An idea. *All candidates, please read.*

[Muffin Top Merkley]

That's simple. I can't speak for you, or Habs, or JGKY. I'm not you, I don't know what your work ethic will actually be no more than you know what mine will be, and I'm not campaigning for any of you, I'm campaigning for me. I know what my intentions are, what kind of work load I can take on, how hard I will work, and how good of a job I will do. You can talk all you want until the cows come home about how you'll give it 110% but I this goes both ways and I have no reason to believe you. As far as I am concerned, any other candidate is going to say whatever they think they need to say to prop themselves up as being a better choice than me. The only problem there is, that there is no better choice as far as I am concerned. I am the guy for the job, I am the one who wants it most, and I am the one who will do the best job. Why would I go on and say "Oh yeah, you and all the other guys would be every bit as good and dedicated as me"? I'm not trying to score points for you, I'm trying to beat you, and if people were listening to what I've been saying and actually reading my posts, taking what I say into consideration, I have no doubt that folks would be in full support of me.

I've read everything that you've posted, as well as every post by every member in this party, in regards to this election. If I didn't how could I be properly prepared?

Actually I have, you just haven't been paying attention. I've posted over and over to that very same accusation as to why everyone should be backing me from the very beginning when I started the People's Party of Moderation. Unfortunately most of you have been too busy with other things to pay attention to the real McCoy and listen to what I've been saying.

Actually, you haven't. You've been running in circles, but haven't actually moved anywhere. We get it, you want us to believe that you won't abuse power and you would respect everyone equally. But that's it. You keep hammering that point, despite there being recent proof that you can't conduct yourself in the manner that you expect us to believe.

I suppose what I'm asking is, aside from the nice guy routine, what else do you provide? What section are you looking at?

On the contrary, you should be voting on who is the best person for the job, because that IS the person who can win. I am that guy, I can win, and I've explained over and over how and why. How can you know who can win and be a good mod? I've already pointed that out, we have a majority, all you have to do is have a little faith, give some support, back me up here, and I promise you, when the dust settles it will be Ba-Bomb who is left standing because he leveled the competition.

What you don't seem to understand is that it's going to take more than what you say during this election in order to be viewed upon as a successful candidate for a moderator. As I've explained to Dagger, it's a combination of attitude, personality, conduct, past-history on the forum etc. that helps determine who has what it takes and THAT is why we should vote on who we know better. You are relativity unknown. That doesn't mean that you can't get the job done, but it hasn't proven that you can either.

In fact, the only things that stick out when it comes to you as a poster is how you handled yourself in that conversation with D-Man (trying to justify it now just seems like damage control), and the fact that you're talking down to me right now. There is nothing to say that you won't conduct yourself in that manner in the future towards other posters.

Anything you say differently can fall into the category of "As far as I am concerned, any other candidate is going to say whatever they think they need to say to prop themselves up as being a better choice." (You're exact words)

 

[ABMorales787]

I don't plan on writing sermons or preaching on what I'd do. I'm not a church minister. I drive discussion. I report news. I post topics. And I keep up with the company. I report posts. I realize there may be times when my reports might be off, but in those cases there's a staff to help me refine that if I make a wrong judgement call. I've been here long enough. I'm here mostly everyday. Commitment has never been a problem with me and if I end up picked, I'd do whatever it takes.

 

[Larry]

I've read everything that you've posted, as well as every post by every member in this party, in regards to this election. If I didn't how could I be properly prepared?

So you've followed from the beginning in the PPM thread, and every other place where I've posted my intentions, ideas, what I would bring to the table and otherwise? Than why do you keep asking me what those positions are? If you're as well studied as you say you'd already know.

Actually, you haven't. You've been running in circles, but haven't actually moved anywhere. We get it, you want us to believe that you won't abuse power and you would respect everyone equally. But that's it. You keep hammering that point, despite there being recent proof that you can't conduct yourself in the manner that you expect us to believe.

I would say the "proof" is of the contrary. Outside of one isolated event that I explained in full detail over and over to the request of others my track record is squeaky clean. I understand this is politics and the idea is to discredit the opposing candidate but what you are doing is complete filibuster. Even in my most recent posts here in this thread I have went over far more than you let on, which points directly to you not reading it or paying attention. You're just throwing up pseudo-informed allegations as I answer every question clearly and openly.

I suppose what I'm asking is, aside from the nice guy routine, what else do you provide? What section are you looking at?

Again you didn't do your research did you? Firstly, I've made it clear from day one that I am running for the Non-Spam Wrestling Section, you can find that all over the place, and it's been no mystery. Secondly, I have expressed and explained repeatedly what I provide and went well beyond your accused "nice guy routine". I bring fervor for one, experience, a different approach, dedication, a strong work ethic, bold ideas, and the list goes on and on of transferable skills I possess that put me as the perfect candidate for the position. I can contribute everywhere meaningfully, I know the rules and therein can enforce them properly, I have a goal in mind for creating a more level playing field for all members, and I have the guts and drive to go for it regardless of how strongly you or anyone else tries to discourage me from doing it because you don't want the competition which I bring plenty of.

