Q&A Thread for members to post questions to Moderators

[mugs]

Question: Why dmccowen still Elite after all his political trolling in Off Topic?

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: mugs
Question: Why dmccowen still Elite after all his political trolling in Off Topic?

First of all he rarely posts in OT, I thnk you mean P&N.

In P&N one man's Troll is another man's spokesman. Frankly I find those who constantly defend Bush's actions to be trollish but there are those who agree with them. The same goes for Dave. One thing I can say, he takes more abuse than any other member in that forum and I can't ever recall him PM'ing us complaining about it unlike hordes of others who post what many feel is nonsense and then whine to us when they are ridiculed for it. It's a tough place but then politics is a tough topic. It's definately not a place for School Marms and easily offended individuals and I definately wouldn't recommend it to my dyed in the wool Republican Fund a Mental Case Mother :Q

 

[SVT Cobra]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: mugs
Question: Why dmccowen still Elite after all his political trolling in Off Topic?

First of all he rarely posts in OT, I thnk you mean P&N.

In P&N one man's Troll is another man's spokesman. Frankly I find those who constantly defend Bush's actions to be trollish but there are those who agree with them. The same goes for Dave. One thing I can say, he takes more abuse than any other member in that forum and I can't ever recall him PM'ing us complaining about it unlike hordes of others who post what many feel is nonsense and then whine to us when they are ridiculed for it. It's a tough place but then politics is a tough topic. It's definately not a place for School Marms and easily offended individuals and I definately wouldn't recommend it to my dyed in the wool Republican Fund a Mental Case Mother :Q

That's true. Who else has their own quote calling themselves an idiot in multiple member's sigs.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: SVT Cobra

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: mugs
Question: Why dmccowen still Elite after all his political trolling in Off Topic?

First of all he rarely posts in OT, I thnk you mean P&N.

In P&N one man's Troll is another man's spokesman. Frankly I find those who constantly defend Bush's actions to be trollish but there are those who agree with them. The same goes for Dave. One thing I can say, he takes more abuse than any other member in that forum and I can't ever recall him PM'ing us complaining about it unlike hordes of others who post what many feel is nonsense and then whine to us when they are ridiculed for it. It's a tough place but then politics is a tough topic. It's definately not a place for School Marms and easily offended individuals and I definately wouldn't recommend it to my dyed in the wool Republican Fund a Mental Case Mother :Q

That's true.

Who else has their own quote calling themselves an idiot in multiple member's sigs.

:laugh: My poll numbers have to be higher than Bush's at this point.

 

[hzl eyed grl]

Originally posted by: scott

Originally posted by: hzl eyed grl

Originally posted by: Ulfwald

Originally posted by: Astaroth33
What I want to know is...

Is hzl (heather) still single, and if so, would she like to go out on a date?

Heather is a trainee, and she has a curfew. Think you can get her home by 9:30?

Not only does Olds require a deposit, but I will install a GPS on your car, her cell phone, and have a large man name Guido following, and he is very good at what he does.

You and olds are too much! Hopefully you weren't watching last night when I snuck out my bedroom window.

But Guido "Piano Wire" Sarducci and his sidekick Louie the Shiv are always watching.
In the mountains, in the city, even out at Pismo Beach, you'rer never outta reach . . .

Crap. They're in Pismo. I guess I'll just have to either be a little more stealthy or find someone "the guys" will approve of.

TallBill - Ahhhhh Okay. Makes much more sense now. I was wondering wtf you saw in it that made it obscene.

 

[Evadman]

Originally posted by: RossMAN
I don't but I heard about your Mod promotion the day after through the grape vine

I plugged that leak. With some lead that happened to have a high amount of kinetic energy. I am pretty sure the leak has been fixed.

 

[lizardboy]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: Evadman

Originally posted by: markgm
If my company matches to my 401(k), am I taxed on the amount they put in when I withdraw it if I invest the money after retirement into a college fund for my great-grand children?

If I understand what you are saying correctly, under the current law the investment would be treated as a gift, and subject to tax if greater than $10k per calendar year.

