Banned by new moderator for outlining my concerns about the new mods

rovert

See this thread:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055421020

I wasn’t even warned before hand and I don’t see how the offending post was even off topic. That thread was about the new moderators of the forum. Other posters gave there hopes on what would change so I don’t see how my posts were off topic. Given the events of the past few days with a thread in feedback I relayed my fears about the new moderators and it looks like they have be realised already.

According to the moderator, orestes my:

posts in this thread have led to you being banned from the Pro Wrestling forum for one week for their overall content.

I wish for this banning of 7 days to be over turned.

Thanks.

orestes

I'll give you the same reply here that I gave you in feedback:

Long version: A thread was started to welcome new moderators. You complained about new mods being appointed (and took a cheap dig at one of the other forums that I mod in the process). When someone commented lightheartedly about your little dig you proceeded to drag the thread off topic and get arguementative. After discussion amongst the forum mods regarding your actions it was decided to issue a one week ban.

Short version: you were being a troll and got a ban.



I stand by the ban, and won't be lifting it unless an smod or admin advises me to do so here.

rovert

orestes wrote: »

Long version: A thread was started to welcome new moderators. You complained about new mods being appointed.

I didn’t complain about the mods themselves I relayed my fears about them. There is a difference.

orestes wrote: »

(and took a cheap dig at one of the other forums that I mod in the process).

I didn’t take a cheap dig I qualified it with that it seemed to me that there was a lot of baby talk. This was based on my viewing of the big Lair thread that is a part of the Nocturnal thread. I acknowledge that this might not be typically thrust of the forum but going by what I’ve seen there and in other threads there it seems part of the course in my opinion. I don’t think it was a low blow a lot of those threads are counter to the serious wrestling discussion found in the Pro Wrestling forum. In comparison the Nocturnal forum is a bit more zany and loose than the Pro Wrestling forum, would you agree with that then?

orestes wrote: »

When someone commented lightheartedly about your little dig you proceeded to drag the thread off topic and get arguementative. After discussion amongst the forum mods regarding your actions it was decided to issue a one week ban. )

I had moved on before you issued the ban. Ill once again argue that other people were also stating there hopes of what the new version of the board should be like. I just relayed my fears. Shouldn’t both ends of the spectrum be allowed in such a thread?

orestes wrote: »

Short version: you were being a troll and got a ban.

Your version of trolling seems to be very board. I just gave my opinion and again after this banning it looks like I was proven right on it. Just because a comment is negative doesn’t make it trolling.

orestes wrote: »

I stand by the ban, and won't be lifting it unless an smod or admin advises me to do so here.

I think the ban was unfair as no warning was issued although other posters have been given this courtesy. I think we have gotten off on the wrong foot. I want to make the new version of the Pro Wrestling forum work. I’ve already hammered things out with KKV for example. Can we end the hostility please?

Beruthiel

Seriously rovert, you just don't know when to quit.
You turned the welcome thread into a bitching session.
After that thread and the one in Feedback, you look like more trouble than you're worth.
The ban sticks.

rovert

Beruthiel wrote: »

Seriously rovert, you just don't know when to quit.
You turned the welcome thread into a bitching session.
After that thread and the one in Feedback, you look like more trouble than you're worth.
The ban sticks.

Beruthiel everyone else got a warning from the mods for the extact same behaviour while I just got banned. Perhaps you may have only seen the worst side of me but to classify me as strictly looking like "more trouble than you're worth" is unfair. I do feel that I bring a lot to the forum. Ive received PMs from regular posters from the forum on how unfair they think my banning was. My position is that yes I may have deserved a warning but a ban was too severe.

KKV got a warning before he was banned for the same reason I was:
http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=57937268&postcount=69

Gordon

If you agree with a warning then you are agreeing that you have done something wrong. The mod thinks that your wrongness deserved a 1 week ban, you don't. You thought you were right to post what you posted, now you say you were wrong. You say that you are right to get a warning, you will see later that it is correct that you were banned instead.

