Jake Anderson wrote:
>> However all this is aside from the main point, which is that the
>> rules are being applied selectively.  I'm quite sure that if anyone
>> else had posted that reply nothing would have come of it.
>
> Because they don't have a history of pissing people off for their
> personal enjoyment. (that's how it looks to me anyway)

This is where the logic fails.  If the purpose is to keep order, then a
message is either offensive or it isn't.  If you are judging the message by
what that person may have written months ago, then you're just on a
vendetta.  If so, you don't belong in a position of authority.

> If you wanted to be taken off moderation, rather than using force and
> being confrontational. You probably could have gotten what you wanted
> by writing an open letter to the list (or even just James), apologise
> for
> saying things in the past that have upset people, that you have learnt
> from this and would like to try the list again with the training
> wheels off.

I doubt that would work.  Past history has shown that whenever I agree to
tone it down, James changes his threshold to ensure he has a excuse to do
something to me.  James and I have fundamental disagreements about what is
acceptable on the list, so eventually I'll say something he doesn't like.
If you look back, you can see this is actually quite rare.  The vast
majority of my messages (when I wasn't on moderation) have been adding
content to the list.  Once every few 100 messages I may say something that
wasn't PC enough for James.  He then deals with it poorly, which sometimes
causes a ruckus, then he blames the ruckus on me.


********************************************************************
Embed Inc, Littleton Massachusetts, http://www.embedinc.com/products
(978) 742-9014.  Gold level PIC consultants since 2000.
-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist