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

Unfairly banned for being anti-EU/Lisbon?

Options
  • 12-12-2009 7:17pm
    #1
    aurelius79
    Closed Accounts Posts: 395 ✭✭


    So I was having a fairly good debate with BlitzKrieg (a site mod and the only other person replying to the thread in question) when a mod (site admin?) by the name of oscarBravo jumps in, accuses me of being a troll, then bans me from the sub-forum for a week.

    The thread in question is:

    http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055763090

    Now I don't believe Mr. Bravo had any right to ban me. I hadn't broken any forum rules and his opinion that I was trolling was based on the fact that I just didn't agree with what BlitzKrieg was saying. I was providing evidence of any claims I made, which Mr. Bravo claims otherwise.

    I also have another issue to raise. I was under the impression that advertising for private companies is forbidden on this forum yet oscarBravo has a very conspicuous link in his signature to an extremely overpriced private internet provider. I guess there are one set of rules for us and another set (or lack thereof) for mods and admins?


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    Zaph
    Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 47,308 ✭✭✭✭Zaph


    OK, before I address your specific issues I'll clear up for you who everyone is and what they do. BlitzKrieg is a moderator of other forums on Boards, but is not a politics mod has no authority on that particular forum. oscarBravo is an administrator for the whole site, but he is also a moderator on Politics and he was acting in this capacity when he banned you.

    On the thread in question both BlitzKrieg and oscarBravo addressed the issue you were discussing, providing clear and unequivocal evidence to support their arguments by quoting directly from the treaty. you, on the other hand, refused to admit that you were incorrect in your assertions and offered nothing better than extracts from Wikipedia by way of refutation. The politics forum requires a higher standard of debate than that, and as you were unable, or unwilling, to offer it an accusation of trolling was pretty much inevitable. Following oscarBravo's comment to you about this you responded with:
    As far as I know, accusations of trolling are against forum rules. If you have a problem with what I say talk to a mod.

    Now you are correct in your assertion that accusations of trolling are not permitted as per the forum charter. However when it's one of the forum mods levelling that accusation at you you are better served to pay attention rather than quoting the rules back at him. Regardless of any potential trolling, arguing with a moderator on-thread will earn you a ban from most forums, so oscarBravo was fully justified in his actions.

    With regard to the second part of your complaint, the site signature rules say the following about advertising:
    Your sig should NOT be a giant advertisment for anything. We'll just cut it. A subtle link to something you run online is fine.

    oscarBravo's signature quite clearly adheres to this rule as it is subtle and in no way intrusive. The same rules apply to everyone and oB isn't getting any special treatment. Should you wish to have a similar advertisment in your sig you are fully entitled to do so. Regarding his company's pricing policy, if you have an issue with that I suggest you take it up with the company directly.


  • Options
    #3
    aurelius79
    Closed Accounts Posts: 395 ✭✭aurelius79


    Thanks for your response, I appreciate your straightforwardness. While I still believe the ban was unwarranted I will concede the point that admins have a right to do as they see fit.

    I honestly didn't know he was an admin, I just assumed he was just a moderator. I believe his warning should have been given via PM where he identified himself as an admin. I wouldn't have replied as I did otherwise.

    I guess I'll just take this time to do some more research so that I can pick up the debate where I left off.


  • Options
    #4
    Zaph
    Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 47,308 ✭✭✭✭Zaph


    aurelius79 wrote: »
    Thanks for your response, I appreciate your straightforwardness. While I still believe the ban was unwarranted I will concede the point that admins have a right to do as they see fit.

    I honestly didn't know he was an admin, I just assumed he was just a moderator. I believe his warning should have been given via PM where he identified himself as an admin.

    As I pointed out in my post, oscarBravo is, in addition to being an admin, a mod of the politics forum. He acted in this capacity, rather than as an admin. As for a warning by PM, it is not site policy to do such a thing, there is enough for the mods to do around here without adding to their workload.


  • Options
    #5
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,804 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    aurelius79 wrote: »
    I honestly didn't know he was an admin, I just assumed he was just a moderator. I believe his warning should have been given via PM where he identified himself as an admin. I wouldn't have replied as I did otherwise.
    Just to clarify: I sent the following PM at 19:55.
    oscarBravo wrote:
    aurelius79 wrote: »
    As far as I know, accusations of trolling are against forum rules. If you have a problem with what I say talk to a mod.
    I am a moderator of the forum, as I suspect you already know.

    If you're not interested in contributing constructively, I'll remove your ability to contribute at all. No more warnings.
    This was followed by yet another pointless and factually inaccurate contribution to the thread at 19:58, which triggered the ban.


Advertisement