SJMST's approval/disapproval rating as a NYTS moderator

Why?

 

Sam and Vik are doing a great job as mods.

edit- he changed the poll from the other thread so if you even vote please read first.

 

Can't we give this a rest?

 

If someone does have an issue with Sam they would be inclined not to vote since the poll is public. FWIW - I voted no clue because I'm not a regular in NYTS.

 

This is really making NYTS looks bad....

 

this is a new record, i've signed onto ferrari chat 4 times today

 

HUBIE MY FRIEND

THIS IS A POINTLESS THREAD AND A BEGINNING FOR A MELTDOWN..

LET IT REST...


SAM OR VIK, PLEASE EITHER DELETE OR CLOSE THIS THREAD

BRUCE

PS...NO OFFENSE TO YOU HUBIE...ITS JUST POINTLESS.....

 

Im not voting simply because enough is enough. I understand your opinions and feelingS, but let it go. Both Sam and Vik are doing a great job, there is never a problem in this region. IMO

 

Agreed im abstaining from voting.

 

60 mins later....

 

I have no real sense of SJMST's actions and that's what I indicated. But that doesn't mean anything. I don't think being a "good" mod is about winning a popularity contest. There are some things that may be necessary "for the good of the site" that are actually unpopular. Also the visible portion of a mod's actions aren't the complete record, as there are also some things that an effective mod does that are done privately and discreetly.

 

I have watched your posts in the past, this time I have to chime in. You say that this is a harmless poll, but your very first statement says "time to be serious". Why the anger ?

 

Sometimes emails can be misunderstood.

"time to be serious" means time to be serious....its a forceful phrase.

Just asking a question.

Cheers M8 !

 

Crawl back into your hole.

 

I agree.

 

When Sam was the only moderator of NYTS, the NYTS section was thriving with lots of activity. Now the NYTS section is down to runs of 4 or so members at 8 in the morning with nothing but Ferrari bashing. There is nothing too helpful on this site anymore expect for how ferrari is making bad cars and Lamborghini is awesome. I own a Lamborghini and i feel this site has become very one-sided.

A moderator is supposed to be simialr to a shepard making sure the flock stays together and is NOT supposed to take sides. That is how Sam moderated the site he kept the group together even though some people liked the site and some did not. But like everything in life the site was evolving and some say it was the wild wild west but you have to go through all phases of evolution. Sam let is happen because he knew the site was getting better with time. Now the NYTS is not evolving it is DEAD and has nothing more than a good old boys section for 4-5 members to socialize.

 

Rehan: Your complaints about this section have nothing to do with Vik. The drop-off in participation here was all about the EC vs. non-EC alignments; Vik merely stepped in to address what some of us had expressed for some time-that the section was insular, and dominated by a few who were not very welcoming, if not outright hostile and treated this section as an extension of a private club, with unconcealed disdain for others. Brad's dissatisfaction with the rules of F-Chat had nothing to do with Vik, and his departure, followed by the others in the EC crew, was a form of protest, as I understood it, over the banning of Woodear (which did take place under Vik's watch). But, it was clear -at least based on what the EC crew had publicly stated here before, during and after that time- that this section was already viewed as 'lame' by the EC crew due to differences in outlook that went far beyond questions of moderation style. Those issues clearly existed before Vik became a moderator. I thought-and still think, unless you can persuade me otherwise- that the EC gang found happiness elsewhere, on a site where the rules, the culture and the overall attitude was more in keeping with what they wanted.
So, for a bunch of EC guys to come back here, after a hiatus, and make charges about the conduct of one of the moderators here, doesn't make alot of sense unless you are saying that those who exited under protest really want to be back here, to post and participate. If you and the other EC'ers want to do that, great. Participate, contribute, be active in organizing events. (Frankly, i don't think it is up to any moderator to do the organizing, and to the extent the moderator 'sets the tone,' this section has been far less fractious, until now, when this flurry of posts calling for Vik's head, started). If there are unfair decisions by a moderator, those will be addressed in due course. If you are just taking shots at Vik for the sake of it, to return to the good ol days of 'playa this, homie that,' I for one am less interested in seeing that gang return here.

I also think the Ferrari-bashing, pro-Lambo thing is a red-herring. It is no better or worse than any other discussion of different marques on this board, whether those are in General Discussion, Modern, or Cars, Trains, Planes and Automobiles.

Frankly, this whole broadside on Vik is, in my estimation, some kind of smokescreen for something else- an apparent desire for some of the people who left here, unhappy, to now come back for purposes which are not entirely clear. If the real issue is that you and others want to participate here, why not do it without this kind of attack? Or is there some need for personal vindication that will only be achieved by deposing Vik? Is this a good opening gambit for a return? I don't think so...

 

...To explain your vote
Well, the Vik poll remains so I can't very well remove this, now can I?
And as long at they remain, I would be curious to know why those who voted "NO, I feel he is biased and doing harm to the nyts section" voted that way. Your names are there anyway so there is no anonymity. If there is something I can change I sure will, but I have thought about it, and have no clue. Without further input I cannot improve and the poll will have limited value. Thanks, Sam

 

Bill, just a quick question, do you honestly think that banning hubertand the other member by Vik was not a personal vindication? all of this started because of the ban and has nothing to do with EC GANG wanting to come back. there is for sure anomosity between some members here with vik but he should not use the power given to him to use it to settle a personal vendication.

 

U-Didn't think Hubie was banned before- I thought Hubie originally left in protest when Woodear kept pushing after Vik drew a line, and Woodear got banned.
If you are talking about the recent 'ban' of Hubie, I didn't study what happened. I saw something about multiple accounts, and Vik claimed he was mistaken. I suppose you could say that he jumped on that very quickly given the past history of Hubie's involvement here with EC. But, I am trying to have an open mind about this. It just seems to me that alot of folks that left, unhappy, now want to come back, and the opening gambit is to get rid of Vik. As I said elsewhere in these threads, I would welcome any past members. The only issue I had, personally, was the insular, hostile nature of the section. And, frankly, I think it would be easier to have some of guys return with the understanding that lines do not have to be drawn in the sand. The demand that Vik be deposed as a condition of people returning, given the history here, is a little too much for me to accept, because it is very adversarial, and
is like a replay of what I didn't like before.

 

Bill

I think you're wrong about many of the EC wanting to come back. I really don't think they do or will. Those that remain don't like Vic's Ferrari Bashing Bias overwhelming the NY section and others don't want to be banned for something they did not do which is what in fact happened to Hubie.