Wecolme back to the board. Did you save all of the things you wanted to post during your suspension? Does Schwebby have a higher post count now?

Where's Morgan?

How on earth did my pal Rhett get suspended? I missed that one somewhere. Someone get me up to speed. That's really hard to believe. rWc3523

He was trying to tell Mike K. how he felt about the nonsense Mike spews.

wow, thats shocking!! welcome back Rhett..

Understandable. And though I only met Rhett once, I read a lot of his stuff here and felt he was a pretty laid back guy. Thanks, rWc3523

Mikey and Rhett come back on the same day. Two men enter one man leaves! What's the under/over on Mikey this time?

I'll take the over - whatever it may be!

......beat me to the punch 4010.

All these people saying "Welcome Back, Rhett" but I haven't seen any posts from him. Has anyone?

BTW, With Pizza God and My Hero on probation, and Rhett just back from suspension, it appears to me that we might be a weeee bit overzealous in the use of the disciplinary hammer for MB infractions. Just my opinion, worth exactly what you paid to read it.

you have to be careful and not mis-spell your profanity! /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

Welcome back, Rhett.

I didn't even use profanity and I got 3months probation.
No personal attack, no veiled physical threats and no inappropriate images.

I think it would be a great idea to publish the name of the accuser.
Why shouldn't we be allowed to know who our accuser is?
Why should they be allowed to remain anonymous?
Do they have something to hide?
They were brave enough to complain, be brave enough to let the world know who you are.

BTW, With Pizza God and My Hero on probation, and Rhett just back from suspension, it appears to me that we might be a weeee bit overzealous in the use of the disciplinary hammer for MB infractions. Just my opinion, worth exactly what you paid to read it.



Bill, are you familiar with our disiciplinary process and/or the offenses they committed? You may be making these judgments based solely on persona, and without any knowledge of the current PDGA Message Board Rules and the offenses those message board users committed.

In each case, a message board user reported them for violation of our PDGA DISCussion Board Rules. A moderator reviewed the post, and agreed that it did indeed break our rules. The guilty party then had the option to appeal to the Communications Director who could overturn or uphold the decision. Three separate persons - the message board user who reported it, the moderator who reviewed it, and the Communications Director who upheld any appeal, were in agreement that there were infractions. In Rhett's case, he was on two probationary periods before the 3 month suspension was enacted.

This is all explained at length in our PDGA Message Board Rules (http://www.pdga.com/msgboard/boardrules.php?Cat=0) and anyone who is not familiar with the disciplinary process should click on the aforementioned link and familiarize themselves with the process.

Yada, yada, yada, just more of the same. :confused:

I heard the line at 47 hours on another thread. Looks like he didn't make it.

BTW, With Pizza God and My Hero on probation, and Rhett just back from suspension, it appears to me that we might be a weeee bit overzealous in the use of the disciplinary hammer for MB infractions. Just my opinion, worth exactly what you paid to read it.



Bill, are you familiar with our disiciplinary [sic] (another typo - must be MTL :) - exczar)

process
-
<font color="red"> Yes </font>
-
and/or the offenses they committed?
-
<font color="red"> The listing of what offense they committed is so vague as to be of litte use:
-
Bryan James Probation 11/11/2007 2/11/2008 Offensive Material
-
From what I understand, the offensive material was a picture of a cartoon character in Southpark dressed up in some sort of Nazi uniform. Southpark is now shown on a local broadcast channel, and I have found that the language on that show to be more off-color than the pictures.
-
John Maurio Probation 10/2/2007 1/2/2008 Material not suitable for a minor
-
Don't know what that was, I think it might have been a link to a pic (?)
-
Rhett Stroh
-
no longer listed on Message Board Disciplinary List, I understand that he referred to UPM as someone with low intellegence (shocking!) </font>
-
You may be making these judgments based solely on persona,
-
<font color="red"> I have met all three of the gentlemen listed above, so I think I have a basic handle on their character and demeanor, not just what they appear to be here on the MB </font>
-
nd without any knowledge of the current PDGA Message Board Rules and the offenses those message board users committed.
-
<font color="red"> Wasn't I asked that already? </font>
-
In each case, a message board user reported them for violation of our PDGA DISCussion Board Rules. A moderator reviewed the post, and agreed that it did indeed break our rules. The guilty party then had the option to appeal to the Communications Director who could overturn or uphold the decision. Three separate persons - the message board user who reported it, the moderator who reviewed it, and the Communications Director who upheld any appeal, were in agreement that there were infractions. In Rhett's case, he was on two probationary periods before the 3 month suspension was enacted.

This is all explained at length in our PDGA Message Board Rules (http://www.pdga.com/msgboard/boardrules.php?Cat=0) and anyone who is not familiar with the disciplinary process should click on the aforementioned link and familiarize themselves with the process.



I am assuming that this response from the Mod was given for more than my edification - I just happened to be the one who said that the subjective criteria possible use a little tweaking.

Maybe we should just go ahead and make the MB truly moderated - all posts must be approved before they are shown on the MB. Should would cut down on the probations and noise we are seeing here, but would be a whooole lotta more work for the mods, and would greatly slow down the time between when a post was submitted and when it shows up here.

All these people saying "Welcome Back, Rhett" but I haven't seen any posts from him. Has anyone?

BTW, With Pizza God and My Hero on probation, and Rhett just back from suspension, it appears to me that we might be a weeee bit overzealous in the use of the disciplinary hammer for MB infractions. Just my opinion, worth exactly what you paid to read it.



I agree, but in the name of fairness... I've only seen a few posts that really made me think whoa! Banning Rhett, no matter what he said, seems wrong.

BTW, With Pizza God and My Hero on probation, and Rhett just back from suspension, it appears to me that we might be a weeee bit overzealous in the use of the disciplinary hammer for MB infractions. Just my opinion, worth exactly what you paid to read it.



Bill, are you familiar with our disiciplinary [sic] (another typo - must be MTL :) - exczar)

process
-
<font color="red"> Yes </font>
-
and/or the offenses they committed?
-
<font color="red"> The listing of what offense they committed is so vague as to be of litte use:
-
Bryan James Probation 11/11/2007 2/11/2008 Offensive Material
-
From what I understand, the offensive material was a picture of a cartoon character in Southpark dressed up in some sort of Nazi uniform. Southpark is now shown on a local broadcast channel, and I have found that the language on that show to be more off-color than the pictures.
-
John Maurio Probation 10/2/2007 1/2/2008 Material not suitable for a minor
-
Don't know what that was, I think it might have been a link to a pic (?)
-
Rhett Stroh
-
no longer listed on Message Board Disciplinary List, I understand that he referred to UPM as someone with low intellegence (shocking!) </font>
-
You may be making these judgments based solely on persona,
-
<font color="red"> I have met all three of the gentlemen listed above, so I think I have a basic handle on their character and demeanor, not just what they appear to be here on the MB </font>
-
nd without any knowledge of the current PDGA Message Board Rules and the offenses those message board users committed.
-
<font color="red"> Wasn't I asked that already? </font>
-
In each case, a message board user reported them for violation of our PDGA DISCussion Board Rules. A moderator reviewed the post, and agreed that it did indeed break our rules. The guilty party then had the option to appeal to the Communications Director who could overturn or uphold the decision. Three separate persons - the message board user who reported it, the moderator who reviewed it, and the Communications Director who upheld any appeal, were in agreement that there were infractions. In Rhett's case, he was on two probationary periods before the 3 month suspension was enacted.

This is all explained at length in our PDGA Message Board Rules (http://www.pdga.com/msgboard/boardrules.php?Cat=0) and anyone who is not familiar with the disciplinary process should click on the aforementioned link and familiarize themselves with the process.



I am assuming that this response from the Mod was given for more than my edification - I just happened to be the one who said that the subjective criteria possible use a little tweaking.

Maybe we should just go ahead and make the MB truly moderated - all posts must be approved before they are shown on the MB. Should would cut down on the probations and noise we are seeing here, but would be a whooole lotta more work for the mods, and would greatly slow down the time between when a post was submitted and when it shows up here.



Mod, and Peter, the Mod director. Please review what Bill wrote here. I suspect that we are following the letter of the law to be fair. I'm not sure we're being served well. I admit I don't have an answer, but I don't think what we're currently doing is the right thing.

A few comments from me :

- Moderating comments before they go public would be a huge task. We are flooded at the time just reviewing comments that people think are offensive, imagine having to moderate EVERY post. Not an easy task.

- As far as certain posters being on suspension that people "like" on the message board, we do not bend the rules for anyone. Whether or not the person has been in trouble with us multiple times or has been on the board since it began and never had a single problem, everyone is judged by the content of the post. In fact, when we receive an email to look at a post, the poster is not shown. This insures an unbiased decision. It is not until we make the decision do we see who posted the content.

If we receive lots of complaining about our process now, I couldn't imagine how bad it would be if we were biased toards certain posters with no history of problems.

Just curious - shouldn't Rhett still be on the list since (if I understand correctly) that someone who comes off of suspension is on 3 months probation? Not trying to cause trouble, I just feel like if you're going to have these (in my opinion - rather silly) rules, they should be followed.

On a side note, I'm happier every day that I live in a country where freedom of speech is not being curtailed by the powers that be in the name of political correctness or whatever you want to call it.

Along with the accused list the accuser beside it. :eek:

That might lighten the load for the Mods.

I have a hunch that naming the accuser would be at minumum uncomfortable (more likely embarrasing) for a couple of people. Not that I'm in favor of this, but it could tell an interesting story. On the other hand, naming the accuser would probably result in the same hesitance to get involved as that of calling our playing rules.

As for Rhett, maybe he's broken the addiction and better spends his time playing than on here? Good for him if that's the case!

I don't hesitate on calling a rule on a player and if I were to find something on this board offensive I wouldn't hesitate to stand up and say so and let them know who I am.

It is just too easy to make frivilous complaints to the moderators of being offended by material on this board with out being held accountable.

If you feel offended then MAN up and stand behind your beliefs. :p

Switzerdan, indeed, when coming off suspension, a user is on a 3-month probationary period. That was an oversight due to a moderator updating the Message Board Disciplinary List who has not previously done so before, and will be rectified shortly.

David, feel free to run your idea by the Communications Director, but I think your suggestion would likely result in dozens of headaches. The system relies on message board users being able to confidentially report when there are rules violations. Knowing the indentity of those who reported violations could lead to retaliation against them, both on the message board and possibly in real life. Message board users would quickly become fearful of reporting violations for fear of retaliation. If the PDGA DISCussion Board is to remain a respectful and friendly place, then it's contingent on message board users being able to report egregious rules violations without fear of retribution.

Furthermore, I can tell you that with almost no exceptions, we don't have an excess of overly sensitive or frivolous notifications to the moderators of Rules violations. It's not like there's one guy out there who reports stuff to us all week long.

Thanks, that was what I wanted to know. ;)

A few comments from me :

- Moderating comments before they go public would be a huge task. We are flooded at the time just reviewing comments that people think are offensive, imagine having to moderate EVERY post. Not an easy task.

- As far as certain posters being on suspension that people "like" on the message board, we do not bend the rules for anyone. Whether or not the person has been in trouble with us multiple times or has been on the board since it began and never had a single problem, everyone is judged by the content of the post. In fact, when we receive an email to look at a post, the poster is not shown. This insures an unbiased decision. It is not until we make the decision do we see who posted the content.

If we receive lots of complaining about our process now, I couldn't imagine how bad it would be if we were biased toards certain posters with no history of problems.



I think you miss the point. It isn't that people like, for example Rhett. We actually respect him. We have talked with him and found him to be rational and adult even when angry. It then surprises us when the rules are such that something he has done gets him banned. Take the case here. Saying the UPM is less than "blank" (I wouldn't want to get myself banned) in response to some of the things UPM says. Relatively speaking, Rhett's reply is metered and rational.

Sometimes a flat rule is surprisingly inefficient. That's why the police use judgment when handing out tickets.

I fully admit, there is no good solution, but I argue, I'd rather have to put up with UPM than risk banning an intelligent contributer like Rhett. As I see it, in the past year we've lost two real problems, along with that we've lost about 5 middle of the road posters who made some great contributions and 3 or 4 great posters who have made significant contributions. I'd say we're on the losing side of this situation...

We have rules for a reason, and they apply equally to everyone. The absolute worst thing moderators could do is to selectively apply the rules. It is no matter whatsoever how intelligent a contributer or well respected a person is. If they break the rules, they break the rules.

Rhett's actions 3 1/2 months ago were anything but metered and rational. He intentionally chose to make statements that knowingly violated PDGA DISCussion Board rules. He continued to choose to make these statements even after he was warned, then placed on a probationary period, then suspended for three days and placed on another probationary period and informed that the next transgression would bring a three month suspension. In each case, a message board user reported each post for violation of our PDGA DISCussion Board Rules. A moderator reviewed the post, and agreed that it did indeed break our rules. The decision was appealed to the Communications Director who reviewed the post and upheld the decision. Three separate persons - the message board user who reported it, the moderator who reviewed it, and the Communications Director who upheld the appeal, were in agreement that there were infractions.

some quick questions...
-UPM = ????
-Is it possible to have full names underneath our aliases? I know its only a few clicks away but it might help to identify with those who are bashing who and realize that there are real people @ the other end and that you are representing yourself and not a fictitious name you made up on the msg bard.

I'm not taking sides on that last question/point... just posing an idea that could help (admittedly I don't think there is any one single solution)

UPM = Under Par Mikey

Mikey Kernan's original alias on the board

We have rules for a reason,...



Again, not trying to cause trouble, but I'm curious. What exactly is the reason for the rules we have on this mesage board? I'm sure this has been covered somewhere. I'm just too lazy to search and find it. :o

By the way, welcome back Rhett! I don't come on the board very often and just happened to see a few weeks ago that you were on suspension. Needless to say, I was shocked!

posted November 13 ~ 11:13 pm

Mikey and Rhett come back on the same day. Two men enter one man leaves! What's the under/over on Mikey this time?




posted November 14 ~ 3:38 am

I'll take the over - whatever it may be!




The list (http://www.pdga.com/msgboard/showflat.php?Cat=0&amp;Number=763431&amp;Main=718979#Post7 63431)
(updated November 14 ~ 11:56 am)

We have rules for a reason,...



Again, not trying to cause trouble, but I'm curious. What exactly is the reason for the rules we have on this mesage board? I'm sure this has been covered somewhere. I'm just too lazy to search and find it. :o

By the way, welcome back Rhett! I don't come on the board very often and just happened to see a few weeks ago that you were on suspension. Needless to say, I was shocked!



We still haven't gotten a follow up on this. I agree, I'm too lazy to look but I'd love some commentary. What is it we're protecting with this policy and has our approach been found to be effective or profitable by other organizations?

I juts noticed a new Rhett post! Glad to read you're back around Rhett, good to have another reasonable voice here.
:cool:

I juts noticed a new Rhett post! Glad to read you're back around Rhett, good to have another reasonable voice here.
:cool:



Thanks for the kind words, although not everyone around here would agree!

I might have to vent at the mods on this thread soon, so maybe I won't see y'all again until Feb... :eek:

I reported the post below for being factually inaccurate and personally damaging. For some reason the moderators at this site like to keep bringing up my name while I am suspended and can't reply, even though they don't ever mention anyone else that was suspended. I really don't get it.


As a recap, I was first put on probation for telling one "Ransom Jones" to go to hell. "Hell" is not a censored word, plus "Ransom", who I suspect is really PDGA BOD member Pat Brennan, was railing unmercifully against longtime PDGA volunteer Pete May. Having volunteered myself and received a lot of crap for my efforts, I wasn't okay with those attacks. As a PDGA member I felt I had a right to stick up for those that work for me. But since Ransom was just a troll making unsupported claims with no intention of debating, I decided to tell him to pound sand after the mods decided that the posts of his that I reported were not offensive.

Part two: three day leave without pay. So "Ransom" continues to rail against a hard-working PDGA volunteer, and the mods do nothing about it. I try to argue some more, and then when the fruitlessness of it all remains obvious, I tall "Ransom" that he is an ignoramus of unbridled proportions. Now if you review what "Ransom" was saying about Pete, you'd know that my comment was nowhere near as offensive, so it was quite surprising and a lot humorous when I got a 3 day suspension for a "personal attack" for posting that gem! Are you serious?!?!? Anyway, instead of appealing this travesty of governance, I used it to appeal the "official lack of action" on the posts I reported. You know, like "Hey now, mods. Take a look at what you are doing. You just suspended me for 3 days for that yet the tirades 'Ransom Jones' are still standing. What up with that?" It was all good, I guess, since the mods finally removed Ransoms posts and suspended him, too. Oh, and let's not forget that my 3-day suspension lasted a week because they "forgot" to un-suspend me. Whatevah...

Strike three: You all know Mikey. He has a man-crush on Brian Guru and just can't stop thinking about him or posting about him. Mikey also has complex thinking skills, in that he thinks the PDGA leadership is a bunch of morons that can't do anything, yet they are capable grand conspiracies to keep him out of office. He's a troll, but I get really tired of people bashing my PDGA. After a few exchanges, Mikey suggests that I like [censored] porn and other things. Man, that's way more of a personal attack than the "ignoramus" comment I got suspended for, so I report Mikey. For about a week, I get emails from mods asking if I really think it's a personal attack or even a big deal. I explain what I explained here, and yes I am offended. "Are you sure?" "Yes I am." "Well, I'll have to ask you the same thing yet again, so that later I can claim I was waiting on your third reply before acting on Mikey..." So like any good blow-hard on this message board, I decide that the mods are changing policy since they are letting these obvious personal attacks stand, and I reply to Mikey and suggest that he didn't lose the election because of a conspiracy <font color="blue"> [personal attack deleted] </font> Within about an hour I am suspended for 3 months. And oh, by the way, this "instant action" takes place while the MSDGC is going down, so there is no real avenue for appeal. As a DISCusssion board blow-hard, I am quite incensed by these actions so I pester Dodge greatly asking for an appeal because it just ain't right. He gives me the ultra-quickie review of <font color="blue"> [personal attack deleted] </font> I'm going to uphold the suspension." Um, okay. See ya'll later.

That, my friends, is how it all really went down. :) Even though I am sounding more liek Mikey that I ever cared to, I think the moral of this long story is "don't try to stand up for PDGA volunteers that are being lambasted on the DISCussion board. The 'set in stone' moderation policies favor the trolls who read the letter of the law and stay barely within it."

So it was fun while it lasted, and thanks for all the fish! :D


We have rules for a reason, and they apply equally to everyone. The absolute worst thing moderators could do is to selectively apply the rules. It is no matter whatsoever how intelligent a contributer or well respected a person is. If they break the rules, they break the rules.

Rhett's actions 3 1/2 months ago were anything but metered and rational. He intentionally chose to make statements that knowingly violated PDGA DISCussion Board rules. He continued to choose to make these statements even after he was warned, then placed on a probationary period, then suspended for three days and placed on another probationary period and informed that the next transgression would bring a three month suspension. In each case, a message board user reported each post for violation of our PDGA DISCussion Board Rules. A moderator reviewed the post, and agreed that it did indeed break our rules. The decision was appealed to the Communications Director who reviewed the post and upheld the decision. Three separate persons - the message board user who reported it, the moderator who reviewed it, and the Communications Director who upheld the appeal, were in agreement that there were infractions.

Now Rhett, I'm sure it was just one big misunderstanding... Group hug. :p

BTW - reread Rhett's comment. The MB favors those trolls who know the rules and stay just within them. Chap's comment that we should shut this site down is incredibly accurate. More politicking goes on here than I can believe. I once saw the commentary here as an information source for the Board and ED. Now I see it as a way to disproportionately affect Board decisions. While I like this site and find it entertaining and would miss it--it needs to go.

On the other hand, I'm confident that won't happen. One suggestion that might happen, cut every thread but the equipment, tournament and advice threads. No commentary on the PDGA allowed just on the mechanics of the game. Then set up the separate site Chap mentioned and let people bash away.

That might not be a bad idea. I do like the sections you described and would like to see them stay. But, all the other stuff can go elsewhere. Put a disclaimer up warning people to enter at their own risk, take the gloves off and have at it.

I remember what went down (and beyond) when certain members were dragged through the mire and I was glad (glad,glad,glad) to read a justified response (P.S. thank you Rhett) to what should have never been said in the first place. I said it before and I will say it again, the majority of everything I have read from a certain member (not Rhett) was negative towards the PDGA and some of it's members.

The list:

http://www.pdga.com/msgboard/showflat.php?Cat=0&amp;Number=763431&amp;Main=718979#Post7 63431

Surprise! Who is on it.....again...?

Just look some of the past posts and you will see what I am refering to. I apologize in advance for sugesting you put your stomache in harms way, as you may need to lean over the toilet to relieve yourself after reading some of this stuff. We need free speech here, but there has to be a limit for our own good....

Rhett, if you get put on the above list with a certain offender.. Thanks for taking the time to recap what happened and why. I hope I am am speaking for the majority of the people on this board when I say WE respect and support your decision to stand up for Pete.

I'm sorry Rhett got banned. Normally he has a lot of valuable things to say, even when I disagree with him. You just have to learn not to be baited in this forum.

Baited or just tired of reading the same crap over and over and over and over?

Baited or just tired of reading the same crap over and over and over and over?



I bet it is the over and over factor.....

Maybe there is only so much a rational, intelligent human being can take before they say:

I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore! :mad:

And in the end are crucified for doing something about it....

