preferential treatment to others with mod status

--amadeus--

No one knows what discussions were had / have been had behind the scenes. No-one knows what (if anything) was said. And we don't need to know because - and this is quite important - it is none of our business. Admin / Mod or User all have the right to have discussions in private and - as you are so vocally pointing out - expect that they will stay private. All mods also have a degree of autonomy in thier forums. If a long standing and valued member (user or mod) of "my" forum makes a tit of themselves I may not approach that in the same way as some blow in who hasn't been in the place a wet week but has been annoying everyone.

Because moderating is about making the right decisions based on whats best for the forum. Not simply rigidly applying the same identikit rules without reference to teh people involved. So sometimes muppets get hit with a ban hammer faster than smart people who screw up. It's life, it's how every reputable judicial system works so build a bridge.

And as for your mod conspiracy - we're regular users outside our own little corners. As such I should be free to say what I want in here, but I didn't want to comment in case it built up this mad fantasy of all mods in it together. So if anything its working in the opposite way to the way you seem to fantasise it does.

trout

Gandalf23 wrote: »

I have not asked you to moderate to please me specifically, but with the greatest respect to you and your fellow BGRH mods you should be moderating fairly, in line with the charter, and applying the rules in a consistent manner to all posters equally.

Yes. We should be. I think we do. We certainly strive to.

If you find cases where we haven't - by all means, report those cases, and let the process work.

Zaph

Gandalf23 wrote: »

So is this the criteria being used in BGRH these days? A post is only personal abuse if its reported?

So then, can I call someone a "cnnt" and that will be allowed if the post is not reported?

Is personal abuse specifically prohibited in the charter? I think it is. Quote from the charter "Boards.ie has a no personal abuse policy and while there may be banter in the bar and the forum in general any argy bargy which results in stress and has the wimmins and brothers muttering into their pints will have the punter responsible removed from the premises and barred. This goes for splash damage from other threads/posts in more contentious forums like Feedback or HelpDesk"

So does this still apply, or is it now overruled by your statement that its only personal abuse if the post is reported?

At the time of DeV's post the two BGRH mods were Tom Dunne and Robbo. Tom Dunne is no longer a mod of that forum and Robbo has already replied to you. Maybe not to your satisfaction, but he has replied. However, despite this fact you continue to insist on action from Thaedydal, trout and smashey, none of whom were mods at the time. There is no reason for them to re-visit issues that took place before they were moderators. They don't have access to any PM discussions that may have taken place at the time, and therefore cannot moderate the post as they are not in possession of the full facts. They have told you that they would not accept this now, so really, what is it exactly you'd like them to do?

Gandalf23

trout wrote: »

If you want to have a post acted on, in a timely fashion, the Report function is your friend.

If I read a post that has personal abuse in it - I will act.
If I see a post has been reported, I will read it - I will act.
If a post is made, and I haven't read it - I won't be acting one way or another.

Thats fair enough.

trout wrote: »

I didn't make any such statement. If you are making honest feedback, and I am still prepared to believe you are, you will be well served to stop twisting my words.

Personal abuse is personal abuse.
Personal abuse that gets reported is bound to be acted on. Even if that action doesn't suit you personally.

Personal abuse that goes unreported, may not be read by a mod, and may not get acted on. Even 11 months later.

I am making honest feedback. But robbo admitted he saw the post at the time and "let it stand".

What do you say to that?

trout

Gandalf23 wrote: »

I am making honest feedback. But robbo admitted he saw the post at the time and "let it stand".

What do you say to that?

Robbo can and has spoken for himself.

GuanYin

Gandalf23 wrote: »

I am making honest feedback. But robbo admitted he saw the post at the time and "let it stand".

What do you say to that?

What do you think should be done?

Gandalf23

Zaph wrote: »

At the time of DeV's post the two BGRH mods were Tom Dunne and Robbo. Tom Dunne is no longer a mod of that forum and Robbo has already replied to you. Maybe not to your satisfaction, but he has replied. However, despite this fact you continue to insist on action from Thaedydal, trout and smashey, none of whom were mods at the time. There is no reason for them to re-visit issues that took place before they were moderators. They don't have access to any PM discussions that may have taken place at the time, and therefore cannot moderate the post as they are not in possession of the full facts. They have told you that they would not accept this now, so really, what is it exactly you'd like them to do?

I accept that, and I'm not "insisting on action from Thaedydal, trout and smashey". I'm simply asking why the post was allowed to stand (as admitted by robbo).

