Issue with mod and PM's

Daysha

Hi, I'll like to get another opinion on something that's been bothering me the past few days, namely GuanYin and the way she has handled my PM's ever since the the soccer feedback thread began.

(Bare with me on this one, this could take a while to explain)

A few days ago, when I saw how people had been thanking Pigheads "abusive" post in the soccer forum, I sent a PM to Xavi letting him aware of a poster who was banned for thanking an abusive post just last week. The main body of the PM is this:

I really think that if the thanks rule only works for some posts and not for others, either Killme's ban should be overturned or else some work needs to be done on clearing up the rule, because at the moment it's extremely inconsistent.

Note, I suggest that either Killme gets his ban overturned (hence more consistency) or else review that particular rule.

I did not ask for all 6 posters to be banned.

Xavi replied, thanking me for the feedback and forwarded the PM onto all the mods, including GuanYin. So I am 100% certain she received my PM.

Then the feedback thread started. After pages and pages of debate, I read this by GuanYin:

Mitch Connor, to answer you question. When I came upon the issue, it was with a PM from a user claiming that we were being incosistant by not banning the users who thanked the abusive post after killmee0 was banned.

I'll admit I don't know the joke being referenced but the ban was made and I erred on the side of consistancy (a user had already complained). I will admit, I did question this with the other soccer mods at the time, however, despite his protestations now, Pighead was asked at the time why he posted the abuse.

Since it was now common knowledge in the thread that I had PMed the mods straight after Pigheads post, to me that reads as if she was talking about me. Obviously I was very surprised, because that was not what I had said in the PM, so I posted this in the topic:

Are those points about me?!?

If they are, then you've completely misinterpreted what I said in the PM.

GuanYin doesn't answer me, yet continues to post away in the thread, so I post again:

GuanYin, please answer this which I posted an hour or two ago, because we really need to clear up what I said in my PM

You said I complained to the mods about the original 6 not being banned for the thanks.

That is simply not true.

Eventually she replies, saying:

Hrmm, well I didn't get the original PM, so maybe I mistook the information within. However, it did mention consistancy

I was very annoyed when I read that.

Firstly, it seems pretty obvious that that is an acceptance that it was me she was talking about when responding to Mitch.

Secondly, she says she didn't get the original PM, which as I've said above, is not the case.

Thirdly, she says she based her claim that I asked for all 6 posters to be banned, simply because "it did mention consistancy". I was being attacked by some posters for originally PMing Xavi in the first place and being responsible in a way for their bans, so you can imagine how I felt when a MOD of all people told the entire thread that I asked for all 6 to be banned. That is a complete lie.

My blood was still boiling at that point, so I responded in the heat of the moment. It was nothing sinister, no where near it, but I admit to being overly-confrontational in my style of writing. I've since apologised to GuanYin for this. You can read it here

Once I posted that, yet again GuanYin continued to post in the thread without responding to me. Eventually, after I asked her again (as well as thanking her for reviewing the decision about the 6 thankers), she replied with this:

I think I won't. If you wantto post something polite and reasonable, I'll happily entertain. If you're going to post something as confrontational as that, I'm going to ignore it.

For all the remarks on my attitude in posting, I never treat anyone with the abuse or vitriol that they treat me.

I think I'm drawing a line under this issue.

I wasn't sure whether she was referring to me when talking about abuse or vitrol, but I gave my thoughts on what she did in a more polite and reasonable manner, precisely what she asked for. You can read that response here

Now I was pretty confident she would respond to me and finally draw under the issue. Not a hope:

GY you did say you'd answer my problem regarding your interpretation of my original PM if I posted something less confrontational. Well, can I point you in the direction of post 420? In case you missed it the first time.

Still waiting on your response to post 420 here as well.

Still waiting on my response too btw.

Three times I asked her to respond to the questions I put towards her, three times she completely ignored me, while posting in the same thread!

