Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

preferential treatment to others with mod status

Options
123468

Comments

  • Options
    #152
    --amadeus--
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,096 ✭✭✭--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.


  • Options
    #153
    trout
    Registered Users Posts: 9,945 ✭✭✭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.


  • Options
    #154
    Zaph
    Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 47,307 ✭✭✭✭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?


  • Options
    #155
    Gandalf23
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,643 ✭✭✭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?


  • Options
    #156
    trout
    Registered Users Posts: 9,945 ✭✭✭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.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #157
    GuanYin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,552 ✭✭✭✭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?


  • Options
    #158
    Gandalf23
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,643 ✭✭✭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).


  • Options
    #159
    The Recliner
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,630 ✭✭✭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


  • Options
    #160
    Gandalf23
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,643 ✭✭✭Gandalf23


    trout wrote: »
    Robbo can and has spoken for himself.

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


  • Options
    #161
    Gandalf23
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,643 ✭✭✭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.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #162
    trout
    Registered Users Posts: 9,945 ✭✭✭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 ?


  • Options
    #163
    Zaph
    Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 47,307 ✭✭✭✭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.


  • Options
    #164
    The Recliner
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,630 ✭✭✭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


  • Options
    #165
    Gandalf23
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,643 ✭✭✭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.


  • Options
    #166
    Nevyn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 43,045 ✭✭✭✭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.


  • Options
    #167
    Gandalf23
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,643 ✭✭✭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?


  • Options
    #168
    Gandalf23
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,643 ✭✭✭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.


  • Options
    #169
    Gandalf23
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,643 ✭✭✭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.


  • Options
    #170
    --amadeus--
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,096 ✭✭✭--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


  • Options
    #171
    Gandalf23
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,643 ✭✭✭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.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #172
    The Recliner
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,630 ✭✭✭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


  • Options
    #173
    Gandalf23
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,643 ✭✭✭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.


  • Options
    #174
    trout
    Registered Users Posts: 9,945 ✭✭✭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 ?


  • Options
    #175
    muffler
    Registered Users Posts: 46,106 ✭✭✭✭muffler


    Gandalf23 wrote: »
    But maybe I'm unique around here in aspiring to that.
    No you're not. We had davey180


  • Options
    #176
    Nevyn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 43,045 ✭✭✭✭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.


  • Options
    #177
    Gandalf23
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,643 ✭✭✭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?


  • Options
    #178
    Gandalf23
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,643 ✭✭✭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!!!!


  • Options
    #179
    Gandalf23
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,643 ✭✭✭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 :D


  • Options
    #180
    trout
    Registered Users Posts: 9,945 ✭✭✭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 ?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #181
    BuffyBot
    Registered Users Posts: 24,924 ✭✭✭✭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 :)


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement