If you want to make a new complaint, make a new discussion, don't bump an old feedback discussion.

+ Re where to put complaints - From the guidelines:

"When it comes to moderating decisions, however, [mods] are not like other posters, because they have powers other posters don't have. In these cases, the Feedback category, or, again, a private message, can be used to complain about moderators' actions in their capacity as moderators. When it comes to moderating decisions, however, they are not like other posters, because they have powers other posters don't have. In these cases, the Feedback category, or, again, a private message, can be used to complain about moderators' actions in their capacity as moderators. Do not use other discussions to do this or your comments will be deemed off-topic and will be subject to deletion."

(Which is why I deleted the Shout box comments and asked you to take your complaint here.)

You say the Feedback category can be used to complain. I posted in a thread located in the Feedback category. I see no rule about bumping an older thread.

We don't have an exhaustive set of rules to cover every occasion. Use your common sense and open a new discussion about a new topic.

Okay, so I'm not wrong.

Here is the new thread in question. Care to provide any answers?

I have to go to real world work now actually, so I'll leave it to someone else for now. Anyway, the mod team as a whole agreed on making @TimeLine a mod.

I made a comment in a relevant Feedback thread expressing my disapproval of TimeLine inexplicably being made a mod on this forum. — Thorongil

As predicted.

1) Who made TimeLine a mod and why? — Thorongil

Only an administrator can make someone a moderator, so it must have been either Baden or jamalrob. She was made a moderator because her name was suggested and there was a consensus.

2) Why was the thread I made my comment in closed? — Thorongil

Personally, I wouldn't have closed it. It was relevant to the topic, and I've never really understood why people view it as an issue if an old discussion is revived. If I was going to take action, I would have moved your comment, and subsequent related comments, into a new discussion, rather than close the discussion. (Then I could have given it a better title than the one that it has ended up with).

3) Why were my recent comments in the Shoutbox deleted and who deleted them? — Thorongil

As Baden rightly pointed out, that is against the guidelines.

4) Is there any assurance that TimeLine will not censure posters and posts with whom and which she disagrees? — Thorongil

I'm not going to give any assurances on behalf of anyone else. And, as long as the right call is made, I don't mind who makes it, or whether it is made by someone who happens to disagree with the member in question.

It has been a real battle of late getting certain of the mods to begrudgingly, but to their credit, acknowledge their biases and attempt not to let them affect their moderation. Promoting TL now seems to torpedo that progress. — Thorongil

I've said this before - TL is passionate but also evenhanded and principled. I am really curious how she will handle being a moderator.

Edit - I have no clue why she would want the job.

She was made a moderator because her name was suggested and there was a consensus. — Sapientia

Stop beating around the bush. Why was her name suggested? Why also did there need to be another mod? I suppose it doesn't seem so inexplicable when one takes into account the fact that she shares the same antipathy for certain posters and certain ideas that most of the other mods do. I can surmise in this manner, but I would like a straight answer.

As Baden rightly pointed out, that is against the guidelines. — Sapientia

Maybe so, but you and I both know that discussion of moderation has occurred in the Shoutbox quite frequently in the past, discussion the mods engaged in and didn't choose to shut down, so appeals to the guidelines don't have much affect on me.

And, as long as the right call is made, I don't mind who makes it, or whether it is made by someone who happens to disagree with the member in question. — Sapientia

I don't mind that either. But the ability to make the right call is my concern here. After her vile accusations directed toward me in a recent discussion, I don't have much faith in said ability.

but also evenhanded and principled — T Clark

Not in my recent experience.

I am really curious how she will handle being a moderator. — T Clark

So am I. But I'm not optimistic.

Why was her name suggested? — Thorongil

I believe she asked.

I don't mind that either. But the ability to make the right call is my concern here. After her vile accusations directed toward me in a recent discussion, I don't have much faith in said ability. — Thorongil

TPF politics are riveting. It's like being thrown back in an end-of-19th-century US Election.
"A vote for TL is a vote for moral degeneracy! She wants beastiality to be taught in highschool!"

Maybe so, but you and I both know that discussion of moderation has occurred in the Shoutbox quite frequently in the past, discussion the mods engaged in and didn't choose to shut down, so appeals to the guidelines don't have much affect on me. — Thorongil

Quick comment on this as I have a minute. I think it benefits the complainant too to have a dedicated discussion in Feedback for their particular complaint rather than have it interspersed with other comments that have nothing to do with it. And it's debatable how relevant the old discussion was but I don't think it's too much to ask to start a new discussion on a new complaint if it's more than just a one-off protest comment.

I believe she asked. — Michael

More can kicking.

Stop beating around the bush. Why was her name suggested? Why also did there need to be another mod? I suppose it doesn't seem so inexplicable when one takes into account the fact that she shares the same antipathy for certain posters and certain ideas that most of the other mods do. I can surmise in this manner, but I would like a straight answer. — Thorongil

Regardless of whether or not it was necessary, we obviously thought that it would be a good idea, and we obviously thought that it would be a good idea because we thought that Timeline would make a good moderator based on her qualities and behaviour.

Obviously you don't agree, which comes as no surprise. I'm under no obligation to discuss this in detail with you, and I've decided against doing so, for reasons that I'm at liberty not to disclose.

Maybe so, but you and I both know that discussion of moderation has occurred in the Shoutbox quite frequently in the past, discussion the mods engaged in and didn't choose to shut down, so appeals to the guidelines don't have much affect on me. — Thorongil

We are not unaware of what has happened in the past. We review these things, discuss them, and sometimes make changes on how we go about things in future. And that's exactly what's happened here.

