Received Warning

Panthro

Hi all,
I am wondering can I get some clarification (for my own benefit, as well a few others). Yesterday I received a Warning for posting this post

just saying...a link with english commentators would be welcomed

in a thread about a boxing match which was taking place at the time.
My warning was for a breach of Forum Charter. That's fair enough, I shouldn't have made a post asking for a link (Not blatantly asking straight out, but hinting)
So I go back to the Boxing Forum Charter and have a read through. The closest rule that relates to me I find is:

12) No Illegal links to fight's, this is a bannable offence, If you ask for a link to a fight which is on PPV you are going to be bombarded with illegal streams, if you must get a link make sure you request a Legal link as Linking Illegal links or requesting them is very serious, Better still just use Google as that causes Boards no legal issues.

Now, I received a warning for asking for a link, as apparently according to a Mod of the forum, to do so is against the Charter.
My query is this: Should this charter not be a bit more specific on the issue of Links for live boxing matches etc? From my reading of the Charter, you are allowed to ask for a link so long as you ask for a "Legal" link. Just so we are clear, I'm not being pedantic for the sake of it, I wasn't the only one who received a warning/yellow yesterday and I believe it needs to be looked at further.
If we are to take the Charter as it is, I can't see where I've actually one wrong.

No Illegal links to fight's, this is a bannable offence

I didn't post a link to the fight, I asked for one (not directly asked either)

If you ask for a link to a fight which is on PPV you are going to be bombarded with illegal streams

OK, so it is informing me that I would likely be bombarded with illegal streams, no mention that I can't actually ask for one all the same.

if you must get a link make sure you request a Legal link as Linking Illegal links or requesting them is very serious, Better still just use Google as that causes Boards no legal issues.[

This section of the rule contradicts why I received a warning (to my mind anyways).
If I "must request a link"...that to me reads as an acknowledgement that I am indeed allowed to ask for a link (directly or indirectly) "it must be a Legal link" so is this in fact where I went wrong? I didn't indirectly mention that I'd like a legal link as opposed to an illegal one?
That whole sentence (to my reading of it anyways) basically contradicts my warning completely.

I PM'ed the Mod that issued the warning, asking what part exactly of the Charter have I breached, and pointed to the Rule above. I outlined that the rule was not specific in whether or not a poster can ask for a link, and suggested that the wording need to be changed, because as it stands and as you can see from above, there is an acknowledgement that a poster can ask for a link so long as the word "Legal" is put into the post.
I was told that the Charter was specific in it's "not asking for a link". (I can't see it). I was then told that I must not understand the Charter, that it's at the Mods discretion on decisions such as this.

Seem as I don't predict an agreement between myself and the Mod in question on the issue, I thought the best thing to do was to raise the issue here instead.
As as said at the top of the post, I'm not trying to be petty or pedantic, I received my Warning as did quite a few others. I'm querying my Warning on the grounds that I did not breach the Charter. I believe that in a forum where asking for links for live events would be a common enough occurrence, if the Mods of the forum do not wish for posters to ask for links, it should be expressly outlined that to do so is against the Charter and action will be taken. I do not think that the current rule in place is specific enough on the issue, and that leaving it to a Mod's discretion on the asking/offering of links is sufficient when issuing out the Warnings/infractions.
To summarize, I would like my Warning and other similar warnings/infractions to be revoked and for the Charter rule to be updated with a more specific rule on the issue one way or the other. As it stands, it's not good enough in my opinion.
As the PM's were private, I will keep them that way. However if any of Mods for this forum would like to see the conversation, please feel free to PM me and I'll forward the conversation on.

Apologies for the novel of a post and thank you for reading.
Panthro

Beasty

Firstly it is permitted to post PMs here if it assists with the dispute process - that means they must be relevant to the dispute, and in connection with the mod action taken.

