Discussion III about the Suspension List
October 19th, 2022 at 11:21:52 AM
permalink
Quote: unJon#FreeBillryan
link to original post
Applications for reinstatement following resignation are handled in private.
May the cards fall in your favor.
October 19th, 2022 at 11:26:18 AM
permalink
Quote: tuttigymThank you all. One more query, how about Mods that use a double standard and some hypocrisy in doling out those dastardly suspensions? BTW, easily proven.
tuttigym
link to original post
I don't pay as much attention as I used to, but there is going to be a non-zero amount of bias if the Admins are doing the job well. By that, I mean you look at the overall body of posting in deciding upon suspensions. You're also going to get a little bit more leeway in borderline cases if you're extremely active on the forums as more posts gives more opportunity for a minor slip up here or there.
Also, I can't say that the current Admins have the same approach I did, but a bunch of people teaming up trying to get one person gone, for me, made it that much less likely that I would get that person gone.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/gripes/11182-pet-peeves/120/#post815219
October 19th, 2022 at 11:28:10 AM
permalink
Quote: unJonQuote: SOOPOOQuote: tuttigymQuote: gordonm888Quote: tuttigymThank you all. One more query, how about Mods that use a double standard and some hypocrisy in doling out those dastardly suspensions? BTW, easily proven.
tuttigym
link to original post
I have been a moderator for over a year and I have been genuinely surprised at how much work and discussion goes into moderator decisions. Almost every decision is vetted with other moderators, and often affected by those discussions. If a moderator is angry over something than has been said, or frustrated with a pattern of behavior, they almost always declare their emotional state and allow the other moderators to decide the situation in a cooler, more clinical way. (OD was particularly religious about doing this and served as a model for Dieter and I.)
"Double standard" - Well, the Forum Rules are our overall single standard, but, as Dieter has said, we do make decisions on a case by case basis because there are lots of factors to consider when trying to be fair. If you feel we have been inconsistent, please give examples.
"doling out those dastardly suspensions" - well, the words 'dastardly' and 'doling' are alliterative, but are 3-day suspensions truly worthy of the adjective "dastardly"? Would "doling out those dinky suspensions" not have also worked?
"hypocrisy" - I'm really surprised by this allegation. If you wish to mention some examples, we're all ears.
link to original post
All right gordon888, I will start with you simply because I feel yours is the most blatant.
1. On Sept. 13, 2022 Page 20 of EB's Roulette thread you posted "The important feature of quoting is that you not change the meaning of what was said when abridging the original post in your quote that is, not change the meaning so as to misinform a conversation or to make someone look bad ...."
2. On Sept. 4, 2022 Page 272 of the General Sports Talk thread I, tuttigym, stated SPECIFICALLY (emphasis) "There is NO science that has actually linked steroids with batting/hitting performance."
3. On Sept. 4, 2022 Page 273 of the General Sports talk thread your post stated "Baseball analysts have studied the link between steroids and improved performance in MLB players." "Analysts" and not necessarily scientists. "Improved performance" is vague not specific and not targeted to any particular phase or skill within the sport. You did not link any such analysis to that statement nor name any author with the associated analysis. In short, you changed the specific meaning of my statement to include "scientific study on steroids that provides more fundamental understanding of their effect on athletic performance."
4. On Sept 6, 2022 Page 274 of the General Sports Talk thread "As I recall, you (tuttigym) have posted that you have very little math beyond the third grade level - so why are you lecturing us about the scientific process and what constitutes science proof?" That post presumes that you know me, my background, and my overall intellect. Do you not no satire? Should you not have been more prudent and asked me directly about my educational and athletic background before jumping to erroneous and false recollections? I have no idea what your educational levels are or any athletic participations might have been, so I would not assume any of what you assumed of me. Perhaps you could enlighten us all so that we might assess your competence in these fields.
5. The final sentence of that post states something that I never do, i.e., "ignore your opinion." I try to take opinions as learning opportunities -- sometimes positive and sometimes negative but never to be ignored.
6. On Page 274 of the General Sports Talk thread I, tuttigym, responded with a portion of relevant sports science background and other info. gordon888 response ..... crickets.
There is a little more to this but I need to do some more research to be accurate, so to be continued.
tuttigym
link to original post
TLDR. (I skimmed some). This can’t be doing YOU any good! I can’t remember who coined the phrase… but…. “Get a life!”
As far as favoritism…. OF COURSE there is favoritism. The moderators and the Wiz will give more rope to a valuable poster, like Mickey Crimm, KEWLJ, BillyRyan before giving them the axe. Posters without a history of valuable posts would have been axed sooner.
link to original post
#FreeBillryan
link to original post
Has anyone heard from Bill? I tried texting him a few times, but got nothing.
♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
October 19th, 2022 at 11:44:55 AM
permalink
Quote: tuttigymQuote: gordonm888Quote: tuttigymThank you all. One more query, how about Mods that use a double standard and some hypocrisy in doling out those dastardly suspensions? BTW, easily proven.
tuttigym
link to original post
I have been a moderator for over a year and I have been genuinely surprised at how much work and discussion goes into moderator decisions. Almost every decision is vetted with other moderators, and often affected by those discussions. If a moderator is angry over something than has been said, or frustrated with a pattern of behavior, they almost always declare their emotional state and allow the other moderators to decide the situation in a cooler, more clinical way. (OD was particularly religious about doing this and served as a model for Dieter and I.)
"Double standard" - Well, the Forum Rules are our overall single standard, but, as Dieter has said, we do make decisions on a case by case basis because there are lots of factors to consider when trying to be fair. If you feel we have been inconsistent, please give examples.
"doling out those dastardly suspensions" - well, the words 'dastardly' and 'doling' are alliterative, but are 3-day suspensions truly worthy of the adjective "dastardly"? Would "doling out those dinky suspensions" not have also worked?
"hypocrisy" - I'm really surprised by this allegation. If you wish to mention some examples, we're all ears.
link to original post
All right gordon888, I will start with you simply because I feel yours is the most blatant.
