Board Ordered Removal of a Forums Super Moderator

[PhotoTom]

While I understand that this is a rather heated discussion mostly about things I don't have a full understanding of I will make this comment.....

Stop using profane language please! It is unseemly and very bad optics to have the top guys violate forum rules. I have no doubt as to what would happen if I (an ordinary forum user who mailed a check for membership a couple of days ago) were to use, or even quote, that word. And you all know which word I am referring to.

Airing complaints and disagreements can be productive if done in a polite and reasonable manner. But when the top people start violating their own forum rules it reflects poorly on the entire organization.

Noted, sir.

The running "joke" was, between members of the forum staff, that word was not included in the auto-censor (cuss) list. We stumbled upon it, but nobody had used it on the forums, so it was our little joke between ourselves. As I said, that joke has long since been over with, but it is being drudged up now to distract from the fact that the "board" removed a moderator without any reason relating to his performance as a moderator.

I have added it to the auto-censor list now and it is retroactive.

-Admin

[Ruger]

We, the forum staff, engaged in 'locker room' talk. It was wrong; I'll not make excuses. We were out of line. We meant no harm, it was not done maliciously. There were a few personalities that had tweaked the noses of every one of the Admin's and Moderators. Our response was inappropriate, a poor reflection upon the Organization which has invested it's trust in us, and a failure to the Membership we are supposed to assist and serve.
On behalf of the forum staff, I apologize to the BoD, the entirety of the MGO membership, and all participants of the forums. We failed to maintain integrity, failed to execute our responsibilities in a professional manner. We ask forgiveness, we ask that we be allowed to put this behind us, and we ask that we be allowed to again earn the trust, and hopefully respect of the BoD, the Membership,and the forum participants.

We made a poor choice, we regret the damage it has done, and we would be grateful if we could move forward and not have our noses rubbed in it further.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

-Tim

My trust use to be universal with all of you except one! Now in light of this new development and total lack of respect and professionalism I will trust no more.
Myself and many more will no longer trust any of your deceitful and flagrant use of our friendship and comradery.

[dougwg]

We, the forum staff, engaged in 'locker room' talk. It was wrong; I'll not make excuses. We were out of line. We meant no harm, it was not done maliciously. There were a few personalities that had tweaked the noses of every one of the Admin's and Moderators. Our response was inappropriate, a poor reflection upon the Organization which has invested it's trust in us, and a failure to the Membership we are supposed to assist and serve.
On behalf of the forum staff, I apologize to the BoD, the entirety of the MGO membership, and all participants of the forums. We failed to maintain integrity, failed to execute our responsibilities in a professional manner. We ask forgiveness, we ask that we be allowed to put this behind us, and we ask that we be allowed to again earn the trust, and hopefully respect of the BoD, the Membership,and the forum participants.

We made a poor choice, we regret the damage it has done, and we would be grateful if we could move forward and not have our noses rubbed in it further.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

-Tim

I really don't think it was really rubbing noses in it...but I hear you. I believe it was given as an example only.

That is one hell of an apology and I find myself unable to not accept it. For the record, I understand locker room talk and I don't believe an apology was warranted.
But please believe me when I say that it is wholeheartedly appreciated.

[dougwg]

While I understand that this is a rather heated discussion mostly about things I don't have a full understanding of I will make this comment.....

Stop using profane language please! It is unseemly and very bad optics to have the top guys violate forum rules. I have no doubt as to what would happen if I (an ordinary forum user who mailed a check for membership a couple of days ago) were to use, or even quote, that word. And you all know which word I am referring to.

Airing complaints and disagreements can be productive if done in a polite and reasonable manner. But when the top people start violating their own forum rules it reflects poorly on the entire organization.

I understand and apologize for the use of that word on the forums.

[Draken]

This just reminds me SO much of what happened with that other organization.

On the forums, I for one never really cared for Jackam, but at the same time I never saw any reason to remove him from the mod status. If you look at his post in "Ask the Candidates" as a mod, yeah he went over the top and maybe should have gotten a couple points for it, but as a member, if he has a grievance, he has the right to put it out there. Now I'm not privy to any of the behind the scenes stuff so no way I can speak to that, but we as a .org need to fix this, and fix it quick....we have history to show us what happens otherwise. Egos need to be left at the door.

[ECSUSER]

Bring me up to speed please - why can't the BOD have read access to the forum? We aren't just talking about PM's are we?

ETA Let me rephrase:

Is the BOD asking for PM's or are there sub forums that are unavailable?

[G22]

Bring me up to speed please - why can't the BOD have read access to the forum? We aren't just talking about PM's are we?

ETA Let me rephrase:

Is the BOD asking for PM's or are there sub forums that are unavailable?

The forums, like the organization, were set up specifically for separation of powers. The BOD demanded access to the sub-forum where Admin and Mods discuss disciplinary actions. Traditionally this was a closed forum only accessible by Admin and Mods. They were granted access. They found locker room talk. It doesn't happen any more.

The BOD wanted access to the Election Committee sub-forum. They were denied access by the EC Chairman. The EC (if you look at the org chart) is an equal and separate branch of MGO that operates autonomously per the bylaws. Access to the EC forum is restricted to election committee members only. It should always remain that way to prevent possible election tampering.

No PM's are accessible by anyone except the recipient and the sender.

[dougwg]

Correction...

The forums, like the organization, were tried to be set up specifically for separation of powers.

In reality, the ORG is a Michigan Corporation and as such the BoD is on the hook for the Corp.

The Forums are an asset of the Corp.

The Bod is RESPONSIBLE for stuff on the forums.

Example: In some secret forum, that only a handful of people can see, they are planning to overthrow the US government.

It is the RESPONSIBILITY of the BOD to not allow that to take place.

If you read the AUP you will see that we have a provision for that. Basically, it says you can't do that bad stuff on the forums.

But, you see, there is this little tiny sub-forum that only a few can see but NO ONE on the BoD can see it, yet we are responsible for it.

[ECSUSER]

The forums, like the organization, were set up specifically for separation of powers. The BOD demanded access to the sub-forum where Admin and Mods discuss disciplinary actions. Traditionally this was a closed forum only accessible by Admin and Mods. They were granted access. They found locker room talk. It doesn't happen any more.

The BOD wanted access to the Election Committee sub-forum. They were denied access by the EC Chairman. The EC (if you look at the org chart) is an equal and separate branch of MGO that operates autonomously per the bylaws. Access to the EC forum is restricted to election committee members only. It should always remain that way to prevent possible election tampering.

No PM's are accessible by anyone except the recipient and the sender.

Thank you for that information.

[G22]

Correction...

The forums, like the organization, were tried to be set up specifically for separation of powers.

In reality, the ORG is a Michigan Corporation and as such the BoD is on the hook for the Corp.

The Forums are an asset of the Corp.

The Bod is RESPONSIBLE for stuff on the forums.

Example: In some secret forum, that only a handful of people can see, they are planning to overthrow the US government.

It is the RESPONSIBILITY of the BOD to not allow that to take place.

If you read the AUP you will see that we have a provision for that. Basically, it says you can't do that bad stuff on the forums.

But, you see, there is this little tiny sub-forum that only a few can see but NO ONE on the BoD can see it, yet we are responsible for it.

The AUP is not a bylaw governing this organization.

The BOD is not responsible for anything the EC does. They conduct their business autonomously. Is the President responsible for the direct actions of the Supreme Court? Can he be sued if the Supreme Court has plans to take over the world?

Autonomous

1a : having the right or power of self-government
b : undertaken or carried on without outside control
2a : existing or capable of existing independently
b : responding, reacting, or developing independently of the whole