Rhett rhote:

"As a recap, I was first put on probation for telling one "Ransom Jones" to go to he--. "He--" is not a censored word, plus "Ransom", who I suspect is really PDGA BOD member Pat Brennan, was railing unmercifully against longtime PDGA volunteer Pete May."

Do you really suspect Pat BrennER is posting under R.Jones' account?
Are you creating your own fictional BOD character?
Can't get in trouble for attacking a nonexistent person.

s timm

Hey Rhett,

If you're still around could you PM me your e-mail address, I had an idea I wanted to bounce off you.

Can't get in trouble for attacking a nonexistent person.



I didn't attack anyone. :D

Rhett wrote:

"As a recap, I was first put on probation for telling one "Ransom Jones" to go to he--. "He--" is not a censored word, plus "Ransom", who I suspect is really PDGA BOD member Pat Brennan, was railing unmercifully against longtime PDGA volunteer Pete May."

Then S. Timm replies, changing the subject heading of the post which Rhett, ironically enough, apparently doesn't notice:

"Do you really suspect Pat BrennER is posting under R.Jones' account?
Are you creating your own fictional BOD character?
Can't get in trouble for attacking a nonexistent person.

s timm"

JPB (aka James Patrick Brennan) feels compelled to reply:

Uh, yeah.

Watch it there, buddy.
/msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

- JPB

some quick questions...
-UPM = ????
-Is it possible to have full names underneath our aliases? I know its only a few clicks away but it might help to identify with those who are bashing who and realize that there are real people @ the other end and that you are representing yourself and not a fictitious name you made up on the msg bard.

I'm not taking sides on that last question/point... just posing an idea that could help (admittedly I don't think there is any one single solution)



I have always wondered about this.
Does anyone know why names are not included in our avatars?
Since the links are obviously set up, I doubt it's a technical reason.
For the same reason, I can't see it as any sort of anonimity.
It's quite frankly a pita (it's not a word; I can use it, right? /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif) to click-click, click-click every frickin' (see above parenthetical /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif) time I'm curious who's writing something.

If you want something that can improve this forum, I say start right there.
I would thank whoever it was that I just quoted that brought it up, but I forgot to click-click, click-click before getting in here to this little teeny-weenie ( :eek: can I say that?) little composition window.
:D :p :D

Oh, and welcome back Rhett, and thanks for the HGTTG reference!

JPB

No intentions to personally attack your existence.
My bad.

Rhett

There will be an after thanksgiving sale on CLUES.

s timm

We have rules for a reason,...



Again, not trying to cause trouble, but I'm curious. What exactly is the reason for the rules we have on this mesage board? I'm sure this has been covered somewhere. I'm just too lazy to search and find it. :o

By the way, welcome back Rhett! I don't come on the board very often and just happened to see a few weeks ago that you were on suspension. Needless to say, I was shocked!



We still haven't gotten a follow up on this. I agree, I'm too lazy to look but I'd love some commentary. What is it we're protecting with this policy and has our approach been found to be effective or profitable by other organizations?



On the 1 hand, no one wants to look at message board drivel but these measures to stop that feel draconian to me. I think people responsible for this policy are acting like big brother wannabes who think they personally know better what is good for us than we do ourselves. I am personally offended and if I want to say (and I do), [post edited for personal attack] I ought to be able to say that.

FREE UNDERPARMIKEY!!!!!

If ActionJeff got let back, UPM can surely come back :)

Then S. Timm replies, changing the subject heading of the post which Rhett, ironically enough, apparently doesn't notice:



You guyz iz sow smrt, an eye R soe dumm. :p

Hey, my venting post was modified by the mods after they (expectedly) denied my reporting of the post made by Moderator.

Then S. Timm replies, changing the subject heading of the post which Rhett, ironically enough, apparently doesn't notice:



You guyz iz sow smrt, an eye R soe dumm. :p



Hey Rhett...since your "Back" and all..

I need a caddie this weekend... ;)
:D

Go to the bathrooms across the street from hole 8, I'm sure one of your "customers" will hold your sack... :D

Go to the bathrooms across the street from hole 8, I'm sure one of your "customers" will hold your sack... :D



Is that where ALL your "family" hangs out now that the upper lot is gone... :o

Go to the bathrooms across the street from hole 8, I'm sure one of your "customers" will hold your sack... :D



Is that where ALL your "family" hangs out now that the upper lot is gone... :o



Yeah, thats right... Good old Uncle Daddy.... :D

Go to the bathrooms across the street from hole 8, I'm sure one of your "customers" will hold your sack... :D



Is that where ALL your "family" hangs out now that the upper lot is gone... :o



I'm glad you and your "customers" won't be anywhere near me this weekend Magaylla Gayrilla...
http://www.halloweencostumes4u.com/Merchant2/graphics/00000003/16310.jpg

easy there...buddy.. /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

Hey now, this thread is supposed to be about me. :)

And what's all this talk about "the upper lot" at Morley? Are you saying that the parking lot by the archery range and little league fields is gone???

No, its just Magilla and his "customers" have taken it over from dusk till dawn...

Go to the bathrooms across the street from hole 8, I'm sure one of your "customers" will hold your sack... :D



Is that where ALL your "family" hangs out now that the upper lot is gone... :o



I'm glad you and your "customers" won't be anywhere near me this weekend Magaylla Gayrilla...
http://www.halloweencostumes4u.com/Merchant2/graphics/00000003/16310.jpg



Deja vu. Just when I thought I had that MTL pic out of my head.

No, its just Magilla and his "customers" have taken it over from dusk till dawn...



Both you guys are ROOKIES....

There USED to be a parking lot that came all the way up to the tee of Hole #10..........

:p

Wecolme back to the board. Did you save all of the things you wanted to post during your suspension? Does Schwebby have a higher post count now?

Of Course it is higher but not higher than RheTT's or Cware

Go to the bathrooms across the street from hole 8, I'm sure one of your "customers" will hold your sack... :D



Is that where ALL your "family" hangs out now that the upper lot is gone... :o



I'm glad you and your "customers" won't be anywhere near me this weekend Magaylla Gayrilla...
http://www.halloweencostumes4u.com/Merchant2/graphics/00000003/16310.jpg



Deja vu. Just when I thought I had that MTL pic out of my head.



I was wondering how long it would take till someone mentioned that :D

Go to the bathrooms across the street from hole 8, I'm sure one of your "customers" will hold your sack... :D



Is that where ALL your "family" hangs out now that the upper lot is gone... :o



I'm glad you and your "customers" won't be anywhere near me this weekend Magaylla Gayrilla...
http://www.halloweencostumes4u.com/Merchant2/graphics/00000003/16310.jpg



Deja vu. Just when I thought I had that MTL pic out of my head.



I was wondering how long it would take till someone mentioned that :D



Mentioned what picture of MTL in a pink tutu? :D

No, its just Magilla and his "customers" have taken it over from dusk till dawn...



Both you guys are ROOKIES....

There USED to be a parking lot that came all the way up to the tee of Hole #10..........

:p



The course parking lot used to be the dirt between the trees of 17 and Pershing before they put in the nursery, rookie.

Rhett_in_SoCal: 2593 Threads, 11736 Posts

Schweb: 1388 Threads, 10056 Posts

You left out SeaHooErrr, the New King. :)

how many threads and posts do I have?

Search results for query _MTL_: 1701 Threads, 9295 Posts

wow!!

You left out SeaHooErrr, the New King

:) :p welcome back and I like the way that sounds "new king" :)

seewhere: 1341 Threads, 11774 Posts

I think you miss the point. It isn't that people like, for example Rhett. We actually respect him. We have talked with him and found him to be rational and adult even when angry. It then surprises us when the rules are such that something he has done gets him banned. Take the case here. Saying the UPM is less than "blank" (I wouldn't want to get myself banned) in response to some of the things UPM says. Relatively speaking, Rhett's reply is metered and rational.

Sometimes a flat rule is surprisingly inefficient. That's why the police use judgment when handing out tickets.

I fully admit, there is no good solution, but I argue, I'd rather have to put up with UPM than risk banning an intelligent contributer like Rhett. As I see it, in the past year we've lost two real problems, along with that we've lost about 5 middle of the road posters who made some great contributions and 3 or 4 great posters who have made significant contributions. I'd say we're on the losing side of this situation...



Today was probably one of the few days I have logged on to this board since it went members only. I used to love reading here, but I hate what it has turned into. I am not up to date on ANYTHING that goes on anymore, but would love to know who the people that left are. (probably my friends)

I have absolutely no clue who the moderators are anymore, but I can take a really good guess. So sad if what I read about the rules are the rules, is the way they are moderating. Judgement should absolutely be used. It sucks to have lost so many good posters in an effort to get rid of a couple of bad. Reminds me of a local situation we had.

Rhett - HOW ARE YOU????? I hope all is well and I miss ya all!

Rhett - HOW ARE YOU????? I hope all is well and I miss ya all!



Hi Jeannie! We are all doing well. Hope the same is true for you and yours. Are you going to be able to make it to K-Zoo next year?

A Very Merry Rhett Stroh Christmas (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VTzLyOtB_LE)
It has quickly become a holiday classic, much like Rudolph and Frosty... :D

What'd he do this time?

"Rhett Stroh Suspension 12/21/2007 12/21/2008 Personal Attack "


not sure what he did but a whole year is a little harsh

"Rhett Stroh Suspension 12/21/2007 12/21/2008 Personal Attack "


not sure what he did but a whole year is a little harsh



Woooooow! What's he going to do with all that free time on his hands??? :o

"Rhett Stroh Suspension 12/21/2007 12/21/2008 Personal Attack "


not sure what he did but a whole year is a little harsh




Agreed.........

Apparently you might have missed the announcements from PDGA Communications Director Peter Shive here:

http://www.pdga.com/news/articles/a-042.php
http://www.pdga.com/msgboard/showflat.php?Cat=0&amp;Number=762813&amp;an=0&amp;page=0#Post7 62813

Apparently you might have missed the announcements from PDGA Communications Director Peter Shive here:

http://www.pdga.com/news/articles/a-042.php
http://www.pdga.com/msgboard/showflat.php?Cat=0&amp;Number=762813&amp;an=0&amp;page=0#Post7 62813



No I saw it, just don't agree with it.

Apparently the new magazine guy doesn't agree with those standards either :o

Apparently the new magazine guy doesn't agree with those standards either :o



How so?

Don't get him started again. (http://www.pdga.com/msgboard/showflat.php?Cat=0&amp;Number=773130&amp;Main=769108#Post7 73130) :p

Did Rhett really get banned for saying the moderating team was clueless in their choice of things to moderate?

That isn't even a personal attack if so.