If you disagree with this then you are being illogical because you were wrong before and you accept that. Saying you are right is not enough, because it was not good enough before, when you were wrong, as you admit.

rovert

Gordon wrote: »

If you agree with a warning then you are agreeing that you have done something wrong. The mod thinks that your wrongness deserved a 1 week ban, you don't. You thought you were right to post what you posted, now you say you were wrong. You say that you are right to get a warning, you will see later that it is correct that you were banned instead.

If you disagree with this then you are being illogical because you were wrong before and you accept that. Saying you are right is not enough, because it was not good enough before, when you were wrong, as you admit.

Apologises Gordon but most of your post I can’t really follow due to how it is structured. Can you please simplify it for me? I don’t want to hurt my case by drawing erroneous implications from your post.

I don’t want to repeat myself but simply I wasn’t given the same opportunity as other posters (KKV & D-FENS) who were also banned later in this thread and I see that as unfair:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055421020

I wasn’t given a warning, what was and wasn’t permissible to talk about wasn’t established yet in that thread when I posted. The mods to their credit after my banning have done a great job doing so in that thread and in general from what I’ve seen.

Gordon

rovert wrote: »

Apologises Gordon but most of your post I can’t really follow due to how it is structured. Can you please simplify it for me? I don’t want to hurt my case by drawing erroneous implications from your post.

Your were wrong to think that you could post what you posted. You agree to that. You think that you should not be temp-banned. The mod does not agree with that. And you will agree that you should be temp-banned in the future.

rovert

Gordon I really dont want to have a back and forth with you.

Gordon wrote: »

Your were wrong to think that you could post what you posted. You agree to that.

I didnt say I was wrong, what I did say is that:

My position is that yes I may have deserved a warning but a ban was too severe.

Gordon wrote: »

You think that you should not be temp-banned. The mod does not agree with that. And you will agree that you should be temp-banned in the future.

Again sorrry but I dont follow this can you quote from what I actually wrote and show me where you drew these conclusions? Please

Gordon

rovert wrote: »

Gordon I really dont want to have a back and forth with you.

You sure are giving mixed signals.

rovert

Gordon wrote: »

You sure are giving mixed signals.

How?

I dont want to rehash this thread and/or make it overly long. Ill just say it again I think a one week ban without a warning was unfair. Regardless whether my posts were off topic or not. My post was made before the new charter came into affect and before what was permissable in thread were established. Other people who got banned were given (multiple) warnings for the exact same offence I was given.

CHARTER UPDATES (I'll clear it up and intigrate it into the charter properly when I get the chance later)


Flaming/baiting/trolling
- Disrespectful posts, trolling, flaming, spamming, and aggressive behaviour will lead to a warning and/or a ban.
Muppetry in any shape or form will not be tolerated.
Posts which are made purely to get a use out of another user will result in a ban. No exceptions.

Off Topic
- Dragging a thread off topic will result in a warning. Doing so repeatedly will result in a ban. Plain and simple.

Personal Abuse
- Posters who abuse personally others will be banned. This includes insulting another user, making fun of them for something they post or do in real life, etc.. Attack the post, not the poster.

Arguing with a moderator
- Do not argue with a moderator in a thread after they have given a warning or a ban etc. If you have an issue with a moderator's action then PM the mod in question. They will discuss it with you. You can then, if unsatisfied with the PM route, take things to Feedback.

Reporting Posts
Any thread or post that contravenes the charter should be reported. When reporting a post, make sure you have good reason. Someone disagreeing with you is not a troll, not all arguments are abusive etc. Do not reply to the post, simply report it and the moderators will deal with it.

Back-seat Modding
- There is to be no back-seat modding. If you see a post that you feel may break the forum charter, report it. Do not tell the poster to edit/delete the post, just hit the report button. Also do not tell other posters how to act/post/etc.. These decisions are to be made by mods, doing so yourself will result in infractions, repeatedly doing so will result in bans.

The charter was updated after I was banned and not before.

Gordon

rovert wrote: »

How?

By stating that and then going back and forth over issues that we have already gone over, that you have proven and you have been told. If you don't want to go back and forth then don't go back and forth.

