Boards is becoming a Ghost Town

Mr E

intheclouds wrote: »

another poster made a very similar comment and was not infracted.

Someone reported your post as abuse, so it was dealt with. Maybe that other similar post wasn't reported?

I don't want to sound like a broken record here, but if a post is abusive or offensive, REPORT IT.

I don't know your reason for taking the moral high ground and not wanting to report posts, but mods are not omniscient - report the post and if it's actionable, it will be dealt with (the same way your's was).

muffler

intheclouds wrote: »

Seems like youd rather waste time searching my history to see if you can make me look bad rather than take the feedback on board which is typical of the attitude round here when posters give legitimate feedback.

Genuine feedback is always welcome but constant whinging about an infraction is something that isn't going to endear you to many people posting in this thread.

That's just an observation and not a criticism.

intheclouds

muffler wrote: »

Genuine feedback is always welcome but constant whinging about an infraction is something that isn't going to endear you to many people posting in this thread.

That's just an observation and not a criticism.

This is a nice opportunity to point out why moderators contribute to a problem.

(a) - Im not "whinging"
(b) - Im not "whinging" about an infraction, I am complaining about inconsistent modding.
(c) - This is feedback so if I cannot complain here, then where can I? Im not trying to "endear" myself to anyone - I dont even really know what you mean by that? Ive already stated that the mod in question didnt even have the decency to respond to my pm so where else is there to bring this up? You want to know why Boards is turning into a ghost town - this is one of the reasons why.
(d) - Maybe itd be better for everyone if you made your criticisms constructively without the use of the term "whinging" which you are simply using to be patronising and/or dismissive.

Chorus_suck

This post has been deleted.

Chorus_suck

This post has been deleted.

intheclouds

Id like to clarify that the mod finally replied to my pm and immediately referenced a past account of mine - so dont tell me theyre not checking out your past history and punishing you for the past and not the present.

Skylinehead

intheclouds wrote: »

Id like to clarify that the mod finally replied to my pm and immediately referenced a past account of mine - so dont tell me theyre not checking out your past history and punishing you for the past and not the present.

That was always the case. You can't just close an account and expect to start with a clean slate on a new one, or the persistent trolls would have a field day.

intheclouds

Skylinehead wrote: »

That was always the case. You can't just close an account and expect to start with a clean slate on a new one, or the persistent trolls would have a field day.

The point is - it should not be the case.

If you are being punished for something (in this particular case I have been singled out unfairly but thats a different "whinge"), then you should be punished for the rule break and not for past transgressions (regardless of what account they are on).

If Im getting an infraction for personal abuse then why does the mod decide to throw in "you had an infraction here once on a previous account" - how is it relevant? Any previous account of mine is well over a year old at this stage so I genuinely cannot see why the mod would reference it, why it would matter, why it is being brought up at all - except as some kind of "youre a naughty child" admonishment.

Suryavarman

intheclouds wrote: »

The point is - it should not be the case.

If you are being punished for something (in this particular case I have been singled out unfairly but thats a different "whinge"), then you should be punished for the rule break and not for past transgressions (regardless of what account they are on).

If Im getting an infraction for personal abuse then why does the mod decide to throw in "you had an infraction here once on a previous account" - how is it relevant? Any previous account of mine is well over a year old at this stage so I genuinely cannot see why the mod would reference it, why it would matter, why it is being brought up at all - except as some kind of "youre a naughty child" admonishment.

Should trolls that have racked up numerous infractions, or have even been banned, be allowed to re-reg and have their past transgressions forgotten?

intheclouds

Suryavarman wrote: »

Should trolls that have racked up numerous infractions, or have even been banned, be allowed to re-reg and have their past transgressions forgotten?

Ok - point taken on people who are a constant issue.

But to be having it brought up when the last time you had an infraction was a year or more ago? Come on??? Surely you can see that that is just an abuse of power?

Timberrrrrrrr

intheclouds wrote: »

The point is - it should not be the case.

If you are being punished for something (in this particular case I have been singled out unfairly but thats a different "whinge"), then you should be punished for the rule break and not for past transgressions (regardless of what account they are on).

If Im getting an infraction for personal abuse then why does the mod decide to throw in "you had an infraction here once on a previous account" - how is it relevant? Any previous account of mine is well over a year old at this stage so I genuinely cannot see why the mod would reference it, why it would matter, why it is being brought up at all - except as some kind of "youre a naughty child" admonishment.

Kinda have to agree with you here.

