Joshua West for Philadelphia Sheriff

[MikeinPhilly]

My LTCF is due to be renewed in Feb and if you win the election I would be happy to be the 1st person issued a LTCF by you.

[theo]

Suppose there's a law against DUI, and it's in the vehicle code. An FBI officer pulls arrests a motorist who the officer believes committed a DUI violation, in Pennsylvania. Suppose there is no law providing for such an arrest. This scenario is described in Com. v. Price, 672 A.2d 280 (Pa. 1996).

Thus, there are rules for the motorist and rules for the FBI officer. Is it an appropriate defense, in light of the FBI officer's enforcement, to say to the motorist, 'if you don't like the rules of Pennsylvania, go out the door, or start your own state'? If not, why would it be appropriate to invoke 'the rules' in this situation? What rules, with what applicability?

* * *

Looks like the definition of 'sheriff' was brought in under the Act of 1988, Dec. 19, P.L. 1275, No. 158, § 1, with the modern language of 18 Pa.C.S. 6109(b).

LOL, you are comparing a DUI and a website????????

You should run for a higher office cause you change the subject like a politician.


.

[JayBell]

I somehow think your cavalier attitude, your belief in shadow dictatorship, and your wish for a user base of 0 is incongrouous with the stated goals of PAFOA. It's clear that Dan believes in information availability and dissemination. I'm sure you could have linked us to 'what Dan says' as it regarded multiple accounts, instead of wasting all of that typing, if it existed. Multiple accounts is an issue that will quite obviously come up and as you have stated, the staff, the lot of them, are already aware of the incidence, so users could easily expect a verbatim rule on the matter.

That Dan provides no dictate in the face of knowledge and expectation is as much a direction to staff, so I wouldn't call it carrying out his wishes by having mods do whatever they want under what they feel is a catch-all. Judges have to make judgment calls, too, but when they are cavalier, we call it abuse of discretion.

* * * * *

Good and disturbing find, Deadpan. I'm going to check how long that's been there because we seem to overlook the definition a lot (i.e. I don't recall this being raised very often in threads where I or others have made claims about the Philly sheriff). That's rather incomprehensive of us...

Obviously, we have zero interest in parsing out the rules to the Nth degree, because not everything can be covered, which, of course is why we have the statement I quoted...which Dan wrote by the way, so yes, thats his "dictate" which, as owner, is his right.

this is not a "shadow dictatorship" at all, its publicly accessible private property, with all the rules and rights that come with being the private property owner for the admin/owner and his staff, and all the restrictions and lack of rights that come to the non-owner "user" of the private property.

you are allowed access to, and allowed to use the property in a manner the owner allows, and access and allowed behavior may be denied or modified for any reason the admin/owner/staff decided... you have not a single right to access or use this forum in any way.. you merely have the ability to access and use it, within the rules ... by using the site you implicitly agree to the rules.

a site like this(or arfcom, or or any other site or forum that is privately owned, but allows public access) is effectively a "benevolent dictatorship" and its best not to forget that. You are GUEST in someone elses house, if you break the house rules, or exhibit unwanted behavior, you will be asked to stop, or leave... fail to stop, you will be forced to leave.

at this point, I understand that you seem frustrated by your inability to be able to whatever you damn well please, however, thats just how it is... if you want to do whatever you dang well please, start a MDJschool.blogspot.com and do /say whatever you want.. a lot of other folks have done this... then you wont have to chafe under the massive civil rights violations and the horrific chains of slavery this website imposes on you.

now, enough of this nonsense, and back on topic to this West guy.

this is your clue to "stop".

[k9loki]

[IronSight]

you are allowed access to, and allowed to use the property in a manner the owner allows, and access and allowed behavior may be denied or modified for any reason the admin/owner/staff decided... you have not a single right to access or use this forum in any way.. you merely have the ability to access and use it, within the rules ... by using the site you implicitly agree to the rules.

Well, there's this statement:

"We have attempted to work out the math to make sure that the points configured in our infractions relate to appropriate punishments in the automatic bans. As time goes on and as needed we will modify the infractions available based on changes to our forum rules and we will always be tweaking the points associated with various infractions to make sure all punishments fit the crime.

Our hope is that the infraction system will be a much more objective, even-handed approach to dealing with users that will ensure enforcement of the rules fairly and provide a reliable tool for keeping such data around."

So, on one hand you have the admin/owner/staff saying that PAFOA tries be objective and even-handed, and a place that clearly attempts to outline the basic rules of entry/use.

On the other, we have the admin/staff saying that users implicitly agree to rules that aren't listed in the Rules forum. Let's look at this statement:

This list only contains explicitly defined rules, however moderation by it's nature will require that moderators apply judgment calls to inappropriate behavior. Just because it is not explicitly listed does not mean moderators can not issue bans.

