Official In Regards to Kalalification’s Moderator Status

Well Kali is winning with 68% of the vote.

He has not personally insulted anybody. He has not made any hate speech against an ideology.

There is nothing that says he can not do what he has been doing this entire time. And he has not been personally attacking members.

And how is that against the rules?

Kali attacked the way he conducted everything, not him personally.

When he starts calling people fucking pricks.

So he backs Demondaze. Ronald then begins to bribe people without Demon even knowing. How in the world does that make Kali look bad?

Hiding insults to an ideology is not against the rules. Even if he was not hiding them it is not against the rules.

When did he declare a crusade against elements of the forum? The only thing I can think of is him going all crazy over grammar mistakes.

It was really just there to piss you off

http://josefvstalin.com/threads/not-the-north-korea-we-have-come-to-know.5248/page-5#post-159122

Just saying...

Saying what, exactly? It's not like I used the word incorrectly or as a pejorative.

Saying that it was an insult.

So, he disagreed with you, and was a dick about it. We've come to that conclusion a while ago. Not to mention it says absolutely nothing about his moderating qualities.

Did you read the thread?
To start off, he wasn't directing it at me...

I skimmed through it, yes. And even if it wasn't directed at you, it still has nothing to do with his skills at moderating the forums. Yes, he was being harsh. Yes, he wanted everyone to know he was right, and wanted to rub it in everyone's face. That's not a very nice thing to do, I'll agree. But again, what does that have to do with his moderating skills?

Nothing.
It has to do with his membership skills.
http://josefvstalin.com/wiki/site-rules/

You're seriously saying that using the word kowtow to describe submission to an opponent in argument constitutes a personal insult?

Then WHY are you people saying he shouldn't be a moderator instead of saying he should be banned altogether?
Not to mention several people who are accusing him of breaking the rules have broken them themselves. Heck, if anyone gets upset for things others said to them (on the internet, for Christ's sake), over half of the people on thise site would get banned.

No.
I am saying that accusing someone of 'submission' to another in the context in which you used it is a deep insult. You, of all the people on this forums, should be able to understand why and appreciate it. In Democratic, Communist, and Capitalist societies alike, accusing one of submission is a deep insult. Had you uttered it in a public square at a stranger, you would probably be lucky to escape with only a few broken bones.

The context in which you used it was in no way meant to say that they were respecting another, but rather that they were becoming the slave of another.

I am well aware that people have broken rules with respect to insulting and that the majority of the people on this site would be banned if it was as strictly enforced as it is worded. It is part of the reason why I have not posted on this thread until now. However, I believe that even in insulting someone, there is a line drawn. I believe that in posting the statement that I quoted above is crossing it. Even the internet, which, yes, has a much looser standard, has standards of conduct, or it is to be hoped. And there is a line, even on the internet.

And I accept that there is no specific standard for conduct for moderators that seperate them from the rest. However, I also am acutely aware that a moderator will be held to higher standards in the minds of the members whether they or the law will it or not.

To be honest, Kali's one of the least insulting members on this forum. If we hold everyone by the standards that you are trying to hold him, most of you would be banned now. Example: http://josefvstalin.com/threads/farewell-losers.4264/
The threads locked so I can't hit reply, so I'll just tell you who said what.


Lennins Beard

General Mosh

Mosh

SovietEmpireUSSR (I like you dude, just being fair to everyone)

Me

I don't really think that I am missing anything here or suggesting anything that is out-of-culture for anyone here.
The context in which he used the word was meant to mean 'slave' or something near to it. That is an insult in most cultures, not just the US, or the West, or the East, or the Middle East, or Africa, or the Americas... etc.

I am well aware of that [which I mentioned above].
And if you need examples, you can pretty much go to any well flushed-out thread and find plenty. On a typical day of the forums, I doubt that less than one rule-violating comment is made.
I am arguing that there is and must always be a line drawn.
I believe that the insult that Kali metted out was greater than many others, parhaps the greatest insult that can be metted out in most cultures.

so 50 to 20, big anti Kali Majority there.

I said that. And it is very debatable that he's committed hate speech/personal insults. It's not something you can say surely about. He's posted many, many times.

Yes, but anyone with sense would stop a mod from harassing members. You do not defend his harassment I see, you simply deny it. Dismiss it. Ignore it. Have you not read my evidence?

Technically posting a picture of someone being raped isn't against the rules either, so long as no nudity is shown. Technically what I posted in the Lighthouse, are you a homosexual? thread wasn't against the rules either. You have to use common sense.

Potato potato.

It is certain disconcerting. Especially since Kali was a major defender of Ronald.

When your at the point of defending the ability to hide insults in your posts, you have to take a step back.

If you didn't notice, I was half mocking your criticism of me. If I went against anything even slightly you said I "waged a crusade" against it.

Anyway, my point still stands that Kali has set out against certain people on the forum. You cannot deny it. I literally just posted the "evidence".

I will not deny that many supporters of the anti-Kali movement have been banned in the past. For everything from Double Posting to "Hate Speech". But again, we served our time like anyone should if they have broken a rule. Kali hasn't. He has evaded the rules. Found loopholes, nitches to skate by on.

Only in technicality has Kali not broken the rules. You notice, no one is defending Kali's actions as being right. They're merely saying that they didn't violate the rules.

That's 30% of voters. And we had a very good voter turnout for a referendum that was widely unknown.

Point of clarification: it is. Technically or otherwise.

@Imperial
You're being ridiculous. The way I used the word was a textbook example of correct usage. Your insinuation that it means 'slave' is preposterous, and I find it hard to believe that calling someone a slave constitutes a personal insult in any case. Otherwise we'd just have to ban all the commies here for calling us slaves to the wage.

Please cite the place it is banned in.