I am not a tax attorney, but I have done quite a bit of research on 401k's. Always verify with a tax attorney as the law changes constantly. Don't sue me.

I think he's talking about income tax; you appear to be talking about gift tax (which is $11,000 or $12,000 now I believe, but there's also a $1 million lifetime threshold you have to hit before worrying about it).

Yep, exemption for gift tax is currently $12,000 annually, up to $1M lifetime before tax kicks in. The money in your 401K will always be taxed to you when you withdraw it, you can't avoid the tax, you can only defer it until you actually withdraw it. If you withdraw the money before you reach a certain age, then you are also subject to an additional penalty unless the money was withdrawn for education, health, etc.

There are lots of ways to fund educational trusts tax-free for your grandchildren. Take a look at 2503(c) trusts and/or Crummey Drawdown Trusts. You can lower your taxble income & put money away for future generations. If you're trying to get money to grandkids or great-grandkids, there may be some generation skipping transfer tax issues.

This is off the top of my head - as always, speak to an attorney or financial planner before you make any actual investments.

 

[Scouzer]

Originally posted by: Sunrise089

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy

Originally posted by: Sunrise089
Comment: Really poor form on the two mods who created new accounts rather than reveal their names. It really shows no confidence in their judgment of their past actions, and questionable integrity on the part of the powers that be who allowed them to keep their positions anonymously.

The need for a separate account is due to some of the actions by a few members here on AT.

The problem is that a few bad apples made the risk unacceptable for myself.

With either Mod, their previous actions would be consider beyond reproach.
Both are Elite members of long term standing w/ great respect within the community.

Should anyone ever feel that my moderation is biased or unfair; I have no qualms about a complete explanation in public using the Personal Forum Issues or via PM.

I appreciate the attitude with which you have addressed this, as well as the explanation you have provided. I still feel it isn't an appropriate action. If the actions of the community are that threatening, then you should choose not to represent the community. Public service, and the power it offers, come at the cost of some degree of risk. If the risk is word based, than a choice needs to be made to either accept it or pass on the offer. No different at all if the risk isn't word based. No one is forced into being a mod, and the other mods have seen fit to come out and reveal their pasts and identities. So far I don't see anything that justifies a separate exception in this case. If I were an Elite Member, and I deleted my account, I'd have to start over from scratch. I couldn't just ask for a new Elite title and forget my past. Here we're involving actual (internet) power, but for whatever reason the exception IS being made. I still think it's poor form to distrust the membership so much.

All that said, I don't have the post count or history to really have any long-term beef here, and I'll continue to use and enjoy the forums. Overall the changes seem like a step in the right direction, with this as the rare exception.

I have to express my whole hearted agreement with this motion.

I do not think the two mods who have to change their names in order to go public should be moderators. They should have their old accounts back and removed from the moderating team. They should not be moderators if they have to remain anonymous, it ruins this 'trust' the forum is trying to build.

 

[Pliablemoose]

If you missed mass on Easter Sunday, but were on a ship at sea and crossed the International Date Line, and then went to church, would that then be a sin?

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: dartworth

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy

The need for a separate account is due to some of the actions by a few members here on AT.

The problem is that a few bad apples made the risk unacceptable for myself.

risk...:laugh:


give me a break...


this is so typical of AT...yes, you should resign

Why for taking an option afford to all of us by AT HQ? If you have a beef about this it should be with AT HQ not the Moderators in question

 

[Pliablemoose]

Ok, a serious one...

Have you all ever considered a blanket amnesty for banned members?

For instance, dennilfloss was allowed back after one of the more spectacular forum stunts, most of the permabanned folks' infractions were far less serious.

 

[Geekbabe]

Originally posted by: dartworth

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy

The need for a separate account is due to some of the actions by a few members here on AT.

The problem is that a few bad apples made the risk unacceptable for myself.

risk...:laugh:


give me a break...


this is so typical of AT...yes, you should resign

You are not privy to all of the security info that goes into the running of these forums Dartworth.My experiences here leave me without a doubt in the world that there's more than one member here who would relish the chance to cause actual harm to mod in some substantial manner.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
Ok, a serious one...

