Making ALL penalties public.

[kirklancaster]

I think it would make for a fairer more open forum if Warnings and Infractions were made public in the same way that Bans are.

Surely no one could object and it should not be difficult to implement.

Perhaps we could have a Referendum on my suggestion?

[Shaun]

They technically already are on our user profiles, but I think some people can hide their profiles.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Good idea and can we have a proper definition of what is baiting and what is having a laugh please because I fear this term for infraction is being abused

:)

[Kazanne]

I'm all for that Kirk,all out in the open ,for all to see

[hijaxers]

I think it would make for a fairer more open forum if Warnings and Infractions were made public in the same way that Bans are.

Surely no one could object and it should not be difficult to implement.

Perhaps we could have a Referendum on my suggestion?

Yes Kirk i agree with you, a very good suggestion.

[Cherie]

Would have no issue with that at all

[Withano]

Oh I had one of those before a couple years back. Don't have a problem with the idea. Also don't see the point in it though.

[Twosugars]

Don't mind

[Crimson Dynamo]

Oh I had one of those before a couple years back. Don't have a problem with the idea. Also don't see the point in it though.

members will be more informed about the reason for infractions and as such will promote better behavoir, it also allows members to see what mods are doing, a positive move

:)

[Withano]

members will be more informed about the reason for infractions and as such will promote better behavoir, it also allows members to see what mods are doing, a positive move

:)

Think it will just encourage the wrong type of discussion. Probably cause that awful clique vs the mods thing (part 2) if one of the squad was infracted for literally anything further along the line.

Was pretty neutral to the idea at first. Mostly against it now.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Think it will just encourage the wrong type of discussion. Probably cause that awful clique vs the mods thing (part 2) if one of the squad was infracted for literally anything further along the line.

Was pretty neutral to the idea at first. Mostly against it now.

calling members "that awful clique" is against forum rules and is exactly what cases disharmony on the forum

may I ask you to edit that part out from your post?

[Withano]

calling members "that awful clique" is against forum rules and is exactly what cases disharmony on the forum

may I ask you to edit that part out from your post?

I meant the awful 'clique v mods' not the 'awful clique' v the mods lol... it was awful, it was mass group bullying really, and I see it happening again if this is agreed.

[Crimson Dynamo]

I meant the awful 'clique v mods' not the 'awful clique' v the mods lol... it was awful, it was mass group bullying really, and I see it happening again if this is agreed.

Yes, so easy for members to bully mods who can infract, ban and delete posts as they see fit with no recourse

:joker:

but yes i understand your distinction even if i dont agree with the principal

[Kazanne]

What really is the problem with things being open and above board :shrug:

[Withano]

Yes, so easy for members to bully mods who can infract, ban and delete posts as they see fit with no recourse

:joker:

but yes i understand your distinction even if i dont agree with the principal

Wasn't that the night where like 9 people were banned lol or am I thinking of a different argument :suspect:

Doesn't really matter, I don't think this would be a great idea because people will just use it as a way to vent anger at the mods.

[Amy Jade]

I think it would be a bad idea.

I can imagine if certain people saw somebody they dislike had say 3 open infractions they would try to bait them into an argument.

[Cherie]

Wasn't that the night where like 9 people were banned lol or am I thinking of a different argument :suspect:

Doesn't really matter, I don't think this would be a great idea because people will just use it as a way to vent anger at the mods.

Where has anger been vented at mods?

[reece(:]

Could just see more trouble arising, maybe I'd agree a few year ago when I was nosey and here for constant mess (no shade at people wanting this change)

[Crimson Dynamo]

I think it would be a bad idea.

I can imagine if certain people saw somebody they dislike had say 3 open infractions they would try to bait them into an argument.

That is a very negative attitude

:conf2:

[Jordan.]

Yes more opportunity for members to nitpick and whinge about moderator decisions, wonderful idea.

[Cherie]

Yes more opportunity for members to nitpick and whinge about moderator decisions, wonderful idea.

Mystic Meg?

[Matthew.]

name them and shame them!:hee:

i would be fine with this decision being made tbh

[Shaun]

Where has anger been vented at mods?

LOL

[Jordan.]

Mystic Meg?

I don't think a crystal ball is required to know people wouldn't be able to control themselves :hee:

[Cherie]

LOL


Mods

[Kazanne]

See if everything was out in the open ,you would see why some people were frustrated NOT angry.

[Cherie]

I don't think a crystal ball is required to know people wouldn't be able to control themselves :hee:

Well of course you can only speak for yourself :hee:

[Matthew.]

See if everything was out in the open ,you would see why some people were frustrated NOT angry.

yeah I agree with you Kazanne

[Kazanne]

yeah I agree with you Kazanne

:thumbs: Thanks Matthew.

[Jordan.]

Well of course you can only speak for yourself :hee:

I haven't got any active infractions, clearly doing something right :hee:

[kirklancaster]

Oh I had one of those before a couple years back. Don't have a problem with the idea. Also don't see the point in it though.

Are you seriously claiming that you have not had an Infraction for a 'couple of years'?

[Crimson Dynamo]

I haven't got any active infractions, clearly doing something right :hee:

yes

you have made one thread in SD in 2 YEARS...


try being a bit more daring

[AnnieK]

Wouldn't bother me but I don't think it should be a thread that people can comment on as that will descend into madness, more a thread like the old ban list where a mod updates with infractions / warnings and then locks it. Also think it should be done from a generic TIBB staff account.

This would provide transparency without allowing multiple members to question other people's infractions publicly, I think any queries should still be undertaken by PM.

That would hopefully keep everyone happy :shrug:

[kirklancaster]

I haven't got any active infractions, clearly doing something right :hee:

I haven't got any active infractions, clearly doing something right :hee:

See; even on this thread certain of us who ARE being infracted - for what ARE the most spurious of 'reasons' - are being adversely criticised, and unfairly judged, even indicted, of wrong-doing and whinging, by other members who have NONE of the facts only prejudice because they BELIEVE they KNOW what is behind this and their sympathies lie firmly with their friends.

And even on this thread, we CANNOT air our grievances OR the facts in order to defend ourselves against these sniping attacks upon us because to do so is to receive yet another Infraction or worse.

So mock away, snipe, attack, because we CANNOT defend ourselves or even answer back in even the civillest manner without being unfairly PUNISHED and our posts unfairly removed - which is EXACTLY the same when being patronized, talked down to, sniped at, mocked, misrepresented, and baited on Serious Debates by certain parties who remain UNPENALISED.

I will probably be banned just for writing this explanatory response to your mocking post.

And if that is anyone's idea of 'Fair Play' then God forbid that any of you are called up for Jury Duty.

[Cherie]

I haven't got any active infractions, clearly doing something right :hee:


Strange, this is why we need it!

[Cherie]

Wouldn't bother me but I don't think it should be a thread that people can comment on as that will descend into madness, more a thread like the old ban list where a mod updates with infractions / warnings and then locks it. Also think it should be done from a generic TIBB staff account.

This would provide transparency without allowing multiple members to question other people's infractions publicly, I think any queries should still be undertaken by PM.

That would hopefully keep everyone happy :shrug:

A good compromise Annie

[Withano]

I will probably be banned just for writing this explanatory response to your mocking post.

And if that is anyone's idea of 'Fair Play' then God forbid that any of you are called up for Jury Duty.

Talking about infractions is a rulebreak, kirk.. might want to edit that post.

Question is, are people aware of the tibb rules? Maybe thats the issue?

[kirklancaster]

Talking about infractions is a rulebreak, kirk.. might want to edit that post.

Question is, are people aware of the tibb rules? Maybe thats the issue?

Thank you Withano.

The question from my POV is 'Equitable Treatment'.

That's all. No more, no less.

[smudgie]

Couldn't give a fig to be honest.:shrug:

[Jamie89]

Oh I had one of those before a couple years back. Don't have a problem with the idea. Also don't see the point in it though.

Same for me really. If the only change is that you can see other peoples infractions I'm not sure what the benefit would be in that tbh? It could end up being a situation where members are micro managing mods by checking who is and who isn't getting infractions and for which posts and I can see that getting quite messy. I suppose it could always be trialled though.

They technically already are on our user profiles, but I think some people can hide their profiles.

I think that's something only you can see even if your profile is public?

[Tom4784]

This thread's been mentioned in the tower and, tbh, I actually agree with the idea of, at least on a temporary basis, infractions being made public. Mainly because it will result in the wind being knocked out of a lot of people's sails when they realise that assumed bias against them doesn't exist.

In fact, to spill a little tea, a lot of people who are for this who also typically believe they are being unfairly persecuted would be faced with undeniable proof of the opposite, that they aren't infracted as much as other people are.

If this does happen, it'll be a good way to teach people to never confuse their assumptions for facts.

Where has anger been vented at mods?

Erm.

[Shaun]

Out of interest for the practicality of this being implemented: wouldn't infractions being made public counteract the measure of deleting an infraction-worthy post, if you can just then see it in this "list of infractions" idea? :laugh:

For example:

Blurryface calls Amy Jade a 'nasty bitch'.
Blurryface receives an infraction, the post is deleted.
Everyone heads to "Latest Infractions" and sees: "Blurryface - 2pts - reason with quoted post"

[Tom4784]

Out of interest for the practicality of this being implemented: wouldn't infractions being made public counteract the measure of deleting an infraction-worthy post, if you can just then see it in this "list of infractions" idea? :laugh:

For example:

Blurryface calls Amy Jade a 'nasty bitch'.
Blurryface receives an infraction, the post is deleted.
Everyone heads to "Latest Infractions" and sees: "Blurryface - 2pts - reason with quoted post"

I'd assume if it were to happen, we'd just say something like

'Blurryface - 2pts - Insulting a forum member'

The infracted person would know the post in question and, in a situation where they could lie about it to rile people up, I'd say we reveal the infraction in it's entirely.

It's something I've been tempted to do often when I see people blatantly lie about why they've got infracted :laugh: It's one way an open system could benefit the mods I suppose. Can't call bias if we can expose the truth when issues are raised. In the current system we kind of have to sit on our hands even when we know we can end a situation by revealing the truth.

[kirklancaster]

This thread's been mentioned in the tower and, tbh, I actually agree with the idea of, at least on a temporary basis, infractions being made public. Mainly because it will result in the wind being knocked out of a lot of people's sails when they realise that assumed bias against them doesn't exist.

In fact, to spill a little tea, a lot of people who are for this who also typically believe they are being unfairly persecuted would be faced with undeniable proof of the opposite, that they aren't infracted as much as other people are.

If this does happen, it'll be a good way to teach people to never confuse their assumptions for facts.
......................................

I'd assume if it were to happen, we'd just say something like

'Blurryface - 2pts - Insulting a forum member'

The infracted person would know the post in question and, in a situation where they could lie about it to rile people up, I'd say we reveal the infraction in it's entirely.

It's something I've been tempted to do often when I see people blatantly lie about why they've got infracted :laugh: It's one way an open system could benefit the mods I suppose. Can't call bias if we can expose the truth when issues are raised. In the current system we kind of have to sit on our hands even when we know we can end a situation by revealing the truth.

:clap1::clap1::clap1: It seems that we both want the same innovation for exactly the same reason.

Just for the record, Dezzy, I am NOT always referring to you when I refer cryptically to 'certain parties' because - and this may surprise you - I do not think that you are behind most of the 'punishments which I personally receive and perceive as 'unwarranted', but I do feel that the current 'closed' system does NOTHING to prevent you - as the Mod who is the most vocally active in most 'heated' Serious Debate threads - as being blamed or unfairly 'scapegoated' in a LOT of cases.

As you so rightly suggest in both these quoted posts, revealing Infractions in their entirety will 'nail the lie' in any wrongly perceived bias claims and prevent frustration and resentment from 'festering' within any members guilty of such wrongful presumptions.

It will of course, also help prove when any Infractions ARE wrongly 'awarded' and that also cannot be anything but a good thing on a forum where so many long-serving, good, and pro-active members are disgruntled, because Mods - like such members - ARE only human and are fallible and CAN make mistakes.

I truly believe that this innovation CAN and WILL help restore good relations on this forum, because there IS a problem, and it is not going to be resolved by ignoring it or stepping up punishments for members who already feel that they are being treated unfairly.

Finally, I applaud whichever Mod/Admin left this thread alone and uncensored because it is helping to 'Clear The Air' just discussing this issue. Thank You.

[Withano]

It will of course, also help prove when any Infractions ARE wrongly 'awarded' and that also cannot be anything but a good thing on a forum where so many long-serving, good, and pro-active members are disgruntled, because Mods - like such members - ARE only human and are fallible and CAN make mistakes.



That will happen literally every single day, when someones mate gets infracted for literally anything. 5 or 6 people coming for the mods at once claiming the insult was only a joke or something. People will only be coming into threads to discuss infractions instead of the thread etc. Its a stupid idea hahha.

I know Dezzy thinks it will be a way to prove that people are not unfairly persecuted (which is true) but he better be prepared for the time that member A, B, C, D, and E, all fresh from the private message chat, are all gonna fight him about member F’s fair infraction.

I mean... if you like ****shows, go ahead. I’ll be there with my ‘tol’ ya so’ glasses though.

[Tom4784]

:clap1::clap1::clap1: It seems that we both want the same innovation for exactly the same reason.

Just for the record, Dezzy, I am NOT always referring to you when I refer cryptically to 'certain parties' because - and this may surprise you - I do not think that you are behind most of the 'punishments which I personally receive and perceive as 'unwarranted', but I do feel that the current 'closed' system does NOTHING to prevent you - as the Mod who is the most vocally active in most 'heated' Serious Debate threads - as being blamed or unfairly 'scapegoated' in a LOT of cases.

As you so rightly suggest in both these quoted posts, revealing Infractions in their entirety will 'nail the lie' in any wrongly perceived bias claims and prevent frustration and resentment from 'festering' within any members guilty of such wrongful presumptions.

It will of course, also help prove when any Infractions ARE wrongly 'awarded' and that also cannot be anything but a good thing on a forum where so many long-serving, good, and pro-active members are disgruntled, because Mods - like such members - ARE only human and are fallible and CAN make mistakes.

I truly believe that this innovation CAN and WILL help restore good relations on this forum, because there IS a problem, and it is not going to be resolved by ignoring it or stepping up punishments for members who already feel that they are being treated unfairly.

Finally, I applaud whichever Mod/Admin left this thread alone and uncensored because it is helping to 'Clear The Air' just discussing this issue. Thank You.

I'll be honest with you, I was behind the deleting of your Micheal thread and the ensuing infraction and I'll explain why since I think you believe you were being censored. I looked at that thread and reversed the situation. If, for example, Marsh made that same thread about, say, Kazanne for example. I think that would have gotten a very negative reaction and would have led to a lot of drama. When it comes to moderating decisions, I value consistency above all. If the reversed situation would have led to drama and would have probably been infracted then I couldn't not do the same for your situation.

People may confuse how I post with how I mod but everyone gets treated equally when it comes to modding. I wasn't censoring you, I was just doing what I would have done if anyone else posted that thread.

I think when it comes to the 'festering' resentment of members towards mods, a lot of that has to do, not so much with us but with certain members spreading half truths and lies and other members buying into it and sadly, I don't think going public with all infractions will completely fix that since, like I've said above, a lot of people tend to use their assumptions as facts and I don't think they'll let an actual fact get in the way of blaming the mods. A lot of people are 'disgruntled' because they are buying into a narrative that simply isn't true.

Still, I'd want to give this a trial run though just so we can completely upend a lot of assumptions about how people are infracted, I just don't think it'll stick with some people since it doesn't fit the narrative they want to portray.

