JohnDoe123 is way too biased and shouldn't be a moderator

Brian Edwards6 said:I will certainly give that matter my full attention.👍

Brian Edwards6 said:I believe my private message was quite explicit, but I will reiterate for the sake of clarity. Law enforcement officers make mistakes—they are human, they perform their duties, and occasionally, ugly or unlawful things happen. However, we are talking about isolated individuals (even if even one is far too many) and rare circumstances (though even one is one too many). It is simply unfair to engage in constant sweeping generalizations. I am not suggesting that the situation you experienced didn't happen; I am saying it isn't the rule. In my experience doing this job every single day, I have personally never done anything like that, nor have I ever witnessed a colleague do so.👍

Regarding the recent deletion of comments on the controversial thread, those posts were removed because they were direct responses to a sanctioned comment—one which repeatedly insisted that filling the federal treasury is the sole purpose of police work. We have covered this ground several times already, citing various federal budget reports that clearly demonstrate what the actual contribution looks like. That was merely one part of the discussion; the other part involved the user being asked to restate their comment, which they did, leading us to continue the debate.👍

Your comment was nothing more than pure generalization, and since that was your entire contribution to that specific discussion, it was removed accordingly. You are welcome to participate in the Legal subforum just like anyone else, provided you follow the same rules as everyone else. And let me be clear: criticism is not unwelcome—there is plenty of it on that controversial thread and across other topics here—but barging into discussions the way you do is problematic. Dropping a single sentence followed by a smiley face and calling it a day doesn't cut it. In my view, that usually amounts to disrupting the flow of conversation, and if I'm wrong, I'll leave it to the administration to correct me.👍

Finally, while I admit I am subjective, I do not allow that subjectivity to interfere with my moderation. We are all subjective; everyone holds personal opinions on most topics and questions. However, there is a time and a place for every subjective opinion.👍

Brian Edwards6 said:I believe my private message was quite explicit, but I will reiterate for the sake of clarity. Law enforcement officers make mistakes—they are human, they perform their duties, and occasionally, ugly or unlawful things happen. However, we are talking about isolated individuals (even if even one is far too many) and rare circumstances (though even one is one too many). It is simply unfair to engage in constant sweeping generalizations. I am not suggesting that the situation you experienced didn't happen; I am saying it isn't the rule. In my experience doing this job every single day, I have personally never done anything like that, nor have I ever witnessed a colleague do so.👍

Regarding the recent deletion of comments on the controversial thread, those posts were removed because they were direct responses to a sanctioned comment—one which repeatedly insisted that filling the federal treasury is the sole purpose of police work. We have covered this ground several times already, citing various federal budget reports that clearly demonstrate what the actual contribution looks like. That was merely one part of the discussion; the other part involved the user being asked to restate their comment, which they did, leading us to continue the debate.👍

Your comment was nothing more than pure generalization, and since that was your entire contribution to that specific discussion, it was removed accordingly. You are welcome to participate in the Legal subforum just like anyone else, provided you follow the same rules as everyone else. And let me be clear: criticism is not unwelcome—there is plenty of it on that controversial thread and across other topics here—but barging into discussions the way you do is problematic. Dropping a single sentence followed by a smiley face and calling it a day doesn't cut it. In my view, that usually amounts to disrupting the flow of conversation, and if I'm wrong, I'll leave it to the administration to correct me.👍

Finally, while I admit I am subjective, I do not allow that subjectivity to interfere with my moderation. We are all subjective; everyone holds personal opinions on most topics and questions. However, there is a time and a place for every subjective opinion.👍

Michelle Alvarez8 said:The only thing saving you here is the rule against posting private messages.

And once again—you're lying.

But hey, it's fine—we're used to the spin, the plants, the deletions, and the blatant lies whenever moderators who shouldn't be doing it start defending their own destructive behavior.

No need to keep this going because this isn't a thread about your resignation, nor is anyone asking you to justify yourself. It's just another shot in the dark.
Take care. 👍

Michelle Alvarez8 said:The only thing saving you here is the rule against posting private messages.

And once again—you're lying.

But hey, it's fine—we're used to the spin, the plants, the deletions, and the blatant lies whenever moderators who shouldn't be doing it start defending their own destructive behavior.

No need to keep this going because this isn't a thread about your resignation, nor is anyone asking you to justify yourself. It's just another shot in the dark.
Take care. 👍

Michelle Alvarez8 As specified by:
There is really no need to drag this story out any further. This isn't a forum dedicated to documenting your shift changes, nor is anyone actually demanding an apology from you.

