Is there an clique on boards.ie who are immune to the rules?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Ludo

Sully wrote: »

Amp wasnt being abusive he was joking about. It wasnt meant to be taken seriously and anybody reading his posts should have got that.

I believe this thread in feedback disproves this assertion. It was a humourous post (which nearly everyone got) which resulted in 15 people being banned from the soccer forum.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055463825

gandalf

Gandalf23 wrote: »

But then they should be banned/infracted no?

Thats why there is a general "no abuse" rule across boards.ie.

To the letter of the law he should have been disciplined but the smods or admins may have decided why bother if he is quitting.

TBH I would have banned him for the original thread because I got a splitting headache after I tried to read it !!!

Earthhorse

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

It's so occasional as to be unremarkable in my opinion. I've rarely witnessed it.

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Well, I doubt we'll come to agreement on that in this thread but in my opinion part of being an adult is not being precious about using swear words where applicable or being afraid to call a spade a spade.

Dades

Let me tell you something, pendejo.

You pull any of your crazy **** with us, you flash a piece out on the lanes, I'll take it away from you, stick it up your ass and pull the fcuking trigger till it goes... "clique".

gandalf

LOL Dades Nobody ****s with the Jesus

Nevyn

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I don't think it is with impunity I do think it is more to do with context which
some people may not be aware of which is just part of being a member of what had grown into a collection of communities here rather then just one big community.

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Hypocrisy or free will ?

I have been running that gauntlet and considering that argument of late myself with having well racked up 3 bans in two weeks.

I have to play by the rules in forums that I mod but I am not restricted in how
I express myself in other forums as long as I accept the consequences of my actions.

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Cos not every post is about the growth model and revenue some times it is about shíts and giggles.

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

People are not perfect, mods are people.

Gandalf23

Earthhorse wrote: »

Not in the example you quoted unless Chong reported the post.

Two mods have also said this (see above). I think this is a silly precedent, and I've heard the exact opposite argued for many many times. Have a read of the soccer thread just under this one in feedback to see the exact opposite being argued by many mods.

Insect Overlord

Ludo wrote: »

I believe this thread in feedback disproves this assertion. It was a humourous post (which nearly everyone got) which resulted in 15 people being banned from the soccer forum.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055463825

Every forum has a different feel/atmosphere about it among its regular users, but the soccer forum has to be modded more strictly than others because of the way things got way out of hand a few years ago.

Earthhorse

Gandalf23 wrote: »

Two mods have also said this (see above). I think this is a silly precedent, and I've heard the exact opposite argued for many many times. Have a read of the soccer thread just under this one in feedback to see the exact opposite being argued by many mods.

An File wrote: »

Every forum has a different feel/atmosphere about it among its regular users, but the soccer forum has to be modded more strictly than others because of the way things got way out of hand a few years ago.

What he said. Though, having read the original post in that Soccer thread I thought it was sailing close to the wind. I wouldn't worry too much about precedents; what we're looking for is a system in which people can use their judgement.

Daithi McGee

Gandalf23 wrote: »

But should others be immune from the general rules of boards.ie? If so, why is this allowed? Should not the rules of the site be applied equally to everyone? I've heard it said many many times on this site that mods are just regular users outside the forms they moderate and are subject to the rules of those forums. But is this really true or are some people here members of a clique to whom the rules do not apply?
.

I am a clique. Sorry for any hassle bosco.

:pac:

Gandalf23

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Thaedydal wrote: »

Hypocrisy or free will?

Hypocrisy.

And I've said it many times.

I was personally abused by a mod in feedback a few months ago. The mod was infracted, but he said he was glad he gave me personal abuse and the infraction was worth it. How can that mod have any moral authority when he bans someone in any of his forums for personal abuse. Its the worst kind of mealy mouthed double standards, and sets a very bad example for the forum and the site as a whole.

Thaedydal wrote: »

I have to play by the rules in forums that I mod but I am not restricted in how
I express myself in other forums as long as I accept the consequences of my actions.

Accepted.

But do you think all users should be treated in a similar manner or that some should be immune from the site rules and able to abuse with no consequences?

Keano

Boards Clique = Priory of Sion

Earthhorse

Gandalf23 wrote: »

But do you think all users should be treated in a similar manner or that some should be immune from the site rules and able to abuse with no consequences?

They are treated in a similar manner - their past behaviour, the context of the thread and the content of their post was all taken into account. What you want is a hard a fast rule that is applied without context and, well, I don't.

Gandalf23

Earthhorse wrote: »

They are treated in a similar manner

Eh, no they haven't.

They have been treated in totally different ways.

Have you been paying attention?

Earthhorse wrote: »

What you want is a hard a fast rule that is applied without context and, well, I don't.

I'd appreciate if you could support that assertion by linking to where I said that.

Or did you just imagine I said that?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

seamus

Gandalf23 wrote: »

How can that mod have any moral authority when he bans someone in any of his forums for personal abuse.

Mods aren't moral authorities. They are charged with keeping the peace on a specific forum. They're caretakers, not authorities.

Its the worst kind of mealy mouthed double standards, and sets a very bad example for the forum and the site as a whole.

With respect, it's only a double standard if the moderator believes that he shouldn't be infracted.

Earthhorse

Gandalf23 wrote: »

They have been treated in totally different ways.

Have you been paying attention?

Have you. I already explained how they were treated similarly; if you care to come back to me on that I'll listen.

Gandalf23 wrote: »

I'd appreciate if you could support that assertion by linking to where I said that.

