EPTOn August 01 2015 03:32 Alakaslam wrote:
Kadaver lost yoshi
Kadaver lost yoshi
ultralisk > yoshi
Why is The_Templar such a bad mod? - Page 2
| Forum Index > Website Feedback |
Shellshock
United States97276 Posts
ultralisk > yoshi | ||
|
fluidrone
France1478 Posts
"the templar is a very decent moderator for tl. ty teh templar | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
On August 16 2015 08:26 IgnE wrote: Get a big rock. User was warned for this post How does that deserve a warning? "Not an appropriate answer"??? It's the most appropriate answer. Is this a preschool or something, where we pretend death doesn't happen? | ||
|
KelsierSC
United Kingdom10443 Posts
| ||
|
fluidrone
France1478 Posts
On August 17 2015 01:57 IgnE wrote: How does that deserve a warning? "Not an appropriate answer"??? It's the most appropriate answer. Is this a preschool or something, where we pretend death doesn't happen? It is a one liner.. not something you should go all pitchfork about, seeing as the objective of said one liner is to disparage apparently. Someone warned you, now you try to make it sound like your "big rock" argument is more than that? a one liner. [use here morrow's roleplay voice]= wow! You should try arguing that it was not disparaging, you would get more ahead I believe. ps: is this obvious bumping temp's website feedback thread into a "window into a banling templar's life" blog? (but who is bumping?) On August 17 2015 20:52 KelsierSC wrote: I think templar meets the standards set by the other tl moderators We all see what you did there. 4/20 rating | ||
|
farvacola
United States18834 Posts
So, why doesn't a mod actually defend that warning? It absolutely does not comport with the posting standards established in that thread and seems very much the kneejerk reaction of a bleeding heart mod who doesn't actually know anything about dealing with injured animals. Most small to medium size birds have an immensely difficult time rehabbing wing injuries without very involved veterinary attention. Furthermore, once grounded, the vast majority of birds will either be eaten, run over, or toyed with by either humans or other animals (and then eaten, of course). Accordingly, given the assumed capabilities of the average person, it is absolutely appropriate to suggest that one put a bird with an injured wing out of its misery. Now yes, the manner in which igne presented this information was abrasive and perhaps callous, but so are many of the posts in the Ask Stupid Questions thread. The reason why should be clear; the thread is full of.......wait for it.......stupid questions. Consequently, are we to assume that moderation choices in that thread are also stupid? | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
On August 17 2015 21:34 fluidrone wrote: It is a one liner.. not something you should go all pitchfork about, seeing as the objective of said one liner is to disparage apparently. Someone warned you, now you try to make it sound like your "big rock" argument is more than that? a one liner. [use here morrow's roleplay voice]= wow! You should try arguing that it was not disparaging, you would get more ahead I believe. ps: is this obvious bumping temp's website feedback thread into a "window into a banling templar's life" blog? (but who is bumping?) We all see what you did there. 4/20 rating The objective of the one liner was to give the most appropriate answer. I have no idea where you get this "disparaging" nonsense from. Do you think that putting the bird down is not an appropriate suggestion? | ||
KadaverBB
Germany25657 Posts
| ||
|
fluidrone
France1478 Posts
hence the defending the disparaging bit I humbly typed. You should try arguing that it was not disparaging, you would get more ahead I believe. So sorry for thinking something simple once in a while. I gestured that someone might feel inclined to not understand your comment because of its brevity and it "sounding" disparaging to someone not knowledgeable about stones and birds. I was not incentive nor am I ever insipid, .. I shared: I mistook a lot of "one liners" in my time and have learned to not be surprised by the amount of people who do fall into it / to those types of quiproquo / misunderstanding. | ||
|
fluidrone
France1478 Posts
On August 18 2015 02:03 IgnE wrote: The objective of the one liner was to give the most appropriate answer. I have no idea where you get this "disparaging" nonsense from. Do you think that putting the bird down is not an appropriate suggestion? Even there the use of "putting it down" is arguably subject to debate, but not in this thread. Now about your question... Yes, I think your answer here is valid: " putting the bird down" if it is coupled with the previous "big rock". hf | ||
|
opisska
Poland8852 Posts
| ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
| ||
|
opisska
Poland8852 Posts
| ||
|
Cascade
Australia5405 Posts
On August 18 2015 00:43 farvacola wrote: The ask stupid questions thread is full to the brim with unwarned one liners, so while your ability to defend moderation choices with insipid Ten Commandments reasoning is noted, baskerville, you'll have to do better than that. And no, that doesn't mean add more spoilers. So, why doesn't a mod actually defend that warning? It absolutely does not comport with the posting standards established in that thread and seems very much the kneejerk reaction of a bleeding heart mod who doesn't actually know anything about dealing with injured animals. Most small to medium size birds have an immensely difficult time rehabbing wing injuries without very involved veterinary attention. Furthermore, once grounded, the vast majority of birds will either be eaten, run over, or toyed with by either humans or other animals (and then eaten, of course). Accordingly, given the assumed capabilities of the average person, it is absolutely appropriate to suggest that one put a bird with an injured wing out of its misery. Now yes, the manner in which igne presented this information was abrasive and perhaps callous, but so are many of the posts in the Ask Stupid Questions thread. The reason why should be clear; the thread is full of.......wait for it.......stupid questions. Consequently, are we to assume that moderation choices in that thread are also stupid? I was about to type more or less this. The answer is on point, but I can see how it could have been delivered in a more... sensitive manner. I don't understand if the warning is for low content or for making people that care for birds unnecessarily sad by delivering the advice in a rough manner. The post had more content that most other posts on TL, and a fair fraction of unwarned posts are being rough about things that people care about. I understand that both content and "roughness" is something to be judged from post to post and that it is impossible to have a 100% accurate limit, but I feel this post was well within limits from what I have seen otherwise. All in all, felt very uncalled for. But well, whatever. The rest of the ASQ-thread got your back igne.  | ||
