Before I get unilaterally banned by Leechasd, I would like some clarification about what constitutes acceptable behavior for forum moderators.
It might help if interested parties (and other mods in particular) read this thread started by Leechasd.
In this thread, Leechasd asked for feedback on some images. lucanaoe gave him feedback that went well beyond a simple "I think A looks better than B." Obviously, lucanaoe gave his responses some time and thought. Leechasd thanked lucanaoe in the text of his response, but did not click the "Thanks" button. In fact, as lucanaoe noted, Leechasd has never once clicked the "Thanks" button. Not realizing that Leechasd was a moderator, I also spoke up, saying Leechasd should click the "Thanks" button. These requests were ignored, so we were left to speculate why Leechasd has never clicked the "Thanks" button. I half-jokingly suggested that people use the scales icon to give Leechasd negative feedback until he starts using the "Thanks" button. Here is the response I finally got from Leechasd:
End of response. So, a moderator on this forum says, "I've never used it and I never will. Forum gimmicks don't apply to much less rep." I'm not entirely sure what that last sentence means, but I think he is saying he thinks a fundamental AO function--the "Thanks" button--is bullshit. Setting aside his reasoning (which I find unconvincing and more than a little confusing), how does one get to be moderator of a forum without respecting all the fundamental assumptions on which that forum is based?
Of more urgent concern to me personally is the very direct threat against me at the end of Leechasd's response. I've seen people say some pretty outrageous things to others on AO that have not resulted in banning or even deletion. And yet here I am being unambiguously threatened with banning not because I said or did something outrageous, but because I had the audacity to speak critically about a moderator. People who are familiar with my posts know that I always strive to be polite and to avoid hostility, except in rare cases in which someone has said something I find deeply offensive. But even my angriest posts are mild in comparison to a lot of posts I've seen on AO. My impression is that Chompy tends to err on the side of free speech (after all, Leechasd, a moderator, is allowed to use an avatar that suggests that slaughtering dozens of Japanese girls is somehow amusing), so I find it hard to believe that he would consider anything I have ever posted to this forum to merit banning.
So I would be grateful if other moderators--and Chompy, if possible--could clarify. Is Leechasd's response to what I wrote reasonable? Because it sure looks to me like an abuse of power. Or is it the case that on AO, moderators are, as it were, "above the law," and unconditionally allowed to ignore forum protocol (i.e., refusing to use the "Thanks" button) and threaten with banning any member they please, for whatever reason they please?
Thank you.
It might help if interested parties (and other mods in particular) read this thread started by Leechasd.
In this thread, Leechasd asked for feedback on some images. lucanaoe gave him feedback that went well beyond a simple "I think A looks better than B." Obviously, lucanaoe gave his responses some time and thought. Leechasd thanked lucanaoe in the text of his response, but did not click the "Thanks" button. In fact, as lucanaoe noted, Leechasd has never once clicked the "Thanks" button. Not realizing that Leechasd was a moderator, I also spoke up, saying Leechasd should click the "Thanks" button. These requests were ignored, so we were left to speculate why Leechasd has never clicked the "Thanks" button. I half-jokingly suggested that people use the scales icon to give Leechasd negative feedback until he starts using the "Thanks" button. Here is the response I finally got from Leechasd:
End of response. So, a moderator on this forum says, "I've never used it and I never will. Forum gimmicks don't apply to much less rep." I'm not entirely sure what that last sentence means, but I think he is saying he thinks a fundamental AO function--the "Thanks" button--is bullshit. Setting aside his reasoning (which I find unconvincing and more than a little confusing), how does one get to be moderator of a forum without respecting all the fundamental assumptions on which that forum is based?
Of more urgent concern to me personally is the very direct threat against me at the end of Leechasd's response. I've seen people say some pretty outrageous things to others on AO that have not resulted in banning or even deletion. And yet here I am being unambiguously threatened with banning not because I said or did something outrageous, but because I had the audacity to speak critically about a moderator. People who are familiar with my posts know that I always strive to be polite and to avoid hostility, except in rare cases in which someone has said something I find deeply offensive. But even my angriest posts are mild in comparison to a lot of posts I've seen on AO. My impression is that Chompy tends to err on the side of free speech (after all, Leechasd, a moderator, is allowed to use an avatar that suggests that slaughtering dozens of Japanese girls is somehow amusing), so I find it hard to believe that he would consider anything I have ever posted to this forum to merit banning.
So I would be grateful if other moderators--and Chompy, if possible--could clarify. Is Leechasd's response to what I wrote reasonable? Because it sure looks to me like an abuse of power. Or is it the case that on AO, moderators are, as it were, "above the law," and unconditionally allowed to ignore forum protocol (i.e., refusing to use the "Thanks" button) and threaten with banning any member they please, for whatever reason they please?
Thank you.
just because it doesn't have a cute picture of a younger girl we'd all like to hug at night doesnt make it any less awesome 