Well, it seems to be what you want - the same outcome every time. What do you want then, spell it out for me.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Daithi McGee

Gandalf23 wrote: »

Hypocrisy.

And I've said it many times.

I was personally abused by a mod in feedback a few months ago. The mod was infracted, but he said he was glad he gave me personal abuse and the infraction was worth it. How can that mod have any moral authority when he bans someone in any of his forums for personal abuse. Its the worst kind of mealy mouthed double standards, and sets a very bad example for the forum and the site as a whole.




Accepted.

But do you think all users should be treated in a similar manner or that some should be immune from the site rules and able to abuse with no consequences?

I am not replying to what I quoted from you Gandalf23 but life is full of hypocrisy. You can get cliques anywhere, work for example. Boards cannot help if cliques form nor can they admit to dealing with everyone in the exact same manner, I'd imagine They do try though and that is probably the best part.

Were they really a shower or cnuts (not that you are saying that or even suggesting it) I'd say we would have seen it by now. In fact they are very reasonable and very tolerant people. Way more than about 90% of boards. I pulled that 90% out of my ass by the way. But they are people too and let him who has not sinned chuck the first rock, at me if you like.

I had a better point but I can't remember it

Gandalf23

This post by DeV may add to this discussion.

Very interesting that DeV states "A moderator should remove offensive material", but yet contributes to the offensive material in his other posts!

Perhaps he meant "A moderator should remove offensive material (except offensive material posted by me and the other Admins which cannot be moved or deleted ..."

Daithi McGee

Gandalf23 wrote: »

This post by DeV may add to this discussion.

Very interesting that DeV states "A moderator should remove offensive material", but yet contributes to the offensive material in his other posts!

Perhaps he meant "A moderator should remove offensive material (except offensive material posted by me and the other Admins which cannot be moved or deleted ..."

He is one of the bosses. He can do what he likes, it is their site and frankly I'd say it is a given not to fuk with an admins posts.

If you cannot wrap your head around that you would do well to leave tbh.

seamus

Ah c'mon now, you're really grasping at straws. He was referring to what a moderator is supposed to do where they are editing a post.

Fact is, you could spend 6 years trawling this site and come out with a litany of hypocrasies against every single member and moderator of the site.

I'm not saying that these kinds of things should be ignored, but you need to pick your battles. Argue against the actual injustices, not inconsequential stuff.

Gandalf23

seamus wrote: »

Mods aren't moral authorities. They are charged with keeping the peace on a specific forum. They're caretakers, not authorities.

I'm not sure if many will agree with this, but I've always seen mods as more than caretakers. And the admins are certainly more than caretakers.

Mods/smods/admins etc have power on boards.ie and therefore are more than just regular users. You guys have the power to directly influence the direction of this site. You guys have the power to influence how the community grows and develops. You make the rules and make decisions and judgment calls on how they are enforced.

Nevyn

Gandalf23 wrote: »

But do you think all users should be treated in a similar manner

All users.

I don't care who someone is if they break the rules in a forum I am tasked to
enforced the rules in and they break them then they did it to themselves.
They choose their action and they have to accept the consequences.
There are some cases where it has to be explained and for the most part
people then know where the line is clearly.

I have taken to task an smod for breaking the rules in a forum I mod and while they could not be offically banned from the forums they reclused themselves for the length of the ban.

Gandalf23

seamus wrote: »

Ah c'mon now, you're really grasping at straws. He was referring to what a moderator is supposed to do where they are editing a post.

Fact is, you could spend 6 years trawling this site and come out with a litany of hypocrasies against every single member and moderator of the site.

I'm not saying that these kinds of things should be ignored, but you need to pick your battles. Argue against the actual injustices, not inconsequential stuff.

OK ... fair point ... accepted.

I'm managing to drag my own thread slightly OT. Anyone any more opinions of the original question?

Gandalf23

Thaedydal wrote: »

All users.

I don't care who someone is if they break the rules in a forum I am tasked to
enforced the rules in and they break them then they did it to themselves.
They choose their action and they have to accept the consequences.
There are some cases where it has to be explained and for the most part
people then know where the line is clearly.

I have taken to task an smod for breaking the rules in a forum I mod and while they could not be offically banned from the forums they reclused themselves for the length of the ban.

Thanks Thead ... respect for that.

seamus

Gandalf23 wrote: »

And the admins are certainly more than caretakers.

Well, *they* are.

You guys have the power to directly influence the direction of this site. You guys have the power to influence how the community grows and develops. You make the rules and make decisions and judgment calls on how they are enforced.

You're right to a certain extent. My post may have been better phrased as "Mods shouldn't be the moral authorities", and they shouldn't be treated as the moral authorities by posters either.

However, as the site grows, the moderators become a sub-community too (just like the Photography forum and so forth), which in itself requires direction and guidance from an admin. This, I believe is partly the purpose of the community manager.

stovelid

Cliques - or something similar - are pretty inevitable if you have a large number of people (who have been here a long time), and who also know each other in real life. Why invest them with worth? An ignored clique is just a bunch of sad people.

I also think some posters (especially in the more popular forums) actually seem to think moderators should invest the same kind of application to modding as a paid career job. Like everyone, there are some users and mods I think are ****, but unless I get pretty direct grief from them, I'm happy to ignore them and enjoy boards.

sceptre

Thaedydal wrote: »

I have taken to task an smod for breaking the rules in a forum I mod and while they could not be offically banned from the forums they reclused themselves for the length of the ban.

Admins have been banned from Politics (in the same way). Not lately but it's happened.