More masking - time to fire up the (D) cheat machine

leddy said:
Let me give you an example of something that demonstrates where my thinking lies -

During the George Floyd protests, Trump had an opportunity to start a dialogue. He could have said “look, we hear you. We are going to look at what we can do to improve police training and avoid George Floyd situations”. Even if you think the police can do no wrong, there’s a diplomatic way of communicating that doesn’t throw gas on the fire. Instead, he said “when the looting starts, the shooting starts”. If you’re a black person who has had many instances of being profiled or mistreated, what is that saying to you?
Click to expand...
Maybe he should have said something like -

"All Americans were rightly sickened and revolted by the brutal death of George Floyd. My administration is fully committed that for George and his family justice will be served he will not have died in vain. But we cannot allow the righteous cries of peaceful protestors to be drowned out by an angry mob. The biggest victims of the rioting are peace-loving citizens in our poorest communities and as their President I will fight to keep them safe."

Oh wait, he did. See the video below.

The tweet you're quoting is out of context, he wasn't aware of the history of the phrase - to him the phrase meant looting and rioting would as a matter of course bring violent conditions among the participants - it doesn't matter what Walter Headley's intention was 60 years ago. You of course will refuse to accept any other context because "Orange Klansman Bad!!"

Anyone with any sense whatever their color should have known better than to riot and loot. But of course there's always those who use any excuse to engage in lawlessness. The Floyd incident was no excuse to go on a crime spree. Period.

There are too many asshole cops like Chauvin, there are also too many people like George Floyd who exist to give police, the courts and jails something to do. I'm sure you won't see the irony of Floyd making "you should live right" videos for his church...between his stints in jail/prison. By all rights Floyd should have been shot dead when he home-invaded that woman years back. Who knows what else he did that we don't know about.

I don't know if Chauvin killed Floyd or not, as I understand it Floyd had a toxic level of drugs in him that could have killed him but Chauvin didn't have enough sense to grasp that when people were yelling "you're killing him" that at the very least the optics were really bad and to do something different than sit there with his knee on Floyd's neck - and that it was also possible he was in fact harming Floyd. Chauvin got his ego involved like asshole cops are wont to do and wasn't going to have people tell him what to do.




leddy said:
I am very against going soft on crime. Lack of prosecution is killing cities. That is a liberal policy I despise. Full stop. I voted for some republicans in my local elections as this is a local issue.

I’m sure we all agree there are socioeconomic differences between whites and blacks. What caused it, and what do we do about it? I’ve already stated my position in other threads. We are dealing with multi-generational effects from lack of access to education and jobs, and subsequent pass-down of resources. I’ve advocated assistance for education and home buying. It was pretty clear the right wingers here were against any sort of race-based assistance. My position is the cause was race-based, so the solution could be as well. If it needs to be needs-based regardless of race, fine, it just makes it that much more expensive though.
Click to expand...
By "race-based assistance" when it comes to home buying apparently you mean subsidized loans i.e. that someone else helps pay for? Or lowering standards? You have any recollection of what happened in 2008? There's a reason lenders crunch numbers.

What else does "race-based assistance in education" means other than artificially bumping someone who scores higher out of a spot or insisting someone else subsidize it?

Ultimately what's killing the cities is the presence of so many who are willing to commit crime. We of course know this is a blasphemy to you. Nowhere in your worldview is there any notion of suggesting that people shouldn't procreate in poverty in the first place, that people who haven't figured how to not be poverty cases shouldn't have kids - two poor people have a kid - instant "underprivileged child" - funny how that works.

As it stands any crack whore can procreate with any repeat-offender felon loser.

And you keep asking "how did the inner-cities get that way???"

.smh

leddy said:
Obviously I support a national gun registry
Click to expand...
And it continues to be wrong-minded.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: RFR
leddy said:
This video was 3 days after his incendiary tweet. Took that long for someone to convince him he f’d up and needed to change his approach.
Click to expand...
As predicted there's only one context you'll acknowledge.

People were rioting, looting, causing damage - because nothing expresses genuine sorrow like stealing an X-Box and tv - some large percentage of whom betcha didn't even know George Floyd's name or could tell you or exactly what the issue was, they just knew it was free-for-all time.

They were engaging in lawlessness which I have yet to see you condemn and *Trump* is the one you call incendiary. How many of those looters and rioters do you think had even seen Trump's tweets?

I know - details you can't be bothered with.
 
RFR is right, even if he is being the biggest baby here ("anti-vaxxer' is a "slur", really??) I should be 'neutral as a moderator'. There's a simple solution. I got a lot out of this site in the past, and that's why I volunteered. But there is seldom anything here these days that inspires me, or teaches me anything regarding recording. So I bid 'adieu'. You can thank RFR for that.
 
That's sad Mike - Prime Time - sure gets weirder by the day, but the rest is pretty good? always seemed that way to me? Give it a chance maybe?

I really don't get this bit RFR posted?
"They can expect to be abused, and they should be able to take it. "Giving as good as one gets" is not appropriate behaviour for a mod."

WHY can they expect to be abused? That's just crazy, and while I take it on the chin sometimes, or get taken to task, it's done nicely - I don't mind that, but I note in the armoury of mod tools is one that sounds pretty suitable for some people? I'd love to try?
 
brassplyer said:
They were engaging in lawlessness which I have yet to see you condemn
Click to expand...
I’ve condemned it many times. You’re too dishonest to continue with here. In the interest of cleaning up this place a bit, I’m done with you. Taking a break. You should go back to truth social or something.
 
Well, if mjb goes I'm still not being mod. Decision is final, so don't even start.

