Submitted by Trickster on Fri, 01/25/2008 - 12:03pm.
Since this is "BART RAGE", I don't believe that any BART employee should be allowed to moderate. What happens when the comments are posted against that employee or their beliefs about BART's policies? Even if they don't delete post, there is always that lingering question of censorship since they work for BART.
Submitted by bartish on Fri, 01/25/2008 - 12:10pm.
this got a "dont care" vote from me. i agree that this is a site to rage about the problems about bart and provide our comments and so much. but at the same time i feel that the employee you have launched your crusade against, shrapnel, to be pretty receptive of the feedback. i also think he or she (you refer to shrapnel as a she in a few places) is pretty cool about it overall. i dont think there is really a conflict of interest with him/her. ive seen her weigh in on just about every vote, plus he/she is pretty objective when push comes to shove. she's posted things here that i would have never known even so.
i dont think there is an issue of him/her defending bart at all costs, because thats not his/her job on this site. i've read posts where she attacks the bart beaurcracy with the same visciosness that passengers do, and it shows a real passion on his/her part to dedicate their time to this site and help keep it clean. i was an anon lurker before it became registered users only, and i have noticed a real reduction in hateful and racist posts since shrapnel and boopiejones were made moderators. i vote to keep shrapnel as moderator, even though this wasnt your question, because its a thinly veiled attempt to get the admin to take away his/her power. the good far outweighs the bad in this one. i dont think just any bart employee should be given moderator powers though. but he/she seems best suited for the job, sorry.
Submitted by Trickster on Fri, 01/25/2008 - 12:45pm.
No need to apologize, I’m just asking the question because it seems strange that post that criticized the BART Board and SHRAPNEL’S understanding of how the law works disappeared without explanation. I am also concerned that someone, claiming to be a BART Police Officer, can make some of the claims that have been made about police work and how the law works, can be so far off reality. Something just doesn’t fit and when that person has the power to control what is being posted on BART RAGE, I find it a little unsettling. I applaud the work that SHRAPNEL has done on this site, however as I stated before, I do not believe that anyone working for BART should have the power to censor post, it just creates the appearance of impropriety. I just hope that people can understand my concerns.
Submitted by BARTholomew on Sat, 01/26/2008 - 1:28am.
I originally wrote/posted a long winded reply and then thought to hell with it. I hope it goes unread while I write this revision... (sorry to the folks who abhor removing posts...I'll confess my sins on Sunday and throw three Hail Mary's while watching the Super Bowl).
This topic is old, tired, has gotten way too much mileage.
This being the internet, authentication is next to impossible and we are in a position to trust what people have to say. It's an honor code of sorts. If somebody says they are a BART employee, well then they are a BART employee. If I don't believe Shrapnel is a BPD, then I say snowball's chance in hell that TENTHIRTYSIX is one too. Or Train Operator is a train operator? Crap! This is a two way street and I don't understand what makes this pill so hard to swallow? The second guessing is just stupid and makes some people (I won't name Trickster or TENTHIRTYSIX....whoops...) look like ass clowns when they initiate this pissing contest of 'Shrapnel says this and does that and is a real meany but that's wrong and I'm gonna tell my mommy on her' kind of crap.
And thank you, Captain Obvious, for pointing out lawyers read this. So do teachers. So do french fry friers from McDonalds. So to Starbucks coffee people. So do corporate 9-5'ers. Maybe even hobos. I don't know. But reading between the lines...does it really matter? C'mon! You clearly have no grasp of law if you think it does and that a lawyer can run like mad down to Superior Court and file a suit over people trading BART war stories. I really hate to be the bearer of bad news...but you can't sue over a post either disappearing or being deleted. Talk about a hard knock life, eh? There is no constitutional right to free speech in a moderated forum.
This whole thread is a huge effort to turn water into wine. If you reeeeaaallllyyy think you are getting fleeced, then why the hell are you still here? Move on. This isn't the only watering hole in town. So far this topic is taking a lot of eyes off of maybe more entertaining or more enlightening stores.
Submitted by Shrapnel on Fri, 01/25/2008 - 12:27pm.
In the interest of neutrality, Trickster, I - unlike you - am going to abstain from voting in this poll.
However the point of a moderator is not to be the cyber police. As moderators, boopie and myself try to help facuilitate conversation, help out new users, and - yes - delete posts. We also help out with some of the technical aspects of the site to take some of the workload off the Admin's hands.
We even did a survey not too long ago to measure people's sense of our effectiveness. And guess what? Everyone supported the job we were doing, and said it was satisfactory or better. And that was right after the furor that was raised when I deleted someone's post against Rafa. Deja vu... Deja vu.
Submitted by Trickster on Fri, 01/25/2008 - 1:00pm.
Obviously I’m not neutral, that’s why I posted my opinion along with the poll. I have no problem with you as a person being a moderator; my problem is with a BART employee being a moderator. It creates an appearance of impropriety. I am also concerned that you may be misrepresenting yourself as a BART Police Officer to people on this site. Many of you comments just don’t fit the law, and appearantly, I am not the only person with this concern. If people don’t care about this, that’s O.K. as long as they go in with their eyes open.
Submitted by TENTHIRTYSIX on Fri, 01/25/2008 - 1:03pm.
It seems as though you do like to police any comments that affect your reputation or where you're called out on an obvious error. Remember that there are real cops/attorneys on this site. Personally, I am ready to nitpick anything you post related to law enforcement. At this point in time, I am not convinced that you are what you claim to be and I wouldn't be surprised to find out that you are a Community Service Officer, train operator, or even a system service worker.
To be honest, anyone taking anyone ELSE'S word on being what they say they are is pulling the wool over their own eyes.
God bless the information age, for almost anything anyone claims to be "true" or "the correct information" can be researched by anyone interested enough to do so.
Whether you choose to believe Shrapnel is a BART officer or not, the REAL question should be are you willing to accept anything she says as 100% correct. Remember, even those who are what they say they are aren't always 100% correct/informed about their line of work. I don't mean any disrespect to her assuming she is what she says she is, but I certainly don't expect her to know EVERYTHING about police work. There aren't too many of us with photographic memories and infallible recall.
