Page 9 of 17 [ 243 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 ... 17  Next

nurseangela
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Nov 2014
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,443
Location: Kansas

11 Jan 2017, 9:58 am

I disagree. There has to be turnover because some members may not get along with certain moderators. Also, there is a tendency to abuse the power if one is left in such a position for too long a time. Just like in government there is a time frame. Some are not equipped to handle the position in a fair manner so there should be ways to get them out.


_________________
Me grumpy?
I'm happiness challenged.

Your neurodiverse (Aspie) score: 83 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 153 of 200 You are very likely neurotypical
Darn, I flunked.


Drake
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 782

11 Jan 2017, 10:44 am

I don't like the idea of a timeframe on moderators. That would just end up expelling the good ones and be needlessly disruptive.

I haven't seen any real evidence of a lefty bias moderating team, and believe me having come here to WP due to issues with another forum dominated by hard left authoritarian abusive egocentric brittle mods who put their own interests before that of the forum, I am now quite sensitive to such a thing. What happened to (I think) Sly was the only incident I've seen which looked potentially suspicious. And anyway, as far as I can tell, Fnord had a strong hand in that, and he's not here anymore.

As far as I can see, the moderators here do seem willing to talk with people at length and seem friendly. I'm not picking up on any fragile egos or superiority complexes or obvious bias or being too quick to resort to the banhammer or threats or hostility even when the subject is criticism of the mods, or trying to control or censor threads and opinions. They also participate in the threads and behave like regular members, and don't break their own rules. It was the opposite of all these things on that other forum.

If you are interested in being more trustworthy, I think it's all about transparency. Transparency is something I don't think the mods are lacking, but I can think of two big improvements. One would be public knowledge of all warnings and punishments, along with who delivered said punishments and the other would be to end post-deletion or editing out of non-spam and non-illegal material. Let people see when people are punished and what they were punished for. I don't know if this forum supports the function, but offensive material could be placed beneath spoiler tags or whited out so they have to be highlighted to see them. It's also useful for the members to see examples of rule breaking and the consequences.

I also know the moderators apparently have a code they have to follow. It would be interesting to be able to see this.



blackicmenace
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Nov 2016
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 866
Location: Sagittarius A

11 Jan 2017, 6:33 pm

It is important to remember, your perspective and interpretation of your environment and reality is not universal. Facts must be respected, but beliefs are not universally shared. Last but not least our opinions are not facts and can be up for debate so long as it's constructive.


_________________
Do not fear to be eccentric in opinion, for every opinion now accepted was once eccentric.” ― Bertrand Russell


Adamantium
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2013
Age: 1017
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,998
Location: Erehwon

11 Jan 2017, 7:14 pm

Drake wrote:
What happened to (I think) Sly was the only incident I've seen which looked potentially suspicious. And anyway, as far as I can tell, Fnord had a strong hand in that, and he's not here anymore.


Minor quibbles: to the best of my knowledge, Fnord was never a mod and never had any particular influence with the mods. Also, Fnord is still here, but no longer posts.

If I recall, Fnord felt that he had already said everything that needed to be said, and had some idea about a particular post count being significant in some way, and when he reached that post count, he stopped making new posts.


_________________
Don't believe the gender note under my avatar. A WP bug means I can't fix it.


Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,044
Location: Seattle

12 Jan 2017, 3:24 am

I foolishly opened this can of worms on a day off and am now consumed with work, so it might be a while before I can make the in depth replies to some of these posts that I'd like to.

In the meantime, lest people think I'm merely being thin-skinned or angry that I didn't get away with something, I thought it might be useful to illustrate what I'm upset about. I recently received a board warning for this post:

viewtopic.php?t=330581&start=105#p7411599

Dox47 wrote:
Mikah wrote:
Has anyone seen GGPViper since the election result?


Him and a good half dozen others who were so certain of a Clinton win; can't say I miss many of them.


I was told that this was considered a "personal attack" despite the fact that I didn't attack anyone, merely registered my lack of distress at their absence, and didn't even name any names. Do I really need to explain why I feel that I was singled out in this case, especially given that this was upheld as constituting a personal attack by the mod team at large? I'm also not ruling out the mod team functioning as a sort of clique that never goes against each other no matter how egregiously bad the call, but that's a problem for a different thread.