Lets go forward, how can we all work together to achieve this?

rovert

Gordon wrote: »

By stating that and then going back and forth over issues that we have already gone over, that you have proven and you have been told. If you don't want to go back and forth then don't go back and forth.

Ok then

Gordon wrote: »

Lets go forward, how can we all work together to achieve this?

I have made efforts to improve things over at Pro Wrestling forum for for example I worked things out with KKV over the whole Kane thing (see the feedback thread) after the mods suggested doing this to KKV. I want to make a fresh start but banning me while I was posting as per the old charter's rules on the grounds of new rules I couldnt even see because the updated charter wasnt even posted yet is in my view not the way to make a fresh start IMO. As Ive said in this thread before the mods to their credit after my banning have done a great job from what I’ve seen creating and enforcing the new and pre-existing rules in the charter. In viewing the "new" Pro Wrestling forum I would like to be an active and postive member of it. In light of this I would like to see the 7 day ban lifted if possible.

Gordon

I think that's fantastic that you have worked with KKV to smooth things out and I'm sure the mods will only feel positive over this fresh new beginning. Nicely done. Being positive and active in the forum is the only way forward and it can only make the place a great place to be in, as you know. I'm very sure that the mods will take this into consideration when after your ban is up you start contributing and posting again.

I don't read the PW forum but after all this I may pop in from time to time and talk about Big Daddy and Hulk Hogan so prepare to be bored!

rovert

Gordon wrote: »

I think that's fantastic that you have worked with KKV to smooth things out and I'm sure the mods will only feel positive over this fresh new beginning. Nicely done. Being positive and active in the forum is the only way forward and it can only make the place a great place to be in, as you know. I'm very sure that the mods will take this into consideration when after your ban is up you start contributing and posting again.

So will I get a final reasoned judgement (Ive made a reasoned case in fairness) on whether my banning is unfair or not and whether my ban will be lifted at all? Or is this it? Sorry to press you and others I just want closure on the issue.

Gordon wrote: »

I don't read the PW forum but after all this I may pop in from time to time and talk about Big Daddy and Hulk Hogan so prepare to be bored!

There is discussion to be had believe it or not.

Gordon

rovert wrote: »

So will I get a final reasoned judgement (Ive made a reasoned case in fairness) on whether my banning is unfair or not and whether my ban will be lifted at all? Or is this it? Sorry to press you and others I just want closure on the issue.

From who?

There is discussion to be had believe it or not.

I think Hulk Hogan would bounce off Big Daddy so I'd bet on the latter..

rovert

Gordon wrote: »

From who?

From my understanding isnt it a group or commitee decision?

Im not going to press any further in light of this board's charter. But I would like some reason(s) why my banning is viewed as fair despite the case I made. I have accepted that my posts may be seen as off topic.

Gordon wrote: »

I think Hulk Hogan would bounce off Big Daddy so I'd bet on the latter..

:rolleyes:

Gordon

rovert wrote: »

From my understanding isnt it a group or commitee decision?

Im not going to press any further in light of this board's charter. But I would like some reason(s) why my banning is view as fair despite the case I made.

I guess it is a group decision, but there have been no formal decisions on how formal decisions are to be made on the Helpdesk forum. I dunno, we could try adding a poll if you like but Smods/Admins are not obliged to post or give their input, it is requested that they do*, so you could be waiting a while for a poll result from every Smod/Admin.

*That's how I see it anyway.

rovert

Gordon wrote: »

I guess it is a group decision, but there have been no formal decisions on how formal decisions are to be made on the Helpdesk forum. I dunno, we could try adding a poll if you like but Smods/Admins are not obliged to post or give their input, it is requested that they do*, so you could be waiting a while for a poll result from every Smod/Admin.

*That's how I see it anyway.

I wouldn’t be looking for input by every Smod/Admin (it isnt that important) just a general or near general consensus from some of them on why they feel my ban was fair in light of the main points I posted. Without any disrespect to the authority of Beruthiel or yourself I’m still hoping still that this ban will be overturned on the basis of unfairness of it.

Thank you for answering this query and for your time in general.

Gordon

OK, maybe another few people will give a yay or nay.

ta

rovert

So is any one going to explain why this ban was fair?