About an hour ago, I gave up, and PM'ed her instead. Again, I apologised for my overly-confrontational post, and I asked her once again what I was asking her the entire thread:

If you feel you didn't misinterpret my PM and are happy with the way you dealed with it, then please, explain to how you feel like that.

If you admit to misinterpreting my PM and posting untrue stuff about it when you originally replied to Mitch, I'd like an apology, and then the matter is settled.

Then her reply confused the hell out of me. Obviously I wont post it here without her permission, but in no uncertain terms, she hinted that she wasn't even talking about my PM when responding to Mitch in the first place!

Looking at that PM now, I still can't fully understand whether that's what she actually said or not. The wording of it was...confusing, to say the least.

I responded asking her could she confirm whether it was my PM or not she was referring to, to which she told me she doesn't feel the need to take the discussion further and to post in helpdesk if I wished.

Not exactly very helpful is it?

She won't respond to me via PM anymore, so I have to use this topic to ask her the same questions I still haven't got full replies to nearly 2 days later.

1) GY, were you referring to my PM when you responded to Mitch? Judging by your first response about "consistency", I've assumed this answer to be yes.

2) If no, why couldn't you tell me this before I sent 6 PM's and 9 posts about the issue? It was completely obvious from reading my posts that I had assumed they were, so why didn't you tell me otherwise?

3) If yes, then I'll ask the same questions I've been asking for days, one's I still haven't got answers to:

If you feel you didn't misinterpret my PM and are happy with the way you dealed with it, then please, explain to how you feel like that.

If you admit to misinterpreting my PM and posting untrue stuff about it when you originally replied to Mitch, I'd like an apology, and then the matter is settled.

Regardless of the answers I get from her, at this stage I wanted to highlight my unhappiness in the way she's handled this whole mess.

She blatantly ignored my numerous posts in the thread, all but one of which were written in a proper, mature fashion. I've done nothing out of order in the soccer forum or that feedback thread to deserve to be completely neglected like that.

I understand she had her hands full with that topic, but when a poster feels that a Mod has misinterpreted a private message and posted that misinterpretation in a public forum, I think that poster deserves to be anxious to get clear up any confusion that arises.

As it still stands, there are many soccer posters who believe I asked for the thankers to be banned and got what I wanted, all complete lies, and its because of what GY said in the topic.

This has gone on for days now, so all I want is for it to be sorted as quickly and fairly as possible.

Daysha

One point I forgot to mention. GY does know this topic exists, and I have already asked her for a response here. She hasn't confirmed to me whether she will or not, surprise surprise.

Considering how she's been so dismissive of me up until this point, I'm not holding my breath for a reply. If she continues to ignore me, since PMs no longer work with her, can an admin/smod possibly have a word with her?

It's generally common curtosy to reply to something as lengthy as that, never mind the fact that it's her that needs some explaining to do, not me.

PS - Admins/Smods, please note this is not a personal vendetta. I've had numerous posters back me up, either in the feedback topic or via PM, who are equally annoyed at how GY has treated me the past 2 days.

hullaballoo

I think you need to back away from the whole issue and take some time off without thinking about it.

It looks to me a lot like you're getting overly frustrated by GY's mannerisms and her way of dealing with things. From the outset, it seems like your tone is accusatory - that you're accusing GY of misinterpreting your PM. There's no evidence available to either me or you that GY was referring to your PM when responding to Mitch. It could be the case that you're not the only person who PMed the soccer mods saying that they were being inconsistent.

Basically, I think you've over-involved yourself in this issue where it really doesn't have a whole lot to do with you. Oh, and it really does look like a personal vendetta at this stage - and saying that it's not doesn't mean it isn't.

(Just in case you think there's any vitriol in this post, there isn't: it's my genuinely-held opinion that you need to cool off because this really isn't a big issue relative to some of the ongoings on this site.)

Daysha

Thanks for the reply hulla. Just a couple of points if I may:

GY has since confirmed in the feedback thread that she was talking about my PM when responded to Mitch. Two of the posters attacked her on the way she handled the situation and she said this:

I have told Deise that I received only a forward of his PM and not the initial PM. I didn't respond to him. I merely discussed the issue with the mod. Deise didn't ask for anyone to be banned. Fair enough, if I suggested he did I was wrong.

