Can see ignored users being quoted.

[boomboom]

Thanks for the hit and run, too, boomboom

This thread is funny.

[slowrx7]

I am here to please.

[HoustonGM]

Your choice to side with whoever you want, just don't be surprised when our newest mod calls you dense.

Again, I made the "dense" comment prior to becoming a mod, and also, it wasn't even in response to anything you said.

HGM - I know how frustrating it can be to not be able to articulate an argument. It happens to me all the time. The Sheffield thread is a prime example. But - that does not give you the right to go raped ape on people. If you have to nicely say it 10 times, and someone still doesn't get it - tell them nicely the 11th time, or just stop responding.

In these specific cases I've been referring to, I articulated my argument as crystal clear as I could.

And just to throw this out here, is someone who lacks obvious social skills dense?

I don't lack obvious social skills. Which social skills do I lack?

Nah, I haven't been here long enough, I'm a loose cannon, and I wouldn't want the job. But do I think he shouldn't be a mod? Yes, he was a bad choice.

Robinhoodnik and I have both become mods. I know you're going to call me biased, but i think that we were both excellent choices to mod the forum. Why? here's why.

1) We've both been active participants of the forums for many years. I joined 5 years ago, and started really participating on a daily basis 3 years ago.
2) Robin joined 4 years ago. I don't know exactly how long he's been a very active member, but it's been for as long as I can remember.
3) We both provide mods for the game to the community. I provide rosters, and I've done photos. Robin's provided photos, logos, and has also been a very active member of the BMO community.
4) We both try our best to help new Mogul players.

I realize that. However, moderators generally attempt to diffuse situations. HGM doesn't know that art (nor do I). A moderator taking pot shots at contributors and attempting to escalate situations to bait a contributor into tossing an insult back is pretty much unheard of.

Keep in mind I became a moderator like two days ago. I'm not going to change my beliefs or how I defend my beliefs in a debate. I've rarely had problems until recently. I don't see why two people can't debate an issue on which they disagree, without in escalating into ridiculousness.

I have something against the way he treats people and insults them.

Please, where have I insulted people besides that one "dense" comment, that was not harsh at all, and was a general statement based on how ridiculous it was to have to repeat the same thing over and over again when it was clearly put into one, neat sentence?

[slowrx7]

HGM - being a good contributor has nothing to do with being a moderator.
It is a worthy trait, and it shows you will be here a lot, but its only a prerequisite for the job, and honestly, the only prereq I think you have.

You lack the social skills of being able to calm people down, being able to not respond to baiting, you are overly defensive (even your response to my question which sparked this response, which was a yes or no btw, was defensive), you lack the petting of ego to help someone feel smart even if it appears they aren't, you lack a sense of humor, you lack the ability to be nice when frustrated, and you lack the ability to choose words that are not profanity when a more politically correct word is available.

Dense isn't harsh? Wait, that a joke? And does it matter who it was aimed at? I actually care about the other members of this board, which leads to another social skill you lack - compassion.

You are a mod now. You don't need to change your beliefs, but you are supposed to be a role model on the forums, and are here not to 'pwn' contributors, but moderate discussions. Like it or not, you should tone down a little bit, and act more like ohms. I used to be frustrated at ohms, but all in all, ohms has acted fairly neutral.

[HoustonGM]

HGM - being a good contributor has nothing to do with being a moderator.
It is a worthy trait, and it shows you will be here a lot, but its only a prerequisite for the job, and honestly, the only prereq I think you have.

What's that? A contradition? First you state that being a good contributor has nothing to do with being a moderator, than you claim it as a prerequisite! Which is it? Does it have something to do with being a moderator, or not?!

[/sarcasm]

You lack the social skills of being able to calm people down, being able to not respond to baiting, you are overly defensive (even your response to my question which sparked this response, which was a yes or no btw, was defensive), you lack the petting of ego to help someone feel smart even if it appears they aren't, you lack a sense of humor, you lack the ability to be nice when frustrated, and you lack the ability to choose words that are not profanity when a more politically correct word is available.

Just to let you know, you don't know the first thing about me.

Dense isn't harsh? Wait, that a joke? And does it matter who it was aimed at? I actually care about the other members of this board, which leads to another social skill you lack - compassion.

Again, you don't know the first thing about me.

And when I say that I think that somebody is purposely not understanding me to get me frustrated, yeah, that's not that harsh.

You are a mod now. You don't need to change your beliefs, but you are supposed to be a role model on the forums, and are here not to 'pwn' contributors, but moderate discussions.

Moderators are members of the community as well. They're sole purpose isn't to just simply moderate discussions. They're allowed to participate in them as well. If becoming a moderator meant not being allowed to participate in debates, I would not have agreed to it, as a big reason I am here is to participate in discussions.

[slowrx7]

I don't know what a contradition is, but I wasn't contradicting myself. Good contributing is needed to be recogized and selected. It isn't a necessary part of the task.

Ok, you ask me what you lack then totally dismiss it? Why even ask? To bait me? I know enough to make a first impression, and I honestly answered to the best of my knowledge.

The insults - You could have worded it the way you did just now in your earlier post, but you didn't. You called them dense.

Of course you can partake in discussions, but not knowing troll or bait people, or incite an angry reaction, which is what you usually do.

[HoustonGM]

I don't know what a contradition is, but I wasn't contradicting myself. Good contributing is needed to be recogized and selected. It isn't a necessary part of the task.

Okay, you can stop pointing out every itsy bitsy typo I make. That's just pointless. A moderator that doesn't contribute won't be a moderator long. Activeness is a requirement of a moderator.

