Are mods exempt from rules when moderating?

Insect Overlord

It might be a good idea to take a few hours to calm down about the infraction before you continue to the campaign against injustice. Calling out Admins on-thread ain't the best thing to be doing on a hot Friday afternoon...

Tallon

Dades wrote: »

"Not being a dick" is a well-known internet trope, and one of the core tenets of how to behave on Boards (or most any discussion forum). Referring in moderation to that term is not abuse - it's a warning about how not to act.

Use of it by non-moderators is more back seat modding than anything, unless the context is such that someone is actually being abusive.

So you're telling me that this is not personal abuse

No need to be a dick <username>

but this is...

<username> was a dick in that thread too.....

Tallon

Insect Overlord wrote: »

It might be a good idea to take a few hours to calm down about the infraction before you continue to the campaign against injustice. Calling out Admins on-thread ain't the best thing to be doing on a hot Friday afternoon...

Please don't patronise me, I do not need to calm down... I have not posted in anyway to insinuate as such!

The infraction is a few days old, and I've already been involved in PM's with the mod, and a DRP thread...

I am not 'calling out an admin' I am asking a User why he posted something, and then deleted it while I was replying to it! The fact that he is an admin has no relation to anything

Penn

Tallon wrote: »

It's exactly that black and white.. The moderators said the same thing I did, but with me, it's 'Personal Abuse'

Yes, because you're not acting in the capacity of moderating, which means for all intents and purposes, you're calling another poster a dick. That's personal abuse.

Tallon wrote: »

I could link endless threads with the same issues, but you've asked me not to

No, I said that other people's posts weren't up for discussion in your DRP thread as DRP threads are to decide whether a mod action taken was correct, not to discuss the comments and actions of other posters and posts

Tallon

Penn wrote: »

Yes, because you're not acting in the capacity of moderating, which means for all intents and purposes, you're calling another poster a dick. That's personal abuse.

So again, the answer is a yes. mods are allowed to break, and are exempt from Boards.ie rules, as long as they are 'moderating'!

Penn wrote: »

No, I said that other people's posts weren't up for discussion in your DRP thread as DRP threads are to decide whether a mod action taken was correct, not to discuss the comments and actions of other posters and posts

No, you said...

I would advise you not to start reporting posts from the past, as retroactively reporting posts in order to prove a point constitutes an abuse of the report function.

This to me, includes linking to said posts?

Dades

Tallon wrote: »

I am not 'calling out an admin' I am asking a User why he posted something, and then deleted it while I was replying to it! The fact that he is an admin has no relation to anything

I see oBs deleted post and it was only one line repeating what has been said several times - and what you seem intent to ignore.

In the course of moderation, it's different to suggest someone is being a dick than, say, an arsehole. That is because of the accepted forum rule of "don't be a dick", an it's associated history.

I don't use that term personally, as clearly the history behind it is not known to everybody, and it might therefore be seen as overly harsh. That said, now the context has been (repeatedly) pointed out - this should no longer be a source of confusion.

Jerrica

The irony here is that in arguing the whole situation to the nth degree Tallon you are exemplifying exactly the kind of dickish behaviour that causes Mods to have to implement that rule in the first place.

Tallon

Dades wrote: »

I see oBs deleted post and it was only one line repeating what has been said several times - and what you seem intent to ignore.

In the course of moderation, it's different to suggest someone is being a dick than, say, an arsehole. That is because of the accepted forum rule of "don't be a dick", an it's associated history.

I don't use that term personally, as clearly the history behind it is not known to everybody, and it might therefore be seen as overly harsh. That said, now the context has been (repeatedly) pointed out - this should no longer be a source of confusion.

So what I said then wasn't personal abuse? I was just back seat modding?

Penn

Tallon wrote: »

No, you said...

This to me, includes linking to said posts?

No, I meant reporting numerous old posts (via the report function) as an attempt to prove a point (which people have done in the past) is an abuse of the report function and causes unfair work to moderators depending on how old the posts are. Linking to them in the context of this discussion is fine as far as I can see, unless an admin says otherwise (I'm not a mod or cmod here).

Mr C Nut

Tallon wrote: »

I would still like to know why OscorBravo deleted his post as I was replying to it...

What did his post say? This is curious to say in the least

Penn

Tallon wrote: »

So what I said then wasn't personal abuse? I was just back seat modding?

Hypothetical example, Tallon:

I, in this thread, call you a dick.

Would you consider that to be personal abuse or backseat modding?

P. Breathnach

Penn wrote: »

Hypothetical example, Tallon:

I, in this thread, call you a dick.

Would you consider that to be personal abuse or backseat modding?

Are polls allowed in this forum?