If you don't entirely believe someone, then take what they say with a grain of salt and look for confirmation elsewhere.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Would you consider sponsoring me for AIDS/Lifecycle 7? http://www.aidslifecycle.org/2145
thanks spice for that. i agree with you on every poitn except that no one is perfect and knows everything abotu police work, for it seems tenthirtysix knows all there is to know, and he and sidekick trickster are probably some sort of demi-gods among the bart police
Submitted by Trickster on Fri, 01/25/2008 - 1:49pm.
I don't expect Police Officers to know everything about police work, but every Police Officer is expected to know the basics. I understand that SHRAPNEL is very popular, but she is making comments that even a rookie just out of the academy would know is wrong. Hate to burst you bubble people, but any police officer that doesn't know the Penal Code for Vandalism, or what probable cause is needed to detain someone, let alone pull them off a BART Train, has no buisness being on the force. This is why I question SHRAPNEL's claims. She may be doing a good job as moderator, but if she is doing what she claims to be doing as a Police Officer, it is just a matter of time before she is sued or fired.
It is also my opinion that she is tarnishing the image of the BART Police since she is showing her ignorance of the law while claiming to be a representative of that department.
Yes, SHRAPNEL knows a lot about BART, but be wary when she makes comments about the law or BART Police
I understand exactly what you're saying and conceed you probably have a point, but MY point is, how do I know I should be believing YOU? I know nothing about police work so how do I know "the basics" include memorizing the penal code for vandalism?
I may take advice on a recipe or some shit like that, but shame on me if took someone's advice on anything substantial in a forum or chatroom just because they told me they were an authority on a subject.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Would you consider sponsoring me for AIDS/Lifecycle 7? http://www.aidslifecycle.org/2145
Submitted by Trickster on Fri, 01/25/2008 - 2:28pm.
Just ask yourself this question, wouldn't you expect someone who has gone through a six month police academy and another six or so months of on the job training to know if they could legally detain someone. If they screw this up, any arrest and charges resulting from this can be thrown out. Wouldn't you expect an officer who writes police reports to know a common section like vandalism. They have to write the section down every time they take a report.
Currently, I think that BART Police is sending their officers to the Alameda County Police Academy which to can see from their website is a six month academy.(http://sheriffacademy.com/classes/academy/class.htm). After the academy officers go throught on the job training with a training officer. This can last another four to six months. Do you really think that after almost a year of training, an officer wouldn't know these things. Look at the website and talk to any police officer and ask them what they think about this. Better yet, if you see a BART Cop, ask them.
Honestly, as I already stated, I know nothing of what's taught to police officers - so I DON'T know what to expect from someone who's gone through a six month police academy.
Maybe Shrapnel IS a cop but she slept in class the day they covered vandalism. Ask me the IEEE standards for writing up a test plan for testing a software application and I'll stare at you like you sprouted another head from your neck... yet that's what I do for a living. Go figure.
Again, I rely on my personal way of dealing with knowing someone online vs. in the real world. I take them at face value and get my information from a reliable, verifiable source. At this point in time Shrapnel's really a lot of fun to talk to, so yeah... ummm, well... that's about it. Not like I'm gonna go testing BART (or CA or U.S.) law based on anything she's said.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Would you consider sponsoring me for AIDS/Lifecycle 7? http://www.aidslifecycle.org/2145
Submitted by TreoBART on Fri, 01/25/2008 - 5:26pm.
[soapbox]
I voted Don't Care and here's why:
I know you're talking about Shrapnel. If you really think she's deleting stuff then you have reason to be concerned and you should take it up with the Admin, who can see if stuff is in fact being deleted and who is deleting it. Boopie may even be able to see that kind of log depending on what permissions have been set. Demand to see the logs if it makes you feel better and quit guessing and speculating on something you can't prove, but IS provable. IF Shrapnel is PROVEN to be removing controversial posts, then I think Admin should take her power away and ban her IP address forever.
Short of a blatant, provable violation, Shrapnel isn't going anywhere. One real good reason is because Admin and Shrapnel, based on what I've seen and heard on the boards for a while now, appear to be friends or at least know each other outside the internet. Heck, I wouldn't be at all surprised if Admin is a Bart employee. You can't be Admin and not be able to delete posts, so just making a blatant "no employees" rule won't work.
I suggest you keep copy/paste copies of your "controversial" posts and if one disappears, try it again. I always copy/paste my long involved posts until I confirm they have posted so I don't have to rewrite them if my device dies. The way the board has been throwing errors recently, who knows what ate your post.
Honestly, dude, I think you're over reacting and I wish you would drop it. I hate posts being deleted just as much as you do, and I wish the board software worked like many other blogs and would just leave a "comment deleted" tag where the post had been before, but running the software for a site I don't own is not my department.
We don't need contributing members tearing each other apart over speculation. We should be focusing on tearing apart idiots and trolls like CoffeeGirl and Sankafarta Running Wind.
[/soapbox]
-----------------------
There is no "U" in BART
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Would you consider sponsoring me for AIDS/Lifecycle 7? http://www.aidslifecycle.org/2145
Submitted by Shrapnel on Fri, 01/25/2008 - 5:46pm.
boopie and I have discussed having a Moderator Terms or something like that, to avoid controversy, that we can maybe vote to ratify or something. I'll contact boopie and we'll work on something, and have you guys vote to see if you agree with it, and that will be an opportunity to have any suggestions or whatnot.
Posts *HAVE* been deleted by boopie, the Admin, and myself when they contain personal attacks or stuff that is totally off-topic and not BART-related. Obviously this person (Trickster / TENTHIRTYSIX) has some sort of problem with me.
boopiejones can, and I urge him to, go into the server log and review which posts have been deleted by me (and him, and the Admin). If he has any objections, he should contact the Admin (and myself, if he wants) at once.
If I was really concerned with deleting posts that went against me, wouldn't I have been deleted this before it got so many votes and replies? Even those replies against me?
However, I won't delete ANY (spam included) posts until boopie and I come up with Moderator Terms or something, and you all vote to ratify it and have your say.