Secondly you should conclude your discussion with the Mod before starting a thread here - the fact you do not "predict agreement" does not mean it cannot be reached, and that avenue should have been exhausted

However in order to draw this to a rapid conclusion, I've had a quick look at the thread and charter

As you have already mentioned, the Charter states

If you ask for a link to a fight which is on PPV you are going to be bombarded with illegal streams

This is the crux of the matter for me. As I understand it, this was a PPV fight. Why would there be "legal" streams for this? Details of a subscription online channel had, I believe, already been provided in the thread. Hence the only realistic consequence of your request (and those of others) would be that an illegal stream would be posted. This contrasts with a non PPV event where there may, I would guess, be legal free streams available,

Hence by asking for a stream you were encouraging others to break the forum charter (and indeed another poster proceeded to do this and was dealt with accordingly). Clearly you feel the charter needs further clarification. I don't see a particular issue with it - encouraging someone to break the charter is definitely worthy of a yellow card.

Now I will ask the local mods to have a look at the charter anyway, if only to minimise the risk of someone else trying to appeal what to me is a fairly clearcut card

Panthro

Hi Beasty,
Thank you for your reply. I've PM'ed the Mod and ended the conversation.
Again

No Illegal links to fight's, this is a bannable offence

This(to my mind) is too vague a rule. As I read it, I am not allowed to provide a link to a live stream, fair enough. But does even asking for a link fall under this rule? As I said, I didn't provide a link.

If you ask for a link to a fight which is on PPV you are going to be bombarded with illegal streams

This (to my mind) is informing me that if a poster asks for a link, the likelihood is they would be bombarded with illegal streams. Is this therefore meant to be taken as "you can not ask for links?" Again, I feel it's very vague to be honest.

Beasty

Do you really think there were some "legal" free streams out there for a PPV event?
Do you accept that inviting others to break the charter is worthy of mod action?

As I said, I'll discuss with the local mods changes if it avoids getting to this situation again, but I really cannot see any basis for overturning this yellow

Panthro

Beasty wrote: »

As I said, I'll discuss with the local mods changes if it avoids getting to this situation again, but I really cannot see any basis for overturning this yellow

To reiterate my point on the matter:
I was given a Warning for asking for a link on thread. To my mind, the rule given does not outline that you can not ask for a link. Therefore I believe that I have not in fact broken any rules to begin with. Using this as the crux of the issue:

If you ask for a link to a fight which is on PPV you are going to be bombarded with illegal streams

I do not believe that informing (which is all this sentence is doing) a poster could/should be interpreted as a "you are not allowed to ask for links".
Furthermore, This sentence does not outline a consequence of asking for a link, it's merely outlining a statement of likelihood of the type of link you may end up getting.

As I've said in my OP I think the rule should be updated to be more specific on the rules of asking for a link in a match thread. I stand by my earlier post when I say the current rule is too vague. I therefore believe that my yellow was void.
I have brought the matter to both the Mod and your attention, I do hope that it it better worded as I believe the current wording to be too vague and open to interpretation by both poster and Mod.

Beasty

Panthro wrote: »

I was given a Warning for I have brought the matter to both the Mod and your attention, I do hope that it it better worded as I believe the current wording to be too vague and open to interpretation by both poster and Mod.

The local mods have changed the wording to remove any residual doubt on this. I stand by my decision though - it was entirely inappropriate for you to ask for a link when you must have known that any link provided would be illegal and therefore against both forum and site rules

Please advise if you wish an Admin to review this

Thanks

Panthro

I would continue to be of the opinion that the actual motion of asking was not specified in any way as being against the original Charter. The original Charter did not cater (either specifically or through implication) that a poster could not ask.
A point which has been acknowledged and/or conceded with the recent amendment of the rule to include:

or asking for links

If needs be, yes I would like an Admin to review.
Thank you.

BuffyBot

I think that in this case it's disheartening that it's really nessecary to differentiate between asking for something that isn't allowed and providing it. It's two sides of the same coin. Charters cannot cover each and every eventuality, and a certain about of common sense must be applied.

It comes down to the a spirit and letter of the law debate. I concur with the argument above: that asking for something that's disallowed is just as bad as providing it, as the knowledge of it being disallowed was there. As such, the mod action is upheld on this basis