Posts by Roger Ortiz2

Michelle Evans said:It’s a bit of both, really. He definitely didn't get kicked out just because the moderators asked him to leave. That part isn't quite right...
Smod doesn't really moderate unless they happen to be managing the PDF files at the same time. In that sense, they act like a bit of a ghost... though they can step in if they feel it's necessary. I decided it was necessary here...

2. What’s the reasoning behind that... Never... He hasn't actually posted anything in the Pets section yet, even though his status was updated to supermoderator back on October 15, 2012...
...and wasn't there a need to question his actions several times over?
It didn't make any difference even when the topic was first introduced... It is high time you finally brought some order to the Blue Paw subforum... Which one is still waiting on those essential answers...

It seems like you might have cut off there...No, not really... The same...It says so right there in my profile...
I joined Smod on May 1, 2013, not October 15, 2012...
You’re clearly looking at the supermoderator list on that PDF, which hasn't been updated since then. That doesn't mean everyone listed was appointed back then... The roster has definitely changed and grown since that date, even if there isn't a visible edit log to show it...

That serves as my explanation for why I wasn't part of that discussion...

I’ll briefly touch upon your post from that other thread as well, since it relates directly to my work...

I saw the inquiry, but I have no way of knowing if you actually received an answer unless you let me know the moderators aren't getting back to you. If you tell me, I can check in with them to see what's going on... I don't track every single thread or know which issues are being handled through private messages, though that doesn't mean I'm not familiar with the PDF issues in general...

You never actually reached out to me about this. Please feel free to do so next time...

Any other questions...

Is there anything else that needs clearing up?

There is on my end, specifically an inquiry I filed in the appeals and sanctions section that hasn't received a response yet.
It concerns that claim of a staggering 75 instances regarding something being constant...
Does that mean you're constantly monitoring the entire forum, or are you specifically watching my posts, because about 50 of my attempts to use the report button yielded absolutely nothing except for deleted posts, so now...

The reporting system might be broken, considering I saw Cirduroy looking pretty baffled by the volume one day...
But since I posted this in the right place, I assume an answer to that part can be found here.

Anthony Jackson2 said:exactly. and once the forum is back online, all our problems will just vanish into thin air, everyone will suddenly be best friends, showering each other with compliments and exchanging roses and honey cakes like some kind of utopia.

oh wait...

Give me a break, because realizing that things aren't magically going to fix themselves isn't quite the same thing as trying to ignore them or running away from reality. :-D

I’m pretty much convinced the admins have some kind of panic button they just hit whenever they get tired of dealing with us, or when it gets too hot outside, or maybe during the holidays... or whenever they find themselves facing a pile of questions they can't answer and whatever else, so I don't think any amount of charity work is going to change their minds..

😍

Lisa Young83 said:@Kenneth Ross8, let's drop the provocative tone and those malicious insinuations used to "frame" questions, because at that level, moderators neither want to nor can communicate with the community. There's also private messaging, and some users have used that to ask questions and get answers here.

Who actually decides if a question is malicious or insinuating, or determines how thick that supposed "frame" is?
The thing is, what I find malicious might be hilarious to you, and vice versa.
If that rests entirely on a moderator's subjective judgment, then we have a problem, and I could go into detail about why.

I haven't arbitrarily introduced or enforced a single new rule myself; while I might suggest updates, whether they get adopted is up to the people who have always made those decisions.

You have enforced it, though, and cited this so-called unwritten rule multiple times, even though it isn't detailed anywhere in the actual rulebook, nor is there a specific penalty for it—since it was "unwritten" (usually) before it became written on the KLJ.

You didn't invent it out of thin air, obviously, but you likely worked alongside the Admins to ensure it was eventually formalized. On the KLJ!

Which is fine... rules exist once they are established, but they don't exist until they do.

Until then, there was just Tyndalov's instruction: don't argue with the moderator.
I can provide quotes if necessary.

I'm not Rina, but I'm curious about the answer.

Honestly, moderators, you should probably just lock your profiles... it feels a bit insulting and lazy when there’s clearly enough time to log on to the Forum, yet somehow none to actually moderate replies or handle inquiries.

Just keep in mind that the vast majority of people here aren't lacking intelligence, nor are they technically incompetent.

p.s. I'm intentionally not replying to my previous post because I've already edited it once.

Michelle Evans said:I've let the moderators know about this, and they'll get back to you when they have a moment. Please bear with us until then.

When they can, or once they finally reach an agreement?
Because they’ve had plenty of opportunities to respond elsewhere whenever they were asked.
If they aren't able to handle it, then there's a problem, and we should probably find people who actually possess the competence and the will to do the job.

We're only ten days past the installation of the NEW leadership, and already we're being asked to give them space to "settle in."

How much time does one need to settle in, considering this forum isn't CERN or some massive project building a particle collider?

Both Snow and Blaise are here... or rather, they are, but they aren't... if you catch my drift. ☕

edit: the point is cowardice and incompetence. When you decide to take a course of action, you need to be able to explain it logically, with a clear beginning and end. It isn't enough to just say, "this is how we want it because we feel like it."
It's cowardly to dodge questions simply because you don't actually have a concrete answer or any evidence to support your moves.
You can't just hide behind "discretionary rights" all the time; that's exactly why rules exist.

Besides, I've already made it quite clear what the fundamental role of moderation should be.
The whole "I want it my way" mentality is something you leave behind in kindergarten.

Kenneth Ross8 said:Anyway, let's get back to the point.
...The core issue here is:
simply getting clear answers to direct questions regarding threads opened to help animals.
1. Have the rules changed?

.

I'm not going to weigh in on whether you received an answer, where you got it, or how it was delivered.
However, I do have some thoughts on other aspects of this situation.
Maybe this isn't quite the right thread for it, but if anyone feels otherwise, we can certainly move this discussion elsewhere.

**
The essence of Blue Paw used to be humane, but it doesn't feel that way anymore. Thanks to inconsistent, poor quality, and confusing moderation, it now feels like a training ground for deleting things, stripping context, killing discussions, making it impossible to actually help, blurring definitions, delaying responses, giving vague answers, and creating a chaos that forces people to leave because you never know what arbitrary decision will be made next.

In the past, the moderation team was deeply knowledgeable about the issues at hand, active in multiple ways, and available almost instantly, ready to provide real help while understanding the unique nuances of both the people and the problems involved.

Moderating doesn't mean just hitting delete, playing games, and acting superior.

The word itself implies that a quality moderator MUST understand the subject matter deeply, MUST be able to guide the conversation in a direction that preserves the purpose of the PPDF, and—to use a bit of a joke—must possess actual skills. They need to provide high-quality, understandable answers, leave their ego at the door, keep the PPDF organized and accessible to everyone regardless of intelligence level, and have a decent technical grasp of how the forum functions.

There is another ridiculous phrase stuck in my head lately: working "with dignity and fairness."
Oh... that sounds difficult, though clearly not impossible.

Ever since the last group of quality moderators left, there hasn't been even a trace of that kind of leadership left.
Rules??

What rules?
The rules shift, certain topics expand while others that should be broadened are narrowed down, posts are moved without reason, conversations are fragmented, necessary threads are closed while ones that should be shut are left open... context is lost, and rule updates arrive ten days after the sanctions have already been handed out.

***I don't consider myself some relic of a better era, nor am I someone mourning the past. I've followed Blue Paw since its inception and I know what this forum and this community should look like. This current mess is entirely due to the moderation, not the users. It's frustrating when you can't make heads or tails of anything, watch yourself get flagged for no reason, or report a dozen posts a day only to see zero action taken. It leaves you wondering.
Blue Paw has enriched me and taught me so much... many others too. We've laughed, cried, celebrated, helped, learned, stepped up, and stayed awake through the night on this platform. Change is good when it leads to improvement...but not when it degrades the quality of everything we built.***

......

mellowraven22 said:Look, here’s the deal—even if puppy mills aren't actually illegal, we still don't allow anyone to promote them here on KLJ. It's the same logic with ear cropping; even though just owning a cropped dog isn't against the law (sadly), we aren't about to tolerate anything that promotes animal cruelty or mutilation for purely aesthetic reasons.

I'm sorry, but I'm just not following you.
Who decided we should tolerate ear cropping, and how exactly does posting a photo of a cropped dog equate to endorsing the practice itself?
Are we really all supposed to be so gullible that a single picture is enough to sway our entire worldview?
Give me a break.

Can someone please explain the psychological mechanism where one image manages to rewire the human brain? Please.
And besides, plenty of dogs were around long before these rules existed, many of them already cropped for whatever reason, and their photos are still right here on the forum.

