preferential treatment to others with mod status

muffler

Gandalf23 wrote: »

So, you claim to have been "taken to task by the mods" and "asked not to post for a week". You ignored the specific mod warnings and posted anyway? Was any sanction taken against you for going against a specific mod request? Or did you just ignore it like you ignored the "no personal abuse" rule in the BGRH charter?

Tell me this Gandy. Would you walk into someone's house and ask them why they shouted at their children for example?

RoundyMooney

muffler wrote: »

Tell me this Gandy. Would you walk into someone's house and ask them why they shouted at their children for example?

Poor analogy.

We are not his kids, if anything we are his houseguests, some of whom do the washing up after dinner.

A gracious host would not shout at their guests (who in turn wouldn't behave badly, or put their feet on the coffee table etc. etc.), as I believe DeV has already acknowledged.

Dunno why this has been brought up again

Gandalf23

muffler wrote: »

Tell me this Gandy. Would you walk into someone's house and ask them why they shouted at their children for example?

Yes poor analogy.

It looks bad when admins are immune to the rules they themselves set for others to follow.

I dont respect anyone who sets a higher standard for others than they expect of themselves.

muffler

RoundyMooney wrote: »

Poor analogy.

We are not his kids, if anything we are his houseguests, some of whom do the washing up after dinner.

A gracious host would not shout at their guests (who in turn wouldn't behave badly, or put their feet on the coffee table etc. etc.), as I believe DeV has already acknowledged.

Dunno why this has been brought up again

It is a poor analogy alright but what I meant (and you seen it) is why all the questions from Gandy about why an admin would perform a particular action on his own site.

I dont believe that anyone here would knowingly and intentionally post anything that that would suggest that they operate a double standards policy.

Gandalf23

RoundyMooney wrote: »

Dunno why this has been brought up again

It's brought up again because people (not just me) obviously feel strongly about this. And the thread is also about this, no?

I had an inbox full of pm's supporting me and what I was saying after the last feedback thread... more than a few mods amongst them. Almost everyone asked not to quote them directly (that says a lot btw ...).

People feel strongly about this and that has to be respected.

Gandalf23

muffler wrote: »

I dont believe that anyone here would knowingly and intentionally post anything that that would suggest that they operate a double standards policy.

post removed by me ...

tbh

Gandalf23 wrote: »

So, you claim to have been "taken to task by the mods" and "asked not to post for a week". You ignored the specific mod warnings and posted anyway? Was any sanction taken against you for going against a specific mod request? Or did you just ignore it like you ignored the "no personal abuse" rule in the BGRH charter?

dude, I think it was a different incident he was talking about. Also, seriously, let it go. you're the only one who seems to have a problem with this - anonymous pm's aside - and it's looking like you're just arguing for the sake of it now.

Gandalf23

tbh wrote: »

dude, I think it was a different incident he was talking about. Also, seriously, let it go. you're the only one who seems to have a problem with this - anonymous pm's aside - and it's looking like you're just arguing for the sake of it now.

Ok fair point ... I'm finished. Muffler, please ignore my questions.

I'm just pissing against the wind here. I'm out for good.

tbh

Gandalf23 wrote: »

Ok fair point ... I'm finished. Muffler, please ignore my questions.

I'm just pissing against the wind here. I'm out for good.

don't have a hissy fit man (if you want your questions ignored, just delete them, surely?). Go outside, forget about boards and relax for a while. Then come back when you are ready for your brainw...eh...mod lessons.

RoundyMooney

muffler wrote: »

It is a poor analogy alright but what I meant (and you seen it) is why all the questions from Gandy about why an admin would perform a particular action on his own site.

While I don't agree with DeV (who is for me on the side of the angels, and always has been) coming in for repeated questioning, I'm sure, in fact I know that both of the active admins have never dissuaded any questions that users may ask. IOW, I don't understand the repeated questioning, but I defend his right to ask it.

muffler wrote: »

I dont believe that anyone here would knowingly and intentionally post anything that that would suggest that they operate a double standards policy.

The vast majority don't, nor suggest as much. There are some however who do. Users are not exempt from such duplicity either of course

Gandalf23 wrote: »

It's brought up again because people (not just me) obviously feel strongly about this. And the thread is also about this, no?

Well kinda. I really wouldn't like to see any welcome debate on the way the site is run getting bogged down in over analysing a lapse of judgement or temper by one of the people that brought it to where it is, and who is more open than anyone as to where it may go in the future.

Gandalf23 wrote: »

I had an inbox full of pm's supporting me and what I was saying after the last feedback thread... more than a few mods amongst them. Almost everyone asked not to quote them directly (that says a lot btw ...).

People feel strongly about this and that has to be respected.

Of course. Personally, I would have no issue whatsoever or fear about questioning Vex or Dev about anything site related. They have both in my experience always proven candid, helpful and open minded. I don't recall them banning anyone for not agreeing with them.

If people are loathe to raise questions openly, it has more to do with the fanboi culture that surrounds boards than anything else. Users and moderators alike will and have shouted down people who rightly or wrongly have some beef with any aspect the community here.

Gandalf23 wrote: »

Muffler, let me ask you direct questions ... on the forums you moderate would you ban someone who called another poster a "cnnt"?

Would you have banned dev for calling someone a "cnnt"?

What would you do if you specifically asked someone to do something in one of your forums and they ignored you?

Without wishing to answer for him, I am quite sure muffler would respectively, have banned, have requested that they not post, and would ban if possible in the third instance.

I know I would have.

Dudess

The "c*nt" comment appeared to be tongue-in-cheek - its intended recipient only laughed at it.

seamus

Gandalf23 wrote: »

That is a lie.

So, you claim to have been "taken to task by the mods" and "asked not to post for a week". You ignored the specific mod warnings and posted anyway? Was any sanction taken against you for going against a specific mod request? Or did you just ignore it like you ignored the "no personal abuse" rule in the BGRH charter?

I don't think DeV is referring to that one in particular.

Gandalf23 wrote: »

Muffler, let me ask you direct questions ... on the forums you moderate would you ban someone who called another poster a "cnnt"?

Would you have banned dev for calling someone a "cnnt"?

Well, ignoring the fact that he cannot technically ban DeV at all, I think you're grasping onto this special case a little too tightly.

The simple fact is that a large majority of moderators wouldn't take DeV to task for calling someone a ****, not because of some perceived clique or preferential treatment, but purely because they can't. They don't have the authority to. Boards has oft been described as a "benevolent dictatorship". Well there's your dictator, and he's causing **** on your forum, and there's pretty much f*ck all you can do about it.

Is that right. Well no, not any more. The size of the site means that it's no longer the "mighty 'mins", and the vast majority of posters here have no idea who DeVore is or why they should care. So it stands to reason that we should attempt to apply the same standard to all posters, dictator or not, because outside of these virtual walls made of nothing more than electricity and polarised atoms, we're all just people.

There are only a handful of mods who would have the balls/insistence/stubbornness to stand up and actually say, "Hang on, this might be your party and you ball, but that doesn't give you licence to treat anyone else like crap". And that's not preferential treatment, that's human nature.
Human nature also creates reverse cliques - there are groups of non-moderators who will back their buddies to the hilt if they even get a sniff of a feedback thread, regardless of how right or wrong they are.

I think now we are starting to understand more that we need to start calling eachother to task on these things, regardless of level, because if we don't then we all just look like a bunch of tossers with our fingers stuck up our arses.

Dragging up past incidents and using them to somehow prove a point in the present is actually pissing against the wind, as was pointed out to you in the other thread.

Gandalf23

tbh wrote: »

don't have a hissy fit man (if you want your questions ignored, just delete them, surely?). Go outside, forget about boards and relax for a while. Then come back when you are ready for your brainw...eh...mod lessons.

Questions removed.

I'm not hissyfitting ... I'm out of this thread. Simple as.

Sherifu

It seems Kharn gives special treatment to mods.

kaimera

Sherifu wrote: »

It seems Kharn gives special treatment to mods.

too soon

Sherifu

kaimera wrote: »

too soon

It's never too soon kai.

Gandalf23

Brilliant post as usual Seamus.

seamus wrote: »

I think now we are starting to understand more that we need to start calling eachother to task on these things, regardless of level, because if we don't then we all just look like a bunch of tossers with our fingers stuck up our arses.

I agree. This needs to happen and will ultimately make the site stronger.

But we have to ask is this happening. Genuine, accurate and well supported feedback is often dismissed by the powers that be on this site. Look at the amount of sh1t people have to take (including me) when things like this are raised in feedback. We are accused of being trolls and worse... the fanboi mob culture takes over with people queuing up to get a kick in. I think we have all seen that happen.

