Wonderin wrote:
Hey!! I just turned 39 the other day and I DEEPLY resemble that remark!!
*makes angry face at SchoolBusKid*
Grrrrrrr!!
I still love ya wonderin! Hopefully i'll make it there someday! I can remove that if you like!
Mods: Not sure if this post will be in violation. As always, if it is, please accept my apologies!!
I THINK what Sly's saying is that he's gotten into trouble repeating advice that's frowned upon, but when worded in another way, is NOT frowned upon (or at least, doesn't SEEM to be).
A fairly major violation here (and there are a few others) is to encourage, promote or advise disputing accurate info on CRs. That, from what I understand, is a BIGGIE.
So I think, out-and-out saying "Go ahead and dispute it, even if it's right" is WRONG and a violation. BUT if you've been instructed to by the CA (because they might have a policy that prohibits them from accepting PFDs), even if the basic information IS correct, disputing accurate info is permissible. Sort of a lazy man/CA's PFD. Both sides pretty much get what they want, I assume.
So my take on the situation is that SINCE we pretty much repeat advice here ('cause really, a lot of situations, while not the SAME are similar), it's easier to say "go ahead and dispute it" without actually stating the rest of the sentence (i.e., "because the CA instructed you to as part of the "deal"). Don't get me wrong ... I'm Southern and I LOVE to talk (even if it's just to myself or the nearest, inattentive teenager), so I don't mind repeating the whole spiel over and over and over and .... you get the point.
But Sly tends to play a bit more on the concise side of the street and doesn't love to jabber on like I do! So he's just gone with sentence fragments and gotten chided for it.
But you can't take the Mods as being nit-picky about this. They HAVE to moderate and apply the rules -- it's their JOB (paid or not -- and I'm 99.9% sure they are NOT, they do it out of the goodness of their hearts) -- even if they KNOW what the gist of the post is. Because we get newbies in here everyday and I'll bet that for every newbie that posts, there are 50 who just lurk. And the Mods don't want to encourage THEM to break the law, either. So they have to interpret posts to the "worst degree."
All in all, I think it's a misunderstanding. We're ALL human and we all tend to interpret things differently. At least, that's my take of the situation!!
Hugs to all!! 'Specially Sly!!
I THINK what Sly's saying is that he's gotten into trouble repeating advice that's frowned upon, but when worded in another way, is NOT frowned upon (or at least, doesn't SEEM to be).
A fairly major violation here (and there are a few others) is to encourage, promote or advise disputing accurate info on CRs. That, from what I understand, is a BIGGIE.
So I think, out-and-out saying "Go ahead and dispute it, even if it's right" is WRONG and a violation. BUT if you've been instructed to by the CA (because they might have a policy that prohibits them from accepting PFDs), even if the basic information IS correct, disputing accurate info is permissible. Sort of a lazy man/CA's PFD. Both sides pretty much get what they want, I assume.
So my take on the situation is that SINCE we pretty much repeat advice here ('cause really, a lot of situations, while not the SAME are similar), it's easier to say "go ahead and dispute it" without actually stating the rest of the sentence (i.e., "because the CA instructed you to as part of the "deal"). Don't get me wrong ... I'm Southern and I LOVE to talk (even if it's just to myself or the nearest, inattentive teenager), so I don't mind repeating the whole spiel over and over and over and .... you get the point.
But Sly tends to play a bit more on the concise side of the street and doesn't love to jabber on like I do! So he's just gone with sentence fragments and gotten chided for it.
But you can't take the Mods as being nit-picky about this. They HAVE to moderate and apply the rules -- it's their JOB (paid or not -- and I'm 99.9% sure they are NOT, they do it out of the goodness of their hearts) -- even if they KNOW what the gist of the post is. Because we get newbies in here everyday and I'll bet that for every newbie that posts, there are 50 who just lurk. And the Mods don't want to encourage THEM to break the law, either. So they have to interpret posts to the "worst degree."
All in all, I think it's a misunderstanding. We're ALL human and we all tend to interpret things differently. At least, that's my take of the situation!!
Hugs to all!! 'Specially Sly!!
MontanaGal wrote:If you get a reply you are very very lucky, I seen where people ask question and no one replied to even help them.I guess when the MODS were peons like us they got their questions answered thats why their scores are higher.But yes I have seen people begging for help and people who aren't really sure might reply to help them. I understand this isn't a paid job for some but replies to people questions would be nice so they can join the 700 club.
Yes, the Mods are all volunteers who do the best they can with what they have to help as many people as they can on here, but they also don't know everything and can't be everywhere at once. They also have jobs, lives, families, etc., just like the rest of us, so just by their being human, some posts are bound to go unanswered right away or may fall through the cracks entirely, if the OP (or anyone else) doesn't *bump* the thread to make sure it doesn't get lost.
Since even Mods don't know everything, it also may be that some questions posted are simply ones to which even they don't know the answers, but rarely - I'm tempted to say never - have I seen a post go completely unacknowledged, ever. Usually one of them will eventually catch a post that's being neglected and, if they can't help, ask anyone else who can help to please do so.
As for the Mods not posting on every thread, if other members have posted correctly, informatively, and responsively to the OP and all of OP's questions/problems have been addressed by other members, there's no point in their chiming in on the thread; if a thread has no posts by any Mods, it means other members have done a great job of answering the OP. Letting others contribute that way not only spreads around the burden of helping everyone, it's also kind of the point of these forums that discussion/participation by everyone is encouraged and expected. It also helps 'grow' new Mods to let others do their best to answer questions if they believe they have the correct or most helpful response.
Letting others contribute that way not only spreads around the burden of helping everyone, it's also kind of the point of these forums that discussion/participation by everyone is encouraged and expected. It also helps 'grow' new Mods to let others do their best to answer questions if they believe they have the correct or most helpful response.As for your comment about Mods' high scores, many 'peons' on here have higher scores than the Mods; those who do have high scores (Mods & 'peons' alike) didn't achieve them just by 'getting their questions answered' by past Mods, early on in their own credit journeys; they earned them through hard work, savvy management of their credit and finances in general, and I'd bet you anything many hours of researching past threads on here and many other resources as well - all things any one of us can do to help ourselves achieve those 700+ scores. 