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

Sick of being told "Go to After Hours"

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Dravokivich
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Music Moderators, Politics Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 22,360 CMod ✭✭✭✭Dravokivich


    keanooo wrote: »
    The comment: The comment was "That is totally gay". Note the "totally". It implies that there may a shade of sarcasm in the comment.

    Your comment was considered abuse, or did you not realise that?


  • Options
    #33
    keanooo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 445 ✭✭keanooo


    Dravokivich wrote: »
    Your comment was considered abuse, or did you not realise that?

    If it was it shouldn't have been. I wouldn't abuse anyone on boards unless they really deserved it. Clark Kent didn't say anything that deserved abuse.

    He just made a post that was a bit gay.


  • Options
    #34
    Oryx
    Subscribers Posts: 19,425 ✭✭✭✭Oryx


    On the one hand your saying calling someone gay is light hearted humour, and on the other you point out that you consider it an insult. (exercising restraint in not calling someone homosexual). Youre trying to say the ethos here is too serious while ignoring the posts you made where you know your brand of humour overstepped the mark. I think maybe its you that needs to reassess and not the forums you post in.


  • Options
    #35
    keanooo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 445 ✭✭keanooo


    Oryx wrote: »
    On the one hand your saying calling someone gay is light hearted humour, and on the other you point out that you consider it an insult. (exercising restraint in not calling someone homosexual). Youre trying to say the ethos here is too serious while ignoring the posts you made where you know your brand of humour overstepped the mark. I think maybe its you that needs to reassess and not the forums you post in.

    Oryx, I think that's a bit harsh. Everyone knows that the term "that's gay" does not refer to a thing's sexuality. There's a whole South Park episode dedicated to the topic. Now in my exchange with Clark Kent there is a cross-over between the modern-day sense of "gay" and the more traditional "not being a heterosexual" sense; in that Clark wasn't pursuing a potential opportunity to go out on the lash with a woman and wanted to go admiring flowers with her instead. But I think that the cross-over makes my comment even funnier.

    As for the restraint, I meant restraining from saying what the mods don't want me to say. The "maybe you are all homosexuals" is a Simpson's line. It is funny because it parodies the neanderthal views of the person who speaks it, not because it questions the sexuality of the people it's directed at.


  • Options
    #36
    AlmightyCushion
    Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 35,079 Mod ✭✭✭✭AlmightyCushion


    tbh wrote: »
    Hey OP, I'm the mod that banned you for the "thats so gay" post you made.
    Here's the post I made on thread, and the text of the message I sent you at the time.




    So, I gave you a permanent ban, but that's not because I never want to see you posting in the GC again. I didn't ban you to punish you, I banned you so that we (the mods) didn't have to deal with the fallout of those type of posts.
    As I said above, I'm not here to explain to you why I'm not going to allow you to post that kind of.....post on a thread. It's a lesson you'll either learn, or you won't. If you care, that's grand, you'll apologise and the ban will be lifted. If you don't, that's grand too, and you can post anywhere the mods will let you. I don't have any grudge against you, I'm not angry with you, I'm just making sure that you don't post like that again.

    Sam gave you a warning on thread, and that's fine too, but my thought process was "if we have to explain to this guy why that kind of post isn't acceptable, then either he's doing it deliberately to cause trouble, or he's just got a sense of humour that's going to lead to lots more inappropriate posts like this". So I decided to cut to the chase and let you do your maturing somewhere else on boards.

    I notice you said the post was made "in a moment of madness" but I also notice you said "I exercised restraint by not replying "Maybe you are all homosexual"". That's the kind of statement that reassures me I made the right call.

    Like I said, you're welcome back anytime if you're willing to suck it up and assure us that kind of behaviour won't be repeated. I'm not trying to humiliate you and I promise, it's not a power thing - I don't care either way. As long as the behaviour isn't repeated, I don't care what method achieves that.
    Totally up to you.

    So for saying "that's totally gay" he got an indefinite ban which will last at least a few months and can only get back in once he's discussed it with you. That's a completely over the top decision.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    tbh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,914 ✭✭✭✭tbh


    AlmightyCushion wrote: »
    So for saying "that's totally gay" he got an indefinite ban which will last at least a few months and can only get back in once he's discussed it with you. That's a completely over the top decision.

    he got a ban which will not be auto-lifted because he displayed a complete lack of understanding of whats expected of him in the forum.


