Board Thread:Voting for New Rules/@comment-24808864-20151218183248/@comment-32747950-20151222040151

HMcCoy wrote:

[...]

If you have justification for performing some action while managing chat, just do it. Even if there were no Muslims in chat and only Canadians and Swiss, and someone uses the term "terrorist" in an inappropriate way. Ask them to stop. If they don't, block them.

If they tattle on you for being mean to me [them I think you mean right?], may God have mercy on their soul (at least with me). I supported the promotion of all chat mods, so I am going to side with you unless they bring some kind of extraordinary evidence.

And even if extraordinary evidence was presented that a chat mod was abusing their rights, I would definitely talk to the chat mod first to get their side. And based on my interaction with the chat mods so far, I would lean towards the chat mods perspective to begin with!

Sorry, this is getting a little long so short version: chat mods are leaders, they should use their powers as wisely and justly as they can. Gave kudos and totally agreed.

As a former chat mod, I would feel that if I kick somebody,... they shouldn't complain to the Bureaucrats or Sysops about it. That's... for lack of a better word, ridiculous.

''The people who have had punishment exacted upon them should have the understanding that if the current chat moderator kicks/bans them, that chat moderator had justification to do that action. ''

In the case of [REDACTED] complaining to a Bureaucrat should be a "seriously, if you were kicked/banned, the chat moderator had a good reason of doing so, whether it be repeated abuse, spam, whatever." situation, not a "well..." situation because the chat moderators were picked for a good reason.

HMcCoy wrote:

[...] chat mod was abusing their rights, I would definitely talk to the chat mod first to get their side. [...]

Again, in the case of [REDACTED] and of others, said person can twist facts, or use emotions, et cetera. Said person doctored photos, et cetera.... which leads me to my main point of this whole long thing...

Please, let's add a truth clause.

If a person is messing with facts just because they either

1. dislike a chat mod

2. want to see said person with the same punishment that they recieved,

then that person should be punished, even if it is slight (like a 2-hour chat ban or something).

Because if we're lying to make someone look bad, I do believe it's abuse.

Sorry if I sound too controversial, I can revise this post if it sounds too bad.