Home  ›  Forums  ›


all discussions

show all 6 replies

Mr Brome


Nov 24, 2014, 5:44 PM
Why exactly is it that you seem to pick and choose who is allowed to insult who on your website? I received two emails stating my comments were deleted because they amounted to "personal attacks".
1st, I dispute the term personal attack. Referring to someone who is lying or defrauding people as a liar or a fraud is not a personal attack any more than saying the sun is yellow is a personal attack.
Referring to someone who is trolling and using inflammatory language as a troll is not a personal attack. It is describing behavior.

If you want to continue to choose sides and allow one party to insult another but not allow it for others, that is your "right" as the site owner, but it doesn't make you "right" to do so. If you want to censor pe...

Nov 24, 2014, 10:31 PM
Now, you have sent an email to me claiming that saying that someone's argument was "childish" and "what a joke" is a personal attack.
I'm not exactly sure how loosely you are going to apply this apparently very elastic term of yours.
I did not refer to anyone as "childish". I referred to his argument as such. Referred to his point as "what a joke". This is common place on this website by other users and is by no means an ad hominem attack on anyone.
I have issued moderator reports for direct ad hominem attacks on me and yet you do nothing.
This is obviously something personal on your part. Maybe how I pointed out a pattern of this behavior from you? Was it the "East Coast Liberal" comment? I've seen you and Eric ban people in the past...
Rich Brome

Nov 29, 2014, 4:06 PM
I don't choose sides. Heck, I honestly don't even look at the usernames, so how can I be biased? I don't care who's saying what. I care what's being said.

We have standards for what we deem inappropriate. You may disagree, but they are still the rules we've set. Name-calling is name-calling and it's not welcome here.

We do our best to apply our rules fairly and consistently. If you feel we've been inconsistent, we may have missed something. We can't read every single message. Please bring anything we may have missed to our attention so we can rectify it.

Dec 1, 2014, 9:55 AM
I find that hard to believe since a) you have ignored my moderation requests and b) the guy I was arguing with is one of your twitter friends as well.

As I pointed out, you are applying your rules rather loosely where I am concerned and completely ignore your own rules altogether when others flagrantly break them.

Again, calling someone a troll for trolling behavior is not name calling...you deleted my post for that excuse but left several instances of me being called a troll within the exact same thread. Pointing out an argument is childish is also not name calling. So again, yes you are being biased.
Do what you want. You always have. But dont pretend you are not biased.
Rich Brome

Dec 1, 2014, 10:04 AM
I disagree. "Troll" is a disparaging name. It's certainly not a compliment. I consider it name-calling. Calling someone childish is an insult. That is my opinion and within my discretion as moderator. I try to apply those rules as fairly as I can, without bias. I honestly have no idea what this other person is that you're referring to. I don't care. I don't look at the names when moderating.

Dec 1, 2014, 11:30 AM
You didnt disagree when I was called a troll. And I called no one childish. I referred to their argument as childish. Like you said though, it's your 'discretion' but your ddiscretion is a little one sided.
I was referred to as a troll several times, called uneducated several times, called a 'punk kid' once or twice... How far does your 'discretion' stretch, Rich? I also reported them to you but instead of deleting the offending posts, you chose to troll through my posts and nitpick several and delete them. It is no coincidence that my posts were also arguing valid points.
It's also no coincidence that your forum and site hits have shrunk in recent years.

Dec 30, 2014, 8:15 AM

How do you sleep at night being a non-discriminatory, non-judgmental arbitrator of facts on hand without the blessing of omnipotence?

Shame on you trying to drag the collective "we" into this argument. What are you? A communist?

Muhahahahaha! Smile

You must log in to reply.

Please log in to report a message to the moderator.

all discussions

Subscribe to Phone Scoop News with RSS Follow @phonescoop on Twitter Phone Scoop on Facebook Subscribe to Phone Scoop on YouTube Follow on Instagram


All content Copyright 2001-2018 Phone Factor, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Content on this site may not be copied or republished without formal permission.