I don't know what you are reading, but I never said you banned TDog or that you are loose on trolls especially since I know about your history with T28 etc. As for all of my suggestions, all you need is the PM system and the ban button, there is no need for extra special forum software. And when did I say you are an idiot? You are just rambling on about because I offered some criticism of a flawed moderation policy. Shoot the messenger, always works.
If you are (now) pretending that you weren't criticizing me, then why did you feel the need to offer me your blessed "coaching" on how "good moderation policy" works? And what of this statement? I shoot the messenger when he's the author too.
Because you were rambling about how I should be perfect to point out anything. What is wrong with you, you bring politics into everything. Are you seriously suggesting that ET doesn't have a flawed moderation policy, where the guidelines I mentioned followed which are the most basic at any forum? If there wasn't any protocol followed as is obvious in TDog's case, how can you say that it wasn't seat of the pants moderation.
ET does have a flawed moderation policy, but it's more of a software limitation than a policy. My issue with you is that I came here and made an apology for something I didn't do, yet was professional enough to speak for whoever did. You immediately jumped my case and attacked me over it, accusing me, personally, of being a flawed moderator. The word "you" is what tipped me off to it. That's my issue. If you have a problem with my moderation, fine. Point out where it is or just simply tell me you don't want to. But if you attack me, personally, for issues I had nothing to do with, expect a response. That is what is "wrong with me". Even now, you won't admit that you probably should have been pointing out that the policy (and not me) was at fault for this. And that just proves my original point that one of us takes blame in a straight forward manner, for mistakes both ours and others, and one of us doesn't even take blame for our own mistakes.
So you were accused of being a flawed moderator, and became defensive? Why is that? Do you think of yourself as a flawless moderator?
Once again (because I know that you don't absorb much before you turn on the flame thrower), if I am being accused as a "flawed moderator" I don't have a problem with it. Point where you disagree and I'll accept it. But accuse me of being flawed because of an action I had nothing to do with, and I become defensive. Yes. Is it clear now or should I put this all into a pop-up book to make it even easier to understand?
I made a point against the flawed moderation policy which you yourself admit was correct. I don't know why you would equate this to your worth as a moderator, it's not your fault that you weren't trained as a moderator or were handed guidelines which only leads to reactionary seat of the pants moderation. Any critcism will look as attacks/abuse if you give it a political slant, which was obvious when you agreed with Piker about the whole liberal nonsense.
"because I know that you don't absorb much" That is a personal attack, right? So you are not a flawed moderator, you are flawless, right? Consequently if someone accused you of being a flawed moderator, it disturbed you, right? I mean, if you did have flaws as a moderator...you would just admit it, right? You wouldn't become defensive about something you actually are, right? Ohhh, of course make a pop up book, no doubt it would become a best seller...