Daniel Ward87

Is the internet actually working where you guys are, or are we all just communicating via carrier pigeon at this point? 😲

silverviper3 said:I don't get why everyone is making such a big deal out of people looking out for one another just to make a quick buck; I read through it and there isn't any blatant advertising going on, so if you want to ban this, you might as well ban any kind of recommendation, even for a doctor, since suggesting a physician could technically lead to them gaining a patient, and frankly, I find this whole thread and the way you guys are handling it to be pretty pathetic.

is advertising
extremely clearly
and if you can't see that then you might want to work on your reading comprehension...give it another read, they say that helps.

Got it, thanks for the heads-up 🙂

rustydrifter10 said:Bear with me here because there is quite a bit to get through. 🙂

It’s certainly not the Encyclopædia Britannica...☕

I figured I’d weigh in on this too.
Since the admin rustydrifter10 decided to enforce a rule banning photos of docked dogs—even though docking itself isn't illegal under American Law, and certainly doesn't make posting a picture a crime
The reasoning used here lacks even a shred of common sense; by citing the ban on docking, the moderators are claiming that showing a photo is inherently promoting the practice, despite the fact that nobody here has actually advocated for it.
It feels like a targeted move against owners of these dogs, and honestly, it ignores the dogs themselves, though they don't get a say in things like neutering either, but I won't linger on that point for too long.
I’m just a volunteer who loves dogs, and I am a staunch opponent of docking or any kind of unnecessary mutilation, which is exactly why I see absolutely nothing wrong with posting photos of docked dogs, because

-there is no way for anyone to know, nor is an owner obligated to disclose, if a dog was brought into the US from a country where docking is legal, or if they were simply rescued.

On one hand, they cite the Law, yet on the other, they are essentially creating their own private Law on this forum while ignoring actual violations that steelorca2 has pointed out.
I'm sure the admin rustydrifter10 knows exactly what I'm getting at, so rather than starting a whole new thread, I’ll just keep my comments right here in this existing discussion.

As far as I understand, discrimination is prohibited in all its forms, and this forum policy discriminates against certain owners by denying them equal rights within this community.
Furthermore, it really undermines the credibility of the moderation team when they insist on imposing personal opinions as universal rules.

p.s. I might suggest a speed-reading course; apparently they aren't expensive and they can be quite helpful.

stormywolf10 said:hey, so I asked the CDC about the situation and they basically told me not to panic and blah blah blah, just the same thing everyone else is saying..
it's ridiculous, honestly, because one day they'll make a mistake, someone will get sick, and they'll claim they're in the clear since nothing was officially recorded because their whole tracking system relies on people just tapping things...
I've already gathered some general info about the lady and her dog so I might actually manage something, I'm thinking of checking if the dog's vaccinations are up to date

I hope it is

It isn't a disaster, nor is it stupidity.
for an animal to transmit rabies, it would actually have to be infected with rabies, and the odds of a house pet being rabid are probably lower than me winning the Powerball without even buying a ticket
If I were you, I'd be much more concerned about the everyday places where your kid sticks their hands or tongue out, rather than worrying whether some little Yorkie-poodle mix could possibly be bitten by something rabid...and then somehow pass it on further.

I don't think the issue lies with the medical literature; I'd say the issue is more about your misunderstanding of it.

I can only imagine what kind of protection you're going to try to force on him when other things come up down the road.☕

ambermason16 said:you’re making the wrong assumption... 😁

alright, now you've got it right. 😁

🤣

I honestly thought you didn't need any alcohol since you seemed pretty drunk on love already. 😍

Mod, feel free to lock this thread... I think we've covered everything here.

Thanks again.

Elizabeth Ward61 said:Thanks 🙏

Mirror, you’re easily the best moderator on TV 🙏

I also want to thank the crew from the North America, because without them we'd be left completely in the dark 🙏

🤣

It almost sounds like dark humor when you put it that way, but honestly, without the North America, we'd be totally lost 🙂

blueraven6-don't go looking for a reason to make a mountain out of a molehill, as the old saying goes
there are plenty of other places for this kind of talk...

don't be ridiculous
they did us a favor, quite literally, so please just let it go
please

Nice work

thanks

🙏 🙏 🙏

I'm hoping there won't be any issues with linking streams moving forward, though I don't expect much trouble with anything else

fadedsailor932 said:...we're considering...just a moment...

👍

that's kind of you 🙏