Submitted by TENTHIRTYSIX on Sat, 01/26/2008 - 2:24am.
I've come to the realization that there is no feasible way of convincing you folks that Trickster and I are not the same person. I guess most of the regular posters on here believe that there is no possible way that two individuals can doubt Shrapnel's credibility. I invite anyone to take the time and compare my posts with Trickster's and look for similarities. Maybe detective Shrapnel can take on this task.
Bottom line... like Trickster, I do not necessarily have an issue with Shrapnel as a person/moderator. However, she has probably achieved this status as a moderator under the guise that she is a BART police officer. On a number of occasions she has been very sloppy and made law enforcement related statements that are downright appalling. Since Shrapnel claims to represent an entity that I work for the last thing I want is for her to mislead readers or provide inaccurate advice on police related matters.
Whether people believe that I am a police officer or not is of no concern to me. I have not come on here claiming to be something I'm not. I know what I am and thats what matters to me. If you track my posts you'll find that most of them have to do with police related matters. Feel free to double check my posts for accuracy.
After all, this site is called "BART RAGE." The name itself incites a negative tone. Not everyone who posts here is going to be pleasant and cooperative. This is a discussion board and everyone here has a right to free speech. Challenging someone's credibility should not be a reason for censoring posts. Disagreement is a fact of life so get used to it.
Submitted by Train Operator ... on Sat, 01/26/2008 - 3:33am.
Ya know I don't care if your name is legion I'm convinced you are a prick and I don't even need to double check but, if you have something to contribute by all means. As for being a moderator she was invited by the creator of this site because he has other obligations and can't camp out here. This isn't an official site and she never claimed to be representing you or the department. Jayzesus what a douchebag you are, but as you said, I guess I'll have to get used to it.
Submitted by Trickster on Sat, 01/26/2008 - 5:37am.
Train Operator, I could care less if SHRAPNEL is a moderator, but I do care when she provides faulty information while claiming to be a Police Officer. People come to this site to vent and look for solutions for the problems that they encounter on BART. When someone who claims a position of authority post a solution that is wrong, this helps no one and just causes problems for the person that believes this person, the people on this board that follow the advise, and BART.
How would you feel if someone claimed to be a Train Operator on this board, was accepted as such, and then gave out false or inept information that made you and your fellow operators look foolish and created situations that made it harder for you to do your job. I am willing to bet that you and the other TO's on this board would be all over that person, especially if that person had the power to delete your post pointing out that the information was wrong.
At this point I am going to drop this subject, but whenever someone who claims to be in the legal profession or law enforcement post something that is false, I am going to call them on it.
Sorry, but considering we don't know YOUR credentials either, all that you've said about Shrapnel can be said equally about you. You're going to stand there and say you're going to call people on "false" information however since we don't know you have the credentials and background to be correct, you're in the same exact position as Shrapnel - claiming to have intimate knowledge of a subject but not proving who you are.
So... *shrugs shoulders* let that be a warning to the board:
Trickster and/or TENTHIRTYSIX's comments are to be considered as suspect as Shrapnel's until any party wishes to prove his or her identity beyond a doubt.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Would you consider sponsoring me for AIDS/Lifecycle 7? http://www.aidslifecycle.org/2145
Submitted by Trickster on Sat, 01/26/2008 - 11:02am.
Good idea considering comments as suspect. That is why I have posted the written law and web site addresses when possible to prove my point. For those of you who need to confirm what "probable cause" is look here ( http://www.lectlaw.com/def2/p089.htm ) or Google it.
Google's a wonderful thing isn't it? Just because you were able to Google sections of law code doesn't mean you're an authority on the law. Surely you can see how difficult it is to prove oneself on the Internet.
And yes, TO and I are one in the same. You caught us.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Would you consider sponsoring me for AIDS/Lifecycle 7? http://www.aidslifecycle.org/2145
Submitted by Trickster on Sat, 01/26/2008 - 12:06pm.
Have you been smoking the spice?
Now your just being silly. I never said it proved that I was an authority on the law, but is does provide proof when I post a comment about the law and back it up with the printed law online. The T/O comment was because you responded to a comment directed at him/her and was a joke, but I'm sure you were aware of that also. I'm also sure that you are intelligent enough to understand that there is a difference between someone on BART RAGE claiming to have legal knowledge and pointing out what the law is, something that can be looked up online, and someone on BART Rage claiming to be a BART Police Officer and telling posters what BART Police will do, when to call them, and claiming to have arrested and cited people. (None of which can be confirmed)
Yes, I've been smoking the spice. You caught me. Again.
What this all boils down to, is who gives a crap. The same sentiment that's been shown in the polls, the same sentiment others have written. For the third time I'll post - shame on you if you take someone's advice online for anything more serious than their best recipe for a steak marinade for a summer bbq.
My point about your googling and posting law material is that is doesn't make you an authority, so thank you for agreeing with me. Any schmo can google and cut & paste, but that doesn't mean you know what you're talking about. Nor am I going to spend the time chasing down whether or not what Shrapnel or you say is true or not. If I need the information I'll consult a lawyer, thanks.
If you've got a beef with whether or not Shrapnel is a legitimate police officer and could possibly be providing the public with incorrect information you have 2 recourses: 1) take it to the admin of this site, not whine about it here in post after post and 2) without spending inordinate amounts of time, I'm sure claiming to be a police officer and offering advice based on such at least BORDERS on impersonating a police officer. If you think she's not legit, than contact the real police and report her.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Would you consider sponsoring me for AIDS/Lifecycle 7? http://www.aidslifecycle.org/2145
Submitted by Trickster on Sun, 01/27/2008 - 8:21am.
Spice, I want to apologize about the whole "Is SHRAPNEL a BART Police Officer" thing, and thank you for opening my eyes.
After rereading all your post, I have come to realize that I may have been wrong.
After all, there are many postings on this board pointing out how certain BART employees lack the basic knowledge that is required of their job, and of “hanky-panky” in the hiring process.
