mozilla censorshiping!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Moz Champion (Dan)]

Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>
>> Um, wasn't it stated at one time that since you had been 'banned'
>> earlier, your messages could be removed without the requirement of
>> informing you prior?  I recall something like that being stated, but
>> that may be mis-remembering something.
>
> show me the posting!

That was quite a while ago now, and as I said, I may be mis remembering
it anyway. But I do distinctly remember something about warnings (and you).

>
>> The only person you can change is yourself, you can't change others.
>> Regardless of how you feel, or think, the moderators are acting on
>> their own interpretation (s) of the guidelines.
>
> sorry, but they created the guidelines, and they're not following them!  
> As someone else once said: "Do as I say, not as I do!"


Never made a mistake? Never forget something? Never assume something in
error? Moderators, regardless of how careful they may be, are simply
humans and can err.  Stuff happens. Well intentioned actions may be
superceded by events or circumstance.

It may have been an accident, or it could have been deliberate, or an
oversight, I don't know, I wasn't there. In any case you have pointed it
out, and they are aware of it so why go on with the subject?
Complaining about it isn't going to make it any better, nor is it going
to 'correct' itself, the moment is gone, what's done is done.

I don't see anything in the guidelines about what moderators are
suppossed to do when something goes awry, what do you expect them to do?
Commit hari kari? Say 'Oops'? Prostrate themselves and beg forgiveness?

It's a shame that you spend so much time on trivialities, on
inconsequential events. That you spend so much time and make so much
noise over something that, in the bigger picture, doesn't matter a
tinkers darn. You want us all to cry 'Boo hoo' your post got cancelled
or something? Would that make you feel better?

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general

[squaredancer]

On 29.04.2009 09:30, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Moz Champion
(Dan) to generate the following:? :

> Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
>  
>> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>>
>>    
>>> Um, wasn't it stated at one time that since you had been 'banned'
>>> earlier, your messages could be removed without the requirement of
>>> informing you prior?  I recall something like that being stated, but
>>> that may be mis-remembering something.
>>>      
>> show me the posting!
>>    
>
> That was quite a while ago now, and as I said, I may be mis remembering
> it anyway. But I do distinctly remember something about warnings (and you).
>  

That was the removal policy on (persistent, repetitive...) OT posts.
"One Warning, Second warning - boom"

What Peter insists on (correctly??) is the adhesion to the "Personal
attack removal policy" which is a different kettle of stink!

By the way - have you noticed that Nir is back (again) from wherever??
ALWAYS (note the big writing) when he goes away to wherever, canceling
stops - when he returns, posts vanish.
It seems certain to me that s/he (Nir) has singular responsibility for
post cancellation!

reg
>  
> <<snipped>>
>  

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general

[Moz Champion (Dan)]

squaredancer wrote:

> On 29.04.2009 09:30, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Moz Champion
> (Dan) to generate the following:? :
>> Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
>>  
>>> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>>>
>>>    
>>>> Um, wasn't it stated at one time that since you had been 'banned'
>>>> earlier, your messages could be removed without the requirement of
>>>> informing you prior?  I recall something like that being stated, but
>>>> that may be mis-remembering something.
>>>>      
>>> show me the posting!
>>>    
>>
>> That was quite a while ago now, and as I said, I may be mis
>> remembering it anyway. But I do distinctly remember something about
>> warnings (and you).
>>  
>
> That was the removal policy on (persistent, repetitive...) OT posts.
> "One Warning, Second warning - boom"
>
> What Peter insists on (correctly??) is the adhesion to the "Personal
> attack removal policy" which is a different kettle of stink!
>
> By the way - have you noticed that Nir is back (again) from wherever??
> ALWAYS (note the big writing) when he goes away to wherever, canceling
> stops - when he returns, posts vanish.
> It seems certain to me that s/he (Nir) has singular responsibility for
> post cancellation!
>
> reg
>>   <<snipped>>
>>  
>

No I hadn't noticed actually.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general

[Jay Garcia]

On 29.04.2009 02:30, Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:

