On the apologies of doomers

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TB2K spinoff uncensored : One Thread

Some consider doomers who apologised after the fact exanerated.

I do not.

Vindicated Regards,
Andy Ray



-- Andy Ray (andyman633@hotmail.com), June 02, 2000

Answers

So, who cares what you think anyway MR SPAM?

****YAWN******

-- consumer (shh@aol.com), June 02, 2000.


I feel sorry for you. Your hatred for 'doomers has/will eat you up spiritually and emotionally inside.

I pray you can find peace and the ability to forgive.

-- I believe in Him (Jesus is King@Kingdom.com), June 02, 2000.


Do you want their first born?

-- Never forgive or forget but obsess (smallman@you.now), June 02, 2000.

What's exanerated mean?

-- (@ .), June 02, 2000.

exanerated is spelled exonerated.

apologised is spelled apologized.

Children should learn to spell the big words or not use them.

-- third grade level (thats@bove.you), June 02, 2000.



Andy,dude.

You need to get out a little and party,you are oh so dull and stuffy.Go burn a big one,adjust the ol' attitude,it will help ward off the meme of repetition,tequilla shots are very effective as are mushrooms.you are starting to sound like a doomer(was that an insult?).

Like ANYONE needs your exoneration,hehehehe : )

-- capnfun (capnfun1@excite.com), June 02, 2000.


HTML coding tricks

Multiple Web personalties that are sometimes a polly and sometimes a doomer

Efforts to shut get MIT to shut down the TB 2000 forum

Are any of these familiar to you, Andy Ray?

Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us...

-- (the@golden.rule), June 02, 2000.


After what fact?

-- Debbie (dbspence@usa.net), June 02, 2000.

Hee hee! It seems that Andy wants people to say that they are sorry for being wrong before it is proven that they are, indeed, wrong!! LOL what an idiot.

-- Uncle Deedah (unkeed@yahoo.com), June 02, 2000.

Hey there Capn:

Wanna Wrestle....in the bud fields? LOL.......

Pass da papers and we'll 'maybe' share one with Andy whats his name...

LOL.

-- consumer (shh@aol.com), June 02, 2000.



Sumer,

What ya doin' hon? Sure we'll share with Andy.no need to be stingy,ain't never been why start now.Bud rassle!!! ok my dear,sounds good to moi : ) bud-n-mud rassle?

-- capnfun (capnfun1@excite.com), June 02, 2000.


God some of you people are freaking MORONS.....Doomoronics my guess. Here is a Brit(Andy Ray) doing what YOU should be doing, defending Freedom. Exposing scum which would eliminate YOUR republic like throwing out the trash. But what do you do?

Look, if you cannot see past your hang-up with personalities, at least shut the freak up. Don't even read these posts of Andy's. Many here have not the foggiest clue what Y2k was about,>>trust me<<, and you should consider doing so, because I was correct about Y2k before many of you even had computers.

About Freedom, about responsibility, about the new medium, about memetics, about YOUR ability to SURVIVE in a new reality. Based on what I see here, it doesn't look good for many of you. Is Andy a baiter? Duh is grass green? Many here are so shallow they cannot even get past simple egging.

Even have some defending Ed Yourdon? How BLIND does one have to be? Here is a guy who thought because he was receiving many hits from Virginia at the old TB2000 forum, this somehow indicated the Gumbit was "watching" Ed and his cult memebers? Ed is so stupid he cannot even understand AOL is in Virginia, and DOES explain why his log files are so top heavy with Virginian entries. And now this NOBODY is going to publish a newsletter? BEND OVER suckers. What on this Earth could Ed Yourdon possibily have that not a dam one of you cannot find on any search engine? Yep, he massages your fat ego about sums it up, a techno-pimp. Ed don't know squat, and take that to the bank,,,,see Y2k for a major clue. Eddie has every right to peddle his dribble, your responsibilty is to ignore him and others who would play games. By doing so, maybe Eddie will become a useful part of society again and drop his spiral into self-imposed oblivion.

It is JUNE 2000 and some are still claiming Y2k was about some stupid computer dating glitch? Ah ya it was, and THAT PART, as one can see (hopefully), was as small as some of the brains around here. Government reports? please....these be the same folks who have difficulty running a 2 question Census, and one expects them to have relevant y2k info? Same yo-yos who spend $300 on a $5 toilet seat? and you expect me to have sympathy for your BAD info? The Hypocrisy is so open most have become numb to it by now it seems.

