Request For Feedback: Bullying

The Optimistic Pessimist

Overheal wrote: »

OutlawPete knows that I've probably never had direct dealings with him, OutlawPete should know that I am not at all personally invested in this debacle, and have no reason to personally abuse him, for I have neither love nor hate for the man

Nonsense, you've had it in for me for years:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=69828373&postcount=59

Wibbs

Tragedy wrote: »

In fact, I don't see his posts attacking anyone by name, and instead he only brought up his own personal history because it completely and directly contradicted what Wibbs was posting i.e. it was relevant.

It didn't, or more to the point he left the bones of it out. Last night as promised I looked back through that saga and it was a very longwinded saga at the time T. It started off with Outlawpete getting a mod warning in tLL. Yep a warning, not an infraction, not a ban. So yes he's correct there.

So far so good. However what followed was the headwreck. He then went off and started a DRP thread over this warning. Since DRP is clearly not for that, it was moved to Helpdesk. Then when he found no satisfaction there he endlessly revisited his issue in Feedback on various threads*. Examples include: What is a female point of view/perspective?, Gender issues in After Hours - Your feedback requested, Moderators, Overzealous Modding & The Ladies Lounge, to name but four. That's under his Outlawpete handle. He chimed in many more times under his other re reg aliases. Most of which were deleted.

Then he was permabanned from tLL by an admin. Another DRP trhead started. Then after closing his account he reregged umpteen times to continue on as he still is over a year later. In this thread alone he's got two reregs TheFisherKing and The Optimistic Pessimist. Others off the top of my head included codyjarret, the boss and god knows how many others, sitebanned or still active. I'd reckon including banned rereg accounts we're into double figures. This does not include the multitude of very long PM's back and forth throughout this saga. Hell I got two more tomes late last night from this latest account. So yes he was/is a timesink and like I said T, this all came out of a warning. So yes he's correct there, however that post was not the reason he was permabanned from tLL.

Now I agree, people are calling him obsessive over this and yes maybe that should be dialed back, but as another admin put it when dealing with OLP in yet another thread in FB "if you don't want people to think you're obsessive, stop behaving obsessively".





*At the time there was also a small number of blokes that had decided that tLL was in error in it's treatment of male users. The simple response of "well if you don't like the forum don't post" seemed to be a hard concept to grasp. This also got to bloody ridiculous proportions in FB and spread to other forums too and in the end Dav had to come on and call "enough".

RoundyMooney

I liked OutlawPete, and he may have had a point, initially. He may well have been "handled" badly too-that wouldn't be a first, but it doesn't mean either that the decision was a wrong one.

However, whether you're an admin or not, it's flippin' impossible to carry on a discussion with someone who insists in constant sockpuppeting. Even in this thread alone, I don't know whose post I'm reading half the time.

Insect Overlord

Tragedy wrote: »

Excellent examples of bullying on thread for all to see ^^

Regardless of Pete (whoever he is) having or not having a history with TLL, these kinds of posts are simply ganging up and bullying a member.

I really hope you're being sarcastic.

Wibbs wrote: »

In this thread alone he's got two reregs TheFisherKing and The Optimistic Pessimist. Others off the top of my head included codyjarret, the boss and god knows how many others, sitebanned or still active. I'd reckon including banned rereg accounts we're into double figures.

Take your estimate of double figures and double that. He's revealed at least 22 28 accounts since closing his original one.

Tragedy, if that's not obsessive, then what is?

Overheal

The Optimistic Pessimist wrote: »

Nonsense, you've had it in for me for years:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=69828373&postcount=59

Good times. Except now I actually work retail, and still side with the shop

LoLth

I think we shuold shelve discussion of Outlaw Pete's serial re-regging, its not really advancing anyone's understanding of what is and is not bullying.

