Moderation in Atheism & Agnosticism Thread

Cabaal

GreeBo wrote: »

The issue was with mods and admins being treated differently

Which to be fair you've not proven,
As I've already pointed out you've complained about one of my posts against another user which only you appear to have perceived as personal abuse, (assuming Mary hasn't reported the post)

So basically what we appear to have is you have taken offense on behalf of another user,

GreeBo wrote: »

An Admin posting as both an authority figure and as a poster with no way to tell the difference is part of this issue.

But thats not specific to AA, we're back to bold v non-bold usage which applys site wide.

GreeBo wrote: »

Second one is me, as a human, apologising.

You sure? You said

cop on and stop ignoring moderators instructions, please.

Is that not backseat modding...if your not posting as a mod?

Cabaal

GreeBo wrote: »

As above, its an admin posting in the thread.
They post as a regular user and as an authority figure with no way to differentiate.

Is this a personal opinion or a moderator action?
Can I dispute it without being accused or arguing with a mod?

This is attacking a poster. Again, can I dispute this or is this an authority opinion that I cant question?

Posts like above mean that a regular Joe Soap user sees "special" treatment of certain posters. Its only going to enforce the idea of a members only clique.

Curious,
Since you had concerns about the posts did you report them at the time?

After all thats what the report function is for, to raise issues/concerns about posts.

I'm sure one of the other mods/cmods etc would have been happy to review the posts and step in if needed.

Just because a mod in a forum they moderate posts as a user doesn't mean they can't be warned on thread by the other mods for stepping out of line (if they did), we're only human after all.

My personal take on

"Weathering. Championing minority rights since 2012".

It was specially in response to

if you can't make that happen well tough just get on with it. A Catholic school is a Catholic school simple as that, don't complain when teach Religion or enforce it. You knew what you were letting yourself in for it is what it is.

Weathering post appears to completely ignored the rights that Irish people have under Irish law, EU Law and the Irish constitution when it comes to education and state paid for schools. It was evident that they had no idea what they were on about and as such they were happy for non-catholic rights to be steam rolled over by catholic ethos schools.

I don't see it as a personal attack, it was clearly made tongue in cheek

GreeBo

Cabaal wrote: »

So basically what we appear to have is you have taken offense on behalf of another user,

Thats incorrect. I have an issue with what I perceive as biased moderation.

Cabaal wrote: »

You sure? You said


Is that not backseat modding...if your not posting as a mod?

Yes I am sure. As I already explained that was in the feedback forum for the forum I moderate. Everything I post in there is as a moderator.

Cabaal wrote: »

Curious,
Since you had concerns about the posts did you report them at the time?

After all thats what the report function is for, to raise issues/concerns about posts.

I'm sure one of the other mods/cmods etc would have been happy to review the posts and step in if needed.

My issue is with the moderation, not just a specific post.

Cabaal wrote: »

Just because a mod in a forum they moderate posts as a user doesn't mean they can't be warned on thread by the other mods for stepping out of line (if they did), we're only human after all.

Indeed. However in my opinion they werent warned. I can only imagine its because they are part of "the group".

Cabaal wrote: »

My personal take on


It was specially in response to


Weathering post appears to completely ignored the rights that Irish people have under Irish law, EU Law and the Irish constitution when it comes to education and state paid for schools. It was evident that they had no idea what they were on about and as such they were happy for non-catholic rights to be steam rolled over by catholic ethos schools.

I don't see it as a personal attack, it was clearly made tongue in cheek

Honestly I dont value your opinion on what constitutes personal abuse.

hullaballoo

I know cat pics aren't allowed but what about song lyrics? I have a great little number from Hot Chip that suits this thread down to the ground.

Dades

How can "Weathering. Championing minority rights since 2012" be not taken as anything other than implying the poster is ignoring a minority rights issue with his 'tough luck' attitude?

Where exactly is the abuse?

Cabaal

GreeBo wrote: »

Thats incorrect. I have an issue with what I perceive as biased moderation.

Which is only due to the fact that you have perceived a post I directed at another user as personal abuse, you are taking offense on behalf of somebody else.

