Erin: response to closing blacklisting thread

[CreativeDestruction]

Originally Posted by Erin

Dear CreativeDestruction,

We found something in your post that rubs us the wrong way (call us crazy, but we like meaningful, intelligent posts):

http://www.urch.com/forums/showthread.php?p=535235

Reason: Multiple complaint threads
-------
I understand that you're frustrated, but do not make multiple threads to complain about a moderator's action.
-------

Please post in the Feedback Forum if you have any questions, as you may not be able to respond to this message.

This infraction is worth 10 point(s). Just so you know--a one-point 'infraction' is fairly minor; a twenty-point infraction is serious. If you get enough infractions, we may block your account for a while or permanently.

Finally, I wish you all the best in your studies!

The TestMagic Forums

I find things that rub me the wrong way about other posters' comments, and I usually live and let live. Why do other posters' opinions matter more than mine? I've never complained about a poster even when I thought the idea was poorly stated or immature. In addition, you're quoting the professors at Johns Hopkins who repeatedly used the word "crazy" around me. I already have lawyers who find that to be creating a hostile work environment. You're doing something illegal in parroting the JHU professors. That rubbed lawyers the wrong way, so I have a legal basis for saying it rubs me the wrong way too.

I have legal documentation for all of my comments, so I satisfy that part of the new rules. In addition, I could have edited the existing threads to remove the names of the people at Johns Hopkins. I can start new threads related to the institution in general as the new rules allow, but new threads increase the amount of time and drama of the whole thing. You've made this into a more of a spectacle than it needs to be.

[Erin]

Originally Posted by CreativeDestruction

I find things that rub me the wrong way about other posters' comments, and I usually live and let live. Why do other posters' opinions matter more than mine? I've never complained about a poster even when I thought the idea was poorly stated or immature. In addition, you're quoting the professors at Johns Hopkins who repeatedly used the word "crazy" around me. I already have lawyers who find that to be creating a hostile work environment. You're doing something illegal in parroting the JHU professors. That rubbed lawyers the wrong way, so I have a legal basis for saying it rubs me the wrong way too.

I have legal documentation for all of my comments, so I satisfy that part of the new rules. In addition, I could have edited the existing threads to remove the names of the people at Johns Hopkins. I can start new threads related to the institution in general as the new rules allow, but new threads increase the amount of time and drama of the whole thing. You've made this into a more of a spectacle than it needs to be.

CD, I suggest that we stick to the topic in question, which I assume is the infraction. I gave you an infraction because you made three posts complaining about a moderator's action. You're free to complain or provide feedback, but one thread is enough.

I'd like to think that a lot of the problems found in some of your threads are caused by miscommunication. For example, you make some statements that are simply not true, and I (and others I'm sure) feel the need to refute them, if only to defend myself. For example, you say, In addition, you're quoting the professors at Johns Hopkins who repeatedly used the word "crazy" around me. This is patently false.

This style of communication causes problems in forums, and in truth, appears to be trollish. I'm afraid that we will continue to moderate you and your posts if the tone of your future posts continues in this vein.

[CreativeDestruction]

Originally Posted by Erin

CD, I suggest that we stick to the topic in question, which I assume is the infraction. I gave you an infraction because you made three posts complaining about a moderator's action. You're free to complain or provide feedback, but one thread is enough.

I'd like to think that a lot of the problems found in some of your threads are caused by miscommunication. For example, you make some statements that are simply not true, and I (and others I'm sure) feel the need to refute them, if only to defend myself. For example, you say, In addition, you're quoting the professors at Johns Hopkins who repeatedly used the word "crazy" around me. This is patently false.

This style of communication causes problems in forums, and in truth, appears to be trollish. I'm afraid that we will continue to moderate you and your posts if the tone of your future posts continues in this vein.

A number of the lawyers who looked over my evidence agreed with me that the JHU professors and others were going out of their way to repeat the term, "crazy." You're justifiably nervous about your legal liability. Stating the obvious, you shouldn't violate another poster's privacy rights. Not to be snarky, but I haven't learned anything I didn't know already from the posters. Many are well-intentioned, but they are also immature and inexperienced. If posters here don't want to hear from people with more experience and want to fly blind, then I'm fine with letting them fly blind. I really don't like or respect bullies, and you're not an expert in economics, FAFSA laws, privacy laws, so you're not in a position to push me around.