@madam X , yes I agree "grow a thicker skin" or "ignore it" is not a solution but neither is it a suggestion entirely without merit. Some people, both on boards and in real life, simply cannot accept criticism, even if it is meant constructively, without takign personal offense. This being a discussion forum any user can be almost guaranteed that someone is going to disagree with their opinion and is going to criticise their views or even the way their views were presented. Then , of course, there are the users that instantly jump on the offensive and take any flaw in spelling/grammar as an indicator that the entire post or point of view is irrelevant. This, however, is not necessarily bullying or any form of targetted abuse and all users should be aware that , on the internet, there will be posters that are insensitive/aggressively passionate or just straight up argumentative and those responses should be either ignored or not taken personally. If it continues, or if a pattern is seen, then there could be a case made for bullying and it should be reported.

On a point raised: admin PMs. If an issue has gone through mod cmod and then admin review and all have said the same thing, can this be perceived as bullying or just the proper application of the forum rules?

If a moderator infracts a user for the same offense repeatedly (for the same topic or style of post made on different occasions) , can this be interpreted as bullying or applciation of the forum charter? If two users post the same post and one gets infracted and the other doesn't, is this bullying or could it be that maybe the infracted user has been warned before and the non-infracted user was a first time offender (we see a lot of appeals where this exact scenario turns out to the be case and a lot of the time the claim is made that the mod is bullying them).

@Wibbs: if one user says you smell, ignore - fair enough , if 20 say it, buy soap - not necessarily imho. Allow for the possibility that they may have a point but then again, 20 people disagreeing with me is not, imho, bullying either. 20 people insulting me is not bullying imho. 20 people following me from thread to thread / forum to forum and interfering with my enjoyment of boards discussions over a period of time - thats a different matter entirely.

Could a lot of the mistaken claims of bullying be avoided if users learned to "take a step back" and re-examine the situation from a less emotional and less personal point of view?

---

Once a user feels that the level of abuse is both disproportionate and extended over a prolonged period and that there could indeed be a case made that they are being bullied, whats the next step?

Do they report it to a mod and let the mod take it form there? How long before an answer should be received? Does this just offer another tool for the trollish arsenal ("I'm being bullied! look at these posts and tell me that they're not ok") as reports of bullying will receive more attention than just reporting a post - or at least it would appear that way. Should there be a punishment for false reports? For abuse of the reporting system?

To what degree are other users responsible for reporting bullying behaviour? To what extent are the mods responsible (all mods - so thats mods/cmods and admins) for spotting bullying behaviour? Should we only respond to users that ask for our help? How much say should an accused bully be given before a decision is made? Should the reporter be kept anonymous or would statign the accuser be only fair in the case where its nota one sided affair?

As for actions off boards.ie: we have had reports in the past of users following on an arguement on boards in teh real world whether it be threats or just aggression. We have also seen organised facebook / twiter etc campaigns where multipe users have tracked a user on boards and reported on their posting and discussions so that they can , collectively, arrange to post sock puppet arguments to harass the user being targetted. Should this type of behaviour be punished or just the behaviour that occurs on boards? (imho: anything real world becomes a matter for the gardai and we will do our best to assist the authorities in any investigation that protects a boards.ie member. the whole facebook/twitter thing, I honestly dont know.).

/blatant attempt to get thread back on target

Morag

Could not someone maybe the community manager approach other platforms and drop them a line that they are being used to target one of the members here, which most likely will breach their T&Cs?

I've seen people sockpupet/maskerade on other sides pretending to be a boardsuser with thier username and some of the details of how the post and usually approaching the admin/owner of those sites will get it removed.

Dav

I'm happy to go to other sites in an official capacity and talk to their admins about what's going on, I've done so before with good results. People need to make me aware of it though.

Other small websites are usually happy to help. Giants like Facebook or Twitter will have an automated process to run through and whilst it's not impossible to work with, it's generally up to the individual to resolve more than something I can help with.

Internet Service Providers are the most difficult to deal with on these issues. The thing is they're not all that bothered by what their paying customers are doing when there's no real legal requirement for them to be. Only one ISP showed any reception to the idea that we be able to report it's customer's for breaches of it's own terms and conditions (whatever about ours), but with a relatively flooded market and lots of options for the consumer, it's hard to justify kicking a paying customer off your service unless you're actually being ordered to legally. That's a pretty damning statement to have to make, but it's also the reality of the situation. I'm a firm believer that if this could change, we'd have a lot less arsholery on the internet. Imagine having to explain to your employer that the reason that they've had their internet connection cut off is because you were being a plonker on the internet?

Earthhorse

Y'see, you say that your case is relevant to the broader issue of bullying but I don't see any reasoning from the particular to the general in your posts, just reasoning from the particular to the more particular.

P. Breathnach

Earthhorse wrote: »

Y'see, you say that your case is relevant to the broader issue of bullying but I don't see any reasoning from the particular to the general in your posts, just reasoning from the particular to the more particular.

Those who pop in here occasionally will be intrigued by this post.

Steve

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Those who pop in here occasionally will be intrigued by this post.

Suffice to say the deleted post(s) and the user involved won't be missed. Thank you Gordon

Onward with the seriouz stuff...

Tragedy

Insect Overlord wrote: »

I really hope you're being sarcastic.

Not at all. You added nothing constructive to the thread, you simply zeroed in on one poster and made an unpleasant remark about them. If that isn't an example of casual bullying on boards, I don't know what is.

The condescending tone isn't helping much either.

Insect Overlord

Tragedy wrote: »

Not at all. You added nothing constructive to the thread, you simply zeroed in on one poster and made an unpleasant remark about them. If that isn't an example of casual bullying on boards, I don't know what is.

The condescending tone isn't helping much either.

*yawn*

LoLth wrote: »

I think we shuold shelve discussion of Outlaw Pete's serial re-regging, its not really advancing anyone's understanding of what is and is not bullying.

...

/blatant attempt to get thread back on target

Tragedy

Insect Overlord wrote: »

*yawn*

As I said, the condescending tone isn't really helping.

How is casual bullying on thread not on-topic?

Insect Overlord

Tragedy wrote: »

As I said, the condescending tone isn't really helping.

How is casual bullying on thread not on-topic?

Because it wasn't bullying. Obviously.

oscarBravo

Tragedy wrote: »

How is casual bullying on thread not on-topic?

If you think that that idiot is being bullied, you're missing the point spectacularly.

Any further discussion of Pete's self-appointed victimhood is off-topic for this thread. Any more posts by any more of the obsessive-compulsive sock-puppets he continues to sign up to bang a drum nobody but him wants to hear will be deleted. Any replies to any of his posts will be deleted.

Stop feeding the troll, people. It's the kindest thing we can do for him. Maybe - I doubt it, but maybe - that way he'll finally get the message that this isn't his website, and he doesn't get to post here in contravention of the site's terms and conditions.

Back on topic.

El Guapo!

Threads starting to get derailed at the minute I think. It's focusing on one incident* whereas the original aim of the thread was to get feedback about possible future steps to be taken regarding the treatment of bullying throughout the site. The thread started off excellent, but its slowly spiralling out of control.

* I'm not detracting from this issue. While I'm sure it is important to some people, I don't think this is the right place for that discussion.

PC CDROM

Dean09 wrote: »

Threads starting to get derailed at the minute I think. It's focusing on one incident* whereas the original aim of the thread was to get feedback about possible future steps to be taken regarding the treatment of bullying throughout the site. The thread started off excellent, but its slowly spiralling out of control.

* I'm not detracting from this issue. While I'm sure it is important to some people, I don't think this is the right place for that discussion.

I'll try again. Bullying is not something a lot of people admit to.
Bullying takes many forms. It is not just giving someone abuse. Thats just abusing someone.

It is not stalking someone as has been said. That's just stalking.

One form is that goes unnoticed is kind of the ganging up on someone and shouting them down so their voice can't be heard. Belittling them.

Not so prevalent now here on feedback but it was back in the day.

That's a good thing.

LoLth

you are correct. Shouting down a user can be bullying *but*, and this is something I have seen more than once and have taken a lot of time to try to explain mor ethan once to more than one user and it has never ever ended in a good way - sometimes the user does actually bring it on himself (or herself).