What you don't seem to understand is that it's going to take more than what you say during this election in order to be viewed upon as a successful candidate for a moderator. As I've explained to Dagger, it's a combination of attitude, personality, conduct, past-history on the forum etc. that helps determine who has what it takes and THAT is why we should vote on who we know better. You are relativity unknown. That doesn't mean that you can't get the job done, but it hasn't proven that you can either.

And that's a clever way to raise doubt and argue for dismissing someone well qualified and readily able to do the job. Unfortunately that is YOUR view, YOUR definition, and that doesn't make it law or status quo. I find it rather telling that you would rather promote voting for someone you know better, rather than someone better suited for a position. It shows where your values truly lie, and it's not with the best interests of the forum, filling the position with the BEST candidate, just one that makes you feel warm and fuzzy because you know them. In my view(since we're trowing those around so freely) this should automatically disqualify you in the eyes of any onlooker as you express a blatant selfish motivation. I want to be of service to the community, help where help is needed, help promote the good welfare of the people, help the forum progress further, and help mentor posters to improve, adding a great overall benefit for the forum and it's members. These are selfless motivations, and those selfless motivations are the main thing that separate me from everyone else and make me a better candidate than anyone else, among other things like my qualifications that set me apart from the pack as well.

In fact, the only things that stick out when it comes to you as a poster is how you handled yourself in that conversation with D-Man (trying to justify it now just seems like damage control), and the fact that you're talking down to me right now. There is nothing to say that you won't conduct yourself in that manner in the future towards other posters.

You'd like that to be true which is why you keep trying to use it against me, but regardless of that what sticks out is that I am a top quality poster, others have admitted as much, and there is plenty to say and show exactly how I will conduct myself regardless of your denials of that fact. What also sticks out is my consistency in my message(you've even pointed that out for me, thank you) my many qualifications, and the fact that these things must be true and I must be THAT much of a threat to you and others, or all of you wouldn't have invested so much time in trying to stifle me. I've never "Talked Down To You" either, this is another lame allegation in a desperate attempt to neutralize a serious threat. I recommend you do better research of the people you plan to attack, to avoid asking question of which the answer is already out there in plain black and white and looking uninformed.

Anything you say differently can fall into the category of "As far as I am concerned, any other candidate is going to say whatever they think they need to say to prop themselves up as being a better choice." (You're exact words)

And again that is your opinion which you express well, but what have you proven thus far other than the fact that you haven't done your homework on me as you said you have, that you've wasted time asking questions to which the answers already exist in plain black and white, and thrown out false allegations and tried to smear someone you clearly view as a threat? Is any of that supposed to help your case because I don't see how any of that is becoming of a suitable moderator?

 

[Muffin Top Merkley]

My goal isn't to pick someone for a certain section, per se, it's to get the best representative for the job, So seeing that I'm essentially ambivalent about the section, and more about the person and what they bring to the table, what makes you the best choice as Mod, irregardless of section?

By improving even on section of the forum, you improve the forum as a whole.

More than any other member that is running in this election, I possess attainable and realistic ideas that will truly revitalize the Video Game & Technology section and return it to the state that it once was. More than anyone, I am both aware of the condition that the VG&T section currently is in, as well as what it is capable of becoming. I also have confidence that I can be the man who accomplishes the goals that I have set for myself and the section. I will go into greater detail below.

My hope is that the best person for the job gets selected, not only because of popularity, but because of a combination of factors such as attitude, personality, respect, approachability, history on the site, quality of posts etc. I believe that I possess a lot of the characters and trait of a good moderator.

I am not interested in the board room; my purpose is to improve the forum that I hold in high regard. It took me a while to decide if I was even up for the task at hand, and in the end I determined that I was because I believe that I have the key to be successful and improving one of the sections that I enjoy the most.

This is some of the same rhetoric Ive heard from Habs(not saying that this is a bad thing), and I'll ask a similar question: Is it more important for you as an individual to get the nomination, or for the party to get the nomination? Are you willing to step on toes of others in the party if it means getting the nod?

There are certain people running in this election that I am 100% willing to support, should I not be the elected candidate. There are others that, while bringing a lot to the party as a regular poster, I do not believe would make for a good moderator at this time. While it may look like I’m being too harsh on certain posters, and constantly grilling them on their platform, I do it the intent of hopefully walking away with a better understanding of their plans, so I can then give them my support if they earn it.