Because you believe my post was personal abuse you believe a mod should have taken action, the lack of action is what you believe is biased moderation.

I just find it amusing that you claim you have an issue with moderation of the thread yet when I asked did you report the posts you've used as examples you've not said you have.

Instead you simply went straight to feedback, completely ignoring the very basic reason why the report post function exists and you didn't bother with PM'ing any mods etc either.

You of all people know how important and useful the report post function is to mods in a forum,

As I've said before, its all rather odd.

Honestly I dont value your opinion on what constitutes personal abuse.

No clearly you don't,

Just as you don't appear to think other users are capable of taking issue with posts directed at them if they find them offensive. You'd rather find them offensive on their behalf,

GreeBo

Dades wrote: »

How can "Weathering. Championing minority rights since 2012" be not taken as anything other than implying the poster is ignoring a minority rights issue with his 'tough luck' attitude?

Where exactly is the abuse?

Is it attacking the poster or is it countering the specific points in his post?

If the argument that Cabaals post is ok because of very specific wording I dont see how your posts can also be labeled ok because its only generically attacking the poster?
Is that not double standards?

GreeBo

Cabaal wrote: »

Which is only due to the fact that you have perceived a post I directed at another user as personal abuse, you are taking offense on behalf of somebody else.

Because you believe my post was personal abuse you believe a mod should have taken action, the lack of action is what you believe is biased moderation.

I just find it amusing that you claim you have an issue with moderation of the thread yet when I asked did you report the posts you've used as examples you've not said you have.

Instead you simply went straight to feedback, completely ignoring the very basic reason why the report post function exists and you didn't bother with PM'ing any mods etc either.

You of all people know how important and useful the report post function is to mods in a forum,

As I've said before, its all rather odd.

Again its not about just you.
Its about a number of issues within the thread, this is not the Cabaal feedback thread.

KERSPLAT!

Cabaal wrote: »

No clearly you don't,

Just as you don't appear to think other users are capable of taking issue with posts directed at them if they find them offensive. You'd rather find them offensive on their behalf,

Do you only report posts that are directed at you?

I personally will report/take issue with any post that I perceive as breaching a charter, whether it is directed at me or not. I would have thought that that is the norm

Cabaal

GreeBo wrote: »

Again its not about just you.
Its about a number of issues within the thread, this is not the Cabaal feedback thread.

I'm well aware this thread is not specifically about me, but that doesn't change the fact that you are on here complaining about posts that you had no interest in reporting....as you've not said you reported them.

If you were a new user I think ok fair enough it would make sense if you didn't report them and instead just came to feedback or help desk to complain.

But instead you're a mod, you know the reason why the report post function exists and you know how it works.

Why you choose to ignore it and not raise posts you had issues with is extremely odd, it seems you just wanted an audience in feedback for an issue that very easily could have been resolved at the time if you had reported the posts.

If every user did what you've just done and they added in the claim of moderator bias then we'd have a whole lot of threads needlessly in the feedback forum.

Cabaal

KERSPLAT! wrote: »

Do you only report posts that are directed at you?

I personally will report/take issue with any post that I perceive as breaching a charter, whether it is directed at me or not. I would have thought that that is the norm

Oh I'll report posts that i perceive as abusive to anybody and in doing so I'll leave the mods do their job. But it appears GreeBo didn't even do this (he's not said he reported them anyway)...instead GreeBo started this thread.

However, I wouldn't start a feedback thread claiming a post was abuse towards another user if I didn't report it. That would just be wasting people's time.

Its disrespectful to the user to try fight a battle on their behalf, especially when you don't know their feelings on the matter and if they actually did find something abusive or not. Please see http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=92154442&postcount=92 also

JRant

Cabaal wrote: »

Oh I'll report posts that i perceive as abusive to anybody and in doing so I'll leave the mods do their job. But it appears GreeBo didn't even do this (he's not said he reported them anyway)...instead GreeBo started this thread.

However, I wouldn't start a feedback thread claiming a post was abuse towards another user if I didn't report it. That would just be wasting people's time.

