Why Did Wally Get Banned?

[fournineteenfiftynine]

NEWS FLASH!!! Not all Members of LPSG have a penis. Just like not all Members here are, gasp, gay! Or here for the penis! For so many, it really is the community that keeps us coming back.

Here's something else I know: You don't need a penis or a vagina to be a good Moderator at LPSG.

But you do need a brain! Some smarts. An open mind. Patience. Good judgment. And very often, more patience! The wonderful ladies who moderate here have that. And so much more. It's why I find myself often seeking their advice. Input. It's nice having that balance.

Very little here in the big scheme of things that requires moderation revolves around "the penis". But we do have some Members who seem to think with their penis, rather than the head above their shoulders; hence the need for a lot of the moderation that happens here.

Check out LPSG's Terms and Rules. Here's a link: Terms of Service and Rules. We find that a lot of Members have no clue it even exists based on some of the Reports we get.

If you take a look at the Terms and Rules, you'll see Moderation is more likely to be about conduct. Behavior. Inability to follow the Terms and Rules. And what's interesting is that the majority of Moderation involves Members who have a penis, lol.

Even though I have a penis, I know what I don't know. Unlike a few others on here who might think they do.

Well now. I once again and for the third time have to explain that my comment was in response to a question posted by another member. "Can you please give me an example where a woman may not understand a situation?" His comment was clearly in my post and I replied with the answer to his question. So again, please read my post and the post I responded to . It did not say that women shouldn't be moderators because they don't have a penis. You made that jump.

 

[LPSG Support]

Well now. I once again and for the third time have to explain that my comment was in response to a question posted by another member. "Can you please give me an example where a woman may not understand a situation?" His comment was clearly in my post and I replied with the answer to his question. So again, please read my post and the post I responded to . It did not say that women shouldn't be moderators because they don't have a penis. You made that jump.

Well that user happened to be me and I happen to be the owner. The question was in direct response to the comment that women shouldn't be moderators because on certain issues women will not understand things that men would. It wasn't a discussion of whether women understand what an erection feels like. It was saying women can not possibly be as good as men at moderating.

I'll make the question a little more direct and clear.

"Can you please give me an example where a woman moderator may not understand a moderating situation that a male moderator would understand?"

 

[LPSG Support]

Well now. I once again and for the third time have to explain that my comment was in response to a question posted by another member. "Can you please give me an example where a woman may not understand a situation?" His comment was clearly in my post and I replied with the answer to his question. So again, please read my post and the post I responded to . It did not say that women shouldn't be moderators because they don't have a penis. You made that jump.

Actually you made the jump on my comment. Go back and read what he wrote.

He wrote
Perhaps the mod team should be a representation of the demographic of the sites users? I feel this is important because there are issues which come up on this site that aren't necessarily understood by another demo. I hope that maked sense.

I think you got into it with people after jumping to the wrong conclusion about what they were referring to.

 

[fournineteenfiftynine]

Actually you made the jump on my comment. Go back and read what he wrote.

He wrote
Perhaps the mod team should be a representation of the demographic of the sites users? I feel this is important because there are issues which come up on this site that aren't necessarily understood by another demo. I hope that maked sense.

I think you got into it with people after jumping to the wrong conclusion about what they were referring to.

I don't feel "I got into it with people" again it seems like assumptions are being made. People "got into it with me" when they didn't follow the train of thought. I never said women shouldn't be moderators. But a couple of people made that assumption without reading the context. I was responding to you. You asked a question. I answered. That's about it. I never said women shouldn't be moderators. Never. But I understood the nice man to be wondering if there should be more representative balance and also he came up with some alternative ways. I did not "get into it" with anyone other than clarifying their wrong assumptions. Thanks.

