Actually, quite a bit. However, it would all be along the lines of supporting my two suggested changes.

Moreover, it would hopefully encourage those who both support and oppose my proposals to post their feelings.

Dovster,

There is a very SIMPLE solution to this issue:

The TB member in question could post within the TOS and thus would not CONTINUE to receive suspensions.

Good point.

You have many "simple solutions" - no doubt about it.

So a good buddy of yours who may or may not have once been a TB President, you'd have supported being removed and replaced from TB after he was suspended?

Funny, I do not recall seeing one post from you about that at the time, branding him arrogant and calling for his demise.

"Simple solutions" don't work so well when they have personality filters built into them.

How about you remove the innuendo and post some FACTS. I know of NO instance where a TB President had their posting PRIVLEDGES suspended.

I'll repeat what I said, but type real slow so that you can follow:

ANY TB member who is arrogant enough to EARN a suspension of posting PRIVLEDGES should be subject to a recall election.

My post was 100% factual.

I repeat - your silence last year was deafening on this very subject, seeing the names have now changed. (Whether typed slowly or quickly.)

WHAT Names?

I know of only TWO TB members who were arrogant enough as to have their posting privledges suspended. Neither is a friend of mine.

There is only ONE way to take your lack of evidence.

Gawd, I love that BOLDING.

CameraGuy, I understand that you want to have anyone who makes a TOS violation suspended.

Would that include making insulting remarks to another poster such as "I'll repeat what I said, but type real slow so that you can follow"?

Please note, additionally, that OzStamps did not say a TB President had been suspended. He referred to a "a good buddy of yours who may or may not have once been a TB President".

You have managed to throw this thread completely off the topic -- which is solely whether or not moderation policies are allowed to be discussed -- but seeing as you questioned OzStamps' honesty I will give you your reply.

A former TB President was suspended. There can not be too much of a secret about that as the word "suspended" appeared under his name for a full month.

If this is considered a TOS violation, I would disagree, but take any punishment like a man.

This is pure innuendo. NOT facts.

In your opinion, I have taken this off-topic. In MY opinion. I have not. Everyone knows that you brought this up because one of your clique buddies keeps getting suspended. As for ozstamps honesty, I would have hoped that he would have answered for himself, but this experience, like so many in the past, has proven that hope futile.

If in fact, this member was an elected TB member at the time of the suspension, then they should have faced a recall. I still do not know who you and ozstamps are referring to, since neither one of you has the guts to name names.

It is not a matter of "guts", it is a question of not dragging this person's name through the mud.

Incidentally, while I am aware of the reason for the suspension, I do not agree with it. (I am referring to the reason for the suspension of the former TB President. I do not know the reason for the suspension of the current member.)

Please note that I raised this issue before his current suspension. Also please note that -- as I pointed out earlier in this thread -- he was not one of the five people I supported for election to TalkBoard.

Those five were Gleff, Cholula, Kokonutz, Bhatnasx, and Socrates. Their names appeared in my signature block for the entire campaign.

If the member currently suspended were to be removed from TalkBoard, his replacement would be Bhatnasx.

I do believe that Bhatnasx would be an excellent TalkBoard member but that is not the question. The current member got more votes than he did and therefore should be the one on TB -- no matter what my own feelings regarding the two are.

If anyone threw it off-topic, Dovster, it was you back in post #10 when you first brought up that a TB member had recently been suspended.
I for one agree with CameraGuy in that a TB member should not be allowed to remain in office if they can't follow the TOS enough to keep from being suspended.

I agree too. ^^^

Tazi, I believe that was on topic because it pointed to the necessity of getting a standing policy established -- not one which is true only for this member, but for all members, now and in the future.

As I have said, I want to discuss this on the TalkBoard Topics Forum and make a formal suggestion there, but have to wait until Randy states whether that is permissible.

Note that I have neither come to the defense of this member nor have I have attacked him. It would be rather foolish of me to do either as I have absolutely no idea of what he was suspended for or if I consider that suspension to have been deserved.

I certainly do not want (nor will participate in) a debate about whether the suspension is deserved.

I'd love to know what & if we can talk about moderation too.

Just today I saw one thread locked by a moderator for using language that's against the TOS, even though the word was filtered out, and another thread which allowed same to remain with the thread not being locked.

The strange thing is that the locked thread was in Omni, which is more lenient, and the one which remains is in another forum.

And, to boot, one of them was a moderator

Perhaps more importantly is what are the moderator guidelines and when they're not followed what is supposed to be done, since we can't talk about specific moderator actions (of which I agree).

If it was on topic then any other discussion of the same thing should be considered on topic as well....regardless whether YOU agree with their opinion or not.