Double Standards on boards.ie

John Sugrue

Moderator Asiaprod has informed me that this forum is a more appropriate place to post this issue than where I had originally posted it.

Hi All,

This is not a major issue but one I would like to draw attention to. I received a warning from a moderator in the Leaving Cert forum for the use of the term 'Mr. Smartass'. As I explained to the moderator in my PM following the warning, this was meant jokingly and has been misconstrued by the moderator, who admits in his response that nobody reported the comment.

He tells me this: "You should also be aware, however, that forums vary to some extent as to the amount of leeway allowable. LC has always been and always will be quite tightly moderated in comparison to some other forums, in order to ensure that it provides a useful and calm environment for the discussion of issues pertaining to the Leaving Cert, something which is in itself sufficiently stressful for most people undertaking it without having to endure a stressed and antagonistic atmosphere in this forum."

By and large, I accept this reasoning. I regret making the comment. I will be more careful in future.

However, my issue is now one of transparency and equality on the forums. The moderator in question is called 'randylonghorn'. His profile clarifies this as 'exactly what it says on the tin'. What's more, he has an avatar on his profile with the term 'porn star' on it. Nobody can dispute that this is a sexually explicit username and profile and given that he is so active in the Leaving Cert forum and that his profile is thus easily viewable by those under 18 who he claims require an additional degree of moderator protection, I feel that it is hypocritical and unfair, that such a person can discipline me for using the term 'smartass'.

Nevertheless, I do not expect any satisfying response to this post. From reading other threads in this forum, it is clear that the majority of moderators will cover each other even against the most logical of arguments (of which I believe this is one). But I feel that drawing everybody's attention to an apparent double-standard is worthwhile. However, if any moderator does feel that randylonghorn's profile is indeed inappropriate and should be renamed, especially given his specific role on the site, I would be very appreciative (and, unfortunately, surprised).

Regards,
JS

Tallon

I don't think someones name affects how well they moderate

For all I know, Asiaprod could mean something rude

John Sugrue

No but it raises questions with regard to their suitability to moderate. If a moderator is allowed to criticise me for using the term 'smartass' it is only reasonable that that moderator be expected to behave in an equally clean manner, which this one clearly is not.

Tallon

John Sugrue wrote: »

No but it raises questions with regard to their suitability to moderate. If a moderator is allowed to criticise me for using the term 'smartass' it is only reasonable that that moderator be expected to behave in an equally clean manner, which this one clearly is not.

But, as explained, that forum is moderated more 'tightly' than others

IITYWYBMAD

Tallon wrote: »

But, as explained, that forum is moderated more 'tightly' than others

I believe you're missing the point. The question is not really with regards to the degree with which LC is moderated, more the stated claim by the mod.

The OP is fairly accepting of the reasons behind his "slap on the wrist".

However, he is asking, quite legitimately imo, why is he being targeted for the use of a fairly lame term "irrespective and outside of it's contextual use" while the moderator is allowed to have a "nom de guerre" which suggests that he is a "porn star"?

If the kids need protecting, they need protecting!!

Spear

John Sugrue wrote: »

No but it raises questions with regard to their suitability to moderate. If a moderator is allowed to criticise me for using the term 'smartass' it is only reasonable that that moderator be expected to behave in an equally clean manner, which this one clearly is not.

It's the moderators job to ensure civil discourse and this means stopping people from abusing each other. It is not a moderators job to shield people from any aspect of reality they may not agree with or find acceptable.

LoLth

John Sugrue wrote: »

Moderator Asiaprod has informed me that this forum is a more appropriate place to post this issue than where I had originally posted it.

welcome to feedback.

Hi All,

This is not a major issue but one I would like to draw attention to. I received a warning from a moderator in the Leaving Cert forum for the use of the term 'Mr. Smartass'. As I explained to the moderator in my PM following the warning, this was meant jokingly and has been misconstrued by the moderator, who admits in his response that nobody reported the comment.

The warning could have been if the term Mr. Smartass was directed at someone as (mild) abuse instead of a joking comment. Under a tightly moderated forum I can understand *any* abuse warranting an infraction even if it is mild and unreported. all depends on circumstance tbh. However, feedback is not the place to sort out infractions or bans. thats the DRP in helpdesk (theres a link to it in the charter for this forum)

He tells me this: "You should also be aware, however, that forums vary to some extent as to the amount of leeway allowable. LC has always been and always will be quite tightly moderated in comparison to some other forums, in order to ensure that it provides a useful and calm environment for the discussion of issues pertaining to the Leaving Cert, something which is in itself sufficiently stressful for most people undertaking it without having to endure a stressed and antagonistic atmosphere in this forum."