Y2k was NEVER a common_mode_failure, end of story. Issues were real, but the QUESTION, as it is ALWAYS, is about risk. Unfortunately for the revisionists, the skids were not like ducks in a row and the show never even paused beyond all the mindless wankers and their "warnings and meme spreading"(a huge exercise in utter waste). Y2k issues were not even close to common or similar. Tossed into a mix of a diverse, barely working society now, how on earth were they any threat? There are probably 500 "issues" right this minute threatening YOU and YOUR family as much or more than Y2k ever did, are you preparing for all of these? Why not? don't have THAT meme bout now? Why don't THEY bring the house down?

My style is hostile, been so for a long time. Some of you need to have somebody, anybody, stand-up and call your shit. To others I hope you understand the intent, understand the impersonal nature of the medium, and know we are all in this together and someone at some point needs to stand-up and say enough is enough. Staying silent is not what this Freedom deal is about. Letting the pollution of the typical doomoronic go uncountered is the ONLY thing threatening you, me or anybody else who believes in a Free Society.

-- Doc Paulie (fannybubbles@usa.net), June 02, 2000.


My style is hostile, been so for a long time. Some of you need to have somebody, anybody, stand-up and call your shit. To others I hope you understand the intent, understand the impersonal nature of the medium, and know we are all in this together and someone at some point needs to stand-up and say enough is enough. Staying silent is not what this Freedom deal is about. Letting the pollution of the typical doomoronic go uncountered is the ONLY thing threatening you, me or anybody else who believes in a Free Society.

-- Doc Paulie (fannybubbles@usa.net), June 02, 2000.

Hey capn:

Wuz up Doc???

CAPN: Think we oughta give ol Paulie a Power Hit? LOL...

Almost quitting time, gonna go have me a creamsickle margarita!!!!!

Dont bogart that Bud my friend.

Honestly, sometimes we gotta have some FUN.....

TRUST ME... hee hee

-- consumer (shh@aol.com), June 02, 2000.


Look, if you cannot see past your hang-up with personalities, at least shut the freak up. Don't even read these posts of Andy's. Many here have not the foggiest clue what Y2k was about,>>trust me<<, and you should consider doing so, because I was correct about Y2k before many of you even had computers.

Dear Doc:

Are you saying we should be 'censored'? to quote the above, Don't even read his posts.

We are freaking morons? You know what two words for you dude and they are not merry christmas.

Some of us have moved on....Instead ol Paulie the Quacker, you want to help AR beat a dead horse. Can you change what did/did not happen?

Hell no, so what exactly is your point? Perhaps you are AR? :_-)

Quack on there Paulie, as an UNCENSORED board, I can read what I choose, comment on what I choose or not do either.

Deal with it. Freedom IS here.

Love,

sumer

-- consumer (shh@aol.com), June 02, 2000.


I am always amused when a doomer states here that they have "moved on."

Vindicated Regards,
Andy Ray



-- Andy Ray (andyman633@hotmail.com), June 02, 2000.


Hey Doc,

Heres the power hitter dude,freshly loaded and ready to rock.Chill my friend,y2k is over,it never happened.Who cares about y2what?

Sumer,

Moi bogart??? Never!!!

I Needa Rita,but.....off to the salt mines : (

-- capnfun (capnfun1@excite.com), June 02, 2000.


moving on...

-- Not now, not like this (AgentSmith0110@aol.com), June 02, 2000.

LOL Stephen - I needed that. I have been on and off here the better part of a morning and sheeeeit, part of an afternoon - not a good thing for the old' mental health - makes me cranky, unfocused, and suggestible - not to mention dopey. And I have WORK TO DO, dammit! And a weekend coming! P.S. I like your style, always have.

-- Debbie (dbspence@usa.net), June 02, 2000.

Andy,

I don't have any problem whatsoever in dredging up quotes from the rabid, foam-at-the-lips Doomers who regularly attacked people like us, claimed that we "wanted people to die" and stuff like that.

But we disagree here, at least in part. Some credit should be given for admitting that one was wrong. Much more credit is given for an apology for name-calling. I believe that King of Spain did both, and I respect him for that.

