[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

well i just want it noted for the record that I greatly respect Niamh and Vicky's posts and their moderating across a number of years.

Thanks BOTS

[jet]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

well i just want it noted for the record that I greatly respect Niamh and Vicky's posts and their moderating across a number of years.

I've no idea what happened but I absolutely agree. I couldn't fault either of them.

[Tom4784]

The problem is that people allow their feelings to become their facts when it comes to the mods, I know this first hand as I've got my own hateclub of members that will screech that I'm biased based on nothing more than they don't like me, they think that, because they hate me, that means I'm biased towards them which is ridiculous and nonsensical. I'm probably the most impartial mod of them all, I don't let who my friends are and who I dislike affect my decisions and, tbh, if you're reporting something and I see it, you better hope you haven't broken any rules yourself since I have a tendency, when it's applicable, to infract both sides of an argument. When it comes to modding, I don't play favourites.

When modding used to be more transparent, people used to abuse the system, for example they knew of their infraction points and such to break the rules but reign it in when they knew they were close to a ban, That's why you don't see how many points you have anymore. When we try to be transparent about decisions there will always be a loud section of people who will simply oppose what we say because it's easier to blame us for things than admit when they are in the wrong.

There are problems in Tibb towers and it's funny that people say the mods will back each other up because I don't think we've ever been as fragmented as we are currently, We would not stick up for each other if someone was in the wrong, especially these days. I don't think, in this case, that neither Vicky nor Niamh are in the wrong.

[Mokka]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Except, you are completely wrong, as it is just an assumption that is was niamh. I have just got back from a party with my daughter and the thread had grown by hundreds of posts, read through it, saw all of the nonsense and locked it to delete the nonsense (and yes, the personal comment to niamh, which I am actually considering giving an outright ban for as it was very below the belt and that member only ever comes on to have a go at mods anyway), then re-opened it, as is pretty standard.

Figured it was fine for me to do this, as I had barely been involved in the thread, and was definitely not involved in the bickering stuff.

But no doubt I was still wrong.

As for



Good luck finding someone willing to moderate who does not post.

I have been asking for a while to be de-modded as I just cannot be arsed with the way we are always in the wrong and accused of being biased, and how some members seem to think we should not have opinions as mods.

I genuinely am sick to the back teeth of this forum and how nothing is ever right and stuff.

Oh please do. I've called you transphobic on here before... and you agreed you are and said thank you... so when do you get your hands slapped for moderating a thread about transphobia and removing and banning those who don't appreciate or agree with your bigoted views.

You can call people who are in transition "blokes in dresses" but I'm below the belt? Sure. This is why threads like this exist... because of actions like yours.

[Vicky.]

Its below the belt to comment on niamhs parenting abilities. If this exchange where I agreed I was trnasphobic actually happened, I am fairly sure it was a sarcastic reply tbh. I am not transphobic. I am self-ID phobic. There is a huge difference between transsexual women, and any man who says he is a woman.

Please quote a post where I call a transsexual a bloke in a dress. It was claimed a few times in that thread but I don't believe I have actually said that. i have, called blokes in dresses blokes in dresses. but not transsexual people.

[AnnieK]

Originally Posted by Mokka

Oh please do. I've called you transphobic on here before... and you agreed you are and said thank you... so when do you get your hands slapped for moderating a thread about transphobia and removing and banning those who don't appreciate or agree with your bigoted views.

You can call people who are in transition "blokes in dresses" but I'm below the belt? Sure. This is why threads like this exist... because of actions like yours.

Absolutely you were below the belt. Call people for their views thats fine but what right on earth do you have to single out a person and question peoples parenting? Bang out of order. Wrong on all levels. I've actually never seen anyone, as heated things get on here stoop that low before

[Jordan.]

Nothing but respect for my moderators

[Mokka]

I'm sure you are the perfect judge of that. Who is trans and isn't? How is it you who gets to decide

But what I said I don't back down from... so block me. I would be ashamed to post the trash I've seen on here about transgender people... and specifically what I saw posted in that thread and ones before... and have my kid or anyone from the next generation see my ignorance exposed as such. As a parent... that's my view. You get your retitled transphobic view posted over and over... why can't I ?

[Toy Soldier]

Right but this is exactly my point, guys; Moderators want to engage as regular members and do so, but members (multiple members of all persuasions) don't feel like they can engage with staff as normal members when things start getting tense. Whether that's "the case or not" is largely irrelevant. Even I feel like I'm "on thin ice" at the moment tbqfh, and whether that's true or not, all that really matters is that it's possible and therefore it - as I said - creates a two-tier system.

[Smithy]

Caaaaah bitches what have I missed!

If I was a mod I can tell y’all this wouldn’t be such a state!

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Smithy

Caaaaah bitches what have I missed!

If I was a mod I can tell y’all this wouldn’t be such a state!

Me being a terrible mother

[Vicky.]

Any man who simply says he is a woman and thats it, is not, in my opinion trans.

Someone who is actually transitioning, is trans.

I don't get why this is a backward view, or whatever. But carry on. You only ever seem to pop on to criticize mods anyway

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Right but this is exactly my point, guys; Moderators want to engage as regular members and do so, but members (multiple members of all persuasions) don't feel like they can engage with staff as normal members when things start getting tense. Whether that's "the case or not" is largely irrelevant. Even I feel like I'm "on thin ice" at the moment tbqfh, and whether that's true or not, all that really matters is that it's possible and therefore it - as I said - creates a two-tier system.

