Moderator bullying on weather forums..

BigCon

BigCon wrote:

I don't know the content of his abusive pm's, but I would guess they’re not too bad, considering how most of his posts are treated by some of the folks on the weather forum.

Well I laughed at them as usual.

Bottom line is I think he shouldn't have been banned as I like reading his take on upcoming events and they always have some basis in fact...

Thats an opinion.
I'd be of the view that a moderator who merges posts or changes thread titles so as to conform with the boards charter is taking the right decision.
Someone who has a hissy fit and undoes the changes and complains in thread is taking the wrong one.

The Hill Billy

The only one having a hissy fit in that thread was Snowbie.

A petulant & undeserved banning.

6th

Tristrame wrote:

so as to conform with the boards charter is taking the right decision.

So it was against the charter because it was considered to be a sensationalist and extreme opinion? But doesnt it look like he was kinda right?

So discussing extreme possibilities is not allowed on the weather forum?

6th

6th wrote:

So it was against the charter because it was considered to be a sensationalist and extreme opinion? But doesnt it look like he was kinda right?

Have you read the charter at all yet 6th? I know last night was probably your first ever post in there Heres the relevant bit for the avoidance of all doubt...

New threads on this subject may only be created for specefic Winter weather events when they have happened and not ahead of when anyone thinks they are going to happen.
This rule will also apply to other seasons and threads may be started at the appropriate time for the forecasting of events then.
Similarally for other seasons,specefic weather events eg thunderstorms, heatwave etc can have their own thread only as they happen and not before.

From here

So discussing extreme possibilities is not allowed on the weather forum?

It is in a thread that discusses overall winter or autumn weather.
WC does know this ,after all he was moderated on it several times by me.

He was just trying it on with the new mod and the new mod said no and rightly so.

FlutterinBantam

I enjoy the weather forum and respectfully suggest we leave moderating to the moderators.
If there are too many self appointed watchdogs then the system will become a shambles.

6th

I've read the charter and tbh i think its a bit choking.

Banning of WC will only harm the forum, it wont be as interesting to read without him.

My final thoughts on the matter, the charter needs to be reworked by a mod who is actually passionate about the subject.

Hobbes

6th wrote:

wait ... who are the chess geeks?

Who knows!

All I know is after reading this post I have no clue what is going on but I do know it would kick the ass out of the Exchange Variation of the Queen's Gambit Declined or the Falkbeer Countergambit. :eek:

Does no else see the threat?! :eek:

Although it could be worse, Gordon could come and blow you.

6th

6th wrote:

My final thoughts on the matter, the charter needs to be reworked by a mod who is actually passionate about the subject.

So snowbie,myself and dapperGent arent fit to moderate or agree a charter and apparently arent passionate about the subject...
:rolleyes:

6th I've been around long enough to know what you're at here.
Boredom shouldnt be the reason to take up a case.

The case should hold some water in the first place.

RE*AC*TOR

Seems to me that the mods do have a personal issue with WC. It seems they know what buttons to push - and are all too happy to push them.

Also I read the "Charter" - could it be edited down to a single post with bullet points? Its like reading a normal charter, except translated twice through Babelfish.

6th

I didnt say you guys werent fit to mod, i just said the charter should be reworked. It needs to allow for posters who are passionate about the subject. WC was not setting out to cause a fight but its like hes being told "careful now only post the facts, dont go being an individual and have an opinion on what could happen".

I'm not here cos I'm bored, I'm here because a poster has been unfairly treated. Have a look at my form or ask anyone - i'm usually standing up for the mods but in this case its been handled very badly.

6th

I am not the only one who thinks this ban was harsh and unfair. I'm also not the only one who thinks WC is a great poster in the forum.

Shuld I start a poll and see what people think?

DapperGent

You can if you want.
But I'll introduce some more facts.
This is a quote from one of WC's threads last year that was recycled
And note he didnt come here to complain about the recycling,yes we had to dump a whole thread...

Title of the thread was
Severe Weather - Blizzards and Gusts to 85mph
In reply to WC's warning that everyone in the East should stay indoors,DapperGent who is a meterologist in the met, posted this

DapperGent wrote:

This sort of advice is totally unnecessary. It's overblown sensationalism. It's going to be very windy early on. That's it folks, windy. Very windy. With likelihood of wintry stuff being confined to high ground. Stay indoors if you don't like high winds.

You can't seem to restrain yourself from predicting worst case scenarios and overblowing every single chance of severe weather. You seem unable or unwilling to include appropriate caveats in your forecasts. My patience is wearing thin.

where it got funny was when Mothman who lives on the East coast got worried and DapperGent posted the following

DapperGent wrote:

Nail up some storm shutters and hide in the basement with your family. Better bring the dog in too. God willing you'll make it through the night. I'll be praying for you.

Hopefully the blizzards won't have snowed you in by tomorrow. Maybe go to the supermarket and stock up on canned food just in case.

Needless to say the event like many didnt happen in anything near the severeness wc was posting on.
The thread was moved [url=http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=225587[/url] here [/url] [viewable to admins]

Now you as a regular weather poster (not) can jump on your hobby horse and try to defend the like of that,but I'll come right back at you and tell you,that you are wrong and I'll also tell you that the charter is there to prevent a reoccurance of the likes of that.

Talliesin

6th wrote:

Abusive pms? ... take it to the mod forum and i'm sure a permanent site ban will follow. Abuse isnt tolerated on Boards.

I'll siteban in a heartbeat for threatening PMs. I'll even lean quite heavily towards taking veiled threats as threats.

However for abuse mods warn and/or ban from specific forum.

If one receives abusive, but not threatening PMs, the best thing to do is ignore the user.

If one receives abusive, but not threatening PMs, in response to a moderation action the best thing to do is to ban them, or increase their ban. If they persist in being abusive, perm-ban and then ignore.

So, no, abusive PMs won't result in a siteban as you say. What's more responding to an abusive PM a mod receives with an extension of a ban has been standard practice since the early days.

Someone was flooding a forum with a marginal viewpoint. The moderator allowed that marginal viewpoint through, but moved all of those posts into a single thread. That's pretty good modding IMO; keeping the balance of the forum mainstream without completely blocking those views that are outside of that mainstream is a difficult balancing act, and this was a good tact to take.

If someone objected to that decision they could have complained about that before things went the way they did, but that didn't happen.

BigCon

He was the first to predict snow on Christmas day 2005. I rest my case.

Amz

Jesus christ, I could say "There's going to be snow this Christmas day" and I have a 50/50 chance of being right.

6th

Amz wrote:

Jesus christ, I could say "There's going to be snow this Christmas day" and I have a 50/50 chance of being right.

Wow, mate you should stay away from the weather forum and any forum involving percentages.

Amz

Sorry love, are you suggesting I pursue more accurate passtimes such as ghostbusting?

6th

so when betting on a football match or a fight its always 50/50? to the gambling forum with you





(you know i'm being playful, right?)

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

6th

Amz wrote:

Sorry love, are you suggesting I pursue more accurate passtimes such as ghostbusting?

Yeah i would have edited that post too

oh and i love when people call me "love", makes me feel all girly.

Amz

Well big girl's blouse is probably more accurate.

6th

Amz wrote:

Well big girl's blouse is probably more accurate.

PERSONAL ABUSE! PERSONAL ABUSE ......... kidding

Gordon

Jesus 6th, shut up.

Villain

WC might get a little excited and look at the worst case scenario a little too often, but his knowledge is excellent and he is very young so I'm sure with more experience he use that knowledge in a more relaxed way.

During the winter I post a lot on the weather forum but I normally post questions or reports of what is currently happening as I don't have a great knowledge of reading the charts, there is only a few members who reply to those question and WC is one.

Surely a compromise can be met?

delly

Amz wrote:

Sorry love, are you suggesting I pursue more accurate passtimes such as ghostbusting?

Zing!

Hobbes

6th wrote:

Wow, mate you should stay away from the weather forum and any forum involving percentages.

Everything eventually boils down to 50/50 it will happen or it won't.

Hobart

I don't think I've ever posted on the weather forum, and I have not read many posts on it, but I do see WC's nic pop up on a regular basis on the front page.

Maybe he talks sh1te, maybe not. I personally find that most "forecasters" could not tell you if it was going to be cold or warm tomorrow, never mind the complications of things like rain, snow,etc....

Maybe the guy is just a 17yo going on like a 17yo. There does appear to be a undercurrent to try and wind up the guy to a certain extent by people who should know better. I remember we had an ignore function installed (if memeory serves me right at my suggestion ) that would cope with 90% of the problem here.

From what I can see most people think he is wildly inaccurate, while others, who don't really comment on his forecasting ability, find the guys posts informative and enjoyable.

I would have also thought that the science of meteorology involves a certain amount of guesswork. So his guesswork seems to be a bit more inaccuarte than others...meh tbh. The charter has been changed to try and circumvent his inaccuracies. Hasn't really worked, has it? Ignore function tbh.

As for the charter:

Charter wrote:

Please post any views on winter weather forecasts in relevant threads.
New threads on this subject may only be created for specefic Winter weather events when they have happened and not ahead of when anyone thinks they are going to happen.

The purpose of this is to keep the forecast of events that may or may not happen separate from the reporting of events that are actually happening.
This is to prevent clutter and to treat events like snow storms as they happen as a "news" event" with separate threads of their own.

This rule will also apply to other seasons and threads may be started at the appropriate time for the forecasting of events then.
Similarally for other seasons,specefic weather events eg thunderstorms, heatwave etc can have their own thread only as they happen and not before.

That's what you linked too Con. Tbh I don't think Tom Hanks, Ian McKellen and Audrey Tautou armed with a cryptex would be able to unravel that mess. For example, these lines:
Please post any views on winter weather forecasts in relevant threads.
New threads on this subject may only be created for specefic Winter weather events when they have happened and not ahead of when anyone thinks they are going to happen.

You talk about the posting of forecasts being in relevant treads and yet you deem it necessary to say that new threads can only be created for events that have happened??? How is that forecasting (I know it makes the job easier), but still.

I've seen the thread(s) in Mod forum, this would also lead me to believe that the guy is being targetted, and unfairly.

Endurance Man

I love the way all the mods on boards seem to take each others side regardless of the situation , i see hobart is straying from the flock.

DapperGent

Taken in isolation this ban can be seen as being unfair. However put simply there are two things that Weathercheck has been banned for in the past and warned about for the future:

1. Taking the worst case scenario of a set of possibilities and presenting in as extremely likely or certain. Predicting bad or dangerous weather without any proviso as to it either not being so bad or for that matter not occuring at all.

2. Throwing a hissy fit when he gets moderated.

Here Weathercheck presented the worst case scenario without much in the way of alluding to it's uncertainty and then threw a hissy fit at a thread merge with the less sensational thread title being used along with changing the thread title himself.

This comes after being given so much leeway and second chances by myself and Earthman/Tristrame in the past due to how young he was and his enthusiasm. It was made absolutely clear to him that he was on his last chance, I think we've been very fair to him.

Perhaps all the leeway he's been given is some sort of subtle bullying plan? :rolleyes:

BigCon

Amz wrote:

Jesus christ, I could say "There's going to be snow this Christmas day" and I have a 50/50 chance of being right.

No you don't, it's about a 1 in 20 year event...