Steve-o explains - Page 2

DeeYakaBaka · #11 (**permalink**) 07-25-2006, 07:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ypsieast

I have read most of what has been posted on this subject. I have a couple of thoughts right now.

The merits of editing/deleting certain posts and banning/unbanning certain members is debatable - but circumstances have moved well beyond the point of debate. There are larger issues now, which I will get to. For now, I think 2 things need to be clearly defined (presumably by Kid):
1) What is acceptable/unacceptable, including consequences, when it comes to criticizing the actions and methods of a Mod. There is a clear discrepency among members as to where the line needs to be drawn. So, draw the line and move on. As long as members feel they have recourse against "mod abuse" and as long as mods feel they aren't too undermined in their authority.
2) What is accepable "editing" by a Mod. Can a mod delete a valid post to protect the direction of discussion of a thread? Can a mod delete controversial posts to curb unhealthy bickering and personal attacks? Again, just set the rules and be done with it.

Now, the larger issue at hand. PFO, it seems to me, is at risk of losing 4 or more members who are hugely EV+ contributors to the site: Irexes, Beavis, Marm and Antneye. These 4 are responsible for close to 18,000 posts. In the Mobber categories of Best Goto Poster, best post, most helpful, most respected player and best overall poster they received a whopping 64 votes!!! I think I speak for the majority when I say, We don't want PFO to lose these members.
A lot has been said about how mods are supposed to operate. IMHO, the most important job of a mod is to maintain an environment in which intelligent discussion of poker can thrive. Well, these 4 members are responsible for much of the poker talk on this site that has made most of us better players and allowed us to enjoy this community.

This week the system has failed if Rex, Beavis, Ant and Marm feel that their best option is to say goodbye to PFO. I don't care who's right and who's wrong (and for the record, I think there is more wrong than right to pass around to everybody). I don't see that anyone's actions have been vindicated - just the actions of everyone have culminated in the worst possible outcome: the possible loss of (at least) 4 very important members.

So, to Steve and Kid: please do what it takes to get them back.
To Beavis, Marm, Rex and Ant: don't feel like coming back vindicates Steve, Kid or anyone else - it doesn't. Coming back just means that your contributions to the community are more important than the ideology of running an internet forum - because they are.

if there were more posts as reasoned and calm as this in the last few days, there wouldnt be a problem right now.

as someone who has gone through life with a care free attitude towards life and someone who doesnt lose his temper at anything, this whole situation has baffled me.

every single person involved in this over the past number of days has been at fault imo....my reasons why i think they're at fault have been discussed in private with some of them and im not gonna attempt to turn this thread into another flaming match by stating them here.

i have always thought that it takes a much tougher man to walk away from a fight than it takes to get involved in one......i have also thought that it takes a strong man to apologise in public for his wrongdoings.

this thread was started with an apologetic post by Steve......how sincere this was or how this has been received by the people mentioned within it, i dont know cos im not involved either way......at the end of the day, it was still an apology and an admission of his part played in this whole debacle.

it has been mentioned on numerous occasions that this is more than a forum, its more like a community - this is the main reason why i think these guys absence will hurt pfo more so than other forums who have lost members.
this is also perhaps an indication of the feelings involved when they feel that this is their only option.

redfoster · #12 (**permalink**) 07-25-2006, 02:52 PM

lemme get this straight. marm, irexes, beavis, and antneye all left because steve-o got mad at people for saying he was bad at his job and freaked?

damn, steve. i think you might have fucked up, man. i suggest you hit the books because the loss of those guys will not do much for the state of the knowledge on this forum.

i always saw everyone here as pretty laid back and cool, and i certainly didn't think this was the kind of place that would ban people for stuff like fighting with the people in "power." (is being able to access a moderator control panel that much power, anyway? i always looked at mods as equals that were able to delete posts that had spam in them.)

whatever, though. just days ago we were all playing tourneys together and not worrying about being blasted for what we said, unless it was manguy talking, in which case the blasting was in good fun.

now the whole place is scared to say what they feel, because they might not be able to say it again.

certainly you have to agree that isn't a good thing.

steve, you said something like this would never happen in the workplace. that you woukld never say this to a supervisor. last time i checked, no one here got paid and we were here because we like poker and like to talk about it. i'll tell you what, if you start paying me a salary, myself and everyone else here will shut their mouth quick, deal?

KiD[ReD] · #13 (**permalink**) 07-25-2006, 03:00 PM

It's also free to come here, and the moderators don't get paid either.

DeeYakaBaka · #14 (**permalink**) 07-25-2006, 03:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by redfoster

now the whole place is scared to say what they feel, because they might not be able to say it again.

this isnt true......anything that needs to be said in a personal capacity should be through PMs, not in public

Quote:

last time i checked, no one here got paid and we were here because we like poker and like to talk about it. i'll tell you what, if you start paying me a salary, myself and everyone else here will shut their mouth quick, deal?

im up for this

KiD[ReD] · #15 (**permalink**) 07-25-2006, 03:04 PM

And just for the record, I don't make a single cent from here. Those adverts are just up for.. decoration..

redfoster · #16 (**permalink**) 07-25-2006, 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KiD[ReD]

It's also free to come here, and the moderators don't get paid either.

i never said they did - that was the point. this is not a workplace environment. it is a internet forum.

