[Mind's Eye] Re: Why Has Allan Been Barred From The Group ?

We are working on it.

On Oct 2, 2:17 pm, gabbydott <gabbyd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yep, and watch how the non-committedness of one behind near the lens can
> block the view on tens of activists. ;)
>
> On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 12:19 PM, Chris Jenkins
> <digitalprecip...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > I didn't realize my auto sig was on. Poor form, and of course you're right.
>
> > Regarding Allan? I have no idea. However, there is a group of moderators
> > you can ask about it. :)
> > On Sep 29, 2011 4:54 AM, "gabbydott" <gabbyd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Being too close or over-identifying with the moderation role can have the
> > > opposite effect, as we have seen. Has this effect been corrected yet?
> > > I haven't seen Allan reentering the fair exchange stage so far.
>
> > > And please switch off your automatic signature when you are posting here,
> > > Chris, you might be taken for a spammer by moderators to come who don't
> > know
> > > your history here.
>
> > > On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 8:11 PM, Chris Jenkins
> > > <digitalprecip...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> > >> *laughing* I think that Gabs was insinuating I was about to re-enter the
> > >> moderation fray. As it turns out, that is incorrect. I have completely
> > >> removed myself from any form of moderation or ownership. As I mentioned
> > the
> > >> last time around, I was far too disconnected from the daily going-ons to
> > be
> > >> effective in that role.
>
> > >> Now it's in the hands of others, and I'm free to pop in from time to
> > time
> > >> without dealing with moderation issues...unless, of course, I were to be
> > >> banned. :)
>
> > >> On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Pat <PatrickDHarring...@hotmail.com
> > >wrote:
>
> > >>> On Sep 25, 7:39 am, gabbydott <gabbyd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>> > Ah, Mr Putin is preparing to reenter the stage light! Voting for a
> > >>> natural
> > >>> > death is indeed ridiculous in the eternal presence of God.
>
> > >>> Putin is Russia's answer to G. H. W. Bush. In other words, he's the
> > >>> man behind the puppets. Actually, they're muppets, because the
> > >>> strings come from below rather than above!! Nevertheless, Bush Sr.
> > >>> and Putin call the shots in their respective countries. The facts
> > >>> abour Bush are all laid out in an appendix of my book. The whole
> > >>> story of how the power moved from Hoover's FBI to Bush's CIA. It WILL
> > >>> stir up trouble, but there's no such thing as bad publicity!!
>
> > >>> > If I was in power, I'd learn to see rants as rants against my own
> > power
> > >>> > position - is this how you are trying to impress others? Now guess
> > who I
> > >>> > think is looking ridiculous. But I promise I won't go into details.
> > Go
> > >>> on,
> > >>> > my American Hero, clean the group from unwanted, unsupportive,
> > >>> unproductive,
> > >>> > degenerated elements and get it going to how it used to when you
> > still
> > >>> had
> > >>> > full control over what was happening here!
>
> > >>> > On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 6:06 PM, Chris Jenkins
> > >>> > <digitalprecip...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> > >>> > > God I hate banning people.
>
> > >>> > > I seriously, seriously do. It's a win for martyred trolls. It
> > >>> accomplishes
> > >>> > > silencing disruptive input, but create further division and
> > animosity
> > >>> (much
> > >>> > > like Gab's oft descriptions of my jack booted thuggery).
>
> > >>> > > I've asked Orn for a detailed explanation of the banning. It's a
> > heavy
> > >>> > > hammer, and I'd like to understand why it happened before making
> > any
> > >>> further
> > >>> > > decisions regarding group management.
>
> > >>> > > Chaz contributed much to this conversation, and I was sincerely
> > >>> regretful
> > >>> > > that I had to ban him. His absolute refusal to engage in civil
> > >>> conversation,
> > >>> > > and instead to flame incessantly, forced our hand. Craig and I
> > debated
> > >>> it at
> > >>> > > length; those who were around then may recall he was put on
> > moderation
> > >>> twice
> > >>> > > prior to being banned.
>
> > >>> > > Despite not having anywhere near the time necessary to be a
> > meaningful
> > >>> > > contributor to this group, I still want it to flourish. I believe
> > >>> important
> > >>> > > conversations have been held here, and archived in perpetuity
> > through
> > >>> > > Google's group pages. Contributors like Neil provide the
> > opportunity
> > >>> to
> > >>> > > speak directly with a Bukowski, a Thomas; Francis Hunt has given me
> > a
> > >>> fine
> > >>> > > education in the history of the Catholic Church in Europe, and
> > western
> > >>> > > religious politics; Pat has melted my brain with Yeti-Phi-Tau space
> > >>> and
> > >>> > > inside out tesseracts. The thought of Minds Eye losing contributors
> > >>> like
> > >>> > > that pains me greatly. I still miss my squabbles with
> > Atalante...she
> > >>> was
> > >>> > > another Professorial type whose vast knowledge and experience made
> > me
> > >>> feel
> > >>> > > lucky to be part of this group.
>
> > >>> > > I'm reading through threads now, trying to catch up. I wanted
> > >>> management
> > >>> > > questions to be resolved when I initially posted, and it seems that
> > >>> the lack
> > >>> > > of a clear direction then has led to a further breakdown now. Let's
> > >>> get it
> > >>> > > resolved once and for all.
>
> > >>> > > Oh, and Gabby, I'm tempted sometimes to make YOU the owner of the
> > >>> > > group...I'd love to see the threads where you ranted against
> > yourself.