I'll just say this as well, I think I've been modding this site for years now and I can probably count the amount of incorrectly given infractions on my hand (meaning ones given out of a misunderstanding). One thing people always forget is that all the mods see each other's infractions and we do tend to voice our thoughts if we disagree. If we were to reveal all the infractions, you'd see that 99.9999% are completely correct.

[Maru]

Mods will always have to worry about an angry mob. Unfortunately, that is "justice" on the internet. Anonymity in general allows people the flexibility to play out any role they wish, including individual fantasies of being an important clogs in the mob justice mission directives...

I don't think that making things public is a bad idea, because it puts at least some onus on the rest of the community to hold the rule breakers to a consistent standard. That can help manage egos... because they have the vent there on record, and it's also pretty easy to call out the worst of it.

If it's just people talking about the same deleted posts, then it's pretty easy to fall into the pattern of assuming a lot as bystanders... and even I'm guilty of this at times, since I almost never see the drama unfold with the real time. I'm usually on after the morning pick up when I think most stuff happens. Anyway... it's harder for the community itself to indulge a witch-hunt when the recurrent patterns of trollish behavior are laid out for all to see in plain view... then it becomes an argument with the community itself and not just a handfull of mods. I think they can manage that well most of the time, as the user base is a shared ownership in a sense... so they have some authority there... and it's easier to back up the moderators on the specifics of things, and how maybe some things could've gotten misconstrued... rather than rollover threads that read like the latest tabloid of local TiBB celebrity activity... anyway, that's my take... I've never been infracted, so the way that is handled would not effect me anyway... but I don't mind to chime in a bit if I think something is being missed in the conversation or someone is being particularly abusive... that is the way it should always be in a tight-knit community.

[kirklancaster]

That will happen literally every single day, when someones mate gets infracted for literally anything. 5 or 6 people coming for the mods at once claiming the insult was only a joke or something. People will only be coming into threads to discuss infractions instead of the thread etc. Its a stupid idea hahha.

I know Dezzy thinks it will be a way to prove that people are not unfairly persecuted (which is true) but he better be prepared for the time that member A, B, C, D, and E, all fresh from the private message chat, are all gonna fight him about member F’s fair infraction.

I mean... if you like ****shows, go ahead. I’ll be there with my ‘tol’ ya so’ glasses though.

I am completely mystified by your stance here, Withano.

Dezzy himself has stated how he is in favour of 'trialling' this proposition yet here you are all Quixotically mounted on your Rocinante tilting at windmills on his behalf.

Dezzy is undoubtedly one of the most intelligent and able members on this forum - yes, I do really believe that - so do you truly believe that he is incapable of taking care of himself if such a situation as the one you envisage did occur? (which it will not).

My proposition is not any kind of 'trap' it is a genuine attempt to resolve a very real issue on here for the sake of the forum, the Administrators, the members and the Mods and I genuinely believe that opening up these Infractions will be a step in the right direction for the reasons which Dezzy and me have already given.

[kirklancaster]

Mods will always have to worry about an angry mob. Unfortunately, that is "justice" on the internet. Anonymity in general allows people the flexibility to play out any role they wish, including individual fantasies of being an important clogs in the mob justice mission directives...

I don't think that making things public is a bad idea, because it puts at least some onus on the rest of the community to hold the rule breakers to a consistent standard. That can help manage egos... because they have the vent there on record, and it's also pretty easy to call out the worst of it.

If it's just people talking about the same deleted posts, then it's pretty easy to fall into the pattern of assuming a lot as bystanders... and even I'm guilty of this at times, since I almost never see the drama unfold with the real time. I'm usually on after the morning pick up when I think most stuff happens. Anyway... it's harder for the community itself to indulge a witch-hunt when the recurrent patterns of trollish behavior are laid out for all to see in plain view... then it becomes an argument with the community itself and not just a handfull of mods. I think they can manage that well most of the time, as the user base is a shared ownership in a sense... so they have some authority there... and it's easier to back up the moderators on the specifics of things, and how maybe some things could've gotten misconstrued... rather than rollover threads that read like the latest tabloid of local TiBB celebrity activity... anyway, that's my take... I've never been infracted, so the way that is handled would not effect me anyway... but I don't mind to chime in a bit if I think something is being missed in the conversation or someone is being particularly abusive... that is the way it should always be in a tight-knit community.

Superbly written (again: laugh:) Maru, and such valid points.

[kirklancaster]

I'll be honest with you, I was behind the deleting of your Micheal thread and the ensuing infraction and I'll explain why since I think you believe you were being censored. I looked at that thread and reversed the situation. If, for example, Marsh made that same thread about, say, Kazanne for example. I think that would have gotten a very negative reaction and would have led to a lot of drama. When it comes to moderating decisions, I value consistency above all. If the reversed situation would have led to drama and would have probably been infracted then I couldn't not do the same for your situation.

People may confuse how I post with how I mod but everyone gets treated equally when it comes to modding. I wasn't censoring you, I was just doing what I would have done if anyone else posted that thread.

I think when it comes to the 'festering' resentment of members towards mods, a lot of that has to do, not so much with us but with certain members spreading half truths and lies and other members buying into it and sadly, I don't think going public with all infractions will completely fix that since, like I've said above, a lot of people tend to use their assumptions as facts and I don't think they'll let an actual fact get in the way of blaming the mods. A lot of people are 'disgruntled' because they are buying into a narrative that simply isn't true.

Still, I'd want to give this a trial run though just so we can completely upend a lot of assumptions about how people are infracted, I just don't think it'll stick with some people since it doesn't fit the narrative they want to portray.

I'll just say this as well, I think I've been modding this site for years now and I can probably count the amount of incorrectly given infractions on my hand (meaning ones given out of a misunderstanding). One thing people always forget is that all the mods see each other's infractions and we do tend to voice our thoughts if we disagree. If we were to reveal all the infractions, you'd see that 99.9999% are completely correct.

Sincere thanks for your honesty, Dezzy.

I am chagrined about my 'Michael' post thread removal which I thought was unnecessary and about the Infraction which I thought was heavy-handed.

The thread and my OP was light-hearted, friendly to and actually supportive of Michael, but surely, even if removing it was deemed necessary as a precautionary measure for the reasons given, was it REALLY necessary to give me an infraction instead of a mere friendly note by pm or even a Warning?

[Withano]

I am completely mystified by your stance here, Withano.

Dezzy himself has stated how he is in favour of 'trialling' this proposition yet here you are all Quixotically mounted on your Rocinante tilting at windmills on his behalf.

Dezzy is undoubtedly one of the most intelligent and able members on this forum - yes, I do really believe that - so do you truly believe that he is incapable of taking care of himself if such a situation as the one you envisage did occur? (which it will not).

My proposition is not any kind of 'trap' it is a genuine attempt to resolve a very real issue on here for the sake of the forum, the Administrators, the members and the Mods and I genuinely believe that opening up these Infractions will be a step in the right direction for the reasons which Dezzy and me have already given.

Well, you’re not really the worst offender of this (top 10 perhaps, but there are far worse), people like to lay in to the mods quite regularly, and unfortunately, most of the others in that top 10 are quite friendly with each other, so I think it will just amount to group fights, which is just ugly.

I don't see how making mods’ decisions public will limit that... i mean, it definitely will not, I guess that’s not Dezzy’s point.

I think Dezzy wants to do it so that he can point out the facts when people inevitably kick up a fuss... I think he shouldn’t because it will encourage people to angrily kick up a fuss more regularly, making the entire excercise kinda counterintuitive.

I guess my issue is not quite believing the bit I’ve bolded. And if it is actually true of you, it would not be true of several others, who would misuse this new system as a way to vent anger at the mods and believe that they’re justified in doing it.

