Warning for insulting behaviour

Handsome Bob

rovert wrote: »

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

I'm not the one who started a thread over a minor warning man, you seem to be taking it quite serious.

rovert

LZ5by5 wrote: »

I'm not the one who started a thread over a minor warning man, you seem to be taking it quite serious.

It is not about the degree of warning, if you read the thread you would know that.

Doctor DooM

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?

Ah ah. No.

You don't get away with that.

If you don't report the post, don't complain if nothing gets done.

You are complaining about inconsistency: No doubt someone reported your post, so it was acted on.

Thats the way it works.

rovert

SDooM wrote: »

Ah ah. No.

You don't get away with that.

If you don't report the post, don't complain if nothing gets done.

You are complaining about inconsistency: No doubt someone reported your post, so it was acted on.

Thats the way it works.

Fozzy said it was him.

Doctor DooM

rovert wrote: »

Fozzy said it was him.

I dont quite understand? I'm saying that if you do not report posts you cannot complain about posts being inconsistently moderated. thats the way the system works on Boards.

rovert

SDooM wrote: »

I dont quite understand? I'm saying that if you do not report posts you cannot complain about posts being inconsistently moderated. thats the way the system works on Boards.

The way Fozzy communicated it to me was that he reported AND issued the warning.

Handsome Bob

rovert wrote: »

The way Fozzy communicated it to meiwas that he reported AND issued the warning.

I told you already that I complained to Fozzy, I brought it to his attention rovert.

Doctor DooM

LZ5by5 wrote: »

I told you already that I complained to Fozzy, I brought it to his attention rovert.

Seriously rovert, I am not just making this up. If you don't report a post, you can't be complaining when nothing is done about it.

If LZ hadn't reported a post of yours, and came here going on about your posts, first thing Foggy would have done was ask "Did you report the posts?" to him, for example.

You cannot go on about inconsistency in modding if you cannot be sure the posts were not reported.

rovert

LZ5by5 wrote: »

I told you already that I complained to Fozzy, I brought it to his attention rovert.

I didnt see that this thread his been very hectic, I dont think it was overtly said Ive tried to find it. If you did then fine. But still I dont think the warning was justified as it was an attack the post and not the poster as others have pointed out.

SDooM wrote: »

Seriously rovert, I am not just making this up. If you don't report a post, you can't be complaining when nothing is done about it.

If LZ hadn't reported a post of yours, and came here going on about your posts, first thing Foggy would have done was ask "Did you report the posts?" to him, for example.

You cannot go on about inconsistency in modding if you cannot be sure the posts were not reported.

I never said any of that categorically that they were or weren't hence all the qualifiers in my posts on that issue.

Fozzy

Since my "inconsistency" has been brought up, I'll just say that I've taken a slightly harder line with a few posters since that other Feedback thread was posted, a week ago I think it was. If you want to call that inconsistent then go ahead, but I don't think it's the appropriate word

The fact is that I don't want rovert to be calling other poster's ideas probably the dumbest ideas he's ever heard, as that sort of stuff leads to what caused me to start that other Feedback thread in the first place

Sully

Fozzy wrote: »

Since my "inconsistency" has been brought up, I'll just say that I've taken a slightly harder line with a few posters since that other Feedback thread was posted, a week ago I think it was. If you want to call that inconsistent then go ahead, but I don't think it's the appropriate word

The fact is that I don't want rovert to be calling other poster's ideas probably the dumbest ideas he's ever heard, as that sort of stuff leads to what caused me to start that other Feedback thread in the first place

Yes but rovert never actually insulted anybody, he rubbished there post which is different. He received an infraction for insulting members when really it was the wrong infraction to give

ec18

Sully wrote: »

Yes but rovert never actually insulted anybody, he rubbished there post which is different. He received an infraction for insulting members when really it was the wrong infraction to give

he only got a warning afaik

Fozzy

Sully wrote: »

Yes but rovert never actually insulted anybody, he rubbished there post which is different. He received an infraction for insulting members when really it was the wrong infraction to give

You know yourself how many options there are there, I've only ever had to use "Breach of forum charter" and "Insulted a member" before. Is that really the issue? If I'd clicked on "Breach of peace" I think that rovert would still have had a problem

Sully

ec18 wrote: »

he only got a warning afaik

Using the infraction system - there seems to be a bit of confusion as to what people see as an infraction. I always thought that Yellow/Red card were infractions. One went to your total count the other doesn't. Still infractions though.

Fozzy wrote: »

You know yourself how many options there are there, I've only ever had to use "Breach of forum charter" and "Insulted a member" before. Is that really the issue? If I'd clicked on "Breach of peace" I think that rovert would still have had a problem

Oh I know full well where you are coming from. My point is, some people are winging at him being infracted for insulting other members when he actually didn't. Just seemed a poor choice - but I assume you actually didn't mean that, and it was more his posting style you felt needed to be addressed? I think if we get that clarified, the issue is dealt with. Your the mod of the forum, you know what works and what doesn't at the end of the day.

callaway92

This thread lacks ego

Fozzy

Sully wrote: »

Using the infraction system - there seems to be a bit of confusion as to what people see as an infraction. I always thought that Yellow/Red card were infractions. One went to your total count the other doesn't. Still infractions though.

I call a yellow card a warning because the PM it sends is titled with "Warning". A red card PM is titled with "Infraction" Makes sense to me :pac:

Sully wrote: »

Oh I know full well where you are coming from. My point is, some people are winging at him being infracted for insulting other members when he actually didn't. Just seemed a poor choice - but I assume you actually didn't mean that, and it was more his posting style you felt needed to be addressed? I think if we get that clarified, the issue is dealt with. Your the mod of the forum, you know what works and what doesn't at the end of the day.

I didn't actually mention anything about other members in the administrative note or the message part of the warning, that's not what I had a problem with. It was rovert's behaviour that I was addressing, so I would have clicked a different option if I'd thought about it longer

Insect Overlord

This thread reminds me of one in here five or six months ago. Some guy had been posting information and advice, I think it was about the stock market or shares or something similar (haven't been able to find it, despite searching) He was upset because he'd been given an infraction/short-term ban for calling other users "idiots". There was a couple of hundred posts, from moderators and users alike, trying to explain to the guy that idiot was considered an offensive term. He just wouldn't accept it. Think he ended up receiving a 12 month break.

My point is, OP, you have to let this go. It's my opinion that you would've been banned by now if you weren't a subscriber. Your questioning of the moderator's decision-making is on a level I've never seen before, a level I thought was not tolerated around here.

leninbenjamin

Fozzy wrote: »

Since my "inconsistency" has been brought up, I'll just say that I've taken a slightly harder line with a few posters since that other Feedback thread was posted, a week ago I think it was. If you want to call that inconsistent then go ahead, but I don't think it's the appropriate word

ummm... do you need the word inconsistent clearly defined for you?

Definitions of inconsistent on the Web:

* displaying a lack of consistency; "inconsistent statements cannot both be true at the same time"; "inconsistent with the roadmap"

you said he was insulting members which isn't true; it clearly satisfies the definition of inconsistent above.

The fact is that I don't want rovert to be calling other poster's ideas probably the dumbest ideas he's ever heard, as that sort of stuff leads to what caused me to start that other Feedback thread in the first place

then why didn't you make that explicitly clear when you issued the infraction?

Fozzy wrote: »

You know yourself how many options there are there, I've only ever had to use "Breach of forum charter" and "Insulted a member" before. Is that really the issue? If I'd clicked on "Breach of peace" I think that rovert would still have had a problem

when moderating (and dealing with the public in general in any capactity) you need to be very clear in what you expect from people. regardless of whether or not you are in the right, if you make a mistake, or don't fully get across what the issue is, people aren't going to be sympathetic towards you and in general you will create excess hassle and grief for yourself, as they continually call you out on your errors.

it's in your own interests fozzy.

rovert

An Fhile wrote: »

This thread reminds me of one in here five or six months ago. Some guy had been posting information and advice, I think it was about the stock market or shares or something similar (haven't been able to find it, despite searching) He was upset because he'd been given an infraction/short-term ban for calling other users "idiots". There was a couple of hundred posts, from moderators and users alike, trying to explain to the guy that idiot was considered an offensive term. He just wouldn't accept it. Think he ended up receiving a 12 month break.

This isn’t comparable to that. I didn’t "attack" other posters personally, I said someone’s idea was dumb. Yes I used a degree of hyperbole/exaggeration but doesn’t everyone here? But I received a warning for insulting someone. It is quite clear just from anyone reading this thread that the poster who reported me does have a vendetta against me (I dont make this claim lightly either and I know how this may come as across too.) Id like to emphasise that this wasn’t about the severity of the warning but rather the reasoning and basis behind it. I also want to say that this situation is in no way indicative of my typical dealings with Fozzy and I bare no ill will. This is pretty much my final word on the whole situation.

