kapkomet Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 BTW and for what it is worth, I would have let him keep his admin title and took away any functions that y'all felt he abused. If that could have been done, it would have been. Unfortunately, it's an all or nothing thing with the programming. :fyou programming. You keep coming back to "power". The only people that have "power" around here are the ones keeping this thing running, and there are about 4 or 5 that do that. Otherwise, it doesn't mean s***. Oh... so if it doesn't mean s***, why is this causing such a stir? Obviously, it does, because if cw got ousted as an admin, he wasn't going to post here anymore? Hmmm. He's more then welcome to post. Re: rules - those are coming, unfortunately or fortunately. Things have been allowed to degrade a little and the group as a whole is sensitive to this issue. We ALL must be held accountable, and the 4 or 5 I spoke of above must be held to an even higher standard. If we're not, we need to get "ousted". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MinnesotaSoxFan Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 If I haven't been nice before(which i believe I am), I will be a good boy for now on. You guys are the best and I will follow whatever order you give me. Damn, I feel like I am a dog right now. Anyways, much a do to you admins for what its worth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Controlled Chaos Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 I received one of those "out of the blue" PM's from cwsox as well. cwsox had a way of stopping temper flare ups before they really got started, and did so while emphasizing the strengths and virtues of the two potential combatants. That is a skill and talent that I fear will be sorely missed around here. I don't know, nor do I want to know, exactly why cwsox's admin powers were revoked. But, I do know this much. Without cwsox's intelligent, insightful and always well meaning leadership, Soxtalk will be less than what it was. I've said my piece. I also received one of those "out of the blue" PM's last week. Cwsox and myself have never really saw eye to eye. Our views on most things are polar opposites. If there was one thing I think we agree on it is soxtalk. It's a place for sox fans to discuss everything from sex to politics, football to hockey, or just plain old baseball, with the common denominator being the analogous infatuation with a team that hasn't won a world seris since Oct. 15, 1917. cwsox, you weren't a sox fan becuase you were an admin on this site...you were an admin on this site because you were a sox fan. Come back and post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queen Prawn Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 It's a place for sox fans to discuss everything from sex to politics, football to hockey, or just plain old baseball. cwsox, you weren't a sox fan becuase you were an admin on this site...you were an admin on this site because you were a sox fan. Come back and post. Or to discuss NASCAR. And I agree with the second paragraph. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mreye Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 Or to discuss NASCAR. You beat me to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 If that could have been done, it would have been. Unfortunately, it's an all or nothing thing with the programming. :fyou programming. You keep coming back to "power". The only people that have "power" around here are the ones keeping this thing running, and there are about 4 or 5 that do that. Otherwise, it doesn't mean s***. Oh... so if it doesn't mean s***, why is this causing such a stir? Obviously, it does, because if cw got ousted as an admin, he wasn't going to post here anymore? Hmmm. He's more then welcome to post. Re: rules - those are coming, unfortunately or fortunately. Things have been allowed to degrade a little and the group as a whole is sensitive to this issue. We ALL must be held accountable, and the 4 or 5 I spoke of above must be held to an even higher standard. If we're not, we need to get "ousted". I keep laughing that anyone thinks there is "power". It's joke. With the exception of the guys who write the check or can program this Edsel, it's a pat on the head and a lolly pop. There is no power. Power to do what? Edit a post? Close a thread? Pin a thread? What is the ultimate power here? The power to ban someone. Ohh wield it carefully, the course of human history depends on it's judicous use. Power to destroy careers? Change lives? Feed the world? IMHO as soon as anyone thinks they have power as an admin, take it away ASAP, they are suffering from delussions. Why is it creating a stir? I have no clue. I find it all rather silly that adults would care if someone calls them an admin. The fun is in reading the posts, responding, sharing ideas, making friends. If someone needs an ego boost of being called by some honorary title or worse, feeling good that they can wield some imaginary "power", it is sad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 I keep laughing that anyone thinks there is "power". It's joke. With the exception of the guys who write the check or can program this Edsel, it's a pat on the head and a lolly pop. There is no power. Power to do what? Edit a post? Close a thread? Pin a thread? What is the ultimate power here? The power to ban someone. Ohh wield it carefully, the course of human history depends on it's judicous use. Power to destroy careers? Change lives? Feed the world? IMHO as soon as anyone thinks they have power as an admin, take it away ASAP, they are suffering from delussions. Why is it creating a stir? I have no clue. I find it all rather silly that