After coming off suspension, Rhett was on a 3-month probation. Several posts of his were reported by message board users for violation of PDGA DISCussion Board rules. Various moderators ruled on those posts and decided that they were not egregious violations of our rules. However, he was warned each time and reminded that a future post that crossed the line would result in a one-year suspension as per the new penalties put into place by PDGA Communications Director Peter Shive on 12/01/07.

After another post of Rhett's was reported by a message board user, the post was turned over to Communications Director Peter Shive because it was aimed at members of the moderation team, who in order to avoid bias, may not rule on such. Communications Director Peter Shive carefully reviewed the post and ruled that the post was a violation of PDGA DISCussion Board rules. This decision was appealed to PDGA Executive Director Brian Graham, who also carefully reviewed the post, but upheld the decision that the post broke the rules.

After coming off suspension, Rhett was on a 3-month probation. Several posts of his were reported by message board users for violation of PDGA DISCussion Board rules. Various moderators ruled on those posts and decided that they were not egregious violations of our rules. However, he was warned each time and reminded that a future post that crossed the line would result in a one-year suspension as per the new penalties put into place by PDGA Communications Director Peter Shive on 12/01/07.

After another post of Rhett's was reported by a message board user, the post was turned over to Communications Director Peter Shive because it was aimed at members of the moderation team, who in order to avoid bias, may not rule on such. Communications Director Peter Shive carefully reviewed the post and ruled that the post was a violation of PDGA DISCussion Board rules. This decision was appealed to PDGA Executive Director Brian Graham, who also carefully reviewed the post, but upheld the decision that the post broke the rules.



OK so will you answer my question? What exactly did he say? Was it what I posted? Feel free to PM me.

"Various moderators ruled on those posts and decided that they were not egregious violations of our rules. However, he was warned each time and reminded that a future post that crossed the line would result in a one-year suspension as per the new penalties put into place by PDGA Communications Director Peter Shive on 12/01/07. "
it sounds to me that the personal attacks have been directed towards RHETT!!!! So he did not violate the rules yet he was warned not to do it again or else!! THATS obsurd! :confused:

According to Rhett, that's what the infraction was.

I think it's silly that he was suspended for that type of infraction. If you look at the collection of posts from the past several months that caused his previous probations and suspension and the current suspension you might be left wondering what all the fuss was about. There are others who have been far more hurtful in their messages and far less helpful than Rhett.

I, personally, now find myself typing on eggshells on this board and find myself using it less and less. It's a shame.

Since I am not the person who reported Rhetts post who found it to be a personal attack, not the moderator who took the complaint and found it to be a personal attack and not the person who took his appeal and still found it to be a personal attack, I feel I can comment on this on behalf of myself and other members of the moderation team.

As shown above, 3 seperate people all found Rhett's post offensive. The rules have been changed and for good reason and everyone was notified of these rule changes. If you choose (that is the key word - choose) to participate in the discussion board, you should be expected to maintain a level of professionalism and follow very simple and basic rules that are clearly listed.

To Rizbee -


There are others who have been far more hurtful in their messages and far less helpful than Rhett.




I could not agree more with this post. Rhett and I have many conversations on here that I have enjoyed and will miss over the next year. Rhett is a GREAT person and a GREAT ambassador for our sport. However we look at every post without knowledge of the poster. This is the best and fairest way to approach this.

For us to say that "well Rhett typically does not cause problems and does a lot for discgolf, so he shouldn't have to follow the rules" would be very biased and unfair to everyone who chooses use this board.

If we are getting this much flack for NOT showing favorites, I can't image what we would get if we did.

Has there ever been a successful appeal? I'm 0 for 1. :D

Come on. How hard is it, really, to discuss disc golf without insulting someone? These boards are here for the members to discuss all things disc golf in a publicly viewable forum. We have private messages and email if you really want to get personal. Is it really that hard to do?

Has there ever been a successful appeal? I'm 0 for 1. :D



Appeals have been successful in the past.

&lt;post edited for personal attack&gt;

Is it just me or is anyone else afraid to even show a little humor on this board because technically, according to the "rules" being enforced, if you show any kind of personality you risk suspension. How dull and how sad.

i have definitely been more careful lately and avoided many threads/topics because i feel today's message board has become less desireable as a vehicle for constructive criticism and dialog that includes ideas for making things better. it remains a fantastic venue for communicating how great we are though!

&lt;post edited for personal attack&gt;

&lt;post edited for personal attack&gt;

really!!!!!!!!!! :p

i have definitely been more careful lately and avoided many threads/topics because i feel today's message board has become less desireable as a vehicle for constructive criticism and dialog that includes ideas for making things better. it remains a fantastic venue for communicating how great we are though!



Some of us enjoyed your nuclear posts.
http://www.pa.msu.edu/~yang/NuclearBomb.jpg
You knew that some MB users are like trained seals and all you had to do was drop the post and enjoy the show.

You better be nice to Billy...I mean, the moderators...

It's A Good Life (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0734580/)

Is it just me or is anyone else afraid to even show a little humor on this board because technically, according to the "rules" being enforced, if you show any kind of personality you risk suspension. How dull and how sad.



I do not think it's difficult to show "any kind of personality" without violating any of the rules. :confused:

How would you suggest the Mb be run (keep in mind it receives thousands of hits daily, and is viewed by minors, non-dgers, and potential big money sponsors)?

common sense

<font color="blue"> post edited for personal attack, as ruled on by Communications Director Peter Shive on 01/09/08 at 12:24 PM </font>

Is it just me or is anyone else afraid to even show a little humor on this board because technically, according to the "rules" being enforced, if you show any kind of personality you risk suspension. How dull and how sad.



It's not just you - we're on the same page.

Since I am not the person who reported Rhetts post who found it to be a personal attack, not the moderator who took the complaint and found it to be a personal attack and not the person who took his appeal and still found it to be a personal attack, I feel I can comment on this on behalf of myself and other members of the moderation team.

As shown above, 3 seperate people all found Rhett's post offensive. The rules have been changed and for good reason and everyone was notified of these rule changes. If you choose (that is the key word - choose) to participate in the discussion board, you should be expected to maintain a level of professionalism and follow very simple and basic rules that are clearly listed.

To Rizbee -


There are others who have been far more hurtful in their messages and far less helpful than Rhett.




I could not agree more with this post. Rhett and I have many conversations on here that I have enjoyed and will miss over the next year. Rhett is a GREAT person and a GREAT ambassador for our sport. However we look at every post without knowledge of the poster. This is the best and fairest way to approach this.

For us to say that "well Rhett typically does not cause problems and does a lot for discgolf, so he shouldn't have to follow the rules" would be very biased and unfair to everyone who chooses use this board.

If we are getting this much flack for NOT showing favorites, I can't image what we would get if we did.



I do not envy the moderating team for having the unenviable task of policing this message board. I'm glad we have a moderating team and a policy aimed towards keeping discussion civil, and I thank you all for your service. It's simply my opinion that Rhett's comments were not egregious enough to warrant probation and/or suspension.

I disagree with some of you as to the sharpness of barb that would be considered an attack. There's never going to be a boundary that all can agree on - hell, the U.S. Supreme Court can't even agree on what defines decency, how can we expect volunteer message board moderators to do more.

I think I'm entitled to my opinion (last time I checked I still was) as you all are to yours. I'm just not a big fan of plain old vanilla.

And to be honest, even amongst the 3 person moderating team (and Comm Director) we have different philosophies and opinions as to what constitutes a personal attack or not. As Jeff always stresses, the different levels of moderation help us make consistent calls.

Everyone has a different point at which he/she is offended by a post. With this in mind, we'll never keep everyone happy. Heck, I insult myself more than most have ever insulted me..it's all in peoples' personalities, and we have to try to cater even to the most sensitive.

I do not envy the moderating team for having the unenviable task of policing this message board. I'm glad we have a moderating team and a policy aimed towards keeping discussion civil, and I thank you all for your service. It's simply my opinion that Rhett's comments were not egregious enough to warrant probation and/or suspension.

I disagree with some of you as to the sharpness of barb that would be considered an attack. There's never going to be a boundary that all can agree on - hell, the U.S. Supreme Court can't even agree on what defines decency, how can we expect volunteer message board moderators to do more.

I think I'm entitled to my opinion (last time I checked I still was) as you all are to yours. I'm just not a big fan of plain old vanilla.



I couldn't have said it better myself.

First Last Penalty Starting Date Ending Date Infraction
Rhett Stroh Suspension 12/21/2007 12/21/2008 Personal Attack

I'm gettting off probation in less than 30 minutes :confused:
We will miss you Rhett.

You better be nice to Billy...I mean, the moderators...

It's A Good Life (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0734580/)



LMAO!!

I disagree with some of you as to the sharpness of barb that would be considered an attack.



Everyone has their own idea on this. The moderation team gets an equal amount of pressure from both sides - some who think that the standards are too tight and those who think that too much "ripping" is already allowed. What is common sense to some may be nonsense for others.

As Communications Director Peter Shive posted in his personal look at the message board (http://www.pdga.com/news/articles/a-042.php), our DISCussion board is one of our windows to the public, and if it is distasteful we may alienate potential friends. Secondly, there are many PDGA members who are not as bulletproof or as thick of skin, and they may be disenfranchised by a board that permits abusive and otherwise offensive posts. Only about ten percent of our members post and the goal is to encourage more participation.

Bottom line though is that because the motto of the discussion board could be "respect and responsibility" and because overt rudeness and unsportsmanlike conduct aren't allowed at PDGA-sanctioned tournaments as stipulated in 804.05 A.(1) the same can be expected on the PDGA DISCussion board.

It seems to me that I keep reading about these "user complaints" to which the moderators are responding to. Since the moderators are not going to look at the "big picture" and instead view each post individually, not knowing whose post it is, really leaves the door open for a witch hunt. If I personally don't like someone, which I suspect may have been the case with Rhett, I can follow every post that person makes, just waiting for them to write something that could technically be considered a violation of a rule, and then file a complaint. With the guidelines established (and I don�t have a problem with them), this would be VERY easy to do. But with such strict rules, you would then need to use some common sense in moderating.

If the above post is what got Rhett suspended, that's pitiful.

If I personally don't like someone, which I suspect may have been the case with Rhett, I can follow every post that person makes, just waiting for them to write something that could technically be considered a violation of a rule, and then file a complaint. With the guidelines established (and I don�t have a problem with them), this would be VERY easy to do.



Yes, you are 100% correct, this is possible.

However, if a user does not post anything that is against the rules the person doing the witch hunt as you call it will never have a post to report.

I'm sure that there are people who watch and read every post I make both from this account and my normal account. However, I never get in trouble for posting. Why you ask? It is very simple - since the new rules have been put in place I have followed them.

Also I think it is worth adding to this discussion that if someone really has it out to get someone as you claim, the person doing the "witch hunt" could be subject to punishment as well. Misuse of the moderator button (such as reporting multiple posts of one person that are clearly not violations) is a rules violation.