I also believe that by finding issues that I perceive as the flaws in their platform, and bringing it to the attention of the rest of the party, I’ll be shedding a positive light on other, more deserving platforms. If that classifies as “stepping on toes,” then I suppose I have already done that and will continue to do so because there are some candidates that I don’t feel have clear view as to what they will actually implement if chosen, unlike me.

Why do you believe this section needs a Mod? I have no doubt that youre passionate about this section, as Ive seen your (excellent)work in there. But I'm passionate about movies and television(Im not running, obviously), Habs and Killjoy feel similarly about TNA, and Dagger is passionate about several sections. Why is the need for a Mod in the VG section more important then another Mod in TNA, an M & T mod, or thinking long term, a spam zone Mod?

No section REALLY needs to be moderated. We could allow free reign throughout the entire forum, but by doing so, we would obviously lose the prestige that is closely associated with WrestleZone Forums.

While every section can improve by having an extra set of eyes and another pair of hands to assist in maintaining order, guiding discussion, keeping a generally positive posting environment for all opinions, a section without a dedicated person to moderate would benefit the most. It is that train of thought that allows me to see that it is the non-wrestling, non-spam sections that need a dedicated mod, more than any other section because all of the rules of the forum still apply.

When the non-wrestling, non-spam sections of the forum are compared side by side, it is the VG&T section, which is the weakest link. The amount of traffic has decreased, as has the overall level of posting, especially by posters that are newest to the section.

I feel that if the VG&T area had a watchful eye that was able to notice spam before it was reported, and encouraged positive posting, the forums would be taking two steps forward, opposed to the one step it would be taking if a moderator was placed somewhere else. If the outside of your house wasn’t pleasing to the public eye, but you had windows that were only five years old, you wouldn’t start renovations by replacing the windows first.

Why do you believe you're the best person for the job from the party? I'm not asking you to bury other party members, quite the opposite. I want to know what makes you the best choice.

I believe that I have already answered this question as it appears to be a duplicate of the first question asked above. If I did not, please let me know and I will reply back as soon as possible.

Since you brought it up, I'll ask the question: In showing self-confidence in your abilities, who do you believe is not equipped to be a Mod? Why?

Should I not be the candidate selected, there are other members within this party who will receive my full support without question. There are also members within this party who are running on a platform that I disagree with for one reason or another, and I currently feel are not moderator material.

I have shared my current lack of faith in other posters such as Ba-Bomb and Dagger in becoming a moderator many times and still support my decisions. Ba-Bomb has shown that while he claims that he will always be the nice guy who remains cool, calm and collected while treating all posters with respect no matter their rank or tenure on the forums. He has most recently proven that he is not the level headed person that he wants us to believe and has handled confrontation poorly.

Dagger, to me wants to become a moderator for all the wrong reasons, and has yet to prove me differently. He is running with two platforms in hopes that everyone supports one or the other and that secures him enough votes to win. He doesn’t seem to grasp the concept that someone might like platform A, and vote for him because of it, but hate platform B. Someone else could support platform B, vote for him and that platform, but not support platform A. He won’t be able to please both.

How do you plan on addressing this problem? How will you, as a Mod, turn this problem around?

Any section that has at least dedicated person to monitor the comments that get posted in his or her section, improved because you have the watchful eye that is able to delete spam posts in a timely manner, and as they are being reported by other vigilant posters.

By encouraging intelligent contributions to threads, you also eliminate the clutter of spam, as you provide an excellent opportunity for the poster to provide reasoning to support his opinion. You can provide posters with that opportunity, by creating general topics, rather than non-specific ones that focus only on one game for example.

You can help posters to gain confidence with their posts, by engaging them in discussion regarding their post. Whether you agree or disagree with their posts, there are talented posters that can help maintain a positive and welcoming posting environment that encourages proper discussion.

I read this thread, and it was a good read. I also cleaned up the spam throughout it, so your point from earlier is well taken. Do you have further plans such as this? If so, what are they? Further, do you believe some games do deserve their own thread, or do you have a plan to make a blanket thread for new games, where people can choose to discuss new games at their discretion.

Absolutely! I have a literal list of threads that I would like to see, and hope to post these sooner rather than later. I was hesitant in listing some thread ideas that I did have in fear that someone would see my idea and beat me to the punch. Without giving out too much information, I have every intention to create threads such as “Essential Xbox 360 Games” and “Essential Wii Games”. I am almost complete a thread I am calling “The State of the PlayStation.” And I will be doing ones that discus the current state of the Wii and Xbox as well. The amount of discussion that can take place around video games and technology are endless, and I plan to create discussion that has yet to be had.

Not every big release needs to have a dedicated thread. Skyrim, Modern Warfare 3, Battlefield 3, Gears of War 3, Uncharted 3, Skyward Sword etc. all came out within the past two months. I feel that if all of these games had their own thread, you’d be inviting spam and other posts that really don’t provide deep discussion. I’ll use Modern Warfare 3 as an example, much like I have many times before. It was the biggest launch of a video game of all time. It made over $400,000,000 in 24 hours. It surpassed 1 Billion dollars in just sixteen days – Faster than the movie Avatar. If there was such a need or desire to discuss it in a non-spam manner, it would have been created by someone already.

Out of the options of every big game that gets released having its own dedicated thread, or one thread to generally discuss game releases, I’ll choose the later because it won’t allow the section to be consumed by clutter, and it will provide those who are not frequent posters with a place to get their feet wet as they get comfortable posting in the VG&T section.

I have my own definition of "controlled vs uncontrolled" spam, but can you go into more details about it?

Uncontrolled spam posts are ones that just state an opinion on the subject, but does not contribute to the thread by providing any reasoning or move the discussion forward. It is the majority of the spam that gets posted on the forums. An example would be in my Essential Games for the PS3 thread, several posts were made just listing a game without providing any reason as to why it should be considered, or what the game is about.

Controlled spam, while not necessarily a violation of the rules, does not move the discussion forward or does not allow another poster to successfully debate or discuss. It’s controlled spam that I find takes away from any momentum of discussing that is occurring. It may not be against the rules of WrestleZone, it can be just as bad, as it doesn’t encourage successful contributions to the thread or the forum.

Believe it or not, Im a gamer myself. I won't try to compare myself to you, Dagger, or Lee, but I do enjoy gaming and pick up every new release that interests me. I'm also a long-time gamer, but for some reason, Ive had little desire to ever visit the VG section except for the odd post here and there. So....

Convince me of what you would do to draw me in to be a regular, or at least a semi-frequent poster.

I believe that you’re a gamer, no doubt. Since the introduction of the iPhone and the increase in smartphone technology I believe that most people are gamers whether they are aware of that fact or not.

I believe the secret to increasing the amount of traffic that visits in the VG&T section, is making it appear more welcoming to posters who don’t frequent the section for one reason or another. When new posters post in the “Welcome New Members” thread, they should be greeted to the forum with more than “Welcome to WrestleZone, follow the rules.” They should be informed that even though WrestleZone is a fantastic place to have wrestling discussion, there is also a section to discuss video games. Encourage them to check it out, and make a few posts.

In order to increase the amount of posting, we need to increase the amount of general, non-specific topics. The best example of this, and one of the best threads currently in the VG&T section is the “What are you currently playing” thread. Not every person has played every game that will be discussed and that can be intimidating and disheartening to them to walk into a section, but not feel like they can contribute. It’s one of the reasons why I don’t post in the Newswire section. Other examples of excellent general topics in the VG&T section is Dagger’s thread on video game music, or my thread on Essential PS3 games. I view threads like these as open-ended questions that everyone can join and discuss.

There are a number of known gamers that are regular posters on this site such as Lee, Melinko, Crock, Jay Sherman etc. I’m curious to know why they don’t visit the section and contribute. I would discuss why that is the case, and what can be done to interest them in posting.

As a married man of four years, and one who is about to welcome a child in the next few weeks, I understand this. I still manage to have a daily presence while undeniably putting my family, work, and faith first. Obviously, you will need to strike a possibly different balance if Modded. How will you do it?

My life is in a good place right now that I can see myself having more time available to dedicate to posting. My daughter is at a good age where she is less dependent on me at all times. My was on maternity leave for a year, and then released from her job shortly after her return. Obviously, with my wife always at home, as well as my infant daughter, my time was consumed with my family.

My wife is attempting to start her own daycare as a means of employment. If having a two bedroom apartment filled with children, three of which under the age of 3, isn’t a good enough reason to get the hell out of the house and go to a library to use the computer there to log on, I don’t know what is.

While deciding if I was up to the task at hand in running for the moderator position, and throughout this entire election process, I have gained a new level of confidence within my posting and that new found confidence with my ability is driving my desire to become a more active member of this community.

These should be the goals of every mod, quality over quantity, but if someone can achieve both, do you feel like this disadvantages you?

Without a doubt this does put me at a disadvantage, but one that I am aware of and trying to correct and will do so with time. There are posters on this site that can produce a high amount of quality posts on a regular basis. I’m not silly enough think that I belong in that category. I do believe that my biggest disadvantage is my rate of posting in the non-spam sections of the forum, which is something that I wanted to address from the start.

Thankfully, this is a disadvantage that can be overcome and I plan on doing just that. I see the caliber of posts that people I hold in high regard are able to make, and I have the drive to reach the level of talent that I have placed them on. I believe I have shown that I am capable of posting quality, no matter how long it seemingly takes for me to get my thoughts into well written words. I am aware that I need to improve in the quantity of my posts and show a presence throughout the entire forum.

I agree. Granted, this is my first wrestling forum experience, but I have been a member of Pittsburgh sports forums, and I highly prefer this one. What do you believe makes you someone who contributes to making this forum so great?

I can’t even pretend that I play a big role in making this forum one of the best on the internet. I know that I am nothing more than a small gear in a giant working machine. There are many roles that we all play to help contribute to the forum, from the regular poster, to the thread creator, to the moderators to the administration, we are all vital parts in making the forums what they currently are.

I try to give 100% of myself to every post that I make, especially when creating new topics to discuss. That is one of the reasons why I wasn’t a frequent poster, is because sometimes it can be a lengthy process to put my well collected thoughts into well written words. If a post isn’t up to the standards that I believe it should and that I expect out of myself, I will work on it until I believe it is where it needs to be. The standards I set for myself is based on the quality of posts that I see from the many posters who I respect and enjoy interacting with. I am trying to improve myself, and will continue to do so as I WrestleZone continues to function.

If you don't win the election, will you work to improve the Video Game section irregardless? As nIve told other candidates, there is plenty that can be done as simply a member to improve a section without the Bold Name.

I’ve not only seen the Video Game & Technology section at its peak, I was also an active participate during this time. I am committed to improving the section and hopefully I can help in bringing it back to its glory, if not surpass it, no matter my role on this forum.

It’s an attainable goal, and we have regular posters that are capable in helping to achieve it, but I believe in order to reach the level that the section is capable of bring, we need someone with realistic ideas to fix what is broken and lead the charge so to speak.

Well said, and I couldn't agree more. This is the exact same approach I take in the CL, and Potluck as well, despite not being the Mod of the latter. I hope you carry this perspective regardless of how the chips fall.

Best of Luck to you, MTM. Excellent mission statement.

I appreciate the time you took to evaluate my position, as well as your kind words. I would like to encourage anyone and everyone to follow LSN lead and share your thoughts regarding anything negative or positive with the philosophy that I used to create and support my platform. Any feedback is appreciated.

 

[Muffin Top Merkley]

So you've followed from the beginning in the PPM thread, and every other place where I've posted my intentions, ideas, what I would bring to the table and otherwise? Than why do you keep asking me what those positions are? If you're as well studied as you say you'd already know.

Every time someone calls you out and ask what you really stand for, you seemingly jerk them around but never really let them finish. You go on and on about how you’ll show compassion when dealing with a poster, no matter their position or history on the forum. But once you take that away, there is nothing left for you to stand on, so you go back to claiming that you’ll respect everyone at all times, no matter what the circumstances.

I would say the "proof" is of the contrary. Outside of one isolated event that I explained in full detail over and over to the request of others my track record is squeaky clean. I understand this is politics and the idea is to discredit the opposing candidate but what you are doing is complete filibuster. Even in my most recent posts here in this thread I have went over far more than you let on, which points directly to you not reading it or paying attention. You're just throwing up pseudo-informed allegations as I answer every question clearly and openly.

One incident is often all it takes for someone to gather all of the ammo that they need against you. You run in circles trying to trick people into falling for your nice guy routine, but as soon as it gets thick, it shows that you’ve just been calling “wolf”

I work at a fire department, someone can talk about how they aren’t afraid of hits until they are blue in the face, but I won’t know it to be true until I see them climb a one hundred foot ladder. You’ve already shown your cards in how you would react in confrontation and no matter how hard you try to do damage control, there is always going to be someone to call you out on it and you’ll have to start your clean-up all over again.

Again you didn't do your research did you? Firstly, I've made it clear from day one that I am running for the Non-Spam Wrestling Section, you can find that all over the place, and it's been no mystery. Secondly, I have expressed and explained repeatedly what I provide and went well beyond your accused "nice guy routine". I bring fervor for one, experience, a different approach, dedication, a strong work ethic, bold ideas, and the list goes on and on of transferable skills I possess that put me as the perfect candidate for the position. I can contribute everywhere meaningfully, I know the rules and therein can enforce them properly, I have a goal in mind for creating a more level playing field for all members, and I have the guts and drive to go for it regardless of how strongly you or anyone else tries to discourage me from doing it because you don't want the competition which I bring plenty of.

Cool. Non-Spam Wrestling section. But what SPECIFIC section. Why that section? I’m truly not attacking you or you as a poster, nor am I trying to discourage you from doing what you want to do. I’m just trying to figure out where you stand exactly in order for people to make an accurate determination if you’re qualified or not for the task at hand.

And that's a clever way to raise doubt and argue for dismissing someone well qualified and readily able to do the job. Unfortunately that is YOUR view, YOUR definition, and that doesn't make it law or status quo. I find it rather telling that you would rather promote voting for someone you know better, rather than someone better suited for a position. It shows where your values truly lie, and it's not with the best interests of the forum, filling the position with the BEST candidate, just one that makes you feel warm and fuzzy because you know them. In my view(since we're trowing those around so freely) this should automatically disqualify you in the eyes of any onlooker as you express a blatant selfish motivation. I want to be of service to the community, help where help is needed, help promote the good welfare of the people, help the forum progress further, and help mentor posters to improve, adding a great overall benefit for the forum and it's members. These are selfless motivations, and those selfless motivations are the main thing that separate me from everyone else and make me a better candidate than anyone else, among other things like my qualifications that set me apart from the pack as well.

How do YOU think this should be decided? Do we take a chance on the new guy, or do we stick with the person who we KNOW can get the job done? I don’t know anyone on this forum outside the forum itself, but I can accurately determine who would be qualified for the position, and who would be successful at the position by how they conduct themselves on the forum.

I’m voting on the person I know better BECAUSE I have the best interest of the forum in mind. To vote for someone who you don’t believe would be the best choice, would be selfish and not for the good of the forum and CLEARLY does not apply to me.

Can you explain why you think people should vote for someone who won’t do a stand up job? Because that is what you are asking them to do, by voting for someone that they don’t know is capable in preforming the duties best.

Who’s the selfish one again?

You'd like that to be true which is why you keep trying to use it against me, but regardless of that what sticks out is that I am a top quality poster, others have admitted as much, and there is plenty to say and show exactly how I will conduct myself regardless of your denials of that fact. What also sticks out is my consistency in my message(you've even pointed that out for me, thank you) my many qualifications, and the fact that these things must be true and I must be THAT much of a threat to you and others, or all of you wouldn't have invested so much time in trying to stifle me. I've never "Talked Down To You" either, this is another lame allegation in a desperate attempt to neutralize a serious threat. I recommend you do better research of the people you plan to attack, to avoid asking question of which the answer is already out there in plain black and white and looking uninformed.

You are a top quality poster. I never have said or even implied differently. But being a quality poster, doesn’t automatically mean you’d be a quality moderator.

I’m not using anything against you that can’t be proven. You lost your cool, during an election were your main selling point (or your constant message) is you won’t lose your cool. When you take that away, which nobody but you did, you show up empty handed.

And yes, you did talk down to me, or at least that is how it came across on my end, which maybe was just lost in translation over the internet, but the fact that you can’t see where it could have occurred worries me. You say one thing, and then you contradict yourself with your next post. Nobody is hurting your own campaign more than yourself.

And again that is your opinion which you express well, but what have you proven thus far other than the fact that you haven't done your homework on me as you said you have, that you've wasted time asking questions to which the answers already exist in plain black and white, and thrown out false allegations and tried to smear someone you clearly view as a threat? Is any of that supposed to help your case because I don't see how any of that is becoming of a suitable moderator?

Good point, I asked questions about how you handle yourself in certain situations, when the answer has clearly been proven repeatedly. I haven’t uttered one false allegation as everything that I have mentioned can be proven. Like I said, you can try and clean up your campaign, but no matter what lengths you go to do so, once someone brings it right back up, it’s back to square one for you. Not for one second do I view you as a remote threat and it’s clear that you’re hoping that someone will see your pity attempt at accusing me of using a bully tactic and you’ll gain a vote or two.

I am confident that I have carried myself well throughout my time here on the forum, as well as throughout the election. I have clearly stated my intensions for running and exactly what I would do should I be selected. I have called people out on their bullshit during this election, which is what I’ve done to you, and what you’ve confused as smear tactics. The truth is I have come clean about everything, while you think we’re idiots who can’t see the written truth past a playful wink.

 

[Larry]

Every time someone calls you out and ask what you really stand for, you seemingly jerk them around but never really let them finish. You go on and on about how you’ll show compassion when dealing with a poster, no matter their position or history on the forum. But once you take that away, there is nothing left for you to stand on, so you go back to claiming that you’ll respect everyone at all times, no matter what the circumstances.

How am I jerking anyone around OR not letting anyone finish? It's not like I can interrupt you mid sentence or something? You asked questions, I gave you answers. I'm sorry if those didn't suffice for you. I have been consistent in what I've said, and if you take that away you are completely ignore everything else I have said that gives me plenty to stand on. This is like reading WWE revisionist history or something.

One incident is often all it takes for someone to gather all of the ammo that they need against you. You run in circles trying to trick people into falling for your nice guy routine, but as soon as it gets thick, it shows that you’ve just been calling “wolf”

Or, one incident is all it takes for someone to beat the dead horse like it will bring it back to life. Face it, that's the only thing you've even remotely got on me, and you just keep trying make a bigger deal of it than it was. I explained the whole thing in detail, why I did what I did, all the circumstances, and it wasn't what you try to make it out to be. Why don't you go back to the PPM thread and see how I handled screaminormansmiley trying to get a rise out of me, or look at me dealing with you here and take that into consideration, or the many other places where people have been trying to test my patience and nothing of the sort has happened. You might have a point if it was a reoccurring theme but like I said that was one isolated incident, and I've given all the explanation I need to on it. I am a nice guy and if you don't believe me or have a problem with me trying to show that maybe your NOT a very nice guy, lol

I work at a fire department, someone can talk about how they aren’t afraid of hits until they are blue in the face, but I won’t know it to be true until I see them climb a one hundred foot ladder. You’ve already shown your cards in how you would react in confrontation and no matter how hard you try to do damage control, there is always going to be someone to call you out on it and you’ll have to start your clean-up all over again.

Call it what you will, stir the pot all you'd like. These desperate acts to disparage me and my character are pointless and I've already explained why. Am I not allowed to be human? Am I not allowed to have ever had a less than flattering moment? Does one incident now define someone? Or are you maybe grasping at straws trying to stifle the competition?

Cool. Non-Spam Wrestling section. But what SPECIFIC section. Why that section? I’m truly not attacking you or you as a poster, nor am I trying to discourage you from doing what you want to do. I’m just trying to figure out where you stand exactly in order for people to make an accurate determination if you’re qualified or not for the task at hand.

Well if you look back to the beginning of this whole ordeal when people were supposed to start making their parties, there were a list of sections to choose from to campaign for. The Non-Wrestling Spam Zone was one of them, no emphasis on any one particular section, just that area in general and that is where I intend to moderate. Some folks have zeroed in on specific forums because they are in sections with broader forums and because they have specific interests. The non-spam wrestling section is all wrestling though, unlike the non-spam non-wrestling sections where VG&T, MMA&Boxing, The Newswire, Music Room, etc... stand. So, I was trying to go for the Non-Spam Wrestling Section in general because I'd like to help everywhere, not just in one forum. If someone decided I only needed to help in Old-School wrestling, ok. If someone decided I only needed to help in the TNA section, ok fine, so on and so forth.

Because I had made that clear from the get-go, I have instead tried to explain other positions I stand on that I would apply to moderating in that section, hence always going back to fair treatment, being more hands on with the people, starting a new thread/forum to work directly with people, and doing some of the other regular stuff like starting threads, helping drive discussion in different threads and forums, clean up of threads and forums, and I've explained also how and why I can and will help do all of that, a lot of which goes back to experience, examples already displayed in the places I've posted, and my overall promise to bring original thought to a thread near you.

How do YOU think this should be decided? Do we take a chance on the new guy, or do we stick with the person who we KNOW can get the job done? I don’t know anyone on this forum outside the forum itself, but I can accurately determine who would be qualified for the position, and who would be successful at the position by how they conduct themselves on the forum.

As I've stated numerous times now, it should be decided by choosing the best candidate for the job, regardless of tenure, who you like per-say, or affiliation. At least that's my take. If someone else came to me and said "Here are my qualifications" and they were up to par, they showed a genuine desire and determination as I have, and they brought ideas and concepts that are fair to everyone like I have, I would have to take away from it, that this individual is at least A great choice for the postion, and that maybe they should be given a chance. Just because you think you know someone better doesn't mean they would automatically the best choice or that you really KNOW they can get the job done. It just means you feel more comfortable with that choice based on affiliation, tenure, and familiarity.

I’m voting on the person I know better BECAUSE I have the best interest of the forum in mind. To vote for someone who you don’t believe would be the best choice, would be selfish and not for the good of the forum and CLEARLY does not apply to me.

Thank you for clarifying that. Still, the person you know better isn't necessarily the best person for the job. That's just the person your more comfortable voting for because of that relationship and your interactions and perceptions of that individual the root from it.

Can you explain why you think people should vote for someone who won’t do a stand up job? Because that is what you are asking them to do, by voting for someone that they don’t know is capable in preforming the duties best.

I never said anyone should vote for anyone who wouldn't do a stand up job, and that's by no means what I am asking anyone to do. What I have been asking people to do is to be a little more open minded, listen to what I have to say in hopes of convincing them I am the best man for the job, and get them to vote for me as a result, gaining their faith and trust. I have been trying to explain why I am not only capable of doing a stand up job, but the best choice to do so. I have had many different reasons, presented plenty of ideas of my own, stood to all criticism, and done all I can to explain I how and why I am the best choice. Nothing misleading, and I'm not asking anyone to vote for me without having confidence in their choice. I've only been trying to gain that confidence which is a lot different than why you are suggesting I am proposing.

You are a top quality poster. I never have said or even implied differently. But being a quality poster, doesn’t automatically mean you’d be a quality moderator.