Handsome Bob

rovert wrote: »

This isn’t comparable to that. I didn’t "attack" other posters personally, I said someone’s idea was dumb. Yes I used a degree of hyperbole/exaggeration but doesn’t everyone here? But I received a warning for insulting someone. It is quite clear just from anyone reading this thread that the poster who reported me does have a vendetta against me (I dont make this claim lightly either and I know how this may come as across too.) Id like to emphasise that this wasn’t about the severity of the warning but rather the reasoning and basis behind it. I also want to say that this situation is in no way indicative of my typical dealings with Fozzy and I bare no ill will. This is pretty much my final word on the whole situation.

How do I have a vendetta against you? I've said before that I have great respect for your knowledge of the business and unlike other posters who have a problem with you I do not go out of my way to argue with you. Just because I used some passionate rhetoric in describing how your posts come across to me does not mean I have a vendetta rovert.

kevteljeur

One might describe some of this as a 'pedantathon'.

randylonghorn

An Fhile wrote: »

It's my opinion that you would've been banned by now if you weren't a subscriber.

Doesn't have any bearing on the issue, by order of God DeV himself ... nor should it have.

I do agree that people have been been patient enough with rovert on the face of things, but at a guess (and it's just a guess) it probably has more to do with the fact mentioned above that he is knowledgable about PW, and the forum mods know that if they could only get him to understand that he sometimes rubs people up the wrong way, and to work on that, he would probably make a valuable and welcome contribution to the forum.

the flananator

I love the internet.

Fozzy

leninbenjamin wrote: »

ummm... do you need the word inconsistent clearly defined for you?

So you consider me taking on advice and acting on it inconsistent? I was consistent with my moderating before that Feedback thread. When I read over it I took a few points on board and I've been consistent with my moderating since then. I've learned a few things and if you expect me to act the same way as I did before just for the sake of being consistent then you're going to be disappointed

leninbenjamin wrote: »

then why didn't you make that explicitly clear when you issued the infraction?

I don't have all the time in the world. I told rovert not to post things that come across as insulting as the post that he made. I thought that would be enough. Eight pages of a Feedback thread later I'm just about beginning to think that maybe, possibly, that wasn't clear enough. I will endeavour to make things clearer for you and rovert in the future

leninbenjamin wrote: »

when moderating (and dealing with the public in general in any capactity) you need to be very clear in what you expect from people. regardless of whether or not you are in the right, if you make a mistake, or don't fully get across what the issue is, people aren't going to be sympathetic towards you and in general you will create excess hassle and grief for yourself, as they continually call you out on your errors.

it's in your own interests fozzy.

Who's not sympathetic towards me? Yourself and rovert? There's been more people on this thread who have understood my point of view than rovert's

It's a message board. I gave a warning not to post the kind of thing that incites other posters and creates a bad atmosphere. It's not that big a deal. I've said all I can say and I'm done with this thread. rovert should know now not to post things like that and I'm not expecting any similar posts from him or anyone else

rovert

LZ5by5 wrote: »

How do I have a vendetta against you? I've said before that I have great respect for your knowledge of the business and unlike other posters who have a problem with you I do not go out of my way to argue with you. Just because I used some passionate rhetoric in describing how your posts come across to me does not mean I have a vendetta rovert.

Well your "passionate rhetoric" was a lot stronger than mine yet you reported me for it. Especially since a main reason for my warning was that I over-exaggerated. I think you do have a vendetta against me besides your passionate rhetoric (which I would label totally irrational), you thank nearly everyone who is critical of me as if you want the worst possible outcome from me in this thread. I think your reporting of me was done more out of malice rather than a reporting based out the rules of the board. Which has lead to this situation with Fozzy.

randylonghorn wrote: »

I do agree that people have been been patient enough with rovert on the face of things, but at a guess (and it's just a guess) it probably has more to do with the fact mentioned above that he is knowledgable about PW, and the forum mods know that if they could only get him to understand that he sometimes rubs people up the wrong way, and to work on that, he would probably make a valuable and welcome contribution to the forum.

But people have failed to point for the past month or so I have changed my perceived behaviour. But it seems they would rather attack me for a small of posts I made in May.

Fozzy wrote: »

I don't have all the time in the world. I told rovert not to post things that come across as insulting as the post that he made. I thought that would be enough. Eight pages of a Feedback thread later I'm just about beginning to think that maybe, possibly, that wasn't clear enough. I will endeavour to make things clearer for you and rovert in the future

Saying someone's idea is dumb is not an insult. We all have dumb ideas and it was an attack someone’s post, not the actual poster. No one has made a case to opposing this.

