Reggie's PM on moderated post in "Wood movement" thread

[Bas]

Earlier today, I soft deleted Reggie's post, and sent him a PM explaining why:

Hi Reggie,

I deleted your post because it quoted Jeff Mill's post, which was deleted because it was in violation of site policy ("Religious content").

Thanks.

In other words, there was nothing wrong per se with Reggie's post, but it's sort of pointless to moderate Jeff's post and then leave the content intact in a reply.

This is what Reggie sent in response to some of the staff & BoD:

Gentlemen: First let me say that I respect the policies of North Carolina Woodworker, even when I don't agree with them. Which is why I went back and reread the policy on "Religious Content." This may be the event that causes me to move on away from this site. Yes, I'm fully aware Mr. Robinson, that this is what you have suggested for those of us who do not agree with the policies.

I found Jeff's post to be well written and expressive. I saw nothing that favored any particular religious belief or sect in his post. In fact, "Merry Christmas, In our prayers, etc" could be construed by some to be offensive, I suppose. But, these are allowed.

I've made several good friendships on North Carolina Woodworker, and those will continue regardless of my decision. I realize that I have been labeled in the past as a "troublemaker" (Steve Coles' words) and I promised Mr. Cole that I would do my best to "offend no more" and I believe I have been true to my word.

If the word "Amen" in agreement to someone's post is in violation of "Site Policy" I will be interested to see what this site evolves into over the next months and years.

My compliments to the BOD, you have done a good job in most matters of managing the site.

I am not personally offended with any of you, but I am beginning to wonder where some of you are coming from with your interpretations of "Site Policy."

Respectfully,

JackLeg

Here is what I'd like to send back to Reggie:

Hi Reggie,

There was nothing wrong with your post. I deleted it because it quoted Jeff Mill's post, which was in violation of site policy. In the context of the question, Jeff's answer was both unhelpful and inappropriate. The original poster asked about why wood moves, which most of us know is related to changes in humidity. While some attribute everything in nature to God, it's a bit of a stretch to say a piece of wood warped due to divine intervention. As for the use of phrases such as "God bless you" or "Merry Christmas", I felt the reference to God creating trees and man's role in the universe went well beyond the common courtesies in everyday speech.

I hope this better explains why the posts were removed, and that you will continue to be a member of this site.

Doug - Given the volatile climate and Jeff's involvement, I figured I'd post this here first, to ensure we're sending a consistent message. If there are no objections, I'll send it out later today.

 

[Ray Martin]

I think that Bas' intended reply to Reggie is well written and in line with the intent of our site's philosophy.

JMTCW

 

[b4man]

Bas,
I sense your frustration. IMHO, I would ditch the sarcasm and reply stating only the policy.

I received a copy of that letter Reggie wrote as well. Unless he's been talking to someone other than me, he knows nothing about what's going on right now and the trials we've been facing here.

Again, it's only my observation and opinion.


Barbara

 

[cskipper]

Not that my input really matters, but I liked Bas's response. Site policy would not necessarily prevent someone from saying amen. Having the post it related having been moderated more clearly explained why the other was moderated.

 

[Gotcha6]

Would it help to explain in a PM in such a situation that the Moderators sometimes consider the initial post a 'troll' or 'bait' to provoke an inappropriate response?

 

[Glennbear]

Earlier today, I soft deleted Reggie's post, and sent him a PM explaining why:
In other words, there was nothing wrong per se with Reggie's post, but it's sort of pointless to moderate Jeff's post and then leave the content intact in a reply.

This is what Reggie sent in response to some of the staff & BoD:

Here is what I'd like to send back to Reggie:

Hi Reggie,

There was nothing wrong with your post. I deleted it because it quoted Jeff Mill's post, which was in violation of site policy. In the context of the question, Jeff's answer was both unhelpful and inappropriate. It violated site policy which prohibits religious subjects. The original poster asked about why wood moves after project completion[STRIKE]., which [/STRIKE][STRIKE]most of us know is related to changes in humidity.[/STRIKE] [STRIKE]While some attribute everything in nature to God, it's a bit of a stretch to [/STRIKE][STRIKE]say a piece of wood warped due to divine intervention.[/STRIKE] [STRIKE]As for the use of phrases such as "God bless you" or "Merry [/STRIKE][STRIKE]Christmas",[[/STRIKE]STRIKE][STRIKE]
I felt the reference to God creating trees and man's role in the universe went well beyond the common courtesies in everyday speech.
[/STRIKE]
[/STRIKE]I hope this better explains why the posts were removed, and that you will continue to be a member of this site.

Doug - Given the volatile climate and Jeff's involvement, I figured I'd post this here first, to ensure we're sending a consistent message. If there are no objections, I'll send it out later today.

I think we should stick to just the pertinent facts and not get into justification or explanation. Jeff's post was wrong, Reggie's post refered to Jeff's, case closed. I have amended Bas's response to reflect my feelings.

Bas,
I sense your frustration. IMHO, I would ditch the sarcasm and reply stating only the policy.

I received a copy of that letter Reggie wrote as well. Unless he's been talking to someone other than me, he knows nothing about what's going on right now and the trials we've been facing here.

Again, it's only my observation and opinion.


Barbara

I am sure Reggie does not know but that is irrelevant, I agree that sarcasm or excess verbiage serves no purpose.

Would it help to explain in a PM in such a situation that the Moderators sometimes consider the initial post a 'troll' or 'bait' to provoke an inappropriate response?

I definitely disagree with this. Folks like Reggie love a good argument and defining "trolling" is a subjective type thing. The bottom line is religion is banned PERIOD.

 

[froglips]

Some days.....

Bas, I like your response. In this instance, I'd skip the middle explaining why we moderated Jeff's post. That is between the Mod's and Jeff. Just stick to Reggies post quoting a post deemed in policy violation.

Jim