Results 11 to 20 of 44
-
05-13-2008, 08:39 PM #11
- Join Date
- Nov 2007
- Posts
- 466
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Mod 1
-
05-14-2008, 12:16 AM #12Originally Posted by Mod 100
-
05-14-2008, 01:16 AM #13
must say that I agree
I agree and dont think those threads should have been taken away. So your saying we can only post things that dont offend the moderator? I thought the moderator was supposed to be neutral.
-
05-14-2008, 01:21 AM #14Originally Posted by MOD 426
Dont let your personal feelings interfere with your job or give up the moderator position to someone that can handle it.
-
05-14-2008, 01:22 AM #15
Re: Coward
Originally Posted by Lorraine Szczepanik
-
05-14-2008, 02:52 AM #16Originally Posted by Anonymous
The very first Post in the Thread was a very detailed critique of some administrators. This Post would have been fine to stay, except for the fact that their were some "allegations" of wrong doing about named Law Enforcement Officers in it. Now, don't jump on me, I use the term "allegations" only because there is no "sufficient proof or reference posted with it. This violates the Terms of Use, especially when made by an Anonymous poster.
Without these allegations this post would probably have been ok. It was someone posting their opinion about the different administrators. What would have even made it better, would have been to refer to them by rank only.
You could then offer your opinions, without getting personal of these individuals and probably, most of you fellow officers would know who you are referring to, but, the public would not. This would help prevent complaints and greatly reduce the possibility of a violation of the Terms of Use.
Using someone's name is not a violation of the Terms of Use, it is the Context in which it is used that makes it a violation or not. It's just easier to avoid a Terms of Use violation when you don't use a person's name.
That was the first post in the thread. When the first post in a thread violates the Terms of Use, there is not an easy way to remove it and allow the other posts to remain. Can it be done? Yes. Does Mod 426 know how to do it? Probably not. It's rather complicated. I can do it. I never have, because usually when the first post in a thread is a violation and you do remove it, the rest of the posts don't make any sense.
There were a few posts between that one and the FTO one. Some were okay, there was one notable violation with the use of Profanity. Shame shame Vic......
The FTO Post. That one also contained violations of the Terms of Use. What constituted a violation was calling Named Officers "Incompetent," profanity, allegations of padding stats, and getting personal with name calling.
Again, if you want to offer a critique of FTOs that might not be flattering and you don't want to do it face to face, you might want to consider doing it without their name.
I apologize for this post being so long.
If you have any questions please let me know.
Mod 1Mod 1
http://WWW.LEOAFFAIRS.COM
Terms Of Use
The real reason that we can't have the Ten Commandments posted in a
courthouse is this: You cannot post "Thou Shalt Not Steal," "Thou Shalt
Not Commit Adultery," and "Thou Shall Not Lie" in a building full of
lawyers, judges and politicians...It creates a hostile work environment.
-
05-14-2008, 03:31 AM #17Originally Posted by AnonymousOriginally Posted by Anonymous
Both of these posts were made by the same poster back to back but, with an hour between them. One post is basically posting "As a different Guest" offering a supporting opinion to the first one.
This is a game/violation of the Terms of Use that I do not take lightly. Please do not continue to do this.
Thanks,
Mod 1Mod 1
http://WWW.LEOAFFAIRS.COM
Terms Of Use
The real reason that we can't have the Ten Commandments posted in a
courthouse is this: You cannot post "Thou Shalt Not Steal," "Thou Shalt
Not Commit Adultery," and "Thou Shall Not Lie" in a building full of
lawyers, judges and politicians...It creates a hostile work environment.
-
05-14-2008, 12:36 PM #18
Re: Coward
Originally Posted by Anonymous
You obviously don't know me very well and didn't read my initial posting. I said that "no agency is perfect, including my own". I do not air my dirty laundry in public nor will I trash a fellow officer or administrator. I simply voiced my opinion in reference to a posting. I might be mistaken but I thought this forum was not about talking of other people's deficiencies and making accusations about them, but to DISCUSS LEO related issues.
-
05-14-2008, 03:19 PM #19Originally Posted by Anonymous
I removed those posts for several reasons and one of them had nothing to do with my emotions. The reasons that MOD 1 listed plus if I let those posts about the FTOs stay, every one of those FTOs would have been posting very not nice things on here and my job would have been a lot harder. It is hard working amongst officers who have such hard feelings for each other when every one of them have such good strengths. Every officer that can last a year in Lauderhill becomes one of the best in the county and even the state. I do not know why you feel the need to bash each other. I am tired of it and I know it is only a few officers doing it. Can you tell me why you think it is fair that these officers get bashed? Is it a lack of self esteem in the officer who is posting these comments? Maybe incompetence, envy or cowardice? Help me to understand.
As a moderator, I have had to remove some real nasty and some not so nasty posts. I remove them when they violate terms of use. The poster of some of these posts that I have removed should be very thankful that I removed them. Part of the reason I remove them is to protect the poster from potential civil or criminal liabilities in some of the cases. It has not happened yet but why give anyone a chance to try. Just use common sense because that is what the terms of use are based on. If your post is meant to anger or embarrass someone, it just might be a violation. I do not enjoy removing your posts so just use your heads please.
-
05-14-2008, 04:26 PM #20Originally Posted by Anonymous
There is no threat there what so ever. Any LEO that has been through any type of academy can see that.
The posts were removed because Mod 426 felt like they contained violations of the Terms of Use. Mod 426 sent them to my private area to review just to make sure they were making the right decision.
If Mod 426 was deleting the posts just because they didn't like the posts or anything like that, they would have just deleted them. Then I would never have seen them nor would I have been able to review them. They would have been gone forever.
This board is not meant to be a slam site. You can give critiques and opinions of Administration, but you need to try to keep it constructive and try to leave personal attacks out of it.
Mod 1Mod 1
http://WWW.LEOAFFAIRS.COM
Terms Of Use
The real reason that we can't have the Ten Commandments posted in a
courthouse is this: You cannot post "Thou Shalt Not Steal," "Thou Shalt
Not Commit Adultery," and "Thou Shall Not Lie" in a building full of
lawyers, judges and politicians...It creates a hostile work environment.
Bookmarks