[Ammi]

Out of interest for the practicality of this being implemented: wouldn't infractions being made public counteract the measure of deleting an infraction-worthy post, if you can just then see it in this "list of infractions" idea? :laugh:

For example:

Blurryface calls Amy Jade a 'nasty bitch'.
Blurryface receives an infraction, the post is deleted.
Everyone heads to "Latest Infractions" and sees: "Blurryface - 2pts - reason with quoted post"

I'd assume if it were to happen, we'd just say something like

'Blurryface - 2pts - Insulting a forum member'

The infracted person would know the post in question and, in a situation where they could lie about it to rile people up, I'd say we reveal the infraction in it's entirely.

It's something I've been tempted to do often when I see people blatantly lie about why they've got infracted :laugh: It's one way an open system could benefit the mods I suppose. Can't call bias if we can expose the truth when issues are raised. In the current system we kind of have to sit on our hands even when we know we can end a situation by revealing the truth.

...I’m going to quote Shaun and Dezzy’s posts just because they feel relevant to my thoughts is all...


...so much is obviously difficult for me to comment on because of my time off the forum with my illness...but even ‘going back to the day’..:laugh:...it was still a thing of not being always able to feel a perspective of transparency because of deletions in threads...for instance, blurry face might have insulted Amy in such a way so it’s easy to feel....aha, you’re guilty blurry face...you broke the rules and insulted a member so really you deserved your infraction etc...but it still wouldn’t be giving an accurate thing if Amy persistently and consistently had prodded and poked Blurryface through thread after thread and over time after time etc....to the point where he had insulted her...?...I mean, we all know the rules but there is also a point where rules will inevitably be broken when people are pushed to feel and react in....enough already!!!!...I do feel these things are relevant as well to get full context to a group or community ‘dynamic’....otherwise it’s a bit like what most of us hate about BB in getting the edited highlights...:laugh:...but the ‘live feed’ would have given full context and full understanding....I don’t think it’s as black and white as showing a post or explaining a post when an infraction was given, I think it’s a little more complicated than questioning of own infractions...but more the participation of others or another...and is fairness being shown..?...(...because all has to be seen to be fair also, that has to have transparency...)...if for instance someone is ‘baited and trolled’, pushed and prodded etc from thread to thread and over much time...to the point where an insult is given...?....then obviously that one insult and one reason isn’t the only factor or only issue...in fact it’s relatively small in the grand scheme of trying to create ‘more harmony’...I would say, personally....people are human, people will react...whether it breaks a rule or not, you know....if someone’s posts and thoughts are constantly ‘picked at’ in negative ways...by the same member or the same few members, then it will inevitably lead to the frustrations and the insults....and I know ‘two wrongs don’t make a right’...but it’s understandable why these things happen....


...anyways, I guess really what I’m saying and what my thoughts are ...I realise that James doesn’t like threads and posts remaining in their entirety because of the negative vibe it gives the forum for any browsers and potential new members....I understand that completely...(...and there are times when individual threads../posts would be justified to be removed and deleted immediately because of a prejudice or intolerant value etc...)....but other than those occasions....maybe a compromise of leaving a complete thread without any deletions etc up for a limited time of 24hours or 48 hours, type thing....(...it could still be closed if appropriate...)...but it would help with transparency for members to have whole context...not just in that thread...’the guilty thread’..:laugh: of the infraction or infractions being revealed....but with other threads that have come before as well and what ‘has led to’....I do think that’s very relevant to feelings of ‘fairness for all’....


....maybe not, maybe I’m completely off key here...but I personally would always like to get the full context of something rather than one or two person’s ‘truths’...which may be true, but there are many truths usually....

[Ammi]

...a big shout out to the staff though..:worship:...crikey not for all the tea in China as the saying goes...

[Cherie]

This thread's been mentioned in the tower and, tbh, I actually agree with the idea of, at least on a temporary basis, infractions being made public. Mainly because it will result in the wind being knocked out of a lot of people's sails when they realise that assumed bias against them doesn't exist.

In fact, to spill a little tea, a lot of people who are for this who also typically believe they are being unfairly persecuted would be faced with undeniable proof of the opposite, that they aren't infracted as much as other people are.

If this does happen, it'll be a good way to teach people to never confuse their assumptions for facts.



Erm.

It was the use of the word Mods plural Dezzy

[Crimson Dynamo]

Sincere thanks for your honesty, Dezzy.

I am chagrined about my 'Michael' post thread removal which I thought was unnecessary and about the Infraction which I thought was heavy-handed.

The thread and my OP was light-hearted, friendly to and actually supportive of Michael, but surely, even if removing it was deemed necessary as a precautionary measure for the reasons given, was it REALLY necessary to give me an infraction instead of a mere friendly note by pm or even a Warning?


I agree Kirk, it was light hearted and obviously in support of Michael who has been the target of quite a bit of late by some nasty comments but I appreciate the explanation from Dezzy and that is very helpful and positive going forward

I do think that the infraction for Kirk was unfair and should be overturned. In a situation like that it would be better for the thread to be closed and a brief explanation given and no infractions, imo.

[Kazanne]

I agree Kirk, it was light hearted and obviously in support of Michael who has been the target of quite a bit of late by some nasty comments but I appreciate the explanation from Dezzy and that is very helpful and positive going forward

I do think that the infraction for Kirk was unfair and should be overturned. In a situation like that it would be better for the thread to be closed and a brief explanation given and no infractions, imo.

I agree with this, good post LT, I would also like someone we can chat with if we think something is unfair ,people wouldn't need to air it on the forum then.

[Crimson Dynamo]

I agree with this, good post LT, I would also like someone we can chat with if we think something is unfair ,people wouldn't need to air it on the forum then.

It would even be an area that is not for all to see but all mods and admin can and is accessible via a password type thing. I get everyone usually thinks they have been unfairly treated at times but because a forum is words only with no facial recognition its very hard to sometimes get the gist of a comment and so something said in all innocence and in jest can be viewed as hostile and baiting, for example and i bet that fits many grievances :shrug:

[Crimson Dynamo]

And can I just add, and in no way of a dig, that if forum member Dezzy was not a mod I would wager, and I think many others would, he would be infracted and banned as frequently as me, Kirk, brillo or Marsh is. So I would not take too much of the moral high ground Dezzy - there is no other Mod who would come close - that is not because you are a bad person but its to do with the fact when you get angry at a differing opinion you cant help but get personal and or condescending (i like to do this too, it makes me feel better) . Its just who you are but dont think that you are somehow immune to the faults you find in others and highlight in threads like this. I still love you but as the forum Dad I am just telling you how it is. x

:)

[Amy Jade]

I think Dezzy wants to do it so that he can point out the facts when people inevitably kick up a fuss... I think he shouldn’t because it will encourage people to angrily kick up a fuss more regularly, making the entire excercise kinda counterintuitive.
Haven't you noticed that's how you get your way on this forum? It's become very apparent to me in the last few months.

99% of the forum are happy with how the forum is run fundamentally and accept the odd infraction for perhaps over stepping the mark but the vocal few aren't happy so now we have to change things? We aren't meant to discuss infractions but there is going to be a thread pointing everyones out? I agree with Withano, it is bound to cause trouble.

[bots]

i disagree that they should be made public. If someone has enough infractions to be close to a ban, people could goad them into them crossing the line. Also, people will start complaining that so and so didn't get an infraction for blah or that the infraction was too heavy or light handed ..... It will just create even more animosity and argument

[Crimson Dynamo]

Haven't you noticed that's how you get your way on this forum? It's become very apparent to me in the last few months.

99% of the forum are happy with how the forum is run fundamentally and accept the odd infraction for perhaps over stepping the mark but the vocal few aren't happy so now we have to change things? We aren't meant to discuss infractions but there is going to be a thread pointing everyones out? I agree with Withano, it is bound to cause trouble.

"99% of the forum are happy with how the forum is run fundamentally"

can you provide any evidence to back up this extravagant claim?

[Amy Jade]

"99% of the forum are happy with how the forum is run fundamentally"

can you provide any evidence to back up this extravagant claim?