However, if a user does not post anything that is against the rules the person doing the witch hunt as you call it will never have a post to report.



Well perhaps it is more about some people being a little thin skinned than it is about scaring new members away.

And as far as someone who is out to get someone is concerned, why would they themselves be open to punishment for continually reporting someone, if the person they are reporting "technically" is violating the rules? That is the problem here, what is being viewed as a violation. That comment that Rhett made in MHO should not be considered a violation. I think maybe someone is being a wee bit sensitive. (I am not saying you. I don't even know who the moderators are.)

I think maybe someone is being a wee bit sensitive

could not agree more this bored has gotten way out of hand with suspension and probation and I am sure the PDGA moderators could find allot better things to do with their time than what they are doing now. :confused: but on a side note with Rhett gone a whole year he will never catch me on post counts.... :)

I noticed the "Show all user's posts" feature wasn't working for me. Is this disabled or is it just me? Darn, that's going to make it a little more difficult for me to take down those I don't care for... lmao!

It's been disabled for a while now. If you really wanted too, you could use the search function to find all of a users posts.

I am sure the PDGA moderators could find allot better things to do with their time than what they are doing now. :confused:



I agree! The moderators would prefer not to have to do anything. But when posts are reported to us for violation of PDGA DISCussion Board rules, we are obligated to look into them.

So..what is the service term for a moderator and how does one become a moderator?.....Does the PDGA check your criminal background?...What about drug testing?....Do you have to go to church or are Atheists allowed in? :cool:

What about "perks"?...Is a company car included? :)

What about ratings?...Do you have to be a Pro or do "short arms" have a chance? :(

Not sure about all of that, but I did hear a lobotomy is required.

http://www.crazythought.net/img/lobotomy.png

:D

There are no requirements. The current moderation staff includes one Senior Grandmaster World Champion, one cashing Open player, one mullet pro, and one intermediate amateur.

The "perks" include being told almost on a daily basis how bad things are, no matter what we do. We're attacked both by those who claim that enough isn't being done, as well as those who find the standards too restrictive.

Actually, the one true perk is knowing that if a few of us hadn't volunteered to step up and respond to message board complaints, there would be no PDGA DISCussion Board. It would have been shut down long ago.

What about ratings?...Do you have to be a Pro or do "short arms" have a chance? :(



Well out of the 4 of us (including Peter Shive) we wouldn't be a bad four some.

Peter has won many world titles and I earned my tour card for 08 winning like 2,800 bux in 32 events.

Jeff never plays but is in the 950 range I think?

Doot however, well, let's just say it's a good thing we like him :D

This thread and excessive moderation sucks the fun out of the board. Bunch of cry babies and whiners reporting 'offensive posts' to the moderators. I have had words with a few folks on this thread and I assure you I would never ask a mod. to interfere. You know who you are. There that is no personal attack.

Well at least we can reminisce. Ahhh, the good ole days... (http://www.pdga.com/msgboard/showflat.php?Cat=0&amp;Board=Miscellaneous&amp;Number=1605 22&amp;page=63&amp;fpart=all)

I had forgot how much fun that was. :D

I know! I loved that stuff. I have to admit that I liked hanging out in the gutter that was known as the Misc. area. That's the kind of stuff that kept me coming back on this board. Ask Hawk, stupid jokes, dumb games. You can only talk so much about the flight of new discs and rules. I rarely come on here anymore. Too boring and too many people who like listening to themselves up on their pedestals.

Those threads are still there and can still be used....

That game lasted like a year and a half wow.

The dynamics on the board have changed. The funny people are gone and I hardly think half of what was written in that thread would fall under the new "rules". Almost the entire thread could be perceived as offensive to the thin skinned.

I'm sure a case of beer and a couple of sub sandwiches would fatten up some of those "thin skins" and maybe they would learn how to laugh again. :)

As a matter of clarification, one post by Rhett Stroh was deleted for violating the rules of the message board following his recent three month suspension, and not "several" as was previously posted.

My statement is in response to a request by Rhett to set the record straight on this point. I am addressing Rhett's request and making this announcement myself because I have asked the message board moderators to refrain from posting information about a members suspension or mentioning them by name in their posts. The only information that we will release publicly in this regard is available to all readers of this forum here:

Message Board Disciplinary List (http://www.pdga.com/msgboard/showflat.php?Cat=0&amp;Number=718979&amp;Main=718979#Post7 18979)

I believe our moderators are doing an excellent job enforcing the published rules in a fair manner and that the message board is a better place because of it. The moderating team is comprised of volunteers who are performing a very valuable service in maintaining a great resource for disc golf and the PDGA. Thanks guys!

Regards,
Brian Graham
PDGA Executive Director

Well I believe that with all that is written on this board, if the comment " the moderating team was clueless in their choice of things to moderate" was the cause of someone being suspended from this board then something is very wrong here.

Well at least we can reminisce. Ahhh, the good ole days... (http://www.pdga.com/msgboard/showflat.php?Cat=0&amp;Board=Miscellaneous&amp;Number=1605 22&amp;page=63&amp;fpart=all)



Thanks for reviving it Jeannie....now don't be scared to post. :D

I believe our moderators are doing an excellent job enforcing the published rules in a fair manner.....



I believe that children are our future
Teach them well and let them lead the way.... :D

I don't have any children so I'm counting on yours to pay my social security. :cool:

I don't have any children so I'm counting on yours to pay my social security. :cool:



lol nice.

perfect example of humor that doesn't cross any lines and doesn't violate any rules.

i miss mark bruce aka discgolfdude.

Don't forget Nick Kight...

Well at least we can reminisce. Ahhh, the good ole days... (http://www.pdga.com/msgboard/showflat.php?Cat=0&amp;Board=Miscellaneous&amp;Number=1605 22&amp;page=63&amp;fpart=all)



You want the really "old" days! Check this out (yeah, it's almost time to clean it up):

http://www.pdga.com/discus/index.html

ha ha.. wow, that was fun to look at and before my DG days.

seewhere: 1363 Threads, 11968 Posts

Rhett_in_SoCal: 2616 Threads, 11803 Posts

Schweb: 1399 Threads, 10133 Posts


:o :D

So, I just got an email saying I got a 3 month suspension. I don't know if making this post will get me a second one. We'll have to see. I suppose I can't say why I got suspended on this message board, because I will probably get another suspension. But if anyone is interested, I will post what I said on my message board. Be careful what you write people. This apparently is a message board that you are not aloud to have opinions on.

I am editing this. I meant to say probation instead of suspension as I did in what I titled the post. It was a typo.

&lt;post edited for personal attack&gt;

You want the really "old" days! Check this out (yeah, it's almost time to clean it up):

http://www.pdga.com/discus/index.html

[/QUOTE]

that was awesome!

You want the really "old" days! Check this out (yeah, it's almost time to clean it up):

http://www.pdga.com/discus/index.html



I forgot how basic it was. I wasn't really ready for this board, but i'm glad ya'll made me switch.

What a crock...of doodle-doo. :mad:

So, I just got an email saying I got a 3 month suspension. I don't know if making this post will get me a second one. We'll have to see. I suppose I can't say why I got suspended on this message board, because I will probably get another suspension. But if anyone is interested, I will post what I said on my message board. Be careful what you write people. This apparently is a message board that you are not aloud to have opinions on.



what a shame!!

Post deleted by drunkentroubadour

regardless.. seriously , what did she do that was so bad.. /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

Was she probed or suspended? Did she get to pass GO and collect $200 or was it GO straight to jail?

Geez it's late, i GO to bed..........
.

Efrain, can you tell me what Doot wrote and then deleted that you responded "Regardless" to please. Thanks.

Doot, why did you delete what you wrote??

he probably did not want to get put on probation.

Exactly. Which has me wondering... what recourse to we as posters have when we are harrassed or attacked by a moderator? My assumption is none. Seeing how calling someone clueless is judged as an attack leaves me little hope of a reasonable appeal for my circumstance and even further doubt that anything would be done to a moderator. It is not worth my time.

It had to be more than that. I think of myself as one of the last ones to discourage or villify those who give of their time for the betterment of the Assocation, but I have to agree that there have been many postings previously made that have been much more offensive than that. I realize that the MB Disciplinary procedures changed on 12/1/07, but I did not realize that the posting standards were as well.

what recourse to we as posters have when we are harrassed or attacked by a moderator?



Moderators are not held to any different standards than anyone else and we have to follow the exact same rules as the rest of the message board users, even when (and especially when I might add) posting under our Moderator accounts.

If a moderator made a post breaking the rules the exact same process would be done with the exception of that moderator would not be a part of any of the discussion of his post.

Also, I would assume if a moderator did break the rules and faced sanctioning he could be asked to step down as a moderator.

From a moderator on this thread (http://www.pdga.com/msgboard/showflat.php?Cat=0&amp;Number=728993&amp;an=0&amp;page=0#Post7 28993)

* The ruling was established by former Communication Director Steve Dodge that anytime anyone uses the phrase "it leaves you looking like a X" or "you are making yourself look like a X" is almost essentially the same thing as posting "you are a X." To allow otherwise would be a loophole that sneaky users would take advantage of. Whenever they wanted to insult someone, they could simply post "it leaves you looking like a X."
* X was an abbreviation for a profanity and an offensive word.



Using a suggestive hypothetical to apply a derogatory term is treated the same as using the derogatory term directly.

Repeatedly posting something clearly against the stated rules is asking for probation.

Why is it necessary to describe those people that are enforcing a policy with a derogatory term instead of complaining about the policy directly ?

besides, it's not the moderators, its the hyper-sensitive narcs who are the problem.

Calling someone clueless is way too low of a bar. Some of these probations are ridiculous. Whether it is the policy or the individuals enforcing it, something needs retooling. And please don't point me to the past and give me some false choice that it is either this or that. Everyone sees right through that.

besides, it's not the moderators, its the hyper-sensitive narcs who are the problem.



That is probably a factor, but the responsibility and discretion have been placed with the moderators. If the policy does not allow them enough discretion, then change the policy.

besides, it's not the moderators, its the hyper-sensitive narcs who are the problem.



I am aware of a situation in which Shive (I think it was his personal account) notified the mods about a post that would take some imagination to be construed as an attack.
It read "I don't think they want you there."
I found that funny.

So there are also hyper-sensitive moderators that notify the moderators.

Is hyper-sensitive a personal attack? Could Shive imagine it as a personal attack? After all, he has imagined letters to replace characters such as @, #, %, *, and banned people for "implied profanity". I'm not even joking, IMPLIED PROFANITY!!! Does that sound ridiculous to anyone else?

BTW, I am about to fork this shot.