I 100% agree with your quote above, but this is not happening on this site. If this is going to happen it will probably be the new CM's biggest task.

Red Sleeping Beauty

Dudess wrote: »

The "c*nt" comment appeared to be tongue-in-cheek - its intended recipient only laughed at it.

There's been bans for less than that. What would happen if we were allowed call each other cnnts in a tongue-in-cheek manner ?
Sure, you can get banned for thanking posts now!

seamus

alan dunne 27 wrote: »

Sure, you can get banned for thanking posts now!

Leave it!

Dudess

Here's an example of a tongue-in-cheek post that didn't get penalised, but the other posts which were verbally abusive did:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=58374869&postcount=59

alan dunne 27 wrote: »

Sure, you can get banned for thanking posts now!

Damn straight. I've seen venomously abusive posts (not tongue-in-cheek abusive - an ocean of a difference) being thanked. I think the sneaky thankers in those instances deserve every penalty they get.

FlutterinBantam

I'll have a think about that and get back to you next month:rolleyes:

GuanYin

Gandalf23 wrote: »

But we have to ask is this happening. Genuine, accurate and well supported feedback is often dismissed by the powers that be on this site. Look at the amount of sh1t people have to take (including me) when things like this are raised in feedback. We are accused of being trolls and worse... the fanboi mob culture takes over with people queuing up to get a kick in. I think we have all seen that happen.

It is happening. It happens all the time, sometimes it happens behind the scenes, which I have reservations about, but then again, the mods here do a job for nothing. If they make mistakes, they deserve a private telling off. Why should they take a public dressing down for it?

The problem and reason that feedback threads don't work is that there are cliques on boards.ie. Not just mod cliques, but forum cliques and user cliques and real-life friend cliques and even I don't like that guy cliques. Some people call their co-clique members by another term....ermmm, what is it... oh, yes... "friends". This being a social community site and all that jazz.

When the angry mob gathers, be they right or wrong, constructive feedback goes out the window and the sensible posters stay away. Even when posters do have a point, for some reason, unknown to the gods themselves, they often post it in the most aggressive unhelpful way possible, which doesn't really make any rational adjudicator inclined to listen.

How often do we see someone make a complaint which is replied to and defended and eventually mutates into a completely different complaint until eventually the charge is something like "you're just not a good human being"*. Even if the person isn't a good human being, I seriously don't think it is within the remit of the Smods or even the Admins of Boards.ie to do anything about it.

Boards is based on cliques and popularity on all sides but the catch is that no one-clique is more important than the other. They all have their place and I'm sure, even unknowingly, some people will give unwavering support to their friends ** but the trick is knowing when it is just your clique against my clique or when there is an actual issue.

Feedback won't work when you digress from the issue or don't post in a respectful way. Maybe we should have a rant forum where someone can go and say "I hate that stupid mod they did this" separate from feedback so that this forum can be used to actually address feedback and solve issues.

Really though, no mod here gets site-wide preferential treatment. It doesn't happen. there are "cliques" within the mod fraternity and I know some mods hold greater vendettas than all the "wronged" users combined. Some mods are just as petty and childish as anyone else. We're all just humans in the end.

The point is, to make a case here you should really be clear, succinct and respectful. Sure someone screwed up, but everyone does, there is no need to
be a jerk about it. Jumping on people for petty digs and to troll them, it is childish, it is petty, it derails the thread, it undermines feedback, it undermines the system and it doesn't do you*** as a poster any favors and it certainly doesn't help anyone seeking perceived justice in a feedback thread. Look at alandunne27's post above as a prime example of what would usually turn a feedback thread into a trainwreck and take 20 posts off the original topic.

If anyone wants to complain about feedback and ensuring everyone gets equal justice, then feedback is the first thing that needs to change. EVERYBODY has a role in that and it is down to all users, not just mods.


* Seriously people, it's a BBS for crying out loud!!!!
** See special friend definition above
*** That is the everybody "you" not the Gandalf23 "you".

DeVore

I'll stand on my record and be judged by it. All of it.

I was referring to a case in Politics where I ranted about something and was told off by the mods. The pm discourse ended with me agreeing to not post there as a "user" for a week.