Are most of the forum wanting change or just the same people over and over again? :shrug:

How about we have an opt in list for your infractions being public so you can have yours posted but I can keep mine where they should be, in my inbox. Frankly it is nobody elses business what my infractions are or if I even have any.

It's like a wall of shame essentially.

[bots]

Also on the Michael thread, no matter how good intentioned, it was encouraging personal referral to a forum member which will illicit both positive and negative opinions. Those that appreciate a forum members contributions will let them know one way or another, without needing a specific thread

[Kazanne]

i disagree that they should be made public. If someone has enough infractions to be close to a ban, people could goad them into them crossing the line. Also, people will start complaining that so and so didn't get an infraction for blah or that the infraction was too heavy or light handed ..... It will just create even more animosity and argument

If we had a mediator though bots,it wouldn't be aired on the forum ,people could talk it out privately, and sort things out,as it stands,some people think there is some unfairness in certain areas, those bleating that people are just out to cause trouble haven't got a clue as to what goes on or went on, sometimes people need to get things off their chests and the forum is not the place ,we need someone we can approach,who we know will do a fair job,who we can talk to,as it stands people are just infracted and cannot explain why they think it's unfair (if it is),I am not bothered either way,but I don't think it's a bad idea.

[Kazanne]

Also on the Michael thread, no matter how good intentioned, it was encouraging personal referral to a forum member which will illicit both positive and negative opinions. Those that appreciate a forum members contributions will let them know one way or another, without needing a specific thread

I get that aswell but we get it all the time in threads like for example 'which Tibb member blah,blah,blah, they aren't taken down and members are talked about.

[Cherie]

I get that aswell but we get it all the time in threads like for example 'which Tibb member blah,blah,blah, they aren't taken down and members are talked about.

Good point, Micheal's was a light hearted thread, he posted in it himself, what is wrong with boosting a member who gets alot of negativity up, i think what should have happened is the negative comments should have been removed,. there have been threads about members before when they went awol and they went pages long with no penalities.

Dezzy I comment you for your comments in this thread I do think progress has been made across the great divide :love:

[Kazanne]

Good point, Micheal's was a light hearted thread, he posted in it himself, what is wrong with boosting a member who gets alot of negativity up, i think what should have happened is the negative comments should have been removed,. there have been threads about members before when they went awol and they went pages long with no penalities.

Dezzy I comment you for yoru comments in this thread I do think progress has been made across the great divide :love:

Totally agree plus most people could see it was a positive thread,shame some have to spoil them.There is nothing wrong with being nice now and again.:wavey:Plus I really don't care who sees my infractions bans etc,if I have been bad I will take a slap on the wrist.

[bots]

Good point, Micheal's was a light hearted thread, he posted in it himself, what is wrong with boosting a member who gets alot of negativity up, i think what should have happened is the negative comments should have been removed,. there have been threads about members before when they went awol and they went pages long with no penalities.

Dezzy I comment you for yoru comments in this thread I do think progress has been made across the great divide :love:

But then, those that posted negatively will get pissed if their posts were deleted, and also, it projects a group mentality that i don't think is healthy personally as I already think there is far to much group mentality on display already.

[Denver]

I'm a good girl so wouldn't affect my life #Noinfractions

[Kazanne]

I'm a good girl so wouldn't affect my life #Noinfractions

I didn't realize you were a girl Adam :laugh:

[Cherie]

But then, those that posted negatively will get pissed if their posts were deleted, and also, it projects a group mentality that i don't think is healthy personally as I already think there is far to much group mentality on display already.

If someone makes a feel good thread, going into it to specifically say nasty things is against forum rules as it is insulting members so there should be no debate over their deletion

[Amy Jade]

The Michael thread asked a question and people answered. I won't elaborate on my reply but it was my honest opinion. Why do people seek to censor only those who oppose their way of thinking?

[Kazanne]

The Michael thread asked a question and people answered. I won't elaborate on my reply but it was my honest opinion. Why do people seek to censor only those who oppose their way of thinking?

That's fine and no problem as long as those that do that can take the negativity back.

[Tom4784]

Sincere thanks for your honesty, Dezzy.

I am chagrined about my 'Michael' post thread removal which I thought was unnecessary and about the Infraction which I thought was heavy-handed.

The thread and my OP was light-hearted, friendly to and actually supportive of Michael, but surely, even if removing it was deemed necessary as a precautionary measure for the reasons given, was it REALLY necessary to give me an infraction instead of a mere friendly note by pm or even a Warning?

Like I said, if it was anyone else they would have gotten the same so I can't make exceptions.

[Tom4784]

I agree with this, good post LT, I would also like someone we can chat with if we think something is unfair ,people wouldn't need to air it on the forum then.

I've been for a return of appeals for quite a while but the problem is that people will inevitably abuse it like they did last time. If it were to ever come back it would need to come with certain rules like

- You can't appeal blatantly deserved infractions, if someone gets infracted for calling another member a twat for example, that's obviously infraction worthy and there's no way it's a mistake. Ultimately if it were to make a comeback members would need to be more self critical than they were back when the previous Appeals were a thing and accept that most infractions are justified.
- You've got to be respectful in the appeal itself, in the old appeals we'd get tons of irate appeals with people screaming the odds at us over infractions they ultimately deserved. If appeals were to come back, members would have to be reasonable and explain why they believe their infractions were wrong without basically screaming curses on our bloodline at us.
- Members would have to understand it's not a place to appeal EVERY infraction they'd get, we used to get a lot of members who would try to appeal everything and it was a waste of time for all involved.
- People would have to accept the verdict, whether it's given out by me or another mod anyone might dislike, members would have to accept that our final says are well, final.

That being said, if you want to talk then there's nothing stopping you PMing me or any other mod. I'm always saying to people who disagree with my decisions or anything to do with modding that they can talk to me over PM but people rarely take me up on that offer.

I remember saying it a lot during the last time I had a wave of attack threads against me but I think only Cherie took me up on that offer? I can remember us having a good chat about things and resolving issues and now I think there's a mutual respect there and we can have a laugh and a joke now.

I will always make time for people who are reasonable and want to fix things and not just want to have a screaming match. My PMs are always open.

[Greg!]

Makes me crease that certain chicks act like they are so hard done by on this forum when I can guarantee that on 99% of other forums if you were to make constant threads moaning about mods and their decisions and whinging about 'bias', you'd be banned and that would be the end of that. Certain people just need to suck it up when they get infractions/warnings and take it on the chin like everyone else.
http://i.imgur.com/5zjy5ZG.gif

[Crimson Dynamo]

Makes me crease that so certain chicks act like they are so hard done by on this forum when I can guarantee that on 99% of other forums if you were to make constant threads moaning about mods and their decisions and whinging about 'bias', you'd be banned and that would be the end of that. Certain people just need to suck it up when they get infractions/warnings and take it on the chin like everyone else.
http://i.imgur.com/5zjy5ZG.gif

"when I can guarantee that on 99% of other forums if you were to make constant threads moaning about mods and their decisions and whinging about 'bias', you'd be banned"

do you have evidence for this or did you just make it up to have a dig at people you dont like?

[Greg!]

Do you have evidence to the contrary sis? Also don't make assumptions on who I do and don't like on here!

[Crimson Dynamo]

Do you have evidence to the contrary sis? Also don't make assumptions on who I do and don't like on here!

so that would be a no


:skull:

[Greg!]

And I would say I don't really dislike anyone on here actually, just getting a bit sick and tired of seeing the same old threads moaning and unfairly attacking the mods day in day out!

