Politics Infraction

M three

Hi,
Received an infraction from eliot rosewater for this post
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=70525998


Reason: Breach of Forum Charter

---

Your personalising the debate, contributing nothing and generally being a nuisance.

A certain standard of post is expected in Politics. If you want to continue posting clean up your act - stop contributing nonsense, stop personalising the debate and read the charter. If you can't do this your posting rights will be removed.

---

I dont agree with the infraction, the infracted post does not appear to be on the thread anymore?? in the particular post i asked permabear to clam down, it was said in jest more than anything and this was evident from the post itself.
Eliot rose water infracted the post and went on to say that i was "contributing nothing and generally being a nuisance."
Such a generalisation was very much over the top, i was contributing plenty of valid points and no one else found me to be a nuisance. I mentioned this to eliot but my points were ignored, eliot just wanted to focus on my "personalising the debate"
In an earlier post on that thread I jokingly asked if perma bear was part of the fianna fail spin machine. perma bear actually responded to that post and didnt seem to have a problem with what i said.

In this case I was infracted for "personalising the debate"
If you quote another poster and ask them a question surely that is personalising the thread. If every post of this nature was infracted there would be very few eligible posts on boards.

Dades

Just going back a page or two it seems to me you were involved in some form of "banter" that was unfortunately one-sided. You seemed to trying to reduce the thread to one-liners, or poking Permabear about his responses.

Politics is mayhem this weather, so it's important that the place isn't allowed to develop into a free-for-all. I don't mod politics - but I completely see the need to run a tighter ship than other forums on Boards.

I see that infraction as a timely reminder in the thread to stick to the topic of discussion without resorting to the above. You're not banned or anything serious, take a card, and move on, I suggest.

M three

Dades wrote: »

Just going back a page or two it seems to me you were involved in some form of "banter" that was unfortunately one-sided. You seemed to trying to reduce the thread to one-liners, or poking Permabear about his responses.

Politics is mayhem this weather, so it's important that the place isn't allowed to develop into a free-for-all. I don't mod politics - but I completely see the need to run a tighter ship than other forums on Boards.

I see that infraction as a timely reminder in the thread to stick to the topic of discussion without resorting to the above. You're not banned or anything serious, take a card, and move on, I suggest.

I appreciate the response.
However as you say there was a bit of banter, none of which bothered any other posters on the thread.
Banter or one liners arent reason enough for an infraction, even in the tighter ship of the politics forum. I wasnt the only one in that thread who may have diverted from the thread topic momentarily, but i was the only poster who was infracted.
I was accused by eliot rose water of being a nuisance and contributing nothing which is false. No one else thought i was being a nuisance.

I would like the infraction removed.

Dades

M three wrote: »

However as you say there was a bit of banter, none of which bothered any other posters on the thread.

How do you know? If something bothers you the procedure is to report it rather than complain in-thread. (I don't know if anything was - just making the point).

M three wrote: »

Banter or one liners arent reason enough for an infraction, even in the tighter ship of the politics forum...

I wasnt the only one in that thread who may have diverted from the thread topic momentarily, but i was the only poster who was infracted.

Well that all depends. I used the term "banter" in loose terms - and suggested that it was a one-sided affair.
You were the only one with the double-smileys etc.

M three wrote: »

I was accused by eliot rose water of being a nuisance and contributing nothing which is false. No one else thought i was being a nuisance.

Again, you don't know that.
However I can see how that thread was being devalued with one-liners and the prodding of one particular user.

M three wrote: »

I would like the infraction removed.

Given the heightened (and necessary) state of moderation going on in Politics at the moment an infraction is only a small return.

So I'm going to have to endorse Eliot Rosewater's decision.

If you want an Admin to look further into the matter, just say so here and it will happen.

M three

Dades wrote: »

How do you know? If something bothers you the procedure is to report it rather than complain in-thread. (I don't know if anything was - just making the point).

Well that all depends. I used the term "banter" in loose terms - and suggested that it was a one-sided affair.
You were the only one with the double-smileys etc.

Again, you don't know that.
However I can see how that thread was being devalued with one-liners and the prodding of one particular user.

Given the heightened (and necessary) state of moderation going on in Politics at the moment an infraction is only a small return.

So I'm going to have to endorse Eliot Rosewater's decision.

If you want an Admin to look further into the matter, just say so here and it will happen.

This is why i received the infraction:

Reason: Breach of Forum Charter

---

Your personalising the debate, contributing nothing and generally being a nuisance.

A certain standard of post is expected in Politics. If you want to continue posting clean up your act - stop contributing nonsense, stop personalising the debate and read the charter. If you can't do this your posting rights will be removed.

Contributing nothing - I was contributing, just look at all my posts in that thread
personalising the debate - i addressed another poster - that doesnt warrant an infraction
generally being a nuisance - so the majority of people that read that thread felt i was being a nuisance, this is incorrect

So yes, can admin take a look at this please.

r3nu4l

Hi M Three, I've taken a look at the thread. Here's my thoughts. I'll concern myself with the posts surrounding Permabear as that's why you got the infraction.

Your first post on the thread was a decent contribution, so I agree that you did at one point contribute to the thread. I disagree that you made no contribution to the thread. Great start on the thread actually!

Your second post was merely you telling Permabear that he was clutching at straws. Not much of a contribution there, no real counter-argument at all actually. Just a mocking statement "Lol". Poor follow-up to a good first post.

Your third post is where you start to personalise the debate, calling out a poster as part of the FF spin machine.

Now if you knew anything about this forum you would know that Permabear has been very anti-FF all along so calling him part of the spin machine shows ignorance of the forum and the poster at best or trolling at worst. I suspect the former rather than the latter. This third post has contributed nothing to the debate, merely personalised it. Very poor continuation

Your fourth post was calling on Permabear to criticise Bertie Ahern. Again, not exactly on-topic and if you knew anything about the forum you would know that Permabear would happily criticise Bertie (he'd have to join the queue though! ).

Your final post was deleted so can't be linked. I'll quote it.

Getting a bit carried away there teddy bear

Personalising it again. Okay this post could be taken as being 'humourous' thanks to your big grin smilies, however it could also be taken as mocking and given the rest of your posts I take it that way. It also contributed nothing to the thread.

Overall you did contribute, well at first but then continued extremely poorly and you did personalise the thread, going after one poster and taking the thread off-topic.

Banter and one-liners alone aren't a reason for an infraction but when they are all aimed at one poster and personalise the debate then they are.

I think in this case that the infraction has merit but I don't agree that you made no contribution to the thread.