I don't know who mentioned the perception of an in crowd I think it was either barefacedmonk or salmonandmashedpotatoes... if I'm wrong I apologize.
I have seen the mods on these threads repeatedly ask for examples of this perception people have.
Just look at page 8 of the "Logging off for good" thread. IP (sorry to single you out, I like you as a poster) enters the discussion by mocking the allegations that have been made about an in crowd by talking about a meeting of blood brothers and what not. Immediately all of these mods and others who may be perceived as being part of an in crowd jump on the bandwagon and continue to mock the other people on this blog by talking about this stupid made up meeting.
Whether the inner circle exists or not, it is things like that that causes the general public to believe there is an inner circle amongst the blog.
To Roy(I think), you mentioned the fact that blind polls have been conducted and the responses have always seemed to favor the mods. Perhaps if you were to conduct a blind poll right now the results wouldn't favor the mods as you seem to think they would. A time like this would be a perfect time to have a poll. I believe there is a silent majority who believes there is an in crowd and there is a big time segregation happening on this blog.
Mocking people who believe something strange is going on doesn't help the image of the "CelticsBlog community", it only hurts it.
If I have over stepped my boundaries in this post, which I don't believe I have. Please just delete my post and we'll move on. I won't cause a fiasco.
The blind polls were conducted immediately after the "Celticsblog has lost its way" and related threads. If there was a time to get a flavor for the feeling of the blog, that would seem to have been the time. Negative feelings were at their height at that point. Here's one example:
http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=31637.087.5% gave the blog either an A or a B. To me, that's the overwhelming majority of the blog. Furthermore, we have an entire forum dedicated to feedback about the blog, and we've spent dozens of hours responding to that feedback. I personally think we do a good job.
It should come as no surprise that the staff is on good terms with one another. However, I don't think that means that that proves the existence of an "in crowd" and an "out crowd". If IP makes a joke, and others join in, I don't see any problem with that. If people think the mods are buddies, I honestly don't see 1) a problem with that, or 2) a way to avoid it.
What I'd have an issue with is favoritism, where certain posters were unfairly punished, and other "favored" posters avoided discipline. Based upon the facts that 1) nobody can identify who the "in crowd" is; and 2) members who some have linked to this purported "in crowd" have admitted to having been suspended in the past, I don't see what the problem is.
It's clear that the staff has no problem suspending members who individual staff members are on good terms with, and it should be equally clear that there are plenty of members that individual staff members disagree with who are still posting strongly. (As BBallTim mentioned above, he and I have vigorously disagreed plenty of times over the years, and he's still here in good standing.)
What's the "strange" thing that you think is going on here? That certain members get along with one another more than others?