One such incident where a user was indeed being bullied happened about three years ago. the user cried bully and yes, on inspection there was a group of users that were shouting him down every time he posted. The users were warned and told that if it didnt stop they would be permabanned from the forum and the category. Both myself and the mods put a lot of time and effort into proving that it was bullying before approaching those responsible.

thing is, what did the victim do? go straight back on to the threads and start posting "I told you so" posts and then started shouting down other users, arguing ad infinitum with anything that in any way contradicted his thinking, reported every post that he considered to be bullying him (and that included posts that just provided links to evidence that what he was arguing was wrong) and started disrupting other users enjoyment of the forum under the impression that he was somehow justified in his behaviour because the mods said he was right.

that user was permabanned from the forum for being a timesink and for beign disruptive after 8 days of constant PM tennis between me and him where I tried to get him to alter his way of posting. In the end , he was banned and after all that I got a lovely PM stating , quite seriously, that I was bullying him.

so, yes, I agree that a user beign shouted down on thread *can* be a form of bullying but sometimes its just an entirely deserved reaction and sometimes , just sometimes, what appears to be a group of posters picking on another is actually a single poster refusing to make any effort to fit in or respect his or her peers.

The user has since left boards and I hope I have been vague enough on the details to protect their account identity. The mods involved may guess who it was but, in case the user does come back and has changed their attitude I would ask them not to speculate or guess in public please. (if the user is reading this and recognises themselves, know that you're welcome to return and take part in the discussion but I would hope you have given some serious thought to the points raised by myself and the mods in the conversation that lead up to the ban).

You're right about feedback though, I remember it the way it was and the huge post-fests dragging up old slights imagined or real. I'm glad Feedback has changed for the better and I hope it is a sign that we do take user input seriously and we do take user opinions seriously. If there is a feeling that a user is beign bullied, let someone know and we'll deal with it as best we can. This is supposed to be a site where a serious discussion results in a user havign something to think about before responding, not fearing what a response will be or feeling anxiety because of a compulsion to check what the reaction to a post is (it happens. It happened to me on the Left 4 Dead official forums. I got into a difference of opinion and it got to the stage of just being trench warfare because I thought the game could be better than it was but a group of fans refused to hear anything against the greatest game in the world - I didnt want to read the responses, I knew what they would be, but I just had to know. pesky curiosity and even though it was "just the internet" it was disappointing that people could be so closed minded and almost militant about something so inconsequential as a difference of opinion about a game! eventually I just left the forum because it just wasnt worth the hassle of being shouted down by the same people no matter what I posted or indeed, where I posted it - did I deserve the treatment I got? possibly to some extent. i was posting in a fan forum after all even though I wasnt posting bad things I was obviously not as dedicated to the game as the others, I should have expected some form of negative reaction and if that were all it was, that would have been ok. its was the follow up and the incessant emnity that I for one, never want to see happen on boards).

PC CDROM

LoLth wrote: »

you are correct. Shouting down a user can be bullying *but*, and this is something I have seen more than once and have taken a lot of time to try to explain mor ethan once to more than one user and it has never ever ended in a good way - sometimes the user does actually bring it on himself (or herself).

One such incident where a user was indeed being bullied happened about three years ago. the user cried bully and yes, on inspection there was a group of users that were shouting him down every time he posted. The users were warned and told that if it didnt stop they would be permabanned from the forum and the category. Both myself and the mods put a lot of time and effort into proving that it was bullying before approaching those responsible.

thing is, what did the victim do? go straight back on to the threads and start posting "I told you so" posts and then started shouting down other users, arguing ad infinitum with anything that in any way contradicted his thinking, reported every post that he considered to be bullying him (and that included posts that just provided links to evidence that what he was arguing was wrong) and started disrupting other users enjoyment of the forum under the impression that he was somehow justified in his behaviour because the mods said he was right.

that user was permabanned from the forum for being a timesink and for beign disruptive after 8 days of constant PM tennis between me and him where I tried to get him to alter his way of posting. In the end , he was banned and after all that I got a lovely PM stating , quite seriously, that I was bullying him.

so, yes, I agree that a user beign shouted down on thread *can* be a form of bullying but sometimes its just an entirely deserved reaction and sometimes , just sometimes, what appears to be a group of posters picking on another is actually a single poster refusing to make any effort to fit in or respect his or her peers.