The Recliner

Gandalf23 wrote: »

If dev is correct we can all call each other "cnnts" in BGRH!!!

Who has annoyed you in BGRH?

You really really seem to want to use that word

You are posting about people being treated in a fair and equaitable manner but in all seriousness would you be making such a fuss if it was another poster who had used that word

If I had made that post would you be dragging it up 11 months later and making a big issue and witchhunt out of it and highjacking other peoples feedback threads, I don't think you would

You have had a feedback thread of your own just cos you didn't get the response you wanted doesn't give you the right to carry your crusade into someone elses thread

Gandalf23

trout wrote: »

Robbo can and has spoken for himself.

I'm asking for your opinion. Are you supporting robbo?

Gandalf23

The Recliner wrote: »

You are posting about people being treated in a fair and equaitable manner but in all seriousness would you be making such a fuss if it was another poster who had used that word

If I had made that post would you be dragging it up 11 months later and making a big issue and witchhunt out of it and highjacking other peoples feedback threads, I don't think you would

Yes. I would.

I would want to know why you were not banned if you personally abused someone in BGRH. I would want to know why a moderator decided to allow your personal abuse to stand without sanction.

trout

Gandalf23 wrote: »

I'm asking for your opinion. Are you supporting robbo?

I've given my opinion. Perhaps you've seen it ... it was in my post above.

In the context of honest feedback, are you going to answer any of the specific questions that have been put to you in recent posts ?

I'll remind you of my specific question - Why didn't you report the post ?

Zaph

Gandalf23 wrote: »

I accept that, and I'm not "insisting on action from Thaedydal, trout and smashey". I'm simply asking why the post was allowed to stand (as admitted by robbo).

And none of them can answer that, only Robbo can.

The Recliner

Gandalf23 wrote: »

Yes. I would.

I would want to know why you were not banned if you personally abused someone in BGRH. I would want to know why a moderator decided to allow your personal abuse to stand without sanction.

And you would have spammed two feedback threads about it

I highly doubt it

Posts like that slip through the net every day for reasons already outlined by mods in this thread already

I don't see you crusading about any of them

Personally in regards to the post you have your knickers in a twist about I feel the abuse was justified

Gandalf23

GuanYin wrote: »

1. You were given how many examples of mods/users who broke the rules. Are you suggesting it is the norm? Are you highlighting the handful of incidents against the 900 mods most of whom have perfect records, often in the face of reckless abuse.

Nowhere have I suggested this is the norm.

GuanYin wrote: »

2. You didn't start this thread. You highjacked it with little regard for the OP.
Why should you be above him/her?

I do not think I am above anyone on this site. I am totally opposed to anyone getting preferential treatment on this site.

GuanYin wrote: »

3. DeVore is the site owner and while I would say I'd risk my modship in taking him on if he wantonly disregarded the rules of the forum I modded, I don't think he did so here. I think everybody slips from time to time. We are all human. He said what he thought without filtering and while that may have been inappropriate I may have done so myself as has everyone.

Interesting take on this. I think he meant exactly what he said ... thats why he used the exact term "cnnt" ... to avoid the filter.

GuanYin wrote: »

In the big picture, he owns the site and allows us to play here. For a long, long time we did so on his dime. Does it mean he should be allowed abuse people? No. Does it mean he holds a special status on the site. Even I can say yes to that. And I'm not one for endearing myself to other mods (most of them hate me as I'm sure you realize).

Thats the point ... he did abuse people and that abuse was purposely let stand by the mod of that forum.

GuanYin wrote: »

Now I don't know what happened at the time, I'm pretty sure that the mods would have taken issue with it. That is their deal. I don't enter that forum but I understand there is a strong community there. I wouldn't dare dream of telling them what they should have done because I don't have their gig. I am sure that by DeVore's own posting standard, he is probably as annoyed as you are by his own comment. At least in the colorfulness of it.

The mods did not take issue with it. The mod of the forum at the time has stated here that he "let it stand" and has refused to elaborate on that.

GuanYin wrote: »

4. I have no idea about amp. He's site-banned now so it is all pretty academic. Sometimes when people who shouldn't go nuts do so, it takes a while to react while you think "WTF!!". The fact is, he did it once too often, he's gone and there is little that can be achieved by playing out what-ifs.

I'm not talking about amp ... no "what-if's" there.