> > >>> :D
>
> > >>> > > On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 6:17 AM, Pat <
> > PatrickDHarring...@hotmail.com
> > >>> >wrote:
>
> > >>> > >> On Sep 23, 12:20 am, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>> > >> > I was asked to moderate but had to decline on time. Does the
> > fact
> > >>> I'm
> > >>> > >> > selling tickets to the pissing match between Molly and Gabby
> > accord
> > >>> me
> > >>> > >> > a ban? Our mannered society is often the 'rotten State of
> > >>> Denmark'.
> > >>> > >> > This group is less interesting without Chaz and Allan. I wonder
> > >>> about
> > >>> > >> > us if we can't be more tolerant. If Allan did something bad
> > enough
> > >>> > >> > for a ban I'd probably want to go and see if he was OK.
>
> > >>> > >> Ahh, yes...I don't want to forget Chaz!!! I'm all for crediting
> > even
> > >>> > >> those who disagreed!!
>
> > >>> > >> > On Sep 23, 12:03 am, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >>> > >> > > I hardly want to lose my odd contact with you Gabby and I
> > really
> > >>> like
> > >>> > >> > > Orn.
>
> > >>> > >> > > On Sep 16, 7:17 am, gabbydott <gabbyd...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >>> > >> > > > This is unacceptable.
>
> > >>> > >> > > > Neil, and who else is not willing to keep on engaging here
> > >>> under
> > >>> > >> these
> > >>> > >> > > > circumstances, could we please try to let common sense win?
>
> > >>> > >> > > > On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 12:43 AM, ornamentalmind <
> > >>> > >> ornsmindseyes...@yahoo.com
>
> > >>> > >> > > > > wrote:
> > >>> > >> > > > > gabby, thanks for the response. That is what I had guessed
> > >>> about
> > >>> > >> you
> > >>> > >> > > > > and Vam but wanted to be sure since you brought it up.
>
> > >>> > >> > > > > Allan is banned from Minds Eye.
>
> > >>> > >> > > > > On Sep 15, 1:57 pm, gabbydott <gabbyd...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >>> > >> > > > > > No, Orn, not feeling attacked by Vam but being attacked
> > by
> > >>> Vam.
> > >>> > >> But I am
> > >>> > >> > > > > > able to stand my man here, thank you.
>
> > >>> > >> > > > > > What is Allan's current posting status, is what we'd
> > like
> > >>> to
> > >>> > >> know. Is he
> > >>> > >> > > > > > being banned, set on moderation or have only some of his
> > >>> posts
> > >>> > >> been
> > >>> > >> > > > > deleted?
> > >>> > >> > > > > > Thank you for providing us with factual information to
> > help
> > >>> us
> > >>> > >> increase
> > >>> > >> > > > > the
> > >>> > >> > > > > > level objectivity.
>
> > >>> > >> > > > > > On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 10:31 PM, ornamentalmind <
> > >>> > >> > > > > ornsmindseyes...@yahoo.com
>
> > >>> > >> > > > > > > wrote:
> > >>> > >> > > > > > > Moderation is and always has been subjective. It also
> > is
> > >>> not
> > >>> > >> > > > > > > democratic no matter what pretense or trappings are
> > added
> > >>> to
> > >>> > >> it.
>
> > >>> > >> > > > > > > gabby, if you feel attacked by vam and want action,
> > let
> > >>> me
> > >>> > >> know
> > >>> > >> > > > > > > specifically and I'll address it. I use judgement when
> > it
> > >>> > >> comes to
> > >>> > >> > > > > > > individual cases.
>
> > >>> > >> > > > > > > Vam, yes it is serious and I've never taken the
> > >>> > >> task/responsibility
> > >>> > >> > > > > > > lightly.
>
> > >>> > >> > > > > > > Also Vam, as egalitarian as your suggested method
> > appears
> > >>> to
> > >>> > >> be we are
> > >>> > >> > > > > > > not about trials here.
>
> > >>> > >> > > > > > > On Sep 15, 9:41 am, Vam <atewari2...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >>> > >> > > > > > > > I believe banning is a serious matter.
>
> > >>> > >> > > > > > > > I really have not kept track of what Allan has said
> > or
> > >>> done.
> > >>> > >> In the
> > >>> > >> > > > > > > > event, I feel there should be a separate thread
> > titled
> > >>> : Why
> > >>> > >> > > > > so-and-so
> > >>> > >> > > > > > > > deserves to be banned, by the Group rules !
>
> > >>> > >> > > > > > > > The person can then be clearly charged, allowed to
> > >>> respond,
> > >>> > >> and a
> > >>> > >> > > > > call
> > >>> > >> > > > > > > > taken by the Moderator in full public view.
> > Shouldn't
> > >>> be
> > >>> > >> difficult.
> > >>> > >> > > > > > > > After all you wouldn't be doing it every month.
>
> > >>> > >> > > > > > > > On Sep 15, 8:24 pm, ornamentalmind <
> > >>> > >> ornsmindseyes...@yahoo.com>
> > >>> > >> > > > > wrote:
>
> > >>> > >> > > > > > > > > Vam, I deleted the offending posts. Allan himself
> > >>> knew he
> > >>> > >> had gone
> > >>> > >> > > > > > > > > over the line and said so in one of his remaining
> > >>> posts.
> > >>> > >> He
> > >>> > >> > > > > followed
> > >>> > >> > > > > > > > > that one with more unprovoked direct attacks (self
> > >>> > >> > > > > admitted/defined)
> > >>> > >> > > > > > > > > upon me. He
>
> ...
>
> read more »