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

Warning for insulting behaviour

Options
135678

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    rovert
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,089 ✭✭✭✭rovert


    LZ5by5 wrote: »
    Thank you SDooM, you put it better than I ever could.

    All I'm asking rovert is for a bit of common courtesy.

    I offer common courtesy when people give it in return.


  • Options
    #63
    shoelaceface
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,079 ✭✭✭shoelaceface


    are you still giving out?


  • Options
    #64
    Ruu_Old
    Closed Accounts Posts: 36,634 ✭✭✭✭Ruu_Old


    rovert wrote: »
    I would have no problem with this if Fozzy and the other mods were more consistent in doing this. Calling an idea dumb isn’t inflammatory if someone presents a case which categorically states which if proves that the idea is totally dumb. An idea which could cost a company millions of dollar is in fact dumb in my opinion. Which I did in fact do. I’m not using semantics or going round in circles. Id actually like you to again actually address what I actually wrote in post#52, as I do think it is reasoned and rational.

    If you see a problem with another post, report it or back up these inconsistencies.


  • Options
    #65
    Doctor DooM
    Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 25,868 Mod ✭✭✭✭Doctor DooM


    rovert wrote: »
    I would have no problem with this if Fozzy and the other mods were more consistent in doing this. Calling an idea dumb isn’t inflammatory if someone presents a case which categorically states which if proves that the idea is totally dumb. Which I did in fact do. I’m not using semantics or going round in circles. Id actually like you to again actually address what I actually wrote.

    Yes it is. It really, really is. You may have proved them wrong, or unknowledgable, but not dumb. Calling something dumb is inflammatory, and TBH it doesn't matter if you don't think so- Fozzy has decided it is.

    Also, you have no idea if Fozzy et all are not modding away in the background. I personally like dealing with issues without going to infractions and bans if possible. It could be completely consistent and you would never know.

    what is it you wish me to address Rovert? I'm actually just trying to offer you advice here to make your life here on boards easier. I'm not a mod of the wrestling forum, I'm just a user like you.

    I am not going to get into a point by point argument rovert: That, tbh, is the mistake others have made with you. I've said three times what the issue is here: I have said 2 times this is an impermanent warning: These are the things which if you take on board will make all this go away, yet you are ignoring it.


  • Options
    #66
    rovert
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,089 ✭✭✭✭rovert


    Ruu wrote: »
    If you see a problem with another post, report it or back up these inconsistencies.

    The inconsistency is this one warning, the one which this thread is about. Prior to this mods and Fozzy had been consistent with me and others in my opinion.
    SDooM wrote: »
    Yes it is. It really, really is. You may have proved them wrong, or unknowledgeable, but not dumb. Calling something dumb is inflammatory, and TBH it doesn't matter if you don't think so- Fozzy has decided it is.
    I don’t see many yellow or red cards issued for this reason. How would you suggest I refer to ideas which I view as dumb? I'll admit yes I do in fact have dumb ideas, can I report myself now?
    SDooM wrote: »
    Also, you have no idea if Fozzy et all are not modding away in the background. I personally like dealing with issues without going to infractions and bans if possible. It could be completely consistent and you would never know.

    I accept your point but I can only talk about my experience about not seeing any yellow cards being issued for such a post like mine before.
    SDooM wrote: »
    what is it you wish me to address Rovert? I'm actually just trying to offer you advice here to make your life here on boards easier. I'm not a mod of the wrestling forum, I'm just a user like you.

    Ive followed that and similar before but as you’ve probably seen that has even been met provocation and when issues do flair up this almost uniformly forgotten. Dont get the violins out or anything but it is true. Ill say it myself I’m probably one of the more helpful posters in that forum.
    SDooM wrote: »
    I am not going to get into a point by point argument rovert: That, tbh, is the mistake others have made with you. I've said three times what the issue is here: I have said 2 times this is an impermanent warning: These are the things which if you take on board will make all this go away, yet you are ignoring it.

    I’m not ignoring it the main reason why I started this topic is not the severity of the warning merely why it given in the first place why I would like you to read the post (I never mentioned about going point by point on it) I keep referring to. I would have pursed the option creating a post on feedback if I did think I had reasons for doing so. Id like to note this the first topic I started in feedback.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    rovert
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,089 ✭✭✭✭rovert


    Fozzy, do you know if you or other mods warned Comic-Book-Guy for saying this to me:

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=56880492&postcount=16


  • Options
    #68
    Handsome Bob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,905 ✭✭✭✭Handsome Bob


    rovert wrote: »
    I offer common courtesy when people give it in return.

