Antisemitism On the Islam forum

Fuhrer

Hi there,

I have a problem with not only the content of this thread but also the actions of the two moderators

http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055843471


As you can see Irishconvert claims that Zionists have infiltrated all the main political and media organisation, a well known antisemitic rant about "The jews control everything!"

I call him on it, saying its nothing but antisemitic innuendo asking if he has any proof that its actually true to tell me.

He then proceeds to threaten me via PM and Hobbes bans me for one month and locks the thread.

LoLth

hi,

have you tried discussing this with the mod in question or with one of the co-mods using the private message system?

if you have already tried that, have you asked one of the category mods for their opinion?

Fuhrer

LoLth wrote: »

hi,

have you tried discussing this with the mod in question or with one of the co-mods using the private message system?

if you have already tried that, have you asked one of the category mods for their opinion?

Yeah, I asked Hobbes and he said if I had a problem to post in Help Desk.


So here I am I guess.

LoLth

Ok.

Technically, you should go to the category mods if the issue cannot be resolved with the mod or co-mod. however, seeing as your here and you did make the effort to PM already, I'll take it up from here. have a bit of patience please, Pm isnt instant I'll post back an update when I have one.

irishconvert

Hi,

I am the moderator the OP is referring to.

I strongly reject the OP's claim that I made antisemitic comments. Please have a look through the thread and you will see I didn't make any comment which could be reasonable claimed to be antisemitic.

In relation to the OP's claim that I threatened him by PM, well that is a downright lie. I can post the one and only PM I sent here if you wish.

IMO the OP is a troublemaker, liar and had some sort of grudge against anyone who critises the policies of Israel.

Regards,
IrishConvert.

LoLth

I'll post up here later outlining the issues that need to be discussed.

No posts from users not invited to participate will be approved.

It should also be noted that fuhrer has retracted the claim of being threatened before irishconvert's post was approved.

Fuhrer

Id like if some of you could take a few minutes a read the thread and give me your opinion if you thought it was anti-Semitic.

It seems to me that it was just another "The jews control the media!" conspiracy rant.

As for Irishconverts last point, if anyone wants to simply wants to do a recent search of my posts you'll find his "Anyone who criticizes Isreal!" rant to be so laughably untrue it speaks to some persecution complex he has.

Rather then explain the full extent of what he meant by his statement, or give some evidence to back it up he immediately declared that no one could discuss it, locked the thread and had me banned.

This should not be the behavior of any user, especially not a mod.

Hobbes

Hi,

I was the person who banned him. The topic was about the documentry (which I have not watched).

Irishconvert made a comment about Zionists in relation to something. The conversation was about to expand on it and Irishconvert correctly said that topic should be continued in another forum (as per the Islam forum charter).

Furhers response was to attack his comment. Irishconvert corrected him on the term Anti-semitism. Furhers went on to equate Jewish people = Zionists (which is not true), and use that to claim that Irishconvert was Anti-Semitic.

At that point the post was reported.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055936876

The normal process in the forum if a mod is having direct issues with a user is that they do not get involved with it (to avoid claims of censorship).

I reviewed it and banned him. Initially I was going to permanently ban, but he might actually add value at a later point. However attacking a moderator is not on. Hence the one month ban.

After that I posted saying that the thread would be locked if there was nothing else to add (appeared not to be going anywhere except the argument).

Just to clarify on this thread, Furher created this thread to report my conduct. Not that of Irishconvert. According to PM I got.

<EDIT>
<PMs snipped> If Fuhrer agrees to have his PM posted then we can add them later but tbh they are besides the point, it really doesnt matter how this came to the helpdesk, its here so we may as well deal with it
LoLth
</EDIT>

To make a point very clear. The Islam forum has a very strict charter and for a very good reason.

The forum is not for people to have a go at others. If you feel someone is posting something not agreeable, use the report post. Don't make accusations on the forum.

Also Irishconvert did not refuse to talk further, just that it would be done on the correct forum. While it is not up to me to say who reported the post, but it wasn't Irishconvert.

Any other questions feel free to ask.

Hobbes

Forgot to add. It wasn't me who locked the thread, but I would of at the timelimit.

Hobbes

LoLth wrote: »

Technically, you should go to the category mods if the issue cannot be resolved with the mod or co-mod.

The moderation is stopping me from editing my posts.