To which I replied:

I don't know what it is with you copacetic. I post numerous PMs and posts asking for an explanation with no given, then you come along, mention it once and you get more out of her than I ever did!

But what confuses me is why did she send me that PM suggesting otherwise? I'm reading over the message now and it definitely reads to me like she says she WASN'T talking about my PM to Mitch.

Was it to wind me up, to get me to stop asking her about it, I don't know.

If you feel like this is a personal vendetta, that's your opinion. But let it be known that had GY been clear to me the very first time I asked about it, we wouldn't be in this situation.

If it was a personal vendetta, I would've accused her of purposefully changing the content of my PM to suit her own agenda. I have never said such a thing.

If she says it was a mistake, I'll believe her.

At this stage, all I ask is an apology on her part for misinterpreting my PM and posting that misinterpretation in the forum as fact without properly reading over the full PM.

Over the 600 posts or so in the feedback thread GY has stressed the importance of the poster never assuming things on a forum, just like how people assumed Pigheads reply was a joke.

She fell into her own trap by assuming the contents of my PM without reading its full context.

It's ironic to think that between the whole mess between the two of us, I'm the only one that's made an apology so far!

I've fully apologised for my first reply, an apology which she accepted. But curtosy and honesty works both ways and I firmly believe I deserve a similar apology.

If said apology is received, this whole thing is done and dusted.

Daysha

Guys, I had intended holding back from posting again until I hear from either GY or anyone else in this thread, but after reading over the feedback thread again, I want to let you aware of some of the other comments from soccer users regarding this issue.

Hobart posted this:

GY directly accuses a "poster" (who we know is dessie59) of claiming that the mods were not consistent by not banning the users who thanked the abusive post after killmee0 was banned. A direct accusation in this post. She has the opportunity to also back up her "it wasn't me" accusation which has been leveled at her from Neil, and yet she does not respond.

deise responds with understandable outrage about being accused of asking for users to be banned. He then asks for GY to clarify what was in the PM. GY responds with a well I didn't get the original PM response, followed by a smiley. WTF? You just accused the guy of asking for his fellow posters to be banned, and you come up with a bucket of sh1t answer like that. Which is later proved to be a lie btw.

This post sums it up perfectly. How dare she accuse a fellow poster of something, and while being in full possession of the facts tries to laugh if off as if it was some sort post on consistency. Rather than addressing the mis-information you have posted about deise29, you decide to accuse him of being impolite and unreasonable. You've some neck tbh.

Pighead posted this:

Guan Yin claimed that deise had complained to the mods about the original 6 not being banned for the thanks. This was an outright lie which deise pulled her up on. Her reply:

Hrmm, well I didn't get the original PM, so maybe I mistook the information within. However, it did mention consistancy

Thats absolutely shocking. It smacks of making up lies to suit her agenda. And the "Oh well, guess I didn't read it properly" brushing it off attitude stinks too.

Apologising on message boards is simple! You don't have to look into the other persons eyes and your throat doesn't get all tight with the prospect of having to admit you are a flawed human being. Message board= five tippity tap taps and its done. SORRY. Easy.

Others like redout and Des have also noted how I was blatantly being ignored by GY throughout the thread.

I'll say it again, this is not a personal vendetta. I'm here representing the many posters in the soccer forum who've been very unimpressed with how GY has gone about her business.

GuanYin

Desise may I publish your entire PM?

Daysha

Hi GY. The one I originally sent to Xavi which was forwarded onto you?

Of course.

GuanYin

Hey Xavi, how's it going? Just a quick query if I may:

One of the posters in the Man Utd-Chelsea topic, Killme00, was banned for 2 weeks for thanking a post against the charter. He posted a message in the help desk debating why he didn't deserve the ban but GuanYin was pretty straight him - thank a post against the charter is a yellow card offense.

