Moderating in Radio.

Gits_bone

There's a massive problem in moderating the radio forum.

I'm a keen supporter of Ray D'arcy. Love his show. His thread is full of people abusing him for his height, giving out about his salary, his button pressing, his interest in running and healthy living.

There is no discussion of his show. It's a Ray D'arcy thread and not a Ray D'arcy Show thread. I was sick of this so I set one up.

Immediately I get a red card and told "DON'T DO THIS TYPE OF THING AGAIN!".

Fast forward to today and "Harry Angstrom" replies to my comment with "Are you Ray D'arcys PR agent or a director of RTE Radio 1?".

In a previous post he said he didn't like the show so I said "You'll have no trouble turning him off so".

In the OP of the thread it reads.

There will be zero tolerance in relation to the following:
1. As per Nody's earlier warning, no one is to suggest that another poster is in any way associated with Ray D'Arcy or the show - this will be a one month ban for first offence, and more severe bans subsequently (there aren't many more before it's permanent);

2. Personal abuse - fairly obvious, don't do it. Don't abuse the presenters, don't abuse each other.

3. No more "if you don't like x, then y". No more. People have to listen to the radio in work, people are entitled to listen to something they don't like. People are entitled to discuss that here. People are entitled to criticise, especially public personas, once this doesn't transcend into abuse.

4. Be civil.

So...I am left with another infraction for trying to make the thread readable.

Harry Angstrom? Well...hullaballoo conveniently deleted "the posts that break the charter" - seemingly forgetting about mine.

So Harry Angstrom doesn't get banned for a month while I am punished. Where is the zero tolerance? And this type of stinkiness goes on all over boards.

The Hill Billy

To be honest, if you wish to appeal your infraction you should do this in the Dispute Resolution forum, but only after discussing it with the mod who gave you the card. (See Step 1 in the process at the top of the page in the DR forum.)

Gits_bone

The Hill Billy wrote: »

To be honest, if you wish to appeal your infraction you should do this in the Dispute Resolution forum, but only after discussing it with the mod who gave you the card. (See Step 1 in the process at the top of the page in the DR forum.)

No I want to discuss in general how this is allowed happen.

Gits_bone

The Hill Billy wrote: »

To be honest, if you wish to appeal your infraction you should do this in the Dispute Resolution forum, but only after discussing it with the mod who gave you the card. (See Step 1 in the process at the top of the page in the DR forum.)

Also there's no point discussing with that mod when I get threats in reply such as "I'd be very slow to reply if I was you".

I had asked was the other person banned for the month because they broke the zero tolerance policy or did he just delete his post and let him away.

Orion

Gits_bone wrote: »

Also there's no point discussing with that mod when I get threats in reply such as "I'd be very slow to reply if I was you".

I had asked was the other person banned for the month because they broke the zero tolerance policy or did he just delete his post and let him away.

And if you get that type of response then you move on to Stage 2 and a CMod looks at it. That's how DRP works. The CMods are independent. Then if you're still unhappy you can ask an Admin to look it. Three levels of appeal.

As for asking if the other person was banned - tbh it's none of your business. If I talk to someone in PM or ban them it's nobody's business bar that person and the other mods of the forum. You won't get an answer to that question - and rightly so.

Gits_bone

Orion wrote: »

And if you get that type of response then you move on to Stage 2 and a CMod looks at it. That's how DRP works. The CMods are independent. Then if you're still unhappy you can ask an Admin to look it. Three levels of appeal.

As for asking if the other person was banned - tbh it's none of your business. If I talk to someone in PM or ban them it's nobody's business bar that person and the other mods of the forum. You won't get an answer to that question - and rightly so.

Yes, but then the person posted in the thread so they clearly weren't banned so that's why I set this thread up.

This thread is not about me trying to get my infraction rescinded. This is about mods deleting posts of posters who break the charter.

Lovely Bloke

Mod who's posted in this thread with stock "it's none of your business what happened to other posters" type posts, it's abundantly clear that the mod in question has moderated in a biased fashion by not implementing a rule for a poster under what is supposedly a "zero tolerance" rule break, and simply deleting the posts, brushing them under the carpet - this is a legitimate Feedback thread subject.