  • Options
    #38
    AlmightyCushion
    Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 35,079 Mod ✭✭✭✭AlmightyCushion


    tbh wrote: »
    he got a ban which will not be auto-lifted because he displayed a complete lack of understanding of whats expected of him in the forum.

    So does everyone else who breaks the rules. Maybe it's just me but I'd consider abuse or trolling worse than what he posted and unless someone had a history or it was some extreme situation I wouldn't issue that sort of ban for those.


  • Options
    #39
    tbh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,914 ✭✭✭✭tbh


    AlmightyCushion wrote: »
    So does everyone else who breaks the rules. Maybe it's just me but I'd consider abuse or trolling worse than what he posted and unless someone had a history or it was some extreme situation I wouldn't issue that sort of ban for those.

    There are mitigating circumstances to a lot of cases, like when someone loses their temper. In that case, usually I wouldn't ban at all, because a quick chat with the user makes them realize their behavior is unacceptable, and is enough to resolve the situation. Someone trolling or posting abuse deliberately would get a ban - that wouldn't be lifted - because it is usually clear that the sole reason they are posting is to troll or post abuse. In that case, a ban is the only method which will stop the behavior.

    In the OP's case, as I pointed out, the permaban was given, not for the length, but so it wouldn't be auto-lifted. I want the OP to acknowledge that the post he made isn't acceptable in the forum - if the forum is important to him, he can get the ban lifted today, if it's not, then we're saving ourselves a load of hassle in the future.

    by the way - I don't have a problem with people posting jokes per se. I took the post he made in the context of the thread he was making it in. If someone was talking about a date on the forums off-topic thread, and he'd replied with the post he made, I doubt it would have warrented a yellow card.


  • Options
    #40
    sam34
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,073 ✭✭✭sam34


    keanooo wrote: »
    Oryx, I think that's a bit harsh. Everyone knows that the term "that's gay" does not refer to a thing's sexuality. There's a whole South Park episode dedicated to the topic. Now in my exchange with Clark Kent there is a cross-over between the modern-day sense of "gay" and the more traditional "not being a heterosexual" sense; in that Clark wasn't pursuing a potential opportunity to go out on the lash with a woman and wanted to go admiring flowers with her instead. But I think that the cross-over makes my comment even funnier.

    As for the restraint, I meant restraining from saying what the mods don't want me to say. The "maybe you are all homosexuals" is a Simpson's line. It is funny because it parodies the neanderthal views of the person who speaks it, not because it questions the sexuality of the people it's directed at.


    not everyone bases their opinion of what's funny on american tv shows.

    ironically, in your PM to me after i gave you the yellow card you complained about the actions of another poster in the forum and ended with "gentlemens club indeed" ... do you think your gay comment was gentlemanly?

    it's an immature, juvenile insult at best... if I heard my ten year old nephew saying it to someone i'd tell him to cop on.


  • Options
    #41
    IITYWYBMAD
    Registered Users Posts: 1,035 ✭✭✭IITYWYBMAD


    tbh wrote: »
    In the OP's case, as I pointed out, the permaban was given, not for the length, but so it wouldn't be auto-lifted. I want the OP to acknowledge that the post he made isn't acceptable in the forum - if the forum is important to him, he can get the ban lifted today, if it's not, then we're saving ourselves a load of hassle in the future.
    tbh wrote:
    Ok chap, I don't think this forum is for you to be honest. Banned for the foreseeable, if you want to come back at some stage, drop me a pm and we can chat about it. Leave it a few months tho, I haven't the time or the inclination to be dealing with the whole "that's so gay" thing. It's probably hilarious in school, but it's just annoying here. OK?
    Your two statements are in direct contrast to each other. You tell the OP not to contact you for "a few months" and yet, in the next breath you suggest that he can get the ban lifted today? How exactly is he to do that?

    Secondly, as childish as he remarks are perceived by you (and others), and I ask this genuinely, does his pattern of behavior on the GC forum really warrant an open ended ban? Really? Banned for a few months for what was obviously a lame attempt at humor?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    tbh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,914 ✭✭✭✭tbh


    IITYWYBMAD wrote: »
    Your two statements are in direct contrast to each other. You tell the OP not to contact you for "a few months" and yet, in the next breath you suggest that he can get the ban lifted today? How exactly is he to do that?

    that's a fair point and that's my bad. OP, you can ignore the bit about leaving it a few months. If you want to get back in, pm me and we can talk about it.
    Secondly, as childish as he remarks are perceived by you (and others), and I ask this genuinely, does his pattern of behavior on the GC forum really warrant an open ended ban? Really? Banned for a few months for what was obviously a lame attempt at humor?

    yeah, it does. As I said, it was in the context of the thread he made it in. The ban is to draw his attention to the fact that that kind of posting won't be tolerated. It's not intended to punish him. I want him to acknowledge that it was a stupid remark to make and to give assurances that it won't be repeated. If he's prepared to do that, he can come back today. If he isn't, he can't.


  • Options
    #43
    IITYWYBMAD
    Registered Users Posts: 1,035 ✭✭✭IITYWYBMAD


    tbh wrote: »
    yeah, it does. As I said, it was in the context of the thread he made it in. The ban is to draw his attention to the fact that that kind of posting won't be tolerated. It's not intended to punish him. I want him to acknowledge that it was a stupid remark to make and to give assurances that it won't be repeated. If he's prepared to do that, he can come back today. If he isn't, he can't.
    I seem to remember DeV saying that a ban is kinda a "last resort" thing.

    Do you not feel that an editing of his comment, followed up with a PM explaining what you have said above, would have a been a fairer and more "even handed" approach to something that while hugely objectionable to you, can be viewed as quite harmless in the "cold light of day"?

    I don't know this posters history, but on the face of it, it looks like a huge overreaction to a fairly innocuous comment. I also don't like the whole "school teacher" type mentality of "I want him to acknowledge etc...", but that's just me.


  • Options
    #44
    keanooo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 445 ✭✭keanooo


    tbh wrote: »
    yeah, it does. As I said, it was in the context of the thread he made it in. The ban is to draw his attention to the fact that that kind of posting won't be tolerated. It's not intended to punish him. I want him to acknowledge that it was a stupid remark to make and to give assurances that it won't be repeated. If he's prepared to do that, he can come back today. If he isn't, he can't.

    Instead of an apology by PM I thought the manner of this apology might be more to your liking.


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0nHIXcc7Sw


  • Options
    #45
    old hippy
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 9,441 ✭✭✭old hippy


    keanooo wrote: »
    It hardly "clog".

    How come it's always the Mods throwing in their 2 cents, complaining and defending the actions of other Mods? Let everyone else have their say for at least one thread please.

    Like a graffitti wall? That's just anarchy.


  • Options
    #46
    tbh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,914 ✭✭✭✭tbh


    IITYWYBMAD wrote: »

    Do you not feel that an editing of his comment, followed up with a PM explaining what you have said above, would have a been a fairer and more "even handed" approach to something that while hugely objectionable to you, can be viewed as quite harmless in the "cold light of day"?

    There are certainly arguments to be made for that approach in other situations, but to be perfectly honest with you I don't feel like my time, and the time of the other mods, is best spent messaging someone explaining to them why we're not going to allow them to post "that's so gay" in a thread, and in that thread in particular. Put simply, if he thinks that that kind of post is ok, then he doesn't get what's expected of him, or he doesn't care. In either case, I'm happy to let him decide how he wants to play it, while at the same time making sure there are no repeats. That's my call to make as the mod of the forum, and it's how I'll continue to mod. If the admins, cmods, other mods or the users of the forum object to that, then I'll happily stand aside with no bad feeling at all.
    I don't know this posters history, but on the face of it, it looks like a huge overreaction to a fairly innocuous comment. I also don't like the whole "school teacher" type mentality of "I want him to acknowledge etc...", but that's just me.
    I take your point and I'll bear it in mind. I would however dispute the overreaction aspect to it - I'm not angry about it, I didn't do it in a fit of pique and I'm not looking to humiliate the poster. If he had contacted me and said either "sorry - didn't realise what I was saying" or "sorry - was a moment of madness" or "you guys have no sense of humour but I won't say that again", then ban would have been lifted immediately - I would act the same way as I have always acted when someone contacts me after a ban. I've said before -the ban isn't a punishment, it's a time-out - once I'm assured that the behavior won't be repeated, the ban is pointless. To paraphrase a cliche, if someone acts like a schoolboy, then they can't be suprised if I act like a school teacher.