The user has since left boards and I hope I have been vague enough on the details to protect their account identity. The mods involved may guess who it was but, in case the user does come back and has changed their attitude I would ask them not to speculate or guess in public please. (if the user is reading this and recognises themselves, know that you're welcome to return and take part in the discussion but I would hope you have given some serious thought to the points raised by myself and the mods in the conversation that lead up to the ban).

You're right about feedback though, I remember it the way it was and the huge post-fests dragging up old slights imagined or real. I'm glad Feedback has changed for the better and I hope it is a sign that we do take user input seriously and we do take user opinions seriously. If there is a feeling that a user is beign bullied, let someone know and we'll deal with it as best we can. This is supposed to be a site where a serious discussion results in a user havign something to think about before responding, not fearing what a response will be or feeling anxiety because of a compulsion to check what the reaction to a post is (it happens. It happened to me on the Left 4 Dead official forums. I got into a difference of opinion and it got to the stage of just being trench warfare because I thought the game could be better than it was but a group of fans refused to hear anything against the greatest game in the world - I didnt want to read the responses, I knew what they would be, but I just had to know. pesky curiosity and even though it was "just the internet" it was disappointing that people could be so closed minded and almost militant about something so inconsequential as a difference of opinion about a game! eventually I just left the forum because it just wasnt worth the hassle of being shouted down by the same people no matter what I posted or indeed, where I posted it - did I deserve the treatment I got? possibly to some extent. i was posting in a fan forum after all even though I wasnt posting bad things I was obviously not as dedicated to the game as the others, I should have expected some form of negative reaction and if that were all it was, that would have been ok. its was the follow up and the incessant emnity that I for one, never want to see happen on boards).

Thank you for your post.

Boards.ie has done well moving from the "old ways" of Internetz. I for one am glad to see it.

There are real people behind those names. One didn't mean to take away from your bullying thread but just to expand it.

I always remember "Internet: Serious Business"

and it came to be so.....

As was once said to Devore. What if that was your mother who stumbled upon the site and asked a serious but simple question. In AH by mistake.

How would you want your mum treated?


Regardless, keep up the good work.

Nodin

PC CDROM wrote: »

Thank you for ..........treated?


Regardless, keep up the good work.

Yes, the sooner we're all wrapped in cotton wool the better.

Dav

At what point did an expectation of being treated in a civil way become "being wrapped in cotton wool" I wonder?

Is it unreasonable to expect a baseline of civility from other humans in your society? The question PC CDROM mentions is both fair and important.

Nodin

Dav wrote: »

At what point did an expectation of being treated in a civil way become "being wrapped in cotton wool" I wonder? .

....when somebodys 60 plus (I presume) mother was dragged in as the baseline for what would be considered "civil".

Wibbs

I suppose "don't be a dick" covers it nicely and is inclusive of mothers or whomever.

Nodin

....I merely point out that bread thats too white has had the good taken out of it. There has to be some limits, and these are usually dictated by common sense and the subject matter of the fora.

Dav

With respect Nodin, I don't think you make a very good point at all. A person's age has nothing to do with anything, I think the point being made above is in an effort to point out that we don't want AH to be some sort of Irish 4chan or YouTube (and I use these as ultra extreme examples, we're not even remotely close to that level of vitriol), but that this site (and therefore every forum) should be accessible to every and anyone (obvious exceptions like Thunderdome, Ranting and Raving and Nein 11 not withstanding). So the point remains, I don't think anyone would like their mother (or father or brother or sister or son or daughter etc) to have abuse shouted at them for no reason by total strangers.

