Not Animally - The Off Topic Thread

Whispered

seamus wrote: »

In general a mod should avoid putting mod directions and personal opinion in the same post. I'd usually put the mod direction in one post, then personal opinion in the next.

Yes, because a moderating post "don't do this" followed by an opinion can look as if moderator is moderating the posts based on their opinion rather than the actual discussion, people going off topic etc.

This is all I meant and certainly not intend on there being a big thing against Hellrazer here.

If a poster asks "can you tell me where to find a reputable breeder of a cavachon" and you know, that due to the nature of the breed, the breeders are byb or people who haven't a clue what they are doing. Are you "soap boxing" by telling the op that? Is this, again, a problem with tone rather than content in a lot of cases, and if so, can it be dealt with as any other reported posts?

Whispered

seamus wrote: »

I post more regularly in a personal capacity than any of the other mods. Presumably you think I should forgoe my mod status too?

Stop fishing for compliments

toadfly

Hellrazer wrote: »

I was proven right.The chavcon thread--the user bought a Chavcon which I disagree with but its THEIR decision--totally proves that opinion ramming doesnt work.

This isnt exactly true, that particular OP was interested in the idea of a rescue and he said the pup was bought without him knowing. Not the same thing as not listening to advice.

Discodog

Hellrazer wrote: »

You have a serious problem with me since the day you started posting here DD.Im starting to find it personal now.

My views are ALWAYS a personal opinion and I posted about first hand experience.

Where did I do that

I do not have a problem with you. I do not have a problem with you posting or Seamus & any other Mod. I have never had an issue with any other Mod on Boards. What I do have a big problem with is this:

Hellrazer wrote: »

Can the regulars please stop preaching to users asking genuine questions about these mixed breeds/mongrels or whatever you want to refer to them as.

Im sick to my teeth of these "get a rescue" responses everytime someone mentions a labradoodle/rothrussel or whatever.

It is putting users off the forum.

Im going to discuss this with the other mods and see what their view is on it.

Two threads in two days ruined by the whole " get a rescue" brigade.

Enough is enough.

This is clearly you trying to direct the forum in a way that you feel is appropriate to reflect your view. It is a very threatening & totally unnecessary piece of Moderation. Immediately before this intervention the OP made it clear that they welcomed pro rescue opinion.

Your Moderation was not to protect or in response to the OP but purely to shift the discussion & threaten anyone else who posts. Had any other poster of made the same remark you would probably of banned them. It is to the great credit of Sweeper & the other posters who continued to post.

What makes it inexplicable is that you did it twice & this after you PM'd me to say that you are going to be more "hands off".

What's more you have sent out a very clear warning to the pro rescue fraternity to back off.

seamus wrote: »

TBH, I don't see that as a problem, I see it as a bonus. You could equally say that the fact that my personal views are in line with the majority of posters is a serious problem because it means there's an instant biase against anyone who posts a differing opinion.

It is not a problem because you have shown that you can detach your personal view from Moderation as 99% of Mods do very well. You & I both welcome opposing opinion & we both treat it with respect. How many of my posts are reported ?.

seamus wrote: »

I post more regularly in a personal capacity than any of the other mods. Presumably you think I should forgoe my mod status too?

No one in this forum, including me, would wish you not to post. You would never of posted in the way that Hellrazer did & there is never any ambiguity between your posts & your Moderation.

Hellrazer

Discodog wrote: »

I do not have a problem with you I do not have a problem with you posting or Seamus & any other Mod. I have never had an issue with any other Mod on Boards.

Is that right--how many times have you run to the helpdesk and feedback forum to complain about the modding of this forum every time one of us went head to head with you over some topic or another.You complained about Bond,Star-pants and myself at one stage or another.

This is clearly you trying to direct the forum in a way that you feel is appropriate to reflect your view. It is a very threatening & totally unnecessary piece of Moderation.

I was not trying to direct the forum--I was trying to give a different view which Ive experienced personally.?In your opinion it was unnecessary--In mine it wasnt.

Your Moderation was not to protect or in response to the OP but purely to shift the discussion & threaten anyone else who posts.

My comment was to give the OP something else to think about other than getting a rescue rammed down their throat.And if you search back this whole has been an issue of mine for years.

Had any other poster of made the same remark you would probably of banned them.

I dont think so--I made my point and explained why here in this thread.

What makes it inexplicable is that you did it twice & this after you PM'd me to say that you are going to be more "hands off".

Hands off until something is reported which those threads were with the reason of "bullying the op in a rescue dog" which I agreed with.

What's more you have sent out a very clear warning to the pro rescue fraternity to back off.

Yes I do believe that they should back off a little bit at times.This forum is for all animal users not just the rescue fraternity who I sometimes think that this is their forum to solely post in.

Whispered

So can you confirm please, your posts which we are talking about, with clear moderator instructions to posters. Were they based on your opinions and experiences or were you moderating the discussion based on what is and isn't allowed in the forum?

A moderator trying to stop a conversation, and saying it's because all the rescues they have had experience with have been "fooked up" is certainly likely to put people off rescues. Which would be an awful shame. And I know something you wouldn't want.

Hellrazer

Whispered wrote: »

So can you confirm please, your posts which we are talking about, with clear moderator instructions to posters. Were they based on your opinions and experiences or were you moderating the discussion based on what is and isn't allowed in the forum?

It was based more on my experiences with rescues and the fact that rescuing does not always work or is not always right for a particular person.

A moderator trying to stop a conversation, and saying it's because all the rescues they have had experience with have been "fooked up" is certainly likely to put people off rescues. Which would be an awful shame. And I know something you wouldn't want.

I was never trying to stop that or any conversation--I was as I keep saying trying to get an alternative opinion across and Im getting flak for that because it goes against all the "rescue fraternitys" views.

Its quite typical here to be honest.If anyone mentions an alternative view that goes against the grain they are slated by a core group of those involved in rescue.Its the same with hunting--I got slated because I agreed to let a discussion continue and god forbid even mentioned that I went hunting twice in my life.

People are getting annoyed because Im a mod with a view that goes against the grain.Id love it to have been an ordinary user to have posted something similar to what I said and seen what happened.That user would have been run off the forum by some people for posting it.

**Edit**The mod hats off for this post!

Cherry Blossom

Since you've mentioned the hunting thread

Apologies if I've offended anyone (or everyone!) with my little rant on the 'opinions' given on it, I probably shouldn't read hunting threads at all :rolleyes:

Discodog

Hellrazer wrote: »

Is that right--how many times have you run to the helpdesk and feedback forum to complain about the modding of this forum every time one of us went head to head with you over some topic or another.You complained about Bond,Star-pants and myself at one stage or another.

Not true. I have never complained nor had any reason to complain about Starpants. Personally I think that she tried to do a good job & I would welcome her back anytime. However since you mention the Feedback thread you made the same allegations about me in Jan 2010 & this was my response.

Discodog wrote: »

Hellrazer you have stated my case more eloquently that I could. How many times have I been infracted or banned ?. If I see that something is wrong I follow the system & politely raise it. You will not allow any criticism of you, the moderation, & the content of the Board. To her credit Starpants did offer some explanations. You are making it sound as if I dominate your inbox. I have raised 5 queries in 15 months. I have only ever sent 1 "complaint" to another topic Mod so I am hardly constantly "moaning".

Hellrazer wrote: »

I was not trying to direct the forum--I was trying to give a different view which Ive experienced personally.?In your opinion it was unnecessary--In mine it wasnt.

But you used words and phrases that made it obvious that you were issuing a Moderator warning - for absolutely nothing.

Hellrazer wrote: »

My comment was to give the OP something else to think about other than getting a rescue rammed down their throat.And if you search back this whole has been an issue of mine for years.

