Unwarranted warning and mod overreach

First Up

Some strange behaviour by the Mod ancapailldorcha in the discussion on the US Presidential Race in International Politics. Several posts (mine and others) have been deleted for being "one liners" (as if being succinct was an offence) and a discussion about Donald Trump's business failures was cut short on the grounds that it was not relevant to a discussion on his presidential candidacy!

On top of that I then get a warning for being uncivil over a post in which I was nothing of the sort. In brief:

A poster said someone should make a movie about all the scandals and accusations against the Clintons.

I asked is this not what Fox News was for?

A poster replied, referring to Fox News as "Faux News"

I replied in kind saying maybe Fox News should be re-named "Comedy Central".

That was it - no "uncivility", no personal abuse, nothing that could remotely be seen as warranting a warning. I took it up with the Mod in question and he replied that my "last two posts" were the problem. All of my posts (except those deleted by the Mod and which I assume are stored somewhere) are there to be seen and I defy anyone to point to anything that merits this accusation. It is also ridiculous to have a discussion that is 100% on topic (Trump's record in business) terminated.

Either this Mod doesn't understand the subject of the forum he is moderating, or he is abusing his position by deleting posts with views contrary to his own.

Toots

Hello First Up,

Can you please forward me the PM exchange between yourself and the mod in question?

Thanks

First Up

Toots wrote: »

Hello First Up,

Can you please forward me the PM exchange between yourself and the mod in question?

Thanks

How do I do that? Each message seems to be separate.

First Up

Toots wrote: »

Hello First Up,

Can you please forward me the PM exchange between yourself and the mod in question?

Thanks

I'm sure there is a better way but below is a cut & paste of the exchange of PM, starting from the first. I have put my inputs in bold. Unfortunately it is still not that easy to see who said what etc. Perhaps the Mod in question has a record you could examine more easily?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ancapailldorcha
Dear First Up,

You have been warned for being 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. We don't want that here.

For more information please refer to the Boards.ie FAQ.



ancapailldorcha

Moderator Note

For your last 2 posts. There are multiple on thread warnings about the standard of posting.

Your post:
Quote:
Originally Posted by First Up
Quote:
Originally Posted by walshyn93
Hardy har har. Don't you mean Faux News?

Or Comedy Central.

I have not the faintest idea what you are warning me about.

Re: You have received a warning
________________________________________
Quote:

Originally Posted by First Up
Quote:Which ones?
Originally Posted by ancapailldorcha
There are multiple warnings on the thread about the standard of posting expected in Politics. It is a forum for serious debate. Your comments fell short of this standard.

The warnings are on the last few pages of the thread.
My posts are at least as objective, informed and substantive as anyone else's in this thread. I am entirely at a loss as to which of them has upset you.



Re: You have received a warning
________________________________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by ancapailldorcha
None of them has "upset" me. The posts were unconstructive and breached the issued mod warnings. I don't think I can explain it any better than that.

Well I'm sorry but that makes absolutely no sense.

Someone spoke of making a movie critical of the Clintons; I said is that not Fox News' job; someone called them "Faux News" and I replied (in kind) liking Fox News to Comedy Central.

If - among everything else posted in this discussion - you find that to be "unconstructive" and meriting a warning, I have to seriously question both your judgement and impartiality.

An earlier post in which I raised Trump's business failures as a possible issue (given his claims to be someone who "gets things done") also incurred your displeasure, even though it is 100% on topic.

These two incidents suggest that either you don't understand what we are discussing or you are bringing a partisan position to your role as a moderator.

Re: You have received a warning
________________________________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by ancapailldorcha
If you feel like the card is unfair, the next step is to begin a thread on the dispute resolution forum under Helpdesk. I don't think that I can make my position any clearer.
The card is both unfair and ridiculous and your position is extremely clear. If it was just a warning I would treat it with the contempt it deserves but as you are also arbitrarily deleting posts you don't like, I will take it up in the dispute forum when I have time.

Toots

It's ok, I can make sense of what's been posted above.

I'm looking in to this and reading through the thread in question.

