I think that JG is worthwhile contributor. He's opinionated and not afraid of sharing his views even if they aren't PC and that's something I definitely respect.
It takes some strength to stand consistently in the face of opposition, and that can earn some respect, I would agree.
However, doing so because your mind is closed and you cannot see alternatives, or are unwilling to consider other views, then you are not going to be so respected. Not a statement on JG directly, but general practice for such forums where people hold strong opinions.
I don't really understand why people are so shitty to him, but my guess is it's because he isn't on the "right side" of some issues. I think if there wasn't such a double standard in the CEP things would go a lot more smoothly. But I've seen it time and time again where a more right leaning poster is driven off by the leftist majority. I don't think it's very fair to provoke or insult someone and then get them in trouble when they don't just sit there and take it. That's my opinion on the matter anyway.
You would be wrong on you're guess. If it was because his views weren't wanted or tolerated, they'd be completely removed and you'd see no similar remarks from anyone else. For example, there are certain topics that simply are not discussed on this site. However, he is allowed to continue to post, and others share similar views at times (myself among them).
You are new to staff, and there are several members who have never been on staff. As pointed out earlier in this thread, there is simply a lot that isn't publicly known in terms of staff discussion on when to take action, and what action to take. In that, there is a long history some people participating in CEPS and NOT operating by the forum rules, despite PMs, nudges, edits, outright warnings, and at time suspensions based on repeated insistence on not adhering to the rules. THAT is what many cannot see other than the individual involved, and the staff in private staff discussions.
Consider, this type of thread shows up in STH every year or so. We've left the threads find able in here, rather than deleting them (we have nothing to hide). What you'll find is that it is typically the same persons who consistently have problems with how the forum is moderated over the years, regardless of who is holding staff positions at the time. That brings two possibilities to mind. First, the site simply doesn't tolerate certain posters, and it's not necessarily mods run amok = clearly not true, as those posters continue to be able to post AND complain about it. This is remedied by simply posting elsewhere, a choice everyone has if they feel this is not a comfortable place for them to participate in such discussions. The second possibility is that the MEMBER can't adjust to the rules. This is plausible if the member is addressed repeatedly overtime by different members of staff, especially over a given number of years, and yet the member CONTINUES to suffer the same discipline over and over without changing. How is this remedied? Staff continue to try and correct behavior for the umpteenth time it's been addressed and expect no change yet again? That's what you're seeing.
This isn't to call out JG specifically. If you look at the similar threads in this forum where people complain to staff about how a forum is being managed, do you see the same people consistently feeling targetted? Despite who is moderating the forums? What is true problem here?
FTR, a 'double standard' simply won't be tolerated, and we work for consistency in how mods enforce their rules. We have Sr. Staff oversight on if a mod is operating rogue and can undo any disciplinary actions taken (undo edits, undo deletes, undo warnings, remove suspensions, etc). For a fact, this has been done when such over reach by a staff member has occurred. This isn't seen or known by the public, but it is reality.
You're encouraged to have your opinions, and to share them. But it's best to know the facts rather than make assumptions on partial information.