Implicitly, by using the site, I agree that you can make a judgement call on "inappropriate behavior". I however don't see any rule, or any hint of a rule in the rules forum, that says users can't express their opinion on whether a admin/staff/owner's interpretation of "inappropriate" was appropriate or not. If expressing a dissenting opinion to the interpretation of staff is a violation of the rules then I'm leaving the site, because it is not a rule I've implicitly or explicitly agreed too.

So, in effect, here in this thread, we have a poster stating they have multiple accounts and then we have an admin stating: "I have no problem with that in your case, although I'll admit that a heads-up to me or the other staff members would've been nice."

This is far different from a statement saying; "tell me your other account name or get banned". MDJschool isn't exactly incorrect in his description of the historical issues with multiple accounts, and his post doesn't violate any of the specific rules listed; I don't exactly see anything in the rules saying that members can't mention what PAFOA has generally done or had issue with in the past.

now, enough of this nonsense, and back on topic to this West guy.

this is your clue to "stop".

MDJschool's post is potentially important to a topic that the OP brought up by mentioning, and one continued by staff. Your own posts furthered this path in this thread, and I find it highly absurd to make an obvious threat to other posters that discussing the topic any further with you will lead to a ban or punishment.

If making a post about a thread discussion that both relates to the original poster and only turned into a discussion because of staff input is all of a sudden off-topic simply because the staff member that engaged in the discussion doesn't like where it is going, and is then punishable by infractions and bans by that very staff member, then that's something that should be made clear in the forum rules section before someone is banned for it, in my opinion.

.................................................. ......................................

Judging by his lack of response, not just to the (IMHO unimportant) discussion of his posting handle(s), but to a couple of questions concerning his candidacy posted here, one can only assume he's no longer running. I was interested, so I asked if there was any other events coming up, which if he was serious about this there would have been. No reply on his part = no further interest on mine. If a candidate can't even take the time to answer questions on a thread he himself started, it doesn't speak well to his ability to handle the demands of an important office like that of Sheriff.

I wouldn't be so quick to assume he is no longer running, or that he isn't serious about the issues. You're free to disagree of course, but that's just my opinion.

[GunLawyer001]

First, I pointed out (in my usual subtle manner) that West appears to be the only candidate for Philly Sheriff who reached out to PAFOA, and he should be spotted a few points for that. He doesn't get a pass on the issues, but fairness requires that we acknowledge the effort, rather than whine and bitch about any perceived lack of perfection.

Second, moderating a website is like herding cats, and the mod staff needs to have a lot of latitude to deal with the professional trolls. There are more than a few instigators here and elsewhere who will consistently push the other users' buttons, push the boundaries, and generally goad others while very carefully staying inside the rules. Their posts are always negative, always on the side of anarchy and strife. The mods need a free hand to be able to deal with these types of people, who add little except entertainment for the truly bored and simple-minded, the type who like to look at car crashes and "Saw" movies.

This is a moderated website, not a train wreck. Being a dick who stays inside the rules doesn't mean someone isn't a dick, and a pattern of provocation is far more destructive to a forum than posting a nipple pic, even if the rules only specifically address the latter. This may be a party that's open to the public, but the house owner still gets to eject the annoying guests. And insulting the host is bad form.

[JayBell]

If making a post about a thread discussion that both relates to the original poster and only turned into a discussion because of staff input is all of a sudden off-topic simply because the staff member that engaged in the discussion doesn't like where it is going, and is then punishable by infractions and bans by that very staff member, then that's something that should be made clear in the forum rules section before someone is banned for it, in my opinion.

you make some assumptions here that are way off the mark.

I already stated how it is, and quoted relevant policy here... I know where this argument is going, and where it'll end... dont try to make it look like I'm cutting off discussion because I'm afraid someone will somehow override the fact that PAFOA is private property and frankly, the admins can do anything they please, whether its written down and made public, or otherwise.

the threadjack discussion we were having is off topic for this thread, if it needs to be discussed, then it needs to be discussed elsewhere, and not in this topic...we have, may times, in the past told folks to drop the off topic discussion, and start a discussion thread elsewhere... IE the help and suggestions forum.

so, go start a thread there to discuss this, instead of continuing to hijack this one.

no further discussion along this line will be permitted in this thread.

[fragmag]

So is Joshua West still running for sheriff?

[Joshua_West]

Yes, I'm still running - and the campaign has been quite busy, but satisfying, lately..

Let me apologize for not getting back to NHA, it was an unfortunate oversight. Therefore, if anyone wants to plan an impromptu get together (in or around the city - I don't have time to travel to Dauphin county) this week before the election, I will come and you can ask me any question you wish..