There are many examples of employees that "may have been asleep in class". Perhaps in the spirit of BART RAGE, I should have been questioning how a highly paid BART Police Officer could show a total lack of knowledge when it comes to the Penal Code and Probable Cause. I pay property taxes to BART, sales taxes that go to BART and BART fare that just went up. Is it too much to expect for BART employees to know and perform their job in a competent manor, or has everyone just come to expect lower standards when it comes to BART. I do not want to see my taxes and fares going to some lawyer and homeless person because they won a lawsuit against BART. A lawsuit won because some BART Police Officer didn’t know the law and violated their civil rights. One again, thank you Spice for putting me back on BART topics in the spirit of BART RAGE. I promise that I will do my best to stay on BART related topics.
Submitted by TENTHIRTYSIX on Sat, 01/26/2008 - 12:24pm.
Yep. Get used to it. I plan to scrutinize everything Shrapnel posts in relation to law enforcement. I have a feeling that you would do the same thing if you saw someone claiming to be a train operator and boasting a bunch of misleading opinions.
Submitted by BARTholomew on Sat, 01/26/2008 - 1:18pm.
Okay cop'ers.
What would your commanding officers say to you bitching and moaning on this site? Calling into question everybody's credibility? Being general weasels without hesitation and stirring up the pot? The shit slinging is getting old. And to top it all of, to be doing this anonymously! It is well understood that you doubt Shrapnel and her credentials. Your opinion has been tendered again and again. Do you really need to continue to pour salt into the wound? Or can you be big, potty trained boys and take off your diapers and move on. It appears a good number of folks are reaching a consensus that you (or both of you?) TENTHIRTYSIX/Trickster are an ass (or asses?) who worship the anonymity of this venue and act accordingly. I would think officers of law would hold themselves to a higher level and conduct themselves in an appropriate manner no matter the setting (like here). But clearly you tore that page out of the rule book. You are down in the quagmire of little petty attacks and name calling. Save it for your real job where people actually know who you are and not profess to be, cop or other. I'm so disappointed that this forum has fallen to the levels of finger pointing with the liberal use of 'liar' being thrown about and you/you two took it there. It wasn't that way before.
Agree to disagree and move on. There are BART employees on this site who know Shrapnel, and Shrapnel knows them. If they say she quacks like a duck...she's probably a duck (read 'COP'). Also...and this is by no means an accusation or finger pointing or whatever...some stories turn into fishing stores. You know the ones...the "I caught a bass the size of a watermelon" when it was really a tadpole that you later used for bait for the fish you never got. Stories sometimes fall victim to this spin zone of sorts. You might tell drinking buddies that you physically drug a fighting hobo off of the train who was drunk and disorderly and saying mean things about your mom, when in reality it was just a drunk hobo passed out who could barely talk and walk without someone to act as a crutch. People might be inclined to add faux-spice to the story to make it more entertaining...nevermind the civil rights portion of it cause I'm not in that position so I don't really give a damn. Them's be the breaks. You talk about 'that's life so get over it.' That is a tired cliche but it also is best suited when applied to all parties, you included.
Lastly...BART RAGE is a venue to talk about BART. Not the moderators.
Can we talk about BART again? You are yesterday's news.
Submitted by Trickster on Sun, 01/27/2008 - 5:01am.
BARTholomew,
#1: I don't have a Commanding Officer and I have never claimed to be a BART Police Officer. That being said, I don't think that any Commanding Officer with the BART Police Department or for that matter any Police Department would be upset with anyone correcting faulty information, regarding law enforcement or the law in general, being posted on this site.
#2: Someone has left the impression that I am the same person as TENTHIRTYSIX. That same person has been quick to point out when two posters had the same IP address in the past. Wonder why they didn't do it this time? Why do they wish to leave that impression?
#3: I agree with you, one "would think officers of law would hold themselves to a higher level and conduct themselves in an appropriate manner no matter the setting". That an "officer of the law" would not go "down in the quagmire of little petty attacks and name calling".
I know that I would never post the real name of an employee at my place of employment and state that she was "one of the most incompetent managers under the sun" or state that there must be "hanky-panky going on in the hiring and promotional process". That would be so unprofessional, not to mention against company policy, possibly subjecting one to disciplinary procedures.
(http://www.bartrage.com/node/1092)
#4: To the best of my recollection, I never called SHRAPNEL a name. Pointing out false or faulty information is not name calling, but calling someone an "ass" is.
#5: I never used the word "liar" as you putting it in quotes would indicate.
#6: I have tried to move on, but people are making post directed at me, I am only responding to them.
#7: You are right, sorry to interrupt your reality. You may now return to your blissful state.
These are fair concerns. I can see the potential conflict of interest. I think writing up an entire set of guidelines is an overreaction, though. It's the Internets. If this board starts to suck, people will just go someplace else.
Submitted by transit first on Tue, 01/29/2008 - 9:32am.
I don't think Shrapnel is a cop either. In fact, Shrapnel tried to pass herself off as a black person and that sort of did it for me believing she was a cop. It was over some comentary about black people that I found extremely distasteful coming from a police officer. I've just chosen to ignore it since this is cyberspace and there's no way to know who any of you really are. If you are really concerned, write a letter to Gary Gee, who I think is still BART police chief, and share your concerns.
By the way, any cop who doesn't know what probable cause is a serious problem for that police department.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Would you consider sponsoring me for AIDS/Lifecycle 7? http://www.aidslifecycle.org/2145
Since this is "BART RAGE", I
Since this is "BART RAGE", I don't believe that any BART employee should be allowed to moderate. What happens when the comments are posted against that employee or their beliefs about BART's policies? Even if they don't delete post, there is always that lingering question of censorship since they work for BART.