  • Options
    #47
    tbh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,914 ✭✭✭✭tbh


    keanooo wrote: »
    Instead of an apology by PM I thought the manner of this apology might be more to your liking.


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0nHIXcc7Sw

    funneh :) but seriously, whatever about the heavy-handedness of a ban or whatever, is there anyone who would argue that the forum isn't better off without this guy?


  • Options
    #48
    Chinafoot
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,894 ✭✭✭Chinafoot


    IITYWYBMAD wrote: »
    I seem to remember DeV saying that a ban is kinda a "last resort" thing.

    Do you not feel that an editing of his comment, followed up with a PM explaining what you have said above, would have a been a fairer and more "even handed" approach to something that while hugely objectionable to you, can be viewed as quite harmless in the "cold light of day"?

    I was always under the impression that editing of someone's posts was, in most instances, a complete no-no.


  • Options
    #49
    Doctor DooM
    Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 25,868 Mod ✭✭✭✭Doctor DooM


    Chinafoot wrote: »
    I was always under the impression that editing of someone's posts was, in most instances, a complete no-no.

    It's ok as long as it's not for nefarious ends, like going back and changing what someone said to make them look bad for the lulz (which occasionally used to happen).

    If someone put something totally illegal in a post I'd edit it in a heartbeat.


  • Options
    #50
    Chinafoot
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,894 ✭✭✭Chinafoot


    Doctor DooM wrote: »
    It's ok as long as it's not for nefarious ends, like going back and changing what someone said to make them look bad for the lulz (which occasionally used to happen).

    If someone put something totally illegal in a post I'd edit it in a heartbeat.

    Something illegal is different though, or personal phone numbers and addresses. Editing a post because it has an inappropriate or off-topic comment shouldn't happen though. If its a bannable offence then ban them and leave the comment or soft-delete it if you're worried about it completely derailing a thread. I posted in feedback about mods editing posts before and it was confirmed that its not the done thing nor should it be.


  • Options
    #51
    keanooo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 445 ✭✭keanooo


    Chinafoot wrote: »
    Something illegal is different though, or personal phone numbers and addresses. Editing a post because it has an inappropriate or off-topic comment shouldn't happen though. If its a bannable offence then ban them and leave the comment or soft-delete it if you're worried about it completely derailing a thread. I posted in feedback about mods editing posts before and it was confirmed that its not the done thing nor should it be.

    Does that mean that they can ban you but would still have to leave your comment up?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    Chinafoot
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,894 ✭✭✭Chinafoot


    keanooo wrote: »
    Does that mean that they can ban you but would still have to leave your comment up?

    They don't have to leave your comment up. If it's a completely ridiculous, nonsense comment that adds nothing to the thread at all they would be within their rights to ban you *and* delete the comment. Then again, they could ban you and leave your comment there as a warning to others. It varies incident to incident and mod to mod.

    The thread I mentioned previously regarding mods editing posts is here.


  • Options
    #53
    nesf
    Registered Users Posts: 27,645 ✭✭✭✭nesf


    keanooo wrote: »
    Does that mean that they can ban you but would still have to leave your comment up?

    We don't have to but generally speaking it's best to leave the comment up so other people can see what is and what is not acceptable on the forum.


  • Options
    #54
    tbh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,914 ✭✭✭✭tbh


    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=72668640#post72668640
    :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #55
    DublinWriter
    Registered Users Posts: 9,557 ✭✭✭DublinWriter


    tbh wrote: »
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=72668640#post72668640
    :rolleyes:

    As keanoo used his/her/it's original username, I feel that all sense of irony may have been lost on you, but at least you were scrupulous enough to work through his/her/it's previous posts in an effort to undermine his original feedback argument.