However, you are absolutely on the money when you say that these things should be dictated by common sense. Which of course means that you'll have the real idiots who want nothing more than to waste our time with endless nonsense that will point out that just because something isn't written down, it can't be a "rule" which is nonsense since common sense shouldn't need to be written down.

looksee

Just going back to the poster who told the story about her father deliberately splashing school children, and the claim that she was bullied as a result. Would the bullying claim have arisen if she had not closed her account?

If she had argued her case, or apologised for an ill-considered post would the responses still have been considered bullying?

She came on and made a post which suggested she was amused by, or at least tolerant of, her father's bullying behaviour - an adult using a car to soak children could possibly be considered assault. It certainly was not funny, but she apparently wanted people to laugh with her.

So are people not allowed to express the opinion that it was not funny? In other words express disapproval of bullying! Are they supposed to agree it was funny so not to hurt her feelings? She was not bullied, she was embarrassed. She made a wrong call on a post.

Some of the language was a bit abusive, but no cards were handed out, it only became a bullying issue after she closed her account.

There will always be bullying. It would be nice to think people could be educated out of it but it really isn't likely to happen any time soon. The relatively sudden availability of social networking and the opportunity to share your every thought - anonymously - with the world is still new. Maybe in time there will be a swing in public opinion and on-line bullying will become unfashionable, but in the meantime all Boards can do is keep its own house clean. I think it is doing pretty well at that.

Nodin

Dav wrote: »

With respect Nodin, I don't think you make a very good point at all. A person's age has nothing to do with anything, I think the point being made above is in an effort to point out that we don't want AH to be some sort of Irish 4chan or YouTube (and I use these as ultra extreme examples, we're not even remotely close to that level of vitriol), but that this site (and therefore every forum) should be accessible to every and anyone (obvious exceptions like Thunderdome, Ranting and Raving and Nein 11 not withstanding). So the point remains, I don't think anyone would like their mother (or father or brother or sister or son or daughter etc) to have abuse shouted at them for no reason by total strangers.

However, you are absolutely on the money when you say that these things should be dictated by common sense. Which of course means that you'll have the real idiots who want nothing more than to waste our time with endless nonsense that will point out that just because something isn't written down, it can't be a "rule" which is nonsense since common sense shouldn't need to be written down.

The notion of the 'mother' wasn't invoked by me. Suffice to say its used to convey a notion of sensitivity - as is age i- n these matters.

I've at no stage advocated "that people have abuse shouted at them for no reason by total strangers." in the case of members of this site.

My point, such as it is, remains that if the internet (more specifically this site) is regulated so that it becomes entirely inoffensive, it loses its quality.

Madam_X

In an ideal world commonsense would prevail Nodin but the lack of boundaries on the net means some of the lowest forms of life (online anyway, probably nowhere near as "bad-ass" in real life) go on their sprees.

Another thing I've noticed is the way bad-taste humour which sensible people know is a joke and don't actually hold cruel and prejudiced opinions... is being hijacked by the dregs, who actually do think this way and use it as a licence to inflict their vomit on others. Rape as actually hilarious (rather than some rape *jokes* as funny) is what springs to mind.

LoLth

Nodin wrote: »

My point, such as it is, remains that if the internet (more specifically this site) is regulated so that it becomes entirely inoffensive, it loses its quality.

I agree that no-one wants a nanny state where any argument / upset or non-conformity instantly elicits a "won't somebody think of the children!!!" response but your post suggests that there is some correlation between offensiveness and quality on a website. I would find both of these attributes to be almost exclusive of one another if not in direct opposition.

for example, if I were to look for installation guides for a piece of software and I saw two threads on two different forums:

the first is a step by step how to with some supporting advice given by other users

the second is a stream of responses calling the OP names and denigrading his ability with computers

guess which one I would consider to be of greater quality and which I would consider offensive?

apart from that, I do get your point and that is sort of the point of this thread too, Bullying exists and we dont want it to but to tackle it we have to know what to look for and how to recognise it when we see it. At the same time the users need to know what is and is not bullying so there arent any false claims or worse, trollish / timesink claims.