unfair infraction

daheff

Hi

I received an infraction today from posting

"why would you ruin a perfectly good nipple (might need pics to confirm this) with a tattoo?"

in this thread

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056930277

The MOD reason given to me was that the post was uncivil (Typically, this means that you are posting in a needlessly aggressive or confrontational manner being disruptive on the forum or causing stress for the other members.)

In my opinion this was not uncivil, not aggressive or confrontational or would cause stress for the other posters.

In addition to this, the MOD posted this in the thread (in contradiction to the reason given to me)
"If you have nothing constructive to contribute, please do not do so, and do not make any suggestive/sleazy remarks."

1- The Op was looking for reassurance about getting it done- he/she doesnt look to be 100% sure about doing it
"If I get this done, I'd want to be happy with it"

My post was (albeit in a light hearted manner) that I dont see it as a good idea.

While the Mod may find my post sleazy- the whole thread is somewhat sleazy so I cannot see why I get infracted while the OP doesnt ?(and i'm not suggesting that he should). I didnt mean my remark in a sleazy manner at all.

2- From what I can see, no other person commenting on the thread has yet given a constructive response to the OP.


I think the MODs response has been extremely heavy handed. If anything, the mod could have just removed the part of my post that offended the MOD and given an in post warning. An infraction is OTT as far as Im concerned. :mad:

I'd appreciate it if a Cmod could take the time to look at this (as the Mod in question isnt for turning.)

thanks

Daheff

faceman

Hi Daheff

We're reviewing your issue at the moment and will revert.

faceman

Hi Daheff,

Thanks for your patience. I have reviewed the matter and I can see both sides of the story. Tattoos and the like wouldn't be my thing as such so it made it easy to apply an unbiased eye to the dispute.

In short, while I recognize your grievance and see the tongue in cheek nature of the comment, I am going to respect the spirit of the forum and the preferred behaviour that the mods there are trying to foster and especially given the thread is a sensitive topic in itself. The forum expectations will no doubt be held to a higher standard in a thread like that.

Its worth having a read over the charter of the forum before first posting a forum, particular in niche forum such as tattoos & piercings. The infraction as a once off has no implications for you to post in the forum and this thread with your post also helps clarify your side of the dispute.

Again thanks for your patience and taking the time out to give feedback on your experience. While this may not be the response you are seeking, I hope you can appreciate my comments.

daheff

Hi Faceman,

I appreciate you taking the time to look into this and that you can see from my point that the post was tongue in cheek.

While I see that you are respecting the spirit of the forum, I still feel that the infraction is extremely heavy handed. As I mentioned, if the mod in question had a problem, surely deleting the post and an in post warning would have been sufficient. Even leaving the post and posting that the mod didn't want any other comments like mine would have been (at least to my mind) more valuable as people could see that a line in the sand had been drawn. As it stands nobody knows what was posted (see comment #11 from the OP) and as such does not know where the mod stands on it.

faceman wrote: »

The infraction as a once off has no implications for you to post in the forum ...

I would seriously disagree with this. As it stands I will not be returning to this forum. As infractions seem to be thrown around way too easily in this forum and I don't see any point in adding any more comments for fear of more needless heavy handed infractions.

In addition the fact that the Mod tells me one reason for the infraction and post something contradictory in the forum is annoying to say the least. The reason given was my comment was "uncivil". I still maintain that there was nothing uncivil about it and as such the infraction is unwarranted.

While I respect the fact that mods are there to keep order in forums, there are much worse going on that are ignored. http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=84193325 (thread that has people saying that they love boobs #8253,#8254)
One poster calls it a "shoit thread"

Should you not want to reconsider your response to me (or the original mod involved does not want to reconsider the infraction) then I would like to ask an admin to take a look at this.


I would also be of the opinion that the MOD is banning/ infracting people that disagree (or post anything that disagrees) with having tattoos



http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=84262639
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=84153765



again thanks for your time.

Trojan

Please report all posts that you feel contravene the charters or ethos of any forums here on boards. In addition, please note that posts from other users cannot be used to justify anyone contravening those rules.

Resolved.

I must have mis-read the last post, I thought there was agreement and resolved the DRP. My apologies, I've re-opened it and will review it tonight if another admin doesn't take it on in the meantime.

daheff

Trojan wrote: »

Please report all posts that you feel contravene the charters or ethos of any forums here on boards. In addition, please note that posts from other users cannot be used to justify anyone contravening those rules.

