The moderating imbalance is purely instinctual, as Faust demonstrates.
Mods (and all creatures) don’t know that they’re biased, or rather, they choose their particular bias with their whole being.
For the rest it’s a matter of taking criticism, learning, evolving. In other words, pointless.
Not at all, FC. When I was on staff, I chose my biases based on Carleas’ overall view of how the site should be run, the advice of other mods, feedback from members, and whether the poster called himself Satyr or not. And some other factors. But surely not with my whole being. That’s just creepy.
I post on a weed forum that’s about 100 times more heavily moderated than this place. Find freer speech online, where anyone is saying anything interesting at all, and post up the link.
This is surprising to me. I don’t understand what would make you say this about Pav. If he’s doing a bad job, then I don’t know who’s doing a good job.
Thank you for the compliment, Fuse!
I’m getting bored. This thread isn’t melodramatic enough. Couldn’t somebody break down in tears or something? And where are those drones I ordered??? Crap, I’d better call the White House again…
If you don’t know what thread I mean apparently you’re not paying a lot of attention to the threads you’re locking, but I don’t think my condemnation should lead to a vote to have you replaced.
Glad to see you in old form.
Seriously, I don’t like what modship does to people.
You can write that up as my biased opinion.
We might be just as concerned with not being selected as a mod does to people. Some of us never seem to get over it.
I must admit that I am surprised that you took such offense to that apology. I do recall that thread, of course, but assumed that you were referring to something less recent.
I honestly apologize that you took exception to the manner in which I handled Locking that thread. In all honesty, I made that statement the way that I did with intent to acknowledge the fact that the two more recent posts in that thread were not the reasons for which I was Locking the thread. I was basically just trying to say, “Look, I know a few of you guys are discussing the subject matter for which the thread exists, but we still have these infractions going on in this thread that I would like to put a stop to rather than banning people.”
In any event, I am instituting the vote just to ensure that there’s no, “Slient majority,” type thing going on with respect to my continuance as a Moderator of this website. I would suggest that if less than half of the Active Members in Good Standing of this website want me to continue to Moderate, then I should not Moderate. It was an appointed position, so nobody asked for me to be a Moderator, here. I maintain, however, that if more people should like to see me terminated rather than to continue to Moderate, then that is the way it should be. I also would not want to Moderate in spite of the wishes of over half of our Members.
Well, now that you mention it, I must admit that personally I’m outraged that you’re worrying so much about we the half drunken mob. One more apologetic kinda statement from you and I might change my vote. 
You’ve been given a room to manage. Manage it. Manage it however you feel it should be managed. If the forum owner doesn’t agree, they’ll let you know. This isn’t a democracy and you’re not running for election.
Being a mod is just like being a poster. We write our posts the way we want to write our posts, and the readers like them or they don’t. Modding is a different form of forum art that should be pursued in the same way. Do your thing.
Dear Mods,
I accept your warning that I have violated the rules. I was fully conscious of it while doing it, and suspected that I would receive a warning. However, I continued to be abusive as my ‘interlocutor’ deserved it. If he can speak to others with some civility and respect, then he’ll receive it in return. Otherwise, there’s no point me being passive about it.
People can check my 7 year history here. I rarely go off the deep end and abuse others. If I do, it’s usually because I’ve been on the receiving end of it first.
On the other topic, labelling me a ‘racist’ is only a tactic to shut me up. The discussion under consideration is a perfectly legitimate topic and should be allowed to be discussed. Ironically, the person in question labelling me a ‘racist’ makes racist comments in regards to Americans frequently.
american isn’t a race. juts saying
That’s correct.
However, neither are Muslims, Iranians, or Afgani’s, but I keep getting called a racist for be critical of them. So I am just using siatd’s own ‘reasoning’ against him.
then tell him that islam is not a race
And being critical of US foreign policy or even not disliking the mixing of cultures does not make one a Marxist anarchist. In fact you have to do and believe a highly complex mixture of stuff in a number of disciplines to be this.
This is good, we are learning about certain kinds of false labeling.
If only we had a word like the urban slang version of ‘religionist’ or perhaps ‘chauvinist’ or ‘segregationist’.
But we don’t.
we have “ignorant bigot” and “cuntcandle” but those words get me a warning 
I hadn’t had cuntcandle but now I have. 
(I mean, I learned a word. I am not confessing to a recent sexual act.)
I just saw this thread. I vote for Pav.
I can’t believe you guys kept this going so long…gees…
It’s Pavlovian.
What do they expect?