We havent chosen Yes-men* as moderators, we've chosen strong people with opinions and backbone and intelligence as much as possible. I honest dont believe a word of what you say about mods messaging you complaining about me. I call shenanigans about that and every mod will tell you that they don't fear bringing hard questions or criticism to me, I have never ever punished anyone for cricising me. Ever. Thats completely against my nature and kinda insulting to suggest. I call shenanigans as I said and maybe you could give access to your account to RoundyMoundy (who I may disagree with but who's basic integrity I trust) to access your PM's and verify that those PM's from Mods reside in your PM box prior to today.

You game?

I'm not universally liked, I cant be because ultimately I end up being "solomon" as someone put it (god if only...) and every decision leaves 50% p*ssed off with me. But I sleep well at night and I look myself in the mirror with a clear conscience.

DeV.

Time Magazine

DeVore wrote: »

I have never ever punished anyone for cricising me. Ever.

Get a haircut :pac:

tallaght01

The Economist wrote: »

Get a haircut :pac:

He's cockeyed too. State of him :pac:

Dudess

Gandalf23 wrote: »

Genuine, accurate and well supported feedback is often dismissed by the powers that be on this site. Look at the amount of sh1t people have to take (including me) when things like this are raised in feedback. We are accused of being trolls and worse... the fanboi mob culture takes over with people queuing up to get a kick in. I think we have all seen that happen.

I agree 100%. I have raised concerns about it myself. And the word "troll" is seriously abused on Feedback. However, what makes me lose sympathy for those who feel wronged is when the "mod clique" crap then gets trotted out - as in, there's all this ganging up but it's ONLY attributed to mods. First of all, please stop thinking of moderators as one homogenous group. There are mods who dislike each other, you can be sure of it. Non moderators also do plenty of ganging up. Seriously, there's a view that a moderator sees another person's status is also moderator and a switch goes on in their brain to be all sycophantic to them. I mean that's just utter silliness.
And the "high postcount" crap, that people who have a high postcount get preferential treatment due only to their postcount - as if they've no other merits. :rolleyes: That's just paranoid, bitter nonsense.
The "Kawasaki" thread - while I agreed there should have been a penalty for arguing with a moderator on-thread, I also felt it was fair enough to raise the point that the moderating on After Hours can be rather brusque... but then that was all discredited by the childish crap the complainant starting throwing around.
You have to remember too that if you're a long-time user, you get used to the same people being around and develop something of a relationship with them so yes, that is going to affect how you treat them versus how you treat a newbie. Surely that's allowed though - it's human nature. I'm not referring to whether you'd infract/ban them or not, I'm just referring to how you'd generally receive them. There are some moderators for whom I have a massive amount of respect, yet I really and truly would have zero problem banning them - in fact I'd find it easier because I know they wouldn't be giving me crap back.

GuanYin wrote: »

It is happening. It happens all the time, sometimes it happens behind the scenes, which I have reservations about, but then again, the mods here do a job for nothing. If they make mistakes, they deserve a private telling off. Why should they take a public dressing down for it?

The problem and reason that feedback threads don't work is that there are cliques on boards.ie. Not just mod cliques, but forum cliques and user cliques and real-life friend cliques and even I don't like that guy cliques. Some people call their co-clique members by another term....ermmm, what is it... oh, yes... "friends". This being a social community site and all that jazz.

When the angry mob gathers, be they right or wrong, constructive feedback goes out the window and the sensible posters stay away. Even when posters do have a point, for some reason, unknown to the gods themselves, they often post it in the most aggressive unhelpful way possible, which doesn't really make any rational adjudicator inclined to listen.

How often do we see someone make a complaint which is replied to and defended and eventually mutates into a completely different complaint until eventually the charge is something like "you're just not a good human being"*. Even if the person isn't a good human being, I seriously don't think it is within the remit of the Smods or even the Admins of Boards.ie to do anything about it.

Boards is based on cliques and popularity on all sides but the catch is that no one-clique is more important than the other. They all have their place and I'm sure, even unknowingly, some people will give unwavering support to their friends ** but the trick is knowing when it is just your clique against my clique or when there is an actual issue.

Feedback won't work when you digress from the issue or don't post in a respectful way. Maybe we should have a rant forum where someone can go and say "I hate that stupid mod they did this" separate from feedback so that this forum can be used to actually address feedback and solve issues.

