Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
let sloth out?
Options
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
I've refrained from posting on this thread up until now, because it really isn't any of my business. I'm only doing so now because I'm bored and I seem to have a penchant for sticking my nose in where it isn't wanted.
Anyway, this has gone a bit out of hand. All of this originated from a forum request (which incidentally I thought was quite valid - even though I don't play SWG myself, and don't intend to for the forseeable future). I think that the admins resented the fact that it seemed that they were being taken for granted, the poster played the 'god given right' card, and so it spiralled to the present escalation.
Now, I don't think that anyone is going to shed a tear for the posters that have been banned (no offence to the posters in question), but it does create an interesting precedent. Anyone with a gripe with an admin will point towards this as an example of totalitarian rule. Of course, everyone will point out the obvious, that no apologies are being made about this, it is entirely an admin's right to determine who stays and who goes.
However, it has the potential to create needless strife, friction and conflict. I think what is really lacking is a little finesse in the fine art of politely telling people when they are wrong and when to shut up
. The posters in question also need to realise that this is not real life (TM), it is a privately owned and operated community site that nobody is being forced to read. The admins give their free time, don't get paid, and don't like it when people seem ungrateful for their efforts or take those efforts for granted.
DeVore, you might not like me saying this, but I distinctly remember you telling people that a judicious use of the 'ignore' feature is a therapeutic way of getting rid of the annoying drone of a particular poster that ires you. Might I suggest that you take this piece of advice? Now, I accept that you might not want to do this in case that poster does something completely out of line - warranting a ban. However, an alternative solution would be to simply peruse that persons post i.e give it a quick glance, but pay it no real heed or attention. Doesn't always work - but worth a shot.0 -
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
I did all of the banning in this incident so I think I have more to explain than DeVore does.Originally posted by swiss
Anyway, this has gone a bit out of hand. All of this originated from a forum request (which incidentally I thought was quite valid - even though I don't play SWG myself, and don't intend to for the forseeable future).
SWG is a valid suggestion. If anyone with a bit of patience who isn't out to wind us up wants to raise it again then feel free.
I can't argue with the 'out of hand' comment for obvious reasons.I think that the admins resented the fact that it seemed that they were being taken for granted, the poster played the 'god given right' card, and so it spiralled to the present escalation.
A certain amount of that. A certain amount of Sloth/DS (apparently the same person, I'm not sure though) posting in a manner designed to get up our noses. A certain amount of previous crap with both those accounts (in the case of Detonated Sauce and his signature it was the day of that thread. It might be a small thing, but if I admin something I don't expect a poke in the eye I expect someone to talk to me if they have a problem). A certain amount of not buggering off and letting us calm down when we suggested that perhaps it might be a good idea to bugger off and let us calm down.
I guess you can't take that thread on it's own. I referred to 'stupid insults' on that thread for example that were made elsewhere, but I read a lot of boards, I notice, I see when mods are complaining and this stuff gets noted at the back of my mind. It will determine whether I treat someone as a newbie or a muppet.
You'll not that I didn't ban 'urban ninja' (although Vexorg did
) and I didn't ban MrNuked (who since came back and apologised) despite the abuse they handed out. I've taken plenty of crap on the Security forum without taking any action.
All I'm saying is that there's evidence to support the idea that I'm lenient or that I'm overly harsh. In reality I'm probably usually lenient, and sometimes a complete nazi. I suppose people should try not to pick a bad day to act the muppet.Now, I don't think that anyone is going to shed a tear for the posters that have been banned (no offence to the posters in question), but it does create an interesting precedent. Anyone with a gripe with an admin will point towards this as an example of totalitarian rule. Of course, everyone will point out the obvious, that no apologies are being made about this, it is entirely an admin's right to determine who stays and who goes.
Well, the important point is that nobody (or at least very few) is shedding a tear for those posters. I think that creating the Prison forum represents us throwing a bone to Banned users to create some sort of peace with us and we just crap crap crap and more crap.
And yes, it is entirely within our right to do that, and yes, people can point to this as some sort of precedent, but we're not running a court of law, or claiming to be impartial or even infallible. We're running a website, which supports a community, and I do it because it's cool. If the community thinks I'm a complete prick and rises up against us or they all **** off to altboards.ie or whatever then that's gone, and I sincerely hope that never happens. I don't think that's happening though, and I think we'd know pretty quickly if it was.
Forget about any principles or precedents or perceptions. What do you think about this episode?DeVore, you might not like me saying this, but I distinctly remember you telling people that a judicious use of the 'ignore' feature is a therapeutic way of getting rid of the annoying drone of a particular poster that ires you.
I would dearly love to put some posters on ignore. That doesn't mean I want to ban them though (although I might ban some of them from one or two individual forums), it just means that I find them immensely irritating. It's quite possible to irritate the **** out of me without it being a bannable offence. There's plenty of examples of exchanges I've had with different posters on these boards that hasn't resulted in banning, because it's just a difference of opinion. PM me if you want examples (some of the examples that come to mind are mods on boards actually).
However, I don't think that admins should use the ignore feature. We are supposed to be able to see all sides of a dispute, view a signature (another thing I'd dearly love not to have to view) etc etc etc.Originally posted by DeVore
In this case I gave someone just too much respect and time. Ecksor had the right idea, ban and be done with it.
Ah now, I'm the lenient one really (on average). Also, if I was so determined to ban and be done with it I wouldn't have come up with the Prison forum ...0 -
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
Advertisement