Have you all ever considered a blanket amnesty for banned members?

For instance, dennilfloss was allowed back after one of the more spectacular forum stunts, most of the permabanned folks' infractions were far less serious.

No not a blanket amnesty. There are too many idiots who were banned for serious offenses such as thievery. You wouldn't want some wanker posting back at the For Sale forum who had ripped off dozens of people would you?

 

[Pliablemoose]

I understand not wanting amnesty for theft related bannings, how about considering it for the social forums?

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
I understand not wanting amnesty for theft related bannings, how about considering it for the social forums?

That'll be up to AT HQ to decide. If they believe it's a good idea then it will happen, if they don't then it won't. My feeling is that it will be on a case to case basis. For instance if a member was banned for blatant violations of the rules as they would stand today then no they wouldn't be let back. On the other hand if they were banned for violations of rules that no longer are in affect then maybe they'll be let back. Of course this is just me speculating, like I said it's soley up to AT HQ to make that call.

 

[Scouzer]

Originally posted by: Geekbabe

Originally posted by: dartworth

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy

The need for a separate account is due to some of the actions by a few members here on AT.

The problem is that a few bad apples made the risk unacceptable for myself.

risk...:laugh:


give me a break...


this is so typical of AT...yes, you should resign

You are not privy to all of the security info that goes into the running of these forums Dartworth.My experiences here leave me without a doubt in the world that there's more than one member here who would relish the chance to cause actual harm to mod in some substantial manner.

The whole point of coming public with mods is to know their identities. We don't know these two guys identities, so it undermines the whole idea here.

They should not be mods.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Scouzer

Originally posted by: Geekbabe

Originally posted by: dartworth

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy

The need for a separate account is due to some of the actions by a few members here on AT.

The problem is that a few bad apples made the risk unacceptable for myself.

risk...:laugh:


give me a break...


this is so typical of AT...yes, you should resign

You are not privy to all of the security info that goes into the running of these forums Dartworth.My experiences here leave me without a doubt in the world that there's more than one member here who would relish the chance to cause actual harm to mod in some substantial manner.

The whole point of coming public with mods is to know their identities. We don't know these two guys identities, so it undermines the whole idea here.

They should not be mods.

Well AT HQ feels differently. I suggest that if you have a problem with that you take it up with them, not the Mods in question. In fact the rules state that members are not to harrass the Mods and any criticism directed at those Mods personally about this could be considered harrassment. Just be civil regarding your complaint and take it up with the proper authoities which is AT HQ and their representive which is Derek Wilson. They have the final word about everything regarding moderating these forums

Also keep in mind people that nobody is trying to get over on anybody here, we are all doing this to help these forums. All Senior Moderators have had a long record of either moderating these forums or of being extremely helpful contributors to these forums and members. We are also unpaid volunteers.

 

[Scouzer]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Scouzer

Originally posted by: Geekbabe

Originally posted by: dartworth

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy

The need for a separate account is due to some of the actions by a few members here on AT.

The problem is that a few bad apples made the risk unacceptable for myself.

risk...:laugh:


give me a break...


this is so typical of AT...yes, you should resign

You are not privy to all of the security info that goes into the running of these forums Dartworth.My experiences here leave me without a doubt in the world that there's more than one member here who would relish the chance to cause actual harm to mod in some substantial manner.

The whole point of coming public with mods is to know their identities. We don't know these two guys identities, so it undermines the whole idea here.

They should not be mods.

Well AT HQ feels differently. I suggest that if you have a problem with that you take it up with them, not the Mods in question. In fact the rules state that members are not to harrass the Mods and any criticism directed at those Mods personally about this could be considered harrassment. Just be civil regarding your complaint and take it up with the proper authoities which is AT HQ and their representive which is Derek Wilson. They have the final word about everything regarding moderating these forums

Also keep in mind people that nobody is trying to get over on anybody here, we are all doing this to help these forums. All Senior Moderators have had a long record of either moderating these forums or of being extremely helpful contributors to these forums and members. We are also unpaid volunteers.