Have had warnings/infractuons/bans myself in the pasthe, most deserved but some I think not. When PM'ING the mods about these at the time you get told "ah sure it's only a warning, a virtual slap on the wrist and doesn't go on record" another one is "bans expire and are removed from record" yet anyone who has ever read the prison or DRP forum knows that the first thing bought up by mods/administration is "you have had xxx warnings xxx infractions and xxx bans"

There have been cases in prison/DRP where mods have bought up the fact someone received a ban in xxx forum yet never take into account that the ban was several years previous! It seems that ANY mark against you stays with you forever just waiting to get dragged up if you end up in wither of those threads.

intheclouds

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Kinda have to agree with you here.

Have had warnings/infractuons/bans myself in the pasthe, most deserved but some I think not. When PM'ING the mods about these at the time you get told "ah sure it's only a warning, a virtual slap on the wrist and doesn't go on record" another one is "bans expire and are removed from record" yet anyone who has ever read the prison or DRP forum knows that the first thing bought up by mods/administration is "you have had xxx warnings xxx infractions and xxx bans"

There have been cases in prison/DRP where mods have bought up the fact someone received a ban in xxx forum yet never take into account that the ban was several years previous! It seems that ANY mark against you stays with you forever just waiting to get dragged up if you end up in wither of those threads.

Yep. Id never use DRP again because of it. You see it over and over.

LoLth

intheclouds wrote: »

Id like to clarify that the mod finally replied to my pm and immediately referenced a past account of mine - so dont tell me theyre not checking out your past history and punishing you for the past and not the present.

wait. Are you suggesting that a users past posting history and behavior should not be taken into account when dealing with them now? So any poster should be able to post whatever they want, anywhere they want and, if they delete their account and sign up again all is forgiven?

I see a lot of past mod/admin behaviour being criticised here (including one from 5 years ago that is actually a good example of Admins taking user feedback on board and making changes based on it) . Should the same not apply to both groups? is this not a double standard as well?

while I'm here, Chorus_Suck , I'm sorry you had an issue in the past however, as it stands you claim cannot be confirmed and so is just hearsay. I know thats a bit catch 22 but its unfair to make a claim (such as a breach of data protection) and not support it with evidence. Again, thats a bit like what some mods are being accused of. (similarly your admission that you had another, previously registered, account to fall back on would be unconfirmed).

I'm not disregarding the feedback or opinion here but I think users need to be aware that feedback can be contradictory or sometimes apparently hypocritical (I know its unintended but on the face of it some users can be just as guilty of do as I say and not as I do as they claim the mod/admin to be).

As for actions not being taken on threads: mods dont read all threads all the time. sometimes, threads can grow very quickly and make it difficult for mods to catch up so they have to skim and in doing so can miss issues. If you report a post, then the mod knows where to look and that there is an issue. This is a good example of contradictory feedback. some users are requesting less moderation, that threads be allowed flow and discussion be allowed evolve unhindered. But in the same feedback thread a mod is getting blamed for not interjecting. Yes, I know its possibly an extreme example in this instance but which is preferred? no moderation of a thread or active management of the content? Should mods only respond to reported posts? in which case how can someone complain about moderation if they dont report posts? Should moderators post mod warnings to keep it on topic and act as a reminder or should they card posts that have gone too far as an indicator to others about what is and is not acceptable? Where do mods draw the line between discussion and soapboxing? where does an opinion stop and pontificating begin? Where is the line between determined defense of an ideal and aggressive determination not to compromise? (these are honest questions by the way). As things stand, mods have to decide these things based on the current forum, the current thread, the users involved in that thread now and from its beginning and how those users have interacted in the past. I am in no way claiming mods are infallible, given all the variables here we get it wrong sometimes. The issue though isnt getting it wrong, its minimising the number of times that we get it wrong, its consistency. If boards was one big forum then that would make things easier but each forum is a mini community of their own , each with their own standards of interaction and code of conduct (with a common baseline) , new mods in particular find the balance difficult to get used to. Thing is, this all leads to inconsistency in decisions, or at least perceived inconsistencies. If mod A issues a card for a post and Mod B doesnt, its not necessarily inconsistency. However, if the same happens and both posts are in the same forum and the mod clearly dealt with both posts and the situations are similar if not the same (same posters, topics, maybe even same thread in response to similar statements) then yes, thats inconsistent and something that needs to be flagged to a cmod, possibly through the DRP - or via a calm PM that shows or links to the evidence that shows why you think it is inconsistent. Its the only way a mod is going to learn the balance and get better at modding - which will in turn make the forum better for users

I guess the point of my post here is to remind users that we should be using feedback to make the site better (admins should not ignore feedback and users should not just use it to re-visit personal gripes unless they are relevant).