GuanYin wrote: »

5. They only go that way because people take that attitude. They accomplish nothing. You can't degenerate the thread and then complain that it is because "that happens". Take responsibility for your actions, especially if you're going to take shots at others.

I disagree. Totally. And you should know better.

The first feedback thread I raised about this is here. Have a look at it ... it makes interesting reading. I made my point as eloquently as possible and I was personally abused by 2 mods (called a "cuntnugget" by one).

GuanYin wrote: »

If you'd posted clearly, concisely and without rancor, *maybe*, just *maybe* this thread could have been looked at, someone may have said, yeah, you might have some point, we'll look at it. OK, the scope here is a grander things, but I think if you want a professional response, you have to make a professional complaint. You don't, or at least shouldn't, call up your local TV service call center and make a rambling non-specific diatribe about the call center manager swearing at someone once. You make a succinct clear point that the person dealing with the complaint can address or escalate.

We mods, for our part, need to realize that too. We need to offer that service. It can be hard, I know I fail at it too. But it is something I'd like to aspire to.

I have attempted to post clearly and concisely at all times. Have a look at some of the replies I'm getting in this and other threads. Is the same courtesy being given to me at all times?

GuanYin wrote: »

6. Come now. Be honest. I addressed you in a clear, simple and passive manner and before the post to which I am now responding, you insulted, trolled and flamed me.

Apologies if I trolled or flamed you. That was not my intention.

GuanYin wrote: »

7. I did. It didn't.
Moreover, the people who might be inclined to do something about it may not be inclined to read through multiple threads on multiple topics hijacked to this agenda.

They are not inclined to anything about it anyway.

GuanYin wrote: »

8. As such, why not post, once and for all, clearly, in one post a concise and non-aggressive summation of the issue and your proposed solution.

I think I have done that. If you read all my posts in this and other threads you will see my point.

It's unfair (and bordering on trolling) to keep asking for clarification of my point when I'm being very clear. Others seem to understand me very well.

Nevyn

Robbo has said he took the appropriate action at the time as he is entrusted to do so by the admins and I as his co mod trust that he did just that and as it has been pointed out
it was before my time and I am not privy to or need to be privy to all that went into taking that action, I don't need to be.

Again this site works on trust and certain checks and blanaces and you either don't get that or don't like it and you still have not answered the question of inlight of this
why you still post here.

Gandalf23

trout wrote: »

I've given my opinion. Perhaps you've seen it ... it was in my post above.

Could you please clarify this. Are you supporting robbo in this? Do you agree with him "letting it stand"?

trout wrote: »

In the context of honest feedback, are you going to answer any of the specific questions that have been put to you in recent posts ?

I'll remind you of my specific question - Why didn't you report the post ?

I didnt see the post until a few weeks ago. I have now reported it as advised in this thread. Will action be taken?

Gandalf23

Zaph wrote: »

And none of them can answer that, only Robbo can.

Then I think he should say specifically why he allowed the post to stand.

Gandalf23

The Recliner wrote: »

Posts like that slip through the net every day for reasons already outlined by mods in this thread already

The mod admitted he saw the post and "let it stand".

The Recliner wrote: »

Personally in regards to the post you have your knickers in a twist about I feel the abuse was justified

So you are now justifying personal abuse.

Nice. Says all I need to know about you.

--amadeus--

This is going nowhere fast but anyway....

If the owner of a pub went behind the bar and poured himself a pint without paying for it would you expect the barman to punch him? Would you think it gives you the right to help yourself as well? Would you still tell the story in tones of shock and outrage at every opportunity?

Train crash thread that's just waiting for the lock, IMO

Gandalf23

Thaedydal wrote: »

Robbo has said he took the appropriate action at the time as he is entrusted to do so by the admins and I as his co mod trust that he did just that and as it has been pointed out
it was before my time and I am not privy to or need to be privy to all that went into taking that action, I don't need to be.

Again this site works on trust and certain checks and blanaces and you either don't get that or don't like it and you still have not answered the question of inlight of this
why you still post here.

This bullsh1t is why people think there is a mod conspiracy. Look at yourselves ... you are circling the wagons around a mod who purposely allowed personal abuse (specifically disallowed in the forum charter) to stand. He admitted he saw it and did nothing. He "let it stand". And you are all defending this? Can any of you not see anything wrong with that? Why have none of you the balls to say this is wrong?