I am not intending to come across with a harsh tone, I just want to emphasize my point with bold face.

I apologize.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Scouzer

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Scouzer

Originally posted by: Geekbabe

Originally posted by: dartworth

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy

The need for a separate account is due to some of the actions by a few members here on AT.

The problem is that a few bad apples made the risk unacceptable for myself.

risk...:laugh:


give me a break...


this is so typical of AT...yes, you should resign

You are not privy to all of the security info that goes into the running of these forums Dartworth.My experiences here leave me without a doubt in the world that there's more than one member here who would relish the chance to cause actual harm to mod in some substantial manner.

The whole point of coming public with mods is to know their identities. We don't know these two guys identities, so it undermines the whole idea here.

They should not be mods.

Well AT HQ feels differently. I suggest that if you have a problem with that you take it up with them, not the Mods in question. In fact the rules state that members are not to harrass the Mods and any criticism directed at those Mods personally about this could be considered harrassment. Just be civil regarding your complaint and take it up with the proper authoities which is AT HQ and their representive which is Derek Wilson. They have the final word about everything regarding moderating these forums

Also keep in mind people that nobody is trying to get over on anybody here, we are all doing this to help these forums. All Senior Moderators have had a long record of either moderating these forums or of being extremely helpful contributors to these forums and members. We are also unpaid volunteers.

I am not intending to come across with a harsh tone, I just want to emphasize my point with bold face.

I apologize.

Understood and no problem, my comment was meant more for others who might not be as civil.

 

[Pliablemoose]

How about Personal Messages?

I've seen posted multiple times how mods read our PM's, and heard more than once where PM's were read & then posted in the Batcave (not PM's to the mods)

How about a promise to leave our PM's alone unless theres a real suspicion of criminal activity, ie: copyrighted file sharing etc?

 

[SVT Cobra]

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
How about Personal Messages?

I've seen posted multiple times how mods read our PM's, and heard more than once where PM's were read & then posted in the Batcave (not PM's to the mods)

How about a promise to leave our PM's alone unless theres a real suspicion of criminal activity, ie: copyrighted file sharing etc?

They cannot read them. However the admins can (they can log into your account).

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
How about Personal Messages?

I've seen posted multiple times how mods read our PM's, and heard more than once where PM's were read & then posted in the Batcave (not PM's to the mods)

How about a promise to leave our PM's alone unless theres a real suspicion of criminal activity, ie: copyrighted file sharing etc?

Yeah we don't have access to your passwords so we don't have access to your PM's. Only the Admins can access them and they only do it when there is a real suspicion of illegal activities such as selling drugs and stealing. In those cases we are tipped by other members who have been ripped off or have been approached to buy drugs such a steroids, pot, etc and we forward it to the Admins to do what they feel is appropriate.

 

[SVT Cobra]

Who were the first mods?

Who came next etc...

Before this big change, who was the last added mod?




Oh, and do you guys call it the batcave also joking around?

 

[minendo]

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
How about Personal Messages?

I've seen posted multiple times how mods read our PM's, and heard more than once where PM's were read & then posted in the Batcave (not PM's to the mods)

How about a promise to leave our PM's alone unless theres a real suspicion of criminal activity, ie: copyrighted file sharing etc?

As others have stated only Admins can access PMs and this is only done when there is justifiable suspicion of illegal activity.

 

[Pliablemoose]

Originally posted by: minendo

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
How about Personal Messages?

I've seen posted multiple times how mods read our PM's, and heard more than once where PM's were read & then posted in the Batcave (not PM's to the mods)

How about a promise to leave our PM's alone unless theres a real suspicion of criminal activity, ie: copyrighted file sharing etc?

As others have stated only Admins can access PMs and this is only done when there is justifiable suspicion of illegal activity.

Has it always been set up like that or have moderators had access to our PM's in the past (as I've seen them post they could more than once)

<---got vacationed for asking for a coupon code in Hot Deals via PM once, and have had my PM's from here posted by mods on other forums.