 

[LPSG Support]

I don't feel "I got into it with people" again it seems like assumptions are being made. People "got into it with me" when they didn't follow the train of thought. I never said women shouldn't be moderators. But a couple of people made that assumption without reading the context. I was responding to you. You asked a question. I answered. That's about it. I never said women shouldn't be moderators. Never. But I understood the nice man to be wondering if there should be more representative balance and also he came up with some alternative ways. I did not "get into it" with anyone other than clarifying their wrong assumptions. Thanks.

You seemed to not take into the context of what I was asking and then blamed others for understanding my context but not getting yours. It seems like an unnecessary back and forth where they actually all knew what was being asked.

 

[fournineteenfiftynine]

Mr. Mr. LPSG,

He said: Perhaps the mod team should be a representation of the demographic of the sites users?

He didn't say that women should not be moderators.

i was backing him up in the idea of balance. Again, not saying that women should not be moderators. This shouldn't be that difficult if people would read the real words of people rather than making assumptions.

 

[HellaX24]

Mr. Mr. LPSG,

He said: Perhaps the mod team should be a representation of the demographic of the sites users?

He didn't say that women should not be moderators.

i was backing him up in the idea of balance. Again, not saying that women should not be moderators. This shouldn't be that difficult if people would read the real words of people rather than making assumptions.

Actually reading and responding to the post, rather just responding with how they feel about the post. Their perception isn't always what they are responding too.

 

[LPSG Support]

Mr. Mr. LPSG,

He said: Perhaps the mod team should be a representation of the demographic of the sites users?

He didn't say that women should not be moderators.

i was backing him up in the idea of balance. Again, not saying that women should not be moderators. This shouldn't be that difficult if people would read the real words of people rather than making assumptions.

I agree with diversity but the point I addressed was very specific. He implied women can not be as good as men at moderating.

Once again
He wrote
Perhaps the mod team should be a representation of the demographic of the sites users? I feel this is important because there are issues which come up on this site that aren't necessarily understood by another demo. I hope that maked sense.

 

[LPSG Support]

Mr. Mr. LPSG,

He said: Perhaps the mod team should be a representation of the demographic of the sites users?

He didn't say that women should not be moderators.

i was backing him up in the idea of balance. Again, not saying that women should not be moderators. This shouldn't be that difficult if people would read the real words of people rather than making assumptions.

I like how you pick what you want to discuss rather than what the rest of us are discussing.

 

[deleted924715]

If you read the context of the question I was answering was:
"Can you please give me an example where a woman may not understand a situation?"

I wasn't stating they shouldn't be moderators. However, moderators should be able to read the context of comments that are made.

I read the context of the comments. Hence my reply.

I didn't say anyone said women shouldn't be moderators - I pointed out that having a penis is irrelevant to enforcing the site rules.

Relevant to a conversation of what it feels like to get kicked in the balls? Yes. Relevant to discussing the impact of circumcision? Absolutely. Relevant to the application of rules governing the behaviour of *all* members? Not particularly.

I'm not the one cherry-picking here.

 

[fournineteenfiftynine]

I agree with diversity but the point I addressed was very specific. He implied women can not be as good as men at moderating.

Once again
He wrote
Perhaps the mod team should be a representation of the demographic of the sites users? I feel this is important because there are issues which come up on this site that aren't necessarily understood by another demo. I hope that maked sense.

Mr. Mr. LPSG,

Again, you are the one cherry picking. You said, "he implied women can not be as good as men at moderating." As your quote clearly says, he did not. He said, "Perhaps the mod team should be a representation of the demographic of the sites users.'

That is not anywhere close to saying that women can not be as good. He suggested there should be a representation. He did not say that women can't be as good. Geesh.

And by the way Mr. Moderator, I am the OP.

 

[deleted848353]

Mr. Mr. LPSG,

Again, you are the one cherry picking. You said, "he implied women can not be as good as men at moderating." As your quote clearly says, he did not. He said, "Perhaps the mod team should be a representation of the demographic of the sites users.'

