At what point do we ban the mods?

It’s pretty bad, probably time for a shake up.

this is like Black Lives Matter wanting to dismantle the police. But in this case, the police are working for free and BLM is a few trolls on an internet forum

^Why do you hate black people? Were you beaten up by black dudes?


Posts are being deleted by “the police” (as they call themselves), abuse of power. Pretty sure Igor’s post of “lol” can not be a forum violation. Who is policing “the police”?

^correct - and these cowards refuse to answer me or acknowledge who did it and why

It would be nice if there was a little more transparency when a post gets removed -> (Deleted by bchad) for example.

Also, there have been several instances of some mods removing posts just because they were either directed at them or they just didn’t like the content of the post even though it wasn’t breaking the rules.

I place into evidence this thread…

A serious topic for discussion, which a number of forum members have shown interest in discussing seriously. Yet THREE mods jump in and start trolling the thread with one liners (BChad is at least subtle about it, but with Itera and S2000 it is blatant trolling).

Then an over-the-top troll comes in, Topperharley. After his 10 posts filled with name calling and attacks that “this thread is stupid”, he admits he hasn’t even read the thread!! And the hilarious part, the mods (S2000) start trolling me for policing this guy, when they should be doing either 1) doing actual moderating, or at least 2) doing nothing.

Economics: if you don’t get paid, but add NEGATIVE value, the company creates value by firing the unpaid non-employee. wink

^ S2000 brought up on that thread that he doesn’t care what the forum users think of his substandard behavior, only what the boss thinks. We learned about these types of mgmt problems in CFA/MBA studies. I would propose…

A user satisfaction survey on the mod’s performance. These types of exercises can be enlightening. enlightened

More mod trolling. As usually S2k isn’t even following the thread , or adding anything to the conversation. He’s jumping into the thread only to name call forum members, generate some reaction, and hopefully derail the discussion for pages with his witless one-liners.

It’s clear that banning this person would lead to a better forum. Negative contribution far outweighs positive contribution.

If you’re going to quote me, at least have the intellectual honesty to include the entire quote, to put it into context.

Here, for example, your selective quotation makes it sound as though I’m the one calling you a liar and a jerk, whereas in reality I’m merely interpreting what higgmond was writing.

Your assumption that I want to derail the thread is also incorrect, and blatantly self-serving. You’re the one who has refused several times in the thread to address higgmond’s request. If you had wanted to keep the thread on track, you could have done so simply by answering his question. Instead you persist in your holier-than-thou arrogance, then whine in this thread when someone has the temerity to point it out.

Further, your conclusion that I’m not following the thread is also baseless; indeed, it was exactly from following the thread that I discovered that you repeatedly dodged higgmond’s request. Of course, if you admit that I am following the thread, you might be forced to concede that you’re the one who’s been acting like an ass throughout.

At least you have the satisfaction that this reply isn’t a one-liner.

I, for one, didn’t delete it.

As you know, I’ve PMed you when I’ve deleted your threads.

So . . . it’s still a mystery. Slightly less of a mystery, but still a mystery.

i had a hunch it wasnt you since you are a real man and own up. the rest are cowards

I hate to flog a dead horse but can we get CVM back?


You’re trying to derail this thread, you’re replying in droll one-liners, and you’re contributing nothing.

According to purealpha, you should be banned.


The problem starts at the top. Yes, I’m looking at Chad Sandstedt. He doesn’t have the vision to bring this site to the next level. We were at an inflection point a few years ago and unfortunately the site took the wrong direction. Chad was a genius starting this baby but he isn’t the right man to grow this thing from here. If AF had shareholders, he would have been booted off.

What I’m basically saying is if Chad Sandstedt had any pride left, he would retire.

We’ve been studying inflection points in my Business Calculus class.

Was the site going from being concave upward to concave downward, or from concave downward to concave upward?

Please let me know when you have some time for a call to discuss your ideas. I would like to hear them.

So, concave down to concave up.

Of course, that by itself doesn’t tell us anything about the slope of the curve. Your graph assumes that it’s positive; it needn’t be.

And it could change from concave up to concave down; in that case, you don’t necessarily want that point to be an inflection point; a local minimum would be much better.