By and large, I accept this reasoning. I regret making the comment. I will be more careful in future.

all good so far

However, my issue is now one of transparency and equality on the forums. The moderator in question is called 'randylonghorn'. His profile clarifies this as 'exactly what it says on the tin'. What's more, he has an avatar on his profile with the term 'porn star' on it. Nobody can dispute that this is a sexually explicit username and profile

hold it right there. I think you need to re-examine your definition of explicit. This is, if anything, implicit or innuendo. Boards.ie does have a policy on usernames and we do not allow usernames that are offensive or explicit. if you find one that you think is explicit then by all means report it but you need to brush up on the difference between innuendo (subtle or otherwise) and rude/crude/explicit

and given that he is so active in the Leaving Cert forum and that his profile is thus easily viewable by those under 18 who he claims require an additional degree of moderator protection, I feel that it is hypocritical and unfair, that such a person can discipline me for using the term 'smartass'.

I'm thinking that your objection to his name/profile is more fueled by his infraction of your post than it is by any real concern for the children.

Nevertheless, I do not expect any satisfying response to this post. From reading other threads in this forum, it is clear that the majority of moderators will cover each other even against the most logical of arguments (of which I believe this is one). But I feel that drawing everybody's attention to an apparent double-standard is worthwhile.

and there we have it. My favourite way that a user can be guaranteed to not get taken seriously. they type "i know you wont take this seriosuly" as a way of making the reader think that if they dont actually take you seriously then they must be doing something wrong. maybe a more legitimate concern would be taken more seriously ?

However, if any moderator does feel that randylonghorn's profile is indeed inappropriate and should be renamed, especially given his specific role on the site, I would be very appreciative (and, unfortunately, surprised).

I dont knwo about you but most 16 to 18 year olds I've encountered wouldnt blink an eyelid at that level of innuendo or quite a lot worse. Where would you suggest we draw the line at the level of exposure?
so should longhorn cattle in the states be re-named because some people may mistake the meaning ? perhaps its a good thing that windows changed windows longhorn's name. Perhaps we should force a namechange by deed poll on everyone called Randy (Randall, Randalph, etc) in real life. Maybe we should ask him to change his profile career type to "aspiring actor" or "pizza delivery boy" and report him to Ronseal for theft of their catchphrase.

Trust me, there are worse innuendo names on boards and they have been here a long time. I think you need to relax a bit and not read into everything so much or you are going to find the internet a very scary place indeed.

Regards,
JS

you are, of course, entitled to your opinion and I am sorry if you find his name offensive. I'm sure others would have an opinion on the matter and I would be interested in hearing them.

faceman

OP, while randy's username is tongue in cheek, its not directed at anyone, whereas Mr Smarta$$ was. the explicitness of randy's profile would seem no different than what can be found in the 12's rated movie nowadays.

Besides, everything is innuendo nowadays. even the OP' username. Its an anagram for "Use Jug Horn"

looksee

Since you ask for opinions, I tend to agree with the OP. Its a bit disingenuous to wander round the meaning of randylonghorn when it is perfectly obvious what it means, especially with the accompanying material.

No doubt the OP would not have bothered but for the warning - there does seem to be a bit of a double standard. I would not consider it overly offensive if it was obviously a joke rather than an insult, was the mod referring to the term or to the fact that it contained the word ass? Would he have been warned if he had referred to Mr Cleverclogs or any other similar expression?

John Sugrue

LoLth wrote: »

I dont knwo about you but most 16 to 18 year olds I've encountered wouldnt blink an eyelid at that level of innuendo or quite a lot worse. Where would you suggest we draw the line at the level of exposure?
so should longhorn cattle in the states be re-named because some people may mistake the meaning ? perhaps its a good thing that windows changed windows longhorn's name. Perhaps we should force a namechange by deed poll on everyone called Randy (Randall, Randalph, etc) in real life. Maybe we should ask him to change his profile career type to "aspiring actor" or "pizza delivery boy" and report him to Ronseal for theft of their catchphrase.

Trust me, there are worse innuendo names on boards and they have been here a long time. I think you need to relax a bit and not read into everything so much or you are going to find the internet a very scary place indeed.

Thank you. My point exactly. I don't know a single 16-18 year old who would consider the term 'smartass' vulgar or worthy of a warning. But as I said above I'm over it.

My issue is not with the username per se. It is with the fact that someone with such a username is in a position where he can criticise me on issues of decency and child protection.

El Weirdo

John Sugrue wrote: »

Thank you. My point exactly. I don't know a single 16-18 year old who would consider the term 'smartass' vulgar or worthy of a warning.

No. But if it was directed at someone, then you deserved a warning as per the charter.