And I'm here because I'm part of this community and have been since 2005. How dare you question my being here and making what I see as valid feedback. How dare you.

The Recliner

Gandalf23 wrote: »

The mod admitted he saw the post and "let it stand".

So you are now justifying personal abuse.

Nice. Says all I need to know about you.

What do you want done about it?

The post was 11 months ago, if you went around reporting every old post that had abuse in it you would be very busy

Due to the nature of vBulletin Dev cannot be banned or sanctioned

Dev has admitted he was wrong

I fail to see what you hope to achieve

And yes I do think abuse is warranted in certain circumstances and don't care what opinion you form of me for that, in this case someone was denying the site the possibility of revenue, a site that they enjoy for free, I think admitting that should be a bannable offence

Gandalf23

--amadeus-- wrote: »

This is going nowhere fast but anyway....

If the owner of a pub went behind the bar and poured himself a pint without paying for it would you expect the barman to punch him? Would you think it gives you the right to help yourself as well? Would you still tell the story in tones of shock and outrage at every opportunity?

Train crash thread that's just waiting for the lock, IMO

I would expect the rules of any community to apply equally to everyone.

Heres a story for you. Would you be outraged if Brian Cowen got pissed and got into his car and caused an accident, and then expected the "rules" not to apply to him? Maybe you wouldn't... that seems to be what you are arguing.

I just think its wrong for people to expect others to follow rules they themselves have set, and yet not follow those rules themselves.

But maybe I'm unique around here in aspiring to that.

trout

Gandalf23 wrote: »

Could you please clarify this. Are you supporting robbo in this? Do you agree with him "letting it stand"?

It's somewhat academic at this stage, but I'll answer as best I can.

If such a post happened on my watch, and I read it, or it was reported to me - I would take action.
I have stated this already in this thread. So has smashey.

In this case, given that I was not a mod of the forum, and I have no further insight or knowledge of the events and background - I am inclined to trust Robbo's judgement.

Can you accept this ? Do you accept this ?

Gandalf23 wrote: »

I didnt see the post until a few weeks ago. I have now reported it as advised in this thread. Will action be taken?

An action has already been taken - you clearly don't like that action.

Genuine question - How can this particular issue (DeVore's post) be solved to your satisfaction ?

muffler

Gandalf23 wrote: »

But maybe I'm unique around here in aspiring to that.

No you're not. We had davey180

Nevyn

Gandalf23 wrote: »

And I'm here because I'm part of this community and have been since 2005. How dare you question my being here and making what I see as valid feedback. How dare you.

I ask cos you seem really unhappy and I can't see things changing on this site to make you happy when lots of people, infact the majority of people of people are happy. So that just leaves you and what you have the power to do and that is accept the trust structure or leave the site or keep being unhappy.

Gandalf23

The Recliner wrote: »

And yes I do think abuse is warranted in certain circumstances and don't care what opinion you form of me for that, in this case someone was denying the site the possibility of revenue, a site that they enjoy for free, I think admitting that should be a bannable offence

What if I said to you that "I think you have your head so far up your own arse that you cant see the light of day". Or "I think you are such a smarmy little brown nosing lick arse cnnt to the BGRH mods that you would be willing to back them under all circumstances".

Do you think that personal abuse is warranted? Do you think that makes the site a better place or just brings the place into the mire?

As someone who supports the use of personal abuse on this site, please tell me how the community benefits from anything like that?

Gandalf23

trout wrote: »

It's somewhat academic at this stage, but I'll answer as best I can.

If such a post happened on my watch, and I read it, or it was reported to me - I would take action.
I have stated this already in this thread. So has smashey.

In this case, given that I was not a mod of the forum, and I have no further insight or knowledge of the events and background - I am inclined to trust Robbo's judgement.

Can you accept this ? Do you accept this ?

Yes. I accept this.

trout wrote: »

An action has already been taken - you clearly don't like that action.

Genuine question - How can this particular issue (DeVore's post) be solved to your satisfaction ?

Maybe I'm stupid, but what action has been taken?

Its not that I dont like it ... I dont know what it is!!!!

Gandalf23

Thaedydal wrote: »

I ask cos you seem really unhappy and I can't see things changing on this site to make you happy when lots of people, infact the majority of people of people are happy. So that just leaves you and what you have the power to do and that is accept the trust structure or leave the site or keep being unhappy.

Eh, no. I'm very happy in general ... and I'll be staying here and making feedback when I see fit. You see, unlike you I know this site is not perfect (yet!) and I'll be doing my part to make it better.