_________________
Murum Aries Attigit


TheSpectrum
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Jun 2014
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,596
Location: Hampshire

12 Jan 2017, 4:37 am

Yeah I don't see how that warranted any sort of moderation unless they thought it's intent was to be inflammatory and get a reaction. But then there are threads (RIGHT NOW!) that could be classed exactly as examples of this and they are allowed to stay because it's against PE Trump, the GOP or Republicans.


_________________
Yours sincerely, some dude.


Drake
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 782

12 Jan 2017, 5:20 am

That really is a bad example to show Dox. Someone says they're worried about Viper and he might have ended his own life, and your response is basically "f**k Viper." Why did you do that?



blackicmenace
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Nov 2016
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 866
Location: Sagittarius A

12 Jan 2017, 5:24 am

TheSpectrum wrote:
Yeah I don't see how that warranted any sort of moderation unless they thought it's intent was to be inflammatory and get a reaction. But then there are threads (RIGHT NOW!) that could be classed exactly as examples of this and they are allowed to stay because it's against PE Trump, the GOP or Republicans.


Sometimes it's best to agree to disagree and that's okay. To be fair anything political at the moment is sort of inflammatory in the current climate. We are so divided, but as they say, divide and conquer. While we quibble, they continue to conquer. Probably not the right place for this so I will keep my thoughts to myself now so we don't go off topic. Singling out one person to gloat, probably not a good thing to do. Probably best to respect one another, even when we disagree. After all, we are not the enemy, we are fellow countrymen and countrywomen who happen to disagree.


_________________
Do not fear to be eccentric in opinion, for every opinion now accepted was once eccentric.” ― Bertrand Russell


smudge
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Sep 2006
Age: 29
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,401
Location: London

12 Jan 2017, 7:50 am

Drake wrote:
That really is a bad example to show Dox. Someone says they're worried about Viper and he might have ended his own life, and your response is basically "f**k Viper." Why did you do that?


You sure it was about ending his own life? I can't imagine someone like Viper would commit suicide over something like the election.

It wasn't a personal attack because first he stated that Viper and others were certain of an election win. Then he said he doesn't miss many of them. That could be anyone.



Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 26
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,367
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

12 Jan 2017, 8:01 am

That warning is definitely inappropriate, it is warranted to mention that there have been a number of posters that have disappeared after this election for whatever reason. A lot of these same posters had running commentary on me personally for my 100% correct analysis of the election so I am curious where there have all gone too, I do miss them and think we have some unfinished business.



nurseangela
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Nov 2014
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,443
Location: Kansas

12 Jan 2017, 8:11 am

What it boils down to is that each moderator is human and whether a member gets reprimanded for a post depends on that moderator's "perception" of what was said. I have been banned twice. Anyone who has not been banned, it's not a pleasant experience - I didn't even see it coming. I tried to log in one day and BAM! there it was saying that I had been banned (not by who), what the problem was and how long the ban was (to the hour and minute). No one tried to talk to me or see my side of things - it was just that fast. I think that is a very rude way of doing things. One moderator "perceives" that you did something wrong and with the tap of a few keys - you're banished from the Kingdom. And who decides for how long? There is also no recourse that one can do. This is why I was so adamant in another thread about there not being a permanent ban because to a certain person it can be a very traumatizing experience. No one knows you have even been banned and there is no way for you to make contact with anyone who is still on the site.

Has anyone else here been banned except me? How many and for how long?

And what are the rules for banning? Is it 3 strikes and your out?


_________________
Me grumpy?
I'm happiness challenged.

Your neurodiverse (Aspie) score: 83 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 153 of 200 You are very likely neurotypical
Darn, I flunked.


Drake
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 782

12 Jan 2017, 8:23 am

smudge wrote:
Drake wrote:
That really is a bad example to show Dox. Someone says they're worried about Viper and he might have ended his own life, and your response is basically "f**k Viper." Why did you do that?


You sure it was about ending his own life? I can't imagine someone like Viper would commit suicide over something like the election.

It wasn't a personal attack because first he stated that Viper and others were certain of an election win. Then he said he doesn't miss many of them. That could be anyone.

Mikah's full quote says he's a tad worried that Viper may have ended it all. I can't see it either that Viper would do that especially over such a thing, but I'm not Mikah.

I do however agree that it isn't a personal attack, but it isn't not doing anything wrong either. Mikah asked if anyone's seen Viper because he his worried. Opinions on Viper were not solicited. Especially negative ones. It's bad form. I don't understand why he did it. It comes across as vindictive.



