the thread-slayer Bayer aspirin primitive gets some guff

[franksolich]

From the meta forum, closed to non-members, so no link; sorry.

Call Me Wesley (37,522 posts)

ATTENTION: Admins (as well as long-term members since DU2:) Very serious bug right here.

What this means is, that everyone who was a mod before the switch still has access to the profiles of members who where here before DU3 happened.

It includes this:

- The e-mail address you signed on with.
- The name you have put in when you signed on.
- A record of your locked threads/deleted posts.
- A section of mod comments.
- The record of warnings with full text (and issuing mod.)

While this was a tool we (former mods) relied upon, it has become defunct with DU3, but still some members who were former mods can easily access it, check your old records, etc. Why this issue wasn't addressed, I have no clue. I will alert on this message and sent it to admins to hopefully close this wormhole ASAP.

I am a former mod, but wasn't during the switch. If I've seen that this still was available, I would have alerted admins. Obviously, I'd have been the only one.

CreekDog (32,899 posts)

28. why should mods have EVER had access to private information at all? i mean info that we only were sharing with admins.

cbayer (110,900 posts)

34. We had it to assist in identifying trolls and other disruptors.

The only private information we had was email addresses. Everything else supplied by a member is optional or can be fictional. Since repeat disruptors often use variations of the same email address, it was helpful. The mod confidentiality agreement would have prohibited any use other than that.

CreekDog (32,899 posts)

36. how would the confidentiality agreement work on someone who is improperly accessing the info NOW?clearly not beholden to any rules or policies, i highly doubt they would take a pesky agreement seriously.

cbayer (110,900 posts)

38. The mod confidentiality agreement is still in effect.

I inquired specifically about that under other circumstances. It's binding.

What is your beef with me?

CreekDog (32,899 posts)

42. i'm pointing out that if people are accessing info when they are no longer mods --then...they kind of suck at following/obeying agreements.

and if they suck at following one kind, they probably suck at following the other kind.

cbayer (110,900 posts)

47. I accessed it after offering to get it and post it. Yardwork asked me to do that.

I knew about the warning, but did not think it had anything about alerting in it. It actually did. I apologized and then posted it at her request.

I am painfully scrupulous, often to my detriment, and don't like to be accused of sucking at following or obeying agreements. It never occurred to me that it would be interpreted that way.

DU2 stuff was brought to the table and I brought some DU2 data that I had access to in. If you wish to think negatively of me, so be it, but I meant no harm at all.

yardwork (34,143 posts)

98. You did not offer to get it and I certainly did not ask you to do so.

You're all over this thread misrepresenting this. I didn't request any research. I remember what that warning said perfectly well. I didn't ask you or anybody else to go find it. You insisted that I was wrong about my memory of it and you went and dredged it up to prove your point. Then you discovered that your memory was wrong, not mine, and you PMed it to me. I didn't respond to your PM (and you're blocked from PMing me so no need to bother trying that again) and then you posted about it several times in the thread essentially daring me to let you post it, so I said go ahead. Let everybody else read it and draw their own conclusions.

Now you're saying that I sent you on some errand of research. It's really quite laughable.

CreekDog (32,899 posts)

112. your story is not checking out

yardwork's denying that she asked for or that you offered to send what you said you could send.

of course, your story is sketchy now, because you're saying you weren't doing anything wrong, yet you discussed what should be confidential warnings with another DUer, said you were scrupulous about the rules, yet contradict that by discussing confidential things with another DUer and were willing to share written material with that poster.

i hope when you actually were a moderator that you weren't as cavalier and rationalizing about what you've done wrong as you are now.

Kali (29,790 posts)

4. mods had access to our email addresses?

did I know that?

Call Me Wesley (37,522 posts)

10. Yes, it was made public on DU2 that mods had access to this, after singing a confidentiality agreement. It's a bit like MIRT can see the newbies first posts. But MIRT doesn't have to sign a confidentiality agreement, nor do the new hosts or members if they were mods at the switch. So these members still have access to your e-mail address you signed up with.

woo me with science (15,747 posts)

52. WHAT?!!!!

When and how was this made public?! I don 't remember anything about this at all.

This is extremely disturbing.