LoLth

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Kinda have to agree with you here.

Have had warnings/infractuons/bans myself in the pasthe, most deserved but some I think not. When PM'ING the mods about these at the time you get told "ah sure it's only a warning, a virtual slap on the wrist and doesn't go on record" another one is "bans expire and are removed from record" yet anyone who has ever read the prison or DRP forum knows that the first thing bought up by mods/administration is "you have had xxx warnings xxx infractions and xxx bans"

There have been cases in prison/DRP where mods have bought up the fact someone received a ban in xxx forum yet never take into account that the ban was several years previous! It seems that ANY mark against you stays with you forever just waiting to get dragged up if you end up in wither of those threads.

So someone who has a history of personal abuse of other posters should be treated the same as a poster who has been nothing but polite but had one bad day when they lost it ?

Which one do you think should be given another chance? Which is more likely to just ignore the warning and resort to personal abuse when they feel like it?

I will admit, I do look at poster histories when I have dealings with them in DRP or feedback. For feedback it can help determine if their opinion should be trusted or if it should be maybe checked out before taken as a genuine issue. For example, a poster complaining about lack of freedom in a forum that has multiple bans from that forum for obviously actionable posting might not be as trustworthy or objective as the same feedback from a user with no history of transgression but a similar level of posting activity.

I'd like to see a link to a DRP where a very old transgression was brought up and used against a poster? I do think history should expire/fade with a timeframe based on severity / total at one time but generally (and I do mean generally) a history is only brought up if it indicates a pattern or if the single incident was severe or memorable

for example:

poster: "that ban was from a year ago"

mod: you posted a link beastiality pr0n

poster: I told you it was a mistake!

mod: and this time?


One suggestion that was made here that I do like is making it easier for users to see their own history - not that of other posters. That way, maybe a poster will be more aware of their own behaviour and make an effort to make a change themselves before it becomes an issue.

intheclouds

LoLth wrote: »

wait. Are you suggesting that a users past posting history and behavior should not be taken into account when dealing with them now? So any poster should be able to post whatever they want, anywhere they want and, if they delete their account and sign up again all is forgiven?

Not if its not relevant - its just used as a stick to beat posters with. A single infraction in a forum more than a year previous is not relevant to an infraction today so why is it brought up at all except to be a dick?

LoLth wrote: »

But in the same feedback thread a mod is getting blamed for not interjecting. Yes, I know its possibly an extreme example in this instance but which is preferred? no moderation of a thread or active management of the content? Should mods only respond to reported posts? in which case how can someone complain about moderation if they dont report posts? Should moderators post mod warnings to keep it on topic and act as a reminder or should they card posts that have gone too far as an indicator to others about what is and is not acceptable?

This is quite a wall of text but I am complaining because I was singled out and treated unfairly. Another comment very similar to mine was not infracted.

I pointed this out to the mod in pm and basically got short shrift (which is pretty much all Ive ever received via pm with a mod). The mod at this point doesnt give two hoots because now its become about them being right (as usual). They decided to further admonish me by bringing up something irrelevant from over a year ago. Oh and to throw in a few digs about I should think about things. But no addressing the point I was making at all.

Oh the final joy was the suggestion of the DRP which is (as pointed out above) a waste of time.

Its the inconsistency and unfairness that does my head in personally. That and the fact that a user is never treated well via pm despite being encouraged to "drop the mod a pm".

intheclouds

LoLth wrote: »

So someone who has a history of personal abuse of other posters should be treated the same as a poster who has been nothing but polite but had one bad day when they lost it ?

How is one previous incident over a year ago a "history"?

But now, its going to be 2 infractions with the previous one supporting the new one and then next time itll be cited as "history" when its anything but.

Edward Hopper

I think there's something to be said for warnings and infractions having an expiry date. Forum bans could still be permanent if necessary, and a note about serious indiscretions or abuse etc could be left.

3 years (a figure plucked from an orifice) seems like a decent length of time for warnings and infractions then they disappear, or are discounted at least when mentioning a posters history if it would be too difficult to implement (maybe whilst the ongoing fuppin up of the appearance of the site they could include time limited bans).

LoLth

intheclouds wrote: »

Not if its not relevant - its just used as a stick to beat posters with. A single infraction in a forum more than a year previous is not relevant to an infraction today so why is it brought up at all except to be a dick?

I don't know the post you are referring to (you may be surprised to learn that I haven't looked at your history). However, if you feel a mod is not taking you seriously or is being unfair toward you then I would suggest that you contact a co-mod for a second opinion or a cmod.

This is quite a wall of text

sorry!

but I am complaining because I was singled out and treated unfairly. Another comment very similar to mine was not infracted.

as I said, inconsistencies can happen. It would be great to keep them to a minumum though. You say a comment that you think is similar to your was not infracted so some questions:

are you sure it is similar to yours when taken in context?

How similar? sentiment/ language used / post it was responding to?

Could the mod just have missed it? did you point the mod to the post in question in your PM? (if you want you can send me a link to your post and the post you feel is similar and I'll give it a look for you).

I pointed this out to the mod in pm and basically got short shrift (which is pretty much all Ive ever received via pm with a mod).

what you consider short shrift a busy mod may consider all the time they have to give to an issue. Unless you mean a mod being impolite in which case how amny mods have you had dealings with? they cant all have been impolite and if they were, have you given consideration that they may be responding to a wrongly perceived tone?

The mod at this point doesnt give two hoots because now its become about them being right (as usual). They decided to further admonish me by bringing up something irrelevant from over a year ago. Oh and to throw in a few digs about I should think about things. But no addressing the point I was making at all.

Please report the PM and the admins will take a look. Things have changed quite a bit over the years and one of those changes is in how mods are asked to interact with posters by PM.

Oh the final joy was the suggestion of the DRP which is (as pointed out above) a waste of time.

DRP has been quite successful for many posters. It gives the opportunity to clarify your point of view and hopefully get a better explanation of the issue that was found with your post. In all honesty, the content you posted here would already have been enough for a DRP to be reviewed by a Cmod.

Its the inconsistency

I agree. it is something we need to work on but as I said, it is a byproduct of the nature of the forums. This is not the first time its come up and admin/cmods and mods all agree that we need to address it, if for no other reason than the mods' sanity as they try to remember what is acceptable where

and unfairness that does my head in personally.

unfairness would need DRP, its why its there. It also helps mods and cmods determine how best to work at achieving consistency.

That and the fact that a user is never treated well via pm despite being encouraged to "drop the mod a pm".

as I said, report the PM and I'll take a look for you. I do encourage posters to politely PM a mod because I expect the mod to politely respond.

LoLth

Edward Hopper wrote: »

3 years .

:O

I was thinking in terms of months! I like your way of thinking! wanna be an admin?

Tipperary Fairy

intheclouds wrote: »

How is one previous incident over a year ago a "history"?

But now, its going to be 2 infractions with the previous one supporting the new one and then next time itll be cited as "history" when its anything but.

Careful itc, you're going to get a name as a troublemaker with all your infractions and your 'whinging'

Tipperary Fairy

LoLth wrote: »

I don't know the post you are referring to (you may be surprised to learn that I haven't looked at your history). However, if you feel a mod is not taking you seriously or is being unfair toward you then I would suggest that you contact a co-mod for a second opinion or a cmod.

sorry!

as I said, inconsistencies can happen. It would be great to keep them to a minumum though. You say a comment that you think is similar to your was not infracted so some questions:

are you sure it is similar to yours when taken in context?

How similar? sentiment/ language used / post it was responding to?

Could the mod just have missed it? did you point the mod to the post in question in your PM? (if you want you can send me a link to your post and the post you feel is similar and I'll give it a look for you).

what you consider short shrift a busy mod may consider all the time they have to give to an issue. Unless you mean a mod being impolite in which case how amny mods have you had dealings with? they cant all have been impolite and if they were, have you given consideration that they may be responding to a wrongly perceived tone?

Please report the PM and the admins will take a look. Things have changed quite a bit over the years and one of those changes is in how mods are asked to interact with posters by PM.

DRP has been quite successful for many posters. It gives the opportunity to clarify your point of view and hopefully get a better explanation of the issue that was found with your post. In all honesty, the content you posted here would already have been enough for a DRP to be reviewed by a Cmod.

I agree. it is something we need to work on but as I said, it is a byproduct of the nature of the forums. This is not the first time its come up and admin/cmods and mods all agree that we need to address it, if for no other reason than the mods' sanity as they try to remember what is acceptable where

unfairness would need DRP, its why its there. It also helps mods and cmods determine how best to work at achieving consistency.

as I said, report the PM and I'll take a look for you. I do encourage posters to politely PM a mod because I expect the mod to politely respond.