Brian Edwards6 said:If you find a private message that crosses the line, just click the little checkbox icon to file a report. That will flag the message and make it visible to the site administrators.👍

It wasn't even a question. The administration has full visibility into every single deleted comment within the Law subforum, so they can easily review the exact contributions I was describing.👍

Michelle Alvarez8 As specified by:
There is really no need to drag this story out any further. This isn't a forum dedicated to documenting your shift changes, nor is anyone actually demanding an apology from you.

I am not attempting to make excuses here; rather, I am simply presenting my position. It is standard practice for a moderator to respond to public call-outs so that the administration can take a more objective view when rendering a final decision. And just so we are clear: whatever the outcome may be, I will respect it, as I always have.👍

hollowtrucker77 said:The rule against sharing private messages doesn't apply when it comes to moderation and admin duties

Besides, the whole PDF situation is basically suffocated and sterilized at this point, and honestly, the worst part is that the mods just roll over and accept it because it means they have less work to do while they sit pretty in their fancy little offices.

Michelle Alvarez8 said:Seriously? I had no clue. Must be some new feature—kind of like that Facebook button, right? 🙄

Michelle Alvarez8 said:Seriously? I had no clue. Must be some new feature—kind of like that Facebook button, right? 🙄

Michelle Alvarez8 said:Ever since he stepped up as a mod, he’s been systematically wiping out any comments that don't fit his specific version of the FBI—it's pretty obvious. Look, I get how you defend your profession—trust me, I'll defend the IT field just as fiercely—but the issue here is that he does it without a shred of critical thinking regarding the police. It’s actually gotten so bad that he straight-up told me the things I saw with my own eyes were—get this—untrue.

Just to be clear, I think our local police are fine for the most part; they don't have an issue with me, and I don't have one with them. I think they do a good job, but that doesn't mean I won't call them out when they mess up or screw something up. After all, isn't criticism exactly what drives improvement and fixes problems?

That goes for this thread, too. In my opinion, Brian Edwards6 is way too subjective to be a quality moderator, and his actions constantly stifle constructive debate and actual critical thinking.

I know deep down this post won't change a thing—and people will probably just roll their eyes and go, "Good grief, there she goes again with the trolling"—but I also know this will serve as ammunition for when Brian Edwards6 finally gets called out by someone who is actually high-quality, sincere, and honest. It's just a matter of time before he messes up so badly that even the admins can't ignore it, and then they'll start remembering all the complaints... including this one.

Best,
Michelle Alvarez8 👍

redtiger15 said:My bad, guys. I really didn't mean anything by it. :Brian Edwards6: 👍

Why is it that a moderator like this stays firmly in their seat even though they’re getting hit with a non-stop barrage of complaints? Honestly, it’s because:
He basically just does whatever the admins tell him to do without even blinking.
Man, this guy moderates like his life depends on it. And honestly? In the eyes of the admins, "over-moderating" is basically synonymous with "doing a stellar job." Because of that, you can pretty much just ignore all his constant little outbursts and the way he loves to tear into people's posts on a daily basis. It’s all just background noise at this point. I mean, look at the logic: if they actually let go of a moderator who moderates this aggressively, the subforum is suddenly left without someone who moderates aggressively. That just creates a massive headache for the admins because then they have to deal with the extra workload and go through the whole exhausting process of hunting down a new moderator. And let's be real—who actually has the energy for that? Not them.

I'm really hoping my take—which, let’s be honest, is the absolute truth here—doesn't get nuked from orbit this time. 👍

redtiger15 said:My bad, guys. I really didn't mean anything by it. :Brian Edwards6: 👍

Why is it that a moderator like this stays firmly in their seat even though they’re getting hit with a non-stop barrage of complaints? Honestly, it’s because:
He basically just does whatever the admins tell him to do without even blinking.
Man, this guy moderates like his life depends on it. And honestly? In the eyes of the admins, "over-moderating" is basically synonymous with "doing a stellar job." Because of that, you can pretty much just ignore all his constant little outbursts and the way he loves to tear into people's posts on a daily basis. It’s all just background noise at this point. I mean, look at the logic: if they actually let go of a moderator who moderates this aggressively, the subforum is suddenly left without someone who moderates aggressively. That just creates a massive headache for the admins because then they have to deal with the extra workload and go through the whole exhausting process of hunting down a new moderator. And let's be real—who actually has the energy for that? Not them.

I'm really hoping my take—which, let’s be honest, is the absolute truth here—doesn't get nuked from orbit this time. 👍

redtiger15 said:My bad, guys. I really didn't mean anything by it. :Brian Edwards6: 👍

Why is it that a moderator like this stays firmly in their seat even though they’re getting hit with a non-stop barrage of complaints? Honestly, it’s because:
He basically just does whatever the admins tell him to do without even blinking.
Man, this guy moderates like his life depends on it. And honestly? In the eyes of the admins, "over-moderating" is basically synonymous with "doing a stellar job." Because of that, you can pretty much just ignore all his constant little outbursts and the way he loves to tear into people's posts on a daily basis. It’s all just background noise at this point. I mean, look at the logic: if they actually let go of a moderator who moderates this aggressively, the subforum is suddenly left without someone who moderates aggressively. That just creates a massive headache for the admins because then they have to deal with the extra workload and go through the whole exhausting process of hunting down a new moderator. And let's be real—who actually has the energy for that? Not them.