Tallon

Penn wrote: »

Hypothetical example, Tallon:

I, in this thread, call you a dick.

Would you consider that to be personal abuse or backseat modding?

If you said I was being a dick or acting like a dick then no! I have been called it loads an never battered and eyelid!

And that's a question you need to ask the mods and admins

Penn

Tallon wrote: »

If you said I was being a dick or acting like a dick then no! I have been called it loads an never battered and eyelid!

And that's a question you need to ask the mods and admins

Just because you wouldn't take offence to it doesn't mean others wouldn't. The rules don't change just because it's perceived that the person it's directed at wouldn't find it offensive.

Tallon

Penn wrote: »

Just because you wouldn't take offence to it doesn't mean others wouldn't. The rules don't change just because it's perceived that the person it's directed at wouldn't find it offensive.

Then what relevance was it asking me?

Tallon

Jerrica wrote: »

The irony here is that in arguing the whole situation to the nth degree Tallon you are exemplifying exactly the kind of dickish behaviour that causes Mods to have to implement that rule in the first place.

I sincerely hope that this user is infracted for this abusive post towards me? Otherwise it might make your arguments look invalid?

LoLth

For clarification purposes Tallon:

Allowed:
as a moderator of feedback: "Tallon infracted for being a dick/troll" That's me giving my reason for the infraction to let other users on thread know what is and is not acceptable behaviour

Not allowed:
as a moderator/user on feedback: "Tallon, you're a dick" . that's me abusing the poster and not tackling the post.

Not Allowed:
As a USER on boards.ie (ie: a moderator anywhere they don't mod): "Tallon stop acting like a dick". that's me calling a user a dick and then trying to use semantics later to say "but I said acting like a dick...I didn't actually call him a dick...bow before my cleverness puny mods and admins for I am the insultinator!" ahem.. sorry.


so, to answer your question in a simple yes or no: NO

as for posters deleting posts, that's their own business and the reason for a deleted post is not something they have to reveal to anyone. Mods/admins can see deleted posts and we can see the reasons given for deletion. Admin/Mod/User do NOT have to answer to you because they changed their mind about a response to a question you asked.

Tallon

And what about the examples in the OP?


http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=85365328&postcount=421

Originally Posted by .ak View Post
Don't be a dick. Read the warning in the OP.

'Don't be a dick' That is calling someone a dick, that is not saying 'don't act like a dick'

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=85359975&postcount=1

Originally Posted by .ak
MOD NOTE: It seems people are more interested in being dicks than actually discussing what's at hand. Straight one week bans for anything we consider uncivil. Be mindful of your fellow posters - you have been warned.

'people are more interested in being dicks' Again, calling people 'dicks' not acting like dicks


http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=85333232&postcount=2

Originally Posted by Diabhal Beag View Post
No need to be a dick audman, this is a genuine request.

And this one speaks for itself!


You're telling me that none of those posts are 'abuse' ?


I said there was no need for the poster to be a dick towards the OP - That is not calling someone a dick

I also said, he was a dick in another thread - meaning he was acting like a dick, and that was implied, and anyone that read it could see that

Just because you think you're being funny with your:

"but I said acting like a dick...I didn't actually call him a dick...bow before my cleverness puny mods and admins for I am the insultinator!"

post, doesn't mean that's what I was thinking or saying

I said the user was a dick in one thread, and posting like a dick in another, that is not personal abuse... and if the moderators are allowed say the exact same thing, or worse, then that is double standards!

jordainius

I think you need to just take your infraction on the chin and move on, this thread is nothing but pedantry.

The difference between a "non-mod" calling another user a dick and a moderator infracting someone for being a dick is pretty straightforward.

It's pretty simple;
1) Don't be a dick.
2) Don't call someone else a dick.
3) If you feel someone is being a dick, report them, let the mods deal with it, and move on.


Aside; It might be no harm for the site rules to re-word the "Don't be a dick" wording of the site rules and focus more on wording like "Don't be uncivil". Despite the fact that everyone knows what "Don't be a dick" means, it seems to come up a wee bit on Dispute Resolution forums that people decide to take personal offence to having the word "dick" thrown at them/their behaviour, might be no harm for mods to stick to using the word uncivil so as not to offend anyone.

Although, some people will just argue about anything after receiving an infraction, I've seen some people take issue with the definition of uncivil as well :rolleyes:. But some people find the word dick offensive, so it might be no harm to remove/replace that word from the charters and direct mods to use a diifferent phrase. I say this for the benefit of the mods as it would spare them having to argue over such a trivial issue as they have enough on their hands already :P

oscarBravo

I deleted my post because I started typing it, got distracted, came back and posted it, then found that I was just rehashing what had already been said repeatedly.