That is not anywhere close to saying that women can not be as good. He suggested there should be a representation. He did not say that women can't be as good. Geesh.

And by the way Mr. Moderator, I am the OP.

Mr. LPSG ain't a moderator hes the site owner.

Also Wally got banned for a month and now hes back from banned camp so can we stop picking holes in the sites moderation

 

[fournineteenfiftynine]

Mr. LPSG ain't a moderator hes the site owner.

Also Wally got banned for a month and now hes back from banned camp so can we stop picking holes in the sites moderation

I don't know why, then, he keeps accusing me of something that isn't true. I NEVER said or implied that women should not be moderators. Nor did the other guy. If I made a mistake I would admit it. It's not that hard. It is quite simple. One guy said, "Maybe there should be a representation." Mr. LPSG jumped to conclusion that the guy said women shouldn't be moderators. He didn't. Then Mr. LPSG asked if there was anything women couldn't understand. I said, well, they probably can't understand things related to being the owner of a penis although they offer valuable perspectives. Then I was accused of not wanting women to be moderators when that's not the case. Mr. Mr. LPSG - I appeal to you to say if anything I just said isn't true.

 

[MisterB]

Mr. Mr. LPSG,

Again, you are the one cherry picking. You said, "he implied women can not be as good as men at moderating." As your quote clearly says, he did not. He said, "Perhaps the mod team should be a representation of the demographic of the sites users.'

That is not anywhere close to saying that women can not be as good. He suggested there should be a representation. He did not say that women can't be as good. Geesh.

And by the way Mr. Moderator, I am the OP.

You are correct. He did not SAY women cannot be as good as men as Moderators. And Congrats on being this Thread's OP.

But Mr. LPSG, who is LPSG's Owner, is also correct. It's what that poster implied. And you must have also thought that was what he implied, because you added this little nugget which somehow is missing from this discussion. So let us add it here now, for proper context:

YOU: "Well while women can offer an interesting and valuable perspective on many things women can't understand what it feels like to have a penis (big or small) and all that goes with it."

And that's when the conversation really took off. What could you possibly be implying with that comment other than "You need a penis (big or small) to be a Moderator at LPSG"? That's why I responded to you, and it appears to be why others also took umbrage with your statement.

Let's play this out, shall we? Women have stellar Military careers, rising to the rank of Admiral/General. Women become fighter jet pilots. Scientists. Engineers. Attorneys. Judges. Just to name a few occupations which were typically male-dominated not that many years ago. Oh hell, who am I kidding; those occupations are still male dominated. Yet a lot of women persevere. And prevail. And have laudable careers.

All of which requires good judgment. Ability to see the forest for the trees. Patience. Understanding. Leadership. And not one of those jobs requires a penis. At least not TODAY. Yet there are those who still believe that maybe you do need a penis to do a certain job.

The good news is Mr. LPSG is not one of them. It's precisely why we have a variety of Moderators. Straight, gay, male, female. And what we all have in common is that Mr. LPSG recognizes each of us has the requisite skills upon which to render appropriate and timely Moderation of LPSG.

And that my friend, is what is important. That Mr. LPSG has the team of Moderators for HIS site that he feels best represent him and how he wants the site to operate.

It really is that simple.

 

[fournineteenfiftynine]

You said:
YOU: "Well while women can offer an interesting and valuable perspective on many things women can't understand what it feels like to have a penis (big or small) and all that goes with it."

And that's when the conversation really took off. What could you possibly be implying with that comment other than "You need a penis (big or small) to be a Moderator at LPSG"?

ME: I was implying my agreement that women CAN and SHOULD be moderators but that I also felt that the guy had a legitimate point that there may be some topics that women can't relate to as I can't relate to topics that are aimed at straight men or women. I have said at least a half dozen times now. I'm all in favor of all the moderators you can get, male, female, straight, gay, trans, bi, whatever I'm sure a thankless job. But I never said nor implied that women should not be moderators. I was saying that for many threads and topics that are clearly focused on "how one feels about having a penis" that women can offer interesting and valuable perspectives. Which is exactly what I said. I'm happy that women choose to be moderators on this site.

 

[deleted924715]

I don't know why, then, he keeps accusing me of something that isn't true. I NEVER said or implied that women should not be moderators. Nor did the other guy. If I made a mistake I would admit it. It's not that hard. It is quite simple. One guy said, "Maybe there should be a representation." Mr. LPSG jumped to conclusion that the guy said women shouldn't be moderators. He didn't. Then Mr. LPSG asked if there was anything women couldn't understand. I said, well, they probably can't understand things related to being the owner of a penis although they offer valuable perspectives. Then I was accused of not wanting women to be moderators when that's not the case. Mr. Mr. LPSG - I appeal to you to say if anything I just said isn't true.

Er, you are cherry picking - the entirety of what the "other guy" said:

I'm slightly concerned about the ratio of men to women mods. I could be wrong, but there doesn't appear to be that many women, compared to men, using this site yet they represent 40% of the mod team. Perhaps thethe mod team should be a representation of the demographic of the sites users? I feel this is important because there are issues which come up on this site that aren't necessarily understood by another demo. I hope that maked sense.

Mr. LPSG questioned him on it and you extrapolated for him. I don't think you intended to imply women shouldn't be moderators. But the other guy did. Mr. LPSG (and everyone else who commented) understood the context. Either you did and you don't think women capable of moderating the site too, or you weren't aware of the context, yet you're lecturing everyone else on context.

 

[fournineteenfiftynine]

Again....read what you just posted. The other guy said: Perhaps the mod team should be a representation of the demographic of the sites users?

That is not the same as saying women should not be moderators. It is in fact saying the opposite.He is saying there should be women moderators. But he is asking if it would be a good idea for a representational balance. That's different.

 

[deleted924715]

Again....read what you just posted. The other guy said: Perhaps the mod team should be a representation of the demographic of the sites users?

That is not the same as saying women should not be moderators. It is in fact saying the opposite.He is saying there should be women moderators. But he is asking if it would be a good idea for a representational balance. That's different.

Now you're being disingenuous by omitting the first part of his comment.

Cherry picking at its finest.

It's not everyone else - it's you.

 

[fournineteenfiftynine]

Now you're being disingenuous by omitting the first part of his comment.

Cherry picking at its finest.

It's not everyone else - it's you.

Oh brother. Here's the full quote:

I'm slightly concerned about the ratio of men to women mods.
(I'm reading that he is concerned about the ratio - not saying there should be no women moderators)

I could be wrong, but there doesn't appear to be that many women, compared to men, using this site yet they represent 40% of the mod team.
(He's wondering about the ratio - not saying there shouldn't be women moderators)

Perhaps the mod team should be a representation of the demographic of the sites users?
(He's wondering if the ratio should be similar to user ratio - again not saying there should not be women moderators)
I feel this is important because there are issues which come up on this site that aren't necessarily understood by another demo. I hope that maked sense.
(He's wondering about the ratio again, not saying there should not be women moderators and politely asks if it makes sense or not)

My response was to that. I though yes, it made some sense for some threads.

 

[Cum_is_Great]

My response was to that. I though yes, it made some sense for some threads

And what threads and context would it prevent them from fulfilling their moderator duties? What does the ratio have to do with properly moderating? What is the logic of moderation needing to match the user ratio in any demographic? We all seem to be in agreement there is no topic or context that would prevent them from being a good moderator, only you and that guy. Please expand a hypothetical.

If you think there isn't then there was never a reason to answer shaps original question because it was, in context, about fulfilling moderator duties. We all got it. You answered not applying the already understood context. Only you missed the context. Answering his question which had implied and known context by all, without the context was a shortsight by you and only you. Us correcting you was not a failing on our end, you decided to change the context everyone else understood and was working with.