  --- Original Message ---

>>> The only person you can change is yourself, you can't change others.
>>> Regardless of how you feel, or think, the moderators are acting on
>>> their own interpretation (s) of the guidelines.
>>
>> sorry, but they created the guidelines, and they're not following
>> them!  As someone else once said: "Do as I say, not as I do!"
>
>
> Never made a mistake? Never forget something? Never assume something in
> error? Moderators, regardless of how careful they may be, are simply
> humans and can err.  Stuff happens. Well intentioned actions may be
> superceded by events or circumstance.
>
> It may have been an accident, or it could have been deliberate, or an
> oversight, I don't know, I wasn't there. In any case you have pointed it
> out, and they are aware of it so why go on with the subject? Complaining
> about it isn't going to make it any better, nor is it going to 'correct'
> itself, the moment is gone, what's done is done.

What I think Peter is alluding to is just that, an "interpretation" of
the guidelines. And the bone of contention follows that if a moderator
interprets an action as being in violation of the guidelines then he/she
should email the suspected offender to solicit and tender an explanation
- it's a "two-way-street". Cancellation of a post without explanation is
intolerable IMHO of course IF the guidelines are in fact not clear and
there is NO interpretation.

Example:

The guidelines say NOT to do this.
I did that.
Post cancelled. No interpretation needed.

I remove posts on the UFAQ and ALWAYS notify the poster as to why,
ALWAYS. Sometimes I edit a post containing incorrect support answers and
I ALWAYS enter a note as to why.

--
Jay Garcia - Netscape/Flock Champion
www.ufaq.org
Netscape - Flock - Firefox - Thunderbird - Seamonkey Support
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general

[Jay Garcia]

On 29.04.2009 06:25, Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:

  --- Original Message ---

> squaredancer wrote:
>> On 29.04.2009 09:30, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Moz Champion
>> (Dan) to generate the following:? :
>>> Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
>>>  
>>>> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>  
>>>>> Um, wasn't it stated at one time that since you had been 'banned'
>>>>> earlier, your messages could be removed without the requirement of
>>>>> informing you prior?  I recall something like that being stated,
>>>>> but that may be mis-remembering something.
>>>>>      
>>>> show me the posting!
>>>>    
>>>
>>> That was quite a while ago now, and as I said, I may be mis
>>> remembering it anyway. But I do distinctly remember something about
>>> warnings (and you).
>>>  
>>
>> That was the removal policy on (persistent, repetitive...) OT posts.
>> "One Warning, Second warning - boom"
>>
>> What Peter insists on (correctly??) is the adhesion to the "Personal
>> attack removal policy" which is a different kettle of stink!
>>
>> By the way - have you noticed that Nir is back (again) from wherever??
>> ALWAYS (note the big writing) when he goes away to wherever, canceling
>> stops - when he returns, posts vanish.
>> It seems certain to me that s/he (Nir) has singular responsibility for
>> post cancellation!
>>
>> reg
>>>   <<snipped>>
>>>  
>>
>
>
> No I hadn't noticed actually.

I'm sure I'll be corrected if wrong, but in order for a post to be
cancelled, isn't there supposed to be a majority vote by the three mods?
Or is it that only ONE mod can take it upon himself to cancel posts?


--
Jay Garcia - Netscape/Flock Champion
www.ufaq.org
Netscape - Flock - Firefox - Thunderbird - Seamonkey Support
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general

[Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo]

Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:

> Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
>> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>>
>>> Um, wasn't it stated at one time that since you had been 'banned'
>>> earlier, your messages could be removed without the requirement of
>>> informing you prior?  I recall something like that being stated, but
>>> that may be mis-remembering something.
>>
>> show me the posting!
>
> That was quite a while ago now, and as I said, I may be mis remembering
> it anyway. But I do distinctly remember something about warnings (and you).
>
>>
>>> The only person you can change is yourself, you can't change others.
>>> Regardless of how you feel, or think, the moderators are acting on
>>> their own interpretation (s) of the guidelines.
>>
>> sorry, but they created the guidelines, and they're not following
>> them!  As someone else once said: "Do as I say, not as I do!"
>
>
> Never made a mistake? Never forget something? Never assume something in
> error? Moderators, regardless of how careful they may be, are simply
> humans and can err.  Stuff happens. Well intentioned actions may be
> superceded by events or circumstance.

well, if you can't provide such a posting, then it
never happened.