Resolved.

I must have mis-read the last post, I thought there was agreement and resolved the DRP. My apologies, I've re-opened it and will review it tonight if another admin doesn't take it on in the meantime.

Many thanks for reopening Trojan.

Just to surmise my point for any admin who reviews this:

My post was infracted for being uncivil. In my view it was not uncivil. It was appealing to the op (albeit tongue in cheek) not to get a nipple tattoo. I have pointed out above posts from other threads in the forum that were more 'sleazy' that did not result in infractions for the posters (neither should they have in my view).
I feel that I have been treated more harshly than other more regular posters in this forum.

Additionally I can see that the mod involved has banned/infracted 2 other posters in the last 2 weeks that have made posts giving a view point against tattoos. I accept one of these looks to have been trolling. None the less a view point against a tattoo is still a valid view-even in a tattoo forum. I am not against tattoos in general. Some look good some dont.

In my opinion (based on what i've seen in other forums) posts similar to mine are either cut and an in post mod warning is posted or the post is seen as the tongue in cheek post it is & let go without issue.

While I appreciate modding can be difficult to get the right balance, i think in my case an overly harsh infraction has been issued here.

I didnt intend my post to cause offence or distress to anybody & if it did i apologise for this.

Daheff

Trojan

I've learned a bit more about the T&P forum, which is not one I frequent, and I do a have a somewhat better understanding of the issues, but I'd like to invite the originating mod to post here to see if we can resolve before I have to make a call.

Star Lord

As per my PMs to Daheff/the CMods/Trojan, I'd just like to repost the following, abridged from the PMs to attempt to clarify the issue, and a little bit of (Unintentional) misinterpretation posted above:
___________________________________

The 'Uncivil' reason and the following text, with the exception of the bit that says "Moderator comment" is auto text, that we have no control over, we can simply choose from a predetermined list of reasons, and cannot edit the text of the automatic PM that is sent. In hindsight, "Breach of forum charter" may have been more appropriate.

The reason for the strictness in that particular thread, and any similarly themed threads is because of the subject matter of the thread. The other comments that have been highlighted that are of a similar nature are in threads that are meant for general chat, and as such are a lot more relaxed. Due to the nature of the forum, we do need to be quite flexible as regards the various subjects discussed. In order to keep the forum a safe and friendly place for posters to discuss such topics, we do have to be a lot stricter when threads like the one in which the post in question was posted arise. There was a stern warning issued after the post/infraction.
______________________________________________

The Forum Charter states:

• The forum is based on mutual respect, and as such please treat all other posters with due courtesy and respect.

and:

• No trolling, flaming, fighting, sleazy/inappropriate comments.

We had incidents in the past where some male posters were making inappropriate and kinda sleazy comments to some female posters based on images they'd posted or requests for information on nipple/genital piercings.

In order to keep such threads useful for those seeking information and to save putting female posters off using the forum, we adopted a very low threshold for such comments, hence the infraction.

[edit]
To address the points raised about Warnings/Infractions/Bans issued to those posting from an anti-tattoo/piercing viewpoint:
We rarely encounter anyone posting any salient or constructive points with relation to being generally anto-tattoo/piercing. Such posts tend to be of the variety that tell posters that they'd have to be stupid to get tattoos/piercings, and are generally insulting to the users of the forum. And the majority of such posts are indeed simply trolling posters, trying to stir things up in as many places as possible. Anyone is welcome in the forum, save for those that are insulting or simply trolling the users of the forum.

daheff

DamoElDiablo wrote: »

As per my PMs to Daheff/the

The 'Uncivil' reason and the following text, with the exception of the bit that says "Moderator comment" is auto text, that we have no control over, we can simply choose from a predetermined list of reasons, and cannot edit the text of the automatic PM that is sent. In hindsight, "Breach of forum charter" may have been more appropriate.

The reason for the strictness in that particular thread, and any similarly themed threads is because of the subject matter of the thread. The other comments that have been highlighted that are of a similar nature are in threads that are meant for general chat, and as such are a lot more relaxed. Due to the nature of the forum, we do need to be quite flexible as regards the various subjects discussed. In order to keep the forum a safe and friendly place for posters to discuss such topics, we do have to be a lot stricter when threads like the one in which the post in question was posted arise. There was a stern warning issued after the post/infraction.
______________________________________________

The Forum Charter states:

• The forum is based on mutual respect, and as such please treat all other posters with due courtesy and respect.

and:

• No trolling, flaming, fighting, sleazy/inappropriate comments.

We had incidents in the past where some male posters were making inappropriate and kinda sleazy comments to some female posters based on images they'd posted or requests for information on nipple/genital piercings.

In order to keep such threads useful for those seeking information and to save putting female posters off using the forum, we adopted a very low threshold for such comments, hence the infraction.

[edit]
To address the points raised about Warnings/Infractions/Bans issued to those posting from an anti-tattoo/piercing viewpoint:
We rarely encounter anyone posting any salient or constructive points with relation to being generally anto-tattoo/piercing. Such posts tend to be of the variety that tell posters that they'd have to be stupid to get tattoos/piercings, and are generally insulting to the users of the forum. And the majority of such posts are indeed simply trolling posters, trying to stir things up in as many places as possible. Anyone is welcome in the forum, save for those that are insulting or simply trolling the users of the forum.

Hi DamoElDiablo

Many thanks for clarifying your side of events. However I still do not agree with you.

My main point is that the infraction was overly harsh and unnecessary. As I mentioned, I feel that if such a post stepped over a (blurry) line, that either cutting the offending part from the post & an in post Mod warning or just an in post Mod warning would have been sufficient. It also would have advised people (casual posters or regular posters) of the tone to be set in the thread.

I have read (and reread) the forum charter. To me these are the rules of the forum. They do not say that some threads are going to be more harshly mod'd than others (or less harshly).I've also read a number of other posts in the forum with similar type comments. From that point, if I see other posters making similar comments in (what is a very long) thread, then as far as I can see those comments are reasonable (and allowable) to make.

I completely see your point that you don't want people harassing others...but as Faceman could see, the post was tongue in cheek.
Similarily you don't want females being harassed...but as a casual poster I don't know that the OP is male or female. When I read it first an I had an image of a biker with a tattoo using his nipple as a heart for a zombie or something like that. I'm not big into tattoos (nor do I frequent the forum much) so I wasn't aware that this specific type of tattoo is mainly done on/for females.

For the past issues that the forum has had, I don't feel its fair to be censuring me for others indiscretions. If the OP had reported the post as being offensive or causing distress then there could have been a point to answer. As the post was cut before the OP has even seen it, then I feel that this is not the case. Having said that I can see that you may have been trying to pre-empt any potential issues.


Under the reason given as 'Uncivil', while you now agree that the reason is probably inappropriate and should have been "Breach of forum charter", this is the charge you are laying against me. As such, by your own admission, my post was not 'Uncivil'.


I appreciate that a number of people have now been involved in this and I'd like to thank people for their time (and apologise if anybody feels I'm wasting their time). However I have a clean record on boards and don't feel that it should be tarnished because of one tongue in cheek comment.


thanks
Daheff

ps Damo I will also pm you in response to your pm from yesterday. Feel free to repost anything I write.

Trojan

Apologies for the delay in getting to this thread, it's been a busy day.

I reviewed the situation and came to a conclusion: it would be a harsh call to infract someone for simply going against the ethos of the forum, i.e. by saying "don't get a tattoo" politely and in a non-trolling manner, and if that were the only issue, I would instantly reverse this moderation decision (although it likely would have been done already by the mod and Cmod before me).

But I don't think this mod is holding the position that "a view point against a tattoo is not valid". Clearly the issue here is the OP quote:

daheff wrote:

might need pics to confirm this

This obviously is very suggestive that the girl should post pictures of her nipples and that is 100% in violation of the forum charter, as well as encouraging a violation of boards T&Cs. Therefore this is an open and shut case and my intention was to uphold the original decision as I believe there is no doubt but that the moderator acted correctly in issuing an infraction.

Despite the ruling against the OP, I also wanted to note that daheff has demonstrated a very reasonable approach to the DR process here and that's very much appreciated - as it's sadly rare in many DR situations.

However, in the meantime, between me writing up the above and actually posting it, I received a PM from the moderator in question that he'd been in further communication with daheff by PM, and he believes that daheff is genuine in his assertion that he did think that a 'tongue in cheek' comment would be ok, and that he has learned from this experience. Given that, and the positive approach to the DRP, he's suggested that removing the infraction would be the correct course.

So based on the mod recommendation I'm happy to reverse this infraction. Resolved.