Mr C Nut wrote: »

What did his post say? This is curious to say in the least

I find it more curious that a brand-new user's first post is on this topic, frankly.

LoLth

actually I wasn't referencing anything you posted with my insultinator comment, I was reference the example I gave which was ME theoretically insulting you. How about you stop attacking anyone that disagrees with you and start listening and discussing?

you said the user was a dick in one thread: you personally insulted a poster, not the post or the content of a post. => personal abuse => infraction or warning

the sticking point here seems to be the "don't be a dick" rule. Lets change the language to something a little clearer: replace dick with ****wit

No. under no circumstance can a mod call a user a ****wit. we've de-modded mods for doing that in their ban messages in the past and we've demoded mods for doing that in posts in the forums they moderate.

now. if you posted X user was a ****wit in that thread, then you've directly abused the poster.

if a mod comes along and infracts you for "being a dick" the mod means that you have breached the "don't be a dick" rule. They aren't abusing you or calling you names, they are informing you of the rule you breached (by being a dick).

If you feel a poster was breaking the don't be a dick rule , then you report it. Otherwise, by pointing it out on thread its backseat modding.

If you weren't pointing out a breach of that particular rule, then you were name calling and that's personal abuse.

A mod pointing out that a posters behaviour could get them a punishment for breach of the "dont be a dick" rule ie: being a dick is not double standards, its a mod doing their role and giving an on thread warning before taking further action, they could just as easily hit infract and give "being a dick" as the reason for the infraction.

edit: what Jordainus said (and said better than me). Pretty much what happened OB previously. Someone else posted what I had to say while I was typing.

Tallon

jordainius wrote: »

I think you need to just take your infraction on the chin and move on, this thread is nothing but pedantry.

The difference between a "non-mod" calling another user a dick and a moderator infracting someone for being a dick is pretty straightforward.

It's pretty simple;
1) Don't be a dick.
2) Don't call someone else a dick.
3) If you feel someone is being a dick, report them, let the mods deal with it, and move on.


Aside; It might be no harm for the site rules to re-word the "Don't be a dick" wording of the site rules and focus more on wording like "Don't be uncivil". Despite the fact that everyone knows what "Don't be a dick" means, it seems to come up a wee bit on Dispute Resolution forums that people decide to take personal offence to having the word "dick" thrown at them/their behaviour, might be no harm for mods to stick to using the word uncivil so as not to offend anyone.

Although, some people will just argue about anything after receiving an infraction, I've seen some people take issue with the definition of uncivil as well :rolleyes:. But some people find the word dick offensive, so it might be no harm to remove/replace that word from the charters and direct mods to use a diifferent phrase. I say this for the benefit of the mods as it would spare them having to argue over such a trivial issue as they have enough on their hands already :P

No, the difference is; When I say it, it's abusive, when a mod says it, ah sure they're a mod...

Tallon

LoLth wrote: »

actually I wasn't referencing anything you posted with my insultinator comment, I was reference the example I gave which was ME theoretically insulting you. How about you stop attacking anyone that disagrees with you and start listening and discussing?

you said the user was a dick in one thread: you personally insulted a poster, not the post or the content of a post. => personal abuse => infraction or warning

the sticking point here seems to be the "don't be a dick" rule. Lets change the language to something a little clearer: replace dick with ****wit

No. under no circumstance can a mod call a user a ****wit. we've de-modded mods for doing that in their ban messages in the past and we've demoded mods for doing that in posts in the forums they moderate.

now. if you posted X user was a ****wit in that thread, then you've directly abused the poster.

if a mod comes along and infracts you for "being a dick" the mod means that you have breached the "don't be a dick" rule. They aren't abusing you or calling you names, they are informing you of the rule you breached (by being a dick).

If you feel a poster was breaking the don't be a dick rule , then you report it. Otherwise, by pointing it out on thread its backseat modding.

If you weren't pointing out a breach of that particular rule, then you were name calling and that's personal abuse.

A mod pointing out that a posters behaviour could get them a punishment for breach of the "dont be a dick" rule ie: being a dick is not double standards, its a mod doing their role and giving an on thread warning before taking further action, they could just as easily hit infract and give "being a dick" as the reason for the infraction.

edit: what Jordainus said (and said better than me). Pretty much what happened OB previously. Someone else posted what I had to say while I was typing.

I'm not attacking everyone.. Can you please stop trying to paint me in a bad light!

Please re-read my last post... What about the specific examples given in my previous post, and the OP

bumper234

As someone who is often called Dick i take the utmost offence to the misuse of my name and i would like mods to kindly make sure it is never used on here again!

Yours sincerely Richard (Dick) Bumper Jones III

jordainius

Tallon wrote: »

No, the difference is; When I say it, it's abusive, when a mod says it, ah sure they're a mod...

The difference is it's not up to you and me as normal users to accuse other posters of being a dick, or of trolling or whatever else, our role is to report posts and not make accusations on thread. That's pretty clear from the site rules and pretty much all forum charters.

Mods don't use the word to abuse, they use it as a cover-all word when handing out warnings/infractions. A normal user will only use the word dick to abuse another poster (not allowed) or to back seat moderate (also not allowed).

Tallon

jordainius wrote: »

The difference is it's not up to you and me as normal users to accuse other posters of being a dick, or of trolling or whatever else, our role is to report posts and not make accusations on thread. That's pretty clear from the site rules and pretty much all forum charters.

Mods don't use the word to abuse, they use it as a cover-all word when handing out warnings/infractions. A normal user will only use the word dick to abuse another poster (not allowed) or to back seat moderate (also not allowed).

But I didn't use it to abuse either, hence why I'm here...

sundodger5

jordainius wrote: »

The difference is it's not up to you and me as normal users to accuse other posters of being a dick, or of trolling or whatever else, our role is to report posts and not make accusations on thread. That's pretty clear from the site rules and pretty much all forum charters.

Mods don't use the word to abuse, they use it as a cover-all word when handing out warnings/infractions. A normal user will only use the word dick to abuse another poster (not allowed) or to back seat moderate (also not allowed).

They need another word if they are giving other people warnings etc for its use

jordainius

Tallon wrote: »

But I didn't use it to abuse either, hence why I'm here...

I agree, I believe you didn't use the word in the abusive sense, but its not up to you or I to state that someone is behaving like a dick, you questioned the poster's intent, it's easy to see how that is interpreted as accusing the poster of being uncivil/trolling. Not up to normal users, our role is to report posts in that instance.

For what its worth, I actually agree with what you said in the post concerned and I believe it was a harsh infraction, but it was the right call nonetheless.

Taltos

Tallon - in fairness I fail to see any merit in your argument here and it seems as someone just seeing this thread get bumped up that you are arguing for the sake of it.

"Don't be a dick!" and all variations are long established in the history of this site and the discussion on removing it surfaces every now and again. Personally as a mod I choose not to use it - but being a contributor/lurker here for many years I am well used to seeing it crop up now and again in different areas.

In terms of though of the actions you took and your choice to use this - look, plain and simply you were wrong to do so. There is no need for me to go into the why - that is clear in multiple posts above - and fact is despite you not accepting those posts - does not make them any less correct! I for example don't agree with having to pay my household charge - but I still do so or accept the risk of earning a fine/stoppage on my wages.
Depending on the forum you did this in this could have resulted in an on thread warning, all the way up to a ban if for example you had used this on one of the strictly moderated forums. This is not in doubt. If you cannot accept this action then as above maybe step back a bit from this whole thing, take a few days, re-read the charter and if you still cannot accept your slight (and I mean slight) error in judgement then consider always re-reading your post with a virtual mod or OP hat on before you submit it to ensure you are not crossing that line.

Can I suggest that you learn from this - there is a certain behaviour that we are all held to here. If you have an issue with a poster or a post simply report it. If you cannot post in the manner that is expected then you have to accept that this has consequences. There are no double standards here - this is just the way it is. Personally I too have been warned for backseat modding/personal abuse - the difference is I accepted I was wrong and have learnt from it, my first reaction was "what the hell!!!" - then I re-read it and had to apologise to the mod that warned me.

Czarcasm

Tallon wrote: »

No, the difference is; When I say it, it's abusive, when a mod says it, ah sure they're a mod...

Having read through this thread so far Tallon it's clear this is less of a site wide issue and more of a personal issue with being infracted in a pretty standard fashion.

Using silly semantics is hardly the best way to make an argument if a poster expects to be taken seriously.

Lolth and many other posters have pointed out that Moderators in their capacity as Moderators are just as accountable for their actions as an ordinary poster, and when charged with moderating a forum, are the only people with the authority to call a poster out on their uncivil or dickish behaviour.

The "being a dick" rule is a reference to their behaviour and not to the poster themselves. You may argue differently for a meaning that suits you, but that's the generally understood definition of the phrase for most people.

My own personal point of view is that there is a structured hierarchy of authority on the site. I personally find it hard to wrap my head around the fact that Moderators are classed as ordinary posters outside their own forums, but that would be MY own personal issue (Don't even get me started on Moderators who are not allowed moderate threads they post in in their own forums! Fcuking inception personified! ).