Why, exactly, is the poster getting what looks like special treatment? Is it tenure? Is it because the mod likes the cut of his jib, but doesn't like the cut of another poster's?

The OP here is not appealing his infraction, he just wants to give feedback on what is very, very clearly moderation that warrants feedback being given.

degrassinoel

It's not abundantly clear at all, you are making assumptions.

Gits_bone

degrassinoel wrote: »

It's not abundantly clear at all, you are making assumptions.

It's 100% like how Baldy describes it. There's no missing parts of the story or anything. That is it. It's undefendable actions from a moderator.

The Hill Billy

I agree that it warrants looking at based on the OP's version of events. It would be poor form if a zero tolerance policy was implemented selectively. But I feel that this would be better dealt with by a PM to the CMods as Orion advised earlier.

This thread is about a single incident - not a pattern of behaviour. Not site feedback IMO.

Gits_bone

The Hill Billy wrote: »

I agree that it warrants looking at based on the OP's version of events. It would be poor form if a zero tolerance policy was implemented selectively. But I feel that this would be better dealt with by a PM to the CMods as Orion advised earlier.

This thread is about a single incident - not a pattern of behaviour. Not site feedback IMO.

It's a pattern in radio from what I've seen. One mod seems to be doing it all which leaves no room for other interpretations or views.

Orion

Gits_bone wrote: »

Yes, but then the person posted in the thread so they clearly weren't banned so that's why I set this thread up.

This thread is not about me trying to get my infraction rescinded. This is about mods deleting posts of posters who break the charter.

Deleting posts that break the charter is not uncommon. You don't know what was done behind the scenes. And if something was you won't be privy to it. If you feel it's selective modding to borrow tHB's words then PM the CMods. Modding should be fair and objective - if it isn't there are avenues to follow - site Feedback isn't it.

@Baldy - "Mod who's posted in this thread with stock "it's none of your business what happened to other posters" type posts" - that's not a stock answer - it's fact. Just a few days ago I refused to engage with a poster who wanted to know about something involving another poster. It is not your business what happens with somebody else. Take the example to the workplace - if you were disciplined by your boss (written warning, docked pay, whatever) would you like the boss to tell your colleagues what he'd done? No you wouldn't. Same principle applies. I will not discuss discussions, warning, infractions, etc with anyone bar the poster concerned and the other mods of the forum.

Gits_bone

Orion wrote: »

Deleting posts that break the charter is not uncommon. You don't know what was done behind the scenes. And if something was you won't be privy to it. If you feel it's selective modding to borrow tHB's words then PM the CMods. Modding should be fair and objective - if it isn't there are avenues to follow - site Feedback isn't it.

@Baldy - "Mod who's posted in this thread with stock "it's none of your business what happened to other posters" type posts" - that's not a stock answer - it's fact. Just a few days ago I refused to engage with a poster who wanted to know about something involving another poster. It is not your business what happens with somebody else. Take the example to the workplace - if you were disciplined by your boss (written warning, docked pay, whatever) would you like the boss to tell your colleagues what he'd done? No you wouldn't. Same principle applies. I will not discuss discussions, warning, infractions, etc with anyone bar the poster concerned and the other mods of the forum.

If I went to my workplace and I did something and my co worker did something else I'd be well entitled to ask if the other person was punished or if they got away scot free.

degrassinoel

Gits_bone wrote: »

It's 100% like how Baldy describes it. There's no missing parts of the story or anything. That is it. It's undefendable actions from a moderator.

That's your side, not the moderators side and not the other party's side. you have at most 33% of the story there regardless of how it looks, it's incomplete and you can only make assumptions based on that.

I don't know what happened either, other than what you've said but even with that, i'd be making a pretty big assumption by slating the moderator/s of radio as being onesided/biased against yourself or a group of people that regularly post there.

Gits_bone

degrassinoel wrote: »

That's your side, not the moderators side and not the other party's side. you have at most 33% of the story there regardless of how it looks, it's incomplete and you can only make assumptions based on that.

I don't know what happened either, other than what you've said but even with that, i'd be making a pretty big assumption by slating the moderator/s of radio as being onesided against yourself or a group of people that regularly post there.

The facts are there. Why was his post of him breaking the charter deleted yet mine was left there to get a red card?