I've been away a while I should of pointed him in the correct forum.

As for the ban, I won't be removing it. Irishconvert is more then welcome to (barring any overrulling from cmod/admins).

LoLth

Sorry for the late reply to this. pesky RL got in the way.
The original complaint was about anti-semitic comments on the Islam thread.

I, personally dont think the Zionist comment made by irishconvert was anti-semitic. a bit xenophobic perhaps and possibly a bit conspiracy theorist but I can see how the leap could be made to assume it anti-semitic and, as the poster of the comment, irishconvert should have been aware that it could be construed as such and been prepared to respond, politely, to any such calls.

so, to answer Fuhrer's question, no, I dont see the comment as anti semitic.

However, thats not the only issue that shows itself on the thread.

irishconvert: if a user had posted that zionist reference on that thread you would have removed it as being off topic (you as much said so yourself when you said it was better suited to conspiracy theories). As a mod, you should have either known not to post it, or you should have deleted your post. Instead, after saying it was not suitable for discussion, you entered into a discussion.

(post 14 you say its not suitable for discussion there but posts 20 and 22 you return to the discussion)
At this stage the thread was no longer about the original topic and should have been closed or, the zionist discussion should have been cut and moved to a more appropriate forum.
From the Islam forum charter:

4. You are free to ask questions, however if you make accusations you will be expected to back them up with facts especially if you are asked to (even if it is later proven to show those facts are flawed then that is acceptable). Refusing to back up your accusations will result in a warning then a ban.

When asked for examples and clarification on your statement (post 12) you do not respond. when asked later for justification to support your statement (post 19) you refer them to view a documentary posted by someone else. I dont think you would accept that answer from a user. I for one would tell you where to go if your only response was "go watch the doc and get back to me", why would I waste my time watching something I more than likely wont agree with
The thread dies around post 25.
It gets bumped almost two monnths later with no response.
It gets bumped three weeks later and the person bumping it gets an infraction from the recliner for a pointless post. Surely the original bump should have earned an infraction too? In fact, the original bump does earn an infraction later on from Hobbes almost three months after the fact.
The fuhrer posts that the innuendo is anti-semitic. And quotes the mod stating that it is not an acceptable topic for the forum.
Irishconvert responds with a personal comment after posting a definition of anti-semitic (post 29)

People like you who throw around the term so freely dilute the true meaning and actually do a disservice to Jews

Then the Fuhrer posts an attack on the mod himself. (post 30) "You dont believe you have a prejudice against jews?" and asks a valid question requesting what evidence exists to support the original statement.

Now, Hobbes steps in to respond to the post being reported and bans Fuhrer for 1 month for

Fuhrer banned 1 month. Everyone knows the drill. Not open for discussion on this thread or forum

(post 31)

If the topic had not been previously discussed on the thread, or if th etopic had been closed off as beign off topic and not re-engaged by the mod that posted the comment in the first place then this would be a valid ban reason. However, on readign that thread, I think this was a wrong call. If Fuhrer is to be banned for posting off topic, then anyone that posted about the Zionist agenda on that thread after post 14 should also receive a ban.

Additionally an infraction is awarded to the first bump post, three months after the fact.

We dont expect mods to read every thread in their forum nor do we expect mods to stay out of conversations or discussions but we would like to see some moderator consistency.

the issues as I see them here:

irishconvert: you should have known better than to post such an off topic comment in the first place but then to post that it is not suitable for discussion in that thread and to continue discussing it just compounded the mistake.

posts are infracted seemingly without the previous content being read. 2nd bump is infracted but the first isnt. If the first was not infracted because it was two weeks later then it is hardly fair to infract it 10 days after that.

If you dont want the thread bumped, lock it and let it float away.

if you are going to infract for not posting relevant material, then be consistant and infract previous posts (which should have been infracted already).

Hobbes: you responded to a reported post but i think you have reacted without taking the prior thread into consideration. Yes, as a standalone post Fuhrer's post deserved action , though I would hold that a 1 month ban is a bit harsh for a first offense, but taken in the context of the thread, he saw a statement that he (wrongly imho) believed to be anti-semitic and challenged it - as the charter says is to be expected.

additionally, your ban message to Fuhrer was not ... optimal?....

