Did Mod cause the collapse of evcforum?

From your Message 16: ​ After reviewing the numerous debates (my head hurts from all the reading) that led up to the Great Purge a.k.a. "Night of the Broken Glass", I have concluded that you were as even-keeled then as you are now. I have not seen any deficiency in your decision, and I hardly think that Crashfrog is painting an accurate picture about what transpired.

If you really are NJ in disguise, then that makes your "conclusion" above flagrantly disingenuous, making you STILL a rather dishonest/despicable person.

From your Message 182: ​ But I did earn a lot of people's respect, . . .

Really?

Crash Frog's Message 91: ​ he wasn't interested in the moral philosophy, he was interested in insulting homosexuals.

CS's Message 92: ​ But you don't know that, nor can you.

Hyroglyphx Message 182: ​ I was a homophobe and a typical fundy. ​ And I engaged in a shit-ton of controversial topics that pissed a lot of people off. ​ I didn't give a shit then and I don't care now.

In light of Hyro/NJ's latest admissions and glaring intents, do you or anyone else now concede that Crashfrog might have plausible/probable POVs?Just curious.

Hey Straggler,Well, the master manipulator part is a little silly. We are talking about Hyro/NJ afterall. Sheesh.But . . .. . . how do you harmonize this:

Hyro/NJ writes: ​ But I meant then, as much as I do now, that I never hated them. That is the honest truth. And back then it was very much about my fascination for absolutes vs relativism.

with this?:

Hyroglyphx Message 182: ​ I was a homophobe and a typical fundy. ​ And I engaged in a shit-ton of controversial topics that pissed a lot of people off. ​ I didn't give a shit then and I don't care now.

And the self-declaration that Hyro/NJ could have been an even bigger dishonest jerk if he only committed to it:

Hyro/NJ writes: Message 190 ​ If I was an incredibly disingenuous and despicable person, I probably wouldn't have told the forum who I was.

It is evidence that Hyro/NJ is the type of person who would repeatedly bait Berberry with hate speech, yes?

Marvelous. It seems Hyro/NJ agrees to this too. This item was "Part A" that Crash seemed to have some difficulty convincing others.Since you agree with the above . . .Then "Part B" (the million dollar question) is:The next time a member relentlessly pursues (in different threads?) a point on a controversial topic in language that a member finds deeply offensive, what action do YOU think the moderator(s) SHOULD take, if any?For the good of the forum, I am also addressing other participants with this question? What do YOU think?

Thanks, but you didn't quite answer my question:The next time a member relentlessly pursues (in different threads?) a point on a controversial topic in language that a member finds deeply offensive, what action do YOU think the moderator(s) SHOULD take, if any?

In message 200, Hyro admits/concedes: Edited by dronester, : whoops, wrong person attributed to quote

Are you saying that if some one admits to "gay-baiting," he isn't necessarily using offensive language?Perhaps I need to see actual examples for clarity.

Hey Hyro,It may seem like I am picking on you. But, in fact the topic is about whether Mod or any moderator could have done better. If so, what can be done differently next time?But before we can come to any conclusion, we first have to reconstruct the "crime". You have been a star witness. Seriously, thanks for helping us. But, it appears some members of the jury are still unconvinced with the testamony/evidence so far. And IF we have a hung jury, then alas, we can't suggest a better course for the moderators to take next time.I noted your message 230 below. I generally agree. Thank you: Again, thanks for being a good sport about this. Also, by Mod creating this thread, (and potentially putting his head in the noose) he should get credit for trying to improve the forum.

I agree with your second sentence: but . . .offensive "euphemistic language" as opposed to "gay-baiting" language?Hmmm.You have me nearly nodding my head in agreement, but I am still imagining potentially unclear, grey regions.Can you supply a clear example of each?

Hey Mod,Unless, as you say, Crash or someone else can include additional sources, from the links you gave and I perused, then no, it appears the word "relentless" is not applicable.Anyways, thanks for your on-topic contributions to "Gender and Humor". I just wish we had more females on the forum to participate on that particular thread. I still find the subject rather interesting.

Now when it comes to "priorities", I DO understand.

How VERY INTERESTING!!!When you get more info (title, show premiers dates), please let me know. Just update our "Gender and Humor" thread or PM me.In the humor thread, I think Rrhain has only used his brief introductory remarks so far, so it should still be lemony fresh by then.thanks Oni