Unjust Ban from Politics Forum

redspider

(Not sure if this should go in Feedback or here in Help Desk).

I feel that I have been banned unjustly from the politics forum by Oscarbravo. Your thoughts please ...

...[content snipped]...

I've asked the other Politics mods for their opinions, Moriarty, PSI, sceptre and Scraggs. PSI has come back and says he fully supports oscarBravo.

I am interested in your thoughts on this issue.

Thanks,

Redspider

Beruthiel

oscarBravo banned you, PSI agreed.
My thoughts would be, the ban stands.

Ruu_Old

It is also considered very rude and bad form to post private messages without the users permission. That aside, the ban stands in my opinion

hullaballoo

Ok, just to clear up a few aspects that have been raised here:

• Where libel is alleged, the courts look at the comments that are alleged to be offending in the context of the entire article [I can only assume that in this context, it would relate to the entire thread, but that is not well-founded for want of case law].
• In relation to your comments, then, even confining the analysis to your post alone, it's quite clear what you are alleging.
• You cannot, after the event, try to separate the innuendo that exists given that the test that the courts use is that of the reasonable man.
• Thus, the standard is whether a right-minded person would read the innuendo into your comments. I think it's clear that since most of us have already concluded in our own minds what you were insinuating.
• As a result of the above, it seems that the legal analysis in relation to your comments is clear and I have deleted the re-publication of what you said in the beginning. I don't expect to see it anywhere on the site again.

In addition to the above, and in relation to the ban that you have questioned; my understanding is that the moderators' interpretation of offending material is what counts with regard to decisions. If their interpretation is outlandish, or clearly wrong, then clearly that is reviewable by SMods and/or Administrators. However, in the present case, I don't see that the interpretation or the ban in question are outlandish and I think the logic has been consistently applied in relation to the rule against accusations in this context.

I hope this clears up some of the issues or confusion that have arisen here, redspider.

Edit: Additionally, it's not very polite to post in public messages that are received in PM without first clearing it with the sender. Sure, there's nothing officially wrong with it, but it's unlikely to help your case when you're appealing to the goodwill of people to assist your case or to reconsider decisions that they have previously made against your interests.

redspider

hullaballú wrote: »

Ok, just to clear up a few aspects that have been raised here:

• Where libel is alleged, the courts look at the comments that are alleged to be offending in the context of the entire article [I can only assume that in this context, it would relate to the entire thread, but that is not well-founded for want of case law].
• In relation to your comments, then, even confining the analysis to your post alone, it's quite clear what you are alleging.
• You cannot, after the event, try to separate the innuendo that exists given that the test that the courts use is that of the reasonable man.
• Thus, the standard is whether a right-minded person would read the innuendo into your comments. I think it's clear that since most of us have already concluded in our own minds what you were insinuating.
• As a result of the above, it seems that the legal analysis in relation to your comments is clear and I have deleted the re-publication of what you said in the beginning. I don't expect to see it anywhere on the site again.

If the Mods or a 'reasonable man' or right-minded person interprets the original post as having offending innuendo, then fine, I would be more than happy to have that offending innuendo removed, whether it was intended by myself or not (and I am categorically saying that it is not the meaning that I intended to be portrayed).

So surely the other 99% of the post from "The inefficient Tribunals ...." to " .... Some are even exalted in society." is not offensive in any way and should be allowed to be posted, and secondly, should I get an infraction/banning for just one line of potentially offensive innuendo and not even be given the opportunity to delete the offending line? That seems a bit heavy-handed and draconian to me! Its not as if I am refusing to delete that line.

Btw, I fully understand the reasons why any publisher has to be careful about the material it publishes on its media.

Redspider

ps: the reasons why I had to include PM material in the post above was to give the banning decision context, and there was nothing personal included. If the ban would have been made public on the original thread, I think that would have been better (and probably should be a guideline for bannings on all forums, as it allows posters to see why people get banned and reasons why should also be stated).

hullaballoo

redspider wrote: »

If the Mods or a 'reasonable man' or right-minded person interprets the original post as having offending innuendo, then fine, I would be more than happy to have that offending innuendo removed, whether it was intended by myself or not (and I am categorically saying that it is not the meaning that I intended to be portrayed).

I'm glad you're ok with it, because it has been removed and it won't be un-removed. That is irrespective of what you say you meant by it, because it's the easiest thing in the world to deny something after the fact. Also, as I said, you have to allow scope for how other people interpret you. That is something that applies in all walks of life and not just in respect of the law.

So surely the other 99% of the post from "The inefficient Tribunals ...." to " .... Some are even exalted in society." is not offensive in any way and should be allowed to be posted, and secondly, should I get an infraction/banning for just one line of potentially offensive innuendo and not even be given the opportunity to delete the offending line? That seems a bit heavy-handed and draconian to me! Its not as if I am refusing to delete that line.

That, as I have already indicated, is not a matter that is reviewable by us. The Politics moderators have given themselves a wide scope for what penalties they dish out for breaches of the charter. They have applied the discretion that they have to ban you for a breach and that is their prerogative. We cannot overrule their decisions off the back of their interpretation of their rules and their application of the punishments that they have (through their experience) decided are merited in any given situation. Do you see how we cannot impinge on that discretion? We do not have the requisite experience as moderators of [X forum] to know whether or not the rules are being enforced adequately. All I can see is that the ban here is consistent with other bans for similar breaches so I cannot declare this ban invalid, or 'unjust' as you have proclaimed it.

Btw, I fully understand the reasons why any publisher has to be careful about the material it publishes on its media.

Redspider

ps: the reasons why I had to include PM material in the post above was to give the banning decision context, and there was nothing personal included. If the ban would have been made public on the original thread, I think that would have been better (and probably should be a guideline for bannings on all forums, as it allows posters to see why people get banned and reasons why should also be stated).

In relation to the PM material, I accept your reasons fully. However, that you made public those matters is not an issue in relation to your ban. I was simply pointing out that as a matter of common courtesy, you should look for the permission of the sender on this site, in general.

There are two sides to the argument that making the fact of a ban and the reasoning behind it public: 1. there's your argument that it allows for transparency; 2. there's a more persuasive argument that people feel ashamed or embarrassed about having been banned and do not wish that the world at large will have information in relation to that ban.

Personally, I've seen people posting things like, "weren't you banned for something like that before?" or "[X] was banned for that before, so you will be too...". It really is not the best system, in my opinion: though we live in a name and shame culture.

One last aspect to all this is that I do not appreciate being badgered into responding here: I'm a busy person and boards.ie is not my life. Now is the first time I've been online since I replied to this thread the first time around, so I was unimpressed to have received a PM directing me to reply to this thread.

I think there is an element of finality here now. I have explained everything to the best of my ability for the time being and I would expect that you can glean from this the entire rationale behind the site rules and their application and how the system for review works. If there are any further questions on your behalf, please ask them in short, pointed form so that my response is not one of 'tl; dr'.

redspider

hullaballú wrote: »

That, as I have already indicated, is not a matter that is reviewable by us. The Politics moderators have given themselves a wide scope for what penalties they dish out for breaches of the charter. They have applied the discretion that they have to ban you for a breach and that is their prerogative. We cannot overrule their decisions off the back of their interpretation of their rules and their application of the punishments that they have (through their experience) decided are merited in any given situation.

Okay, so you are saying that whatever the mods decide in a particular forum goes. Fair enough, I wont quibble if that is the way.

Btw, I didnt get an answer on: So surely the other 99% of the post from "The inefficient Tribunals ...." to " .... Some are even exalted in society." is not offensive in any way and should be allowed to be posted., but this is up to the politics forum mods from what you've said, so I'll ask them in a PM if such a posting would be allowable.

The issue about Mods behaviours though reminds me of a discussion I had with Gandalf (I think it was, maybe Vexorg as well) a few years back about 'moderator of moderators'. Its all well and dandy having mods, and I do appreciate their work, dont fret about that, and a forum should have some controls - I have thanked the mods in the soccer forum many times over the years and it is 'thankless' work at times for many mods. But mods do have failings, like all people. They can be trigger-happy and they can dish out bannings left, right and centre. They can get moody, etc. When a mod says for example that 'they are too tired' or they write things in large bold text as if they are angry, surely they have at that stage lost the plot, control and impartially and fairness. Anyway, its just a general thing that boards and other forums need to mindful about ie: fair treatment of its users. Chucking users off for small things is not a way to develop a long-term user base. Allowing mods to 'get away' with too much is equally problematic as allowing users to 'get away' with too much.

I have seen unfair bannings in the soccer forum for example and fair ones. I've seen behaviours of users that should have been banned and were not banned, but there you go.

One last aspect to all this is that I do not appreciate being badgered into responding here: I'm a busy person and boards.ie is not my life.

My PM to you was not intended to badger, it was just to point out my reply in this thread which contained questions for you in case you didnt see the post, as it had not been responded to in 24 hrs. Boards is a big place and posts can easily be missed.

Thanks for your replies,

Redspider

redspider

Hello again,

In relation to this item, I have asked all five Politics mods (Moriarty ; oscarBravo ; PSI ; sceptre ; Scraggs) via a PM whether they are okay with a certain piece of text. I asked that 6 days ago but so far I havent received a response of any kind. I've just re-asked them via another PM.

Also, I asked when I was banned how long would the ban last for, but no-one has answered that either. (The ban is still effective).

Redspider

redspider

I have now recieved satisfactory answers to my queries. Thanks OscarBravo. As far as I'm concerned, this matter is now closed.

Thanks,

Redspider