Someone like Hamasaki, on the other hand, who has yet to apologize for all of the (sometimes astonishingly) nasty things that he said about me, BKS, DD, and others, is fair game. Posting his quotes is a worthy pursuit, IMNSHO.

But in that same NSHO, it doesn't serve any purpose to drag up quotes from people who've done both -- ie, who've both admitted that they were wrong and have apologized for name-calling.

Just my two cents' worth (adjusted for inflation, it may actually be worth a dime nowdays!).

-- Stephen M. Poole, CET (smpoole7@bellsouth.net), June 02, 2000.


Well, I gesss my chances of being "exanerated" are slim to none, since I have never "apologised" and never will.

Yes, I was wrong about Y2K, way wrong. I was a doomer, but not a hard core doomer, like Andy likes to pick on, but he feels the need to pick anyway.

I ignored the clowns that "wanted to kill their friends" but it seems that Andy just can't let this sort of thing go. Should we call it the "Y2K Pro Syndrome" ??? (no offense Pro).

Yea, I was wrong, but I'm far from alone. And I guess I've gotta say it again, I will never be "sorry" for doing what I believed to be the correct thing at the time. That's my freedom. And Stephen, I never was big on name calling, but I will say that I am SORRY for those few cases where I did!

And hey Andy,

In reply to your next post, I'm still here because I usually enjoy seeing what other people that I "know" have to say TODAY. That's why I still visit EZ. I feel that I have "friends" in both places. I'm also trying to "make up" with some of my old "enemies" and I'm glad to say that I think I have.

I did post over 3,000 messages on the old TB2000. Know how many on the new? 126. And I'm not even on the list here (less than 150). Would you say that I have "moved on" Andy? Maybe even more than you have???

<:)=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), June 02, 2000.


Doc,

How about a treatise on the "real" threats to freedom.

Andy Ray,

Moving on from y2k aint the same as moving on from y2k humor.

-- Carlos (riffraff@cybertime.net), June 02, 2000.


Government reports? please....these be the same folks who have difficulty running a 2 question Census, and one expects them to have relevant y2k info? Same yo-yos who spend $300 on a $5 toilet seat? and you expect me to have sympathy for your BAD info? The Hypocrisy is so open most have become numb to it by now it seems.

So you dearly love freedom, Doc, but you don't think our government has a lick of sense? I know you're not one, but a similar hybrid attitude is common among militia members...

Quite obviously, the government was *not* predicting a collapse of society, and yet here you are bad-mouthing it for considering the possibility that y2k might have been something more than a non-event. What you are conveniently overlooking is that the free-market corporate world had concerns about y2k disruptions as well. And I don't think the Fortune 500 was concerned about y2k because of Ed Yourdon's forum...

My style is hostile, been so for a long time. Some of you need to have somebody, anybody, stand-up and call your shit.

It wasn't our bad info and "shit," Doc...it was what any average person who chose to look deeper into y2k would have found. Perhaps your beef with the government, the old Yourdon forum and the corporate world is that we didn't pay more attention to anonymous individuals such as yourself and Andy Ray over at the Debunking Web board.

I don't want to be misunderstood here -- I always welcomed messages by people like Hoffmeister who used reasoning and information to suggest that the outcome of y2k probably wouldn't be as bad as some of us thought. I might add that I never expected y2k to cause a collapse of society, not even back in 1998. Was I worried about significant disruptions, the global supply chain and the economic impact of y2k? Yes -- but I think I had valid reasons to be.

You and Andy Ray have been standing up to the wrong people. The TB2000 forum was not the source or cause of the world's interest and concern about y2k. If you and Andy Ray believe it was improper to suggest that y2k was something that could have been more than a non-event, if you were certain before Jan. 1 that fix-on-failure could have quickly taken care of all y2k problems, then what should have done was write letters and made phone calls to the White House, your congressmen, the World Bank and other similar parties.

I doubt you did, even though from your point of view your tax money was wasted and people were unnecessarily worried by government reports. The impact of Ed Yourdon's forum on y2k public policy was minimal, and I do not understand your obsession with the old forum. True, there were a relatively small but vocal group of extremists there, but politics is that way too...there are always extremists on both ends of the Bell curve on just about any political issue.