Ok, you ask me what you lack then totally dismiss it? Why even ask? To bait me? I know enough to make a first impression, and I honestly answered to the best of my knowledge.

Yet, you don't know me. All you know of me is how I act in a debate about baseball, something of which I hold very strong opinions on.

The insults - You could have worded it the way you did just now in your earlier post, but you didn't. You called them dense.

And I later expanded upon it.

Of course you can partake in discussions, but not knowing troll or bait people, or incite an angry reaction, which is what you usually do.

No. I state my opinion, and defend my opinion. I'm not inciting anything by arguing my point, else, everyone that's participated in a debate is guilty of the same thing.

[slowrx7]

It isn't defending your ideals where you screw up. Its the condescending, arrogant, cocky attitude how you defend it.

Possibly contributing is required on this board, so I will concede that point. However, its not the total skillset needed.

I don't need to know you. You portray your social skills on this board and thats all we have to go on. You show a lack of social skills and thats we base it on. I supposed I could have prefaced every example with 'On this board, you seem to'. You could be the nicest guy in the world, but you come off differently here. On the board, thats all we have to go on.

[HoustonGM]

It isn't defending your ideals where you screw up. Its the condescending, arrogant, cocky attitude how you defend it.

If you want to go back and look at older debates, you wouldn't see such an attitude, because I wasn't being personally attacked at every opportunity.

Possibly contributing is required on this board, so I will concede that point. However, its not the total skillset needed.

Which is why I listed other things as well, and it wasn't a complete list.

I don't need to know you. You portray your social skills on this board and thats all we have to go on. You show a lack of social skills and thats we base it on. I supposed I could have prefaced every example with 'On this board, you seem to'. You could be the nicest guy in the world, but you come off differently here. On the board, thats all we have to go on.

You're basing it solely off my debates on a topic I feel very strongly about. Take a look around the rest of the forum. I offer help to people when they need it. I point people in the right direction and answer their questions regarding the game. I get a couple of instant messages a week with people asking me for assistance with the game or the forums. If I was such a bad person on the boards, why would people come to me with issues they're having?

[slowrx7]

They don't know any better? How am I supposed to know why? I am not a mind reader.

Most of your list contained things that pointed to activity. Number 4 I have no idea if its true. In fact, I remember you being mean to me when I first joined.

You aren't being attacked. You were being debated. It's funny how when you do it, its debating, and when people do it to you, its attacking.

[slowrx7]

And no, I don't see you on the other boards where we work together. (joke)

[HoustonGM]

Most of your list contained things that pointed to activity. Number 4 I have no idea if its true. In fact, I remember you being mean to me when I first joined.

All my memories of talking to you have come from debates, in which we disagree. I don't ever recall you asking for help regarding Mogul and me being mean to you.

You aren't being attacked. You were being debated. It's funny how when you do it, its debating, and when people do it to you, its attacking.

It goes beyond debating when I start to get insulted because I happened to have been born in 1989, and when I am called many harsh names, like "****ing fruitcake" and a multitude of others. (And I'm talking about more people than just you, by the way).

[ohms_law]

Robinhoodnik and I have both become mods. I know you're going to call me biased, but i think that we were both excellent choices to mod the forum. Why? here's why.

1) We've both been active participants of the forums for many years. I joined 5 years ago, and started really participating on a daily basis 3 years ago.
2) Robin joined 4 years ago. I don't know exactly how long he's been a very active member, but it's been for as long as I can remember.
3) We both provide mods for the game to the community. I provide rosters, and I've done photos. Robin's provided photos, logos, and has also been a very active member of the BMO community.
4) We both try our best to help new Mogul players.

5) Between the three of us there's always going to be coverage on the non-BMO forums, now.
6) The three of us know each other very well (on the forums, at least), and we know the community (standards, rules, guidelines, etc...)
7) Between the three of us, we sort of run a spectrum. Robin is more "conservative", I'm more "moderate", and HGM is more "liberal". Obviously, none of us are real ideologues, and those labels are far from being 100% accurate, but their accurate enough.

8) I trust their judgment (and Clay obviously agreed).
9) We can back each other up.

[HoustonGM]

5) Between the three of us there's always going to be coverage on the non-BMO forums, now.
6) The three of us know each other very well (on the forums, at least), and we know the community (standards, rules, guidelines, etc...)
7) Between the three of us, we sort of run a spectrum. Robin is more "conservative", I'm more "moderate", and HGM is more "liberal". Obviously, none of us are real ideologues, and those labels are far from being 100% accurate, but their accurate enough.

8) I trust their judgment (and Clay obviously agreed).
9) We can back each other up.

Good additions.

I'd also just like to state that I do understand that I've been more "snappy" lately, as I alluded to when I quoted my private message to Robin. I've been going through some rough emotional times lately, as well as dealing with the stress of college preparation, so I am more "on edge" so to speak.

[ohms_law]

It goes beyond debating when I start to get insulted because I happened to have been born in 1989, and when I am called many harsh names, like "****ing fruitcake" and a multitude of others. (And I'm talking about more people than just you, by the way).

Timing is a big part of this as well. Just prior to your first post, slowrx (and, incidentally, prior to HGM and robin becoming mods), we had a bit of an incident with a member... Let's just say that it wasn't pretty, and HGM didn't do anything wrong, but he was certainly the target.
That was like the day before you joined. Actually, it may have been the day that you joined (or at least the day that you first posted...).

Bad timing.