adults would care if someone calls them an admin. The fun is in reading the posts, responding, sharing ideas, making friends. If someone needs an ego boost of being called by some honorary title or worse, feeling good that they can wield some imaginary "power", it is sad. You said it very well - and I think ALL sides of this issue should agree with this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 Why is it creating a stir? I have no clue. I find it all rather silly that adults would care if someone calls them an admin. The fun is in reading the posts, responding, sharing ideas, making friends. If someone needs an ego boost of being called by some honorary title or worse, feeling good that they can wield some imaginary "power", it is sad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MinnesotaSoxFan Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 Power hungry bastards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mreye Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 I find it all rather silly that adults would care if someone calls them an admin. The fun is in reading the posts, responding, sharing ideas, making friends. If someone needs an ego boost of being called by some honorary title or worse, feeling good that they can wield some imaginary "power", it is sad. That's why your group says "Groundskeeper", huh? You want to feel THAT important. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 That's why your group says "Groundskeeper", huh? You want to feel THAT important. hell all my posts are in green Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MinnesotaSoxFan Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 at first I thought it said STFU Thread Nominee... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 Ok ... reference the remarks spawned by my contribution to this "lovefest" for cwsox. Anybody that has any intuitiveness at all would know that cwsox and I did not agree from a political standpoint. And honestly, I didn't care for style of debate or point proving. But that's just me. I certainly didn't consider it a character flaw. But I generally chose to just ignore it, as long as it wasn't something I couldn't let pass. Sometimes, you just gotta call bulls***, bulls***. However, he did contribute quite a bit to this site as a poster. I never questioned the decision to revoke his admin title. I only expressed the opinion that Soxtalk would be less than it was. A knowledgeable and articulate Sox fan is no longer contributing his input to this board and it will be missed. At least, his input will be missed by me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xero Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 I don't know where this goes into anything you guys are saying but I looked at cwsox posts and his last one was May 24 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Beast Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 I'm curious. How can you abuse power of closing threads, pinning threads, and banning people (which I don't think Vince decides)? Seriously, Vince is always there to be able to give advice, welcome the new users, and wish everyone a happy birthday. A great man he is as well. Though this is off subject, Vince sent me a PM giving me great advice that I use today. I read some of his work he wrote. It was a long paper. But you know what? I read all 21 pages of it. As a writer; (though all the doubters can screw off) I know that people who have talent do not struggle to write such long, yet, quality papers. Vince takes his writing to the next level, and I was sure with his admin duty, he would take soxtalk.com to the next level too. Was I wrong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlaSoxxJim Posted August 27, 2004 Author Share Posted August 27, 2004 I don't know where this goes into anything you guys are saying but I looked at cwsox posts and his last one was May 24 That's untrue. I know he pseted B-day greetings to JoeBatters on Wednesday. Even with the twoo weeks of missing posts, May 24 cannot be right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 I'm curious. How can you abuse power of closing threads, pinning threads, and banning people ...? Perhaps part of the misconception is what admins can do. None of the above things you speak of matter in this case, except banning, and you are dead on... there were no issues there. I am finding it very ironic on many levels that this discussion has turned to "admins" and "powers" in the same breath. Tex has said it all, and very well, I might add. I would prefer that no one looks at one another as "he's an admin"... oooooooooo... but suddenly, this is where the conversation is turning and I think those of you that are fixated on that are missing the point - perhaps on purpose, but as the adage goes, that is neither here nor there. We are fans of a baseball team. We are friends in a internet community. Occasionally, things happen between "friends" where there are disagreements. Sometimes, this leads to a parting of ways. That's how life works. The lessons that are learned here are many, for me anyway. None of this really matters in a greater scheme. I know that I have taken this too seriously, but I also know that something needed to be done, and for that I am not sorry, but I am sorry that this has turned into something it didn't need to be. One thing that should come out of this are guidelines. That will be forthcoming, if everyone agrees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 It is nice that we care enough that when this happens to a person most of us have only met through these boards we care enough to have a 100 post thread. Gee, Jas would you please take away my mod title, I want to see if I will have a 15 post thread I figure I'd start the thread for 1 and I kknow at least 13 people who will post a it's about time, so I'm looking for the lone defender BTW, when do the Sox start playing again?