    Why do you think so many posters show you a lack of common courtesy? It's because you provoke them first in your confrontational way of of posting.

    I don't mind when people disagree with me, the world would be pretty boring if everybody agreed with me. I don't get hot under the collar when someone disagree's with me, but I will get angered if someone is arrogant and down right rude.


  • Options
    #69
    Handsome Bob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,905 ✭✭✭✭Handsome Bob


    rovert wrote: »
    Fozzy, do you know if you or other mods warned Comic-Book-Guy for saying this to me:

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=56880492&postcount=16

    I remember that and you didn't do anything to provoke CBG, some people when they hold a grudge will go out of their way to look for an argument. CBG was out of order there.


  • Options
    #70
    Doctor DooM
    Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 25,868 Mod ✭✭✭✭Doctor DooM


    rovert wrote: »
    The inconsistency is this one warning, the one which this thread is about. Prior to this mods and Fozzy had been consistent with me and others in my opinion.




    I don’t see many yellow or red cards issued for this reason. How would you suggest I refer to ideas which I view as dumb? I'll admit yes I do in fact have dumb ideas, can I report myself now?

    It is quite simple:

    You don't call anything dumb, because it is inflammatory. A mod has said so and his rule is law in that forum.

    Thats it!

    It's no more complicated than that!

    You prove someone wrong, prove them wrong and leave it to that. Say you don't agree.

    Say you don't think it would work without being nasty.


    rovert wrote: »
    I accept your point but I can only talk about my experience about not seeing any yellow cards being issued for such a post like mine before.

    It's, tbh, not much of your business how Fozzy deals with others, and you don't have access to the tools which would show you how many people get infracted in PW, so you don't know. I would drop the inconsistency angle if I were you, because this time you are not in full possession of the facts. I can't help that.
    rovert wrote: »
    Ive followed that and similar before but as you’ve probably seen that has even been met provocation and when issues do flair up this almost uniformly forgotten. Dont get the violins out or anything but it is true. Ill say it myself I’m probably one of the more helpful posters in that forum.

    I actually do think things get a little out of line in PW but people are people and I consider the mods to be doing an excellent job in a forum which covers a topic with an inbuilt machismo and juvenility.

    Some people like joining a lynch mob: But I hope you can see myself, LZ, and fozzy arent among them. I am not defending these people and they should jack it in, in my opinion. Fozzy really is trying to curb behaviour which would potentially harm the forum here: A warning is not a punishment, it is a warning!

    You can be very helpful rovert but that is going to get completely forgotten when you make comments like the one above. It's a very small tweak you need to make to your posting style to accept that you are going to constantly have people with a much lower level of knowledge than yours using the forum. Just because you know more doesn't give you permission to refer to their opinions as "dumb". This is something I had to learn too.


    rovert wrote: »
    I’m not ignoring it the main reason why I started this topic is not the severity of the warning merely why it given in the first place why I would like you to read the post (I never mentioned about going point by point on it) I keep referring to. I would have pursed the option creating a post on feedback if I did think I had reasons for doing so. Id like to note this the first topic I started in feedback.

    I've told you what I thought the reason was in my first point: Fozzy said I was right, and referred you to my post: I repeated it twice.

    I've read the post and most of this thread but nothing changes the simple fact that you made a post which was inflammatory in the opinion of the mod, and he let you know not to do it again.


  • Options
    #71
    rovert
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,089 ✭✭✭✭rovert


    LZ5by5 wrote: »
    Why do you think so many posters show you a lack of common courtesy? It's because you provoke them first in your confrontational way of of posting.

    I don't mind when people disagree with me, the world would be pretty boring if everybody agreed with me. I don't get hot under the collar when someone disagree's with me, but I will get angered if someone is arrogant and down right rude.

    As people dont either read threads or posts they are replying to, his thread being an example. As Ive already addressed this question in it already.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    leninbenjamin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,983 ✭✭✭leninbenjamin


    Fozzy wrote: »
    I didn't give an infraction

    well there's an infraction icon beside the post...

    you also said it was for insulting other members.