|
fluidrone
France1478 Posts
Was it meant deliberately in a disparaging fashion? Should the poster (who might have been offended) feel the brisky chill of death in the morning with the moon howling alongside your post ?  to better ascertain if he was ill moved by such a response."his" On August 16 2015 08:07 [Phantom] wrote: Somebody knows how to take care of a bird? My cat atacked it, but at first didn't seem to have any rpoblem, but couldn't fly (so I guess broken wing)? Sadly...the bird tried to run away after I moved away the cat and fell on a sick which pierced trough her wing.... It's a kinda large bird, and the stick wasn't that thick but fuck... It's in a shoe box right now but don't know what to do. It's kinda late here and most vets already finished their turn...anyone knows? "yours" On August 16 2015 08:26 IgnE wrote: Get a big rock. "mine" Bird has almost no chance of recovering even with a vet.. go place him in the woods within a secluded place so that he dies as peacefully as possible or adopt him and start to read on birds / go to a vet asap / quit your job, gl ps: I had to bury several kittens (died after birth or on birth) and I elected to put them "high up" so that no crawlers would get to them while I dug, and then buried them respectfully knowing full well that they would be eaten/recycled. Edit: On August 18 2015 19:44 Cascade wrote: + Show Spoiler + On August 18 2015 00:43 farvacola wrote: The ask stupid questions thread is full to the brim with unwarned one liners, so while your ability to defend moderation choices with insipid Ten Commandments reasoning is noted, baskerville, you'll have to do better than that. And no, that doesn't mean add more spoilers. So, why doesn't a mod actually defend that warning? It absolutely does not comport with the posting standards established in that thread and seems very much the kneejerk reaction of a bleeding heart mod who doesn't actually know anything about dealing with injured animals. Most small to medium size birds have an immensely difficult time rehabbing wing injuries without very involved veterinary attention. Furthermore, once grounded, the vast majority of birds will either be eaten, run over, or toyed with by either humans or other animals (and then eaten, of course). Accordingly, given the assumed capabilities of the average person, it is absolutely appropriate to suggest that one put a bird with an injured wing out of its misery. Now yes, the manner in which igne presented this information was abrasive and perhaps callous, but so are many of the posts in the Ask Stupid Questions thread. The reason why should be clear; the thread is full of.......wait for it.......stupid questions. Consequently, are we to assume that moderation choices in that thread are also stupid? I was about to type more or less this. The answer is on point, but I can see how it could have been delivered in a more... sensitive manner. I don't understand if the warning is for low content or for making people that care for birds unnecessarily sad by delivering the advice in a rough manner. The post had more content that most other posts on TL, and a fair fraction of unwarned posts are being rough about things that people care about. I understand that both content and "roughness" is something to be judged from post to post and that it is impossible to have a 100% accurate limit, but I feel this post was well within limits from what I have seen otherwise. All in all, felt very uncalled for. But well, whatever. The ask stupid Q/A is indeed a great thread and yes, knowledgeable as I am, reading your post at the time, I did think along the lines of "bedrock cartoons", simple solution, take a big rock and smash the bird's brain. But a "forum" is not me, a forum is a legion of me (and they are all differently particular), hence moderation etc. tldr: I cried "pew pew shots fired" earlier about the linking to the ask stupid Q/A, so moreover, I would say that IgnE's comment (due to its brevity) makes it disparaging for some/quite many people (enough that your or my opinion don't matter if you consider the poster is not a troll (which he could be)) in quite the same way as the "go ask in the simple stupid Q/A " response might have been perceived. In templar we trust! so far (inception needs a rework, call leo, he botched the job again). | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
, [Phantom] + Show Spoiler + or how old he is + Show Spoiler + did he cry about the comment+ Show Spoiler + or did he get a big rock+ Show Spoiler + is the bird dead?+ Show Spoiler + did it have to suffer?+ Show Spoiler + i hope not+ Show Spoiler + that's what i was trying to prevent+ Show Spoiler + suffering that is | ||
|
opisska
Poland8852 Posts
| ||
|
fluidrone
France1478 Posts
You want us to believe that your "Get a big rock" felt like a "that's what i was trying to prevent- - suffering that is" to you. Nothing else from your part? wow. | ||
|
fluidrone
France1478 Posts
On August 18 2015 16:54 opisska wrote: Every post defending Templar in this thread should be banned for being off-topic, because they are of no help in answering the question at hand. You can't just come to a thread asking for an explanation of a phenomenon simply claiming that said phenomenon does not exist at all! "Why is the templar a bad mod?" does not imply he has to be a "bad mod" all the time, nor that he cannot be also a good mod, it asks why he is bad when he is/was bad. So I guess, sorry for being off topic. The templar is bad because he loves tl, he should not be a blind soldier with no religious attachment, liquid is as liquid does, let him close threads with a snappy link .. let him warn with On August 17 2015 01:57 IgnE wrote: heart .... a preschool or something, where we pretend death doesn't happen? .. let him .. .. wait ?! uhh? yes! liquid has done so... On topic: I like bad templar: - liked the link to the stupid Q/A, didn't stop me from linking it (just balance issues and karma). - liked the warn just because I wouldn't want the ask stupid thread to devolve into a place where posters would be afraid of posting (become the abl or something) and the comment seemed disproportionately rude if the poster is 12, while it was sort of funny to little old me. | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
| ||
| ||
