On respecting the DS and respecting all board members.

[Zoomie]

Michael - unlike yourself, I find that most people who communicate effectively over these means are quite ineffective when the fit hits the shan in operations.

Not sure what you mean here Zoomie - care to elaborate?

cheers, mdh

Sorry - my thoughts are not that well organized at the moment (degree in science, not communication)  I just finished 7 hours of searching for a float plane...  I may just revisit this topic at another time or just give it a pass.

I sincerely hope that your comments Che were in jest about locking this thread - like I said, I am working on basic inputs at this moment and have difficulty interpreting sarcasm over the bandwidth.

Britney - I would not classify myself as either an effective communicator via these means, nor an ineffective one - just a man of few words on most subjects...  If you provide a topic that I am passionate about, watch out - no hold's barred.

Good night all - back to the grind in the morrow.

 

[noreaga808]

I've got to agree with Mo-litia's general sentiment. People communicate in different styles so that should be taken into consideration and not deny them of having a voice on this forum. From my experience there seems to be more chance of misinterpretation in the written language compared to being face to face.

Che, if you had a thread on the same topic about a year ago then wouldn't that suggest that there is a problem still in existance with this site? I've been registered on this site since October 2004 and find that I tend to second guess myself before I post anything in fear of getting berated by Staff. I shouldn't just single out the staff of this site but many of the members jump on the band wagon when a member is being disciplined but in an improper manner.

Overall though, I think this is a great site and has helped me out immensely with my pursuit of a career in the Canadian Forces. The directing staff are doing a good job, you just can't expect to satisfy everyone all the time. There's always going to be someone that complains about you even if you are doing the right thing. Any complaints should be ultimately taken in a constructive manner so in the end you can do an even better job even if the way it was presented to you pisses you off.

 

[mdh]

...   I just finished 7 hours of searching for a float plane...  

Zoomie,

Sorry, I've heard the news --  

 

[Slim]

Hey all.

Well I waited for the smoke to clear before I waded in...

No finger pointing or anything like that.

All I'm going to say is that the people that I most respected while in the CF (and after) are those who are able to calmly voice their thoughts and opinions in a reasonable and PROFESSIONAL manner. I may not have always agreed with them, but was (and am) happy to work along side them as I know that they are not likely to go off in hot-headed fashion and generally think an issue through before acting.

Name-calling can be quite cathartic-seeming for the soul but achieves little in the end and...from a certain point of view...displays a weakness of sorts. As warriors it is incumbent on all of us not to display weakness in the face of the enemy or, more important, the face of our peers. We are all past, present or future members of the sharp end of this countries political will. As such is was/is/will be our duty to discharge that trust in the best way we know how!

Soldier on Lads...and Ladies.

Slim

Zoomie: I hope it all turned out alright.

 

[Bav2002]

If it were up to me Id have all the staff here at army.ca write a biography on themselves, military history, etc.  and have this available to the viewing public.  I think this could be interesting and give people an idea to who they have to bow down to and respect like the 6 star general of the united states of canada.

 

[Slim]

If it were up to me Id have all the staff here at army.ca write a biography on themselves, military history, etc.   and have this available to the viewing public.   I think this could be interesting and give people an idea to who they have to bow down to and respect like the 6 star general of the united states of canada.

The DS staff are chosen by Mike Bobbitt...The owner of the site and they speak for him when they do act. I would think that his judgemnt is good enough as they do represent him. Also,there are security issues with people being involved with things that precludess them letting the general public see who they really are.

No one is asking anyone else to bow to anyone. The 6star general comment is just demonstraighting immaturity.

Could you please fill in your profile so we know who and what you are?

 

[Infanteer]

People really need to differentiate when members who are DS act as moderators and when they act as members.   For some reason, if a mod disagrees with someone, all of the sudden it is construed as censorship or heavy-handedness.

News Flash, the staff here are not impartial and enjoy taking part in the discussions (that is why the owner brought us on board).

I'm still wondering what the point of this thread is - that we locked a thread where a few guys were trashing women in the Forces?   If there is a specific problem with moderator action, cut-and-paste it from the thread and post it here and we can discuss it and deal with it.   The general bitching sets me in the same mood as Che....

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

I find it most ironic that those that espouse to be conservative/right wing are the ones that are whining the loudest about the DS taking a right wing/conservative approach when it comes to moderating these boards. Well guess what boys and girls you cannot have it both ways. If you want to go to a board where there is almost zero moderation go to militaryphotos.net or if you can remember back to the way Arsenal of the CF was a couple of years ago (sorry Luc if you are lurking). We have children that come to these boards folks and civilians that have no idea about the CF and the way some of you conduct yourselves as members of the CF is downright shameful. Personally, if you don't like my moderation style, thats tough because the only one I answer to is Mike. I see some of you of having the following options:
1) keep trying to circumvent the board rules and guidelines and most likely end up getting banned 2) Move on to another less moderated board where you can rant and rave and do what you want 3) Sit back and actually read of what we accomplished here in the past few years. All and all its up to you on how you want to approach this.

 

[Mike Bobbitt]

Some good (and a couple not so good) posts made on this topic. I think we're just about out of steam here, or at least out of original thoughts. I'd like to direct the thread to what I believe it's original intent was, and that is ensuring moderation is achieved equably on the site.

So from here on out, let's bring in and discuss specific examples where you didn't understand why a user or post was moderated. If there has truly been an injustice, let's fix it. As often as not though, the mods are so quick to address a problem users don't even know something has happened. All they see is an edited post or a banned user, and wonder why the staff went so hard on a guy who apparently did nothing.

That's the purpose of the Staff, to catch and correct problems quickly, and they do a fine job of it. So while this isn't a witch hunt where Staff have to justify their actions, we'd be more than happy to discuss why a particular action was taken, if anyone has specific questions.


Cheers
Mike

 

[big bad john]

If it were up to me Id have all the staff here at army.ca write a biography on themselves, military history, etc.   and have this available to the viewing public.   I think this could be interesting and give people an idea to who they have to bow down to and respect like the 6 star general of the united states of canada.

You do get a mini biography from your Profiles that you fill out.

 

[winchable]

Che, if you had a thread on the same topic about a year ago then wouldn't that suggest that there is a problem still in existance with this site?

When I said re-hashed I meant we have flame wars re-hashed over different topics that all boil down to personal insults over differeng viewpoints and the cause of these personal insults are people cannot behave and post in a civil and polite manner.
It's as much about how you say it as what you are saying here, this is because it's a faceless form of communication where you can't gage someones tone or mannerisms so you have to try a bit harder to be civil. (I was making no attempt to be civil in my previous post but it was partially...very partially in jest)

As for a mini-biography. Take a look at the profiles, all staff members have profiles filled out.
We don't ask for some god-like respect but we are extensions of the site owners as well as the majority of the posters, will. And as such we have to exercise what we gather the general feelings of the forum is. At this time we feel that these posters are the exception, we have recieved no PMs to the contrary and they have been shown very little public support.
However, if you do ever get a chance to bow down before a 6 star general, I'd like to hear.

TCBF(?) and Zoomie have supported the comments to a certain degree, as well as infanteer, of Madmax and Mo-Litia, Yet for some reason they have been able to keep a civil tongue and not infringe on guidelines...so any argument that we are being impartial and unfair to opposing views need only look to their profiles to see we are not arbitrarily banning and warning opposing viewpoints, so that's laughable.

See that's more or less what I wanted to say last night, even I needed a coke and a smile.
It seems a dead topic for a moment but I do feel I owe something of an explanation.