You didn't address the comment to the OP - it was directed specifically to other posters. I know that you are highly sceptical of rescues & you have posted showing a disdain of the ISPCA. So, because it is an issue of yours, you regulate it. Again you are allowing your personal views & bias to affect your Moderation of the forum. Sometimes it seems like you feel that A&P is your baby & no one else is going to be allowed to influence it.

Hellrazer wrote: »

This forum is for all animal users not just the rescue fraternity who I sometimes think that this is their forum to solely post in.

You know very well that the vast majority of users support rescues & animal welfare - you even claim to do so yourself. There have been a lot of posts where all sides of an argument get aired. Are you really suggesting that posters should back off from expressing an opinion because there is an imbalance ?. How do you propose doing this ?. Is it first come first post ?. Of course the majority are going to be pro rescue & when all the rescues have been scared off this board there will still be people who promote their cause.

Hellrazer wrote: »

I was never trying to stop that or any conversation--I was as I keep saying trying to get an alternative opinion across and Im getting flak for that because it goes against all the "rescue fraternitys" views.

Its quite typical here to be honest.If anyone mentions an alternative view that goes against the grain they are slated by a core group of those involved in rescue.Its the same with hunting--I got slated because I agreed to let a discussion continue and god forbid even mentioned that I went hunting twice in my life.

People are getting annoyed because Im a mod with a view that goes against the grain.Id love it to have been an ordinary user to have posted something similar to what I said and seen what happened.That user would have been run off the forum by some people for posting it.

**Edit**The mod hats off for this post!

You still don't get it. No one is complaining about you posting a contrary or different view or getting annoyed because you are a Mod. The annoying part is that you made a very threatening, warning, moderating post.

Strangely, rather than trying to be objective, you seem to see yourself as a victim. If most of us offend & we didn't mean to, we apologise. It happens quite a lot on A&P because most of us never set out to offend.

Discodog

adrenalinjunkie wrote: »

I probably shouldn't hunting threads at all :rolleyes:

You should probably stay off the Poitin

Btw can you find out how many drag hunts there are in Ireland ?. I have tried & failed but your superior intellect will do better. . Feel free to PM me the answer. Thanks.

Whispered

Hellrazer wrote: »

I was never trying to stop that or any conversation--I was as I keep saying trying to get an alternative opinion across and Im getting flak for that because it goes against all the "rescue fraternitys" views.

Its quite typical here to be honest.If anyone mentions an alternative view that goes against the grain they are slated by a core group of those involved in rescue.Its the same with hunting--I got slated because I agreed to let a discussion continue and god forbid even mentioned that I went hunting twice in my life.

People are getting annoyed because Im a mod with a view that goes against the grain.Id love it to have been an ordinary user to have posted something similar to what I said and seen what happened.That user would have been run off the forum by some people for posting it.

**Edit**The mod hats off for this post!

If my posts are causing issues in the forum hellrazer, please, do let me know. If not, please don't accuse me of attacking posters because they "go against the grain" because I absolutely do not. I can assure I am not part of any "fraternity" and rather than "giving you flak" I'm trying to discuss an issue. It's not personal.

I have said more than once that I have no issue with your opinion, and that I agree that it's important people hear all angles. So really, I hope you don't think I'm just having a go for the sake of it.

You were trying to stop the conversation - that was very clear. You were, as a moderator, warning posters to stop posting about a certain topic. What was not clear, was your reasons why.

Surely, considering the amount of people who have read your post in the same way as I have and posted here, most of them politely, you can see just how your post came across. Whether you meant it to or not, the post read like a mod warning against rescues.

It was based more on my experiences with rescues and the fact that rescuing does not always work or is not always right for a particular person.

Or did you not mean it to come across as a mod warning, just an opinion?

Again to be clear - I have no issue with your - or anybodys views conflicting with my own.

Cherry Blossom

Discodog wrote: »

You should probably stay off the Poitin

Why type a load a words when you can leave half of them out and people still know what it means? What a waste of my life :rolleyes:

Don't drink anything stronger than ribenna!

Discodog

Whispered wrote: »

You were trying to stop the conversation - that was very clear. You were, as a moderator, warning posters to stop posting about a certain topic. What was not clear, was your reasons why.

The Sweeper has conveyed my thoughts. It felt like a kick in the guts to me as well.

The Sweeper wrote: »

@ Hellrazer - no, it wasn't your take on rescues I was disheartened by. It was the tone and message I took (note I took, not necessarily that you deliberately gave), in your post.

I read your post (obviously not literally) as "FFS, you lot who push rescues and counsel against mongrels, would you ever shut up, if someone wants an -oodle they can have one, what's so bad about them anyway, I'm sick of you telling people who come in here looking for an -oodle that it's a bad choice because it puts people off the forum, and I'm going to talk about it with my fellow mods, possibly with a view to amending the charter to stop you bringing it up".

Felt like a bit of a kick in the guts tbh. Individual oodles may be great dogs, but the overwhelming effect of the rise in oodle popularity is, as already discussed, detrimental to animal welfare across the board. Any implication from a forum mod that it's somehow done to death and we should stop talking about it - that disheartens me.

Cherry Blossom

adrenalinjunkie wrote: »

From the labradoodle thread:

Hellrazer wrote: »

Can the regulars please stop preaching to users asking genuine questions about these mixed breeds/mongrels or whatever you want to refer to them as.


Im sick to my teeth of these "get a rescue" responses everytime someone mentions a labradoodle/rothrussel or whatever.

It is putting users off the forum.

Im going to discuss this with the other mods and see what their view is on it.

Two threads in two days ruined by the whole " get a rescue" brigade.

Enough is enough.

Of what I would consider the most 'agressive' posters on that thread to be fair Hellrazer one of them has a total of 76 post on the whole of boards, one has 11 and the other has 3. I'm not sure if these are the ones you are refering to as 'regular posters' but they would definately seem to be to have been the ones most likely reported, can you please clarify this?

What are the chances of a reply to this post? None? thought not. .

Also -

Off-Topic threads are supposed to be chillout zones are they not? What is the point of having a thread called the off-topic thread if it is to be high-jacked and designated by mods as a place to discuss 'feedback' and 'issues' they have with mods and other posters. What was wrong with the feedback thread that was there already and was locked? If a place is needed on the forum for feedback then one should be provided, otherwise the 'designated' place should be a thread started for the purpose in the help desk or dispute resolution areas as stated in the FAQs linked to in the forum charter.

I've checked the forum charter and I don't see any rules why I shouldn't as long as it's animal related and it no longer feels appropriate to post it here so I'm off to start a new thread now called the Chill-out Zone, thanks for listening.

Hellrazer

adrenalinjunkie wrote: »

What are the chances of a reply to this post? None? thought not. .

Sorry adrenaline junkie--Im wasnt online yesterday much and missed this but for what its worth it was a regular that reported a regular.

I've checked the forum charter and I don't see any rules why I shouldn't as long as it's animal related and it no longer feels appropriate to post it here so I'm off to start a new thread now called the Chill-out Zone, thanks for listening.

Good idea.

The Sweeper

...did I just see that the labradoodle thread was edited to remove the comments protesting Hellrazer's original post that caused this fuss, and Hellrazer's original post remains?

So that thread is still on the front page and is back to looking as though labradoodles are the best dog ever and the forum regulars need to stfu?

Hellrazer

The Sweeper wrote: »

...did I just see that the labradoodle thread was edited to remove the comments protesting Hellrazer's original post that caused this fuss, and Hellrazer's original post remains?

So that thread is still on the front page and is back to looking as though labradoodles are the best dog ever and the forum regulars need to stfu?