Just so we are clear that I am not implying any profanity, I mean that I believe I will use a fork grip on my next tee shot, since I am writing this from my phone and am playing disc right now. If I choose to blank out middle letter(s) on each word, does that imply profanity?
Where is the line drawn when moderators can imagine a post to be profane or offensive?
My name is Ch##les. I am about to f##k this sh#t and park it under the basket.

I have some comments, but I just found out today I am on probation for challenging the integrity of ? last month. No warning, no love. I sure wish someone would have informed me though, as I would have went right into "the secret code talk" I learned by drinking more Ovaltine! I still believe ? cheated! ;)

OK, maybe he just selectively didn't follow the rules, kind of like when a post gets removed for no reason because it is about a moderator. :o

Free Jeannie!!!

My name is Ch##les. I am about to f##k this sh#t and park it under the basket.



Brilliant.

Some of these probations are ridiculous.



Thank you James. It was a piece of equipment.

I expect to see Scoot_er on the prob list shortly after Jeannie.

Efrain, can you tell me what Doot wrote and then deleted that you responded "Regardless" to please. Thanks.

Doot, why did you delete what you wrote??



it was something to the effect of you being on prob and not suspended or something to that affect.. seemed like a sarcastic remark towards you which is why i responded.. I should have quoted him.. ;)

From Peter Shives

My style has everything to do with what I believe that the PDGA should be doing. First, our message board is one of our windows to the public, and if it is distasteful we may alienate potential friends. Secondly, there are many PDGA members who are not as bulletproof or as thick of skin as I, and they may be disenfranchised by a board that permits abusive and otherwise offensive posts.

I believe that our message board policies defining offensive material are good ones. They permit plenty of disagreement and criticism, and even civilly articulated expressions of contempt. I would not change them except to add a prohibition on the posting of personal data, and that is a work in progress. I have increased the suspension penalties (effective December 1) because I felt that 1) a three-day suspension was a relatively meaningless wrist slap, 2) the monitors were dealing too often with repeat offenders, and 3) it should cut down on account sharing.




So let me get this straight. We don�t want to alienate potential friends and we don�t want to hurt sensitive people�s feelings, correct? Is there any concern in alienating existing friends (PDGA members) as there is in potential friends?

Is anyone here not seeing what is being done to people who are some of the most involved in our sport? I look at that suspension list and all those that I know on it are tournament directors or people who have given a tremendous amount of their time to the PDGA and our sport. I have been looking at old threads and seeing posts from people who were always on the boards and also were involved ambassadors to the sport, a lot of whom have chosen to let their membership expire.

If only about ten percent of our members post and the concern is to encourage more participation, aren�t you at all concerned about the 10% you already have that are dropping like flies? These are the people who are our �other� window to the world.

I think what it all comes down to is that many people are in agreement that some things on this board have gotten out of hand. Obviously an effort had to be made to control that and new rules were written to make that easier. But the moderators are blinded by the technicalities of the rules and forgetting why it is that they are enforcing them to begin with. I sincerely doubt it was to alienate some of the most involved people we have in our sport, which is what is happening. I feel it was designed to prevent people from really ripping on others and getting to out of control.

Peter says he believes the rules were designed to permit plenty of room for disagreement and criticism. I feel at the worst mine was a minor criticism, but more an opinion. Be honest, do you really think that someone new to this board would be disenfranchised by what I wrote? I sincerely doubt it. And if our moderators were thin skinned enough to consider it an �attack�, I feel they should not be moderators. If there is a job description written for the qualities one looks for in a moderator, thin skinned should not be one of them.

I sincerely doubt the person that reported me, or that reported Rhett was anyone other than a moderator if they felt that was an attack, and they would have had to have been someone thin skinned. I mean come on, it had to be one of you that reported us. No one even likes any of you enough to stick up for you. THAT WAS A JOKE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Are they allowed anymore??

Lighten up guys. Step away from the computer and go play a round. Come back and do your jobs and know there are always times that it is going to be difficult to deal with situations on this board, but put things into perspective. I am beginning to think you should all be put on probation for abuse of power and excessive interpretations of the rules.

I agree with you Jeannie. I hope I don't get probation for doing so. :(

In my humble opinion it seems that some of the color that enticed me to join the PDGA has turned to black and white.

Having grown up in the "flower children" age I guess I might have the sense of humor and personality that the general public now days might find "politically incorrect".

I understand the PDGA wants to clean up it's image to the public but I hope it doesn't let the public redirect the goals, ideals, and freedom of it's members. :confused:

someone better report this cartoonist! ;) Jeannie... rock on!



http://www.hamzy.info/blog/archives/images/FoxTrotDiscGolf.jpg

As a guy with a degree in journalism and a big proponent of the 1st amendment this is my concern. If the cartoon above can use symbo1s for swear words (which has been a staple in the comics as long as I have been around (39 years) why we can�t on this board. Are we implying that what we are doing hear is more pure than the Sunday Comics. Give me a break. Things have definitely taken a downward turn since this neoconservative trend began and this board is about as much fun as a rectal exam. Hopefully this is a passing fad and not a permanent condition. As a director for a fortune 25 company I understand the need for decorum and civility in business and other ventures but things have gone a little too far. I certainly do not want to belittle all the good work volunteers do (and that exactly what most people associated with this board in a regulatory capacity are) but it might be time to take three steps back and put down the emotion and look at things with some common sense. **** it! (can I say that) :o

From Peter Shives

My style has everything to do with what I believe that the PDGA should be doing. First, our message board is one of our windows to the public, and if it is distasteful we may alienate potential friends. Secondly, there are many PDGA members who are not as bulletproof or as thick of skin as I, and they may be disenfranchised by a board that permits abusive and otherwise offensive posts.

I believe that our message board policies defining offensive material are good ones. They permit plenty of disagreement and criticism, and even civilly articulated expressions of contempt. I would not change them except to add a prohibition on the posting of personal data, and that is a work in progress. I have increased the suspension penalties (effective December 1) because I felt that 1) a three-day suspension was a relatively meaningless wrist slap, 2) the monitors were dealing too often with repeat offenders, and 3) it should cut down on account sharing.






Jeannie,

I received pretty much the same generic response when i tried to appeal my probation for posting a picture of a disc with a flower on it. You're a good poster, just do your time. Don't even bother to appeal as i dont think anyone has ever won an appeal. It really has become out of hand (the moderation that is.)

Rhett is our messiah...he certainly has the look. He gave up his posting life for us...and he will rise to post again!

Thanks. I didn't appeal. It's not worth the effort. I have ZERO faith in the ability of the people or person who would handle an appeal to do the right thing.

"It is a thousand times better to have common sense without education than to have education without common sense." Robert Green Ingersoll

Just join us in the Best "Stupid Game" thread that you revived. It is the one place, and it's the rules of the thread where you can personally attack one another and nobody will complain. :D

I'm sensing that things are getting close to the point that there will be a widespread civil disobedience protest. A modification may be required.

Mutiny or a food fight?

Satyagraha.

Salt Satyagraha (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salt_Satyagraha)

To everyone:

The criticism that you have directed toward the monitors is far better directed toward me. I hold the key position because I am Communications Director, and the policies and decisions you dislike are far more a product of my style than of any action by the monitors. The recent probations and suspensions of people attacking monitors were all decisions made solely by me.

I would like to keep you on the message board. At the same time, I don't want you to attack others, especially if they are the wrong target. I offer a possible solution � at least a partial solution.

You want to be able to attack someone. This was part of the fun of "the old days", which many of you yearn for. I am your logical target, and I don't mind being attacked. In fact, I rather expect that it should be part of my job description.

So attack me. Be creative. Feel free to comment negatively on my intelligence, my character, my integrity, my personality, my appearance, etc. I have asked the monitors to ignore any such attacks, and if they sanction you I will reverse it if you appeal.

There are a few ground rules:
1) Make it clear that you are attacking only me. Refer to me by name or as "Communications Director". Stay away from the monitors, my wife and family, and the PDGA staff.
2) Make sure that you are making a personal attack, and don't violate other message board rules (profanity, etc) when you do it.
3) Keep it on this thread.

Pete

Its no fun beating up an old man ;) Someone had to say it. At what point do we (PDGA) take a step back and allow a majority rule on certain things? I am not a fan of opening this up like the wild west. I understand not wanting direct profanity or naked people on a public disc golf forum but don't you think we shoudl ease back on the *&amp;^^# as a sybol of swearinging. I mean for Pete;'s sake (intentional) are we disc golfers or quakers.

Separated at birth?
http://www.tripledisc.com/preview/msdgc/Shive.jpg http://www.tripledisc.com/preview/msdgc/cryptkeeper.jpg
Both with extremely thin skin.

The Communications Director is acting like a Dictator.

excellent post Jeannie!!!! I absolutely agree!!

So attack me. Be creative. Feel free to comment negatively on my intelligence, my character, my integrity, my personality, my appearance, etc. I have asked the monitors to ignore any such attacks, and if they sanction you I will reverse it if you appeal.




A great example of:

entrapment -- To lure into danger, difficulty, or a compromising situation.

We'll see; I just "Notify Moderator"ed my own post above.

To everyone:

The criticism that you have directed toward the monitors is far better directed toward me. I hold the key position because I am Communications Director, and the policies and decisions you dislike are far more a product of my style than of any action by the monitors. The recent probations and suspensions of people attacking monitors were all decisions made solely by me.

I would like to keep you on the message board. At the same time, I don't want you to attack others, especially if they are the wrong target. I offer a possible solution � at least a partial solution.

You want to be able to attack someone. This was part of the fun of "the old days", which many of you yearn for. I am your logical target, and I don't mind being attacked. In fact, I rather expect that it should be part of my job description.

So attack me. Be creative. Feel free to comment negatively on my intelligence, my character, my integrity, my personality, my appearance, etc. I have asked the monitors to ignore any such attacks, and if they sanction you I will reverse it if you appeal.

There are a few ground rules:
1) Make it clear that you are attacking only me. Refer to me by name or as "Communications Director". Stay away from the monitors, my wife and family, and the PDGA staff.
2) Make sure that you are making a personal attack, and don't violate other message board rules (profanity, etc) when you do it.
3) Keep it on this thread.



I am sorry, but I don't want to attack anyone and it is sad that all of us are being viewed that way. I do not consider "clueless" as an "attack". I guess I am thick skinned. I appreciate the volunteer work that is done by all of you. I understand what it is like to be a moderator. On the board I used to moderate I was repeatedly attacked by two of your moderators. Not once did either of them come to a club meeting and voice their opinions of the policy changes that they felt were needed. Instead they chose to make it look like it was MY problem, and take it out on me because I was the moderator, when all I did was try to defend what the readers of our message board wanted.

I have NO interest in attacking anyone, and I am TOTALLY disenfranchised. Do you care?

The "Good Ole Days" I was refering to were the days when you didn't have to walk on eggshells, not the days when people like Jeff Lagrassa were brutally attacking Nick Kight. The days when people had a sense of humor. The days when Theo was a moderator and they tried to use some common sense. Maybe we didn't all agree with everything they did, but at least they tried to be reasonable. I don't see that here now.