Thank you for starters. I do appreciate the compliment and giving me at least that much credit, especially being a newer guy. I understand where you are coming from, and I understand your logic therein but as I am running for moderator, I feel and know that I will be a good moderator. I have done it elsewhere before as I've mentioned and done a great job at it in the past. If I wasn't 100% sure of my ability to do it, I wouldn't say I can or even have attempted to run. You are obviously free to think otherwise, but I assure you and anyone else, I am the best guy for the job and would be a top quality moderator. I wouldn't be fighting so hard for the chance if I didn't know as much of myself.

I’m not using anything against you that can’t be proven. You lost your cool, during an election were your main selling point (or your constant message) is you won’t lose your cool. When you take that away, which nobody but you did, you show up empty handed.

Again, that horse is dead and the stick is probably breaking at this point. Regardless, if you look at this thread alone I come up with a lot more and am in no means empty handed outside of my "selling point" as you put it, of being a mod that would maintain a level head and treat everyone fairly, more so even than the current staff. Keep in mind it was a staff member in a section where anything goes that I let loose on them(completely within rules), and I did so only after being given a lot more crap than many others would have taken(e.g. I did keep my cool). All I did was give back what I had received in spades to make a point.

And yes, you did talk down to me, or at least that is how it came across on my end, which maybe was just lost in translation over the internet, but the fact that you can’t see where it could have occurred worries me. You say one thing, and then you contradict yourself with your next post. Nobody is hurting your own campaign more than yourself.

I'm sorry if you felt "talked down to", that was not what I was doing or trying to project. It's just often time difficult to pick up what someone else if putting down when it comes to you as nothing but cold text. I never said I didn't see where it could have occurred, and I've not contradicted myself at any point either. I'd like you to point out without any doubt where I have done so if you can, and present something that isn't a clever "interpretation" of misunderstanding of anything I have said, or a twisting of words, no catch-22's. Lay it out legitimately. My campaign has been hurt by my only in the fact that I did have a small dust up with D-Man and that it's been trumped up by others and blown out of proportion to be used against me. Other than that, it's been a lot of people simply bad mouthing me for no reason other than political maneuvering and sabotage.

Good point, I asked questions about how you handle yourself in certain situations, when the answer has clearly been proven repeatedly. I haven’t uttered one false allegation as everything that I have mentioned can be proven. Like I said, you can try and clean up your campaign, but no matter what lengths you go to do so, once someone brings it right back up, it’s back to square one for you. Not for one second do I view you as a remote threat and it’s clear that you’re hoping that someone will see your pity attempt at accusing me of using a bully tactic and you’ll gain a vote or two.

This same old argument is getting pretty lame at this point. Anyone else reading this, by now has to be getting as tired of you constantly bringing up this ONE thing as I am, trying to make some big deal, and constantly using it like some case closing incriminating evidence against me. All you prove in doing this is that you have no other valid argument against me. This is all you have so you're going to beat it to death with a hammer, and try to sell it as hard as possible. Again, one incident is irrelevant in comparison to the many others where the situation has been completely different, where I had the opportunity to blow my stack and didn't, and also doesn't account for the many conversations that I simply walked away from and didn't even bother to comment on because I knew that it would lead to an argument with someone that I simply didn't feel was worth it.

I am confident that I have carried myself well throughout my time here on the forum, as well as throughout the election. I have clearly stated my intensions for running and exactly what I would do should I be selected. I have called people out on their bullshit during this election, which is what I’ve done to you, and what you’ve confused as smear tactics. The truth is I have come clean about everything, while you think we’re idiots who can’t see the written truth past a playful wink.

Let me point out the hypocrisy in your own statements once and for all here for you so you can sit down, be quite, and just play nice. Right above in this very paragraph you say and I quote:

I have called people out on their bullshit during this election, which is what I’ve done to you, and what you’ve confused as smear tactics.

First of all, that's your opinion, that what you've called anyone out on is "their bullshit" from my experience here with you, what you've been doing is calling peoples stances and statements as to why they should be a moderator "Bullshit" and then try to claim it's not smear tactics which is clever, but not clever enough.

Then you go on to say about me, and I quote:

The truth is I have come clean about everything, while you think we’re idiots who can’t see the written truth past a playful wink.

Both a lie and smearing in the same sentence. The lie is that you've come clean about anything, you won't own up to a damn thing, certainly nothing I have pointed out up to now, all the while I've been completely open, honest, and candid about my ONE little dust up that you've been blowing out of proportion and smearing me with. THEN, you go on to blatantly smear me, stating "You think we're idiots" thereby trying to cast me in a negative light as you've done through this whole thread. BIG TACTICAL ERROR MY FRIEND. NO TRICKERY HERE, NO TWISTING OF WORDS, YOU LAID IT OUT, I PLAYED IT OUT. GAME, SET, MATCH.