Warning, challenging comments may be deleted.
this got a "dont care" vote
this got a "dont care" vote from me. i agree that this is a site to rage about the problems about bart and provide our comments and so much. but at the same time i feel that the employee you have launched your crusade against, shrapnel, to be pretty receptive of the feedback. i also think he or she (you refer to shrapnel as a she in a few places) is pretty cool about it overall. i dont think there is really a conflict of interest with him/her. ive seen her weigh in on just about every vote, plus he/she is pretty objective when push comes to shove. she's posted things here that i would have never known even so.
i dont think there is an issue of him/her defending bart at all costs, because thats not his/her job on this site. i've read posts where she attacks the bart beaurcracy with the same visciosness that passengers do, and it shows a real passion on his/her part to dedicate their time to this site and help keep it clean. i was an anon lurker before it became registered users only, and i have noticed a real reduction in hateful and racist posts since shrapnel and boopiejones were made moderators. i vote to keep shrapnel as moderator, even though this wasnt your question, because its a thinly veiled attempt to get the admin to take away his/her power. the good far outweighs the bad in this one. i dont think just any bart employee should be given moderator powers though. but he/she seems best suited for the job, sorry.
No need to apologize, I’m
No need to apologize, I’m just asking the question because it seems strange that post that criticized the BART Board and SHRAPNEL’S understanding of how the law works disappeared without explanation. I am also concerned that someone, claiming to be a BART Police Officer, can make some of the claims that have been made about police work and how the law works, can be so far off reality. Something just doesn’t fit and when that person has the power to control what is being posted on BART RAGE, I find it a little unsettling. I applaud the work that SHRAPNEL has done on this site, however as I stated before, I do not believe that anyone working for BART should have the power to censor post, it just creates the appearance of impropriety. I just hope that people can understand my concerns.
Warning, challenging comments may be deleted.
I originally wrote/posted a
I originally wrote/posted a long winded reply and then thought to hell with it. I hope it goes unread while I write this revision... (sorry to the folks who abhor removing posts...I'll confess my sins on Sunday and throw three Hail Mary's while watching the Super Bowl).
This topic is old, tired, has gotten way too much mileage.
This being the internet, authentication is next to impossible and we are in a position to trust what people have to say. It's an honor code of sorts. If somebody says they are a BART employee, well then they are a BART employee. If I don't believe Shrapnel is a BPD, then I say snowball's chance in hell that TENTHIRTYSIX is one too. Or Train Operator is a train operator? Crap! This is a two way street and I don't understand what makes this pill so hard to swallow? The second guessing is just stupid and makes some people (I won't name Trickster or TENTHIRTYSIX....whoops...) look like ass clowns when they initiate this pissing contest of 'Shrapnel says this and does that and is a real meany but that's wrong and I'm gonna tell my mommy on her' kind of crap.
And thank you, Captain Obvious, for pointing out lawyers read this. So do teachers. So do french fry friers from McDonalds. So to Starbucks coffee people. So do corporate 9-5'ers. Maybe even hobos. I don't know. But reading between the lines...does it really matter? C'mon! You clearly have no grasp of law if you think it does and that a lawyer can run like mad down to Superior Court and file a suit over people trading BART war stories. I really hate to be the bearer of bad news...but you can't sue over a post either disappearing or being deleted. Talk about a hard knock life, eh? There is no constitutional right to free speech in a moderated forum.
This whole thread is a huge effort to turn water into wine. If you reeeeaaallllyyy think you are getting fleeced, then why the hell are you still here? Move on. This isn't the only watering hole in town. So far this topic is taking a lot of eyes off of maybe more entertaining or more enlightening stores.
Instead...here I am...here we are...
Warning, this thread SHOULD be deleted.
Seacrest out!
In the interest of
In the interest of neutrality, Trickster, I - unlike you - am going to abstain from voting in this poll.
However the point of a moderator is not to be the cyber police. As moderators, boopie and myself try to help facuilitate conversation, help out new users, and - yes - delete posts. We also help out with some of the technical aspects of the site to take some of the workload off the Admin's hands.
We even did a survey not too long ago to measure people's sense of our effectiveness. And guess what? Everyone supported the job we were doing, and said it was satisfactory or better. And that was right after the furor that was raised when I deleted someone's post against Rafa. Deja vu... Deja vu.
Shrapnel
BARTRage.com Co-Moderator
BARTRage.Moderators@gmail.com
Obviously I’m not neutral,
Obviously I’m not neutral, that’s why I posted my opinion along with the poll. I have no problem with you as a person being a moderator; my problem is with a BART employee being a moderator. It creates an appearance of impropriety. I am also concerned that you may be misrepresenting yourself as a BART Police Officer to people on this site. Many of you comments just don’t fit the law, and appearantly, I am not the only person with this concern. If people don’t care about this, that’s O.K. as long as they go in with their eyes open.
Warning, challenging comments may be deleted.
It seems as though you do
It seems as though you do like to police any comments that affect your reputation or where you're called out on an obvious error. Remember that there are real cops/attorneys on this site. Personally, I am ready to nitpick anything you post related to law enforcement. At this point in time, I am not convinced that you are what you claim to be and I wouldn't be surprised to find out that you are a Community Service Officer, train operator, or even a system service worker.
To be honest, anyone taking
To be honest, anyone taking anyone ELSE'S word on being what they say they are is pulling the wool over their own eyes.
God bless the information age, for almost anything anyone claims to be "true" or "the correct information" can be researched by anyone interested enough to do so.
Whether you choose to believe Shrapnel is a BART officer or not, the REAL question should be are you willing to accept anything she says as 100% correct. Remember, even those who are what they say they are aren't always 100% correct/informed about their line of work. I don't mean any disrespect to her assuming she is what she says she is, but I certainly don't expect her to know EVERYTHING about police work. There aren't too many of us with photographic memories and infallible recall.
If you don't entirely believe someone, then take what they say with a grain of salt and look for confirmation elsewhere.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Would you consider sponsoring me for AIDS/Lifecycle 7? http://www.aidslifecycle.org/2145
thanks spice for that. i
thanks spice for that. i agree with you on every poitn except that no one is perfect and knows everything abotu police work, for it seems tenthirtysix knows all there is to know, and he and sidekick trickster are probably some sort of demi-gods among the bart police
[primus inter pares]
I don't expect Police
I don't expect Police Officers to know everything about police work, but every Police Officer is expected to know the basics. I understand that SHRAPNEL is very popular, but she is making comments that even a rookie just out of the academy would know is wrong. Hate to burst you bubble people, but any police officer that doesn't know the Penal Code for Vandalism, or what probable cause is needed to detain someone, let alone pull them off a BART Train, has no buisness being on the force. This is why I question SHRAPNEL's claims. She may be doing a good job as moderator, but if she is doing what she claims to be doing as a Police Officer, it is just a matter of time before she is sued or fired.