Its disrespectful to the user to try fight a battle on their behalf, especially when you don't know their feelings on the matter and if they actually did find something abusive or not. Please see http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=92154442&postcount=92 also

Hi Cabaal, honest question here, why would somebody report a post if they feel the moderation is biased?

From reading this thread that would appear to be the main issue, not that posts were/weren't reported.

A&A can be a great forum at times but it can also be a right pain as well. You do get the odd poster coming in and giving their tuppence worth on how god created everything etc etc. yet instead of using the many tools available to them ie. ignore function, reporting the post, certain people are given carte blanche to drag any thread they like completely off topic by starting to talk about biscuits etc and it pretty much ruins any discussion.

To be perfectly honest if you pulled that stunt in any other forum you'd be called up fairly sharpish and rightly so.

GreeBo

JRant wrote: »

Hi Cabaal, honest question here, why would somebody report a post if they feel the moderation is biased?

From reading this thread that would appear to be the main issue, not that posts were/weren't reported.

A&A can be a great forum at times but it can also be a right pain as well. You do get the odd poster coming in and giving their tuppence worth on how god created everything etc etc. yet instead of using the many tools available to them ie. ignore function, reporting the post, certain people are given carte blanche to drag any thread they like completely off topic by starting to talk about biscuits etc and it pretty much ruins any discussion.

To be perfectly honest if you pulled that stunt in any other forum you'd be called up fairly sharpish and rightly so.

Exactly.

Cabaal

JRant wrote: »

Hi Cabaal, honest question here, why would somebody report a post if they feel the moderation is biased?

Its sort of like claiming that for example warez links are allowed to be to be posted in the Broadband forum because another user posted them and me or another didn't delete the links, but the person claiming they are allowed by the mods never took the time to highlight then.

In this case the user is claiming the mods are bias because no action was taken in relation to posts which they claim are abusive, this hasn't been proven of course.

Even if GreeBo did prove the posts are abusive this doesn't prove moderator bias because again GreeBo is expecting mods to read every post in the thread, GreeBo should have reported the posts that they had issue with.

As I've said before, just because a mod in the forum says something as a user...it doesn't mean they can't be told off on thread by one of the other forum mods.

At the end of the day the thread is a very fast paced thread and you can't expect a mod to read every single post, its just common sense that GreeBo should have first used the report function. He certainly know what its for.

GreeBo

Cabaal wrote: »

Its sort of like claiming that for example warez links are allowed to be to be posted in the Broadband forum because another user posted them and me or another didn't delete the links, but the person claiming they are allowed by the mods never took the time to highlight then.

In this case the user is claiming the mods are bias because no action was taken in relation to posts which they claim are abusive, this hasn't been proven of course.

Now obviously people's views on whats abuse or not can differ but the first step in such a situation would be to report the posts in question and explain why.

At the end of the day the thread is a very fast paced thread and you can't expect a mod to read every single post, its just common sense that GreeBo should have first used the report function. They certainly know what its for.

No it isnt.
The complaint is about moderation, not your posts.
If I just had an issue with your posts I would have reported them.
I cant really explain this any clearer, its not all about you.

Cabaal

GreeBo wrote: »

No it isnt.
The complaint is about moderation, not your posts.
If I just had an issue with your posts I would have reported them.
I cant really explain this any clearer, its not all about you.

Then why use my posts as examples of your claim of bias moderation? You claim my posts were personal abuse, but yet they went unchallenged.

You clearly have issue with my posts, which means you should have reported them. Really this is basic stuff.

Instead you didn't report the posts and instead came to feedback complaining about no action being taken for posts you perceived as abusive.

You didn't even bother PM'ing the mods or cmods to raise any concerns with them first, instead you've decided in your head that all the mods and Cmods over the AA forum appear to be bias.

Taltos

Going to keep this short.