Autumn (8,588 posts)

56. I had a post locked on DU and I got a PM from a Mod addressing me by my given name.

I freaked out and contacted Skinner. He told me all they had access to was my name and e mail I had signed up with. But Skinner did make an announcement about it, if I remember correctly. Since then there are 2 posters who had always seemed to be constant Mods over there that I really keep an eye on. They are just way too nasty sometimes. And it really bugs me that they still have access to that information after it has been closed off to admin support. There is no reason to still have Mods there.

MineralMan (46,352 posts)

64. I would have been alarmed by that, too.

Even though I don't try to conceal my real life identity, I would have resented that from a moderator. On DU, I am MineralMan. If someone wants to know my real name, it's easy enough to find, but I don't expect to see it used in posts or DU Mail.

Autumn (8,588 posts)

77. It freaked me out big time. Especially since there was one mod that I do not like or trust
at all. He has gone after me a few times and I have seen him in action with other DUers and to think he had access to my info really freaked me out. Skinner was very reassuring to me.

MineralMan (46,352 posts)

79. I'm sorry that happened to you. It shouldn't have.

Once in a great while, I see someone use a DUer's real first name in a post or reply. It's an accidental thing, usually, and usually gets edited if someone notices it. People do exchange names in DU Mail and PMs (DU2), and it's easy to slip that way.

I'm glad to hear that Skinner made you feel more at ease over that.

woo me with science (15,747 posts)

107. I find this EXTREMELY disturbing.

I can't imagine how you must have felt. I had no idea that any mods or community members other than admins EVER had access to private information like email addresses anyway, and I don't consider an announcement after the fact to be sufficient at all as disclosure. I am not sure that I would have joined DU2 if I had known that email addresses were shared with community members who cycle in and out as mods. Who knows how many community members would have access to your email over the years?

And that EX-MODS would continue to have access to all of this personal information after so many months.....Seriously?

This is VERY disturbing news from DU. This is not acceptable at all.

Kali (29,790 posts)

111. so is that a yes or no about e-mails and real names?

as for them still having access - of course, it should be shut down, but I don't see what the big deal is. Mods had access to that info, so what if some still do? They are bound by a confidentiality agreement, right? Just seems like a house-keeping issue.

everybody can see first posts - they are linked in a box on the upper right side of the Latest page. MIRT can see the list of new members before they post, that is the only difference. We get no personal info whatsoever (unless the member puts it in their profile and then it is visible to anybody)

NYC_SKP (43,353 posts)

113. That's a "NO" for certain right now...

Everybody knows that nobody is required to use a real name and a real address, but to the extent any of these were ever visible to moderators, well, it's now moot.

If ever they were, DU2 functionality began diminishing more and more over time, and barely works now, though members still post there, and moderators would drop in to say hi to one another.

Those days are gone, EarlG has closed the moderator forum altogether.

And, you're right, it's just a housekeeping issue.

Whatever concerns anyone has or had, they should have had them last year, not now, because nothing is at risk.

And IF mods had access to anything sensitive and IF they wanted to do something, they would have done it long ago.

All's well, I guess!

DURHAM D (15,700 posts)

12. Hi - I saw the exchange in the earlier thread.

I went to DU2 and did a random check.

I easily found 17 current members still shown as Mods over there. Do you know how many Mods there are/were at any one time?

I am truly shocked by this matter but it does explain some questions/concerns I have seen posted re: MIRT access to info.

JFTR - MIRT does not have access to the private DU2 information, unless they are also current DU2 Mods as it turns out.

Call Me Wesley (37,522 posts)

14. These 17 mods still have access through DU2 on your whole DU2 record; deleted posts, warnings, mod comments, etc.

Some former mod today yanked up a two year old warning which was sent. And you know how gruesome it is searching through the sent-box here, so I thought it'll be a lot more easy if you could still call up the members records. And yep, that it was.

DURHAM D (15,700 posts)

16. Yes. I responded in that thread with the old record.

I would guess that several of the DU2 Mods (that were in place at the switch) do not even know they can access the info.