Mods don't need to put up with that crap. Follow the charter when you can finally come back (1 month)

I would ask, what crap? he didnt post off topic for the thread (for the forum yes, the thread, no and it was a discussion started by and involving a moderator who should be setting the example to the users).

Where did he perform a breach of the charter that was not already breached by a moderator? - honest question. I'm not seeing it myself.

You are right. Mods shouldnt have to put up with crap.. that they dont bring on themselves. In this case however, irishconvert started it and continued it. Banning and locking were not the only options available, the off topic posts could have been moved to a more suitable forum and discussed there.

The main issue I'm seeing here is a lack of cohesion between the moderators. A simple mistake was made worse by not putting a stop to it earlier on. And then the option to ban a user and lock the thread was exercised which, to my mind, was completely the wrong action to take. The ban was given for the wrong reasons, the post was reported out of context.

was Fuhrer confrontational: yes, more so than he needed to be but not so much so that the post could not be edited or a warning given. A moderator had already responded to the post and engaged in debate.

To address the inconsistencies in modding in that thread: I would suggest the setting up of a forum for Islam mods to discuss moderator actions and co-ordinate their approach to the moderation of the forum. several forums already have these and they have proven very useful for communication in the past.

the infraction for the first bump cannot be reversed without also reversing the second and both are technically deserved even if a bit late in being applied.

As for Fuhrer, I would recommend that the ban be removed. He is a messer and has an infraction history that shows he likes to argue, an edge he will need to look at softening in the future but in this instance, I dont see any transgression ban-worthy that has not already committed by another poster earlier in the thread. In fact, if moderators are to display the behaviour we want users to aspire to, then aside from being a bit overly aggressive, he was simply following suit and engaging in a discussion.

That thread contains the following charter breaches from what I can see:

2. Posting an off topic thread will have your thread moved to the respective forum. Numerous posts offtopic will lead in temp ban from forum (you will be warned beforehand). Do not post asking people to read a post on another forum.

3. The following is NOT ALLOWED. You will be temp banned with a possible outright permanent ban posting any of these subjects.
Garbage (eg. muslim = suicide bomber, telling people they are brainwashed).

4. You are free to ask questions, however if you make accusations you will be expected to back them up with facts especially if you are asked to (even if it is later proven to show those facts are flawed then that is acceptable). Refusing to back up your accusations will result in a warning then a ban.

14. Do NOT attack other posters. If you disagree with that poster's opinion, do so in an orderly and well mannered fashion.

not all of which belong to Fuhrer.

Note: I dont want a witch hunt. I just want to hopefully point out soemthing(s) I see as off kilter and hopefully set it on a better track. this is not a post from "on high" and is certianly open for discussion and correction. I am under no delusion that I understand the forum better than anyone else or that ther eis no way that I have not misread something so, please, feel free to correct me where I've got things wrong.

LoLth

irishconvert wrote: »

Hi,

I am the moderator the OP is referring to.

I strongly reject the OP's claim that I made antisemitic comments. Please have a look through the thread and you will see I didn't make any comment which could be reasonable claimed to be antisemitic.

i have looked through the thread and while not anti-semitic, it is off topic, slightly xenophobic and has no place in that thread or in the Islam forum.

In relation to the OP's claim that I threatened him by PM, well that is a downright lie. I can post the one and only PM I sent here if you wish.

that has already been rescinded so no worries there either

IMO the OP is a troublemaker, liar and had some sort of grudge against anyone who critises the policies of Israel.

and you have just jumped to a conclusion based on a post by Fuhrer, just as he did based on a post by you.

LoLth

Fuhrer wrote: »

Id like if some of you could take a few minutes a read the thread and give me your opinion if you thought it was anti-Semitic.

it was possibly off colour but it wasnt anti-semitic.

It seems to me that it was just another "The jews control the media!" conspiracy rant.

Thats exactly how it appears to me as well and as such it should not have been posted there in the first place.

As for Irishconverts last point, if anyone wants to simply wants to do a recent search of my posts you'll find his "Anyone who criticizes Isreal!" rant to be so laughably untrue it speaks to some persecution complex he has.

as already stated, both of you are guilty of jumping to a conclusion here that , on closer inspection proves to be unfounded.

Rather then explain the full extent of what he meant by his statement, or give some evidence to back it up he immediately declared that no one could discuss it, locked the thread and had me banned.

right actions but wrong order and this is something that needs to be addressed.

