Unfair infraction issued in North County Dublin thread

Meesared

I was involved in a thread on the North County Dublin forum, about a new Tesco coming to Swords, and while I admit I did let my temper get the better of me at a point, and the Mod posted a warning, saying to cut it out or not post on the thread again. I calmed down after the warning and tried posting civilly, but then I got told to not post on the thread again and got issued an Infraction for ignoring a mod's instruction. I personally think this is unfair as I was posting in a civil manner after the warning. As you can see from my history I'm no troublemaker and I do behave myself, and I'm struggling to understand this. I have already discussed this with the mod in question, and they have stood their ground with the ban, so I bring it to you in the hope of some clarification.

Thank you.

The Hill Billy

I was the mod in question & can confirm that the OP has PM'd me about this issue.

As Region CMod it would be unfair of me to rule on my own case & will ask that Mr Magnolia review this appeal.

Please note that this is not a forum ban. The OP received an infraction & is banned from further participating in this thread.

@Meesared - Please clarify what you actually wish to dispute. The thread ban or the infraction.

I will not post further unless requested by Mr Magnolia or an Admin.

tHB

Meesared

The infraction, thanks. The thread ban doesn't really matter too much in the grand scheme of things.

Mr Magnolia

Hi Meesared,

An infraction in this case is a tool used by moderators to remind users that there are guidelines that need to be adhered to.

Can you please take another read of the full exchange between yourself and peteb2. It's clear to me that you both continued a line of discussion that the forum moderator had asked you to desist. Can you understand this interpretation?

Meesared

I get where youre coming from, but I don't agree that the last post was bad, it was civil, and it was on topic.

Mr Magnolia

Meesared wrote: »

I get where youre coming from, but I don't agree that the last post was bad, it was civil, and it was on topic.

The issue was that you both continued a line of discussion that the moderator felt was off-topic and had asked ye both to desist.

Meesared

Ok so couldn't that have been made clearer in the warning?

The warning was:

Cut it out. If you both cannot have a reasonable discussion - do not post in this thread again.

tHB

This warning seemed to be wanting us to stop the sniping that was going on (and I admit that) But I stopped and I was trying to get back to having a reasonable discussion, I have no problem with not posting in the thread anymore. If the mod wanted me to stop posting in the thread completely, they should have come out and said it, rather than me attempting to get back to a civil discussion, and having the infraction handed out anyway.

Mr Magnolia

Meesared wrote: »

Ok so couldn't that have been made clearer in the warning?

The warning was:


This warning seemed to be wanting us to stop the sniping that was going on (and I admit that) But I stopped and I was trying to get back to having a reasonable discussion, I have no problem with not posting in the thread anymore. If the mod wanted me to stop posting in the thread completely, they should have come out and said it, rather than me attempting to get back to a civil discussion, and having the infraction handed out anyway.

You may indeed have returned to reasonable discussion but it can, and has been interpreted that a squabble continued despite a moderators request to park it.

The warning could have been more descript perhaps but it's hard for moderators to cover all eventualities when giving direction. If you're in doubt it's always recommended you PM the mod for clarification before posting on-thread.

Meesared

See the problem is, there wasn't even a doubt in my mind that what I was posting was against the mods posted instructions. My posting history shows I have no issue following mods instructions when I understand them. Would you not agree that the infraction was on the harsh side given the circumstances?

Mr Magnolia

I understand you feel you returned to reasonable discussion but put simply you both continued a tit for tat and this is how it was construed by the moderator. It may be deemed by you to be harsh but the moderator deemed it as warranted.
As an on-thread warning had already been given I have no reason to over-turn this. You can appeal this to the Admin if you wish.

Meesared

Id like to appeal this, thank you.

Trojan

"If you both cannot have a reasonable discussion - do not post in this thread again."

As this mod instruction could be considered ambiguous, if one were to split hairs, I will rescind the infraction based on "benefit of the doubt".

However, the original mod decision was correct: the OP was most definitely pulling the thread off-topic, therefore the on-thread warning has to stand. Please do not post on that thread again.

Resolved.