That is, if thats ok with you of course

trout

Gandalf23 wrote: »

Maybe I'm stupid, but what action has been taken?

Its not that I dont like it ... I dont know what it is!!!!

The action taken at the time was to let the post stand.
You have been advised of this action, and you have commented on this action.

Again - genuine question - How can this be specific issue of DeVore's post of 11 months ago, be resolved to your satisfaction ?

BuffyBot

Daithi McGee wrote: »

If that was directed at me then yes. I voiced my opinions. I just had thoughts to pass on. Fail as they may be.

Like you did when you posted your picture on the site many years ago.

Small world dude!

Not everything revolves around you

Gandalf23

muffler wrote: »

No you're not. We had davey180

Muffler!!! Now I remember you! I'd forgotten we had "history". I miss those days and you telling me to "fcuk off" on thread. Ah, the good old days ...

Its all clear now. I understand why you are going against me in this thread. Its clear that you support personal abuse. I feel so stupid that I forgot!!!

I forgive you, because I understand now. You like personal abuse, and your not afraid to use it.

Good old muffly :D Please never ever change!

The Recliner

Gandalf23 wrote: »

What if I said to you that "I think you have your head so far up your own arse that you cant see the light of day". Or "I think you are such a smarmy little brown nosing lick arse cnnt to the BGRH mods that you would be willing to back them under all circumstances".

I would say that it is a slight overreaction to someone disagreeing with you in feedback

Do you think that personal abuse is warranted? Do you think that makes the site a better place or just brings the place into the mire?

I said personal abuse is warranted in certain circumstances, in the instance described above I would say that whilst you are entitled to your opinion but I would ahve to disagree with your opinion but that you have every right to express it

As someone who supports the use of personal abuse on this site, please tell me how the community benefits from anything like that?

As I said I think it is warranted in certain circumstances, if it was allowed all over the shop then it is of no benefit but sometimes it is the only language which some people understand and it is the mods job to decide where and when people should be punished for abuse

as to what you have "hypothetically" said about me above, I take issue with your opinion but how you expressed it doesn't bother me

GuanYin

A quick search found me 12 possible other cases predating the one you're referring in that cat alone where someone was abusive and there is no evidence of action being taken.

That doesn't mean action wasn't taken nor does it indicate the level of action.

In any case, and I'm being honest here, I've said this many times before. It is absolutely no business of yours what sanction a mod took against someone. It is between the mod and the person and if the person wishes to make that public, they can.

We should all really just worry about our own behavior to be honest. But really, if you want to start this crusade, you should, for the sake of fairness, start at the first instance and work your way forward checking each case for appropriate action. Then we should do so for every single forum.

Starting on that one makes it look like you have some specific axe to grind, which doesn't fall into the remit of feedback and hence doesn't require any response.

When you're going through those early ones, I'll be sure to address any of mine. Although I'd appreciate if you got them all in one thread in one go.

Thanks.

Gandalf23

trout wrote: »

The action taken at the time was to let the post stand.
You have been advised of this action, and you have commented on this action.

Again - genuine question - How can this be specific issue of DeVore's post of 11 months ago, be resolved to your satisfaction ?

Thanks for the reply. Please forgive my confusion.

I'm happy. All I wanted was to question this and get a straight answer. Its a pity robbo will not explain his actions further.

Thanks for the straight and honest replies.

Nevyn

Gandalf23 wrote: »

Eh, no. I'm very happy in general ... and I'll be staying here and making feedback when I see fit. You see, unlike you I know this site is not perfect (yet!) and I'll be doing my part to make it better.

That is, if thats ok with you of course

I don't think you will see it become what you want, it's not yours.
IF you want a place to be prefect then I suggest you build your own.

Gandalf23

The Recliner wrote: »

As I said I think personal abuse is warranted in certain circumstances, if it was allowed all over the shop then it is of no benefit but sometimes it is the only language which some people understand and it is the mods job to decide where and when people should be punished for abuse

Interesting!

So would you support your quote above going into the BGRH charter? Do you think it would be better than the current blanket "no personal abuse" rule? Do you think that would be an improvement to BGRH and the site as a whole?

trout

Gandalf23 wrote: »

Thanks for the reply. Please forgive my confusion.

I'm happy. All I wanted was to question this and get a straight answer. Its a pity robbo will not explain his actions further.