We'll see; I just "Notify Moderator"ed my own post above.



ROTFLMAO!

Uh oh! I just posted LMAO. If this bothers any of you hyper-sensitive types please inform me before the mods. :D

I prefer ROTFFLMAO....

to Moolie:

I may be old, but I'm not yet pathetically old. Besides, I get "beat up" plenty in private messages. Why not here? There is no other person, in the eyes of most who post here, more deserving of attack.

The "majority rule" comment is huge. I could say that I was elected to the Board by a majority, but I never ran on a plank of tightening up the message board. As a candidate, I had other things on my mind, but I did not envision becoming Communications Director. I will not be Communications Director after September 2008, but my influence as a Board member would be to keep the message board more polite than you would like. I am certainly impressed by the passion of your protests. I am seriously considering running again in this year's election for my own position, to give disillusioned members another crack at me in an election.

Nobody in my watch has been sanctioned for "*&amp;^^# ". My concern is the implication of specific profane words.

So it's been confirmed through an unnamed source that internet/text short cuts such as LOL, LMAO, ROTFLMAO are okay.

Did you know that POS doesn't mean "piece of feces", it now means "parents over shoulder." Pretty scary!

I use this: http://www.acronymfinder.com/ - lol.

I searched PDGA and got...

1. Professional Disc Golf Association (frisbee golf)
2. Pennsylvania Dairy Goat Association

My buddy came up with another meaning that is pretty funny as well....but, not in good taste for the board.

Shive, it's not that I want to attack you. It's that I disagree with your new rules and your harsh penalties and I want to help people realize that they are stupid.
For every person that you ban for borderline personal attacks, profanity, and other minor penalties, this board becomes more and more useless.
Stop being such a dictator. Your harsh rules are not needed or appreciated here. I think the majority would agree with that last statement.
I could be wrong, but from what I have read, that is what I think.

Peter,

I saw you throw your tee shot on the first hole on the final 9 at worlds this year and it sucked.

Shive, it's not that I want to attack you. It's that I disagree with your new rules and your harsh penalties



Ditto.

to Moolie:

I may be old, but I'm not yet pathetically old. Besides, I get "beat up" plenty in private messages. Why not here? There is no other person, in the eyes of most who post here, more deserving of attack.

The "majority rule" comment is huge. I could say that I was elected to the Board by a majority, but I never ran on a plank of tightening up the message board. As a candidate, I had other things on my mind, but I did not envision becoming Communications Director. I will not be Communications Director after September 2008, but my influence as a Board member would be to keep the message board more polite than you would like. I am certainly impressed by the passion of your protests. I am seriously considering running again in this year's election for my own position, to give disillusioned members another crack at me in an election.

Nobody in my watch has been sanctioned for "*&amp;^^# ". My concern is the implication of specific profane words.



I don't think that most people want the message board to be a free-for-all. The problem is that you have defined a "Personal Attack" as any statement that could possibly have a negative connotation about a person.

The idea that it would do ANYTHING to dissuade a potential sponsor if they went onto a message board and read someone saying"You're crazy!" or "You're Clueless!" or "You must be pretty dumb!" and that would make them not want to be involved with disc golf makes me laugh.

That someone would face suspension for using wording that people feel comfortable using at work, every day makes me laugh.

In the Ask Dave D thread, Dave just wrote: "That is just a WAG and the real story is that I have never noticed this and have no clue." Does this constitute a personal attack on himself? If I report it, will Dave Dunipace be given probation? He did say he's clueless...

If I report myself for my message board handle for abusing myself, will I get probation?

If I report myself for my message board handle for abusing myself, will I get probation?


No, as long as you don't post a pic.

Peter,

I have to agree that having one post stating that someone else is clueless should not be enough to put someone on probation. Now, if that poster was warned by a moderator, and made a similiar post, that would be more grounds for a probation, but I am not stating that even that is enough.

Assuming we are starting from a clean slate (not on probation and no warnings since the time one came of probation, etc.), IMO:

1) Posting that someone is clueless: Not enough for probation.

2) 1), plus getting a warning for 1), then making a similar or worse post: Might be enough for probation.

Again, I think that most of us appreciate the work you and the mods are doing, we are just trying to give you some gentle feedback on your MB disciplinary procedures.

Peter,

I have to agree that having one post stating that someone else is clueless should not be enough to put someone on probation. Now, if that poster was warned by a moderator, and made a similiar post, that would be more grounds for a probation, but I am not stating that even that is enough.

Assuming we are starting from a clean slate (not on probation and no warnings since the time one came of probation, etc.), IMO:

1) Posting that someone is clueless: Not enough for probation.

2) 1), plus getting a warning for 1), then making a similar or worse post: Might be enough for probation.

Again, I think that most of us appreciate the work you and the mods are doing, we are just trying to give you some gentle feedback on your MB disciplinary procedures.



I don't understand how "clueless" even rises to the level to even merit a warning.

Remember that rhyme... "Warlocks and Cyclones may break my bones..."

If this stuff gets upheld as being bad, can we please see a list of what gets reported that goes unpunished? I really am curious.

We'll see; I just "Notify Moderator"ed my own post above.




Peter,

I saw you throw your tee shot on the first hole on the final 9 at worlds this year and it sucked.



ROTFFLMAO!!! Seriously though... these are two of the funnier things i've read on here in years!!! I think this is the type of stuff people are missing. Not that its a personal attack... but that its FUNNY and could be 'thin skinned' thought of as a personal attack... but obviously more meant in jest

GOOD STUFF GUYS!!!

I think I figured this out now.

I'm fed up with the "walking courtesy violation", and you :eek: because of it Peter!
(Sorry Pete, but if it gets us through this )

Have you guys not figured out the board yet? This is no longer the PDGA message board, we are now in a forum called "CHURCH" where if you even think about cursing or calling someone a knucklehead you are punished.

Since you replied to my post, I am inferring you are calling me a knucklehead. Please address it to Pete, and I will let it go with my increasingly thick skin. Thanks MC.

Peter,

I saw you throw your tee shot on the first hole on the final 9 at worlds this year and it sucked.



http://www.pdga.com/news/articles/a-042.php

See, I was there.

Peter,

I hate your asics. They are some of the worst shoes I've ever seen. And your follow though looks like you are about to go on the cross.

And now Jeff Lagrassa is implying on the Skylands message board that I purposely got myself put on probation so that I could become a message board martyr. I can't believe he figured out my plan.

look, people, if you dont like the PDGA and what it does, then just go and start your own association! (http://www.pdga.com/msgboard/showflat.php?Cat=0&amp;Number=781604&amp;an=0&amp;page=0#Post7 81604)

moolie,

to answer your parenthetical question--yes. you can and will be placed on probation for using the "d" word. i wholeheartedly trust the assertion of our brave moderators that this board is moderated with the highest level of impartiality.

to put it bluntly, this forum is pure.

i myself had sinned. i used the "d" word. i was placed on three months probation. you shall suffer the same fate, the moderators don't play favorites, it has been written.

admittedly i put the "g" word in front of the "d" word. surely our god-fearing, brave moderating team didn't stoop to the level of muslims and hindus (or buddhists for that matter) and persecute on religious beliefs. for we all know christians, true christians, understand the fallibility of man and the lesson of forgiveness displayed by jesus himself.

so prepare yourself for that fateful e-mail that will surely rear its ugly head in your inbox. or not. in my case it was not. apparently it didn't go through. so keep a watchful eye on that "he who has sinned" list just below the miscellaneous thread on the discussion board. your name will surely appear.

your time will come.

when that happens, i suggest you embroider the scarlet "A" to your lapel and cleanse your shame in the purity of public ridicule.

yours in sin,

dscmn

If you love Disc Golf and also like expressing an opinion without the harsh side effects...here is a site that let's you be yourself. You can also create your own personal page and join in a live chat that actually has peeps on it...and it's FREE!

http://discgolfer.ning.com/

Discgolfersr.us might be just what you need to get that aftertaste out of your mouth. Especially after a carp smoothie. :confused:
Also special thanks to Terry "the Pirate" Calhoun for making this site a reality. Check it out. 1500+ members and counting! Join today. ;)

I'm relatively new to this message board (i've been on others), and i'm not privy to all of the specifics about some of the recent incidents which led to suspensions, but i do get the sense that the style of moderation is leaning toward rigid/harsh, and straying away from common sense. Mandatory increased penalties can prevent accusations of bias, but i don't feel they serve the DG community as a whole.

No, we don't want a free-for-all, where people hesitate to post because they don't want to be attacked, but we also don't want a board where everyone has to walk on eggshells for fear of reprisal if something said off the cuff is interpreted as a personal attack.

I understand this is a forum that should be geared towards the DG community of all ages, but that doesn't mean we need to keep it rated G. I'm not suggesting we allow filth-flarrin-flarrin-filth on the board, but when i hear that the d-word (as in a beaver built structure) is grounds for probation, i think we may be getting carried away.

Peace.

product of my style

what if the association does not want your style or what makes your style "RIGHT" or are we just stuck with it??


Jeannie you martyr :D

(ps please don't report me for calling you a martyr) :p

http://www.reverendfun.com/add_toon_info.php?date=20071019

Isn't this an interesting post? I had to edit it because if I had used the foul language and name calling that the poster used, he would have given me probation for quoting his own post. He is talking about the new website discgolfersR.us, but who is he refering to about the current mod squad?

From the Bearclaws MB:


the_lung wrote:

the_lung
Plastic Expert


Posts: 571
Location: Many throws less than Gunkel
Posted: Tue Dec 25, 2007 1:55 am Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have very strong reservations against joining that site because of the former PDGA Communications Director who runs it. As a moderator, that person takes some very scary liberties and has some extremely strict interpretations of what is appropriate behavior on an internet message board and what is a personal attack. If you're not posting all sunshine and daisies he will whack it in a heartbeat. He will make the PDGA DISCussion Board and the *edited* who moderate it look like a country club.

There is going to be a *edited* of controversy when people inevitably start to realize all this, and I don't want to be anywhere near that.

what if the association does not want your style or what makes your style "RIGHT" or are we just stuck with it??


sure got quite in here????

Sure got quite what?

Shive has no comments on this relevant thread?

Free Jeannie....

and bring back Rhett!!! :cool:

http://tvland.classictvhits.com/WelcomeBackKotter/Pics/WBK01.JPG

Sure got quite what?

too my question about the association having any input to shive's way of thinking on how to disclipine current PDGA MEMBERS

So attack me. Be creative. Feel free to comment negatively on my intelligence, my character, my integrity, my personality, my appearance, etc. I have asked the monitors to ignore any such attacks, and if they sanction you I will reverse it if you appeal.