However, I wonder if some of them are still over there chatting among themselves. Talk about a secret room...

cbayer (110,900 posts)

20. Come on now. I didn't yank it up. I offered it to the member it was sent to and she told me to
post it.

She brought up the warning and I retrieved it for her. I did not know it would be a problem and would be glad to delete it, but note that she reprinted it in a reply.

yardwork (34,143 posts)

27. How disingenuous of you. Let me post the link so that everybody can read what really happened.

I'm sure that you wish that you could snip this subthread like in the old days. Then all this would be down the memory hole.

http://www.democraticunde...forum=1240&pid=140893

cbayer (110,900 posts)

35. Not at all. I don't feel I have anything to hide here and posted the warning with your permission
and at your request.

I'm lost at this point. Obviously old wounds have been opened. I have absolutely no malice towards you.

CreekDog (32,899 posts)

30. you're still acting like a mod?

jeez.

trawling people's personal records.

you just do whatever you want to do. you'll justify it as okay later on, once asked.

cbayer (110,900 posts)

37. What? Yardwork talked about a warning. I offered to post it for her.

I PM'ed her with it and she asked me to post it.

What exactly is the problem? How is that trawling?

I feel like a mod again, and am reminded of why I am glad to be out from under it.

CreekDog (32,899 posts)

40. well if you aren't a mod, then you shouldn't be using your access as if you were as to your question what my beef is --there it is.

for next time, the correct answer to your situation of not being a mod anymore is:

"when i was a mod i could access that info and could've posted it for you, but now that i'm not, even though the system might allow me access to it, it would be inappropriate for me to access or post it now. sorry, wish i could help you."

muriel_volestrangler (60,561 posts)

43. Why would it be inappropriate to access it when yardwork asked for that?

Notice that cbayer hadn't accessed it before PMing it to yardwork on request - because she had been saying that it didn't mention alerts, when it actually did, but she only saw that when she went to access it, with permission.

The mods are still covered by the confidentiality agreement. I was a former mod, but not at the time of the DU3 switchover; I'm still covered by the confidentiality agreement I signed. If I still had anything recorded from my time as a mod, it would still be covered by the agreement.

CreekDog (32,899 posts)

40. well if you aren't a mod, then you shouldn't be using your access as if you were

as to your question what my beef is --there it is.

for next time, the correct answer to your situation of not being a mod anymore is:

"when i was a mod i could access that info and could've posted it for you, but now that i'm not, even though the system might allow me access to it, it would be inappropriate for me to access or post it now. sorry, wish i could help you."

yardwork (34,143 posts)

83. I did not ask anybody to look up the warning or PM me anything.

cbayer took it on herself to go back to DU2 and pull up my record - accessible only to mods - and bring a warning she had sent me over to DU3. She then PMed it to me - not at my request, and I've now blocked PMs from her because I don't want any more unsolicited PMs from cbayer - and then challenged me repeatedly in the thread by essentially threatening to post it. I told her to go ahead and post it so that everybody could read it and decide for themselves what it said.

That is a far cry from requesting any research.

muriel_volestrangler (60,561 posts)

115. She hadn't looked at it until you said "Please do post it"

http://www.democraticunde...und.com/1240140850#post26

In #26, she said "Again, I would be happy to post it here if you like. ... I said you were not warned about alerting. And you were not."

In #27, you said "Please do post it. It specifically mentions alerting too much."

After a bit where you said she had the ability to edit it without other knowing she had, she said:

#29:" I have sent you the warning by pm and it does speak about alerting. I was wrong about that and apologize, but that was not the gist of the warning, IMO."

and you replied:

#30: "Since you continue to misrepresent I hope that you will post it so that readers can see."

She thought, up to the point where she sent it to you, that it did not mention alerting. It did, and she apologised for getting that wrong. But that shows she had not used her ability to look at it until you had replied 'please do post it' to her suggestion. She did not 'take it on herself' to do it. There was no 'threat' to post it, 'essential' or explicit.

MineralMan (46,352 posts)

48. Would you have been allowed to post that warning publicly on DU2?

I do not believe so. If you would not have been allowed to post it there, then it is, I think, a violation of the moderator confidentiality agreement.

As a moderator, you could see it and you apparently sent it. However, I don't believe that your authority extended to posting it in public. The recipient could have, certainly, but did not.

I find it alarming that you continue to have access to personal information over at DU2.