Really though, no mod here gets site-wide preferential treatment. It doesn't happen. there are "cliques" within the mod fraternity and I know some mods hold greater vendettas than all the "wronged" users combined. Some mods are just as petty and childish as anyone else. We're all just humans in the end.

The point is, to make a case here you should really be clear, succinct and respectful. Sure someone screwed up, but everyone does, there is no need to
be a jerk about it. Jumping on people for petty digs and to troll them, it is childish, it is petty, it derails the thread, it undermines feedback, it undermines the system and it doesn't do you*** as a poster any favors and it certainly doesn't help anyone seeking perceived justice in a feedback thread. Look at alandunne27's post above as a prime example of what would usually turn a feedback thread into a trainwreck and take 20 posts off the original topic.

If anyone wants to complain about feedback and ensuring everyone gets equal justice, then feedback is the first thing that needs to change. EVERYBODY has a role in that and it is down to all users, not just mods.


* Seriously people, it's a BBS for crying out loud!!!!
** See special friend definition above
*** That is the everybody "you" not the Gandalf23 "you".

:eek: - it's like you got into my head and generated my thoughts!

RoundyMooney

DeVore wrote: »

I'm not universally liked, I cant be because ultimately I end up being "solomon" as someone put it (god if only...) and every decision leaves 50% p*ssed off with me. But I sleep well at night and I look myself in the mirror with a clear conscience.

Well, I have always said that you have a lot to be proud of. Cloud too, wherever he is these days.

The fact that you can't please 'em all all the time was pretty much where I was going with the Solomon thing. I'm glad someone got it

If gandy wants me to verify and quantify any discontent that's no problem either.

If he lets loose a deluge of uncharacteristically curmudgeonly posts in quick succession and without prior warning, I'm sure you'll all forgive him

Gandalf23

DeVore wrote: »

I was referring to a case in Politics where I ranted about something and was told off by the mods. The pm discourse ended with me agreeing to not post there as a "user" for a week.

Thats fair enough.

I was referring to the BGRH thread which was the main subject of the other feedback thread. In that thread you admitted to personal abuse, and stated that you got no "special treatment" in BGRH. I call bullsh1t on that. You received no sanction for that when others would have been banned in a heartbeat. Why do you think that was? You even continued to contribute to the BGRH thread after the abuse.

Interesting that.

DeVore wrote: »

I honest dont believe a word of what you say about mods messaging you complaining about me. I call shenanigans about that and every mod will tell you that they don't fear bringing hard questions or criticism to me, I have never ever punished anyone for cricising me. Ever. Thats completely against my nature and kinda insulting to suggest. I call shenanigans as I said and maybe you could give access to your account to RoundyMoundy (who I may disagree with but who's basic integrity I trust) to access your PM's and verify that those PM's from Mods reside in your PM box prior to today.

You game?

No. I'm not game.

Because I don't believe you. And my respect for you drops every time we interact in feedback. Believe it or not, it was very very high until recently.

I have no respect for ANYONE who requires others act to a certain standard, yet refuses to adhere to that standard himself. That is what you do on this site and I have provided examples in other feedback posts.

And please read my previous post carefully. I never said I received pm's "complaining about you". I received pm's in support of what I was saying in the other feedback thread.

I am not willing to make my inbox available to anyone because some (not all) of the people who pm'ed me asked not to be mentioned/quoted. I'll respect that. People reading this can make up their own minds on whether or not they believe me. I got a fair few thanks for my contributions to that thread ... many here agree with at least some of the things I'm saying. Others disagree and thats ok. Make up your own minds on this.

Finally, you frequently accuse me of being a troll. I'm not sure why that is ... it must be just your standard response to anyone saying something you dont like. Tell you what ... I'll make you a deal ... if the other mods of feedback all post here agreeing I'm a troll I'll submit to a permanent feedback ban. If not you should stop calling me a troll when I'm attempting (abet in my own way) to make genuine feedback.

You game?

Dudess

Gandalf23 wrote: »

Finally, you frequently accuse me of being a troll. I'm not sure why that is

I agree with this. A troll is someone who just stirs up sh1t for the sake of it - not because they have a genuine grievance.

RoundyMooney

I can assure you that no one would be mentioned or even quoted.

However, if there is that much discontent out there, surely it deserves to be highlighted?

I mean, I'm the first one in line to complain, but I never claimed to have widespread support...