Well I havent edited anything if thats where youre going with this...unless your mistaking it for the chavcon thread.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056188208&page=3

The Sweeper

Must be mixing it up. Actually hadn't realised you'd posted exactly the same post on both threads.

>__<

Cherry Blossom

The Sweeper wrote: »

Must be mixing it up. Actually hadn't realised you'd posted exactly the same post on both threads.

>__<

Yes, there never was any posts from regular posters pushing rescues on the labradoodle thread which is why I asked for clarification on Hellrazers post on that thread.

Cherry Blossom

Going back to the calender thread - a Boards member came on posting a load of nonsence and trying to provoke other posters I believe for the purpose of getting the thread locked in I believe an act of subtle censorship. The same thing has just happened on the Ceaser Milan thread (I'm aware it was way off topic) except there were 2 of them, the thread was dragged off-topic by them, again by continually posting nonscence, contradicting themselves and directing personal abuse at others. Well it seems they have succeeded in stopping the file of evidence against the god that is Ceaser Millan from becomming any heavier.

I don't understand how mods hand out instant bans to posters of one-liners and no-infractions at all are issued in cases like this.

ToniTuddle

Maybe the mods aint been online?

If someone reports the threads in question and asks the mods to take a look I'm sure they will sort it out.

Think it's called flaming? Getting a deliberate rise out of other posters and that aint tolerated.

Was reading the start of the Cesar thread but aint finished it must have a nosy!

Cherry Blossom

ToniTuddle wrote: »

Think it's called flaming? Getting a deliberate rise out of other posters and that aint tolerated.

Was reading the start of the Cesar thread but aint finished it must have a nosy!

Seamus has locked the thread, which is exactly what they wanted. They have thumbs upped him for it.

Hellrazer

adrenalinjunkie wrote: »

Going back to the calender thread - a Boards member came on posting a load of nonsence and trying to provoke other posters I believe for the purpose of getting the thread locked in I believe an act of subtle censorship. The same thing has just happened on the Ceaser Milan thread (I'm aware it was way off topic) except there were 2 of them, the thread was dragged off-topic by them, again by continually posting nonscence, contradicting themselves and directing personal abuse at others. Well it seems they have succeeded in stopping the file of evidence against the god that is Ceaser Millan from becomming any heavier.

I don't understand how mods hand out instant bans to posters of one-liners and no-infractions at all are issued in cases like this.

Adrenalinejunkie--I think youre being a bit unfair here.The user in question was warned on thread but for the record there were also some regularts who also could have been issued a warning.Discodogs last comment regarding an apology to Egar could be read as back seat modding but I chooes to let it go.

There were also some comments by other regulars that were quite aggressive aswell but again WERE NOT REPORTED

If they were I would have acted.

For the record it was the core group of users who reported Galway k9`s posts and if Galway k9 and I feel that he was ganged up on in that thread.

I choose to issue a warning for his retaliation but if he had acted correctly he would have reported the posts and I would have chosen not to issue a warning on thread but would have closed it a lot sooner.

Cherry Blossom

Quite early on in his posts he made what looked like a very blatent attempt to put a rescue in disrepute by pretending he had some personal knowledge of them then posted that he was going to ignore their reply to it (haha as s/he put it), and continued posting things and denying that s/he had posted when it's clear for all to see. If this isn't blatent provokation I don't know what is. If it were not EGAR, who is a regular poster and was able to defend herself but a comercial business they would easily have had a claim to defamination out of that.

Discodog

I have to agree with AJ. It leaves the field wide open for anyone to get a thread closed if they disagree with it and the evidence suggests that this could of been K9's plan.

Hellrazer

Discodog wrote: »

I have to agree with AJ. It leaves the field wide open for anyone to get a thread closed if they disagree with it and the evidence suggests that this could of been K9's plan.

I dont think it was anyones plan to get that thread closed.You managed that quite well between you.

We dont just lock threads unless they get out of hand and that one did.Having just had K9 pm me about his warning Im convinced that this was not his intention at all.

