Well, why can't they speak for themselves, then -- either here or to Randy privately? Who appointed you the Johnnie Cochran of Flyertalk?

All you have to do, then, is tell me where I'm wrong. Since you are the appointed voice of the OMNI oppressed, I'm waiting to hear "the facts."

However, having been an OMNI moderator and still being a forum moderator, I am aware that all actions of the "OMNI timeout" variety are passed by Randy via a forum and via e-mail. Ergo, I do know that Randy was made aware of the OMNI bans in question.

I don't know if the poster approached Randy via e-mail or not. If he/she did, apparently Randy backed the OMNI mods. If he/she did not (and simply left), we still have the current situation.

In either case, the anti-moderation crowd is attempting to turn this person into a marytr of the OMNI mods, with or without his/her consent. For what it is worth, I'm going go continue to point this out during the course of this debate. I noticed you snipped this particular point and chose not to address it in your reply. I cannot imagine why.....


------------------
Don't feed the trolls.

"Omni oppressed" - LOL!

If anything, Omni is a free-for-all of expression, for better or for worse. The "oppressed" and the "victims" and the "prey of packs of attack dogs" of Omni is really laughable ... especially when "defended" by ...

No you do NOT know as you did not make the very basic, polite, and common sense effort to simply CHECK and ask either party before you fired off your lying nonsense above in print.

Which is exactly what I said above. You were 100% WRONG in your conclusions and your allegations. And you still refuse to accept it so are worse than 100% wrong now.

I advised you of this in a private e-mail which you have also conveniently ignored, rather than edit your post.

The case is still open it seems to me. For any of us to be second guessing Randy's actions is never too wise generally.

No-one, repeat no-one, on FT can urge me to take action on their behalf. I am very independent in that respect as you surely know!

For you to clearly state I was urged to "try to promote him/her as a martyr" is so wrong and so insulting to ME I am very steamed. Do NOT presume to speak for me of FlyerTalk as you what you *think* my thoughts and motives are/were.

And as you point out YOU are a Moderator and should be trying to stop such nonsense on the boards, not create and fan it.

To impute this person and Randy did NOT act precisely in the recommended manner of complaint you so piously preached about - well before this thread was started - when they DID do just that, is now there for all to see.



------------------
~ Glen ~ sipping bubbly from a UA 747-400 exit row 15 near you SOON!

Perhaps your enquiring mind might have asked the question to itself - that ClueByFour should have also asked himself before bagging all and sundry -

"perhaps they HAVE"?

Have YOU asked Randy? Nope, thought not. Perhaps you might.

Perhaps the reason they are not posting here is that both are DONE with Flyertalk over these OMNI bans. But if you had actually read this thread, you'd already know that.

Another person on this thread earlier has stopped posting on FlyerTalk due to THIS thread - and not due to anything I posted, either.



------------------
~ Glen ~ sipping bubbly from a UA 747-400 exit row 15 near you SOON!

Thank you for the condescending remark. Of course I know ClueByFour is a Moderator. I know more than you might imagine about what has and has not been posted, and where. And as you kindly point this out, that makes his total fiction ever worse, as :

(a) ClueByFour should know a lot better

(b) He is in a position to check the FACTS more readily than most.

He simply fired off total incorrect nonsense without doing one single shred hecking, and now refuses to edit, despite a polite email request from me that he might consider it.

He knows the person he is falsely accusing has said he will no longer post on FT and will not defend his actions, so the actions underthose circumstances are ever more appalling. IMHO.

Defend THAT as much as you will ... at the peril of your own credibility I suggest.


================================================== =======



------------------
~ Glen ~ sipping bubbly from a UA 747-400 exit row 15 near you SOON!

[This message has been edited by ozstamps (edited Jan 17, 2004).]

With all due respect, can we please start with your credibility?

Do you have any links to support your allegation on page two where you stated that someone (anyone!) was called a "fascist", "homophobe", "hater", or "social communist" on OMNI without any moderator action?

Its been more than two days since I politely asked you to backup your statement with evidence.

Is it really asking that much to support your statement with fact?

[This message has been edited by skofarrell (edited Jan 17, 2004).]

I have absolutely no problems with MY credibility on this matter.

As you fully know the search function on OMNI is partially fritzed.

So before I waste MY time hopefully illustrating to you what you SHOULD know as a moderator of OMNI, please answer 'Yes' or 'No' to this simple question in the next hour, so we are all on the same page here:

The person we suspended for a month was labeled by other Flyertalkers in recent times - "fascist", "homophobe", "hater", or "social communist" on OMNI without any moderator suspension of those using such terms which are clear breaches of the TOS. [/i]

A "Yes" or "NO" answer only is required please.

Then we shall see whose credibility is in serious question.

My, that hour certainly went quickly enough. Wow, if ONLY we could see the emails zipping about.

Ummmmm, no, actually, I haven't asked Randy because the question never occurred to me until you (and you alone) raised it repeatedly here.

I have "actually" read the thread, thank you, Ozstamps (by the way, it is long and tedious, but your posts never cease to provide entertainment, especially in a historical context).

This thread wasn't even about Omni bans in the first place, was it? You are the one who has chosen to focus on this particular issue for reasons that are, in absence of all other manifestation from any other possibly interested parties but yourself, rather baffling. If the mysterious others are, indeed, "DONE with Flyertalk over these OMNI bans", then this issue only concerns you, doesn't it? Why would the others care now, anyhow?