John Sugrue wrote: »

But as I said above I'm over it.

I'm guessing you aren't.

John Sugrue

El Weirdo wrote: »

I'm guessing you aren't.

On the contrary, I am. I have accepted the caution. Yes, I directed the term smartass at an individual, albeit jokingly. I have accepted the warning, as I have said on numerous occasions now. However, a number of the comments above, including yours, are missing the point.

I have not accepted the fact that a person who is being ruder, less child-friendly and using sexual language has the power to warn me for far less. The moderators suitablility to do his job is the issue. As it stands, it is hypocritical, irrespective of who or what my comment was directed at.

RolandIRL

John Sugrue wrote: »

Thank you. My point exactly. I don't know a single 16-18 year old who would consider the term 'smartass' vulgar or worthy of a warning. But as I said above I'm over it.

My issue is not with the username per se. It is with the fact that someone with such a username is in a position where he can criticise me on issues of decency and child protection.

it wasn't the term that you were infracted for...it was the way you used it...you called someone Mr Smartass...you could have called someone stupid and you'd still be infracted (stupid's not vulgar but it's still mean). it's personal abuse, and it's not tolerated on boards.

I don't see where randy said that he was criticising you on issues of child protection...could you link to that please?

this is the thread in question: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056238918&page=2

John Sugrue

whiteman19 wrote: »

it wasn't the term that you were infracted for...it was the way you used it...you called someone Mr Smartass...you could have called someone stupid and you'd still be infracted (stupid's not vulgar but it's still mean). it's personal abuse, and it's not tolerated on boards.

I don't see where randy said that he was criticising you on issues of child protection...could you link to that please?

this is the thread in question: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056238918&page=2

Again, you're missing the point. I have accepted the warning.... This is getting tiresome.

The issue of child protection is one of the arguments the moderator gave for stricter moderation of the LC forum. I quoted that above from the PM he sent me so there's nothing to link to. The specific age range 16-18 was indicated by moderater LoLth in another response above.

RolandIRL

John Sugrue wrote: »

Again, you're missing the point. I have accepted the warning.... This is getting tiresome.

then what is the point? randy infracted you for insulting someone with the term "Mr. Smartass"...no mention in his posts of anything about "Mr. Smartass is too vulgar for the children in the LC forum who need to be protected"...is that your point is?

John Sugrue

whiteman19 wrote: »

then what is the point? randy infracted you for insulting someone with the term "Mr. Smartass"...no mention in his posts of anything about "Mr. Smartass is too vulgar for the children in the LC forum who need to be protected"...is that your point is?

My issue is a double standard on the forum. This is in my first post at the top of the page:

However, my issue is now one of transparency and equality on the forums. The moderator in question is called 'randylonghorn'. His profile clarifies this as 'exactly what it says on the tin'. What's more, he has an avatar on his profile with the term 'porn star' on it. Nobody can dispute that this is a sexually explicit username and profile and given that he is so active in the Leaving Cert forum and that his profile is thus easily viewable by those under 18 who he claims require an additional degree of moderator protection, I feel that it is hypocritical and unfair, that such a person can discipline me for using the term 'smartass'.

Spear

John Sugrue wrote: »

My issue is a double standard on the forum. This is in my first post at the top of the page:

There is no double standard, there's just you taking the standard for one thing and misapplying it elsewhere.

John Sugrue

Spear wrote: »

There is no double standard, there's just you taking the standard for one thing and misapplying it elsewhere.

That's not a rational argument. That's a 'You're making hassle for us. Please go away' comment.

What's more, I have had a fair share of support if you care to read the whole thread.

Spear

John Sugrue wrote: »

That's not a rational argument. That's a 'You're making hassle for us. Please go away' comment.

What's more, I have had a fair share of support if you care to read the whole thread.

You think that being punished for your name calling, somehow means other users names must be sanitized? You honestly think that constitutes a rational argument?

RolandIRL

as i say again...he didn't infract you for being vulgar with the term smartass. it's because you directed that comment specifically at another user which is abuse, and especially in the LC forum, that's taken quite harshly given that the moderators want the forum to be calm and useful to all posters.

you were being antagonistic to that poster. being vulgar has nothing to do with that.

i don't see what the double standard is, you were being rude to another poster...randy infracted you for that...simple as.

tbh

John Sugrue wrote: »

I feel that it is hypocritical and unfair, that such a person can discipline me for using the term 'smartass'.

This would seem to imply that you wouldn't have a problem with him if you hadn't received a warning. Do you think you'd have received the warning if you'd called yourself a smartass? I don't. Do you think you have received a warning if you'd called someone an ignoramus? I do. You seem to think you got the warning for bad language. You didn't. And I very much doubt you're over the warning, it seems to be the only thing that's motivating this tbh.

