I guess overall I couldn’t give much of a damn. I don’t think mods should be unhiding their own posts, but equally I don’t think mods should be hiding a post that says “fuck off” from a poster they themselves have just asked to “fuck off”. Just makes the whole thing a mockery.
It’s very silly.
the letter of the law and the spirit of the law in this case seem mutually exclusive. Chads unflagged a post of his that i think had only been flaggrd by one person (me) and that RFC happened immediately after.
Unhiding your own post that had been flagged multiple times seems like a worse offense.
Start an RFC to no longer hide posts.
I too believe that mods should be held to…a lower standard than the rest of the forum rank-and-file rabble? lol?
Seriously just burn it all down 
everybody has their clique and nothing is ever getting solved anymore just like irl
Most hidden posts are manually hidden by a mod because it’s one of the default options when you agree with a flagged post.
I had my doubts about making Keed a mod, but I’ve been pleasantly surprised. I’ve never been a fan of his bad faith trolling, but as far as moderation goes there’s been no real issues, imo. This thread feels a bit much ado about nothing.
It seems pretty simple to me.
There is a specific rule about moderator actions. Rather than commit to abiding by this rule, Keeed has openly declared that in the future he will be willing to violate it based on his own personal judgement and discretion.
In other words, he’s declared himself above the law.
That so many seem to have no problem with this attitude is surprising to me.
lol what the fuck, do I have this story right?
Riverman, a mod, makes a post telling Keed to fuck off
Keed, a mod, makes a post telling smrk to fuck off
Riverman hides Keed’s post for telling another poster to fuck off (?)
Keed unhides his own post and reaches out to smrk
We’re going to demod Keed
This is like fucking parody at this point
Sometimes an aspect that the law protects is itself questionable, rendering the law possibly moot.
We should first have a debate about whether to continue with the controversial system of hiding posts.
that was probably a reasonable discussion to have, before the rule was voted on and approved.
Agreed, but we don’t have a time machine to hand so let’s have that discussion now so we can be sure we don’t demonise someone unnecessarily.
This is how a kind society should work. I’m sure my kind friend @jman220 will agree with me.
There are procedures available for changing rules or making new ones.
In the meantime, the bare minimum qualification for being a mod should be agreeing to abide by the rules of the community they serve.
It’s worth mentioning that not all “Fuck Offs” are equal.
If you argue that Curt Schilling was such a good pitcher that he should be in the HOF despite his politics, I don’t think someone responding to you should be moderated for saying, “Oh fuck off, Schilling is a scumbag.” This is what Riverman’s F-off was, imo. It’s an implied “Fuck off (with that shit).”
Fwiw, Keed’s F-off was worse, but also not a very big deal.
But all of the F-off discourse seems like a red herring. Keed either agrees to play by the rules or not. And once he says he doesn’t, then you either care or not.
(By the way, if he was annoyed at Riverman hiding his F-off post, he should have just hid Riverman’s F-off post. No broken rules. Hypocrisy pointed out. Sorted.)
I think most agree Keed should not have unhidden the post given there is a clear rule against doing that (not even sure Keed would disagree with this). Most think that the idea that we should jump to de-modding Keed for this offense is absurd and mostly about scoring points/settling grievances.
I agree with this entirely, as do most others, I bet. And I think if Keed would just say that he should and will follow the rules, then 99% of the community would be done with the issue.
I understand your point but this is a small internet forum not the United Nations and we can do whatever we like to make the experience of being here as fair and pleasant as possible for the largest number of people.
Why would we not want to take that line?
But he has disagreed! He still feels unhiding the post was justified—in spite of the rule—because the original hiding was “bullshit”.
I agree this doesn’t rise to the level of an impeachable offense (especially since he wasn’t aware of the rule at the time), but the attitude is problematic.
So, what’s the verdict, chaps? Keed gets dishonourably defrocked, 500 lashes and 10 years hard labour seems about proportionate based on the feedback so far.
Or another few months of being a mod - about the same.