So, if this is such a vital issue for you and you alone, take it up directly with Randy ... along with your "next hour" demands and all of your self-proclaimed inside info and "credibility"... sadly, none of us outsiders are privvy to all of that, which may explain our lack of interest and annoyance with your repetitive ranting here (I speak only for myself, though, even if I used the plural! ).

Or at least have the courtesy to start another thread about your solitary Omni concerns/beefs so we can all use our "ignore user" feature.

Well one of 2 things is occurring here. Either you have still NOT in fact read the thread, and/or your dictionary/vocabularly needs serious updating, to one that has the more usual definition of "solitary" included in it.

This post was made before my posting involvement:



------------------
~ Glen ~ sipping bubbly from a UA 747-400 exit row 15 near you SOON!

I�m sorry to disappoint, but I had better things to do in the last hour.

First: To answer your queston: �No�.

The member in question was given an 30 day vacation for violating what I like to call Appendix "A" of the TOS. Appendix "A" of the TOS is "OMNI specific� and was prominently featured in the announcements when OMNI was reopened:

The suspended member had been warned publicly on threads, warned in emails, given a 7 day OMNI posting suspension, and finally a 30 day OMNI posting suspension. Yet it seems that they still cannot understand the simple rule that was quoted above.

Second: Randy has been copied on all correspondence with this particular member (and any member that received a warning or punishment). The other moderators have been informed of the action and the OMNI moderators have solicited their feedback to ensure the punishment was fair. Let�s also keep in mind that any member that has their OMNI posting privilege removed is free to post anywhere else on FT. Due to its unique nature, and for the most part, �What happens in OMNI stays in OMNI.�

Third: I asked you to backup your moderator bias allegation simply because I cannot recall anyone on OMNI doing what you've alleged without punishment. Since it is clear that you have no fact for your allegation, I'm going classified it as "baseless". We�ll let the community decide who has credibility and who does not in this case.

To summarize: At this point the facts have been presented. Since you are unable to produce any evidence of impropriety on my actions or those of scottc and jfe, I can only deduce that your allegation of bias is unfounded. It is clear to me that you think a conspiracy is occurring and I think it is also clear that I'm not going to change your mind. So, I�m going to follow Randy�s advice above.

All I ask in the future is that if you are going to accuse me of something, please have more than hearsay to back it up.

Thanks

(BTW no emails where sent in the composition of this message)

------------------
Sean
aka: skofarrell
Moderator, OMNI & American Express




[This message has been edited by skofarrell (edited Jan 17, 2004).]

To take your dot points in order:

1. I still hold that view above 100%, no matter WHAT this person may have otherwise posted on OMNI. You emailed the FT'er and said THAT thread was incurring a one month posting ban did you not?

That thread was in MY opinion (which counts for nothing, but I am entitled to hold it) no grounds for a month suspension to anyone.

( And I BET if Randy ran it past his "impartial review committee" they'd concur. )

2. You state this as if it were news of some kind? I posted this earlier that Randy was copied in AS you emailed the FT'er involved to advise of the month ban. Where is the newsflash here?

3. Once again please do NOT presume to think and post for me. And tell me what I do and do not know. When were YOU given that right? And by whom???? Not by ME that is for certain.

I simply asked you if this FT'er had been called various things, and asked for a 'Yes' or 'No' answer. This is called POLITENESS ... i.e. ask those who know the real story for a definitive answer.

Now I do have your answer, it is I suggest erroneous, and I suggest you have misled others by claiming the 'fascist' accusation did NOT occur in OMNI. It surely was posted on November 25, and in the afternoon - does that make your job finding it easier? Hope so.

I am curious if the person making it also received a time-out of any kind? (But to save you some typing, I think we all know the answer to that.) [i]I[/b] have at NO time named any person involved in this matter, on this thread, as it is not my place to do so. And I am not going to start now.

I am thus not about to post links, which would identify the person posting the "fascist" remark, whom I personally have never had a problem with on FT. YOU have denied the use of this term being used against the FT'er you suspended, and you are - for about the 4th time - wrong in saying it was NOT used. Had you not pushed and pushed for this answer I would have let it slide.

To accuse me of posting 'baseless' and 'unfounded material' and posting 'here-say' is totally wrong and I suggest is a breach of the TOS as you keep on alleging it, and I ask you AGAIN to withdraw those false accusations as I strongly resent them.

If someone did JUST what you have done in OMNI you'd probably suspend him too ... the irony of that I hope is not lost on you?

And finally I disagree with you here:

If good folks leave Flyertalk altogether due to what happens on OMNI under your watch and by your direct actions, I could not disagree more.

In summary - is giving ANY FlyerTalker/s the right to suspend ANY other FlyerTalker for a month from any Forum without prior consultation with Randy a good idea? My vote (and I only have one) is a loud NO.


------------------
~ Glen ~ sipping bubbly from a UA 747-400 exit row 15 near you SOON!

Simply amazing.

Unfounded allegations.
Demands for reponses.

I think we have been transported back to Dec 2000.

All that is missing is JaneJet.

I'll paraphrase:

The goals of FlyerTalk (in the words of Daniel Webster): THIS IS A HALL FOR MUTUAL CONSULTATION AND DISCUSSION, NOT AN ARENA FOR THE EXHIBITION OF CHAMPIONS.�

I've said all I'm going to say on this. I'm comfortable with what I've said on this thread, my actions, and the actions of the other OMNI moderators. If you (or the other aggrieved) have an issue with my actions or statements, please take it up with Randy.

Thanks

------------------
Sean
aka: skofarrell
Moderator, OMNI & American Express

[This message has been edited by skofarrell (edited Jan 17, 2004).]