[Kazanne]

I've been for a return of appeals for quite a while but the problem is that people will inevitably abuse it like they did last time. If it were to ever come back it would need to come with certain rules like

- You can't appeal blatantly deserved infractions, if someone gets infracted for calling another member a twat for example, that's obviously infraction worthy and there's no way it's a mistake. Ultimately if it were to make a comeback members would need to be more self critical than they were back when the previous Appeals were a thing and accept that most infractions are justified.
- You've got to be respectful in the appeal itself, in the old appeals we'd get tons of irate appeals with people screaming the odds at us over infractions they ultimately deserved. If appeals were to come back, members would have to be reasonable and explain why they believe their infractions were wrong without basically screaming curses on our bloodline at us.
- Members would have to understand it's not a place to appeal EVERY infraction they'd get, we used to get a lot of members who would try to appeal everything and it was a waste of time for all involved.
- People would have to accept the verdict, whether it's given out by me or another mod anyone might dislike, members would have to accept that our final says are well, final.

That being said, if you want to talk then there's nothing stopping you PMing me or any other mod. I'm always saying to people who disagree with my decisions or anything to do with modding that they can talk to me over PM but people rarely take me up on that offer.

I remember saying it a lot during the last time I had a wave of attack threads against me but I think only Cherie took me up on that offer? I can remember us having a good chat about things and resolving issues and now I think there's a mutual respect there and we can have a laugh and a joke now.

I will always make time for people who are reasonable and want to fix things and not just want to have a screaming match. My PMs are always open.

I appreciate all that and some good points accepted,but the thing that annoys me more than anything is when the powers that be are PMd and there is no response,it's only manners to just acknowledge someone, I know everyone is busy but if you take on that job,you should be prepared to at least answer people ,that's what annoys some people. as for your PM statement,that is duly noted.

[Greg!]

so that would be a no


:skull:

Well chick if you want to test out my theory then you are free to go on other forums and make threads moaning about being infracted for breaking the rules / moaning about the mods and see what happens. Go for your life!

[Kazanne]

And I would say I don't really dislike anyone on here actually, just getting a bit sick and tired of seeing the same old threads moaning and unfairly attacking the mods day in day out!

We are having a debate which might clear some things up,no one is forcing you to read any of it and no one is attacking anyone, we are trying to get things in the open in an adult way.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Well chick if you want to test out my theory then you are free to go on other forums and make threads moaning about being infracted for breaking the rules / moaning about the mods and see what happens. Go for your life!

this thread is about making infractions for all members open and it seems have not read the thread and tried to take it off topic whilst at the same time having (another) pop at members who are not part of your social circle.

I think we can all see what your intentions are, as Kaz said. This is not a thread for you so dont feel you need to participate if you have nothing positive or helpful to add.

also calling me sis etc is what is commonly known as baiting and guess what..its against the rules you so cherish...

:0

[Greg!]

this thread is about making infractions for all members open and it seems have not read the thread and tried to take it off topic whilst at the same time having (another) pop at members who are not part of your social circle.

I think we can all see what your intentions are, as Kaz said. This is not a thread for you so dont feel you need to participate if you have nothing positive or helpful to add.

also calling me sis etc is what is commonly known as baiting and guess what..its against the rules you so cherish...

:0

No need to patronise me hon, I did read the thread. And it doesn't take a rocket scientist to realise that it is yet another attempt to try and bring attention to a 'bias' that doesn't exist. I wouldn't be opposed to making all penalties public FYI if it meant people stopped constantly moaning.

[Jordan.]

We are having a debate which might clear some things up,no one is forcing you to read any of it and no one is attacking anyone, we are trying to get things in the open in an adult way.

I think an adult would simply log out and have bigger things to be concerned about than the moderating of a reality tv forum :skull:

[Kazanne]

I think an adult would simply log out and have bigger things to be concerned about than the moderating of a reality tv forum :skull:

I never hardly log out of Tibb even if I am not using it,I really don't know why that comment was aimed at me,:shrug: but I suppose if it makes you feel better.

[Livia]

How about giving us a thread where we can post the infractions we get, and the reasons for them, so people can see they're not the only ones to get infractions for bugger all. Infractions because the mod took the conversation out of context. Infractions because the mod just doesn't like you. Infractions because the mod is having an argument in the thread and you're going against them...

Some of my infractions have been justified, but a lot have not. They've been for next to nothing, less than I see moderators get away with day after day. If we could post them up and we can all see that I was infracted for, say, asking someone to stop baiting me. Which has been done... and is stupid. All this, we can infract you, you have no comeback and you're not allowed to talk about it... casts the mods in a very sinister light when they're just ordinary people with no special skills or comprehension. And to say that all infractions are discussed by a group of mods makes me despair, because I know they're not all petty, like some of my infractions clearly have been.

[Livia]

And can I just add, and in no way of a dig, that if forum member Dezzy was not a mod I would wager, and I think many others would, he would be infracted and banned as frequently as me, Kirk, brillo or Marsh is. So I would not take too much of the moral high ground Dezzy - there is no other Mod who would come close - that is not because you are a bad person but its to do with the fact when you get angry at a differing opinion you cant help but get personal and or condescending (i like to do this too, it makes me feel better) . Its just who you are but dont think that you are somehow immune to the faults you find in others and highlight in threads like this. I still love you but as the forum Dad I am just telling you how it is. x

:)

This, 100%

[Tom4784]

How about giving us a thread where we can post the infractions we get, and the reasons for them, so people can see they're not the only ones to get infractions for bugger all. Infractions because the mod took the conversation out of context. Infractions because the mod just doesn't like you. Infractions because the mod is having an argument in the thread and you're going against them...

Some of my infractions have been justified, but a lot have not. They've been for next to nothing, less than I see moderators get away with day after day. If we could post them up and we can all see that I was infracted for, say, asking someone to stop baiting me. Which has been done... and is stupid. All this, we can infract you, you have no comeback and you're not allowed to talk about it... casts the mods in a very sinister light when they're just ordinary people with no special skills or comprehension. And to say that all infractions are discussed by a group of mods makes me despair, because I know they're not all petty, like some of my infractions clearly have been.

This is the kind of post that makes me really want this to go ahead.

If you were to make your infractions public, I'd be willing to bet that most people would find them justified.

[Livia]

This is the kind of post that makes me really want this to go ahead.

If you were to make your infractions public, I'd be willing to bet that most people would find them justified.

Dezzy, with respect, please stop replying to me and I'll extend to you the same courtesy. The only reason you're not on ignore is because I can't put mods on ignore.

[Crimson Dynamo]

I think an adult would simply log out and have bigger things to be concerned about than the moderating of a reality tv forum :skull:

another rather dissapointing baiting dig...


:bored:

[Crimson Dynamo]

This is the kind of post that makes me really want this to go ahead.

If you were to make your infractions public, I'd be willing to bet that most people would find them justified.

great then that would surely help?

[AnnieK]

How about giving us a thread where we can post the infractions we get, and the reasons for them, so people can see they're not the only ones to get infractions for bugger all. Infractions because the mod took the conversation out of context. Infractions because the mod just doesn't like you. Infractions because the mod is having an argument in the thread and you're going against them...

Some of my infractions have been justified, but a lot have not. They've been for next to nothing, less than I see moderators get away with day after day. If we could post them up and we can all see that I was infracted for, say, asking someone to stop baiting me. Which has been done... and is stupid. All this, we can infract you, you have no comeback and you're not allowed to talk about it... casts the mods in a very sinister light when they're just ordinary people with no special skills or comprehension. And to say that all infractions are discussed by a group of mods makes me despair, because I know they're not all petty, like some of my infractions clearly have been.

This seems like the fairest option in all of these discussions, then people who don't want their infractions made public can keep them private but others who want people to see for transparency can do so.

[Tom4784]

Dezzy, with respect, please stop replying to me and I'll extend to you the same courtesy. The only reason you're not on ignore is because I can't put mods on ignore.

Now this is a good example of baiting so everyone listen up. Telling someone that they are on your ignore list is considered baiting because it serves no purpose other than to draw a reaction from them. If someone is on your ignore list, continue to ignore them or choose to respond to their posts in a way that isn't baiting.

Telling someone that they are being ignored is baiting and will likely net you a few infractions if you do it enough.