First Up

Toots wrote: »

It's ok, I can make sense of what's been posted above.

I'm looking in to this and reading through the thread in question.

OK - thanks.

Toots

Ok I'm reading through the thread and see that in post #3184 ancapailldorcha posted this warning on thread:

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Can we cut out the one liners and smileys please?

You subsequently posted this:

Doesn't disguise four massive business failures.

and this:

He did - four times.

and this:

Question is, do you want a gambler as president? No Chapter 11 or bankruptcy outs available in that job.

Which prompted another mod warning in post #3198

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

This is a forum for serious debate, not one liners counting the amount of times Trump may or may not have made business errors.

Which you replied to on thread (you're on here long enough to know that questioning mods on thread is a no-no)

You don't think his track record in business has any relevance to his credibility as a presidential candidate and possible leader of the free world?

What else do you think we should judge him on - his number of wives?

I'd have given you a yellow for this TBH, you're lucky you only got another on-thread warning.

So then we have the posts that earned you the yellow card:

In response to this post

If I was Trump I'd be commissioning a world class director to make a film based on the life of the Clintons with all the names changed and include all the allegations against them.

you posted

Isn't that what Fox News is for?

and

Or Comedy Central.

This is very clearly ignoring the previous mod warnings, in addition to falling below the standard of posting required on the Politics Forum. To be perfectly honest, I think you're getting off very lightly with the yellow card. I'd have been inclined to give a red.

I had considered upgrading it to a red, however in light of the fact that your posts today have been in keeping with the forum charter, I will leave it as a yellow.

Decision: Warning upheld.

First Up

Toots wrote: »

Ok I'm reading through the thread and see that in post #3184 ancapailldorcha posted this warning on thread:



You subsequently posted this:



and this:



and this:



Which prompted another mod warning in post #3198


Which you replied to on thread (you're on here long enough to know that questioning mods on thread is a no-no)



I'd have given you a yellow for this TBH, you're lucky you only got another on-thread warning.

So then we have the posts that earned you the yellow card:

In response to this post

you posted

and


This is very clearly ignoring the previous mod warnings, in addition to falling below the standard of posting required on the Politics Forum. To be perfectly honest, I think you're getting off very lightly with the yellow card. I'd have been inclined to give a red.

I had considered upgrading it to a red, however in light of the fact that your posts today have been in keeping with the forum charter, I will leave it as a yellow.

Decision: Warning upheld.

So if I understand you correctly succinct, civil, on topic, polite posts are unacceptable because they are too short? Since when have Mods dictated how long posts should be?

Complete nonsense.

And I would also point out that the warning was for "being uncivil". Could you show me where I did that please?

Toots

You are being deliberately obtuse, my post above couldn't have been clearer. There were 2 mod warnings for people to stop posting one-liners; you persisted and therefore got carded.

The infraction system gives a drop-down menu for what reason is being applied. It is possible that "uncivil" was chosen in error. If you would prefer I can remove the current yellow and replace it with one for "ignored mod instruction".

As I already said, you got off lightly with a yellow. I will not be lifting it.

First Up

Toots wrote:

As I already said, you got off lightly with a yellow. I will not be lifting it.

So just to be clear; what is the minimum length of post allowed in this forum?

Toots

First Up wrote: »

So just to be clear; what is the minimum length of post allowed in this forum?

There isn't one. I suspect you're going to continue in this vein, and anything else I say will be useless, so I am flagging this for Admin review.

Taltos

OK, I've been following this since suggesting earlier about sending the PMs - which I removed as it didn't add to the discussion once Toots confirmed they could follow the quoted text.

First Up - while I appreciate you feel this Warning - aka slap on the wrist is unwarranted or too far I have reviewed the posts above as well as your arguments here and I am siding with the mod and cmod in this case.

Frankly unless you change how you participate fairly fast I expect to see more warnings or infractions being issued, and knowing politics your posts could very well have resulted in said infractions or bans...

So - being blunt - take some time out.
Get a feel for the forum and if you find you can't post per the expectations of Politics stay out before the mods are forced to action you.

Warning Upheld