> It may have been an accident, or it could have been deliberate, or an
> oversight, I don't know, I wasn't there.

if thats the case, then they should have replied, but
nothing!


>  In any case you have pointed it
> out, and they are aware of it so why go on with the subject? Complaining
> about it isn't going to make it any better, nor is it going to 'correct'
> itself, the moment is gone, what's done is done.
>
> I don't see anything in the guidelines about what moderators are
> suppossed to do when something goes awry, what do you expect them to do?
> Commit hari kari?

right now, I'll accept that

if Mozilla is going to have policies set in place, then
*everyone* should be following them.  Not everyone
except for a certain group.  If the Moderators are not
observing the policies set forth, then get rid of them.
  The policies that is.

BTW: its way over 48 hours and still no notification
and not a peep from the "so-called" moderators. This is
disgusting on how they [the Moderators] are treating
people, especially those that try to help others.  Some
friendly community. IMO, this is now a grudge they have
against me.

--
*IMPORTANT*: Sorry folks, but I cannot provide email
help!!!! Emails to me may become public

Notice: Free Speech applies everywhere in the FREE
world, except for some strange reason, not on the
mozilla.org newsgroup servers.  Therefore, replying to
this message may get your posting deleted or may get
you banned from the group, by the Lunacy of the Mozilla
Bullies.

Peter Potamus & His Magic Flying Balloon:
http://melaman2.com/cartoons/singles/mp3/p-potamus.mp3
http://www.toonopedia.com/potamus.htm
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general

[Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo]

Jay Garcia wrote:

> On 29.04.2009 06:25, Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>
>  --- Original Message ---
>
>> squaredancer wrote:
>>> On 29.04.2009 09:30, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Moz
>>> Champion (Dan) to generate the following:? :
>>>> Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
>>>>  
>>>>> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>  
>>>>>> Um, wasn't it stated at one time that since you had been 'banned'
>>>>>> earlier, your messages could be removed without the requirement of
>>>>>> informing you prior?  I recall something like that being stated,
>>>>>> but that may be mis-remembering something.
>>>>>>      
>>>>> show me the posting!
>>>>>    
>>>>
>>>> That was quite a while ago now, and as I said, I may be mis
>>>> remembering it anyway. But I do distinctly remember something about
>>>> warnings (and you).
>>>>  
>>>
>>> That was the removal policy on (persistent, repetitive...) OT posts.
>>> "One Warning, Second warning - boom"
>>>
>>> What Peter insists on (correctly??) is the adhesion to the "Personal
>>> attack removal policy" which is a different kettle of stink!
>>>
>>> By the way - have you noticed that Nir is back (again) from wherever??
>>> ALWAYS (note the big writing) when he goes away to wherever,
>>> canceling stops - when he returns, posts vanish.
>>> It seems certain to me that s/he (Nir) has singular responsibility
>>> for post cancellation!
>>>
>>> reg
>>>>   <<snipped>>
>>>>  
>>>
>>
>>
>> No I hadn't noticed actually.
>
> I'm sure I'll be corrected if wrong, but in order for a post to be
> cancelled, isn't there supposed to be a majority vote by the three mods?
> Or is it that only ONE mod can take it upon himself to cancel posts?

what we thought and what actually goes on are two
different things.  I think they make things up as they
go along.

Anyways, the cancellation policy does say:  "If *they*
agree that a post contains a personal attack, *they*
will immediately remove the post and (if possible)
notify the poster by private e-mail."  Bolding mine.

So, from what I see, it sounds like "they" must work as
a group, and not as individuals.

--
*IMPORTANT*: Sorry folks, but I cannot provide email
help!!!! Emails to me may become public

Notice: Free Speech applies everywhere in the FREE
world, except for some strange reason, not on the
mozilla.org newsgroup servers.  Therefore, replying to
this message may get your posting deleted or may get
you banned from the group, by the Lunacy of the Mozilla
Bullies.

Peter Potamus & His Magic Flying Balloon:
http://melaman2.com/cartoons/singles/mp3/p-potamus.mp3
http://www.toonopedia.com/potamus.htm
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general

[squaredancer]

On 29.04.2009 14:59, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Jay Garcia to
generate the following:? :

> On 29.04.2009 06:25, Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>
>   --- Original Message ---
>
>  
>> squaredancer wrote:
>>    
>>> On 29.04.2009 09:30, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Moz Champion
>>> (Dan) to generate the following:? :
>>>      
>>>> Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
>>>>  
>>>>        
>>>>> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>  
>>>>>          
>>>>>> Um, wasn't it stated at one time that since you had been 'banned'
>>>>>> earlier, your messages could be removed without the requirement of
>>>>>> informing you prior?  I recall something like that being stated,
>>>>>> but that may be mis-remembering something.
>>>>>>      
>>>>>>            
>>>>> show me the posting!
>>>>>    
>>>>>          
>>>> That was quite a while ago now, and as I said, I may be mis
>>>> remembering it anyway. But I do distinctly remember something about
>>>> warnings (and you).
>>>>  
>>>>        
>>> That was the removal policy on (persistent, repetitive...) OT posts.
>>> "One Warning, Second warning - boom"
>>>
>>> What Peter insists on (correctly??) is the adhesion to the "Personal
>>> attack removal policy" which is a different kettle of stink!
>>>
>>> By the way - have you noticed that Nir is back (again) from wherever??
>>> ALWAYS (note the big writing) when he goes away to wherever, canceling
>>> stops - when he returns, posts vanish.
>>> It seems certain to me that s/he (Nir) has singular responsibility for
>>> post cancellation!
>>>
>>> reg
>>>      
>>>>   <<snipped>>
>>>>  
>>>>        
>> No I hadn't noticed actually.
>>    
>
> I'm sure I'll be corrected if wrong, but in order for a post to be
> cancelled, isn't there supposed to be a majority vote by the three mods?
> Or is it that only ONE mod can take it upon himself to cancel posts?
>
>
>  

who's to know - who's going to tell??

reg
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general

[Daniel-257]

Jay Garcia wrote:

> On 29.04.2009 02:30, Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>
>  --- Original Message ---
>
>>>> The only person you can change is yourself, you can't change others.
>>>> Regardless of how you feel, or think, the moderators are acting on
>>>> their own interpretation (s) of the guidelines.
>>>
>>> sorry, but they created the guidelines, and they're not following
>>> them!  As someone else once said: "Do as I say, not as I do!"
>>
>>
>> Never made a mistake? Never forget something? Never assume something
>> in error? Moderators, regardless of how careful they may be, are
>> simply humans and can err.  Stuff happens. Well intentioned actions
>> may be superceded by events or circumstance.
>>
>> It may have been an accident, or it could have been deliberate, or an
>> oversight, I don't know, I wasn't there. In any case you have pointed
>> it out, and they are aware of it so why go on with the subject?
>> Complaining about it isn't going to make it any better, nor is it
>> going to 'correct' itself, the moment is gone, what's done is done.
>
> What I think Peter is alluding to is just that, an "interpretation" of
> the guidelines. And the bone of contention follows that if a moderator
> interprets an action as being in violation of the guidelines then he/she
> should email the suspected offender to solicit and tender an explanation
> - it's a "two-way-street". Cancellation of a post without explanation is
> intolerable IMHO of course IF the guidelines are in fact not clear and
> there is NO interpretation.
>
> Example:
>
> The guidelines say NOT to do this.
> I did that.
> Post cancelled. No interpretation needed.
>
> I remove posts on the UFAQ and ALWAYS notify the poster as to why,
> ALWAYS. Sometimes I edit a post containing incorrect support answers and
> I ALWAYS enter a note as to why.
>

Jay, could the problem be that Peter uses a non-valid address to post
here-abouts, so TPTB cannot notify him, so just delete the message??

And, Jay, am I reading too much into your last para to think that you
might edit someones post but leave the incorrect answer there??

Daniel
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general

[Jay Garcia]

On 29.04.2009 20:24, Daniel wrote:

  --- Original Message ---

> Jay Garcia wrote:
>> On 29.04.2009 02:30, Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>>
>>  --- Original Message ---
>>
>>>>> The only person you can change is yourself, you can't change
>>>>> others. Regardless of how you feel, or think, the moderators are
>>>>> acting on their own interpretation (s) of the guidelines.
>>>>
>>>> sorry, but they created the guidelines, and they're not following
>>>> them!  As someone else once said: "Do as I say, not as I do!"
>>>
>>>
>>> Never made a mistake? Never forget something? Never assume something
>>> in error? Moderators, regardless of how careful they may be, are
>>> simply humans and can err.  Stuff happens. Well intentioned actions
>>> may be superceded by events or circumstance.
>>>
>>> It may have been an accident, or it could have been deliberate, or an
>>> oversight, I don't know, I wasn't there. In any case you have pointed
>>> it out, and they are aware of it so why go on with the subject?
>>> Complaining about it isn't going to make it any better, nor is it
>>> going to 'correct' itself, the moment is gone, what's done is done.
>>
>> What I think Peter is alluding to is just that, an "interpretation" of
>> the guidelines. And the bone of contention follows that if a moderator
>> interprets an action as being in violation of the guidelines then
>> he/she should email the suspected offender to solicit and tender an
>> explanation - it's a "two-way-street". Cancellation of a post without
>> explanation is intolerable IMHO of course IF the guidelines are in
>> fact not clear and there is NO interpretation.
>>
>> Example:
>>
>> The guidelines say NOT to do this.
>> I did that.
>> Post cancelled. No interpretation needed.
>>
>> I remove posts on the UFAQ and ALWAYS notify the poster as to why,
>> ALWAYS. Sometimes I edit a post containing incorrect support answers
>> and I ALWAYS enter a note as to why.
>>
>
> Jay, could the problem be that Peter uses a non-valid address to post
> here-abouts, so TPTB cannot notify him, so just delete the message??

His address is correct.

> And, Jay, am I reading too much into your last para to think that you
> might edit someones post but leave the incorrect answer there??

Leaving an incorrect answer visible along with the correct answer can be
very valuable in some circumstances. "This is the wrong answer because
..." followed by the correct answer. That's standard practice in good
support venues.


--
Jay Garcia - Netscape/Flock Champion
www.ufaq.org
Netscape - Flock - Firefox - Thunderbird - Seamonkey Support
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general

[Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo]

Jay Garcia wrote:

> Leaving an incorrect answer visible along with the correct answer can be
> very valuable in some circumstances. "This is the wrong answer because
> ..." followed by the correct answer. That's standard practice in good
> support venues.

well, we all know that good support isn't practised here.

--
*IMPORTANT*: Sorry folks, but I cannot provide email
help!!!! Emails to me may become public

Notice: Free Speech applies everywhere in the FREE
world, except for some strange reason, not on the
mozilla.org newsgroup servers.  Therefore, replying to
this message may get your posting deleted or may get
you banned from the group, by the Lunacy of the Mozilla
Bullies.

Peter Potamus & His Magic Flying Balloon:
http://melaman2.com/cartoons/singles/mp3/p-potamus.mp3
http://www.toonopedia.com/potamus.htm
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general

[Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo]

Daniel wrote:

> Jay, could the problem be that Peter uses a non-valid address to post
> here-abouts, so TPTB cannot notify him, so just delete the message??

well, if you bothered to look, you'd see my address is
real, just like yours, well sort of like yours

--
*IMPORTANT*: Sorry folks, but I cannot provide email
help!!!! Emails to me may become public

Notice: Free Speech applies everywhere in the FREE
world, except for some strange reason, not on the
mozilla.org newsgroup servers.  Therefore, replying to
this message may get your posting deleted or may get
you banned from the group, by the Lunacy of the Mozilla
Bullies.

Peter Potamus & His Magic Flying Balloon:
http://melaman2.com/cartoons/singles/mp3/p-potamus.mp3
http://www.toonopedia.com/potamus.htm
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general

[Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo]

Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
> it looks like the anal retentive bastards [aka the Mozilla Bullies] are
> at it again with their censorshiping:
>
> [hidden email]
> http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.support.firefox/browse_thread/thread/278bd5dc6e2f7a4c/705ca7f915fe1887?q=#705ca7f915fe1887 
>
>

well, its way more than 72 hours and still NO message
from them.  Why? Not even a peep!  All I can say is
they know they are in the wrong and that is why they
have not said anything.