It is also my opinion that she is tarnishing the image of the BART Police since she is showing her ignorance of the law while claiming to be a representative of that department.
Yes, SHRAPNEL knows a lot about BART, but be wary when she makes comments about the law or BART Police
Warning, challenging comments may be deleted.
I understand exactly what
I understand exactly what you're saying and conceed you probably have a point, but MY point is, how do I know I should be believing YOU? I know nothing about police work so how do I know "the basics" include memorizing the penal code for vandalism?
I may take advice on a recipe or some shit like that, but shame on me if took someone's advice on anything substantial in a forum or chatroom just because they told me they were an authority on a subject.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Would you consider sponsoring me for AIDS/Lifecycle 7? http://www.aidslifecycle.org/2145
Just ask yourself this
Just ask yourself this question, wouldn't you expect someone who has gone through a six month police academy and another six or so months of on the job training to know if they could legally detain someone. If they screw this up, any arrest and charges resulting from this can be thrown out. Wouldn't you expect an officer who writes police reports to know a common section like vandalism. They have to write the section down every time they take a report.
Currently, I think that BART Police is sending their officers to the Alameda County Police Academy which to can see from their website is a six month academy.(http://sheriffacademy.com/classes/academy/class.htm). After the academy officers go throught on the job training with a training officer. This can last another four to six months. Do you really think that after almost a year of training, an officer wouldn't know these things. Look at the website and talk to any police officer and ask them what they think about this. Better yet, if you see a BART Cop, ask them.
Warning, challenging comments may be deleted.
Honestly, as I already
Honestly, as I already stated, I know nothing of what's taught to police officers - so I DON'T know what to expect from someone who's gone through a six month police academy.
Maybe Shrapnel IS a cop but she slept in class the day they covered vandalism. Ask me the IEEE standards for writing up a test plan for testing a software application and I'll stare at you like you sprouted another head from your neck... yet that's what I do for a living. Go figure.
Again, I rely on my personal way of dealing with knowing someone online vs. in the real world. I take them at face value and get my information from a reliable, verifiable source. At this point in time Shrapnel's really a lot of fun to talk to, so yeah... ummm, well... that's about it. Not like I'm gonna go testing BART (or CA or U.S.) law based on anything she's said.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Would you consider sponsoring me for AIDS/Lifecycle 7? http://www.aidslifecycle.org/2145
ooops
ooops
Good question. It's called
Good question.
It's called deleting your post to cover your trail.
Now her post is there, now its gone.
Someone has something to hide?
Warning, challenging comments may be deleted.
I deleted it because it was
I deleted it because it was off-topic and posted by me. Yes, I am hiding the fact that I asked Spice to email me. Shame, shame, shame on me.
Shrapnel
BARTRage.com Co-Moderator
BARTRage.Moderators@gmail.com
SHOULD A BART EMPLOYEE HAVE
SHOULD A BART EMPLOYEE HAVE THE POWER TO DELETE POST ON THIS SITE? NO, it's the moderators who have that power.
[soapbox] I voted Don't Care
[soapbox]
I voted Don't Care and here's why:
I know you're talking about Shrapnel. If you really think she's deleting stuff then you have reason to be concerned and you should take it up with the Admin, who can see if stuff is in fact being deleted and who is deleting it. Boopie may even be able to see that kind of log depending on what permissions have been set. Demand to see the logs if it makes you feel better and quit guessing and speculating on something you can't prove, but IS provable. IF Shrapnel is PROVEN to be removing controversial posts, then I think Admin should take her power away and ban her IP address forever.
Short of a blatant, provable violation, Shrapnel isn't going anywhere. One real good reason is because Admin and Shrapnel, based on what I've seen and heard on the boards for a while now, appear to be friends or at least know each other outside the internet. Heck, I wouldn't be at all surprised if Admin is a Bart employee. You can't be Admin and not be able to delete posts, so just making a blatant "no employees" rule won't work.
I suggest you keep copy/paste copies of your "controversial" posts and if one disappears, try it again. I always copy/paste my long involved posts until I confirm they have posted so I don't have to rewrite them if my device dies. The way the board has been throwing errors recently, who knows what ate your post.
Honestly, dude, I think you're over reacting and I wish you would drop it. I hate posts being deleted just as much as you do, and I wish the board software worked like many other blogs and would just leave a "comment deleted" tag where the post had been before, but running the software for a site I don't own is not my department.
We don't need contributing members tearing each other apart over speculation. We should be focusing on tearing apart idiots and trolls like CoffeeGirl and Sankafarta Running Wind.
[/soapbox]
-----------------------
There is no "U" in BART
Treo? You.
Treo? You. Rock.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Would you consider sponsoring me for AIDS/Lifecycle 7? http://www.aidslifecycle.org/2145
boopie and I have discussed
boopie and I have discussed having a Moderator Terms or something like that, to avoid controversy, that we can maybe vote to ratify or something. I'll contact boopie and we'll work on something, and have you guys vote to see if you agree with it, and that will be an opportunity to have any suggestions or whatnot.
Posts *HAVE* been deleted by boopie, the Admin, and myself when they contain personal attacks or stuff that is totally off-topic and not BART-related. Obviously this person (Trickster / TENTHIRTYSIX) has some sort of problem with me.
boopiejones can, and I urge him to, go into the server log and review which posts have been deleted by me (and him, and the Admin). If he has any objections, he should contact the Admin (and myself, if he wants) at once.
If I was really concerned with deleting posts that went against me, wouldn't I have been deleted this before it got so many votes and replies? Even those replies against me?
However, I won't delete ANY (spam included) posts until boopie and I come up with Moderator Terms or something, and you all vote to ratify it and have your say.
