Moderator issues.

s9841121

Hello,

I have an issue with a boards.ie moderator, namely aka "Lemming".

See thread: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2054901917

Some background:

I rarely post on boards.ie - i may have read the rules at some point years ago but really cant remember. So a chap pm'd me and asked some questions, which i answered. We then agreed a sale. I did not realise this was against the rules. So, no problem, i totally agree i was utterly in the wrong.

However. I was then banned without warning for 2 weeks. The moderator in question did not so much as warn me.

My questions are:

Would it not have been wiser to simply ask me to post the pm's on the forum? This would have educated me as to the problem and saved any hassle. It would also have kept 2 of your users a *lot* happier. (the buyer was banned too).

It seems an extremely bad decision to have what appears to be some power tripping student "Well guess what ... I AM a moderator." come along and ban 2 users for 2 weeks, when it would have taken the very same amount of effort to simply send me a pm and explain what i did wrong. i could have rectified the situation in seconds.

Now im sure ye are all good buddies in there, so i doubt this suggestion is going to be listened to. But please, put in some mature, considerate moderators. Slapping a ban on every little violation is not a moderators job (and ive been a moderator on multiple large sites). *Resolving* situations with maturity and keeping your users happy should be a moderators main aim. A ban is a very last resort.

Please, no replies of "you should have read the rules, period" etc. I presume you are all old and wise enough in there to realise that probably a large % of your users dont read them, and that some of yer older users may forget :-)

Thanks for your time.

Dont be at yourself

The onus is on the user to read the charter before posting, and the responsibility is on the moderator to make sure the charter is enforced. It is not the moderator's responsibility to hold each user's hand and go through the rules with them. On a busy forum, such as Lemming's, you just would not have the time.

Lemming was perhaps overly strict, but then it is the For Sale board, and you really do have to be strict if people are disregarding the rules, as at the end of the day, those rules are in place to stop people getting burned with dodgy dealings.

secret_squirrel

You posted on FS without reading the charter and somehow its all the mods fault you got banned?

You realise how many threads have to be dealt with on FS?

There's plenty of good reasons for zero tolerance on FS, I suggest you read the charter when your ban is up.

Tough luck til then. Put it down as a learning experience.

Open and shut case imo.

Although I would suggest that Chitywest should have got the worst of the ban due to the abusive nature of some of his post.

s9841121

well, ive just been taking a further browse (i almost never use boards.ie).

It seems there has been a lot of debate on this.

As for the moderators holding the users hands, why do they need to hold our hands when we try to *buy* something? Because this is essentially what this no pm business is doing.

The holding hands comment does not hold up either - it would have taken the very same amount of effort to tell me to post up the pm's. and kept some users a lot happier. If it takes the same effort, why take the option he took?

Caveat emptor.

Change the rulebook to state "Let the buyer beware. If you get ripped off, do *not* come crying to boards.ie staff. Buying here is entirely at your own risk"

There are more decent people than rip-off merchants. There is hardly a point in putting us all through these silly hoops to protect the odd silly fool who buys something for twice as much as he should. The buyer can always post publicly on the thread and state what he has offered. If people see a bad deal, they will no doubt make their opinions heard.

Karoma

s9841121 wrote:

Caveat emptor.

Change the rulebook to state "Let the buyer beware. If you get ripped off, do *not* come crying to boards.ie staff. Buying here is entirely at your own risk"

This element exists no matter what rules are enforced.

As for paying too much for something - this happens anyway with the "no thread-spoiling" rule in place.

There are more decent people than rip-off merchants. There is hardly a point in putting us all through these silly hoops to protect the odd silly fool who buys something for twice as much as he should.

I think that is the point.
The forum exists primarily to allow Boards.ie members to sell and trade things. You said yourself that you rarely use Boards.ie. Dropping the rule(s) would create another version of the Broken & stolen, TBH - with random idiots signing up, refusing to trade with any decency and then disappearing again. In such cases, what does it matter if the buyer publicly complains about the seller!? And, even if the user is a long-term member: at the end of the day, buyers got stung unneccessarily.

secret_squirrel

s9841121 wrote:

Change the rulebook to state "Let the buyer beware. If you get ripped off, do *not* come crying to boards.ie staff. Buying here is entirely at your own risk"

Why? By your own admission you wouldnt read it anyway.

s9841121

Karoma wrote:

I think that is the point.
The forum exists primarily to allow Boards.ie members to sell and trade things. You said yourself that you rarely use Boards.ie. Dropping the rule(s) would create another version of the Broken & stolen, TBH - with random idiots signing up, refusing to trade with any decency and then disappearing again. In such cases, what does it matter if the buyer publicly complains about the seller!? And, even if the user is a long-term member: at the end of the day, buyers got stung unneccessarily.

are you speaking from experience here, or is this what you think would happen?

s9841121

For the person called "secret squirrel", where did you make that deduction from? When Esel pointed out on that posting that rules were broken i had a look straight away, before i even had realised i was barred. Next thing i scroll further down in the original tab and boom, i am barred. Nice.