1. On Sept. 13, 2022 Page 20 of EB's Roulette thread you posted "The important feature of quoting is that you not change the meaning of what was said when abridging the original post in your quote that is, not change the meaning so as to misinform a conversation or to make someone look bad ...."
2. On Sept. 4, 2022 Page 272 of the General Sports Talk thread I, tuttigym, stated SPECIFICALLY (emphasis) "There is NO science that has actually linked steroids with batting/hitting performance."
3. On Sept. 4, 2022 Page 273 of the General Sports talk thread your post stated "Baseball analysts have studied the link between steroids and improved performance in MLB players." "Analysts" and not necessarily scientists. "Improved performance" is vague not specific and not targeted to any particular phase or skill within the sport. You did not link any such analysis to that statement nor name any author with the associated analysis. In short, you changed the specific meaning of my statement to include "scientific study on steroids that provides more fundamental understanding of their effect on athletic performance."
4. On Sept 6, 2022 Page 274 of the General Sports Talk thread "As I recall, you (tuttigym) have posted that you have very little math beyond the third grade level - so why are you lecturing us about the scientific process and what constitutes science proof?" That post presumes that you know me, my background, and my overall intellect. Do you not no satire? Should you not have been more prudent and asked me directly about my educational and athletic background before jumping to erroneous and false recollections? I have no idea what your educational levels are or any athletic participations might have been, so I would not assume any of what you assumed of me. Perhaps you could enlighten us all so that we might assess your competence in these fields.
5. The final sentence of that post states something that I never do, i.e., "ignore your opinion." I try to take opinions as learning opportunities -- sometimes positive and sometimes negative but never to be ignored.
6. On Page 274 of the General Sports Talk thread I, tuttigym, responded with a portion of relevant sports science background and other info. gordon888 response ..... crickets.
There is a little more to this but I need to do some more research to be accurate, so to be continued.
tuttigym
link to original post
I think you are not understanding a rule. The rule about changing quotes refers to the practice of hitting the quote button on a person's post and then changing the wording of the post so as to falsify or change the meaning of the other person's post.
In the example that you cite, on p273 of the General Sports Talk thread, I did indeed quote/show your entire post without any abridgement or alterations.
You had made a statement "There is NO science that has actually linked steroids with batting/hitting performance." and I quoted it in full and I responded "Baseball analysts have studied the link between steroids and improved performance in MLB players." and you claim that because I used the word "analysts" and you were discussing "scientists" that this constitutes "misquoting" of your post? Am I correctly understanding your grieivance?
My view: What occurred on p273 of General Sports thread was a discussion about the link between PEDs and sports performance. You and I disagreed with each other on that subject and you seem to feel that my response did not satisfactorily address specific aspects of the statements that you posted. Fair enough, that sometimes happens in social media. But I certainly maintain that I did not violate Rule 17 by misquoting you. I will ask Dieter or Wizard to review the exchange and will self-suspend myself if they judge that I did indeed break a rule.
In the p273 exchange I did indeed call your statements "nonsense." I realize that was harsh and I am sorry if I hurt your feelings. I was speaking as a forum member who strongly disagreed with you on a subject in which I thought that no one had a personal stake. You are free to dislike me, but I will continue to bear no ill will towards you.
So many better men, a few of them friends, are dead. And a thousand thousand slimy things live on, and so do I.
October 19th, 2022 at 11:46:40 AM
permalink
He recently Joined DT and reached out to me. I pointed him in the right direction to achieve your proposed objective.Quote: AxelWolfQuote: unJonQuote: SOOPOOQuote: tuttigymQuote: gordonm888Quote: tuttigymThank you all. One more query, how about Mods that use a double standard and some hypocrisy in doling out those dastardly suspensions? BTW, easily proven.
tuttigym
link to original post
I have been a moderator for over a year and I have been genuinely surprised at how much work and discussion goes into moderator decisions. Almost every decision is vetted with other moderators, and often affected by those discussions. If a moderator is angry over something than has been said, or frustrated with a pattern of behavior, they almost always declare their emotional state and allow the other moderators to decide the situation in a cooler, more clinical way. (OD was particularly religious about doing this and served as a model for Dieter and I.)
"Double standard" - Well, the Forum Rules are our overall single standard, but, as Dieter has said, we do make decisions on a case by case basis because there are lots of factors to consider when trying to be fair. If you feel we have been inconsistent, please give examples.
"doling out those dastardly suspensions" - well, the words 'dastardly' and 'doling' are alliterative, but are 3-day suspensions truly worthy of the adjective "dastardly"? Would "doling out those dinky suspensions" not have also worked?
"hypocrisy" - I'm really surprised by this allegation. If you wish to mention some examples, we're all ears.
link to original post
All right gordon888, I will start with you simply because I feel yours is the most blatant.
1. On Sept. 13, 2022 Page 20 of EB's Roulette thread you posted "The important feature of quoting is that you not change the meaning of what was said when abridging the original post in your quote that is, not change the meaning so as to misinform a conversation or to make someone look bad ...."
2. On Sept. 4, 2022 Page 272 of the General Sports Talk thread I, tuttigym, stated SPECIFICALLY (emphasis) "There is NO science that has actually linked steroids with batting/hitting performance."
3. On Sept. 4, 2022 Page 273 of the General Sports talk thread your post stated "Baseball analysts have studied the link between steroids and improved performance in MLB players." "Analysts" and not necessarily scientists. "Improved performance" is vague not specific and not targeted to any particular phase or skill within the sport. You did not link any such analysis to that statement nor name any author with the associated analysis. In short, you changed the specific meaning of my statement to include "scientific study on steroids that provides more fundamental understanding of their effect on athletic performance."
4. On Sept 6, 2022 Page 274 of the General Sports Talk thread "As I recall, you (tuttigym) have posted that you have very little math beyond the third grade level - so why are you lecturing us about the scientific process and what constitutes science proof?" That post presumes that you know me, my background, and my overall intellect. Do you not no satire? Should you not have been more prudent and asked me directly about my educational and athletic background before jumping to erroneous and false recollections? I have no idea what your educational levels are or any athletic participations might have been, so I would not assume any of what you assumed of me. Perhaps you could enlighten us all so that we might assess your competence in these fields.