I don't mind that either. But the ability to make the right call is my concern here. After her vile accusations directed toward me in a recent discussion, I don't have much faith in said ability. — Thorongil

No one's perfect. I do have confidence in her ability to make the right call. That's why she got my vote.

Anyway, she's now a moderator, whether or not you approve. My advice would be not to jump the gun.

Sorry, I don't understand what this means.

It means you still haven't answered my question but are merely kicking the can down the road. It's an expression commonly used. That someone asks to be a mod doesn't oblige you to make them one, so I still want to know why you chose to make her a mod.

It means you still haven't answered my question but are merely kicking the can down the road. It's an expression commonly used. That someone asks to be a mod doesn't oblige you to make them one, so I still want to know why you chose to make her a mod. — Thorongil

Right, sorry, don't know the answer to that. Only that she was considered because she asked.

Obviously you don't agree, which comes as no surprise. I'm under no obligation to discuss this in detail with you, and I've decided against doing so, for reasons that I'm at liberty not to disclose. — Sapientia

Fine, don't talk. As you say, you don't have to. But you must know that your silence only raises my suspicions about how it went down and why.

Fine, don't talk. As you say, you don't have to. But you must know that your silence only raises my suspicions about how it went down and why. — Thorongil

This is how it went down:

Beat me to the punch. I was just about to post that same snapshot.

The only thing I know is when I got into a somewhat cynical "conversation" with her about seductive females I got a ban warning and my comments were called ugly sexism.

You know a significant segment of the shoutbox is about constant flirting and we all know the dynamics of that. I am not suprised at all that she became a moderator.

Most intriguing, first because none of you could manage to think of a single reason why she ought not to be made a mod, and yet are thoroughly unsurprised that Agustino and I have complained about the decision. If you are unsurprised at our reaction, this means that you did know there to be potential reasons to be opposed to the choice, ones we can readily supply, such as the fact that TL has not followed the guidelines herself and has engaged in unsavory character assassination.

Second, because Sap just got done spending a paragraph telling me how he wasn't going to tell me anything, but now is okay with your posting this evidence. Strange little about face there.

You hit the nail on the head I believe.

Who made TimeLine a mod and why? — Thorongil

I don't think it's very mysterious. Timeline is an intelligent sophisticated person. She asks to be a mod. She's female. You've probably noticed that some of the male mods are concerned about the balance of estrogen and testosterone in the Body Philosophic. They might like it to be 50/50. In fact, nothing runs on 50% T and 50% E, except Title IX regulation of college athletics. It's mostly one or the other.

Time will tell whether she is a good moderator or a bad moderator. It's sort of like appointing a supreme court justice. Sometimes appointments backfire, and the justice doesn't rule the way the appointing president hoped. The difference is, this appointment isn't for life and bitching about decisions can be incessant as well as up close and personal.

I don't know why anybody would want this unpaid, thankless, and slush-mucking job. I'm glad somebody does.

My main complaint about TimeLine is that I feel she could do a better job proofreading her posts, and that she is a fan of pasta salad. Pasta Saladorians should be suppressed.

She would resurrect the neutral opinion I had of her prior to our most recent conservation if she would retract the accusation that I am an apologist for rape. Until then, no, I have no respect for her, whether intelligent or not. I'll take a low cognitively functioning but charitable and compassionate fellow biped making decisions over an "intelligent and sophisticated" assassin of character any day of the week.

Most intriguing, first because none of you could manage to think of a single reason why she ought not to be made a mod, and yet are thoroughly unsurprised that Agustino and I have complained about the decision. — Thorongil

That's an erroneous inference. That pros and cons were not expressed does not entail that none of us could think up any. I just cut to the chase and voted in favour as soon as I'd reached that conclusion, as, I would surmise, did others.

If you are unsurprised at our reaction, this means that you did know there to be potential reasons to be opposed to the choice, ones we can readily supply, such as the fact that TL has not followed the guidelines herself and has engaged in unsavory character assassination. — Thorongil

Of course we are aware of your opinion, which is why your reaction did not come as a surprise.

Second, because Sap just got done spending a paragraph telling me how he wasn't going to tell me anything, but now is okay with your posting this evidence. Strange little about face there. — Thorongil

No, don't take things out of context. There has been no about face on my part. As indicated by the preceding paragraph, I meant that I do not care to go into details regarding what it is about Timeline that makes me think that she has the potential to be a good moderator.

"Apologist for rape" is the sort of ideological slander that should not be allowed. Such statements should be deleted. Now that she is a mod, she can just delete the offending post and retract her accusation.

I would expect my views on uncontrolled migration of Arabs and Africans into Europe or uncontrolled migration of Mexicans, Central Americans, and South Americans into the US to be characterized as an "apology for genocide" and "racism" and be threatened with banning. Migration should be controlled. Look at what uncontrolled migration of Europeans into North America did to the American Indians, or uncontrolled migration of the English into Australia did for Aboriginals.

TPF politics are riveting — Akanthinos

They really are; I can never bring myself to look away.

1) Who made TimeLine a mod and why?

2) Why was the thread I made my comment in closed?

3) Why were my recent comments in the Shoutbox deleted and who deleted them?

4) Is there any assurance that TimeLine will not censure posters and posts with whom and which she disagrees — Thorongil

I made her a mod, because she is a good thinker, a good writer, and shows good judgement.

I don't know anything about 2 and 3.

I don't understand 4. Can there ever be such an assurance? Why would you expect one? Why do you have a concern about it in this case? What is your problem?

I made her a mod, because she is a good thinker, a good writer, and shows good judgement. — jamalrob

Well, I beg to differ.

What is your problem? — jamalrob

See here: https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/129749#Post_129749