I'm thinking, mjb, you not only throw in the towel as mod, but also pack up and leave, it's going to make you look like the biggest crybaby. Or at least the biggest crybaby this week, or today or whatever. Which is about how long anything said here should bother someone, or shorter. Quit as mod of it doesn't suit you, but hang out. You ain't gotta leave, man. We forgive you.
 
mjbphotos said:
RFR is right, even if he is being the biggest baby here ("anti-vaxxer' is a "slur", really??) I should be 'neutral as a moderator'. There's a simple solution. I got a lot out of this site in the past, and that's why I volunteered. But there is seldom anything here these days that inspires me, or teaches me anything regarding recording. So I bid 'adieu'. You can thank RFR for that.
Click to expand...
Well I’m sorry you feel that way.

You had asked for some kind of document regarding a mod being neutral.

I provided that from the post Gecko posted when he was recruiting new mods.

He refers also to a mod being like a referee. A ref doesn’t cheer for any particular team but just makes sure both teams play by the rules of the game. Simple.

In some of these prime time discussions especially in these divisive times things can get pretty heated.

A moderator, like a referee should be there to keep things from getting out of line. He’s not there to get in the game.

I have no desire to see you quit, and am sorry if you feel that way, but that’s up to you. You’re a big boy.
 
rob aylestone said:
I really don't get this bit RFR posted?
"They can expect to be abused, and they should be able to take it. "Giving as good as one gets" is not appropriate behaviour for a mod."
Click to expand...

Rob, I didn’t write that, I don’t think mods should be abused, and I never abused MJB.

I simply pointed out earlier that a mod should be neutral.
He asked for me to show him something where it said that. So I posted the pertinent parts of a post Gecko had made when he was recruiting for mods.

We live in some pretty divisive times and discussions in Prime time are a reflection of that.
It is my belief that a mod shouldn’t be in the trenches along with those bickering, but he should be above that.

From Geckos post it would seem he agrees.
 
Last edited:
Got you - got pretty lost in the topic.

What is very tricky is to wear two hats. I had not realised that on this forum, as opposed to others I look after, people do get upset by some content, but don't wish to publicly steam in and say so, they do it privately. The other thing is there is a real difference between the UK and US, and I have to keep remembering to avoid to comment at all in some topics - especially Prime Time. If I can find it, I'll repost a topic that appeared here on a British cameraman's forum (sorry, it's now camera professionals forum) - I thought it quite funny as a joke, but then it turned into a Prime Time free for all!.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RFR
It seems reasonable, to me, to view Gecko's guidelines or suggestions in the context of moderating content, rather than general participation.
The idea that a moderator shouldn't express an opinion or engage in discussion, or debate, seems a bit far.

If this was an analog/digital debate rather than a covid one, I don't think anyone would be questioning a moderator's participation in it.

If, however, the moderator's conduct warrants moderation then, of course, that's no good,
but that applies to any member.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RFR
mjbphotos said:
How's that tinfoil hat fitting? :ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...

I have no desire to see mjb go. If he wants to stay on as mod I'm okay with that as well, not that I have any say in the matter, and have no desire for a say. However.....

Is the above quoted post representative of proper mod behavior? I think that is a legit question. Rather than a mere expression of an opinion, It kind of smacks of a taunt , feeding the fire rather than setting an example for others to follow, self discipline, restraint, moderation. I see it with Gecko, conduct that inspires, aspirations in the admirable ability to express oneself, or a thought. I don't suppose it is exactly the same, but akin, in the context of interactions with others, particularly with those you disagree, is it something you would say in the presence of your mother, or father. Would they approve or believe you are putting your best foot forward, and to an extent being a representative of themselves.

Believe it or not I ask myself this question from time to time, perhaps less than I should, at times. Not necessarily here, in life. Admittedly I can occasionally be an ass here in homerecording dot com. I admit that, I could do better. But I'm not a mod, wouldn't want to be. If I were? Well, I reckon I would be on constant alert to ask myself if I am being a good representative of proper and moderated conduct, of my elders so to speak. I may also ask myself, do I really want that responsibility. Is it more funner to as they say fight fire with fire. But in the end that is not what a moderator is supposed to do, more so extinguish or temper the heat.

In the end, and nobody asked me, perhaps use this as a learning experience. It's not a huge deal, or deal breaker. mjb not leave the forum, remain as a mod if he wishes. The site apparently needs mods or Gecko would not have asked.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RFR
Mick Doobie said:
I highly doubt there are a lot of white supremacists shooting up the streets in bullet riddled Chicago. Looting, shoplifting, smash & grab robberies, it's a problem.
Click to expand...

Right (see what I did there?), so we NEED more White Supremacists to stop all the Black People from doing all these things you're talking about? Got it.

RFR said:
Gecko on the other hand is a great moderator. He lives up to the ideals.
Click to expand...

Sure. So, you're happy about the Mod on the Right, but mad about the Mod on the Left? Makes sense... makes sense why I have both you and him on Mute too.
 
@Mick Doobie
It's a valid question, for sure.
I haven't read this discussion in full so I don't really know the context.
Context, as always is everything. If reports come in we'll look at them.

As to the need for moderators, I can't really say.
I'm active, and have always been but I wasn't involved in the discussion or decision to recruit.

I don't go looking for things to moderate - I look at reports and new member approval queue semi-regularly and that's about it.
It's not exactly overwhelming.
 
Ujn Hunter said:
Right (see what I did there?), so we NEED more White Supremacists to stop all the Black People from doing all these things you're talking about? Got it.



Sure. So, you're happy about the Mod on the Right, but mad about the Mod on the Left? Makes sense... makes sense why I have both you and him on Mute too.
Click to expand...

If you're suggesting that Gecko moderates this forum based on his political leanings please make a report about it and I'll thoroughly investigate it.

When a claim like that is made it's safe to say at least one person has to go.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top