Karoma

s9841121 wrote:

are you speaking from experience here, or is this what you think would happen?

Experience, I've seen a few bad deals. It's more a case of what would happen. General (non-Boards.ie) experience again would dictate that things would really go downhill - just look at the Buy & Sell. The no PM rule makes perfect sense as it allows people to gauge properly what a buy/seller is like to deal with, and makes it easier for mods to spot a problem both before it's reported and after. "After", as it saves the need for both parties to send on a lot of PM's to a mod who then has to try piece together what happened (And that's assuming that both parties are still even around!)

RuggieBear

Have to admit i'm not a huge fan of caveat emptor. Naive as it sounds i do consider boards a community where people should try to look out for one another and do our best to make sure people are not ripped off.



edit: I more or less agree with Karoma's summation.

s9841121

Karoma wrote:

The no PM rule makes perfect sense as it allows people to gauge properly what a buy/seller is like to deal with, and makes it easier for mods to spot a problem both before it's reported and after. "After", as it saves the need for both parties to send on a lot of PM's to a mod who then has to try piece together what happened (And that's assuming that both parties are still even around!)

"After" would not be required if caveat emptor was in the rulebook.

Karoma

RuggieBear wrote:

...i do consider boards a community where people should try to look out for one another and do our best to make sure people are not ripped off.

You see s9841121, Boards.ie primary focus(Probably not the best word,but the best I can think of for now) is that of a community. Not merely another trading place. As such, the primary concern to protect and help each member of the community. A community that spends its time ripping each other off in the FS section, is not a community that will last.


I can appreciate that you feel the mod's decision was harsh. But after so much time and so many threads as well as trying to balance spending their time being a mod + living their own life I'm sure that you can appreciate why a mod wouldn't spend too much time pussyfooting around any breach of the charter.

The zero tolerance policy protects both buyer and seller,and the community, not to mention the sanity of the mod's. (Ahem.)

Hagar

Caveat Emptor to me comes under the heading of common sense.
There is no need to state the obvious.
As Ruggie said this is a community, we protect ourselves by protecting each other.
If the mods stop me being ripped off they stop you being ripped off.
They are doing an excellent job, let them get on with it.

s9841121

The more i read the more I see this has been flogged to death over and over.

I find it a silly, counter-intuitive rule. Sure, no weapons or illegal stuff, but pm'ing seems a natural thing to do when trying to agree a buy/sale with somebody. I do not believe it is even boards.ie's staff business to interfere with sales between people.

In any case I am far from happy with manner of dealing with this. I feel the initial ban and manner of dealing with it was highly inappropriate of a moderator. I told him I would apologise and post up the pm's if he lifted my ban, but to no avail. So far it has certainly wasted more time than any reasonable solution would have taken.

An online "community" is a very false notion. Think about it.

In any case, doesnt the rule of having to post the price (a very sensible rule) with every item for sale, in some senses pre-empt this no-pm rule to "protect people" ? Surely if somebody posts a crazy price he will get blasted on the forum anyway, so nobody will buy until she/he lowers the price.

RuggieBear

s9841121 wrote:

I do not believe it is even boards.ie's staff business to interfere with sales between people.

Oh but it is.
They are providing you a forum, on their private website,to sell some stuff. It is very much their business whether or not they allow you to use their facilities. If you want to use this website follow their rules. You don't want to follow the rules find somewhere else to sell/buy stuff.

Hagar

@ s9841121 I disagree. Many years ago before I was Hagar I posted on boards under another "persona", and to be honest even though I had a fair few posts I didn't really understand how things worked. I messed up a sale. The truth was I advertised a few items at a time, a bit of a clearout, and I got overwhelmed by the numerous responses to the different items. To try and get some breathing space I posted that I had sold many of the items by PM. Instant ban. No PM. Nothing. Exactly what I deserved, on the face of it at least. I PMed the all the MODs in FS and told them honestly what had happened and made a sincere apology for my stupidity. Result, the ban was lifted immediately and I learned a lesson as did everone else on the thread because I publically explained and apologised to all concerned. The rules are there for a reason. The mods are fair and decent. If you fuck up, be man enough to admit it and get on with it. There is nobody here out to get you or anyone else for that matter.
Take the medicine, it won't kill you, it might even make you better.

Dont be at yourself

I find it a silly, counter-intuitive rule. Sure, no weapons or illegal stuff, but pm'ing seems a natural thing to do when trying to agree a buy/sale with somebody. I do not believe it is even boards.ie's staff business to interfere with sales between people.