  • Options
    #73
    copacetic
    Subscribers Posts: 16,587 ✭✭✭✭copacetic


    SDooM wrote: »


    It's, tbh, not much of your business how Fozzy deals with others, and you don't have access to the tools which would show you how many people get infracted in PW, so you don't know. I would drop the inconsistency angle if I were you, because this time you are not in full possession of the facts. I can't help that.

    Why isn't it his business? He can certainly see if a post has a warning or an actual infraction by the cards on thread, everyone can. The one he linked above doesn't, I presume that is where he is coming from on consistency?


  • Options
    #74
    copacetic
    Subscribers Posts: 16,587 ✭✭✭✭copacetic


    leninbenjamin wrote: »
    well there's an infraction icon beside the post...

    you also said it was for insulting other members.

    I think Fozzy meant that the yellow card icon simply means a warning, it doesn't carry an infraction 'point' the way a red card does. Ten points in a certain period means a site ban, 100 yellow cards in a day wouldn't automatically do anything to you. Although unlikely you would get that far without someone noticing something was up..


  • Options
    #75
    Doctor DooM
    Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 25,868 Mod ✭✭✭✭Doctor DooM


    copacetic wrote: »
    Why isn't it his business? He can certainly see if a post has a warning or an actual infraction by the cards on thread, everyone can. The one he linked above doesn't, I presume that is where he is coming from on consistency?

    That post, agreed is bang out of order IMO.

    We all know though if a post wasn't reported, there's no point coming to feedback to moan about it. Did you report that revort?


  • Options
    #76
    Handsome Bob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,905 ✭✭✭✭Handsome Bob


    copacetic wrote: »
    Why isn't it his business? He can certainly see if a post has a warning or an actual infraction by the cards on thread, everyone can. The one he linked above doesn't, I presume that is where he is coming from on consistency?

    To be fair, Fozzy is doing a lot and he might miss a few things. He may be a mod but he's human too man, he won't have the time to go through each thread with a fine tooth comb. Plus, rovert should have reported the post because he was personally and directly insulted without any provokement.


  • Options
    #77
    copacetic
    Subscribers Posts: 16,587 ✭✭✭✭copacetic


    LZ5by5 wrote: »
    To be fair, Fozzy is doing a lot and he might miss a few things. He may be a mod but he's human too man, he won't have the time to go through each thread with a fine tooth comb. Plus, rovert should have reported the post because he was personally and directly insulted without any provokement.

    Well no mod does, I just meant that rovert is an entitled as anyone to wonder about consistency. If he didn't report that post then of course he hasn't a leg to stand on..


  • Options
    #78
    Sully
    Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 24,056 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sully


    rovert; I think the soundest and honest advise given here so far has been by SDooM. I honestly think you should take what he says into deep consideration. I think the mod in question was only trying to help as he/she knows the hassle you get in the forum. You probably are a good contributor, and hate those who contribute something they say is fact which isn't or use unreliable sources when posting. Chillax with these people when pointing out there wrong, and don't be so harsh or blunt.

    I really think this thread is pointless. You were given a warning which is just a way to give you a heads up rather then a slap across the wrist. Just take note of the warning and try to work around the problem the mod feels you are having. This way, you can get on better with the folks in the forum. Just take it as a tip or bit of advise and nothing more. :)

    For those btw who dont understand the difference between a Yellow Card and Red Card when it comes to Infractions, maybe this will explain it:-
    Sully wrote: »
    Infractions & Bannings

    A moderator will use his/her discretion when issuing out bans or infractions based on common sense. This means – you might be issued a warning first, or depending on the seriousness of the problem, you might be instantly banned. A warning might be given publicly in a topic, over PM or using the infraction system.

    The infraction system works on a Red & Yellow card basis. If you receive a red card infraction it will be marked on your profile. A red card infraction has a time frame of 10 days (per infraction) and is worth one point. If you clock up 9 active points, you will be given a temporary ban from Boards.ie.
    • A “Yellow” card is a warning and does not count towards your active point count.
    • A “Red” card increases your active point count.