5. The final sentence of that post states something that I never do, i.e., "ignore your opinion." I try to take opinions as learning opportunities -- sometimes positive and sometimes negative but never to be ignored.
6. On Page 274 of the General Sports Talk thread I, tuttigym, responded with a portion of relevant sports science background and other info. gordon888 response ..... crickets.
There is a little more to this but I need to do some more research to be accurate, so to be continued.
tuttigym
link to original post
TLDR. (I skimmed some). This can’t be doing YOU any good! I can’t remember who coined the phrase… but…. “Get a life!”
As far as favoritism…. OF COURSE there is favoritism. The moderators and the Wiz will give more rope to a valuable poster, like Mickey Crimm, KEWLJ, BillyRyan before giving them the axe. Posters without a history of valuable posts would have been axed sooner.
link to original post
#FreeBillryan
link to original post
Has anyone heard from Bill? I tried texting him a few times, but got nothing.
link to original post
Psalm 25:16
Turn to me and be gracious to me, for I am lonely and afflicted.
Proverbs 18:2
A fool finds no satisfaction in trying to understand, for he would rather express his own opinion.
October 19th, 2022 at 12:47:23 PM
permalink
BillRyan has been released.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
October 19th, 2022 at 2:04:22 PM
permalink
wow.. someone who resigned that didnt create an easily traceable 2nd acct to get perm-banned?Quote: WizardBillRyan has been released.
link to original post
Craps is paradise (Pair of dice).
Lets hear it for the SpeedCount Mathletes :)
October 19th, 2022 at 2:56:33 PM
permalink
Quote: gordonm888Quote: tuttigymQuote: gordonm888Quote: tuttigymThank you all. One more query, how about Mods that use a double standard and some hypocrisy in doling out those dastardly suspensions? BTW, easily proven.
tuttigym
link to original post
I have been a moderator for over a year and I have been genuinely surprised at how much work and discussion goes into moderator decisions. Almost every decision is vetted with other moderators, and often affected by those discussions. If a moderator is angry over something than has been said, or frustrated with a pattern of behavior, they almost always declare their emotional state and allow the other moderators to decide the situation in a cooler, more clinical way. (OD was particularly religious about doing this and served as a model for Dieter and I.)
"Double standard" - Well, the Forum Rules are our overall single standard, but, as Dieter has said, we do make decisions on a case by case basis because there are lots of factors to consider when trying to be fair. If you feel we have been inconsistent, please give examples.
"doling out those dastardly suspensions" - well, the words 'dastardly' and 'doling' are alliterative, but are 3-day suspensions truly worthy of the adjective "dastardly"? Would "doling out those dinky suspensions" not have also worked?
"hypocrisy" - I'm really surprised by this allegation. If you wish to mention some examples, we're all ears.
link to original post
All right gordon888, I will start with you simply because I feel yours is the most blatant.
1. On Sept. 13, 2022 Page 20 of EB's Roulette thread you posted "The important feature of quoting is that you not change the meaning of what was said when abridging the original post in your quote that is, not change the meaning so as to misinform a conversation or to make someone look bad ...."
2. On Sept. 4, 2022 Page 272 of the General Sports Talk thread I, tuttigym, stated SPECIFICALLY (emphasis) "There is NO science that has actually linked steroids with batting/hitting performance."
3. On Sept. 4, 2022 Page 273 of the General Sports talk thread your post stated "Baseball analysts have studied the link between steroids and improved performance in MLB players." "Analysts" and not necessarily scientists. "Improved performance" is vague not specific and not targeted to any particular phase or skill within the sport. You did not link any such analysis to that statement nor name any author with the associated analysis. In short, you changed the specific meaning of my statement to include "scientific study on steroids that provides more fundamental understanding of their effect on athletic performance."
4. On Sept 6, 2022 Page 274 of the General Sports Talk thread "As I recall, you (tuttigym) have posted that you have very little math beyond the third grade level - so why are you lecturing us about the scientific process and what constitutes science proof?" That post presumes that you know me, my background, and my overall intellect. Do you not no satire? Should you not have been more prudent and asked me directly about my educational and athletic background before jumping to erroneous and false recollections? I have no idea what your educational levels are or any athletic participations might have been, so I would not assume any of what you assumed of me. Perhaps you could enlighten us all so that we might assess your competence in these fields.
5. The final sentence of that post states something that I never do, i.e., "ignore your opinion." I try to take opinions as learning opportunities -- sometimes positive and sometimes negative but never to be ignored.
6. On Page 274 of the General Sports Talk thread I, tuttigym, responded with a portion of relevant sports science background and other info. gordon888 response ..... crickets.
There is a little more to this but I need to do some more research to be accurate, so to be continued.
tuttigym
link to original post
I think you are not understanding a rule. The rule about changing quotes refers to the practice of hitting the quote button on a person's post and then changing the wording of the post so as to falsify or change the meaning of the other person's post.
In the example that you cite, on p273 of the General Sports Talk thread, I did indeed quote/show your entire post without any abridgement or alterations.
You had made a statement "There is NO science that has actually linked steroids with batting/hitting performance." and I quoted it in full and I responded "Baseball analysts have studied the link between steroids and improved performance in MLB players." and you claim that because I used the word "analysts" and you were discussing "scientists" that this constitutes "misquoting" of your post? Am I correctly understanding your grieivance?
My view: What occurred on p273 of General Sports thread was a discussion about the link between PEDs and sports performance. You and I disagreed with each other on that subject and you seem to feel that my response did not satisfactorily address specific aspects of the statements that you posted. Fair enough, that sometimes happens in social media. But I certainly maintain that I did not violate Rule 17 by misquoting you. I will ask Dieter or Wizard to review the exchange and will self-suspend myself if they judge that I did indeed break a rule.