The policy is there for everyone to follow, including
the Moderators, and yet, they do not.  They are the
ones that created the scheme to enforce, and they do
not follow it themselves.  If they cannot follow their
own procedures then why is the policy there in the
first place? If the moderators cannot follow it, then
the powers to be must remove it.

--
*IMPORTANT*: Sorry folks, but I cannot provide email
help!!!! Emails to me may become public

Notice: Free Speech applies everywhere in the FREE
world, except for some strange reason, not on the
mozilla.org newsgroup servers.  Therefore, replying to
this message may get your posting deleted or may get
you banned from the group, by the Lunacy of the Mozilla
Bullies.

Peter Potamus & His Magic Flying Balloon:
http://melaman2.com/cartoons/singles/mp3/p-potamus.mp3
http://www.toonopedia.com/potamus.htm
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general

[Daniel-257]

Jay Garcia wrote:

> On 29.04.2009 20:24, Daniel wrote:
>
>  --- Original Message ---
>
>> Jay Garcia wrote:
>>> On 29.04.2009 02:30, Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>>>
>>>  --- Original Message ---
>>>
>>>>>> The only person you can change is yourself, you can't change
>>>>>> others. Regardless of how you feel, or think, the moderators are
>>>>>> acting on their own interpretation (s) of the guidelines.
>>>>>
>>>>> sorry, but they created the guidelines, and they're not following
>>>>> them!  As someone else once said: "Do as I say, not as I do!"
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Never made a mistake? Never forget something? Never assume something
>>>> in error? Moderators, regardless of how careful they may be, are
>>>> simply humans and can err.  Stuff happens. Well intentioned actions
>>>> may be superceded by events or circumstance.
>>>>
>>>> It may have been an accident, or it could have been deliberate, or
>>>> an oversight, I don't know, I wasn't there. In any case you have
>>>> pointed it out, and they are aware of it so why go on with the
>>>> subject? Complaining about it isn't going to make it any better, nor
>>>> is it going to 'correct' itself, the moment is gone, what's done is
>>>> done.
>>>
>>> What I think Peter is alluding to is just that, an "interpretation"
>>> of the guidelines. And the bone of contention follows that if a
>>> moderator interprets an action as being in violation of the
>>> guidelines then he/she should email the suspected offender to solicit
>>> and tender an explanation - it's a "two-way-street". Cancellation of
>>> a post without explanation is intolerable IMHO of course IF the
>>> guidelines are in fact not clear and there is NO interpretation.
>>>
>>> Example:
>>>
>>> The guidelines say NOT to do this.
>>> I did that.
>>> Post cancelled. No interpretation needed.
>>>
>>> I remove posts on the UFAQ and ALWAYS notify the poster as to why,
>>> ALWAYS. Sometimes I edit a post containing incorrect support answers
>>> and I ALWAYS enter a note as to why.
>>>
>>
>> Jay, could the problem be that Peter uses a non-valid address to post
>> here-abouts, so TPTB cannot notify him, so just delete the message??
>
> His address is correct.
>

After sending, I noticed Peter uses a gmail addy....I thought I remember
him using a totally bogus address some time ago!

>> And, Jay, am I reading too much into your last para to think that you
>> might edit someones post but leave the incorrect answer there??
>
> Leaving an incorrect answer visible along with the correct answer can be
> very valuable in some circumstances. "This is the wrong answer because
> ..." followed by the correct answer. That's standard practice in good
> support venues.
>
>

Valid way of doing things.

Daniel
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general

[Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo]

Daniel wrote:

> Jay Garcia wrote:
>> On 29.04.2009 20:24, Daniel wrote:
>>> Jay, could the problem be that Peter uses a non-valid address to post
>>> here-abouts, so TPTB cannot notify him, so just delete the message??
>>
>> His address is correct.
>>
>
> After sending, I noticed Peter uses a gmail addy....I thought I remember
> him using a totally bogus address some time ago!