So what is your proposed solution here then? Mods are not allowed to post? Seems the only way you would be happy, or do I have that wrong? Please tell me how you reckon this apparent problem could be solved.

[Smithy]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Me being a terrible mother

Tsk, what are you like!

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Smithy

Tsk, what are you like!

[y.winter]

Cue the we'resupposedtohaveanicetea.gif

[Toy Soldier]

As I can no longer post in SD's (with very little explanation, by the way, and yet I'm supposed to believe that the moderating is level-headed and consistent. Snooze.);




With regard to "quoting" specifically where the problems lie in the transgender threads... I still can't do anything extensive as I'm on my phone and tbh I'm not all that inclined to any more. But for anyone who cares to do a little legwork...

I quickly came across two threads. One is about a trans female competing in the Olympics in female events, the other is about a 19 year old trans female being g a women's officer.

Both threads make good examples because I *agree* with the premise of both. I fully agree that a 19 year old who was born male should not be women's officer. I fully agree that it's unfair for a biological male to compete in a women's sporting event.

However, both threads, within the first page (as I didn't even delve deep) are absolutely FULL of loaded terminology. Repeatedly saying "he", "him", "man", "19 year old boy". The words "dick" and "cock" are used so frequently its like they've been loaded into a party popper and fired at the threads. It's pointed. It's aggressive. The sentiment behind it is VERY, VERY clear.

Those who can look at those threads and not see what I'm talking about, will never understand what I'm talking about, so there's little need for me to continue looking back further and quoting specific parts of posts.

[caprimint]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Me being a terrible mother

Wow How disgusting.

From what I know of you, you're absolutely so far away from that. Judging by everything I do know, I'd say you set a really good example of a parent.

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

So what is your proposed solution here then? Mods are not allowed to post? Seems the only way you would be happy, or do I have that wrong? Please tell me how you reckon this apparent problem could be solved.

Choose between sticking to considered, balanced posts that don't take sides when it comes to contentious discussions, or choose to be a regular member who can freely get into contentious discussions.

The vast majority of threads don't fall into the category of being contentious issues but on those that do, in my opinion, yes mods need to remain impartial or the threads become completely unbalanced.

Is it unfortunate? Sure. Is it fair? Nope. That doesn't mean it isn't a real issue.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by caprimint

Wow How disgusting.

From what I know of you, you're absolutely so far away from that. Judging by everything I do know, I'd say you set a really good example of a parent.

Thanks Stacey

[Jack_]

Originally Posted by Mokka

Oh please do. I've called you transphobic on here before... and you agreed you are and said thank you... so when do you get your hands slapped for moderating a thread about transphobia and removing and banning those who don't appreciate or agree with your bigoted views.

You can call people who are in transition "blokes in dresses" but I'm below the belt? Sure. This is why threads like this exist... because of actions like yours.

The thing is Mokka, I reckon that there are a few people on this forum for whom your remark in the other thread COULD apply, but neither Niamh nor Vicky are them. I fundamentally disagree with a lot of the rhetoric on trans issues in SD these days (and make a conscious and concerted effort to stay out of it), but not for a second would I ever think either of them would fall guilty to the accusation you were levelling, they are nowhere near the kind of people you're painting them to be and that's why it came across so badly. You are, IMO, directing your anger at the wrong people.

I did however agree with the larger discussion about the kind of atmosphere that has been fostered in these types of threads. But that's a wider issue, and not one that can be narrowed down to a couple of mods.

[Toy Soldier]

ALSO Niamh, for what it's worth, the post that I had written in the thread when it was locked (that I tried to post then found out was locked) was to say that I completely disagreed with the comment on you as a parent and that from my impressions of you, I actually strongly believe that you would be completely supportive and your stance would change very quickly.

I do also agree that bringing people's kids into a discussion (that isn't actually about parenting) crosses a completely different sort of line.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

ALSO Niamh, for what it's worth, the post that I had written in the thread when it was locked (that I tried to post then found out was locked) was to say that I completely disagreed with the comment on you as a parent and that from my impressions of you, I actually strongly believe that you would be completely supportive and your stance would change very quickly.

I do also agree that bringing people's kids into a discussion (that isn't actually about parenting) crosses a completely different sort of line.

Thanks TS, I appreciate you saying that.

[Mokka]

Originally Posted by Jack_

The thing is Mokka, I reckon that there are a few people on this forum for whom your remark in the other thread COULD apply, but neither Niamh nor Vicky are them. I fundamentally disagree with a lot of the rhetoric on trans issues in SD these days (and make a conscious and concerted effort to stay out of it), but not for a second would I ever think either of them would fall guilty to the accusation you were levelling, they are nowhere near the kind of people you're painting them to be and that's why it came across so badly. You are, IMO, directing your anger at the wrong people.

I did however agree with the larger discussion about the kind of atmosphere that has been fostered in these types of threads. But that's a wider issue, and not one that can be narrowed down to a couple of mods.

My response was directly to a few phrases I read over multiple pages by Niamh. My own trans kid is a member on this site and saw what I was posting as we discussed it and conversed about it as it was happening... and if they are proud of their mother having their back.. that's all I need. I just am sickened by the turn this site has taken over the last few months.. propping up and patting the backs of those setting the anti-trans rhetoric.

[Kazanne]

Don't really know what this is all about,but have to say most of the mods in here seem fair enough,I don't always agree with them,but at the same time they have a thankless job at times .