In the p273 exchange I did indeed call your statements "nonsense." I realize that was harsh and I am sorry if I hurt your feelings. I was speaking as a forum member who strongly disagreed with you on a subject in which I thought that no one had a personal stake. You are free to dislike me, but I will continue to bear no ill will towards you.
link to original post
First, I do not wish for you to "self-suspend." For me you are a valuable member of this forum. I will continue the with the protest to complete my position and then respond to your current rbuttal.
Sept 6, 2022 Page 275 of the Greater Sports Talk thread lilredrooster posted a link to an article which WAS science based with a firm conclusion that "Physics CANNOT (emphasis) tell us whether a particular home run was steroid -assisted, or even whether an extraordinary individual performance indicates the use of illicit means." The article goes on to say that analysis of physics and physiology does yield results. "These results certainly do NOT (emphasis) prove that recent performances are tainted, but they suggest that some SUSPICION (emphsis) is reasonable." Which I highlighted.
Sept 6, 2022 Page 275 of the Greater Sports Talk thread I offered my own experience in weight training and was good naturedly mocked but summarily called a liar.
Sept 6, 2022 Page 275 I said an unkind retort but not, in my view, an insult. I also asked gordon888 if he had read the posted link and my valid assessment. gordon888...crickets.
Sept 6, 2022 Page 275 gordon888 issued a suspension. All of that occurred in the span of about 30-45 minutes.
My SUSPICION (emphasis) was that gordon888 retaliated for my one-upmanship.
Quote: gordon888
You had made a statement "There is NO science that has actually linked steroids with batting/hitting performance." and I quoted it in full and I responded "Baseball analysts have studied the link between steroids and improved performance in MLB players." and you claim that because I used the word "analysts" and you were discussing "scientists" that this constitutes "misquoting" of your post? Am I correctly understanding your grieivance?
No, I do not feel that the above is misquoting. It is replacing true scientific experimentation with sports reporting and conjecture. The only grievance I have is your word choice.
Quote: gordon888In the p273 exchange I did indeed call your statements "nonsense." I realize that was harsh and I am sorry if I hurt your feelings. I was speaking as a forum member who strongly disagreed with you on a subject in which I thought that no one had a personal stake. You are free to dislike me, but I will continue to bear no ill will towards you.
You did NOT "hurt my feelings." As far as a personal stake, I have been fighting this battle of home runs/steroids for several years challenging the sports writing establishment at every turn as well as others because I believe they are cheating Bonds, et al out of their rightful place in the HOF. Finally, I do NOT "dislike" you, and I will continue to read what you post.
tuttigym
October 19th, 2022 at 3:02:40 PM
permalink
Quote: SOOPOOTLDR. (I skimmed some). This can’t be doing YOU any good! I can’t remember who coined the phrase… but…. “Get a life!”
As far as favoritism…. OF COURSE there is favoritism. The moderators and the Wiz will give more rope to a valuable poster, like Mickey Crimm, KEWLJ, BillyRyan before giving them the axe. Posters without a history of valuable posts would have been axed sooner.
Yet you read and respond to every word. Quite flattering.
I know there is favoritism. "Valuable poster" is in the eye of the reader. One does not have to like it though.
tuttigym
October 19th, 2022 at 7:05:11 PM
permalink
Tuttigym, let me please suggest that if you want to continue to debate the issues of steroids vs athletic performance, that the General Sports thread would be the correct place to post on that subject. Not here. This thread is designated to be about discussion of suspensions and moderator policy.
Also, the topic of steroids in sports is not an issue that I feel passionate about, so I intend to refrain from stating any further disagreement with you on that topic.
Live long and prosper.
Also, the topic of steroids in sports is not an issue that I feel passionate about, so I intend to refrain from stating any further disagreement with you on that topic.
Live long and prosper.
So many better men, a few of them friends, are dead. And a thousand thousand slimy things live on, and so do I.
October 19th, 2022 at 7:59:49 PM
permalink
Quote: tuttigym
2. On Sept. 4, 2022 Page 272 of the General Sports Talk thread I, tuttigym, stated SPECIFICALLY (emphasis) "There is NO science that has actually linked steroids with batting/hitting performance."
That is false. Sports science has proved the ball travels farther when performance enhancing drugs are used. It's generally agreed that it adds an extra 10 feet or so per 100. Meaning a 310 foot fly out turns into a 340 foot homerun in some ballparks. There is zero questions PED's improve play.
ZCore13
I am an employee of a Casino. Former Table Games Director,, current Pit Supervisor. All the personal opinions I post are my own and do not represent the opinions of the Casino or Tribe that I work for.
October 19th, 2022 at 8:34:44 PM
permalink
Quote: gordonm888Tuttigym, let me please suggest that if you want to continue to debate the issues of steroids vs athletic performance, that the General Sports thread would be the correct place to post on that subject. Not here. This thread is designated to be about discussion of suspensions and moderator policy.
Also, the topic of steroids in sports is not an issue that I feel passionate about, so I intend to refrain from stating any further disagreement with you on that topic.
Live long and prosper.
link to original post
I got the impression that Tuttigym was citing examples of moderators not properly representing what he posted.
October 19th, 2022 at 10:07:12 PM
permalink
Quote: AlanMendelsonQuote: gordonm888Tuttigym, let me please suggest that if you want to continue to debate the issues of steroids vs athletic performance, that the General Sports thread would be the correct place to post on that subject. Not here. This thread is designated to be about discussion of suspensions and moderator policy.
Also, the topic of steroids in sports is not an issue that I feel passionate about, so I intend to refrain from stating any further disagreement with you on that topic.
Live long and prosper.
link to original post
I got the impression that Tuttigym was citing examples of moderators not properly representing what he posted.
link to original post
I concur.
October 20th, 2022 at 7:32:42 AM
permalink
Quote: AlanMendelsonQuote: gordonm888Tuttigym, let me please suggest that if you want to continue to debate the issues of steroids vs athletic performance, that the General Sports thread would be the correct place to post on that subject. Not here. This thread is designated to be about discussion of suspensions and moderator policy.
Also, the topic of steroids in sports is not an issue that I feel passionate about, so I intend to refrain from stating any further disagreement with you on that topic.