I'm really hoping my take—which, let’s be honest, is the absolute truth here—doesn't get nuked from orbit this time. 👍

Brian Edwards6 said:Since I've looked at the report you submitted, I don't see any evidence of what you're claiming, nor does it match the reason you gave for the report. If anyone interpreted my posts that way, I followed up with several messages to clear the air (which you are, of course, welcome to report as well). Besides, the rest of this thread addresses the issue directly, and I believe I've been perfectly transparent about my stance.👍

Some of those complaints are legitimate, and some aren't. When a complaint is valid, I adjust my approach to ensure users are satisfied. As for the idea that I should be removed from the moderation team—well, if that's what the community decides, I have no problem with it; that's just how a healthy forum operates.👍

Look, if I make a mistake and someone objective points it out to me, I don't see much point in getting angry, sulking, or throwing a tantrum about it.👍

The vast majority of what I do happens behind the scenes, where it remains invisible to most users while keeping things running smoothly.👍

A federal employee is obligated, within the scope of their authority, to ensure the realization of rights and the respect of the integrity and dignity of citizens and other federal employees without discrimination or favoritism based on age, nationality, ethnic or social affiliation, linguistic or racial origin, political or religious beliefs or inclinations, disability, education, social status, gender, marital or family status, sexual orientation, or on any other basis.

A federal employee has the right to protection from harassment—that is, behavior intended to, or which actually represents, an affront to the dignity of the employee,
which creates fear or a hostile, humiliating, or offensive environment.

loneraven25 said:...honestly, looking at the big picture here, this entire discussion shouldn't even be happening because it’s targeting the personal life and actions of a moderator,
someone who just happens to volunteer his spare time on a forum, making things
simpler for everyone to communicate... ...now, if someone were to actually prove that he's browsing these forum pages during his official working hours, then sure, you might have some grounds for suspicion...
but as far as any other possible solutions go, I’m going to lean on his legal protections: The Code of Ethics for Federal Employees,

A federal employee is obligated, within the scope of their authority, to ensure the realization of rights and the respect of the integrity and dignity of citizens and other federal employees without discrimination or favoritism based on age, nationality, ethnic or social affiliation, linguistic or racial origin, political or religious beliefs or inclinations, disability, education, social status, gender, marital or family status, sexual orientation, or on any other basis.

So, I really want to point out that you all seem to be on a bit of a witch hunt here, and by doing so, you're unacceptably interfering with his professional duties and his right to work...

A federal employee has the right to protection from harassment—that is, behavior intended to, or which actually represents, an affront to the dignity of the employee,
which creates fear or a hostile, humiliating, or offensive environment.

…generally speaking, this topic shouldn't even exist since it revolves around the actions and character of a specific moderator,

A public official is obligated, within their jurisdiction, to ensure that rights are upheld...

brightcrane56 said:I’ve been noticing the exact same thing over on the Law forums. Honestly, I think having a slightly more heated debate can actually be pretty constructive, and we shouldn't just shut those conversations down from the jump simply because people aren't using formal titles or ending every single sentence with "with all due respect."

It wouldn't hurt to loosen up a little bit once in a while. 😉

loneraven25 said:...honestly, looking at the big picture here, this entire discussion shouldn't even be happening because it’s targeting the personal life and actions of a moderator,
someone who just happens to volunteer his spare time on a forum, making things
simpler for everyone to communicate... ...now, if someone were to actually prove that he's browsing these forum pages during his official working hours, then sure, you might have some grounds for suspicion...
but as far as any other possible solutions go, I’m going to lean on his legal protections: The Code of Ethics for Federal Employees,

A federal employee is obligated, within the scope of their authority, to ensure the realization of rights and the respect of the integrity and dignity of citizens and other federal employees without discrimination or favoritism based on age, nationality, ethnic or social affiliation, linguistic or racial origin, political or religious beliefs or inclinations, disability, education, social status, gender, marital or family status, sexual orientation, or on any other basis.

So, I really want to point out that you all seem to be on a bit of a witch hunt here, and by doing so, you're unacceptably interfering with his professional duties and his right to work...

A federal employee has the right to protection from harassment—that is, behavior intended to, or which actually represents, an affront to the dignity of the employee,
which creates fear or a hostile, humiliating, or offensive environment.