This should not be the behavior of any user, especially not a mod.

I have always maintained that a mod should behave as they would expect their users to behave and lead by example (especially in, but not limited to, their own forum).

Hobbes

LoLth wrote: »

....

I had a big long rebuttal on each comment but it is just picky at this point so I will get to the main point.

He was banned for personal attacks. Not off topic posting. Attacking a moderator rather then reporting it. Sure you see one person complaining about a ban. What you don't see prior to that is months of anti-Islam attacks on moderators or posting in the forum anti-Islam statements. Which is not what the forum is about. So there is very little give in regards to this. His ignorance of this fact is not a protection from it.

Equating Anti-Zionist = Anti-Jewish is utter BS and using that as the argument is what pushed it to 1 month rather then 1-2 weeks.

Personally I was going to make it a perm ban, but the other mods on the forum are quite strict on not doing this until they have to. From reading Fuhrers posts in other forums it is quite clear that he has issue with Islam/Muslims in general. That he is certainly allowed to do. The Islam forum is not a forum to voice those issues. It is not a forum that Muslims need to continually have to defend themselves from attacks. If such posters want to have such discussions they have politics/humanities/AH and other forums where even Muslims will join into the discussion.

We have a number of posters on the Islam forum who share the same feelings but do work within the forum guidelines to poke at Islam related issues and get productive responses.

Let me make the next bit clear as I will no longer comment on this thread and I am not going to engage in a witch hunt of nit-picking the Forum charter.

I personally will not rescind the ban. Personal attacks are out of order and there is a report button feature. Irishconvert from what I can see correctly worked within the forum charter *regardless*, had nothing to do with the ban.

If Irishconvert wants to lift the ban or I am overruled by other mods on the forum (they do often) or cmod or admin then I will certainly respect that decision.

As for Fuhrer this is no way denied him to discuss the subject matter on other forums. Nor does it stop him from reading the forum.

irishconvert

LoLth, with all due respect, the OP's complaint is that he thinks I made an anti-sematic statement, not about how Hobbes or I moderate the Islam forum.

As for my statement supposedly being ant-sematic, you have agreed with me that it wasn't so I suggest this should be the end of this thread.

If you have seperate issues about how I or the other Islam moderators moderate the forum then feel free to take them up with us.

Regards,
IrishConvert.

P.S. I stand by Hobbes' decision to ban the OP and will not be overriding it.

LoLth

there is a point there that attacking a moderator is not acceptable. However, the moderator in question was posting as a poster and not a moderator. It was not a moderator decision that was criticised, it was a post from a poster that had been discussed already on that thread , albeit off topic.

were the prior months of anti-Islam sentiment posted by the user that was banned? Was there anti islam sentiment in the post? where did the poster criticise Islam? they only thing I see is a criticism of possible abuse of moderator power (posting an anti-zionist statement and then saying its not allowed to discuss it) and a criticism of what the user believes that statement to represent. yes, I see one person complaining about a ban and not the history of the forum, thats why I want to hear the moderator opinions.

yes, equating anti-zionist to anit-jew is not right but getting a fact or definition wrong is not grounds for a banning, it is grounds for losing an argument and possibly having the basis of your objection swept out from under you. Would pointing out that fact not have been the better course of action?

I dont expect Muslims to have to constantly defend themselves from attack. You are absolutely correct in that statement and if this was a discussion about an attack on muslim beliefs or tradition then you would have my full support. Fuhrer's post was an attack on an attack on another organisation or belief (zionists) stated by a poster. It was a series of posts better suited to CT but it wasnt posted there or moved there, it was posted and discussed in the Islam forum before Fuhrer's post.

The ban was awarded based on a personal attack made by one poster against another poster (the fact that the poster was a moderator doesnt matter here as he was posting and interacting as a poster, not as a moderator, in that particular discussion, easily proven by the fact that he did not moderate the off topic discussion that had derailed the thread)

both posters made a personal attack in their posts. To ban one and not the other for that reason is inconsistent moderation and is not fair to the users.

I would suggest that the ban be lifted and the thread remain locked.

Fuhrer in the meantime should do his research on what is and is not anti-semitic and anti-zionist and then, not post on those topics in the Islam forum.

I know that you have said that you will not discuss this any further but I would be interested in hearing the opinion of your co-mods and the category mods as this is a decision that should not be made without their input.