Please explain how it is silly and counter-intuitive to have all dealings in the thread. I can't actually think of a single advantage of dealing by PM. When posting in the thread, all interested parties are aware of what stage the dealing is at, the current highest price, the level of interest etc, etc. PMing the buyer/seller before a deal has been agreed is what's counter-intuitive, if you ask me.

But sure, have a moan at the mods because you got banned because you didn't read or follow the rules. I notice how the only people who complain about mods are the ones who've been admonished for breaking the rules (that are, after all, in place to protect everyone).

s9841121

Hagar wrote:

@ s9841121 I disagree. Many years ago before I was Hagar I posted on boards under another "persona", and to be honest even though I had a fair few posts I didn't really understand how things worked. I messed up a sale. The truth was I advertised a few items at a time, a bit of a clearout, and I got overwhelmed by the numerous responses to the different items. To try and get some breathing space I posted that I had sold many of the items by PM. Instant ban. No PM. Nothing. Exactly what I deserved, on the face of it at least. I PMed the all the MODs in FS and told them honestly what had happened and made a sincere apology for my stupidity. Result, the ban was lifted immediately and I learned a lesson as did everone else on the thread because I publically explained and apologised to all concerned. The rules are there for a reason. The mods are fair and decent. If you fuck up, be man enough to admit it and get on with it. There is nobody here out to get you or anyone else for that matter.
Take the medicine, it won't kill you, it might even make you better.

i already admitted that, please read my post before you lecture: "So, no problem, i totally agree i was utterly in the wrong."

I am complaining about the method i was banned in. Any mod that, with *the same amount of effort* could keep 2 users happy and sort an issue but instead slaps a ban is a *bad" moderator. I dont see how *anybody* could disagree with that.

All your arguments are aimed on a situation that never happened, ie: that i traded publicly and abided by the rules. The fact is the mistake was *already made*.

I am still interested in what people think about this:

Doesnt the rule of having to post the price (a very sensible rule) with every item for sale, in some senses pre-empt this no-pm rule to "protect people" ? Surely if somebody posts a crazy price he will get blasted on the forum anyway, so nobody will buy until she/he lowers the price.

Karoma

Doesnt the rule of having to post the price (a very sensible rule) with every item for sale, in some senses pre-empt this no-pm rule to "protect people" ? Surely if somebody posts a crazy price he will get blasted on the forum anyway, so nobody will buy until she/he lowers the price.

Not when the other rule of "no thread spoiling" is in place too. That's in place to prevent a heated ten page bargaining/bitching session. If dealing is done via PM - then what's to stop a seller claiming that they got a higher offer ro drum up the price? If somebody is asking for far too much money - the solution presents itself - offer a genuine and reasonable amount, or ignore the seller.
The charter is the best all-round solution. Unless of course you have a better solution? So far, you're opting for anarchy rather than caveat emptor.

FranknFurter

TBH, if you don't like the rules then sell on Buy & Sell or e-bay etc.
The FS (etc) forums are only a small part of what are 98% discussion boards, and frankly I'm glad to have them there at all.

There is no point in thrashing any particular mod for enforcing a rule, whether he / she could have been more "polite" about it, probably, but it would end up with every mod having to spend much more of their (unpaid) time than is needed or should be expected.

b

s9841121

Karoma wrote:

Not when the other rule of "no thread spoiling" is in place too. That's in place to prevent a heated ten page bargaining/bitching session. If dealing is done via PM - then what's to stop a seller claiming that they got a higher offer ro drum up the price? If somebody is asking for far too much money - the solution presents itself - offer a genuine and reasonable amount, or ignore the seller.
The charter is the best all-round solution. Unless of course you have a better solution? So far, you're opting for anarchy rather than caveat emptor.

Thats not thread spoiling, according to the charter, which seems to make a great case for let the buyer beware.

"It is up to the buyer to find that out. Is is a buyers market after all. Genuine comments are welcomed if someone is really trying to rip someone off. We personally think let the buyer beware. You have net access, we have Elara and Komplett to name but a few low cost suppliers, a bit of research never hurts. If you are interested and want to haggle... post a link to the relevant price... if someone is way off the mark with an asking and we mean way off.. post a link to the current available price (like for like vat and postage must be commented on). "

Im not proposing anarchy at all. Just a more reasonable approach. I dont want to be treated like an idiot if i am buying something, I dont want to be treated like a criminal if i am selling something.

Hagar

s9841121 wrote:

i already admitted that, please read my post before you lecture: "So, no problem, i totally agree i was utterly in the wrong."

I am complaining about the method i was banned in. Any mod that, with *the same amount of effort* could keep 2 users happy and sort an issue but instead slaps a ban is a *bad" moderator. I dont see how *anybody* could disagree with that.

All your arguments are aimed on a situation that never happened, ie: that i traded publicly and abided by the rules. The fact is the mistake was *already made*.