I'm very disappointed.

cbayer (110,900 posts)

49. She asked me to post it. Get up to speed before you start attacking me.

Thanks.

editing to add that I would have been permitted to post it. The difference is that I would have had a group of mods that I would have discussed it with first. I don't have that now.

Don't bother replying.

MineralMan (46,352 posts)

50. You did not answer my question.

Would you have been allowed to post that warning publicly on DU2? It's a simple question, and I know you know the answer to it. Permission or not, you did post it publicly. If you don't wish to answer the question, that's fine.

Edit to add: I see the question was answered while I was composing this post.

cbayer (110,900 posts)

51. See edited post. I am done talking with you.

wakemeupwhenitsover (68,642 posts)

58. I think there's a mix up here.

Under DU2, NO ONE was allowed to post Mod correspondence. Not the member, not the mod. Under DU3 somehow because a member asked, it's okay? It doesn't make sense. Either there's mod confidentiality that holds over to DU3 with hosts or there isn't. I can't see how anyone can have it both ways.

MineralMan (46,352 posts)

61. In four years, I never saw a single piece of PM correspondence from a moderator to a DUer made public. Not once. I believe that would never have happened, even if the DUer asked for it to be posted. and I never saw anyone post a warning PM from a moderator publicly. I'm not saying it never happened, but I never saw such a thing.

I never got a moderator warning that I'm aware of. I exchanged a couple of PMs with admins. I would never have posted any of that correspondence, either sent or received. PMs on DU2 were private. At least that was my understanding.

Since DU3 went live, I assumed that all of that old stuff that only the mods had access to was shut down. Now, we learn, almost 10 months later that it was not, and that people who were moderators then still have free access to it.

This is disappointing, I think. That people who are no longer moderators can still access those files and that information, and can bring it to DU3 and post it here, is disappointing. This is the first time someone has done that. I hope it will be the last time anybody does that.

It's really too bad that Skinner or other mods will have to deal with this while two of them are at the Convention. Embarrassing all around, I think.

wakemeupwhenitsover (68,642 posts)

87. I think the confidentiality agreement is still in effect also.

So, cbayer pulling up an old warning to prove her (incorrect) point violates that.

cbayer (110,900 posts)

18. I fully support this. A few points of information.

The email addresses are all hidden. No one has access to them.

The issue was not addressed because some mods continued to work DU2, but I don't think anyone would object to locking it up at this point.

Call Me Wesley (37,522 posts)

23. Okay, no e-mail adresses,

but still deleted posts, warnings, comments, etc. Yes?

And, please, still work on DU2 when there was a banner saying 'you're looking at an outdated ...' or something like this the second DU3 went in effect? What was the work? Sending PMs to members still posting there telling them it's outdated?

Yes, there's always a time you have to give for adjustments, but I think almost 10 months are quite enough.

cbayer (110,900 posts)

25. The profiles are still there.

A number of mods kept working du2 and also used it as a place to stay in touch with each other. Quite a few members continued to post (and alert) there. The admins left it open for all of that.

I have no disagreement with you here. I think it's time to shut it down, but I am not one of the mods who stuck around on DU2. I hope that some of them might weigh in here as to the function it serves at this point.

pacalo (18,942 posts)

24. Even though DU2 continued to exist after the DU3 switchover, I don't see the mods' need for further access to that information at a time when DU2 was drawing its last breaths. It should have been pointed out to the admins. at that point, imo.

cbayer (110,900 posts)

26. Why they did or did not shut it down, I don't know.

There has been nothing nefarious or malicious done here that I am aware of.

But all the ire that this is stirring up makes me glad once again that I am done with the moderating system. It was, for the most part, a thankless job and one that made you a target for all kinds of nastiness and bile.

mopinko (38,767 posts)

32. i am sure that none of the mods that still visit 2 would really care if it got shut down. like cbayer said, it is great not to be a mod any more. people project all their feelings about authority on you, when you are just trying to be a good person and help out.

it sucked, and the only real reward was the kind of camaraderie that you only get from sharing a thankless job with someone. it was nice of the guys to just leave things open. lots of people needed a bridge.

but i don't really give a damn about the 'treasure trove of personal information' that remains available, and i know no one else does either. about the only thing any of us do over there any more is nuke those that get nuked here.

when a former mod starts stalking people based on this all, let me know and i might worry.

cbayer (110,900 posts)

41. Thank you, mo.

What a freaking nightmare. It did suck and the transition to DU3 sucked, since so many held on to their animosity. And it still sucks. As much as I miss you and miss the camaraderie, I wouldn't go back to it for anything.