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xero Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 That's untrue. I know he pseted B-day greetings to JoeBatters on Wednesday. Even with the twoo weeks of missing posts, May 24 cannot be right. Normally whenever you click on a member and Find All Posts By This Member it will show your last post. If you click cwsox it says his last one of May 24. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spiff Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 For those of you who didnt get it the first time, he misused his admin powers by editing his and other people's posts and then lying about it. It was more than a personality clash. I had nothing to do with the decision to de-admin him, but when I was told what he did I agreed with it. You just can't have people doing that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heads22 Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 I guess we just needed spiff to put it plainly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 I want to make a comment regarding a post about CW being very against people being banned and stuff in that capacity. All I have to say is, has this site ever been ban happy. If it were, this type of thread wouldn't be here. I'm happy this thread is here, people want to know whats going on and were more then happy to explain to a point. Spiff said it best, so just check out his thread above. However, for those that were around when I was basically the main admin and RPS was here as well as a mod/admin, you'll remember this site was built on the premacy of not banning and that won't really change. We give you the slack and if someone wants to still hang themself, then and then only will we come in and make an effort to stop it. In general we give posters the benefit of the doubt and hope they can work things out. This is a good board because of it, this policy does at times lead to some harshness, but in general it does a lot more good then bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1549 Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 In life, friends come and friends pass. Though I only knew CW through the White Sox threads, Soxtalk's rigerous political debates, and through a few pm's, I consider CW a friend. I regret CW's decision to stop posting here, and I hope it is only a temporary decision, for CW was one of the many great aspects of Soxtalk. The roaring political debates are a great feature of this site, and CW helped to keep the level of intellect in these threads high. I wish CW the best of luck in his life. I pray that his son returns to the states safely, and that his grandson grows up an avid White Sox and Michigan fan. Thank you CW for everything you brought to Soxtalk. The Patron Saint of this board will be sorely missed. God Bless, and stay safe Vince Hail to the Victors, and just for you...Go Kerry! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlaSoxxJim Posted August 27, 2004 Author Share Posted August 27, 2004 For those of you who didnt get it the first time, he misused his admin powers by editing his and other people's posts and then lying about it. There. That is the accusation. And on its own it is rather damning. I think it deserves more explanation, particularly regarding the following: cw did/does edit his posts after the fact. Usually to fix typos or bad syntax. Partly this is a marginally effective way for him not to let dyslexia (which he admints to suffering from) get in the way of what he is trying to say. Partly it is because he is often tthinking fast and typing faster, and inadvertant ommissions or grammatical mistakes change the contextual meaning of what he is trying to say. As I have said to others, I believe cw feels an ownership and a responsibility for his words, and he would rather make post hoc edits than to have his words convey something other than what he intended. Thus far then, cw was utilizing a board feature avvailable to us all - whetther we choose to go back and edit. So, that is at worst a questionable practice as a poster, a quirk of his posting style, but NOT an abuse of Admin powers. as for the more serious accusation of editing others' posts - clearly something only Mods or Admins can do. It is importannt to be careful with this allegation. If the perceivved transgressions come down to cw going in and again editing HIS OWN WORDS that now appear as in-post quotes posted by others, then that needs to be stated. because, again, for a man who stands on his words as the means to express often well-read and scholarly opinions, letting typos or dyslexia or clumsy finggers get in the way of what he is trying to convey woud be hard to take. Yes, it causes confusion, and yes, there are probbably better ways to say, "Hey, that's not what I meant!" So, this is a part of tthe accusation that does bear consideration. Now, if the accusation about editing others' posts really means editing other posters' words, it's a lot harder to justify. cw has been accused of doing that, and he flatly and patently refutes the allegation (Admin-deleting of offensive, attacking posts notwithstanding, I assume). Admins who have helped to make this decision: Has it been demonstrated that cw used his Admin authority to change someone else's word in his/her posts as suggested?? I cannot say anything about the last part of the charge - lying about abusing the Admin priveleges. cw should ad I'm sure will be the onne to speak to that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts