Moderation has nothing to do with knowing a rooms rules.

To put it gently, you do not have strong written communication skills.

Your original post asked for a special tournament on holidays. It made no mention of eliminating or replacing existing tournaments. I would be willing to bet that a majority of literate adults polled would understand your original post to mean that you'd like a tournament added as opposed to it having anything to do with other tournaments.

I appreciate your attempt to goalshift as you have in previous posts when called out for inaccuracies or lack of logic, but I don't think it's as effective as simply stating, "Sorry for being unclear. Here's what I meant."

So um...not sure if this is where to post this. I tweeted it out to Mason and the Two plus two twitter, but how does the moderation team feel about Rapini asking someone (with a female name and avatar responding to a room's question) if they have blown someone else?

https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/s...&postcount=805

I reported it, but obviously if he sees it that won't matter.

I think tweeting is probably fine and hopefully someone will address your concern soon, but you also can try sending Mat Sklansky a PM. That is the more direct approach.

I noticed all discussion about it was deleted. Hopefully someday the other moderators stand up to you. I'm not sure if a couple thousand twitter followers will be enough to get anything done, but that won't stop me from trying (obviously I kept a screenshot)

Best of luck to you.

I'm one of the last people one might expect to defend Rapini, but it sounds like you didn't follow the context of that post.

Can someone explain to me what's going on here?

Is it just a deleted bad joke or what?

I sure didn't understand it, and I think I read the relevant threads.

It was a play off of this post. Context matters.

If you know that Sarah Spades started things off with, "Who do I have to blow..." and you are familiar with Howard Beale, I think it's a good joke.

I didn't delete it, but it looks like someone did. I don't care either way. Hopefully the deletion saved overly sensitive readers who feel the need to be offended on behalf of others from having to make use of their fainting couches.

To nobody’s surprise, the twitter post omitted the context of the joke, completely changing its meaning. Brent is revealing way more about himself and his hang-ups than anything else here.

I read the post, didn't see any relevant context.

The earlier post must have been pretty old and /or in a different thread.
I even know who Howard Beale is, and Rapini's post still made no sense to me, wasn't funny in any way. Seemed out of any context and deliberately abusive, the way so many of his posts are.

It was less than 2 weeks old in the same thread 20 posts back.

More than a week and not on the same page is pretty old for people to "get" a callback. Even seeing the original post now doesn't make the "joke" funny.

Now I'm certain that it was funny.

Happy to reveal more, or Rapini can do it for me (again). In fact you're welcome to interview me, AMA.

I literally preemptively, in the first comment on my Twitter post, said that someone would say something like that. Doesn't change what was said.

I did my part, if the verdict is "meh bad joke" I'm happy to update my Tweet (and the person that brought it to my attention) with that.

Edit: I forgot to address your main point, that I didn't look at the context. There was nothing else on the same page and the posts were super old. I assumed there was some context if I went back and looked, but I know who Rapini is and I assumed the context was that this person had been in a spat with him before. IMO the context doesn't make it funny, and just because she used that context before doesn't mean she was "asking for it"

The context is that Rapini would have deleted it from anyone else.

In fact, she literally was asking for it:
If you ask a question using language that may be considered offensive to some, it can be assumed you're not going to be offended when someone answers it, whether earnestly or tongue-in-cheek.

This is also true, but it is also fair to point out the proper context of his post when it would otherwise look far worse than it really is.

It was pretty obvious looking at his post in question that he didn't ask her out of the blue if she blew Howard Beale. A reasonable person would either understand there is some context there and move on, or if it is found to be troubling, go look for the context.

He quoted what he was replying to. From what I know about Rapini's character and reputation, it was totally reasonable to assume that he just didn't like this person and was being offensive and abusing his power to not delete it. That's basically his MO. And I did look on the page like "WTF?!" but again the posts got pretty old.

This was brought to MY attention from someone else who knows two things - I have an issue with Rapini (which isn't too far back in this thread when he decided that my anonymity didn't matter because he didn't like how I acted towards him and revealed personal info he had about my account because of special moderator access notes) and I have a non-zero voice in poker.

So they didn't see the context either, and were rather annoyed by it.

He would have deleted it from anyone else, it wasn't funny, and just because she made a joke doesn't mean she was cool with someone else making the same joke about her blowing someone. To put that in context, a black person isn't "asking for it" when they drop n-bombs in their daily interaction, and suddenly it's totally cool to use it in their direction.

Sexual activity is kinda on the same level no?

For the sake of the point I'm going to make, let's concede that Rapini's post was "wrong". Most forums on this site have multiple moderators for 2 main reasons:

1. Traffic/coverage. Some forums are too busy to be handled by 1 mod. Also more mods = more coverage throughout the day.

2. Keeping each other in check; ensuring final decisions/actions are impartial. It's important that posters have options to appeal to when they disagree with a mod. Also it's important to have multiple people with different viewpoints address a situation.

Let's focus on 2. Mods are people. People are fallible. There are lots of reasons why a mod might do something "bad". Sometimes we misread a situation. Sometimes we don't pay close attention. Sometimes we're drunk. Sometimes we act on personal bias. Sometimes we're just having a bad day. Humans gonna human.

Mods are posters too, and sometimes a mod may cross the line with their post. That's where having multiple mods comes into play. If you don't like something a mod posted, report it, just as you would for any other poster. Although you feel that doing so is a futile endeavor, you did report Rapini's post anyway (as did chillrob). And guess what happened? Another mod came in and deleted the post. The system worked, just as intended!

My point is that if you see a post you feel is wrong, don't get hung up on the fact that the poster's name might be green. Treat it the same way as if any other poster made it. It will be addressed by another mod if any of us feels it needs to be.

Like any position of authority, it should mean that there's a higher standard applied. In Rapini's case, to the best of my understanding, this is a pattern. Maybe not specifically things that can be taken out of context as sexual harassment a few weeks later, but things that do not fit the bill of "higher standard". Or frankly even regular standard.

If a random person had doxxed me, and put that information in a thread I would assume that moderators would ban them for doing so. Rapini not only put that information out there, but told me it was my fault (if I didn't want my information posted, maybe I shouldn't be a dick was the paraphrasing).

Anyone who saw that post about the blowing from someone not in green would have deleted it (maybe messaging the poster saying you get the context, but it was still bad form a couple weeks later), but Rapini posted it.

I'm sure someone else that frequents the forums more often could list of a number of other transgressions, but the moderators don't police the moderators if they can't remove one of their own.

Doxxing AND sexual harassment!