Text 1558, 97 rader
Skriven 2004-11-05 09:12:00 av Robert Couture (1:229/2000)
   Kommentar till text 1533 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
Ärende: Science 1/2
===================
Michiel van der Vlist -> Dale Shipp wrote:

 MvdV> No, I am not. I am merely the co-moderator.

You're not that stupid are you?  Or perhaps your grasp of the English language
is worse than I thought.

The prefix co- means "together, joint," as in co-owner; "equally, mutually," as
in coextensive, cooperative; "partner with, associate to," as in coauthor,
coproducer, or to cosign [a note]; and "assistant or subordinate to," as in
coadjutor. And sometimes the "equal or subordinate" issue is ambiguous, as in
cohost, coanchor.

Now the last sentence may have bearing, however it still makes you 'a'
moderator.  You may not be the chief moderator, but you are an assistant
moderator ... but still /a/ moderator.


 MvdV> No, I was appointed CO-moderator.

See above.  You are still /a/ moderator.

 MvdV> So that I could update the listing in case he was unable to do it
 MvdV> himself. The mere fact that I have the password does not make me the
 MvdV> moderator. Ever heard of third party updates?

Still part of the duties as /a/ moderator.

 MvdV> I updated the listing once. The is not "using" the e-list.

If you updated the elist once, then you used it once.  That covers Dales
statement.

 MvdV> No. It is the stupid e-list software that does not know the difference
 MvdV> bewteen moderator and co-moderator.

See above.  You are /a/ moderator.

 >>  You moderate the echo (as> in sending netmail to posters who
 >> are out of line).

 MvdV> No.

Then why have the title of co-moderator?

 MvdV> Yes, it was taken care of and I told Earl. It was not taken care of by
 MvdV> *me* however. Who took care of it and how is none of your business.

Sounds like you are hiding something.  It is not a matter of national security.

Besides, it appears that you were privy to the information and allowed this
person to deal with it.  That makes you party to it.

 MvdV> Nevertheless I am denying it. I am merely the comoderator.

Learn the language.  Being an assistant moderator is still being /a/ moderator.

 MvdV> It seems to me there is no way that I can do this right in your eyes. It
 MvdV> is dammed if I do and dammed if I don't.

You constant contradictions and backpeddling make your word meaningless.

 MvdV> If I concede (as I do) that the science echo has a Z1 moderator and
 MvdV> therefore should be subject to Z1 rules, you scold me for not following
 MvdV> EP1.

Nope.  I only scold you when you claim one thing in once sentence and deny it
in another.  HAM echo is one such case.  The Z1 rules state the moderator in
the elist should the moderator choose to use it.  Until that listing expired,
Roy Witt was moderator becuase he uses the elist (as do the majority of Z1
moderators.  To deny this, is pathetic.

To top it off, you used the elist to update the SCIENCE echo.  Kinda makes you
a hypocrite.

 MvdV> If I were to follow EP1 you scold me for trying to impose my set of
 MvdV> rules on others.

You tried to do that on a Z1 echo before.

 MvdV> So what the h*ll DO you want?

You to stop talking as if you are right all the time, when it is obvious that
you are not.

 MvdV> And FYI, EP1 does not say anything about comoderators. EP1 also does not
 MvdV> cater for the situation that there is more than one moderator. It
 MvdV> describes the rights and duties of *the* moderator. Period. Comoderators
 MvdV> are not mentioned and so they have no duties that can be neglected.

That is a failing in your document.  As a co-moderator is still /a/ moderator
and can perform the duties of the moderator.

Robert.

--- JamNNTPd/Linux v1.0 - w/Mods by Hub2000
 * Origin: Hub2000 FTN News Server (1:229/2000)