Puglover (14,308 posts)

53. I'm sorry but your post begs the question....

If it "sucked" so horribly why did you reup term after term after term? And if I remember correctly you were very much opposed to enforced moderator breaks as were others that now characterize the job as "thankless" etc etc.

Frankly I got sick of just the grind after 3 years and if you recall took a break to refresh myself. And finally sadly was just over it for good.

I was accused not too long ago of making the moderator forum unpleasant for taking the time to argue about things that (as a gay man) I found homophobic. Whether clearly so(the clearly so's were easy) or not so clearly so(More difficult). And it wasn't easy or particularly pleasant to disagree with the group. That said I found the job to be a pretty good gig at times.

For the record again, I am not accusing you or any other former moderator of homophobia. It's a term that is used too loosely IMHO however when I see you post how much it sucked it puzzles me. Because it always appeared to me that you loved the job.

Edit again to add:Homophobia certainly was not the only thing we all argued about. I don't want this to be overly simplistic.

cbayer (110,900 posts)

57. Look, puglover, I am hurt and angry right now, so forgive me.

I kept doing it because:

I am dedicated to this site and it's mission.

I am dedicated to the administrators of this site.

I was dedicated to the team of mods who worked their asses off trying to to do the right thing.

I enjoyed the challenge and I liked the camaraderie of team work, even when it sucked.

It was a challenge to me to work by consensus and helped me change how I personally approach some things.

But it sucked and I would never do it again.

Puglover (14,308 posts)

60. I'm sorry you are hurt and angry.

Really. Please see my other post. I think where we differ if that I never saw my dedication to the mod team as more important then the job of moderating. Whether the two are mutually exclusive I am not sure.

Two different ways of looking at it and two different styles.

Nothing to forgive.

Frankly, I make angry into an art form.

cbayer (110,900 posts)

63. Your anger can be epic, but I know who you are underneath there.

Your input regarding whether posts were homophobic or not was valued by the whole team. I hope you know that. You and other lgbt mods were essential in assessing the situation when we were confronted with it and you taught me a lot. We didn't always agree, but I always felt that we were able to resolve very difficult situations amicably.

The job was tough and I was challenged on many levels. But while I don't regret it (honestly, I have few regrets in my life), I would not sign up for it again.

Puglover (14,308 posts)

70. See and maybe this will surprise you but I hate the jury system. It's chaotic and without any kind of predictability. I see it as a panacea for the members that is actually a placebo.

I think if we had mods again, and the mods were able to HIDE posts instead of delete them and never lock threads (unless they were trollish spam) AND have forum hosts. It would be a remarkable discussion forum. But that isn't likely so as Emily Ann would say.

"Never mind"

wakemeupwhenitsover (68,642 posts)

73. I find it really hard to believe that not one former Mod/now host never saw this as a potential for abuse.

How can you possibly have it both ways? DU2 has confidentiality agreements, but go ahead & post a warning on DU3? (A warning, that it's most interesting to note, but was remember correctly by the member & incorrectly by the FORMER mod/current host who had access to that & wanted to pull it up to prove a (incorrect) point?)

That just doesn't sit right with me.

CreekDog (32,899 posts)

82. No, the confidentiality agreement doesn't work like that

if a moderator takes something protected and posts it elsewhere, nobody is obligated to keep what was done a secret.

if a mod took something private and posted it to the New York Times website, the information posted would be protected by the agreement, but the fact that they did this would not be protected.

or else what we have is an agreement which says that whatever a moderator does outside their duties must be kept a secret --that is wrong.

and the thing is, when they act as the ex-mod has acted here, they then involve a non moderator, who signed no agreement and is under no obligation to keep what was done a secret.

i signed NOTHING. good luck putting this toothpaste back in the tube. Wesley posted about what an ex-mod did outside their duties. fair game.

wakemeupwhenitsover (68,642 posts)

86. I think you misunderstand what I wrote:

We're on the same side of the fence. What cbayer did was wrong & that no one told the admins about this glitch has my mind reeling. All I can think of is they wanted to keep their clubhouse/private info going.