LoLth

irishconvert wrote: »

LoLth, with all due respect, the OP's complaint is that he thinks I made an anti-sematic statement, not about how Hobbes or I moderate the Islam forum.

As for my statement supposedly being ant-sematic, you have agreed with me that it wasn't so I suggest this should be the end of this thread.

If you have seperate issues about how I or the other Islam moderators moderate the forum then feel free to take them up with us.

Regards,
IrishConvert.

P.S. I stand by Hobbes' decision to ban the OP and will not be overriding it.

You are right. the main argument has been settled on this thread. But, the issue of the ban itself, in my opinion, has not.

As for the moderation of the thread, I will put the gears in motion to get an Islam moderators forum set up and we can discuss this further there.

Fuhrer

Id like to add that my main gripe isn't with Irishconverts comment but Hobbes & his reaction to it.


Given that Irishconverts first reaction here was to personally insult me and make up some history of me attacking his viewpoints, I think it shows pretty clearly his unsuitableness to be a moderator.

How what I said is deemed a personal attack and not an attack on his post is quite debatable, but what you have here is Hobbes jumping in claiming I have months of Anti-Islamic statements which is almost the same as what IrishConvert has said. Neither of them have offered any posts which back this point up.


Here in this thread, we've had Two mods who made a very questionable decision, they've been advised to revise it instead they refused to and instead focused on personally attacking me on completely made up things.

If someone went into the Islam forum and started doing this, id imagine they would be rightly banned pretty quickly, how are these two fit to be moderators?

Scofflaw

That is a very heavy ban for the supposed offence - and I speak as someone who has been banning people left right and centre for playing the anti-Semitism card!

To me, the main problem with the ban is that it's clear in the thread that irishconvert is speaking as a poster rather than a mod - certainly I can't see "Zionists have infiltrated all news organisations" as being some kind of vital tenet of any forum - so the idea that this is a challenge to moderation rather than a poster's opinion looks out of line to me.

I therefore find it hard to support a ban based on the idea that this is either a personal attack (is it now an attack to question someone else's opinion?) or an attack on a moderator (are we immune to criticism when we post our opinions?).

cordially,
Scofflaw

LoLth

Fuhrer wrote: »

Id like to add that my main gripe isn't with Irishconverts comment but Hobbes & his reaction to it.


Given that Irishconverts first reaction here was to personally insult me and make up some history of me attacking his viewpoints, I think it shows pretty clearly his unsuitableness to be a moderator.

How what I said is deemed a personal attack and not an attack on his post is quite debatable, but what you have here is Hobbes jumping in claiming I have months of Anti-Islamic statements which is almost the same as what IrishConvert has said. Neither of them have offered any posts which back this point up.


Here in this thread, we've had Two mods who made a very questionable decision, they've been advised to revise it instead they refused to and instead focused on personally attacking me on completely made up things.

If someone went into the Islam forum and started doing this, id imagine they would be rightly banned pretty quickly, how are these two fit to be moderators?

There are three issues being discussed here:

Anti Semitic comments: there werent any that were anti-semitic

Threats against a user by PM: you rescinded that allegation.

The 1 month ban: whether or not a ban was warranted and whether or not the duration should be 1 month.

thats it. IMHO both mods that you mention do a great job overall and have kept order and civility in a religious forum, an achievement I dont think should go unforgotten. Everyone makes mistakes, I feel this whole situation has been born of a mistake that got compounded and now needs to be sorted out without being unfair to anyone. This is not a narrative on my opinion of any moderators ability to moderate. Its an inquiry into the events contained within that one thread.

hivizman

I actually started the original thread "My Name is Muhammad", back in March, having watched a BBC TV programme that interviewed various Muslims who were called Muhammad. The interviewees, some of whom were converts to Islam, while others were lifelong Muslims, were discussing what their religion meant to them, so I believe that the initial post was firmly within the forum charter. Since the programme was available on YouTube, I thought that people who had missed the original programme and did not have access to BBC iPlayer would be interested.

A subsequent poster introduced another documentary, on alleged Muslim extremist entryism in the London Borough of Tower Hamlets, and after I watched that programme I posted my reactions. Irishconvert replied "Funny how they don't talk about a group who have already infiltrated most political parties and media organisations in the UK". There was some interchange about this reply, and another regular poster referred to a documentary that had addressed the issue of "Britain's Israel Lobby". The thread then went off the boil and dropped off the first page of the thread list until it was first bumped in mid-May and then revived in mid-June by Fuhrer.