    With regards to your concern about other posts similar to the one you received a warning on - its possible the mod missed it, or overlooked it. So, just report (report.gif) the post to bring it to the mods attention. :)


  • Options
    #79
    leninbenjamin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,983 ✭✭✭leninbenjamin


    Sully wrote: »
    For those btw who dont understand the difference between a Yellow Card and Red Card when it comes to Infractions, maybe this will explain it:-



    With regards to your concern about other posts similar to the one you received a warning on - its possible the mod missed it, or overlooked it. So, just report (report.gif) the post to bring it to the mods attention. :)

    they are both still infractions. warnings on the internet before this new fangled infraction system meant simply verbal warning, usually on-thread. that's how most users still interpret the word 'warning'.

    edit: anyway; that's beside the point. the original issue raised was inconsistency by the mod in question by rovert. and rovert was correct. he did not insult other users in his post, yet that's what the infraction was given for. that's in line with the definition of inconsistent. in the grand scheme of things it's still fairly small, but rovert does have a valid point.


  • Options
    #80
    Sully
    Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 24,056 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sully


    leninbenjamin wrote: »
    they are both still infractions. warnings on the internet before this new fangled infraction system meant simply verbal warning, usually on-thread. that's how most users still interpret the word 'warning'.

    I never said it wasn't an infraction. Its not a red card, its a yellow card. A yellow card is a warning, but its a recorded warning. It means nothing, it can not add to your infraction count that can result in a site ban. It is exactly like it always was, apart from being recorded. There is no need to go bananas over a warning.
    edit: anyway; that's beside the point. the original issue raised was inconsistency by the mod in question by rovert. and rovert was correct. he did not insult other users in his post, yet that's what the infraction was given for. that's in line with the definition of inconsistent. in the grand scheme of things it's still fairly small, but rovert does have a valid point.

    I agree that the warning given wasn't the right type, was more "Being Naugthy" rather then "Insulting Other Member(s)". Regardless, the mod has a valid point and is asking rovert to relax a bit. That's all :)


  • Options
    #81
    leninbenjamin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,983 ✭✭✭leninbenjamin


    Sully wrote: »
    I never said it wasn't an infraction.

    you didn't, but Fozzy did.
    Sully wrote: »
    I agree that the warning given wasn't the right type, was more "Being Naugthy" rather then "Insulting Other Member(s)". Regardless, the mod has a valid point and is asking rovert to relax a bit. That's all :)

    true; i'm not looking for anything to be done about it. I would just like to point out how even the smallest inconsistency in modding can result in over reactions (like here). I think it would be better myself if fozzy took this on board, instead of raising the defences. takes two to tango you know? :)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    Sully
    Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 24,056 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sully


    leninbenjamin wrote: »
    you didn't, but Fozzy did.

    A lot of people don't consider the yellow card an infraction - they think a red card is one. I wouldn't be to pushed about that. Fozzy said a warning was given, we all know a warning was given. Whether or not a warning is considered an "infraction" really doesn't matter imo :)
    true; i'm not looking for anything to be done about it. I would just like to point out how even the smallest inconsistency in modding can result in over reactions (like here). I think it would be better myself if fozzy took this on board, instead of raising the defences. takes two to tango you know? :)

    I'm sure Fozzy will shed some light on why that warning was given, and if it was a mistake, it will probably be rectified to be a more precise warning. :)


  • Options
    #83
    rovert
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,089 ✭✭✭✭rovert


    SDooM wrote: »
    That post, agreed is bang out of order IMO.

    We all know though if a post wasn't reported, there's no point coming to feedback to moan about it. Did you report that revort?
    LZ5by5 wrote: »
    To be fair, Fozzy is doing a lot and he might miss a few things. He may be a mod but he's human too man, he won't have the time to go through each thread with a fine tooth comb. Plus, rovert should have reported the post because he was personally and directly insulted without any provokement.

    Why would I report someone for calling something I said dumb when I dont think neccessarily it is a reason to do so? I dont see the major problem in calling something a person wrote dumb. If someone called me personally dumb full stop then I would likely report it. This is a reason why I started this topic Ive been warning as if I called a person dumb not their point, post etc.

    The real question is IF the mods and Fozzy saw that post then why didnt they issue a warning for it like they did with mine?


  • Options
    #84
    Handsome Bob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,905 ✭✭✭✭Handsome Bob


    rovert wrote: »
    Why would I report someone for calling something I said dumb when I dont think neccessarily it is a reason to do so? I dont see the major problem in calling something a person wrote dumb. If someone called me personally dumb full stop then I would likely report it. This is a reason why I started this topic Ive been warning as if I called a person dumb not their point, post etc.

    The real question is IF the mods and Fozzy saw that post then why didnt they issue a warning for it like they did with mine?