yardwork (34,143 posts)

85. Thank you for pointing out that the warning was being misrepresented.

I invite anybody who is confused on this point to read the entire subthread here.

http://www.democraticunde...forum=1240&pid=140893

Puglover (14,308 posts)

59. One more thing.

In retrospect (this is probably very obvious but it takes me awhile) I now see the old moderator forum as sort of a small mirror of DU in general. There were mods that believed that Obama could do no wrong and that criticism of the Dems should be minimal at most. And there were mods that were not so enamored so of course we clashed at times. But Skinner was always quite careful to pick a diverse group of mods. While I give him credit for that I wonder if perhaps the man has a sadistic streak. I'm not certain.

I have thought about this as time has passed. I guess I never thought the main thrust of my job as a mod was to get along with the other mods as important as that was. It was to moderate the board in a way that was as fair and unbiased as I was capable of being.

cbayer (110,900 posts)

67. I agree with you. The trick was to work with a team where all votes were equal.

I did feel that the better the team got along and the more we supported each other, the better we were able to do the job. Some periods were clearly easier than others. But I agree that the main thrust was moderating fairly and evenly, which I think we both sincerely tried to do.

Heddi (15,521 posts)

88. MOPINKO REFERRED TO YOU BY YOUR FIRST NAME. ALERT ON HER!!!

When I did that, you got SKINNER to delete my post, beause that was a BREACH OF MODERATOR CONFIDENTIALITY!

If you do not alert to have Mopinko's thread DELETED (not just edited), then it will show that you are a hypocrite, and only interested in the rules when they fit your ultimate purposes.

Heddi (15,521 posts)

93. And just in case you forgot about your little tantrum on being called BY YOUR FIRST NAME

http://www.democraticunde...;forum=1240&pid=33216

ANd here's the email I got from skinner:

I deleted this post:

Mail Message
http://www.democraticunde...;forum=1240&pid=33216

It contained personal information -- cbayer's real first name -- which is a violation of the DU Terms of Service.

Skinner
DU Admin

---------

I anxiously await your furried fingers emailing Skinner to remove Mopinko's egregious violation of DU TERMS OF SERVICE as quickly as you had my post removed

DURHAM D (15,700 posts)

90. "about the only thing any of us do over there any more is nuke those that get nuked here"
via what process are you made aware of those Nukes?

Do you receive a message in your Inbox?

Heddi (15,521 posts)

92. WHY DID YOU REFER TO HER BY HER FIRST NAME? THAT IS A BREACH OF MOD CONFIDENTIALITY

WHen I referred to her as her first name my post was deleted...not by a jury, but by Skinner. I also got a bunch of emails from Skinner about my referring to her as her first name and how she doesn't liek to be referred to by her first name.

So unless your post is deleted by you, or deleted by Skinner, then I will say that CBAYER is a hypocrite and doesn't really care about enforcing rules unless it is to make a point. She wanted to MAKE A POINT with me. But it's okay with you.

That, my friends is HYPOCRISY. And Cbayer, thy name is HYPOCRISY

NYC_SKP (43,353 posts)

91. Skinner will, I'm confident, assure you all that we do NOT have access as the OP describes.

Not to call anyone a liar, just to indicate that very little is left of the old site.

That's all I feel free to say, and for more detail see Robb's post above.

It's DU3 world now, DU2 ain't much anymore though a few members still post there.

Now, back to the convention.

wakemeupwhenitsover (68,642 posts)

95. Then how did cbayer pull up the warning?

Please explain because I'm waiting with baited breath. Or, did cbayer keep a copy of every warning she sent out? Her mac must be running overtime, if so.

NYC_SKP (43,353 posts)

96. I don't know what cbayer did...

...I'm just sharing as much as I feel I can without breaking the confidentiality agreement that I feel bound by.

I don't think it goes to far, however, to say that the things in the OP (an OP by the way which is itself in violation of the agreement) greatly overstates the access available by moderators at DU2.

I'm hoping that Skinner will chime in soon.

  --as if my fellow alum Skins cares.

wakemeupwhenitsover (68,642 posts)

101. You haven't a clue what's going on.

Check the other thread & then get back to this thread.