I wasn't a moderator when the early phase of the thread was under way. The more recent phase of the thread was way off topic, and I certainly think that the decision to lock the thread was correct. Based solely on the posts on the thread, I do not think that Fuhrer was personally attacking Irishconvert in his capacity as a moderator, so I'm not convinced that the ban was appropriate, but as a beginner in moderation I'm happy to defer to more experienced moderators in this area.

irishconvert

LoLth wrote: »

There are three issues being discussed here:

Anti Semitic comments: there werent any that were anti-semitic

Threats against a user by PM: you rescinded that allegation.

The 1 month ban: whether or not a ban was warranted and whether or not the duration should be 1 month.

thats it. IMHO both mods that you mention do a great job overall and have kept order and civility in a religious forum, an achievement I dont think should go unforgotten. Everyone makes mistakes, I feel this whole situation has been born of a mistake that got compounded and now needs to be sorted out without being unfair to anyone. This is not a narrative on my opinion of any moderators ability to moderate. Its an inquiry into the events contained within that one thread.

I think I deserve an apology from the OP because:
1) I was unfairly accused of being antisemitic.
2) I was falsey accused of sending a threatening PM to the OP.

Now that both of these allegations have been deemed false he is trying to change his story and say his problem is with Hobbes, not me. I am not happy to have a poster like this in the Islam forum. I suggest the ban should stay in place and he can come back in one month if he is prepared to be more honest in the future.

LoLth

irishconvert wrote: »

I think I deserve an apology from the OP because:
1) I was unfairly accused of being antisemitic.
2) I was falsey accused of sending a threatening to the OP.

Now that both of these allegations have been deemed false he is trying to change his story and say his problem is with Hobbes, not me. I am not happy to have a poster like this in the Islam forum. I suggest the ban should stay in place and he can come back in one month if he is prepared to be more honest in the future.

So, you want the ban to be left in place for a different reason?

How about the ban remains in place until Fuhrer apologises for the accusation of a threatening PM (to be honest, it is relatively easy to verify such claims and it does appear to be untrue from the evidence and reaction so far).

As for calling you an anti-semitist, as already said, the comment you made as a poster could be interpreted as an anti semitist comment by someone not fully versed in the definition of Zionist but he did have a point that the comment did smack of another "jews controlling the media" rant commonly found in forums dealing with Conspiracy Theories. If you are going to make a comment like yours, you should be prepared to defend the sentiment behind it and expect at least one poster to take issue rightly or wrongly. Should I ask you to apologise to all Zionists for making the comment in the first place?

Fuhrer: would you be willing to post that you accept that the comment was not anti-semitic and apologise for getting the wrong impression in the first place?

irishconvert

LoLth wrote: »

So, you want the ban to be left in place for a different reason?

How about the ban remains in place until Fuhrer apologises for the accusation of a threatening PM (to be honest, it is relatively easy to verify such claims and it does appear to be untrue from the evidence and reaction so far).

Look, forget about the apology, it's not worth the hassle. You can unban Fuhrer if you wish, I don't really care at this stage.

LoLth wrote: »

As for calling you an anti-semitist, as already said, the comment you made as a poster could be interpreted as an anti semitist comment by someone not fully versed in the definition of Zionist

That doesn't matter a jot. If he doesn't understand what Zionist is, and he doesnt' understand what anti semite means he shouldn't accuse people of it. Claiming ignorance is not an excuse. BTW, he hasn't claimed ignorance, you seem to be doing this on his behalf.

LoLth wrote: »

but he did have a point that the comment did smack of another "jews controlling the media" rant commonly found in forums dealing with Conspiracy Theories.

I was not talking about Jews at all. And I was not talking about the media. I was talking about the policital infulence Zionists have on UK political parties. Perhaps I should have elaborated on it but I didn't. I suppose I realised I was dragging the thread off topic so didn't want to let it get out of hand. I referred to Wes' post with the link to the documentary on Channel 4 which explained my point of view. I then suggested that the conversation should continue in another forum.

LoLth wrote: »

If you are going to make a comment like yours, you should be prepared to defend the sentiment behind it and expect at least one poster to take issue rightly or wrongly. Should I ask you to apologise to all Zionists for making the comment in the first place?