I wasn't lecturing, I'm not big on giving or taking lectures. I did read you post, I was empathising with you, but that seems to have gone over your head. I'll withdraw from the thread now and you can sit out you ban, because nothing you have said so far is going to have it lifted. Getting the hump with the moderator is dumb. I repeat that that as you seem to be a bit loathe to accept it, dumb. No offence intended.

Dont be at yourself

I am complaining about the method i was banned in. Any mod that, with *the same amount of effort* could keep 2 users happy and sort an issue but instead slaps a ban is a *bad" moderator. I dont see how *anybody* could disagree with that.

You are also complaining about the existance of the rule in general, but we'll take it one step at a time.

So, you're complained for being banned for breaking the rules. You feel that instead of being banned for breaking the rules, the rules should have been explained to you personally by the moderator (despite a big READ THIS!! CHARTER!! at the top of every forum) and allowed to continue freely. If every moderator took this position for cases where rules were being ignored, what would happen? Is the moderator just to automatically assume that they haven't read the rules, explain them to them and give them another opportunity to break them? Why?

As for your point about posting a price pre-empting the no-pm rule for protecting people - I have no idea what you're talking about. The No PM rule is in place for many reasons. It ensures that all dealings are above board and honest - that the seller cant artificially bump up the bidding by claiming he has received higher bids than he actually has. It ensures that, if there is a problem with the deal, the moderator has all the evidence in front of him in a thread and is not relying on the word of one party. It stops traders, who might use a thread selling one particular product to sell to everybody who PMs him the asking price.

If all dealings were done by PM, you'd have more reason to complain if you ended up buying something from a seller who had artificially bumped up the price, or if you didn't receive payment for something you sold and moderators were unable to do anything due to all dealings being through PM. The rules are there to protect against these situations, and if that means that you have to read the rules or accept the consequences, well, boo-hoo.

s9841121

Hagar wrote:

I wasn't lecturing, I'm not big on giving or taking lectures. I did read you post, I was empathising with you, but that seems to have gone over your head. I'll withdraw from the thread now and you can sit out you ban, because nothing you have said so far is going to have it lifted. Getting the hump with the moderator is dumb. I repeat that that as you seem to be a bit loathe to accept it, dumb. No offence intended.

I have given up on getting it lifted a long time ago. At this point its clear that is not going to happen.

However, i think the moderator was very wrong to deal with it as he did. Banning users when the same amount of effort could have kept them happy and resolved a situation is a *bad* decision. Any takers?

Carrying on, the no-pm rule seems very silly when the charter makes a great case for let the buyer beware and there is also a great level of protection in having to post the prices.

The charter treats buyers like idiots and sellers like criminals, thats just how it is.

2 dumb comments werent typed accidentally, offence was clearly meant. It doesnt bother me though, so np.

Beruthiel

s9841121 wrote:

I am complaining about the method i was banned in. Any mod that, with *the same amount of effort* could keep 2 users happy and sort an issue but instead slaps a ban is a *bad" moderator..

Moderators are not here to hold users hands.
The charter is there to guide you through the rules, it is your problem if you do not take the time to read and understand them.
I happen to know the amount of work that goes into moderating that forum and it's a lot.
Lemming happens to have a life and he puts a lot of his spare time into the smooth running of that forum.
You expect him to spend more time on it but you yourself couldn't take the time to learn the rules.

Macker

s9841121 wrote:

However, i think the moderator was very wrong to deal with it as he did. Banning users when the same amount of effort could have kept them happy and resolved a situation is a *bad* decision.

Congrats to lemming ,it's nice to know the mods spot things like this and deal with it .

secret_squirrel

Macker wrote:

Congrats to lemming ,it's nice to know the mods spot things like this and deal with it .

Which bridge do you live under?

Karl Hungus

Karoma

Mneh. I got bored. I've put as much time and effort into reading your last post(s) as you have mine. It took a ban to get you to read the rules. You contribute little else to the forum and to the site in general. If you don't like it,and have nothing else to add or improve on the current rules - go sell your stuff elsewhere. (If you decide you want to cwy 'cause the Internet man was meannnn - please, create another Feedback thread to be ignored.)

Gordon

s9841121, this is not Amazon, we don't make any money from it.

Also, I don't like the way you are bringing up the moderator's name those two times, do you want me to post up your email address? ivo?

Hagar

s9841121 wrote:

2 dumb comments werent typed accidentally, offence was clearly meant. It doesnt bother me though, so np.

I said I would withdraw from this thread but you seem to have invited me back

I clearly said that the concept of getting the hump with a moderator was dumb. I never ever said that you were dumb. I am not in the habit of being abusive. 9 out of your momentuous 24 postcount have been on this thread, whining all the way. I hope we will not be subjected to too much more of this. All I can say is