Thanks for the straight and honest replies.

/thread

Gandalf23

GuanYin wrote: »

A quick search found me 12 possible other cases predating the one you're referring in that cat alone where someone was abusive and there is no evidence of action being taken.

Could you provide links for these cases please?

GuanYin wrote: »

In any case, and I'm being honest here, I've said this many times before. It is absolutely no business of yours what sanction a mod took against someone. It is between the mod and the person and if the person wishes to make that public, they can.

Well I disagree. I believe feedback is the life blood of this site, and I will continue to make it where I see fit. I also believe that fairness and equality of application of community rules is essential in any online community such as this. And yes, I will question anywhere I see it not being applied. As should every member of this community. Thats how we grow and evolve.

But hey, thats just my opinion. I dont seem to be getting too much agreement here.

DeVore

I love the way he twists anything he can and avoids what he cant.


I have a question, if a long time user came along and made that remark, a user who had previously shown themselve to be a positive supportive poster, and the user, when challenged put their hand up and said "I was having a bad day and in my defence I was provoked but I apologise none the less because its not in my nature and I havent done it before and will try not to again".... What do you think my response to that user would be?

I pose this question to the following users and I would really appreciate a candid honest answer to it.

Gandalf23, Daithi, Roundy, Boston. I'd also welcome answers from anyone who supports the notion that I get unfair preferential treatment.

What do you think, given my past manner of dealing with things, what do you think I would do?

DeV.

The Recliner

Gandalf23 wrote: »

Interesting!

So would you support your quote above going into the BGRH charter? Do you think it would be better than the current blanket "no personal abuse" rule? Do you think that would be an improvement to BGRH and the site as a whole?

If it was decided to amend the charter then I would have no problem being quoted on it

That decision isn't mine and I don't see myself ever being elected Mod so I doubt it ever will be

Plus it is more a rule placed by the site owners and enforced site wide so it isn't really up for debate

Also I doubt most of the users of Boards would support it and I am not egotistical to think that my personal opinion is worth more than the users and owners of this sites

Gandalf23

Thaedydal wrote: »

I don't think you will see it become what you want, it's not yours.
IF you want a place to be prefect then I suggest you build your own.

Well actually this community is partly mine, and I have contributed to building it. As have you, and trout, and robbo, and everyone who has ever joined or posted or contributed in any way. This is a community made up of people ... we make it, and without us there is nothing ... boards.ie is more than just the machine code and servers you seem to think it is.

Pity you have such a narrow view. Pity you want descenting voices to leave.

Well I'm not leaving. I'm staying because I belong here. I'll continue to call things as I see them. I'll continue to contribute to this community, and you should be thanking me for that. Just as you should be thanking every other person who has made this site what it is today.

Gandalf23

DeVore wrote: »

I love the way he twists anything he can and avoids what he cant.

Are you talking about me or the BGRH mods

DeVore wrote: »

I have a question, if a long time user came along and made that remark, a user who had previously shown themselve to be a positive supportive poster, and the user, when challenged put their hand up and said "I was having a bad day and in my defence I was provoked but I apologise none the less because its not in my nature and I havent done it before and will try not to again".... What do you think my response to that user would be?

I pose this question to the following users and I would really appreciate a candid honest answer to it.

Gandalf23, Daithi, Roundy, Boston. I'd also welcome answers from anyone who supports the notion that I get unfair preferential treatment.

What do you think, given my past manner of dealing with things, what do you think I would do?

OK dev, I'll answer this as honestly as possible if you can refrain from accusing me of trolling. I am making genuine feedback (in my own way admittedly ... it might not be to all tastes but it's genuine nonetheless) in an attempt to make this community stronger. I'm not willing to engage with you if you think I'm trolling or you are just going to dismiss me. I'm willing to engage honestly and openly with you only if you give me the same respect.

What say you?

DeVore

Sure, why not, I have no problem with dissent. If I did half the posters on this thread wouldnt be here. Damn, half the mods and a few of the SMods wouldnt be here.

I'll pay you that respect if you return it because I feel you have really been way off the mark, I mean.... right off the plantantion but you arent the first and I've converted many before you.

Give me an honest answer to my question.

DeV.

DeVore

A short honest answer.

DeV.

Nevyn

Gandalf23 wrote: »

Well actually this community is partly mine, and I have contributed to building it. As have you, and trout, and robbo, and everyone who has ever joined or posted or contributed in any way. This is a community made up of people ... we make it, and without us there is nothing ... boards.ie is more than just the machine code and servers you seem to think it is.