I actually backed up Killme00 via PM saying how I thought it was very harsh. I also made the point about how many times in different forums people thank abusive or stupid posts for the "entertainment" factor, if you get me.

Thats happened just now: 4 people have thanked Pigheads post, which is a far worse post then what was thanked by Killme00 over the weekend.

So whats the deal then? Are the football mods really going to ban everyone that thanks Pigheads post? I really think that if the thanks rule only works for some posts and not for others, either Killme's ban should be overturned or else some work needs to be done on clearing up the rule, because at the moment it's extremely inconsistent.

Whatcha think?

Deise

OK Smods, I'll try clear this up as best I can. This was forwarded to me. It drew attention to the fact that 4 posters had thanked a post by Pighead. The killme00 poster had been banned the week previously by another mod which, the user claims was less abusive than this instance.

Now, I'll admit I may have read that as, "well are you going to ban them too?" when the question was "are you really going to ban them all, I think you should overturn the ban". Which is obviously a mistake on my part. That said, desise, your first post does suggest you asked if we were going to ban the other users :
"I PMed one of the mods asking were they going to go down the same route as Killme's ban and ban all the people who thanked the post".
However, I agree that you didn't complain and I'm sorry if I implied you did (that said, you weren't the only PM we got on the issue and I wasbattling on several fronts so I feel a mistake should be forgiven). In anycase, I applied the rules of the forum as they stand. Ones which the Admins know about and support our stance on.

Shortly after, I wondered about the ban, I consulted my co-mod as to whether the bans were valid as there was confusion over whether the poster intended abuse. The response was that by PM with the offending poster, he was sure it was intended abuse and that the bans were valid. With no evidence to the contrary for either of us, we surmmised that a poster had posted abuse and that other posters had thanked the abuse.

Stupidly, I left the post in place.

The next day, I discover some PMs, a feedback thread and an organized breaking of rules.

I looked at the original post saw all the posters who'd thanked an abusive post. I deletd the post as it was merley going to turn into a clusterfrak at that stage. I tried to decide who had broken the rules vs. who had broken the rules as an FU to the mods. Many weren't even soccer forum posters so they were ruled out.

Those who had discussed beaking the rules before they did so, had their soccer access removed with a week before re-applying. The reason for that is that they voided their access request agreement and need to read and agree to the rules again before regaining access. There are ways to disagree with things, that isn't one of them and while you may feel you are being dealt with harshly, you considered the options when you decided to break the rules.

I responded in feedback although at that stage the knives were out. Just addressing deise69, you had no problem with the modding until 1. you got some abuse yourself and 2. you felt I accused you of complaining. Again I was wrong if I suggested you complained. You all was merely for consistancy and stated you were happy with the consistancy of banning the others.

We did on review, reduce the bans of those who did not pre-meditate a breaking of the rules, some were happy with this and some even acknowledged that they should have been more knowledgable of the charter. I would like to thank those posters.

Now, I've explained the reasoning of the issue already. Even if the original post is a joke, we can't have abusive posts in soccer because as man will acknowledge, users will simply use quotes to abuse other posters and then claim Pigheads post as an example of it being OK. Regarding the thankers The same thing. You may not like the rule, I personally agree with it, but then I only use thanks when I feel it is deserved. I didn't create the rule (with reference to the PM that allegedly disputes this, I was referring to wanting to start a thread on thanks/abuse re the entire site, not soccer, the rule was in place in soccer months before that) but I do believe in it.

So yes, mistakes were made by the soccer mods. I'll hold up my hands to that, however we worked within the rules with the best information we had at the time. Had we had clearer indication it was a joke post at the time, maybe we would have deleted it and not banned anyone. We didn't get that, in fact we got the opposite, so we reacted on the information we had at the time.


I understand that there are always those with vendetta and it comes with the job. However, a post like this would never have worked in feedback with the level of spite in that thread. It would have been lost to pedantry and personal grudges. Here, I hope it receives better consideration.

Daysha

Thanks for that GY. Apology accepted.

As far as I'm concerned that's the end of the matter.