Fozzy wrote: »

Who's not sympathetic towards me? Yourself and rovert? There's been more people on this thread who have understood my point of view than rovert's

It has quite clear a lot of people haven’t made the effort to read the thread especially the OP even from the very beginning, so I would even read too much into that now.

Fozzy wrote: »

It's a message board. I gave a warning not to post the kind of thing that incites other posters and creates a bad atmosphere. It's not that big a deal. I've said all I can say and I'm done with this thread. rovert should know now not to post things like that and I'm not expecting any similar posts from him or anyone else

No actually I don’t know what to post as the warning you gave me is still unclear. Labelling someone’s idea dumb and giving reasons why shouldn't be seen as incitful, rather it should viewed as discussion. Which I’m thinking is becoming an increasingly alien concept here. This warning has left me total ambiguity on what is and isn’t permissible to say.

P.S. Fozzy you havent address my previous post.

Handsome Bob

rovert wrote: »

Well your "passionate rhetoric" was a lot stronger than mine yet you reported me for it. Especially since a main reason for my warning was that I over-exaggerated. I think you do have a vendetta against me besides your passionate rhetoric (which I would label totally irrational), you thank nearly everyone who is critical of me as if you want the worst possible outcome from me in this thread. I think your reporting of me was done more out of malice rather than a reporting based out the rules of the board. Which has lead to this situation with Fozzy.

I've only thanked posts that I think describe my stance perfectly, such as SDooM's posts. Rovert, unlike other posters, I don't hold a grudge with you. If I did I would have gone into the Shelton Benjamin thread and would have got right in your face. I didn't do that, and I haven't done that in a long time. You say I reported you out of malice as if I have a vendetta when you know I was one of the posters who was defending you last time around. If I held a grudge against you, why would I hold my hands up and say I was mostly wrong when arguing with you in the past?

If you think I am getting any kind of satisfaction out of this you are badly wrong. I am sorry that Fozzy is getting so much crap for his decision and I am sorry that it has to come to this with you rovert.

rovert

LZ5by5 wrote: »

I've only thanked posts that I think describe my stance perfectly, such as SDooM's posts. Rovert, unlike other posters, I don't hold a grudge with you. If I did I would have gone into the Shelton Benjamin thread and would have got right in your face. I didn't do that, and I haven't done that in a long time. You say I reported you out of malice as if I have a vendetta when you know I was one of the posters who was defending you last time around. If I held a grudge against you, why would I hold my hands up and say I was mostly wrong when arguing with you in the past?

If you think I am getting any kind of satisfaction out of this you are badly wrong. I am sorry that Fozzy is getting so much crap for his decision and I am sorry that it has to come to this with you rovert.

This thread would be much shorter and more to the point if it wasn’t for your and others personal attacks on me in this thread. The reason for reporting my post seems more to do with prior circumstances than the content of the post you reported. Your posts in this thread reflect that too, read them back if you dont believe me.

How did I get it badly wrong, exactly? You are the one over exaggerating here again, something you reported me for. If I got it as badly wrong as you say I have I would held my hands up. The same way I did over my confusion over who reported me.

Again:

Saying someone's idea is dumb is not an insult. We all have dumb ideas and it was an attack someone’s post, not the actual poster. No one has made a case to opposing this.

Labelling someone’s idea dumb and giving reasons why shouldn’t be seen as incitful, rather it should viewed as discussion. Which I’m thinking is becoming an increasingly alien concept here. This warning has left me total ambiguity on what is and isn’t permissible to say.

If I a called another member an idiot and got warned for it, I wouldn’t have PM'd Fozzy or started a thread in feedback as the warning would be totally justifed. Simple as.

Overheal

I swear to high hell, if ever there was a time to point out an incredibly ridiculous thread with a lolcat, now would be the time. What started out as a thread over sweet **** all has become a complete bitchfest.

The Internet: Serious Business.

It takes 10 infractions in a very short period of time to warrant a ban. Unless you are a complete and total muppet it is nothing to bat an eyelid about.

Bubs101

TBH, I think it's about time PW got a 3rd mod in Vince90210. It's a busy forum with one lurker mod (Bombidol) and one great mod in Fozzy, but in the past few months there has been so much back and forth crap going on between Rovert and virtually every other poster at one stage or another that it's become a forum where another mod is certainly needed

mehfesto2

This thread should've stopped with Sdoom's last post on page #4.
It's just been childish since then.

It's been like watching a footballer argue with a ref. His mind is made up and you're not going to say anything that's going to give him some divine awareness to your cause at this stage. Take the booking, don't let it get to you, play your game.

Surely we can leave it at this?