A final thought: I was wrong about the likely impact of y2k. You were wrong about the likelihood of y2k panic. If it was a given that y2k the technical problem was going to be a non-event, then there wasn't going to be public panic about y2k either. The public was too in love with the idea that the stock market can only go up. Only if they had seen real y2k glitches, either fiscal year lookaheads during 1999 or problems in Asia while it was still Dec. 31 here, would there have been a chance the general public would have panicked.

-- Just (an@verage.Joe), June 03, 2000.


Doc, How about a treatise on the "real" threats to freedom.

-- Carlos (riffraff@cybertime.net), June 02, 2000.

Try these links and get back to me. About self Carlos. Without self- mastery, there can be no Freedom.

Threat is we have more and more cumquats around. Worse part is, the loudest of-em "think" they are already free and only need all the bad- people to go away quietly so as they can then practice being together people.

Y2k as an example showed how a significant group of supposedly free- thinking people, bought outright baloney from a few kooks and believed the dribble of sources they curse on other issues beyond the bug. Have plenty of average sheep, but so bad now however, the self proclaimed GetIts are even more lost and are becoming so loud now they threatening the entire applecart(MHO). If the better of the breed (lol) was fooled by a dumb Y2k bug, how on earth can they be expected to understand and place something more complex into perspective? They were wrong because they doubted the integrity of all that is. They operate as if in a vacuum, a cave, they get it, and everybody else doesn't. Everybody else has no sense, no respect, no common sense, is irresponsible and "their" sh#t stinks, not theirs. They bought something as stupid as believing most around could give a rats ass if Y2k ended their business as an example. They believed that a lack of spending indicated many could give a hoot, not the truth which was Y2k was not even close to the threat many previously believed and they did not need to spend the prior allocated amounts. They believed a lie since it helps them cover their OWN dishonesty within self. Much of which they have not a clue they even have, worst part.

All the creative rationalizations around will not help one come to terms with the fact they majorly blew it on Y2k. Not even close is one's clue of how dam LOST they are. I mean seriously, the loudest mouth in Y2k was Gary North, does this need explanation? Why would one buy any of his crap? I did once, cause unlike many, I freely admit the meme had me for a while. The Millenium Contagion is a biggy, no shame admitting one was infected, once one comes to terms with the fact they are very real. Thoughts are things, they are not YOU, they are seperate. Is this understood commonly?

Doombuyers can apologize from here to whenever, matters little until they resolve the issue within self. How could they have been deluded so badly, and so easily? I hope the links will provide insight for some into an area few even know about, really. Plenty of lip-service, hail Marys and the like, but little substance abounds. Toss-in the real issue of Memetics(ignore at your own risk), and it is little wonder Freedom is under attack.

Inspiring Guides to a New Life,,,

Plato's Allegory of the Cave, as told by a truely brilliant woman, Simone Weil,,,and the original version here from Plato's The Republic

-- Doc Paulie (fannybubbles@usa.net), June 03, 2000.


-- Just (an@verage.Joe), June 03, 2000.

Problem I see with your analysis is this.... Y2k was a complete and utter BUST. I would suggest you look at your so called "valid reasons", they ain't doing you no good if Y2k is any indication.

Were many worried? Hell yes with all the BS flying around and rampant Techie/non-Techie disconnect a given, this is understood. That is, if you want to understand the deeper whys instead of just lining up behind stupidity and figuring if JoeBlow at S&P200 is worried, me too! Truth WAS, Y2k was an issue, beyond the NOISE present mostly on the internet, Y2k was off the radar even at most Fortune500 companies. Where was the mass exodus out of these troubled firms? Where was even a single legitimate Whistleblower? Come-on it don't take a MSCE or CCNA to understand Y2k was "mostly" a ruse, a joke in fact around the watercoolers of many firms. Didn't take an IT background to GET IT, that was more bull. One had only to look at the spending percentages to understand Y2k was a yawner. Course most did not even know the SEC reports were "worst case scenarios" by SEC guidance. Never got that far with all the sensible--well informed-- nuts running around with all their Factoids from the Garee and Co. backing them up and making personal investigations a waste of time better spent spreading the manure on webboards like TB2000.