Live long and prosper.
link to original post
I got the impression that Tuttigym was citing examples of moderators not properly representing what he posted.
link to original post
I frequently post in the sports thread as a participant in the discussions. I was not moderating at the time. I posted and quoted tuttigym's post on how steroids do not affect athletic performance - tuttigym's post was correctly displayed in unaltered form . I followed his quoted post with a presentation of my views on the subject of steroids in sports, disagreeing with tuttigym. tuttigym is now claiming that my comments on steroids in sports were not fully responsive to what he was saying. But no one disputes the fact that his post was quoted completely and with 100% accuracy by me (which is what Rule 17 is about).
This was a disagreement between tuttigym and I about whether steroids have been proven to affect athletic performance. I claim that his posted grievance with me has nothing to do with my performance as a moderator and that we are all free to disagree with each other about The 2 Dice Problem or EvenBob's Roulette Method or whether Babe Ruth was better than Hank Aaron. I claim it is prima facie obvious that, on page 273, I did indeed properly quote the tuttigym post I was responding to when I used the "quote post" functionality of this website - which is the intent of Rule 17. Rule 17 does not require a moderator to agree with you on whether Ruth was better than Aaron or to have a supernatural understanding of what you meant in your post when arguing with you about your views on steroids and athletic performance.
As a moderator, I feel very uncomfortable addressing allegations against me. I am still waiting for either Wizard or Dieter to check in with their perspectives.
So many better men, a few of them friends, are dead. And a thousand thousand slimy things live on, and so do I.
October 20th, 2022 at 7:57:16 AM
permalink
Quote: gordonm888Quote: AlanMendelsonQuote: gordonm888Tuttigym, let me please suggest that if you want to continue to debate the issues of steroids vs athletic performance, that the General Sports thread would be the correct place to post on that subject. Not here. This thread is designated to be about discussion of suspensions and moderator policy.
Also, the topic of steroids in sports is not an issue that I feel passionate about, so I intend to refrain from stating any further disagreement with you on that topic.
Live long and prosper.
link to original post
I got the impression that Tuttigym was citing examples of moderators not properly representing what he posted.
link to original post
I frequently post in the sports thread as a participant in the discussions. I was not moderating at the time. I posted and quoted tuttigym's post on how steroids do not affect athletic performance - tuttigym's post was correctly displayed in unaltered form . I followed his quoted post with a presentation of my views on the subject of steroids in sports, disagreeing with tuttigym. tuttigym is now claiming that my comments on steroids in sports were not fully responsive to what he was saying. But no one disputes the fact that his post was quoted completely and with 100% accuracy by me (which is what Rule 17 is about).
This was a disagreement between tuttigym and I about whether steroids have been proven to affect athletic performance. I claim that his posted grievance with me has nothing to do with my performance as a moderator and that we are all free to disagree with each other about The 2 Dice Problem or EvenBob's Roulette Method or whether Babe Ruth was better than Hank Aaron. I claim it is prima facie obvious that, on page 273, I did indeed properly quote the tuttigym post I was responding to when I used the "quote post" functionality of this website - which is the intent of Rule 17. Rule 17 does not require a moderator to agree with you on whether Ruth was better than Aaron or to have a supernatural understanding of what you meant in your post when arguing with you about your views on steroids and athletic performance.
As a moderator, I feel very uncomfortable addressing allegations against me. I am still waiting for either Wizard or Dieter to check in with their perspectives.
link to original post
Tough job when you are required to moderate the way this forum requires.
OnceDear and yourself were/ are top two mods in my opinion.
October 20th, 2022 at 8:01:43 AM
permalink
Quote: tuttigym
My SUSPICION (emphasis) was that gordon888 retaliated for my one-upmanship.
link to original post
According to my message log, this was reviewed by other moderators and the suspension was not deemed retaliatory at that time.
Gordon was in thread, Gordon responded.
Other moderators reviewed the response and deemed it appropriate.
If it was deemed retaliatory, I'm pretty sure the suspension would have been quickly reversed with an apology.
May the cards fall in your favor.
October 20th, 2022 at 8:09:10 AM
permalink
Never knew this guy was a mod (or existed).
I tell you it’s wonderful to be here, man. I don’t give a damn who wins or loses. It’s just wonderful to be here with you people.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/betting-systems/33908-the-adventures-of-mdawg/
October 20th, 2022 at 8:14:35 AM
permalink
Quote: gordonm888 Trimmed for brevity only.
I frequently post in the sports thread as a participant in the discussions. I was not moderating at the time.....
link to original post
Gordon, Now you know that as long as your ID shows as green, you are posting as a moderator, representing the moderator team. You are always in uniform and always on duty. That's a price you pay. That's also why you get the big bucks $:o)
Psalm 25:16
Turn to me and be gracious to me, for I am lonely and afflicted.
Proverbs 18:2
A fool finds no satisfaction in trying to understand, for he would rather express his own opinion.
October 20th, 2022 at 9:02:53 AM
permalink
There are a few Backroom guys with various administrative powers. He and they do not make moderating decisions, which are left to Wizard, Dieter, Gordonm888 and a small number of unnamed moderators with limited powers.Quote: MDawgNever knew this guy was a mod (or existed).
link to original post
Any member with green status Could moderate. E.g. BeachBumBabs, but they don't.
IIRC, even Zuga, the owner, does not involve himself except for one historic situation.
Psalm 25:16
Turn to me and be gracious to me, for I am lonely and afflicted.
Proverbs 18:2
A fool finds no satisfaction in trying to understand, for he would rather express his own opinion.
October 20th, 2022 at 9:14:29 AM
permalink
Quote: Zcore13Quote: tuttigym
2. On Sept. 4, 2022 Page 272 of the General Sports Talk thread I, tuttigym, stated SPECIFICALLY (emphasis) "There is NO science that has actually linked steroids with batting/hitting performance."
That is false. Sports science has proved the ball travels farther when performance enhancing drugs are used. It's generally agreed that it adds an extra 10 feet or so per 100. Meaning a 310 foot fly out turns into a 340 foot homerun in some ballparks. There is zero questions PED's improve play.
ZCore13
link to original post
Take this post to the other thread, and I will comment and have that conversation.
tuttigym
October 20th, 2022 at 9:21:29 AM
permalink
Quote: gordon888
I frequently post in the sports thread as a participant in the discussions. I was not moderating at the time. I posted and quoted tuttigym's post on how steroids do not affect athletic performance - tuttigym's post was correctly displayed in unaltered form . I followed his quoted post with a presentation of my views on the subject of steroids in sports, disagreeing with tuttigym. tuttigym is now claiming that my comments on steroids in sports were not fully responsive to what he was saying. But no one disputes the fact that his post was quoted completely and with 100% accuracy by me (which is what Rule 17 is about).
You produced the quote but then moved the goalposts to infer that my position included all baseball performance was not enhanced with steroid use. At that point, you made your argument. To me that was a dishonest post.
BTW the timeline posts above were not to produce an additional conversation about the subject in question but to illuminate how my dispute arose.
While Rule 17 allows for the re-production of a quote, I guess that it is therefore okay to distort that quote rather than to ask the OP to further explain, clarify, or amplify.
tuttigym
October 28th, 2022 at 8:53:07 AM
permalink
Here is a new one for the books, just after being processed for release, and catching just a few rays of the warm Vegas sunlight (well, not so warm was about fifty degrees yesterday in the early morning), a detainer was placed for new charges (that date from the same date as the first offense). Back to holding (or is it called intake?) and the strip tank! We could create a new show called WOV JAIL over all these suspensions, like COPS (I hate that show actually).
I tell you it’s wonderful to be here, man. I don’t give a damn who wins or loses. It’s just wonderful to be here with you people.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/betting-systems/33908-the-adventures-of-mdawg/
October 29th, 2022 at 3:27:11 PM
permalink
I read FTB's recent posts and they might be construed as trolling MDawg.
However, I cannot understand why Wizard deemed this a personal insult... It's too subtle for me.
Do I have to go and watch the movie Casino again? I did google Ace Rothstein.
https://villains.fandom.com/wiki/Ace_Rothstein
Ace Rothstein is a Mafia connected villain. Didn't FTB compliment MDawg on not being a Mafia connected villain?
If I were to tell a member that he was "Not Atticus Finch in To Kill A Mockingbird", would that rise to the level of personal insult? I'm not saying that, and have no member in mind, so nothing implied there. I just want to know how this whole "You are not" personal insult works?
Or did MDawg claim to be Robert De Niro and FTB called him a liar?
However, I cannot understand why Wizard deemed this a personal insult... It's too subtle for me.
Do I have to go and watch the movie Casino again? I did google Ace Rothstein.
https://villains.fandom.com/wiki/Ace_Rothstein
Ace Rothstein is a Mafia connected villain. Didn't FTB compliment MDawg on not being a Mafia connected villain?
If I were to tell a member that he was "Not Atticus Finch in To Kill A Mockingbird", would that rise to the level of personal insult? I'm not saying that, and have no member in mind, so nothing implied there. I just want to know how this whole "You are not" personal insult works?
Or did MDawg claim to be Robert De Niro and FTB called him a liar?
Quote: WizardQuote: FTBYou're not Robert DeNiro (Ace Rothstein) in Casino. At all....
link to original post
Personal insult. Three-day suspension.
link to original post
Psalm 25:16
Turn to me and be gracious to me, for I am lonely and afflicted.
Proverbs 18:2
A fool finds no satisfaction in trying to understand, for he would rather express his own opinion.
October 29th, 2022 at 3:33:49 PM
permalink
Send not for whom the bells toll.
The difference between fiction and reality is that fiction is supposed to make sense.
October 29th, 2022 at 4:32:11 PM
permalink
Since Wiz has met MDawg, maybe he checked his ID and it says Robert DeNiro, or Bananarama, or something.
Bananarama - Robert De Niro's Waiting (Official Video) - 1984 - YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H87yGvoCNHU
Bananarama - Robert De Niro's Waiting (Official Video) - 1984 - YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H87yGvoCNHU
Last edited by: ChumpChange on Oct 29, 2022
October 29th, 2022 at 4:53:12 PM
permalink
Quote: ChumpChangeSince Wiz has met MDawg, maybe he checked his ID and it says Robert DeNiro, or Bananarama, or something.
link to original post
I'm surprised anyone over on your side of the pond has heard of Bananarama.
https://www.bananarama.co.uk/
This puts Wizard in a Bind. If he knows MDawg to be Robert DeNiro, he cannot reveal that knowledge because of anti-Doxing rules :)
We have some circumstantial evidence that MDawg is not Robert DeNiro. But has anyone ever seen them in the same room at the same time? Ask yourself why.
I'm still unsure whether I'm allowed to say that a member is not bananarama, especially if that member believes himself to be so.
Psalm 25:16
Turn to me and be gracious to me, for I am lonely and afflicted.
Proverbs 18:2
A fool finds no satisfaction in trying to understand, for he would rather express his own opinion.
October 29th, 2022 at 5:40:22 PM
permalink
Bananarama was all the rage here in the states back in the late eighties.
Venus in particular still gets some airplay.
Venus in particular still gets some airplay.
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
October 29th, 2022 at 9:01:03 PM
permalink
Quote: darkozBananarama was all the rage here in the states back in the late eighties.
Venus in particular still gets some airplay.
link to original post
All the top British Bands get big play over here since the beginning
of time. We'll cut him a little slack for not knowing this heck
the poor guy still thinks there are people on this planet who have
special/Royal blood. :)
October 29th, 2022 at 9:28:30 PM
permalink
Although, in the US we call them Buh-nan-uh-ram-uh while Brits call them Buh-naw-nuh-raw-muh.
Have you tried 22 tonight? I said 22.
October 30th, 2022 at 3:11:17 AM
permalink
I never thought of Bananarama as a top British Band, more of a pop group.Quote: rainmanQuote: darkozBananarama was all the rage here in the states back in the late eighties.