Adamantium
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2013
Age: 1017
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,998
Location: Erehwon

12 Jan 2017, 9:38 am

In the interest of transparency--

The rules that cover these things are here:
viewtopic.php?t=73832#p1627572

The rule on personal attacks is:

Quote:
2. Personal attacks.
This includes insinuation, ridicule and personal insults, regardless of whether direct or indirect. Attacking an opinion, belief or philosophy is acceptable, but attacking the person making the comments is not.


Two things have to be true for a statement to constitute a personal attack:
1) the statement must be an attack
2) the target of the attack must be a person, rather than an idea

The simple and obvious case is:
NotARealPoster wrote:
FictitiousMember, you are an idiot and you have intrinsically bad qualities.

It's immediately obvious that this meets both conditions.

But the language of the rule also specifies indirect attacks as a recognized form of personal attack. This is automatically less obvious. Indirect statements by definition avoid direct mention or exposition of a subject.

A case might be something like this:
FictitiousMember wrote:
I like pasta

NotARealPoster wrote:
Why do some people like pasta? Hyperspecificity in food choice is pure stupidity.


NotARealPoster doesn't directly attack FictitiousMember, but FictitiousMember is certainly going to feel attacked.
Parsing this and seeing the attack requires some interpretation and is therefore subject to debate, but a reasonable case can be made that because the accusation of stupidity immediately follows FictitiousMember's post, FictitiousMember is the target of an indirect attack.

The rule also proscribes attacks by insinuation. This is a more subtle, imprecise and murky area altogether. Insinuation
is by definition sly and deceptive and often employs indirectness and innuendo.

A case might be something like:
FictitiousMember wrote:
I hate pasta

NotARealPoster wrote:
I for one would have no objection if some people would tell us less about their food choices.


or this:
FictitiousMember wrote:
I hate pasta

NotARealPoster wrote:
There used to be less inane chatter on these boards. I miss those days."


My reading of the post in question is that by position after Mikah's post, Viper was clearly included in Dox's "I can't say I miss many of them."

Is it an attack? It read to me like an indirect way of saying, at best, "Viper's been gone for a while and I like it better when he isn't here." The subject is another member, and the expressed thought is negative. In the context of Mika's post, my first reading was more like Drake's above.

You could argue that it's possible to interpret Dox's language another way maybe he meant "I don't miss him" in some neutral way, that's the whole thing about insinuation and indirect targets: a well crafted comment of this kind is deniable.

On balance, in context it seemed like Viper was the indirect target and "I don't miss them" was an attack. While indirect and insinuated, it seemed like he was directing gratuitous unpleasantness at another member, and that's what the rule is supposed to stop.

I have no delusion of perfect perception or infallible analysis. In fact, I have a hard time realizing that other people don't think exactly like me, even though I know this to be true. So I am quite willing to recognize that my interpretation may be wrong. I asked the mods to offer their own views on this immediately after giving the warning. There were a variety of views but the consensus supported the warning.

That's the whole story. Dox is in no immediate danger of receiving even a temporary ban. All this warning does is to say in very clear terms: don't make other WP members the subject of negative remarks. That's not what the board is about.

The easiest way to avoid the whole area of personal attacks is to make sure that you are not making other members the subject of negative remarks. It's fine to trash their ideas, but not them.

I can't think of any circumstance in which it's appropriate to say that you don't miss a specific member or group of members when they have been away for a couple of weeks.


_________________
Don't believe the gender note under my avatar. A WP bug means I can't fix it.


Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 26
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,367
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

12 Jan 2017, 9:49 am

You are still wrong, I feel like you are really stretching to justify a decision that you already made and if that is something worthy of a warning then there probably is one every thread and it is not even close to possible to fairly distinguish. I would say that Walrus who is a mod has been continuously guilty of attacking other under what your definition of what an attack is. Is it possible that you like Viper the poster and that irked you the wrong way? I don't recall anybody getting warned when they all said good riddance to Fnord, hypocrites! I'm not even going to mention myself who has been attacked personally more times than I can count, most of those posters decided to leave November 9th for some reason...

Start enforcing the rules equally or get new rules



Last edited by Jacoby on 12 Jan 2017, 9:52 am, edited 1 time in total.

TheSpectrum
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Jun 2014
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,596
Location: Hampshire

12 Jan 2017, 9:50 am

Poor FictitiousMember. People need to cut 'em some slack.


_________________
Yours sincerely, some dude.