Of course not, because what I said was true. There is absolutely no reason for me to apologise about something that is common knowledge and was covered in a documentary on a mainstream broadcaster.

As I said earlier the original complaint by Fuhrer was accusing me of being an anti-semite and as this has now been resolved, and all parties agree I am not, this should be the end of the subject. If you or any other mods have a problem with moderation decisions I suggest you take it up with the moderator in question using PM instead of airing all this dirty laundry in public.

I don't have anything further to add to this thread and this is my final post on it.

Regards,
IrishConvert.

Fuhrer

LoLth wrote: »

So, you want the ban to be left in place for a different reason?

How about the ban remains in place until Fuhrer apologises for the accusation of a threatening PM (to be honest, it is relatively easy to verify such claims and it does appear to be untrue from the evidence and reaction so far).

As for calling you an anti-semitist, as already said, the comment you made as a poster could be interpreted as an anti semitist comment by someone not fully versed in the definition of Zionist but he did have a point that the comment did smack of another "jews controlling the media" rant commonly found in forums dealing with Conspiracy Theories. If you are going to make a comment like yours, you should be prepared to defend the sentiment behind it and expect at least one poster to take issue rightly or wrongly. Should I ask you to apologise to all Zionists for making the comment in the first place?

Fuhrer: would you be willing to post that you accept that the comment was not anti-semitic and apologise for getting the wrong impression in the first place?

I really am confused at how i'm the one that now has to be asked to apologize now.

My comments are debatable to be honest and in absolutely no way deserve a ban. Admittedly its a leap to suggest that someone making completely unsubstantiated Anti-Zionist conspiracy rants could also have these interpreted of Anti-Semitic.

If someone had come in and said that Nigerians are lazy, shiftless and a stupid people, would I get banned for saying that persons comments were racist towards black people? I highly doubt it.


As for personal attacks, other posters have come in this thread and commented that commenting on another users opinion isn't a personal attack yet I think everyone can agree that Irishconvert has personally attacked me in that thread and also in here were he accused me of being a troublemaker and a liar with a history of posting attacks on anyone who criticizes Israel. Theses are no true, and my supposed history of having a grudge against people who criticize Israel is demonstrably false, so either Irishconvert is knowingly lying or hes holding opinions that he has no basis for.

As for Irishconvert's ability as a mod, I barely had any contact with him apart from his outrageous behavior on this issue but ever since I started this thread I've received a number of PM's complaining about how hes a bully and a terrible mod, with these peoples permission would one of the Mods/Admin like me to forward them on?


Anyway in conclusion, I really don't care if I'm unbanned at this stage given the mods who run that forum but I am entitled to an apology from Irishconvert's untrue and insulting statements he has made in this thread and the other.

LoLth

irishconvert wrote: »

If you or any other mods have a problem with moderation decisions I suggest you take it up with the moderator in question using PM instead of airing all this dirty laundry in public.

If the dirty laundry directly affects a user and that user complains, then helpdesk is the place for the discussion. if we only discuss an issue with moderation behind closed doors then any decision that supports the moderator will be met with accusations of bias and mistrust.

The helpdesk is there as a resource for users to appeal a decision and for the moderators to present their side of the argument supporting their decision.

1. The ban from the Islam forum for Fuhrer will be lifted. From the posts in that thread I dont think the reasoning behind the ban was correct. this is not a criticism of the moderators, just of this decision.

2. The thread in the Islam forum will be left locked and allowed to float away. It went off topic quite early on and only resurfaced because of two "bump" posts.

3. A forum is to be set up for the Islam moderators as a sub forum of the Soc Mod section in the Mod Forums. Scofflaw and nesf will be set as moderators of the forum. this should be used to discuss moderation issues and help moderators gives each other a heads up and a place to discuss potential pitfalls or just ask for advice from their co-mods. It will aso serve as a useful resource for new mods in the future to help them get up to speed.

4. Fuhrer will be awarded a 1 week siteban for making a false accusation against irishconvert regarding a threatening PM. As I said, helpdesk is a resource for users and should not be open to abuse. yes, it was rescinded but only when asked for proof, the accusation itself can be damaging to a mods reputation.

If I dont hear any valid objection to these actions I'll put them in place at 5pm today.