Venus in particular still gets some airplay.
link to original post
All the top British Bands get big play over here since the beginning
of time. We'll cut him a little slack for not knowing this heck
the poor guy still thinks there are people on this planet who have
special/Royal blood. :)
link to original post
King Charles does not fart. He has a man do it for him. $:o) Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth never went to the toilet at all, she had a whole team of chamber maids do that for her.
Oh hum. I guess, to get back on topic.... I re-ask Wizard where FTB's insult lay?
Psalm 25:16
Turn to me and be gracious to me, for I am lonely and afflicted.
Proverbs 18:2
A fool finds no satisfaction in trying to understand, for he would rather express his own opinion.
October 30th, 2022 at 7:00:22 AM
permalink
Quote: GialmereAlthough, in the US we call them Buh-nan-uh-ram-uh while Brits call them Buh-naw-nuh-raw-muh.
link to original post
I always pronounced them banana-rama. To be honest, I didn't know they were British. Us Americans were very familiar with them in the 80's. They were all over MTV with Cruel Summer, Na-na-hey-hey, and Robert De Niro's Waiting. Often the discussion came up, in high school, of who did you like better -- The GoGo's or Bananarama. I went with the GoGo's.
Thank you for the trip down memory lane.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
October 30th, 2022 at 8:29:33 AM
permalink
Quote: Wizard
I always pronounced them banana-rama. To be honest, I didn't know they were British. Us Americans were very familiar with them in the 80's. They were all over MTV with Cruel Summer, Na-na-hey-hey, and Robert De Niro's Waiting. Often the discussion came up, in high school, of who did you like better -- The GoGo's or Bananarama. I went with the GoGo's.
Thank you for the trip down memory lane.
link to original post
Hi Wizard, Nice to see you in this thread.
I'd never heard of the GoGo's.
Now, Please Wizard, could you help me understand why FTB got suspended for saying that MDawg is not a fictional Mafia connected villain.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/info/rules/36338-discussion-iii-about-the-suspension-list/128/
Psalm 25:16
Turn to me and be gracious to me, for I am lonely and afflicted.
Proverbs 18:2
A fool finds no satisfaction in trying to understand, for he would rather express his own opinion.
October 30th, 2022 at 10:40:56 AM
permalink
Quote: OnceDearI'd never heard of the GoGo's.
You've got to be kidding! They were the biggest girl group of the 80's. At least on this side of the Atlantic. Surely this at least rings a bell.
Direct: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3kQlzOi27M
Now, Please Wizard, could you help me understand why FTB got suspended for saying that MDawg is not a fictional Mafia connected villain.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/info/rules/36338-discussion-iii-about-the-suspension-list/128/
link to original post
It was the entirely of his post. I probably should have quoted the whole thing in my sentencing post, which I later did. However, just the Robert De Niro comment was enough. If you say to someone, for example, "You're not exactly Clint Eastwood," I interpret it to mean you're pretty much the opposite of Clint Eastwood. As you know, my rule of thumb is I put myself in the victims shoes and if I would have felt insulted, then it's an insult. I do not need to explain why, but out of respect for you, I will at least address this one.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
October 30th, 2022 at 10:54:44 AM
permalink
Nope. I'm familiar with the song, not the group.Quote: WizardQuote: OnceDearI'd never heard of the GoGo's.
You've got to be kidding! They were the biggest girl group of the 80's. At least on this side of the Atlantic. Surely this at least rings a bell.
Quote:
It was the entirely of his post. I probably should have quoted the whole thing in my sentencing post, which I later did. However, just the Robert De Niro comment was enough. If you say to someone, for example, "You're not exactly Clint Eastwood," I interpret it to mean you're pretty much the opposite of Clint Eastwood. As you know, my rule of thumb is I put myself in the victims shoes and if I would have felt insulted, then it's an insult. I do not need to explain why, but out of respect for you, I will at least address this one.
link to original post
Thank you.
I see that the entirety of his post was disrespectful to MDawg.I already acknowledged that. I suggest that maybe you should have quoted more.
Thank you for the thorough answer.
Of course, you don't need to explain your decisions, but clarity helps avoid inadvertent infringement and potential accusations of favoritism.
Psalm 25:16
Turn to me and be gracious to me, for I am lonely and afflicted.
Proverbs 18:2
A fool finds no satisfaction in trying to understand, for he would rather express his own opinion.
October 30th, 2022 at 11:01:12 AM
permalink
"Our Lips Are Sealed" is a song co-written by Jane Wiedlin, guitarist of the Go-Go's, and Terry Hall, singer of the Specials and Fun Boy Three.
It was first recorded by the Go-Go's as the opening track on their album Beauty and the Beat (1981) and was their debut American single in June 1981. The single eventually reached the top 5 in Australia and Canada, and the top 20 in the United States. Although originally written and performed with three verses,[2] an abbreviated version of the song appears on Beauty and the Beat. Although most of the song's lead vocals are performed by usual lead singer Belinda Carlisle, co-writer Wiedlin sings the bridge.
In 1983, Hall's band, Fun Boy Three, released their version of "Our Lips Are Sealed". Issued as a single, the track became a top ten hit in the United Kingdom and remains the best known version of the song in that country. The recording by the Go-Go's, while a bigger hit elsewhere, only made No. 47 in the UK.
***************************
This is the version I was playing on my car phone this summer, then I heard it on the local casino PA.
Our Lips Are Sealed [Official video] - Fun Boy Three and The Go-Go's (HD/HQ) - YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRdXZMO4zxY
BTW, I did see the Go-Gos in concert in mid-1982. I was getting cheap concert tickets for the summer. Fun Boy Three's version came out in the UK in April 1983.
It was first recorded by the Go-Go's as the opening track on their album Beauty and the Beat (1981) and was their debut American single in June 1981. The single eventually reached the top 5 in Australia and Canada, and the top 20 in the United States. Although originally written and performed with three verses,[2] an abbreviated version of the song appears on Beauty and the Beat. Although most of the song's lead vocals are performed by usual lead singer Belinda Carlisle, co-writer Wiedlin sings the bridge.
In 1983, Hall's band, Fun Boy Three, released their version of "Our Lips Are Sealed". Issued as a single, the track became a top ten hit in the United Kingdom and remains the best known version of the song in that country. The recording by the Go-Go's, while a bigger hit elsewhere, only made No. 47 in the UK.
***************************
This is the version I was playing on my car phone this summer, then I heard it on the local casino PA.
Our Lips Are Sealed [Official video] - Fun Boy Three and The Go-Go's (HD/HQ) - YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRdXZMO4zxY
BTW, I did see the Go-Gos in concert in mid-1982. I was getting cheap concert tickets for the summer. Fun Boy Three's version came out in the UK in April 1983.
Last edited by: ChumpChange on Oct 30, 2022
October 30th, 2022 at 11:10:02 AM
permalink
When Mick Jagger first performed for the studio execs, one of them dismissed him with a, "Well, he ain't no Sammy Davis."
I tell you it’s wonderful to be here, man. I don’t give a damn who wins or loses. It’s just wonderful to be here with you people.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/betting-systems/33908-the-adventures-of-mdawg/
November 11th, 2022 at 4:53:11 AM
permalink
Time to free EvenBob.
November 11th, 2022 at 8:02:34 AM
permalink
Quote: SOOPOOTime to free EvenBob.
link to original post
I wonder if the mods remembered to add two hours to every day of suspension to account for EvenBob's magical time zone....
November 11th, 2022 at 8:03:09 AM
permalink
Quote: SOOPOOTime to free EvenBob.
link to original post
No malice aforethought; I just overslept.
May the cards fall in your favor.
November 11th, 2022 at 8:05:54 AM
permalink
Quote: WizardQuote: OnceDearI'd never heard of the GoGo's.
You've got to be kidding! They were the biggest girl group of the 80's. At least on this side of the Atlantic. Surely this at least rings a bell.
Direct: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3kQlzOi27M
Well thanks to this post I have a persistent “We Got the Beat” ear worm. Hope I can return the favor with a flashback from The Knack.
"Truth is ever to be found in the simplicity, and not in the multiplicity and confusion of things."
-- Isaac Newton
November 11th, 2022 at 8:28:59 AM
permalink
Quote: JimRockfordQuote: WizardQuote: OnceDearI'd never heard of the GoGo's.
You've got to be kidding! They were the biggest girl group of the 80's. At least on this side of the Atlantic. Surely this at least rings a bell.
Direct: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3kQlzOi27M
Well thanks to this post I have a persistent “We Got the Beat” ear worm. Hope I can return the favor with a flashback from The Knack.
link to original post
The Knack played at a club I was working at, and while I didn't care for the band, they did an incredible version of Good Girls Don't.
The difference between fiction and reality is that fiction is supposed to make sense.
November 11th, 2022 at 9:08:53 AM
permalink
Quote: billryan
The Knack played at a club I was working at, and while I didn't care for the band, they did an incredible version of Good Girls Don't.
link to original post
That may be the first time in history that anyone has discussed The Knack in reference to any song other than their one hit.
"Truth is ever to be found in the simplicity, and not in the multiplicity and confusion of things."
-- Isaac Newton
November 20th, 2022 at 8:18:56 AM
permalink
May the cards fall in your favor.
November 24th, 2022 at 8:15:25 AM
permalink
U.S. Presidents traditionally pardon turkeys around Thanksgiving, but OnceDear can't get a reprieve?
I tell you it’s wonderful to be here, man. I don’t give a damn who wins or loses. It’s just wonderful to be here with you people.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/betting-systems/33908-the-adventures-of-mdawg/
November 24th, 2022 at 8:46:58 AM
permalink
Quote: MDawgU.S. Presidents traditionally pardon turkeys around Thanksgiving, but OnceDear can't get a reprieve?
link to original post
Characterizing OnceDear as a turkey would seem to be an insult.
Sticking to the 3 day minimum is about the limit of my clement inclinations.
May the cards fall in your favor.
November 24th, 2022 at 8:51:44 AM
permalink
Quote: DieterQuote: MDawgU.S. Presidents traditionally pardon turkeys around Thanksgiving, but OnceDear can't get a reprieve?
link to original post
Characterizing OnceDear as a turkey would seem to be an insult.
Sticking to the 3 day minimum is about the limit of my clement inclinations.
link to original post
You totally missed the point! It was a subtle joke! Unsuspend the big Dawg now! You can ask OnceDear if he felt the SLIGHTEST bit insulted!
November 24th, 2022 at 8:54:10 AM
permalink
Trivia Time! Who was the first president to pardon a turkey on Thanksgiving?
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
November 24th, 2022 at 8:55:46 AM
permalink
I have the answer but don't know how to do the spolier thing.
The difference between fiction and reality is that fiction is supposed to make sense.
November 24th, 2022 at 9:40:53 AM
permalink
Quote: SOOPOOQuote: DieterQuote: MDawgU.S. Presidents traditionally pardon turkeys around Thanksgiving, but OnceDear can't get a reprieve?
link to original post
Characterizing OnceDear as a turkey would seem to be an insult.
Sticking to the 3 day minimum is about the limit of my clement inclinations.
link to original post
You totally missed the point! It was a subtle joke! Unsuspend the big Dawg now! You can ask OnceDear if he felt the SLIGHTEST bit insulted!
link to original post
As OnceDear is currently on suspension, I think I shall need to wait until his return to reconsider.
If OnceDear tells me that it was, in fact, a joke between friends ("banter"), I shall humbly apologize, issue credit for time served in error, and serve a similar suspension myself.
May the cards fall in your favor.
November 24th, 2022 at 9:54:08 AM
permalink
Quote: billryanI have the answer but don't know how to do the spolier thing.
link to original post
Type [spo*ler] before your text and then type [/spo*ler] at the end. But, of course, use the word 'spoiler' inside of the square brackets.
Last edited by: gordonm888 on Nov 24, 2022
So many better men, a few of them friends, are dead. And a thousand thousand slimy things live on, and so do I.