Did TB2000 play a part? did year2000.com? Hell yes they did, as did Gartner and tons more who saw an opportunity and milked it for all it was worth. The issue was FUD over a new medium, not how best to arm twist your local suit into ways to make them less important. Government as we know it is on the run, are you getting THAT yet?

Being the owner of Debunker I was privy to information you were not. I assure you a million hits in 4 months is not just me, Mr. Rueben, and Poole chatting to each other about the wackos posting to Eddie's zoo. I also have from whence these passerbys came. No kidding with a start in say, 1998, a marketing budget and staff, I could have reached a ton more. But we did what we could to answer the nonsense, quite well I might add. I am not even a techie, just an average Joe who wanted to share my experience regards Y2k. I started as a 10 on the North forums...did some digging, researched memetics, and woke-up and decided I needed to share my experience. Had a few handles thru all this but unlike yourself, I always provided an email link. That way the Death Threats could reach me as they did.

Have a nice day

-- Doc Paulie (fannybubbles@usa.net), June 03, 2000.


Hi Doc.

Will you please tell Patricia "Not Irving" says "Hi". (Actually, tell her I said "High" and she will know what I mean because we had some GREAT times getting high.)

-- (Not Irving@but I loved her keyboard.sex), June 03, 2000.


Does anyone know if babelfish.com translates buttbubblespeak into English?

-- (What did@he.say?), June 03, 2000.

Sysman,

I will never be "sorry" for doing what I believed to be the correct thing at the time. That's my freedom. And Stephen, I never was big on name calling, but I will say that I am SORRY for those few cases where I did!

Actually, you've already said this and have already made all the apology you need to make. :)

That's really what I was saying to Andy Ray. I realize that you, in good conscience, thought you were doing the right thing. For that matter, *I* apologize for the name-calling on my part (I tried not to make it a regular habit, and I think I was worse about it in CSY2K than I was here, but still[g]).

And no, saying that "they started it" isn't much of a defense, either ... but it's true. I *never* started the name-calling; I tried to only respond when someone else -- like an Andy EOD2000 or whatever-he-was -- started it first. My odd sense of 'yumor also got me into trouble on more than one occasion. :)

I do *not* put you in the same class as Hamasaki and never have. But having said that ...

Doc,

That last one was well-said. You're also bringing back memories now. :)

-- Stephen M. Poole, CET (smpoole7@bellsouth.net), June 03, 2000.


Just an average Joe,

That is EXACTLY what I've said, a dozen times over: when it comes to high-tech issues, THE GOVERNMENT DOESN'T HAVE A LICK OF SENSE. PERIOD, end of sentence. ANYONE who takes *ANY* government report as gospel has got rocks in his/her head.

Boy, that felt good! Let me say it again: THE GOVERNMENT IS CLUELESS ABOUT HIGH-TECH ISSUES.

They CONTINUE to suffer from this and if we don't learn ANYTHING ELSE from Y2K, it should be this. THE GOVERNMENT IS UTTERLY CLUELESS about high-tech issues. UTTERLY.

Look at the way they react to a typical virus incident. Everyone runs around for a few days like their hair is on fire, the FBI announces a manhunt, three or four "consultant" types will say it's a "wake-up call" and that "electronic pearl harbor is coming!" ... and the whole thing goes away within a week.

(See, if you'd followed this like I have, you'd know that this has been going on since *1992*. It's a never-ending space opera.)

The net *OVERALL* and *LONG TERM* effect of these virus incidents on the government's ability to muddle through, on the economy and/or on the infrastructure? About the same as Y2K's: close to a perfect ZILCH.

And you've got it precisely bass-ackwards when you're comparing Doc (philosophically) to the militia-types: the tremendous irony of Y2K Doom was that many of the same people who distrusted the government (ex., convinced that "Klinton" would use Y2K as a stepping-stone to a dictatorship) would then believe government reports about how bad Y2K was going to be!

That one puzzled me to no end, and still does.

Get your mind right.

-- Stephen M. Poole, CET (smpoole7@bellsouth.net), June 03, 2000.


"I am always amused when a doomer states here that they have "moved on."

Vindicated Regards, Andy Ray

-- Andy Ray (andyman633@hotmail.com), June 02, 2000."

Small things amuse small minds.

-- andy (needs.to@get.a.life), June 03, 2000.


