration of not being able to get folks to agree with your point of view.

I have come to the place where I have accepted that nobody gives a Shyte what I think.

Of course I am happy to reciprocate.”

So first he complains to the moderators which ends with sjh deleting and leaving and then posts as if:

1) he has no idea what has transpired
2) suggests sjh may have crossed some line
3) that deleting posts was due to a failure to find agreement
4) claims no one cares about what he (Tom) posts, and that he is happy to respond in kind

When the fact is he more than anybody except the moderators knew what had started this train of events and that it was his deliberate action. That there was no substantive issue with what sjh had posted and if anything it was a dubious technical violation of a flawed rule notice that he had authored and there was no trolling or crossing of any line. He knew that is was his own frustration at not being able to get sjh to agree with his point of view that lead to him reporting the complaint. That in fact contrary to what he publicly stated and tried to convince everyone of, he very much was concerned what someone else thinks and was perfectly willing to hide behind the anonymity of the report to the moderator system while attempting to abuse the TOU provisions in order to inflict some harm and distress on a forum member with whom he disagreed. There has been no evidence revealed that suggests any across the forum concern regarding copy right compliance on his part.

[PaulC]

Originally Posted by Billybob

Just an observation on something that was revealed earlier this evening. I’d have posted it in the original thread but it’s been locked and this thread is related.

Sometime earlier on Oct 10 before 11:15 PM when the first mention of it remains, sjh started deleting and altering his postings after having moderators find him in violation of the TOU copy right provisions. Early the next morning at 05:42 AM the person who the day before instigated the TOU copy right complaint had read the posts that had been going on about it including Kerry’s “All recent posts or just posts on this thread?” which he quotes and posted this:

RNC heckes thread post #770

“My observation is that Mr. SJH's threads had become increasingly trollish lately. He tries very hard to come off as reasoned and reasonable but it seems difficult to walk that line.

Taking your toys or posts and leaving may be a reaction in frustration of not being able to get folks to agree with your point of view.

I have come to the place where I have accepted that nobody gives a Shyte what I think.

Of course I am happy to reciprocate.”

So first he complains to the moderators which ends with sjh deleting and leaving and then posts as if:

1) he has no idea what has transpired
2) suggests sjh may have crossed some line
3) that deleting posts was due to a failure to find agreement
4) claims no one cares about what he (Tom) posts, and that he is happy to respond in kind

When the fact is he more than anybody except the moderators knew what had started this train of events and that it was his deliberate action. That there was no substantive issue with what sjh had posted and if anything it was a dubious technical violation of a flawed rule notice that he had authored and there was no trolling or crossing of any line. He knew that is was his own frustration at not being able to get sjh to agree with his point of view that lead to him reporting the complaint. That in fact contrary to what he publicly stated and tried to convince everyone of, he very much was concerned what someone else thinks and was perfectly willing to hide behind the anonymity of the report to the moderator system while attempting to abuse the TOU provisions in order to inflict some harm and distress on a forum member with whom he disagreed. There has been no evidence revealed that suggests any across the forum concern regarding copy right compliance on his part.

WGAS?

[Billybob]

Originally Posted by PaulC

WGAS?

Why'd you post in response?

[PaulC]

Originally Posted by Billybob

Why'd you post in response?

I knew that you would appreciate some constructive feedback.