[Marsh.]

Surely no one could object

You having a laugh? A lot of people would be arguing on behalf of others against every little infraction.

I don't mind the ban list including a reason for the ban (whether a build up of points or a straight ban for whatever) but making public every little infraction is pointless. Like, who cares?

I care about my own infractions, no bugger else.

[Tom4784]

This seems like the fairest option in all of these discussions, then people who don't want their infractions made public can keep them private but others who want people to see for transparency can do so.

It'd be a decent compromise.

[Marsh.]

Sincere thanks for your honesty, Dezzy.

I am chagrined about my 'Michael' post thread removal which I thought was unnecessary and about the Infraction which I thought was heavy-handed.

The thread and my OP was light-hearted, friendly to and actually supportive of Michael, but surely, even if removing it was deemed necessary as a precautionary measure for the reasons given, was it REALLY necessary to give me an infraction instead of a mere friendly note by pm or even a Warning?

Well, yes, since that type of discussion in the public forum, discussing a member's contributions to the forum and whether they're for "real" is quite a clear rule break?

As said above, if it was made about any other member it would've had a major backlash from a lot of forum members. I'm not michael21's biggest fan, but even he should be extended that same courtesy everyone else would get tbh.

[Twosugars]

Well chick if you want to test out my theory then you are free to go on other forums and make threads moaning about being infracted for breaking the rules / moaning about the mods and see what happens. Go for your life!

LT is no chick no more:laugh:

[Marsh.]

I also don't think this would change anything.

If it was in the public forum that Member A was banned because of a build up of infractions and it was seen that their last infraction was for "baiting" people are still going to have the conspiracy theories that it's come from mod bias who don't like the political view (or whatever) of that particular member so have made up an excuse to have them banned.

It really won't change anything.

[Marsh.]

And can I just add, and in no way of a dig, that if forum member Dezzy was not a mod I would wager, and I think many others would, he would be infracted and banned as frequently as me, Kirk, brillo or Marsh is. So I would not take too much of the moral high ground Dezzy - there is no other Mod who would come close - that is not because you are a bad person but its to do with the fact when you get angry at a differing opinion you cant help but get personal and or condescending (i like to do this too, it makes me feel better) . Its just who you are but dont think that you are somehow immune to the faults you find in others and highlight in threads like this. I still love you but as the forum Dad I am just telling you how it is. x

:)

So this isn't so much an issue with the infraction/banning system, but more a personal issue with Dezzy?

By which I'd say, act like a grown up and just avoid each other?

[Tom4784]

I also don't think this would change anything.

If it was in the public forum that Member A was banned because of a build up of infractions and it was seen that their last infraction was for "baiting" people are still going to have the conspiracy theories that it's come from mod bias who don't like the political view (or whatever) of that particular member so have made up an excuse to have them banned.

It really won't change anything.

I think that's also a real possibility too tbh.

I'd be all for trying it but, as I said earlier in the thread. I think some people would still hold on to grudges even if the facts said otherwise.

[arista]

I think it would be a bad idea.

I can imagine if certain people saw somebody they dislike had say 3 open infractions they would try to bait them into an argument.



Yes
Some Good Points , Amy.

[Tom4784]

I've noticed that we've been veering close to an argument in the thread at points. I've left this thread unmoderated but if it turns into a screaming match it'll be closed and the discussion is over so let's keep it peaceful.

[arista]

I've noticed that we've been veering close to an argument in the thread at points. I've left this thread unmoderated but if it turns into a screaming match it'll be closed and the discussion is over so let's keep it peaceful.


Good Points

[Withano]

It was the use of the word Mods plural Dezzy

Basically just admitting to group bullying an individual here cherie. Not the smartest move. Although. Yeh. Obviously. Just bit unusual to see somebody admit it. Fair play.

[Withano]

Haven't you noticed that's how you get your way on this forum? It's become very apparent to me in the last few months.

99% of the forum are happy with how the forum is run fundamentally and accept the odd infraction for perhaps over stepping the mark but the vocal few aren't happy so now we have to change things? We aren't meant to discuss infractions but there is going to be a thread pointing everyones out? I agree with Withano, it is bound to cause trouble.

Yeh seems like that to me too

[Cherie]

Basically just admitting to group bullying an individual here cherie. Not the smartest move. Although. Yeh. Obviously. Just bit unusual to see somebody admit it. Fair play.

Can I have some of whatever you are smoking :pipe:

[Withano]

Can I have some of whatever you are smoking :pipe:

You took issue with the word mods being plural instead of singular, Cherie... baiting and bullying aside, what was you hoping to achieve there?

[Crimson Dynamo]

I've noticed that we've been veering close to an argument in the thread at points. I've left this thread unmoderated but if it turns into a screaming match it'll be closed and the discussion is over so let's keep it peaceful.

So essentially whenever it gets a little too close to home for comfort you pull the rip cord and all is well again?


semper eadem...

semper eadem

[Marsh.]

So essentially whenever it gets a little too close to home for comfort you pull the rip cord and all is well again?


semper eadem...

semper eadem

Close to home for comfort = personal insults?

[Cherie]

I had to google semper eadem as I am not old enough to have been taught in Latin :hee:

[Withano]

At least three people who are in favour of this idea have baited inside of this thread.

I think I found the issue. People aren't realising how often, or even when, they are doing it.

[chuff me dizzy]

Well, you’re not really the worst offender of this (top 10 perhaps, but there are far worse), people like to lay in to the mods quite regularly, and unfortunately, most of the others in that top 10 are quite friendly with each other, so I think it will just amount to group fights, which is just ugly.

I don't see how making mods’ decisions public will limit that... i mean, it definitely will not, I guess that’s not Dezzy’s point.

I think Dezzy wants to do it so that he can point out the facts when people inevitably kick up a fuss... I think he shouldn’t because it will encourage people to angrily kick up a fuss more regularly, making the entire excercise kinda counterintuitive.

I guess my issue is not quite believing the bit I’ve bolded. And if it is actually true of you, it would not be true of several others, who would misuse this new system as a way to vent anger at the mods and believe that they’re justified in doing it.

I have seen people complain about ONE mod and ONE mod only

[Maru]

Now this is a good example of baiting so everyone listen up. Telling someone that they are on your ignore list is considered baiting because it serves no purpose other than to draw a reaction from them. If someone is on your ignore list, continue to ignore them or choose to respond to their posts in a way that isn't baiting.

Telling someone that they are being ignored is baiting and will likely net you a few infractions if you do it enough.

Dezzy, this is my thought... I think what words we choose have a major impact. Many of your suggestive posts (like how we can make peace) can be easily misconstrued as instead confrontational by your heavy reliance of the royal /you/. If the comment is general, then "you" shouldn't be used so liberally as it can easily be misconstrued as personal, whereas our intentions come off much clearer when we use the words specific to that context... moreover, if the intent is to be personal or pointed, that would also be clearer as well with the correct usage of you... :laugh: Then they would know you are being serious and delivering a statement to their behavior.

An example of where this really doesn't work... if "you" is lumped with "sorry" or other words that are meant to have a conciliatory tone in the same sentence, it can give the impression of the opposite, rather than inferring the sense of open-ness or genuine thought that we mean to convey.

I used to have a major issue with this with my writing for a long time and changing this pushed my writing and I've been much more successful in conveying the right tone. I think it also forces me to the use more specific terms, sentence structures... so not only a little bit more flavor to writing, but those thoughts are made much clearer than a post of peppered yous that can misdirect or mask the intention of my words...