In saying that he was wrong to retaliate in the way he did.

Whispered

I'm very disappointed to see the thread closed too. It seems that all people have to do when they disagree with the way a thread is going, is cause trouble. I agree with Toni Tuddle that what happened in the thread was flaming (by both sides in fairness) and we have seen it happen in the forum before. (calendar thread for instance). The fact two people involved in the mess the thread became, thanked the closing post just goes to show this is what they intended to do.

A few issues from that thread; why is it acceptable for posters to come into a thread and say things about the forum in general, their opinion of the majority of posters, or bring up other threads? It's off topic and serves only to annoy people, very purposefully. Is that not why this thread is here now? I'm not saying that people should a warning for it or anything, but perhaps a bit of direction like "If you have a problem in the forum please report the post or use the feedback thread".

I have to agree with AJ's feeling that K9 was trying to put a rescues name into disrepute. It is not the first time he has posted in reference to EGAR; something which may be construed as trying to cause issues for the organisation. He was also coughing some nonsense at me, which he has so far refused to say what he was trying to get at.

Personally I think the thread should never have gone so far off topic in the first place and I do feel we need to learn to stop responding to nonsense. (myself included).

You made a reference to choosing to let some things go, personally I'd prefer for you to warn or infract my posts as necessary if it means that trouble makers can be weeded out and those posters who wish to have a discussion can do so. In all fairness, Dre and Vai both posted in support of CM, and there was no (or little?) sniping or sarcasm. I thought we were all doing very well. Ever the optimist :rolleyes:

In my opinion constant reference to "regulars" and non regulars could serve to encourage a "them and us" attitude some posters feel is prevalent in the forum.

Galway K9

Discodog wrote: »

I have to agree with AJ. It leaves the field wide open for anyone to get a thread closed if they disagree with it and the evidence suggests that this could of been K9's plan.

Disco ive always seen you as a really genuine and sincere poster (youve backed me up on many occasion regarding Jack) but i had no intention and didnt even report anyone on the cesar thread. I got a warning and i left.


Ok i wanted to stay out but i have to address this and if i get banned rightly so.


I never once insulted EGAR as i believe she is running a fantastic resue for "BULL BREEDS" (had to emphasize that as i got it wrong before and was attacked!). EGAR has a fantastic reputation quoted from all the people i work with in my club and i send many people out to her on a weekly basis and thats says alot as their are many santuarys that i will not recommend. I remember offerign help at EGAR but was subsequently employed fulltime.


Regarding the agility issue and EGAR, i was saying that ive met a few dogs from her rescue that attended an agility which dissolved due to a Muzzle controversy yet their in my class and without Muzzles. I was simply ssupporting her belief and argument and always will.

For anyone that i have offended i am greatly sorry as i have an overwhelming love of dogs and sometimes it can be over-passionate that turns to defensiveness quite easily.

And finally to whispered, the cough remarks were implying that i made assumptions that you were a Jan Fennell supporter and an Irish Dogs poster. Im very open to correction on that.

Cherry Blossom

Galway K9 wrote: »

Disco ive always seen you as a really genuine and sincere poster (youve backed me up on many occasion regarding Jack) but i had no intention and didnt even report anyone on the cesar thread. I got a warning and i left.

The last post on the thread is by you, you posted several times on the thread that you wern't comming back to it, but kept doing so.

Discodog

Your comments regarding EGAR were totally out of order.

"well Egar your dogs are having a ball at my club after your agility episode!

none are on prong or MUZZLE and all very happy|!
however i comp go against your personailty and methods but do go along with your love for dogs.

Pit bulls are welcome at my class"

You don't know EGAR yet you make such a remark. She has never been to your "club". She doesn't know you. Your remarks are totally out of order & I was astonished that you made them.

I doubt if she reported you & I certainly didn't as both of us are more than capable of fighting our corner.

Btw one of the annoying aspects of locking the thread is that we can't easily quote here.