    Honestly, banning a noob for that gay remark? 155 posts in, I think a warning would have been more appropriate, but then again, will I get banned for 'back-seat modding' for even suggesting this? (I would print out the conflict resolution flow-chart if I was in possession of an A1 printer)

    As someone who has been a user here since 2004, I feel that this thread is indicative of a wider malaise. Does boards really want to encourage new blood to join or does it want to be a self-serving clique?

    I do remember a thread started here about four years ago regarding the polling of new users' experiences that got so many mods hot under the collar. Why? You tell me.

    Somewhere in the back of my brain, I remember a theory thought to me long ago about the reason for the decline of empires due to an emphasis on over-regulation in the twilight of their years. I really hope the same will never be true about boards.ie, but I'm starting to think that evidence suggests otherwise.


  • Options
    #56
    tbh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,914 ✭✭✭✭tbh


    That post was made subsequent to the ban, and this thread. Let him troll all he wants I reckon, but he won't be doing it in the GC.


  • Options
    #57
    Otis Driftwood
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,925 ✭✭✭Otis Driftwood


    Considering the fact he is currently serving a ban from personal issues(earned AFTER this thread was started) for being a douche and ignoring mod warnings,we are better off without him.


  • Options
    #58
    Larianne
    Registered Users Posts: 35,954 ✭✭✭✭Larianne


    DublinWriter wrote: »
    As keanoo used his/her/it's original username, I feel that all sense of irony may have been lost on you, but at least you were scrupulous enough to work through his/her/it's previous posts in an effort to undermine his original feedback argument.

    Honestly, banning a noob for that gay remark? 155 posts in, I think a warning would have been more appropriate, but then again, will I get banned for 'back-seat modding' for even suggesting this? (I would print out the conflict resolution flow-chart if I was in possession of an A1 printer)

    As someone who has been a user here since 2004, I feel that this thread is indicative of a wider malaise. Does boards really want to encourage new blood to join or does it want to be a self-serving clique?

    I do remember a thread started here about four years ago regarding the polling of new users' experiences that got so many mods hot under the collar. Why? You tell me.

    Somewhere in the back of my brain, I remember a theory thought to me long ago about the reason for the decline of empires due to an emphasis on over-regulation in the twilight of their years. I really hope the same will never be true about boards.ie, but I'm starting to think that evidence suggests otherwise.

    Did you read keanooo's previous posts on that thread? He was trying to rile up other posters.


  • Options
    #59
    keanooo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 445 ✭✭keanooo


    Larianne wrote: »
    Did you read keanooo's previous posts on that thread? He was trying to rile up other posters.

    Larianne, I don't remember exactly my other posts from that thread, but I don't think what you've said is accurate. There was one fella (I think he was a Mod) who was disclosing his correspondence with a girl he had met online. He was making her look bad and trying to make himself look like a total legend. I was annoyed at him for making fun of the girl (he made her sound pathetic) so I made a few smart remarks about him to bring him down a few pegs. I thought that was fair game.


  • Options
    #60
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    nesf wrote: »
    We don't have to but generally speaking it's best to leave the comment up so other people can see what is and what is not acceptable on the forum.

    Except where the comment is likely to lead to a spate of replies which derail the thread, obviously.
    tbh wrote:
    I take your point and I'll bear it in mind. I would however dispute the overreaction aspect to it - I'm not angry about it, I didn't do it in a fit of pique and I'm not looking to humiliate the poster. If he had contacted me and said either "sorry - didn't realise what I was saying" or "sorry - was a moment of madness" or "you guys have no sense of humour but I won't say that again", then ban would have been lifted immediately - I would act the same way as I have always acted when someone contacts me after a ban. I've said before -the ban isn't a punishment, it's a time-out - once I'm assured that the behavior won't be repeated, the ban is pointless. To paraphrase a cliche, if someone acts like a schoolboy, then they can't be suprised if I act like a school teacher.

    I'm with tbh on this one. If someone really doesn't grasp why a comment would be inappropriate, then the forum is better off without them. A permaban does save a lot of time for everybody, and is, as tbh says, instantly reversible if the poster indicates in any way that they understand what the issue was. If they don't understand what the issue was in the first place, they're going to do it again and again.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • Advertisement
Advertisement