The other issue, I think... if someone makes a suggestion... don't always shoot someone down so quickly. I think that you have been much better with this in general and I feel you've made real efforts here. We are human beings and prone to bad days, so I always think why talk down to someone in that position and make them feel even worse. I'm sure it makes your biggest fans very happy when their specific people are knocked a peg... but obviously that makes enemies even quicker when we are in a power position if we pick on their friends... I have been through a bad witch hunt myself, with calls and threats to my home among other nasty things and have the emotional scars to prove it... so I understand how it feels to find yourself in this position constantly and not know what to do to change it... my only thought, I just think that we already have very little control over how people receive some of our thoughts... why make it even easier for them to distort our intentions and claim they can mind read. I don't think change your heart... but maybe think about if some of your wording can be bullet-proofed so that you yourself don't have to wonder if you made a mistake someplace... then their misreading is really a separate issue.

THE ROYAL WE: The first person plural used by a person with supreme authority, or, in modern times, sometimes to preserve anonymity. Supposedly, the first king to use ‘we’ in this way was Richard I in the Charter to Winchester (1190). “We are not amused” is a rebuke often attributed to straightlaced Queen Victoria. In the 20th century, magazines and newspapers frequently use the ‘editorial we’ to express an opinion that may in fact be shared by no one but the writer. Lisa Alther expressed an opinion about that in her novel ‘Kinflicks’ (1979): “She had learnt . . . that it is impossible to discuss issues civilly with a person who insisted on referring to himself as ‘we.’’ (Facts on File Dictionary of Clichés)
___________________

One of the reasons, I think, ‘you’ might not hear to much about the ‘royal you’ is that it is almost impossible to distinguish it from the personal you. If a commander says to a group of soldiers ‘YOU must go forth and give it your all,’ who can tell if he means the individual soldier, the singular ‘you,’ or the group plural ‘you.’ Maybe the southerners in the U.S. solved this problem with the invention of ‘you-all’ and some of my less literate N.Y.C. buddies with ‘youse.’ (<:)

Haha, "y'all" :love: Another word I used to overuse as well (in place of royal you)... but I've cut that fat as well...

[thesheriff443]

Dezzy you should not be modding a thread that you are posting in!
This is is whe the mod system loses credibility.

It's playing judge and jury, dezzy you are member first and a mod second, and this is what's causing so much grief.

Every one is sick of the double standards.

And mods talking about this thread in the towers where no members can see what's being said! And mods wonder why members are up in arms.

[chuff me dizzy]

Dezzy you should not be modding a thread that you are posting in!
This is is whe the mod system loses credibility.

It's playing judge and jury, dezzy you are member first and a mod second, and this is what's causing so much grief.

Every one is sick of the double standards.

And mods talking about this thread in the towers where no members can see what's being said! And mods wonder why members are up in arms.

:clap1::clap1: Excellent and ALL true ,time for a shake up in here

[Marsh.]

I have seen people complain about ONE mod and ONE mod only

Sounds like clique behaviour and bullying.

[Jordan.]

Dezzy you should not be modding a thread that you are posting in!
This is is whe the mod system loses credibility.

It's playing judge and jury, dezzy you are member first and a mod second, and this is what's causing so much grief.

Every one is sick of the double standards.

And mods talking about this thread in the towers where no members can see what's being said! And mods wonder why members are up in arms.

Dezzy stop posting in this thread, Dezzy stop posting in the mod section. Just log out tbh :fist:

[Greg!]

Sounds like clique behaviour and bullying.

It does a tad.

[Withano]

And mods talking about this thread in the towers where no members can see what's being said! And mods wonder why members are up in arms.

Members arent up in arms lol. There is a group of 10-15 who have got themselves a reputation of constantly complaining about the forum mods and the system... some continue and try to make out that it is a feeling across the board. This isn’t true.

The majority of the forum disagree with the very vocal minority, the minortiy are just unusually unaware of this.

[Marsh.]

And mods talking about this thread in the towers where no members can see what's being said! And mods wonder why members are up in arms.

So mods can't even talk... in the mod section?

I think some people need to step back and think.

[Daniel.]

Ban certain people and end this!

[Marsh.]

I think we need to ban all Private Messaging.

If we can't ALL see what EVERYONE is doing and saying at all times, there's a conspiracy.

[chuff me dizzy]

Ban certain people and end this!

Dead right ... Problem solved

[Marsh.]

Ban certain people and end this!

To give the truth and sam some company. :clap1: Daniel always thinking of the less fortunate. :clap1:

[Daniel.]

Dead right ... Problem solved

I don't think we have the same people in mind

[Maru]

Really...

[Mokka]

I think we need to ban all Private Messaging.

If we can't ALL see what EVERYONE is doing and saying at all times, there's a conspiracy.

Also... all off forum conversation should be banned. We've banned plug... how about kik and whatsapp? So many of our issues on here atrm from these

[chuff me dizzy]

I don't think we have the same people in mind

Im sure we dont,but my opinion of who should be permanently banned are as valid as yours, and shared by a lot of good members

[reece(:]

I don't think we have the same people in mind

:joker:

[Marsh.]

Also... all off forum conversation should be banned. We've banned plug... how about kik and whatsapp? So many of our issues on here atrm from these

https://media.giphy.com/media/XmhUvi3OXrhPa/giphy.gif

[Vicky.]

I also don't think this would change anything.

If it was in the public forum that Member A was banned because of a build up of infractions and it was seen that their last infraction was for "baiting" people are still going to have the conspiracy theories that it's come from mod bias who don't like the political view (or whatever) of that particular member so have made up an excuse to have them banned.

It really won't change anything.

This is pretty much where I am with this tbh

However there was talk of the appeals forum being brought back not too long ago, not sure whats going on with that. But, what dezzy said about it is true, members would have to stop just heading there with every single infraction, having proper screechy fits at us, and also the (almost constant from a couple of members) complaining that the decision made in the appeals forum was also biased (or that the staff members replying hated them so they would never get a fair result, etc) and that we never ever reverse anything so its pointless to have in the first place. Even since the appeals forum has been gone, I have reversed infractions, and a fair few staff members did in there too after receiving an actual valid appeal rather than a rant. I am sure many members can back me up on that too. I have reversed bans and infractions, edited posts rather than deleting (though some have a huge issue with that too and say they would rather just be deleted), undeleted threads, cleaned up the same thread 3+ times...and so on. I have had very long chats with old members and new ones about various issues on the forum, or issues they have with parts of the forum/members/mods. I don't *think* I have ever just ignored a PM. I do however, tend to ignore PMs that are literally just rants at me. No good will come of me replying to those kinds so whats the point? I know some will say i should reply anyway, but when you already know that the member will get more and more wound up and the insults and such will get worse, and you WILL end up getting mad in the end and possibly snapping...well... its pointless dancing that dance.

So yeah, I don't think this would be a good idea, I actually think it would actually make things worse, and even just a thread discussing infractions received will possibly make things worse as we already know how many members are willing to lie and twist the actual reasons for it. Unless it would be fine...for when inevitably someone heads there to claim they were banned for a fortnight for something seemingly tiny...staff have the right of reply to say, well no actually you already had 27 infraction points for X X and X and this was the straw that broke the camels back. Or something. Its so frustrating sometimes seeing people lie about their infractions and bans and knowing that most would find them unreasonable in the complaining, if they only knew the true/full story. Its as annoying to staff as it is members that infractions are not allowed to be discussed on the forum. however I totally understand why admin have it that way.

Also, we kind of have experience with a public infraction system, and it didn't go well back then, nevermind with how divided the forum is now. People would, and did...report then send messages near instantly asking why nothing had been done to the member, or why their post was deleted and no warning (it was warnings then, not infractions) given, and yes, people would see that some members were on their last warning (system used to be 2 warnings then third is a perma...and you think infractions are harsh today :D) and bait and bait and bait trying to get the member to say something wrong, then report.

I can just see how this would go down, and I think it would **** things up even more tbh. However as always, willing to be outvoted/overruled/whatver. and go with whatevers decided just my 2 cents :p



Edit - FFS I didn't know this was closed. Will probably delete this in a sec as otherwise it looks like I am just trying to get the last word or something, but I cannot bring myself to delete it quite yet given it took me like best part of an hour to write it whilst being used as a clmibing frame and having my hearing tested by screeches in my face...