1. Moderators are human - they are allowed to make mistakes.
2. The A&A forum is the Atheism forum, it is not the Christianity forum or the Islam forum. As you would expect from the name it is intended as a safe place for individuals of a similar mindset to discuss matters relating to their journey in their Atheist world. Posters who "drop" in with "your souls are damned" or similar are rightly given short shrift, just as someone dropping into the Islam forum decrying their faith as a cult or similar. This should not be news for anyone and if it is then there is not much I can say there.
3. Moderation of the thread - having reviewed it I can see there are gaps. Does it show a trend? No - because it is only ONE thread, and without the fodder of reported posts how anyone expects CatMods or Admins to make a ruling on bias is beyond me.
4. Bias - if posters don't report posts out of belief the mods are biased then how do show a trend in behaviour? We all have bad days, we all make mistakes in our modding, if we didn't then we wouldn't need the Dispute Resolution forum - just look at how busy that place is.

See here's the great thing and where the real power lies.
If you don't like how the A&A forum is run and you are not willing to work with the community there to actively and constructively change it then you have the ultimate choice of not posting there. Like any of the forums here the A&A forum has it's own rhythm and style, just because the forum is open does not mean it is the right forum for everyone, and like any forum usually it's best to get the feel of the place before jumping into a heated thread. Equally though the mods there and all posters (mods/admin) have a responsibility to uphold the charter & site rules and where they see a breach - report it or act accordingly. Smart comments are just that - smart, once they don't cross the line into personal abuse or bullying there is no action to take, especially if no one has reported them, and even if they do, quite often the action taken maybe invisible to everyone but the poster involved.

I welcome the feedback forum, but in this case I firmly believe it is a case of using an elephant gun to swat a fly, and to be frank I am more annoyed at this thread than the actual A&A thread itself. This back and forth nit picking of points here has really done my head in. For a second there I thought I stumbled into the Legal forum (no disrespect intended) but there comes a point where you have to say enough is enough and I got to that last night, it took me until now to calm down enough to type this though.

Beyond that - the OP of the original thread - I want to personally thank you for showing such restraint and maturity in all of your posts both in your thread and here. You handled your issue extremely well and even more than that you handled all criticism including that of your parenting in an exemplary fashion. I hope that the threads in A&A continue to get your input and guidance.

Signing off
Taltos

JRant

Cabaal wrote: »

Its sort of like claiming that for example warez links are allowed to be to be posted in the Broadband forum because another user posted them and me or another didn't delete the links, but the person claiming they are allowed by the mods never took the time to highlight then.

In this case the user is claiming the mods are bias because no action was taken in relation to posts which they claim are abusive, this hasn't been proven of course.

Even if GreeBo did prove the posts are abusive this doesn't prove moderator bias because again GreeBo is expecting mods to read every post in the thread, GreeBo should have reported the posts that they had issue with.

As I've said before, just because a mod in the forum says something as a user...it doesn't mean they can't be told off on thread by one of the other forum mods.

At the end of the day the thread is a very fast paced thread and you can't expect a mod to read every single post, its just common sense that GreeBo should have first used the report function. He certainly know what its for.

Cheers, I can see where you're coming from but I don't think that analogy is relevant to this case.

In this case multiple users completely ignored rob's in-thread warning yet only one user was singled out for further reminders.

I agree it was a fast paced thread, however the gap between warnings and repeat offenses was in the single digit post range.

Is it bias? Hell i've no idea and wouldn't comment either way.

Is it inconsistent? Absolutely. If you were a new user dipping into the forum you could find yourself in a quagmire of biscuits, baiting and off topic drivel with no clear boundaries.

Taking your posts out of the equation and looking at it rationally can you not see how it may appear?

IITYWYBMAD

Taltos wrote: »

I welcome the feedback forum, but in this case I firmly believe it is a case of using an elephant gun to swat a fly, and to be frank I am more annoyed at this thread than the actual A&A thread itself. This back and forth nit picking of points here has really done my head in. For a second there I thought I stumbled into the Legal forum (no disrespect intended) but there comes a point where you have to say enough is enough and I got to that last night, it took me until now to calm down enough to type this though.

Beyond that - the OP of the original thread - I want to personally thank you for showing such restraint and maturity in all of your posts both in your thread and here. You handled your issue extremely well and even more than that you handled all criticism including that of your parenting in an exemplary fashion. I hope that the threads in A&A continue to get your input and guidance.