*Steps off her pedestal*
Shrapnel
BARTRage.com Co-Moderator
BARTRage.Moderators@gmail.com
I've come to the realization
I've come to the realization that there is no feasible way of convincing you folks that Trickster and I are not the same person. I guess most of the regular posters on here believe that there is no possible way that two individuals can doubt Shrapnel's credibility. I invite anyone to take the time and compare my posts with Trickster's and look for similarities. Maybe detective Shrapnel can take on this task.
Bottom line... like Trickster, I do not necessarily have an issue with Shrapnel as a person/moderator. However, she has probably achieved this status as a moderator under the guise that she is a BART police officer. On a number of occasions she has been very sloppy and made law enforcement related statements that are downright appalling. Since Shrapnel claims to represent an entity that I work for the last thing I want is for her to mislead readers or provide inaccurate advice on police related matters.
Whether people believe that I am a police officer or not is of no concern to me. I have not come on here claiming to be something I'm not. I know what I am and thats what matters to me. If you track my posts you'll find that most of them have to do with police related matters. Feel free to double check my posts for accuracy.
After all, this site is called "BART RAGE." The name itself incites a negative tone. Not everyone who posts here is going to be pleasant and cooperative. This is a discussion board and everyone here has a right to free speech. Challenging someone's credibility should not be a reason for censoring posts. Disagreement is a fact of life so get used to it.
Ya know I don't care if your
Ya know I don't care if your name is legion I'm convinced you are a prick and I don't even need to double check but, if you have something to contribute by all means. As for being a moderator she was invited by the creator of this site because he has other obligations and can't camp out here. This isn't an official site and she never claimed to be representing you or the department. Jayzesus what a douchebag you are, but as you said, I guess I'll have to get used to it.
Train Operator, I could care
Train Operator, I could care less if SHRAPNEL is a moderator, but I do care when she provides faulty information while claiming to be a Police Officer. People come to this site to vent and look for solutions for the problems that they encounter on BART. When someone who claims a position of authority post a solution that is wrong, this helps no one and just causes problems for the person that believes this person, the people on this board that follow the advise, and BART.
How would you feel if someone claimed to be a Train Operator on this board, was accepted as such, and then gave out false or inept information that made you and your fellow operators look foolish and created situations that made it harder for you to do your job. I am willing to bet that you and the other TO's on this board would be all over that person, especially if that person had the power to delete your post pointing out that the information was wrong.
At this point I am going to drop this subject, but whenever someone who claims to be in the legal profession or law enforcement post something that is false, I am going to call them on it.
Warning, challenging comments may be deleted.
Sorry, but considering we
Sorry, but considering we don't know YOUR credentials either, all that you've said about Shrapnel can be said equally about you. You're going to stand there and say you're going to call people on "false" information however since we don't know you have the credentials and background to be correct, you're in the same exact position as Shrapnel - claiming to have intimate knowledge of a subject but not proving who you are.
So... *shrugs shoulders* let that be a warning to the board:
Trickster and/or TENTHIRTYSIX's comments are to be considered as suspect as Shrapnel's until any party wishes to prove his or her identity beyond a doubt.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Would you consider sponsoring me for AIDS/Lifecycle 7? http://www.aidslifecycle.org/2145
Good idea considering
Good idea considering comments as suspect. That is why I have posted the written law and web site addresses when possible to prove my point. For those of you who need to confirm what "probable cause" is look here ( http://www.lectlaw.com/def2/p089.htm ) or Google it.
P.S. Are you and Train Operator the same person?
Warning, challenging comments may be deleted.
Google's a wonderful thing
Google's a wonderful thing isn't it? Just because you were able to Google sections of law code doesn't mean you're an authority on the law. Surely you can see how difficult it is to prove oneself on the Internet.
And yes, TO and I are one in the same. You caught us.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Would you consider sponsoring me for AIDS/Lifecycle 7? http://www.aidslifecycle.org/2145
Have you been smoking the
Have you been smoking the spice?
Now your just being silly. I never said it proved that I was an authority on the law, but is does provide proof when I post a comment about the law and back it up with the printed law online. The T/O comment was because you responded to a comment directed at him/her and was a joke, but I'm sure you were aware of that also. I'm also sure that you are intelligent enough to understand that there is a difference between someone on BART RAGE claiming to have legal knowledge and pointing out what the law is, something that can be looked up online, and someone on BART Rage claiming to be a BART Police Officer and telling posters what BART Police will do, when to call them, and claiming to have arrested and cited people. (None of which can be confirmed)
You may now return to your blissful state.
Warning, challenging comments may be deleted.
Yes, I've been smoking the
Yes, I've been smoking the spice. You caught me. Again.
What this all boils down to, is who gives a crap. The same sentiment that's been shown in the polls, the same sentiment others have written. For the third time I'll post - shame on you if you take someone's advice online for anything more serious than their best recipe for a steak marinade for a summer bbq.
My point about your googling and posting law material is that is doesn't make you an authority, so thank you for agreeing with me. Any schmo can google and cut & paste, but that doesn't mean you know what you're talking about. Nor am I going to spend the time chasing down whether or not what Shrapnel or you say is true or not. If I need the information I'll consult a lawyer, thanks.
If you've got a beef with whether or not Shrapnel is a legitimate police officer and could possibly be providing the public with incorrect information you have 2 recourses: 1) take it to the admin of this site, not whine about it here in post after post and 2) without spending inordinate amounts of time, I'm sure claiming to be a police officer and offering advice based on such at least BORDERS on impersonating a police officer. If you think she's not legit, than contact the real police and report her.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Would you consider sponsoring me for AIDS/Lifecycle 7? http://www.aidslifecycle.org/2145
Spice, I want to apologize
Spice, I want to apologize about the whole "Is SHRAPNEL a BART Police Officer" thing, and thank you for opening my eyes.
After rereading all your post, I have come to realize that I may have been wrong.
After all, there are many postings on this board pointing out how certain BART employees lack the basic knowledge that is required of their job, and of “hanky-panky” in the hiring process.