...the tremendous irony of Y2K Doom was that many of the same people who distrusted the government (ex., convinced that "Klinton" would use Y2K as a stepping-stone to a dictatorship) would then believe government reports about how bad Y2K was going to be!

That one puzzled me to no end, and still does.

Get your mind right.

My mind is in good shape, regardless of what you may think about it, Mr. Poole. And in case you were implying it, I'm not a believer in dictatorship conspiracy theories.

Also you, like Doc Paulie, are conveniently ignoring that the business community took y2k seriously as well.

There were two kinds of information coming from the government about y2k. One kind were the press releases, usually brought to the media's attention by John Koskinen with the White House. These press releases were generally optimistic and were meant to reassure the general public that U.S. banks had fixed their y2k problems (banks did start earlier than others) and that most of the U.S. would have electricity on Jan. 1, 2000.

The second kind of information coming from the government, likely to be read only by other government officials and by policy makers, were the reports put out by the House, Senate, State Department and others. They painted a picture of possible, temporary utility outages scattered across the U.S., along with much more serious problems abroad that could indirectly reach the U.S. in the form of shortages, including oil, and economic impacts.

International preparedness as of Oct. 1999

Russia and China were believed to be far behind in their efforts, and that would not have been a good thing for world stability.

We can say now, in retrospect, that y2k risks in many foreign countries were smaller because computers are not used as widely, and because the computers they do have are not tied together into systems nearly as much as computers here.

The U.S. itself? The business community and the government may have overestimated the risk of here. On the other hand, given the interconnectedness of systems here, it's also quite possible the reason the U.S. had so few problems was precisely because business and government did take it seriously and spent a large chunk of money to fix it. In many cases, hard to fix systems were not repaired but completely replaced.

Considering the scarcity of detailed information about y2k before the rollover, I don't believe people who prepared for possible short-term utility problems and longer-term global supply chain disruptions need apologize to anyone. I was also totally debt-free by Dec. 1999 in case of a recession or worse. These things do not make me mentally unbalanced nor a conspiracy theorist.

-- Just (an@verage.Joe), June 03, 2000.


Okay, I understand now. Everyone should have apologized before the fact to be in AndyRay's good graces! (As if anyone cares at this point, one way or the other.)

I didn't apologize then. I didn't apologize after the fact. And I have no intention of apologizing now. I did (for myself and family) what I thought best at the time, misguided as it may have been. Certainly, I was personally wrong about the potential effects. But what I did hurt no one, save me and my personal bank account. For that, I owe nobody an apology.

Think of it as my personal "meme," teal-boy.

-- I'm Here, I'm There (I'm Everywhere@so.beware), June 03, 2000.


My point is.... I am also 'an average lets say Josette".

I DID NOT have any technology background. I BELIEVED those who said things would be awful. ie, Cory Hamaski, the government (never did trust them anyhow) and Paula Gordon.

Do I blame them? NO. I blame self, for believing those at the old board, Gary North, And I DO BLAME my damn girlfriend who sent me the Art Bell tapes which triggered it all for me.!!!! Her, I blame.

I at that point after being referred to the likes of Gary, believed it was a government coverup. I can honestly say I did not know any better. As for my girlfriend, she has not spoken to me since the rollover!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! We were friends for a very long time, I trusted her. I didnt get no apology. I didnt spam her email when she was online, I tried to speak to her, she did not respond. go figure.

I made provisions for my family, warned other family members, and looked like a fool. nobody EVER got in my face and said "you owe me an apology, you were full of #$it!!!! They could have, they didnt.

AR wants to keep rubbing this in our face, from what I see, with Doc Paulie right there beside him. To me that is WRONG.

I dont mind seeing the old messages, understand most were motivated by fear. Fear of the UNKNOWN. Correct me if I'm wrong.

How long is AR gonna keep on rubbin? His point has been made. Has it not? What DOES HE REALLY WANT?

Just wonderin (as I realize I wont get a response)

-- consumer (shh@aol.com), June 03, 2000.


I'm so very sorry I was ever even born

-- Registered Member (Official@Apology.Committee), June 03, 2000.



-- (Off@damn.spot), June 03, 2000.

we all are :o)

-- (So, Wh@t else is.new?), June 03, 2000.

(So, Wh@t else is.new?), you are sorry you were born, too? :o)

-- (I'mSo@damned.sorry), June 03, 2000.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