I foresaw all these religious section wars and I created this thread as a suggestion,of course it was trash then.
www.nairaland.com/1394936/suggestions-on-going-religious-section-reforms

striktlymi:

Your thoughts but I think otherwise. Going with the majority with an eye out for the needs of the minority is not a bad thing.

In my opinion there's no eye out for the needs of the minority here. If there was he would at least have done something about the Pagan 9ja and Alfa Seltzer case. If you think there has been then please show me an example. Besides, he's not even going with the majority. Christians disagree with his stance that all mods should be Christians. He's just trying to cater for their needs.

I don't agree with the above completely. There should be an official avenue where members can seek redress for any wrong done to them by mods but the case need not be adjudicated by members without mod privileges. The supermods should act in Seun's stead.

To the best of my knowledge, we have three supermods: seun, who we both agree should be out of this; mukina; and semid4lyfe, who is not as regular as the other two. If there was an official avenue for this there would be tonnes of complaints against mods every day, and it might prove too much for two people. Besides, there are reasons why we have different organs of government, not only will they serve these different functions more effectively, but it would serve as a checks and balances system. Giving the super-mods all these powers to me might prove disastrous.

Who are they and what make their posts any different from yours?

Fortunately or unfortunately (depends on how you look at it ), as of this evening, they have been hidden.

psky:

In my opinion there's no eye out for the needs of the minority here. If there was he would at least have done something about the Pagan 9ja and Alfa Seltzer case. If you think there has been then please show me an example. Besides, he's not even going with the majority. Christians disagree with his stance that all mods should be Christians. He's just trying to cater for their needs.





To the best of my knowledge, we have three supermods: seun, who we both agree should be out of this; mukina; and semid4lyfe, who is not as regular as the other two. If there was an official avenue for this there would be tonnes of complaints against mods every day, and it might prove too much for two people. Besides, there are reasons why we have different organs of government, not only will they serve these different functions more effectively, but it would serve as a checks and balances system. Giving the super-mods all these powers to me might prove disastrous.





Fortunately or unfortunately (depends on how you look at it ), as of this evening, they have been hidden.

No need to continue with the distraction.

I just need to know what this thread sets out to achieve.

PS: I know what the OP says...

striktlymi:

No need to continue with the distraction.

I just need to know what this thread sets out to achieve.

PS: I know what the OP says...

What do you know

psky:

People have said much worse about Seun, have insulted him like hell. So why should my personal opinion which was not intended to aimlessly insult him but was an honest remark be a problem?

Actually I was thinking that of course he cares about the money. This is his livelihood. It is not personal. It is business. As for his life...need I say it.

striktlymi:

No need to continue with the distraction.

I just need to know what this thread sets out to achieve.

PS: I know what the OP says...

How is it a distraction?

texanomaly:

Actually I was thinking that of course he cares about the money. This is his livelihood. It is not personal. It is business. As for his life...need I say it.

I really do not get the point you are trying to make. I said maybe it was all he cared about, I never said he was a fool for caring about them at all. Of course he should care about them, he has every right to. But you would be a terribly cold soul if those were all you cared about. I don't know about you but I care about much more, and I'd even sacrifice both for some.

psky:

I really do not get the point you are trying make. I said maybe it was all he cared about, I never said he was a fool for caring about them at all. Of course he should care about them, he has every right to. But you would be a terribly cold soul if those were all you cared about. I don't know about you but I care about much more, and I'd even sacrifice both for some.

I really did not understand texanomaly's point. I think that she is trying somehow to walk back her original comment

psky:

I really do not get the point you are trying make. I said maybe it was all he cared about, I never said he was a fool for caring about them at all. Of course he should care about them, he has every right to. But you would be a terribly cold soul if those were all you cared about. I don't know about you but I care about much more, and I'd even sacrifice both for some.

Okay...I just think that is an unfair assumption.

Logicboy03:

I really did not understand texanomaly's point. I think that she is trying somehow to walk back her original comment

Huh?

Logicboy03:

I really did not understand texanomaly's point. I think that she is trying somehow to walk back her original comment

Really can't argue with your statement, it's most likely.

Btw pls could you visit this thread and tell me if you find any of the descriptions tellingly near truth.

https://www.nairaland.com/1567858/most-desperate-pathetic-annoying-nairalanders

psky:

Really can't argue with your statement, it's most likely.

Btw pls could you visit this thread and tell me if you find any of the descriptions tellingly near truth.

https://www.nairaland.com/1567858/most-desperate-pathetic-annoying-nairalanders

Lol at that thread.......

texanomaly:

Okay...I just think that is an unfair assumption.

It's not an assumption, it's more of a suggestion.

And I said that because the only time you could be certain of getting a response from him is when you threaten both, not when you have a truly sincere complaint, not even a widespread one , or when you have a suggestion as to how to improve the forum.

To me it's pitiful that you can hardly get his attention through reason, but you would always get it through fear. I would like you to prove how my suggestion is unfair.

psky:


How is it a distraction?

The argument has been centred on the past...

striktlymi:

The argument has been centred on the past...

There's nothing in the present to prove otherwise, so I see no reason why you should label it a label it a distraction.

Me thinks you just want this to end.

Enigma:

Good morning, brah.

@bolded, I ain't no Enigma for nuthin'!

Twale!! 12 fingers in the air!!!

psky:


There's nothing in the present to prove otherwise, so I see no reason why you should label it a label it a distraction.

Me thinks you just want this to end.

If it is about dwelling in the past, then YES!!! let it end.

striktlymi:

If it is about dwelling in the past, then YES!!! let it end.

It's not about dwelling in the past, it's affecting the present. Just look at the religion section and tell me it's functioning flawlessly.

But hey, you have a right to stop, as much as I have a right to continue.

psky:

It's not about dwelling in the past, it's affecting the present. Just look at the religion section and tell me it's functioning flawlessly.

But hey, you have a right to stop, as much as I have a right to continue.

Today is the past we will witness tomorrow. If our discussion is basically about the past of yesterday then the future past we are expecting will have nothing of value.

striktlymi:

Today is the past we will witness tomorrow. If our discussion is basically about the past of yesterday then the future past we are expecting will have nothing of value.

I disagree, why do you think we study history and re-examine cold cases? In life we have discussions about the past to learn from mistakes and successes, to find consistent links it might have with the present, and to seek justice even when some might think it late.

It's wrong to say our modern history will lose value because we re-examine our ancient history, if anything studying and having discussions on the past of yesterday will complement our handling of the past of the future.

psky:

I disagree, why do you think we study history and re-examine cold cases? In life we have discussions about the past to learn from mistakes and successes, to find consistent links it might have with the present, and to seek justice even when some might think it late.

It's wrong to say our modern history will lose value because we re-examine our ancient history, if anything studying and having discussions on the past of yesterday will complement our handling of the past of the future.

The study of history is not about dwelling in the past.

striktlymi:

The study of history is not about dwelling in the past.

You know I think we are bound to have our differences on this, and I'm not ready to keep repeating myself.

Let's just agree to disagree.

psky:

I disagree, why do you think we study history and re-examine cold cases? In life we have discussions about the past to learn from mistakes and successes, to find consistent links it might have with the present, and to seek justice even when some might think it late.

It's wrong to say our modern history will lose value because we re-examine our ancient history, if anything studying and having discussions on the past of yesterday will complement our handling of the past of the future.

Well said.