I have always had valid addresses, which I have receive
emails from many asking for help, and making their
thoughts known about the ethical behaviour of the
policies and the moderators

--
*IMPORTANT*: Sorry folks, but I cannot provide email
help!!!! Emails to me may become public

Notice: Free Speech applies everywhere in the FREE
world, except for some strange reason, not on the
mozilla.org newsgroup servers.  Therefore, replying to
this message may get your posting deleted or may get
you banned from the group, by the Lunacy of the Mozilla
Bullies.

Peter Potamus & His Magic Flying Balloon:
http://melaman2.com/cartoons/singles/mp3/p-potamus.mp3
http://www.toonopedia.com/potamus.htm
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general

[Leonidas Jones-2]

Daniel wrote:

> Jay Garcia wrote:
>> On 29.04.2009 20:24, Daniel wrote:
>>
>> --- Original Message ---
>>
>>> Jay Garcia wrote:
>>>> On 29.04.2009 02:30, Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>>>>
>>>> --- Original Message ---
>>>>
>>>>>>> The only person you can change is yourself, you can't change
>>>>>>> others. Regardless of how you feel, or think, the moderators are
>>>>>>> acting on their own interpretation (s) of the guidelines.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> sorry, but they created the guidelines, and they're not following
>>>>>> them! As someone else once said: "Do as I say, not as I do!"
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Never made a mistake? Never forget something? Never assume
>>>>> something in error? Moderators, regardless of how careful they may
>>>>> be, are simply humans and can err. Stuff happens. Well intentioned
>>>>> actions may be superceded by events or circumstance.
>>>>>
>>>>> It may have been an accident, or it could have been deliberate, or
>>>>> an oversight, I don't know, I wasn't there. In any case you have
>>>>> pointed it out, and they are aware of it so why go on with the
>>>>> subject? Complaining about it isn't going to make it any better,
>>>>> nor is it going to 'correct' itself, the moment is gone, what's
>>>>> done is done.
>>>>
>>>> What I think Peter is alluding to is just that, an "interpretation"
>>>> of the guidelines. And the bone of contention follows that if a
>>>> moderator interprets an action as being in violation of the
>>>> guidelines then he/she should email the suspected offender to
>>>> solicit and tender an explanation - it's a "two-way-street".
>>>> Cancellation of a post without explanation is intolerable IMHO of
>>>> course IF the guidelines are in fact not clear and there is NO
>>>> interpretation.
>>>>
>>>> Example:
>>>>
>>>> The guidelines say NOT to do this.
>>>> I did that.
>>>> Post cancelled. No interpretation needed.
>>>>
>>>> I remove posts on the UFAQ and ALWAYS notify the poster as to why,
>>>> ALWAYS. Sometimes I edit a post containing incorrect support answers
>>>> and I ALWAYS enter a note as to why.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Jay, could the problem be that Peter uses a non-valid address to post
>>> here-abouts, so TPTB cannot notify him, so just delete the message??
>>
>> His address is correct.
>>
>
> After sending, I noticed Peter uses a gmail addy....I thought I remember
> him using a totally bogus address some time ago!
>
>>> And, Jay, am I reading too much into your last para to think that you
>>> might edit someones post but leave the incorrect answer there??
>>
>> Leaving an incorrect answer visible along with the correct answer can
>> be very valuable in some circumstances. "This is the wrong answer
>> because ..." followed by the correct answer. That's standard practice
>> in good support venues.
>>
>>
>
> Valid way of doing things.
>
> Daniel

As I recall, grant has had different email addresses, but they were all
valid.

Lee
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general

[Daniel-257]

Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:

> Daniel wrote:
>> Jay Garcia wrote:
>>> On 29.04.2009 20:24, Daniel wrote:
>>>> Jay, could the problem be that Peter uses a non-valid address to
>>>> post here-abouts, so TPTB cannot notify him, so just delete the
>>>> message??
>>>
>>> His address is correct.
>>>
>>
>> After sending, I noticed Peter uses a gmail addy....I thought I
>> remember him using a totally bogus address some time ago!
>
> I have always had valid addresses, which I have receive emails from many
> asking for help, and making their thoughts known about the ethical
> behaviour of the policies and the moderators
>

Maybe it was just that I did not realise that "gmail" was Google's email
arm!!

My mistake!

Daniel
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general