There are a few ground rules:
1) Make it clear that you are attacking only me. Refer to me by name or as "Communications Director". Stay away from the monitors, my wife and family, and the PDGA staff.
2) Make sure that you are making a personal attack, and don't violate other message board rules (profanity, etc) when you do it.
3) Keep it on this thread.




so, Communications Director Peter Shive... on other threads the moderators have made it excdruciatingly clear that it doesnt matter what the attacked party feels about a reported post. if ANYONE feels it is an attack, then it is.

your guarantee of a free pass for attacks on this thread seems like a unilateral decision that is inconsistent with the Message Board Rules. it could easily result in attack/offensive material being placed on this site for ALL to see - including those who might be offended by the attacks you authorized.

are there other Message Board rules that you have re-written for various threads, or perhaps even for individuals? do you have any other quid pro quo arrangements out there? is the pass that you offer posters for comments about you also available for comments made about Members who are not Communications Director Peter Shive? if not, why not?

and the most important question: has Brian Graham agreed to uphold every decision you render for this thread? if not, your promise of immunity does not mean much - Graham can overrule you anytime he wishes. unless of course, that rule and process has been replaced also.

and the most important question: has Brian Graham agreed to uphold every decision you render for this thread? if not, your promise of immunity does not mean much - Graham can overrule you anytime he wishes.



I told you it was entrapment. Stay away!

Sure got quite what?

You know what he meant... (Personal attack resisted.)

I was put on probation for posting the word REALLY!!!!!!!

Ephraim,

A recent post of yours was edited for personal attack. Starting today, you are on a three-month probationary period (ending 4/08/08). If this or other offenses occur during this period you will be subject to a three week suspension. If you would like to appeal this decision, please contact Brian Graham, PDGA Executive Director. He can be reached at [email protected]

Peter Shive
Communications Director


&lt;&lt;ole0.bmp&gt;&gt; Re: why even appeal? [Re: scoot_er &lt;http://www.pdga.com/msgboard/showthreaded.php?Cat=0&amp;Number=779420&amp;page=0&amp;vc=1&gt;] #779429 - 01/07/08 03:18 PM &lt;&lt;ole1.bmp&gt;&gt; Edit &lt;&lt;ole2.bmp&gt;&gt; Reply &lt;&lt;ole3.bmp&gt;&gt; Quote &lt;javascript:quickReply(7)&gt; &lt;&lt;ole4.bmp&gt;&gt; Quick Reply &lt;javascript:quickReply(7)&gt;

"dang clueless moderators"

really!!!!!!!!!! &lt;&lt;ole5.bmp&gt;&gt;

what a crock of [censored]

Let's see, got the pole...

O.K. let's tie on the bait...

Now for the big cast!'


Lyle, you are so clueless!

you gonna report yourself? :)

Did that Rhett feller really get kicked outta here for a whole year because he used the new 72 hour edit functionality to change the message the hyper-sensitive moderators left when they deleted one of his messages to read

<font color="red"> [ post deleted by clueless moderating team ] </font>

Is that really a one-year banishment offense??? That's pretty amazing.

What's even more amazing is that the user account named "moderator" come on this board and lied about how that Rhett feller had been "warned numerous times since his last suspension", using the strong "numerous times" language to paint that poor feller as muck-raking rascal deserving of a year banishment, when in fact the poor guy had only received a single solitary warning from the mods since his last banning.

I don't know about youse guys, but coming on here and telling lies like that in order to prop up a questionable suspension seems a lot like an extreme personal attack by the account named "moderator" against the guy who used the word "clueless". I think it's actually closer to character assassination, especially since the guy can't even come on here to defend himself against the righteous rantings and lies posted.

Whaddy'all think about that?

It's pretty sad when a guys like Rhett Stroh is banned from this site. One of the ONLY reasons I planned on renewing this year was so my son and I could play the BG Ams. But the more I read this crap I'm inclined to save my money, blow off one of the best events in the country and spend my money on some Southern National events. I think the PDGA needs a wake up call. Keep ostracizing people. See where it gets you. rWc&amp;^#$#

:D

Did that Rhett feller really get kicked outta here for a whole year because he used the new 72 hour edit functionality to change the message the hyper-sensitive moderators left when they deleted one of his messages to read

<font color="red"> [ post deleted by clueless moderating team ] </font>

Is that really a one-year banishment offense??? That's pretty amazing.

What's even more amazing is that the user account named "moderator" come on this board and lied about how that Rhett feller had been "warned numerous times since his last suspension", using the strong "numerous times" language to paint that poor feller as muck-raking rascal deserving of a year banishment, when in fact the poor guy had only received a single solitary warning from the mods since his last banning.

I don't know about youse guys, but coming on here and telling lies like that in order to prop up a questionable suspension seems a lot like an extreme personal attack by the account named "moderator" against the guy who used the word "clueless". I think it's actually closer to character assassination, especially since the guy can't even come on here to defend himself against the righteous rantings and lies posted.

Whaddy'all think about that?



Unruly User = ???? what?! how did you!? i thought you were?! Its like Neo from the Matrix

what up unrulely :D:p

Is it really him????....Has there been a coo within the mod team? :o.... Has he become "The Lawnmower Man" and hacked into PDGA's system, or did he escape from his cell and is currently on the lamb? :confused: :D

^^^^ Is in disbelief!
&lt;&lt;&lt; so am I
vvvv Will try to explain why/how this could happen

^^^^No you're not

&lt;&lt;&lt;&lt;I know but won't tell

vvvvvv Will report it to the moderators

^^ keeps secrets
&lt;&lt; isnt a snitch
vv moderhator

if UnrulyUser's post is truth then this board sucks, and I believe it is, so it does.

^^^ beat me to it, AGAIN!
&lt;&lt;&lt; am amused
vvv moderator

^^^'s are clueless
&lt;&lt;&lt; getting ready to be put on suspension
vvv walking on egg shells

^^ saw the principal today
&lt;&lt; will probably be joining you in wet noodle lashings for the word "moderhator"
VV here is Jeannie's chance

^^^is too kind
&lt;&lt;&lt; logged off, probably missed my chance
vvvv has not thou a clue

Did that Rhett feller really get kicked outta here for a whole year because he used the new 72 hour edit functionality to change the message the hyper-sensitive moderators left when they deleted one of his messages to read

<font color="red"> [ post deleted by clueless moderating team ] </font>

Is that really a one-year banishment offense??? That's pretty amazing.

What's even more amazing is that the user account named "moderator" come on this board and lied about how that Rhett feller had been "warned numerous times since his last suspension", using the strong "numerous times" language to paint that poor feller as muck-raking rascal deserving of a year banishment, when in fact the poor guy had only received a single solitary warning from the mods since his last banning.

I don't know about youse guys, but coming on here and telling lies like that in order to prop up a questionable suspension seems a lot like an extreme personal attack by the account named "moderator" against the guy who used the word "clueless". I think it's actually closer to character assassination, especially since the guy can't even come on here to defend himself against the righteous rantings and lies posted.

Whaddy'all think about that?



This is way funny! Unruly for Pres.

^^^ Does not play well with others.
&lt;&lt;&lt; Wishes someone would play with him. :(
vvv Play's Clue and wants to run for Com director.

^^^chokes on fur balls
&lt;&lt;&lt;likes the sandbox to herself
v v v will get suspended

^^ has a meeting with her officer in ten minutes. Have you been a good girl Jeannie?!?
&lt;&lt; came here to see more UnrulyUser posts
vv wishes they too were Unruly

to meiyouanshi:

I'll comment sequentially on the points you raised in your four paragraphs:

Anyone can report a post, but that does not make it an attack. The moderators make that call.

Yes, my offer was a unilateral decision that is inconsistent with the Message Board Rules. It could certainly result in attacks against me (but not other offensive material) being placed on this thread. I felt that we had entered a vicious circle, and that I could reduce the number of posters who were being suspended for attacking monitors. If it works, fine. If not, it was worth a try.

This is the only "special pass" I have ever issued. You may only attack me, and only on this thread.

Brian Graham acts independently. If any such attack somehow reached him on appeal, he could indeed sanction it. I would certainly try to talk him out of it. If a sanction were still imposed I would feel that I had participated in an entrapment and would resign as Communications Director.

Finally, I have a suggestion. You are a member of the Board of Directors, so you have special powers and responsibilities. If you have issues with my decisions and/or performance, the most proper and effective place to raise them is with the Board. The Board can overrule any decision I have or will make, and it can even replace me as Communications Director.

I was put on probation for posting the word REALLY!!!!!!!

Ephraim,

A recent post of yours was edited for personal attack. Starting today, you are on a three-month probationary period (ending 4/08/08). If this or other offenses occur during this period you will be subject to a three week suspension. If you would like to appeal this decision, please contact Brian Graham, PDGA Executive Director. He can be reached at [email protected]

Peter Shive
Communications Director


&lt;&lt;ole0.bmp&gt;&gt; Re: why even appeal? [Re: scoot_er &lt;http://www.pdga.com/msgboard/showthreaded.php?Cat=0&amp;Number=779420&amp;page=0&amp;vc=1&gt;] #779429 - 01/07/08 03:18 PM &lt;&lt;ole1.bmp&gt;&gt; Edit &lt;&lt;ole2.bmp&gt;&gt; Reply &lt;&lt;ole3.bmp&gt;&gt; Quote &lt;javascript:quickReply(7)&gt; &lt;&lt;ole4.bmp&gt;&gt; Quick Reply &lt;javascript:quickReply(7)&gt;

"dang clueless moderators"

really!!!!!!!!!! &lt;&lt;ole5.bmp&gt;&gt;



you also misspelled my name badly. Or maybe the biblical version is a statement..

http://www.pimpyourshirts.com/catalog/hugitblue.jpg

:D

^^^ Wants to buy the world a coke.
&lt;&lt;&lt; Would rather have a Mountain Dew.
vvv Prefers real cheese from California cows.

^^^ believes that what peter shive is doing is good for the pdga
&lt;&lt;&lt; does not
vvv does not like boobs

^^^ Has a dog named Snoopy
&lt;&lt;&lt; Likes boobs. Just not the ones that walk on two legs.
vvv Is looking at theirs in the mirror.

^^^ Is ashamed to have man-boobs
&lt;&lt;&lt; Is unashamed to have man-boobs
vvv Has lovely boobs

^^^ has no taste in boobs

vvv thinks they taste like chicken

&lt;-- Is glad he started this game here... and thinks it should spread the the message bard like a virus! :)

^^^ needs to proofread his posts.
&lt;&lt;&lt; needs to get a hold of the resident of Ignoramousville.
\/\/\/\/ Really likes Slurpies.

^^ knows me well
&lt;&lt; feels like Jeannie being WAY too slow
vv likes puppies, kittens, and the color PINK

^^^ needs to proofread his posts.




???? in what way