I want to report this post. it's totally unbefitting of what a closure should be and accentuates the very biasedness the creation of that very thread was intended to address.

It seemed clear to me that it was a collective "you."

it's the second line that confuses me. i think she needs to clarify it. what post is she referring to? was a "your" meant to be inserted prior to "post referred to sinas chinom"? it's not like i can ask her in the thread that she closed. if i'm reading this right then the reference was directed at one person.

Krum, did you post in reference to the sinas chinom earlier today?

Not that I remember...

btw, thank you so much for being a friend, Ahavati. From the bottom of my heart.

then i stand corrected. i misread Enforcer's post and thought she was referring directly to you as the OP. the second line confused me.




you're welcome.

Folks, to toss in my 2 agorot.

My impression of the previous thread that is currently being commented upon is that the entire thread got out of hand.

My response was a general response to all. The "you" was a collective you and not pointed at any individual.

Purposefully inciting posters is more than wrong, uncalled for and inappropriate-- but going along and responding til it escalates is on par.

Only 2 days ago it was Tisha B'Av- I don't need to teach a lesson in history, but tradition states that it was a day that 2 batei mikdash were destroyed and one for sinas chinom. Is it possible to get beyond the hatred and understand different points of view? Can we learn from each other no matter ones background, hashkafah, etc.?

For me the answer to both questions are unequivocally yes.

humbly agrees.

thank you for responding and clarifying your post.

Well, I'm obviously not a mod here so I don't know how they are told to do things, however when I use to mod (for a much larger group) we would do a few things before just closing a thread - which, when done that way was sure to cause more harsh feelings.

First, we PM'ed the first offender - the one who started the 1st instance of Loshen Hara

Second - post a firm reminder to the posting rule(s) that were being broken, along with warning that those who continued in that manner would get "strikes" (I think h.com uses warnings?)

Third - Give out strikes - the offender was to read over the TOS before allowed to post again

Fourth - Close the thread, explaining why without adding anything about gulit, etc. Just a simple: "Sorry this is too heated to continue in the proper manner so I'm going to have to close this thread.

As for the other thread, I read it through. And, as people can easily discover, Krum & I may not agree on most things, but she was right on target on this one.

IMO, the thread also had NO flavor of attempting to "take over" the site. As a matter of fact, again, IMO, Silent J actually sparked the popularity aspect off by asking everyone for "nominations" for mods. I do not at all think he meant it to turn out that way, but it did...which is why I had posted the suggestion of those who wanted to be mods PM Silent J with whatever statements of qualifications or why they want to take on the burden of a mod. Then Silent J should be the one to pick. Silent J could also privately contact any member he thinks would also be a good mod.

Members knowing the ID of the mods has never been a good idea. If just nominating folks has brought out the Loshen Hara, imagine what would happen if the ID of a mod was know --then you'd really have screaming of biasness!!

i adamantly agree, which is exactly why i defended her. the thread had merit and addressed a very valid point. that point was crushed under misinterpretation but still remains a growing contention between factions that will eventually explode if not diffused.

your additional notations are valid points as well.

This sounds like a job for Agent Bauer. Back to CTU!!