Steve-O · #17 (**permalink**) 07-25-2006, 03:20 PM

It still needs structure. I direct you to recgamblingpoker for an example of unstructured forums

OrionPro · #18 (**permalink**) 07-25-2006, 03:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ypsieast

I have read most of what has been posted on this subject. I have a couple of thoughts right now.

The merits of editing/deleting certain posts and banning/unbanning certain members is debatable - but circumstances have moved well beyond the point of debate. There are larger issues now, which I will get to. For now, I think 2 things need to be clearly defined (presumably by Kid):
1) What is acceptable/unacceptable, including consequences, when it comes to criticizing the actions and methods of a Mod. There is a clear discrepency among members as to where the line needs to be drawn. So, draw the line and move on. As long as members feel they have recourse against "mod abuse" and as long as mods feel they aren't too undermined in their authority.
2) What is accepable "editing" by a Mod. Can a mod delete a valid post to protect the direction of discussion of a thread? Can a mod delete controversial posts to curb unhealthy bickering and personal attacks? Again, just set the rules and be done with it.

Now, the larger issue at hand. PFO, it seems to me, is at risk of losing 4 or more members who are hugely EV+ contributors to the site: Irexes, Beavis, Marm and Antneye. These 4 are responsible for close to 18,000 posts. In the Mobber categories of Best Goto Poster, best post, most helpful, most respected player and best overall poster they received a whopping 64 votes!!! I think I speak for the majority when I say, We don't want PFO to lose these members.
A lot has been said about how mods are supposed to operate. IMHO, the most important job of a mod is to maintain an environment in which intelligent discussion of poker can thrive. Well, these 4 members are responsible for much of the poker talk on this site that has made most of us better players and allowed us to enjoy this community.

This week the system has failed if Rex, Beavis, Ant and Marm feel that their best option is to say goodbye to PFO. I don't care who's right and who's wrong (and for the record, I think there is more wrong than right to pass around to everybody). I don't see that anyone's actions have been vindicated - just the actions of everyone have culminated in the worst possible outcome: the possible loss of (at least) 4 very important members.

So, to Steve and Kid: please do what it takes to get them back.
To Beavis, Marm, Rex and Ant: don't feel like coming back vindicates Steve, Kid or anyone else - it doesn't. Coming back just means that your contributions to the community are more important than the ideology of running an internet forum - because they are.

I 2nd that as well. Many people here have helped me a lot getting started with poker, including all the above so this is really a pity.

Even if Steve-O is 100% right, quality counts more than being personally offended, imo. This is all anonymous internet, so everybody should be able to get over it. Not just Steve-O, I mean everybody involved.

redfoster · #19 (**permalink**) 07-25-2006, 04:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve-O

It still needs structure. I direct you to recgamblingpoker for an example of unstructured forums

sure, structure is important, but from what i've read, it seems like everything that went down was in some way provoked by you, as well. (only speaking in the case of Irexes, everything else was indirectly influenced)

i think you would agree that those in power can only earn respect by setting an example in which they expect members to behave, and it is very possible that you did not do that.

the alex · #20 (**permalink**) 07-25-2006, 04:02 PM

1.) There's a misconception that something about the forum's fundamental policy has drastically changed while nothing has really changed in the policy.

There is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING that you could display on the public boards on Saturday that you can't display today.

2.) Another misconception is that this whole issue began because Steve didn't like someone criticizing how he mods the forum. That is wrong with a capital "ONG." I don't know how many times I need to stress this, but I'll crarify it with a correction in red:

Quote:

no forum anywhere on the web with any sense of structure allows open criticism to the forum's moderation and though this forum has a different personality than most, this is an issue where PFO has always been consistent with other e-communities.

I've deleted many threads started about why Bonch, No Manner, myself, Marm, and Steve (I wasn't around with Rex as a mod) should be de-modded or why we plain ol' suck. Those threads were deleted and permamanent bans were issued to all of those people except for one that I can remember who has come back and had no problems. All of the people perm-banned are people that you guys didn't like, were happy to see go, or were completely indifferent towards and that made it fine.

That one person who received a temp-ban, was temp-banned by Marm, has been a long-time poster and since returned with no issues. That same respect was arbitrarily given to Rex and Beavis. It was after this that the whole community decided to flame Steve's actions and single him out, forgetting that I agreed with every action and even performed certain actions because the villian in the drama was Steve.

Villians and victims were created in this drama before facts and timelines were laid out and that's unfair to everyone involved. I urge people to step back and review, if you're interested in the past. The fact is that:

1.) What speech was allowed 3 days ago is all allowed today.

2.) Two members broke rules shared by all e-communities that have prospered.

3.) Even long-time posters would longer penalties on most, if not all, of the e-communites that I can think of.

4.) There are no crucified victims or stone throwing villians in this juvenile melodrama.