BTW; since the confidentiality agreement seems to not be in effect, I just wanted to say that when you PM other mods about the havoc you are gleefully creating in other sites then you should be extra, extra careful that you actually are PMing the correct mod. Else, another mod might get the PM accidentally. Sorta like accidentally nuking yourself; not smart.

NYC_SKP (43,353 posts)

104. "PM other mods about the havoc you are gleefully creating"

I really don't know what the **** you're talking about.

This all started in a different meta thread where a member accused me of bias, from out of the blue.

The only PMs between moderators are is other peoples' imaginations.

wakemeupwhenitsover (68,642 posts)

105. I have no idea what what thread you're talking about.

I do know of a PM you thought you were sending to one mod, but sent to another who forwarded it me asking what the hell you were doing.

ETA this was when I was a mod so it was aeons ago. I've just got a memory like an elephant.

Heddi (15,521 posts)

97. Back in January, I got a post deleted by Skinner b/c i referred to Cbayer by her first name

She had been referred to by her first name in the Mod forum, and by other mods in non-mod forum posts.

But I referred to her as "...." and she ran to Skinner and got my post deleted.

Skinner PM'ed me to tell me he deleted my post.

He further PM'ed me this

Skinner
Re: Re: Re: Re: I deleted this post:

Mail Message
One more thing: I would like to remind you that you are still bound by the DU Moderator Confidentiality Agreement that you signed.

Now, when this post was deleted in Jan 2012, I hadn't been a mod for many months...I think I was removed from modding in August 2011.

So If *I*, a a former mod was still bound by DU Moderator Confidentiality, then surely THESE "current but former, real but not real" mods are still bound by DU Moderator Confidentiality Agreement.

Now, I still have my copy of my Mod Confidentiality Form, which was emailed to me when my moderator priveleges were revoked.

This part is pertinent:

after which the infamous Moderator Agreement

So going into someone's DU File, pulling out an alert, and publically posting it (even if the poster asked you to) is against the Mod Confidentiality Agreement, eh?

EarlG (13,021 posts)

109. It's been resolved

No more DU2 mod access.

DU moderator confidentiality agreements remain in effect for everyone who signed them.

[Skul]

The aspirin primitive lit a fuse. 
Round and round they go.

[franksolich]

The aspirin primitive lit a fuse. 
Round and round they go.

Yeah, you know what that means, considering the Bayer aspirin primitive's one of franksolich's favorite primitives.

A primitive messes with any of franksolich's favorite primitives at his own peril.

A lot of lumpenunterprimitiven got put on franksolich's "enemies list" from this campfire.

[Boudicca]

Maybe it's the wine, but my eyes glazed over and I got a headache about one fifth into the bitchfest.

[Skul]

Much like the New Gen Star Trek, they also have a "Weslely" problem. 

[franksolich]

Maybe it's the wine, but my eyes glazed over and I got a headache about one fifth into the bitchfest.

Oh, but think of the sacrifices your humble moderator made in copying-and-pasting it.

I thought it was a good textbook demonstration of the way primitives squibble-squabble about the least little things, which is why I posted it.

The primitives can be so cute when they wiggle-waggle their armpits at each other, almost adorable.

[Carl]

Whiny little bitches aren`t they? 

[GOBUCKS]

One point on this thread and lots of others: They would be easier to follow if the DUmp time and date were copied along with the rest of the post.

[franksolich]

One point on this thread and lots of others: They would be easier to follow if the DUmp time and date were copied along with the rest of the post.

Yeah, I know.

I'll send Skins another g-mail advising him of the problem, that the date and time can't be gotten from copying, like it could on the old DU, which is a problem.  I was sure Elad would've taken care of it by now.

[Chris_]

Holy cow, that thread is like a hilariously demented Energizer Bunny. It just keeps going.

[DumbAss Tanker]

Doesn't sound like cbayer, the authoritarian bitch that she is, was winning many hearts and minds there.

[FlaGator]

Just TS Cbayer and everyone will be happy... except Cbayer of course.

[GOBUCKS]

The date and time aren't too difficult to copy after you do it a few times. You have to copy up from the bottom of the post.

Skimmer's new format is still awful, compared with the Old DUmp.