So you feel invested in the place, lots of people do.

Gandalf23 wrote: »

Pity you have such a narrow view. Pity you want descenting voices to leave.

There have always been room for dissenting voices the admins have always allowed for feedback to be the place in the market square where those who wanted to rant, rile and rave could do, that way it has helped their 'benevolent dictatorship' but how sustainable that is moving forward I don't know.

I do know that if people are really and truly unhappy with the site then they can vote with their feet and leave and some day that could well be what I do.
What I won't do is hang around raining on other people's parades cos I don't like how things are any more.

Gandalf23 wrote: »

Well I'm not leaving. I'm staying because I belong here. I'll continue to call things as I see them. I'll continue to contribute to this community, and you should be thanking me for that. Just as you should be thanking every other person who has made this site what it is today.

Think that if you want but other people are free to think that you are negatively contributing and actively deconstructing this place which they have invested in. Just like you gleefully started that thread in BGRH when pighead's ban was lifted. Yes that was soo helpful and contributing to the forum and the site as a whole.

Gandalf23

DeVore wrote: »

Sure, why not, I have no problem with dissent. If I did half the posters on this thread wouldnt be here. Damn, half the mods and a few of the SMods wouldnt be here.

I'll pay you that respect if you return it because I feel you have really been way off the mark, I mean.... right off the plantantion but you arent the first and I've converted many before you.

Give me an honest answer to my question.

I'll be a difficult one to convert. Maybe I'll convert you!

OK, I'll answer as honestly as possible. This is honest and there is nothing personal in this ... just pure undiluted feedback.

DeVore wrote: »

I have a question, if a long time user came along and made that remark, a user who had previously shown themselve to be a positive supportive poster, and the user, when challenged put their hand up and said "I was having a bad day and in my defence I was provoked but I apologise none the less because its not in my nature and I havent done it before and will try not to again".... What do you think my response to that user would be?

Gandalf23, Daithi, Roundy, Boston. I'd also welcome answers from anyone who supports the notion that I get unfair preferential treatment.

What do you think, given my past manner of dealing with things, what do you think I would do?

The following is my personal opinion. I am not stating anything as fact ... just giving as honest an opinion as possible.

I think you definitely get preferential treatment on this site. I can understand this, but its a very bad thing for the site and the community as a whole. You have special powers here and with those powers comes extra responsibility. You should not be above the rules, and it looks awful if you are immune (or even perceived to be immune) to rules you yourself have set and expect others to follow. You might argue this is not the case, but you need to be above reproach on this. I suggest that its made clear that admins CAN indeed be banned, and you personally expect all mods to apply the rules equally to you. I also suggest that you lead from the front. I respect a lot of what you have done ... this site can potentially be greater than the sum of its parts and needs a great leader. This will be especially true in the next few years ... discussion boards might not even be around in 5 to 10 years ... we need to become stronger and evolve as a strong united community. As I said above, this site is more than servers and source code ... we are people and some of us will shout where we see injustice. We make this site ... we ARE this site, and you have facilitated that. This is not my personal "crusade". Its not a personal attack on the site ... its telling a friend that something is wrong, and trying to ****1ng do something about it.

I know a lot of people here (including you) have a problem with me and my feedback. I should have given up long ago. I'm still here because we have something special as a community, and I honestly believe I can make a positive difference. If anything I have said has made even one person think then it's all been worthwhile.

Your specific question about the long term user ... I believe you would probably make them take a ban and then welcome them back. I have seen this argued many times. I have seen you support mods in this and I understand why you do this.

I know you might disagree with me. At least you know my honest opinion.

And btw, I am not interested in applying for CM (as I jokingly said in another post on another thread). You couldn't afford me :D

muffler

Gandalf23 wrote: »

OK dev, I'll answer this as honestly as possible

Well?

I haven't seen your answer yet. For someone who has persistently asked demanded answers you are a tad slow in reciprocating.

the_syco

Thaedydal wrote: »

the place in the market square where those who wanted to rant, rile and rave

I think the problem may be that there is no snow where the complainer is?

Gandalf23

DeVore wrote: »

A short honest answer.

oops ... the above probably too long :eek:

DeVore

There is absolutely no way I would ban that user. Not in a million years.

I note you couldnt resist getting a speech in all the same.

DeV.