There are many examples of employees that "may have been asleep in class". Perhaps in the spirit of BART RAGE, I should have been questioning how a highly paid BART Police Officer could show a total lack of knowledge when it comes to the Penal Code and Probable Cause. I pay property taxes to BART, sales taxes that go to BART and BART fare that just went up. Is it too much to expect for BART employees to know and perform their job in a competent manor, or has everyone just come to expect lower standards when it comes to BART. I do not want to see my taxes and fares going to some lawyer and homeless person because they won a lawsuit against BART. A lawsuit won because some BART Police Officer didn’t know the law and violated their civil rights. One again, thank you Spice for putting me back on BART topics in the spirit of BART RAGE. I promise that I will do my best to stay on BART related topics.
Yep. Get used to it. I
Yep. Get used to it. I plan to scrutinize everything Shrapnel posts in relation to law enforcement. I have a feeling that you would do the same thing if you saw someone claiming to be a train operator and boasting a bunch of misleading opinions.
Okay cop'ers. What would
Okay cop'ers.
What would your commanding officers say to you bitching and moaning on this site? Calling into question everybody's credibility? Being general weasels without hesitation and stirring up the pot? The shit slinging is getting old. And to top it all of, to be doing this anonymously! It is well understood that you doubt Shrapnel and her credentials. Your opinion has been tendered again and again. Do you really need to continue to pour salt into the wound? Or can you be big, potty trained boys and take off your diapers and move on. It appears a good number of folks are reaching a consensus that you (or both of you?) TENTHIRTYSIX/Trickster are an ass (or asses?) who worship the anonymity of this venue and act accordingly. I would think officers of law would hold themselves to a higher level and conduct themselves in an appropriate manner no matter the setting (like here). But clearly you tore that page out of the rule book. You are down in the quagmire of little petty attacks and name calling. Save it for your real job where people actually know who you are and not profess to be, cop or other. I'm so disappointed that this forum has fallen to the levels of finger pointing with the liberal use of 'liar' being thrown about and you/you two took it there. It wasn't that way before.
Agree to disagree and move on. There are BART employees on this site who know Shrapnel, and Shrapnel knows them. If they say she quacks like a duck...she's probably a duck (read 'COP'). Also...and this is by no means an accusation or finger pointing or whatever...some stories turn into fishing stores. You know the ones...the "I caught a bass the size of a watermelon" when it was really a tadpole that you later used for bait for the fish you never got. Stories sometimes fall victim to this spin zone of sorts. You might tell drinking buddies that you physically drug a fighting hobo off of the train who was drunk and disorderly and saying mean things about your mom, when in reality it was just a drunk hobo passed out who could barely talk and walk without someone to act as a crutch. People might be inclined to add faux-spice to the story to make it more entertaining...nevermind the civil rights portion of it cause I'm not in that position so I don't really give a damn. Them's be the breaks. You talk about 'that's life so get over it.' That is a tired cliche but it also is best suited when applied to all parties, you included.
Lastly...BART RAGE is a venue to talk about BART. Not the moderators.
Can we talk about BART again? You are yesterday's news.
BARTholomew, #1: I don't
BARTholomew,
#1: I don't have a Commanding Officer and I have never claimed to be a BART Police Officer. That being said, I don't think that any Commanding Officer with the BART Police Department or for that matter any Police Department would be upset with anyone correcting faulty information, regarding law enforcement or the law in general, being posted on this site.
#2: Someone has left the impression that I am the same person as TENTHIRTYSIX. That same person has been quick to point out when two posters had the same IP address in the past. Wonder why they didn't do it this time? Why do they wish to leave that impression?
#3: I agree with you, one "would think officers of law would hold themselves to a higher level and conduct themselves in an appropriate manner no matter the setting". That an "officer of the law" would not go "down in the quagmire of little petty attacks and name calling".
I know that I would never post the real name of an employee at my place of employment and state that she was "one of the most incompetent managers under the sun" or state that there must be "hanky-panky going on in the hiring and promotional process". That would be so unprofessional, not to mention against company policy, possibly subjecting one to disciplinary procedures.
(http://www.bartrage.com/node/1092)
#4: To the best of my recollection, I never called SHRAPNEL a name. Pointing out false or faulty information is not name calling, but calling someone an "ass" is.
#5: I never used the word "liar" as you putting it in quotes would indicate.
#6: I have tried to move on, but people are making post directed at me, I am only responding to them.
#7: You are right, sorry to interrupt your reality. You may now return to your blissful state.
Warning, challenging comments may be deleted.
These are fair concerns. I
These are fair concerns. I can see the potential conflict of interest. I think writing up an entire set of guidelines is an overreaction, though. It's the Internets. If this board starts to suck, people will just go someplace else.
I agree with BARTEmp.
I agree with BARTEmp.
I don't think Shrapnel is a
I don't think Shrapnel is a cop either. In fact, Shrapnel tried to pass herself off as a black person and that sort of did it for me believing she was a cop. It was over some comentary about black people that I found extremely distasteful coming from a police officer. I've just chosen to ignore it since this is cyberspace and there's no way to know who any of you really are. If you are really concerned, write a letter to Gary Gee, who I think is still BART police chief, and share your concerns.
By the way, any cop who doesn't know what probable cause is a serious problem for that police department.
Does it really matter
Does it really matter Shrapnel is a cop or not?
Does it really matter who boopiejones is? ( for example )
Does it really matter who rafa1215 is?
Does it matter who I am?
How does it effect you?
I look at it this way...
You, Shrapnel or whomever can claim to be the emperor of the monks of Timbuktu,
I don't care cause I'm not a monk nor am I in Timbuktu.
In a chat forum all that really matters is that one contributes to the to the conversation (preferably in a non-disruptive and non-malicious manor).
*sob* You didn't ask if it
*sob*
You didn't ask if it mattered who I was!!!
WAHHHHHHHHHHHH
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Would you consider sponsoring me for AIDS/Lifecycle 7? http://www.aidslifecycle.org/2145
Are you a monk in Timbuktu
Are you a monk in Timbuktu ?
no?
Then I don't care.
(now go and cry yourself to sleep)
You actually need to ask if
You actually need to ask if those who are upset with BART employees should allow those same employees the right to delete those posts?
BART had to pay some big bucks to be voted the #1 transit agency a few years back, you know.