Could not have agreed more. It's actually amazing the similarities between this thread and the one in A&A. FWIW I believe the OP in A&A deserves a lot of thanks for his restrain in the way he handled a huge amount of crap and b****** being shoved his way, and both he and the Mods deserve a huge amount of credit for handling the thread in the manner it was handled, despite Greebo's and others attempt to constantly de-rail it.

It's no surprise that this thread has ended up as a mirror of some parts of the A&A thread. Some of the constant rebutting would be hilarious, if it was not so sad.

GreeBo

Taltos wrote: »

Going to keep this short.

1. Moderators are human - they are allowed to make mistakes.
2. The A&A forum is the Atheism forum, it is not the Christianity forum or the Islam forum. As you would expect from the name it is intended as a safe place for individuals of a similar mindset to discuss matters relating to their journey in their Atheist world. Posters who "drop" in with "your souls are damned" or similar are rightly given short shrift, just as someone dropping into the Islam forum decrying their faith as a cult or similar. This should not be news for anyone and if it is then there is not much I can say there.
3. Moderation of the thread - having reviewed it I can see there are gaps. Does it show a trend? No - because it is only ONE thread, and without the fodder of reported posts how anyone expects CatMods or Admins to make a ruling on bias is beyond me.
4. Bias - if posters don't report posts out of belief the mods are biased then how do show a trend in behaviour? We all have bad days, we all make mistakes in our modding, if we didn't then we wouldn't need the Dispute Resolution forum - just look at how busy that place is.

1. Fine, no issue with that.
2. Should it not be a safe place for anyone, atheist or otherwise? I have no issue with the moderation of a poster who drops a firebomb and then leaves, it isnt news to anyone so dont know why you bring it up.
3. Its only one thread. Is it the first time moderation on the A&A forum has been questioned? The feedback thread would appear to say no. Do you think the reaction to this thread is going to prompt anyone to bother raising inconsistent moderation again? Despite you agreeing that you see gaps.
CatMods and admins are expected to take a look at the examples given and draw their own conclusions. Its unfortunate that one of the people involved is an admin of said forum and a regular poster there.
4. The moderators reaction on here to use minutiae of language to defend the other poster leads me to believe that any reported post would be ignored.

You said you saw gaps, have any of them been closed as a result of this thread?
No, so why would a reported post have fared any better?

GreeBo

As a newcomer to the A&A forum my overriding opinion is that its

"Welcome fellow Atheist! We will back you to the hilt!"

"Boo! stupid person with religious beliefs, as a group we will ridicule and berate you and then talk about biscuits to belittle your point, whats more we will do it with impunity"

Which, considering I am an atheist myself is a pretty damning impression for me to take away imo, hence I started this thread.

If A&A is to be run unlike any other boards forum then that's fine, I'll just steer clear in future.

Turtwig

GreeBo wrote: »

"Welcome fellow Atheist! We will back you to the hilt!"

Err no no we won't. In fact, it's forum policy to bias towards minority opinions as much as is reasonably possible. The entire moderation of the thread this thread is based on is inherently biased against the op.

Regarding the other feedback threads here on a and a. They're started by posters who, if it were most other fora on boards would have been banned and consequently no right to a feedback thread. We try out best to give everyone a chance to adjust to dialectics.

That isn't to dismiss their feedback, it's just pointing out that because the forum is incredibly lenient when action is taken someone is always going to feel they were hard done by. Few actually realise just how much leniency they are given.

current mod actions in thread were
One day ban and yellow card for ignoring mod instruction: poster kept continually being obtuse and resurrecting posts that were deleted because they were patently off topic and derailing.

Banning of weathering

Carding of a user for an accumulation of very frequent warning in a and a threads for playing the player and not the ball.

Editing of a post to protect boards for legal reasons and the poster of that poster.

C'est tout.

If the forum was biased towards atheists, why weren't the rather obvious religious posters carded? Two newbies in particular.

Mr E

Closing this thread now as it has reached the point where people are repeating themselves and past grievances are being dragged up. There's clearly nothing more to be gained by leaving it open to more of the same.