Same moderator gave me a red card for setting up a seperate ray d'arcy show thread. Look at the thread, it's a trainwreck. Read it and you will struggle to make out who was on the show today. It's Ray D'arcy bashing.

Moderator is just jumping at the chance to give me as many cards as quick as he can so he can ban me as I am in the minority of liking the Ray D'arcy show.

degrassinoel

Gits_bone wrote: »

The facts are there. Why was his post of him breaking the charter deleted yet mine was left there to get a red card?

No idea, and wouldnt care to speculate because i dont have all the facts from all the parties.

Gits_bone wrote: »

Same moderator gave me a red card for setting up a seperate ray d'arcy show thread. Look at the thread, it's a trainwreck. Read it and you will struggle to make out who was on the show today. It's Ray D'arcy bashing.

Fair enough, Did ye report the posts that were offtopic or in breach of the charter?

Gits_bone wrote: »

Moderator is just jumping at the chance to give me as many cards as quick as he can so he can ban me as I am in the minority of liking the Ray D'arcy show.

If that's how you see your last infraction, you should really open a DRP and have it investigated.

weisses

degrassinoel wrote: »

That's your side, not the moderators side and not the other party's side. you have at most 33% of the story there regardless of how it looks, it's incomplete and you can only make assumptions based on that.

I don't know what happened either, other than what you've said but even with that, i'd be making a pretty big assumption by slating the moderator/s of radio as being onesided/biased against yourself or a group of people that regularly post there.

What is the problem with mentioning on thread/affected post the action taken by a mod ?

Post deleted 1 month ban issued as per charter (took me 5 seconds to type)

kneemos

Gits_bone wrote: »

The facts are there. Why was his post of him breaking the charter deleted yet mine was left there to get a red card?

Same moderator gave me a red card for setting up a seperate ray d'arcy show thread. Look at the thread, it's a trainwreck. Read it and you will struggle to make out who was on the show today. It's Ray D'arcy bashing.

Moderator is just jumping at the chance to give me as many cards as quick as he can so he can ban me as I am in the minority of liking the Ray D'arcy show.

The whole forum exists for the sole purpose of bashing presenters as far as I can see.
Make any sort of positive comment and you'll be shot down.
Left it ages ago,literally couldn't take the negativity.

Gits_bone

degrassinoel wrote: »

Fair enough, Did ye report the posts that were offtopic or in breach of the charter?

Yes I did. I quote his post too and the quoted post also got deleted.

I asked the mod "Did you delete some posts?"

He said "Yes. I deleted some posts that broke the charter".

degrassinoel

weisses wrote: »

What is the problem with mentioning on thread/affected post the action taken by a mod ?

Post deleted 1 month ban issued as per charter (took me 5 seconds to type)

I occasionally do that when a topic is getting out of hand, but afaik it's at the mod's discretion and situational.

Gits_bone

degrassinoel wrote: »

I occasionally do that when a topic is getting out of hand, but afaik it's at the mod's discretion and situational.

There was just myself and himself and one or two other posters posting at the time. Wasn't a peak time.

Why is it discretional when my post got left there to be carded while his post (which according to the OP of a zero tolerance policy) was deleted? That's the problem I can see.

degrassinoel

Gits_bone wrote: »

There was just myself and himself and one or two other posters posting at the time. Wasn't a peak time.

Why is it discretional when my post got left there to be carded while his post (which according to the OP of a zero tolerance policy) was deleted? That's the problem I can see.

No idea, but i'd recommend a DRP if you feel you were right and the infraction was wrong.

weisses

degrassinoel wrote: »

I occasionally do that when a topic is getting out of hand, but afaik it's at the mod's discretion and situational.

I know its at the mods discretion .. and exactly that inconsistency creates friction

If the mod was clear about his actions in this case there wouldn't be a discussion

If someone gets infracted ..reports posts and only sees other forum charter breaking posts deleted you get this kind of perfectly legit questions/discussion imo

Gits_bone

degrassinoel wrote: »

No idea, but i'd recommend a DRP if you feel you were right and the infraction was wrong.