    Because he didn't see it first time, I brought it to his attention. And to me what CBG called you was a personal insult, I would have reported him.


  • Options
    #85
    Sully
    Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 24,056 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sully


    I always thought the rule of thumb was "Attack the Post and not the Poster" anyway? So, if I thought rovert was making a stupid point I could tell him I felt his post was useless and say why. No?


  • Options
    #86
    rovert
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,089 ✭✭✭✭rovert


    Sully wrote: »
    I always thought the rule of thumb was "Attack the Post and not the Poster" anyway? So, if I thought rovert was making a stupid point I could tell him I felt his post was useless and say why. No?

    So did I until now.
    LZ5by5 wrote: »
    Because he didn't see it first time, I brought it to his attention. And to me what CBG called you was a personal insult, I would have reported him.

    It is not a personal insult he called something I wrote dumb, not me personally.

    Fozzy did see that post obviously:
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=56882161&postcount=31


  • Options
    #87
    ec18
    Registered Users Posts: 2,723 ✭✭✭ec18


    Rovert should be banned for starting this thread and for my lost twenty minutes that I spent reading it.

    It's a warning get over it


  • Options
    #88
    Handsome Bob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,905 ✭✭✭✭Handsome Bob


    Sully wrote: »
    I always thought the rule of thumb was "Attack the Post and not the Poster" anyway? So, if I thought rovert was making a stupid point I could tell him I felt his post was useless and say why. No?

    It's his style and manner of posting that has caused so much offence, and it's not just me who feels this way, if you look at even just the first page of the previous feedback thread you'll see that. Rovert has a knack of rubbing people up the wrong way by the use of a confrontational, aggressive and unprovoked style in posting. When someone wants a calm discussion, a friendly debate that is not possible with rovert. Even someone who has vast knowledge of Pro Wrestling such as Valid Reasoning has had his run ins with him so it's not even a case of him losing patience with people that are ill informed.

    And he's been told to tone it down before, this is not a once off occasion.


  • Options
    #89
    rovert
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,089 ✭✭✭✭rovert


    LZ5by5 wrote: »
    It's his style and manner of posting that has caused so much offence, and it's not just me who feels this way, if you look at even just the first page of the previous feedback thread you'll see that. Rovert has a knack of rubbing people up the wrong way by the use of a confrontational, aggressive and unprovoked style in posting. When someone wants a calm discussion, a friendly debate that is not possible with rovert. Even someone who has vast knowledge of Pro Wrestling such as Valid Reasoning has had his run ins with him so it's not even a case of him losing patience with people that are ill informed.

    And he's been told to tone it down before, this is not a once off occasion.

    Attack the post, not the poster. My "confrontational, aggressive and unprovoked style in posting" is totally over played. Valid Reasoning was the person who got the other Feedback thread locked for wishing death on another poster (something Ive never even come cloase to doing), even tempered he is not.

    Id really like this thread to stay on topic, LZ5by5. I'll ask you to see my reply to that pile on in the feeback section. Ive moved on from all that you should too. I have been more mindful on how I come across to others since then. Stop trying to derail this thread. You seem to have way more of a problem with me than I do with you. Look at this thread, you've thanked nearly everyone who was critical of me.


  • Options
    #90
    Handsome Bob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,905 ✭✭✭✭Handsome Bob


    rovert wrote: »
    Attack the post, not the poster. My "confrontational, aggressive and unprovoked style in posting" is totally over played. Valid Reasoning was the person who got the other Feedback thread locked for wishing death on another poster, even tempered he is not.

    Id really like this thread to stay on topic, LZ5by5. See my reply in the feeback section. Ive move on from all that you should too. I have been more mindful on how I come across.

    "Attack the post, not the poster."

    To be honest rovert, it has gotten to the stage that's impossible to distinguish between the two when it comes to you. One can feel the venom, the anger and the absolute contempt that you have for your fellow posters when someone falls foul of you. That's why I take offence when you "attack the post" because when you do it, it basically feels like you're "attacking the poster".

    Maybe that's just me, maybe I need a thicker skin.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    rovert
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,089 ✭✭✭✭rovert


    LZ5by5 wrote: »
    One can feel the venom, the anger and the absolute contempt that you have for your fellow posters when someone falls foul of you.

    This is SO irrational. You obviously seem take all this more serious than I do.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement