Discussion in 'SF Open Government' started by ElectricFetus, Apr 11, 2004.
Too bad Xev's an uber philosopophy student, and you aren't.
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
Xev is... um... harsh? She is however usually able to defend her position, even if I completely disagree with it. People saying things which I consider to be wrong (Xev, Raithiere) and then backing them up with evidence is one of the reasons I like this place.
Unless someone can show me a place were Xev was unfair I see no reason to impeach her.
...because she provided me with convincing evidence? How is that "inexplicable"?
Why don't you just close this thread? Porfiry says she's staying accept it. If you don't like it, get lost Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I asked for it to be closed along time ago!
Sorry, I didn't see. In which case:
I second WellCookedFetus' motion Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I didn't say she was staying regardless. I said I would abide by the vote, and the vote has suggested that she's staying.
41/34... don't you think it's about time this closed?
Well I (and many others) thought this thread should have been closed at the beginning and started over because the second choice has nothing to do with wanting to impeach her.
Do you read?
Maybe wcf missed some commas? "do, no, impeach xev"
eh, I guess its more likely that he missed a 't'.
LOL @ option #2:
Q: "Should Xev be impeached?"
A: "Yes Xev is a wacko, but still a OK moderator (Do no impeach Xev)"
Taken from the point of view of a new disinterested member, this is obviously an ambiguous option. The first half reads (adding punctuation) "Yes. Xev is a wacko." implying the desire to impeach Xev, and seeming like a less severe option to #1. The "Do no impeach Xev", although misspelled, implies the desire to keep Xev as a moderator.
While it's likely not a conspiracy, I think it's fair to say that some could have chosen #2 with the intention of having Xev impeached, either because they didn't fully read the option, or because they didn't fully understand it. The idiot-proof way of constructing options would have been a simple "Yes" or "No" option.
Nevertheless, I personally don't think all that really matters. If someone is dumb or oblivious enough to vote for something they don't really want, they deserve the consequences.
Long live Xev !!! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
If you want this thread to die, not posting in it would be an obvious solution, ja?
But I find it sexually gratifying.
55 of the Scfi forum members do not consider her to be "good" moderator, of which 34 want her removed.
To the Admin: When such a huge number of members disapprove of her, what is the point of having her as a moderator. That's almost more than half of the active members.
There is a difference between not liking Xev as a person and not thinking she is fit to be moderator. Obviously there may be at least one person on Sciforums that just hates Xev because of her views and how she may treat a few, but that has nothing to do with how well she can moderate the forums. If she was fit to be a moderator, I am quite sure Porfiry would have noticed somewhere down the road between post number 1 to 8,300.
I think it as an issue that nneds to be adressed. Some of Xev's posts, according to some people, are not appropriate. I have to agree with some of this. I respect others' opinions, but there is a way in which they present it that can be unacceptable. I think that this forum already has too few mods and Xev should be fired and others should take on the job. There are many good people willing to do it, including me.
Thread closed at request of initiator.
Separate names with a comma.