= WE'VE DONE NOTHING WRONG

intheclouds

Tipperary Fairy wrote: »

Careful itc, you're going to get a name as a troublemaker with all your infractions and your 'whinging'

Previous history of mine has already been brought up in this very thread to try and discredit me!!

But yes, apparently Im just a "whinger".

intheclouds

LoLth wrote: »

I don't know...

LoLth - you must operate in a different world to me.

In truth Ive had a positive experience with a mod via pm, maybe twice in many years. Ive had about 10 times as many negative experiences. Contacting higher ups tends to result in wagon circling.

DRP doesnt work and is there to make users grovel.

Those are my experiences.

LoLth

Tipperary Fairy wrote: »

= WE'VE DONE NOTHING WRONG

I'm offering to help and I'm trying to address the feedback that has been given. do you have actual feedback that you would like to give or do you just want to interpret my responses in a way that lets you continue to be outraged?

LoLth

intheclouds wrote: »

LoLth - you must operate in a different world to me.

its a possibility

In truth Ive had a positive experience with a mod via pm, maybe twice in many years. Ive had about 10 times as many negative experiences. Contacting higher ups tends to result in wagon circling.

I dont think I'm participating or instigating any wagon circling here. I also dont think it very helpful for you to automatically assume thats whats going to happen if you do accept my offer of help. Im not saying I am going to agree with your position, I may well agree with the mod's take on things but I do promise to give you some honest feedback and , if there is an issue from the mod side of things, I would be certain to bring it to their attention.

DRP doesnt work and is there to make users grovel.

I think this discussion was had before several years ago and at the time I went through DRP and tallied up the outcomes of each request. the majority of requests resulted in the mod agreeing that the punishment should be reduced. Maybe this is something that should be revisited so we can see if the trend has continued that way in recent years.

Those are my experiences.

and I'm not arguing against that. I'm offering you help in the form of a fresh perspective. (I've been away from boards for a fair while now and I'm easing back into things so I havent grown my asbestos outer layer just yet).

Skylinehead

intheclouds wrote: »

The point is - it should not be the case.

If you are being punished for something (in this particular case I have been singled out unfairly but thats a different "whinge"), then you should be punished for the rule break and not for past transgressions (regardless of what account they are on).

If Im getting an infraction for personal abuse then why does the mod decide to throw in "you had an infraction here once on a previous account" - how is it relevant? Any previous account of mine is well over a year old at this stage so I genuinely cannot see why the mod would reference it, why it would matter, why it is being brought up at all - except as some kind of "youre a naughty child" admonishment.

Well that's a time issue, not a "previous account" issue. I do agree that they should expire eventually, however long that is, I have no idea.

intheclouds

Skylinehead wrote: »

Well that's a time issue, not a "previous account" issue. I do agree that they should expire eventually, however long that is, I have no idea.

Yeah either way, infractions on current or previous accounts.

The history getting thrown back at a user is why people pm and go to drp and try to get it fixed - because otherwise it just gets used against them later.

If that didnt happen I bet people would just accept infractions and move on. The current system is a timesink.

KERSPLAT!

intheclouds wrote: »

Yeah either way, infractions on current or previous accounts.

The history getting thrown back at a user is why people pm and go to drp and try to get it fixed - because otherwise it just gets used against them later.

If that didnt happen I bet people would just accept infractions and move on. The current system is a timesink.

They would accept them and move on because they would be meaningless. Why would a mod bother to issue a card if it has no bearing on anything? It would be pointless to issue them at all.

With regards to them having a time limit, I would agree. Like penalty points I suppose, maybe after 6 months yellows disappear and 12 months for a red. I'm not sure about bans.

intheclouds

KERSPLAT! wrote: »

They would accept them and move on because they would be meaningless. Why would a mod bother to issue a card if it has no bearing on anything? It would be pointless to issue them at all.

So is the point of the card system just to use infractions against users as a historical stick to beat them with for months or years after a specific infraction?

Or what is it for exactly?

KERSPLAT!

I suppose, again, it's the same as penalty points. They are to act as a deterrent when there's a breach in the charter. Rack up enough "points" and soon enough will come a ban.Thread warnings, thread bans, cards and bans are all used. If you continue to receive warnings, cards and bans then they are, IMO, relevant. You, in the general sense, are not understanding the charter and are continuing to breach it. If you continue then it should be expected that actions will escalate.

As I said, I agree with a time limit on these cards.