AckwelFoley

John, you know that to abuse someone on the forums is wrong, but i expect that if you didnt receive a warning you wouldnt have a problem with the moderators name.

My opinion for what it worth, is that i think perhaps the infraction is somewhat harsh, i cant think of particularly any example or tone where the term smart arse could be considered as abusive, but i have not read the thread - however as already stated -

- You received an infraction under the guise of abusing / insulting another poster, you have a problem with the moderators name as you think its not appropriate for the forum - thats not a double standard - they're 2 completely separate issues.

Do i think randylonghorn is an inappropriate name for a moderator in a forum for 16 - 18 year olds? Well i will put it this way - how innocent do you think adolesent irish people are. I remember being 16 - my reaction to the name randylonghorn would have been the same then as it is 18 years later now that im 34 - nothing, its a name with a suggestive meaning, similar to uglybolloxface or Fingers McGee.

John, in essance - play the ball, not the man

tbh

Forgot to say, also think the infraction is harsh.

John Sugrue

Are ye messing me around on purpose? Is that the policy on here when someone complains? Drag conversations that are totally missing the point on until he gives up?

Ok. I will say this one more time. I have accepted that warning. That means comments regarding why I got a warning or who I directed a comment at are all irrelevant.

The issue is with the suitability of the moderator to do his job. It is not acceptable that someone who's language and behaviour on this forum is far from clean has the power to criticise me for using much less crude language, directed anywhere!

It is like a judge locking someone up for dealing drugs and then going out and selling some himself.

tbh

It's really, really not like that.

John Sugrue

tbh wrote: »

This would seem to imply that you wouldn't have a problem with him if you hadn't received a warning. Do you think you'd have received the warning if you'd called yourself a smartass? I don't. Do you think you have received a warning if you'd called someone an ignoramus? I do. You seem to think you got the warning for bad language. You didn't. And I very much doubt you're over the warning, it seems to be the only thing that's motivating this tbh.

A logical argument. Thanks you!!

I appreciate what you're saying but, irrespective of what I said or who I said it to, it is still galling to be told how to behave by a person who's profile contains much worse.

John Sugrue

snyper wrote: »

John, you know that to abuse someone on the forums is wrong, but i expect that if you didnt receive a warning you wouldnt have a problem with the moderators name.

My opinion for what it worth, is that i think perhaps the infraction is somewhat harsh, i cant think of particularly any example or tone where the term smart arse could be considered as abusive, but i have not read the thread - however as already stated -

- You received an infraction under the guise of abusing / insulting another poster, you have a problem with the moderators name as you think its not appropriate for the forum - thats not a double standard - they're 2 completely separate issues.

Do i think randylonghorn is an inappropriate name for a moderator in a forum for 16 - 18 year olds? Well i will put it this way - how innocent do you think adolesent irish people are. I remember being 16 - my reaction to the name randylonghorn would have been the same then as it is 18 years later now that im 34 - nothing, its a name with a suggestive meaning, similar to uglybolloxface or Fingers McGee.

John, in essance - play the ball, not the man

Thanks for that. At last someone who can take a complaint seriously.

I have no problem with the name per se. It is the fact that someone with such a clear sexual tone in his name has the power to punish me for inappropriate language.

And to build one your point. If it is the innocence of the 16-18 year olds and how they would view the sexual terms that matters, do many get insulted when they're called a smartass, jokingly or otherwise? Doubt it. Smartass is an everyday term nowadays. Would many 16-18 year olds consider punishment for calling someone a smartass harsh? I would think so.

tbh

Your problem there is that for people to support your argument, they would have to feel as strongly about RLHs profile as you do. Most people don't I'd say. In fact I'd imagine most people think it's quite tame and would believe, deep down, that that's what you really think too.

tbh

John Sugrue wrote: »

Thanks for that. At last, I'm being taking seriously.

I have no problem with the name per se. It is the fact that someone with such a clear sexual tone in his name has the power to punish me for inappropriate language.

You keep talking about him punishing you. It's why people don't believe you when you say that the warnin is t your main motive for this.

RolandIRL

John Sugrue wrote: »

Thanks for that. At last, I'm being taking seriously.

I have no problem with the name per se. It is the fact that someone with such a clear sexual tone in his name has the power to punish me for inappropriate language.

He punished you for insulting someone, not for using inappropriate language. That's not double standards.

John Sugrue

whiteman19 wrote: »

He punished you for insulting someone, not for using inappropriate language. That's not double standards.

You've been missing the point since you started here whiteman. Sorry