Once again, this is not about my infraction. This is about mods not moderating properly.

degrassinoel

weisses wrote: »

I know its at the mods discretion .. and exactly that inconsistency creates friction

If the mod was clear about his actions in this case there wouldn't be a discussion

If someone gets infracted ..reports posts and only sees other forum charter breaking posts deleted you get this kind of perfectly legit questions/discussion

One person breaks the rules, gets an infraction, nothing said on thread, leaves the thread potentially open for more of the same, yeah i get that alright but sometimes the kids that ratted you out to your mother just want to see you get a clip around the ear too.

Calhoun

So let me get this straight, you have a bug bear with the moderation of a thread in a forum and rather than speaking with the mod team you take it upon yourself to do some backseat modding and create a thread of your own.

You then baited a response from another user (from what i can see), it wasn't just the post that allude to above. Post 528 your response to was fairly antagonistic, you then follow up with the why don't you switch off and then i assume Harry's post happened. It actually looks like you have it in for Harry as you came back to one of his earlier posts twice.

Finally we then have the tone of this thread where you advise you were trying to clean up the thread. That is not your job, its the moderator teams job and they deem if the thread has gone to far and should be the first point of call for any queries.

Something tells me though anything but a blanket ban on criticism of Ray will only be accepted.

My advice is quit while you are ahead, raise a DRP if you think you have been wronged but dont go head to head with volunteers on a site doing a thankless job.

Gits_bone

Calhoun wrote: »

So let me get this straight, you have a bug bear with the moderation of a thread in a forum and rather than speaking with the mod team you take it upon yourself to do some backseat modding and create a thread of your own.

You then baited a response from another user (from what i can see), it wasn't just the post that allude to above. Post 528 your response to was fairly antagonistic, you then follow up with the why don't you switch off and then i assume Harry's post happened. It actually looks like you have it in for Harry as you came back to one of his earlier posts twice.

Finally we then have the tone of this thread where you advise you were trying to clean up the thread. That is not your job, its the moderator teams job and they deem if the thread has gone to far and should be the first point of call for any queries.

Something tells me though anything but a blanket ban on criticism of Ray will only be accepted.

My advice is quit while you are ahead, raise a DRP if you think you have been wronged but dont go head to head with volunteers on a site doing a thankless job.

My reply to that post was anything but antagonistic. But even if it was, is that an excuse for getting away with breaking the charter?

And no, the thread is full of criticism of Ray. The problem here is a difference in moderation towards one poster than another.

Orion

Gits_bone wrote: »

If I went to my workplace and I did something and my co worker did something else I'd be well entitled to ask if the other person was punished or if they got away scot free.

Correct - you're entitled to ask. But that's all your entitled to. The most any boss would (or should) tell you it's being dealt with. Anything else is none of your business.

You've been told what you need to do a few times now. If you're unhappy with the mods and feel that they are being unfair then PM the CMods. I don't know what else it is you're looking for.

Calhoun

I assume as a moderator its a sum of the individual parts they look at and not one incident in isolation. As far as i can see from looking at it from the outside you were baiting, maybe not intentionally but the language on your first post was off.

Its your opinion that it is full of criticism but what do the mods think?

Gits_bone

Calhoun wrote: »

I assume as a moderator its a sum of the individual parts they look at and not one incident in isolation. As far as i can see from looking at it from the outside you were baiting, maybe not intentionally but the language on your first post was off.

Its your opinion that it is full of criticism but what do the mods think?

You see that's the problem. The moderator is always right. How can this be? They can't always be right.

You're not seeing the facts - you're seeing the moderator doing the right thing.

Harry Angstrom

Wow, talk about a one-sided argument here. I made a comment regarding the Ray D'Arcy show, which I am perfectly entitled to do, and which had nothing to do with the OP. This Gits person then proceeded to give a response (directed at me) akin to the "if you don't like it, don't listen to it" variety, which, funnily enough is also a matter which will be treated with zero tolerance:

3. No more "if you don't like x, then y". No more. People have to listen to the radio in work, people are entitled to listen to something they don't like. People are entitled to discuss that here. People are entitled to criticise, especially public personas, once this doesn't transcend into abuse.

After I responded, this guy Gits, replied "Bad Move", a bit of back-seat modding there, which is also not allowed. It was obvious that this guy was going to report my post in order to see that I would be banned.

This Gits person doesn't seem to realise that the Ray D'Arcy thread is not a hagiographical piece. People are fully entitled to give their opinion of the show - be it positive or negative feedback.