Over zealous, and inconsistent modding on the politics cafe forum.

Pasta411

What's it matter if you get banned anyway, can't you set up another account??

dudara

Pasta411 wrote: »

What's it matter if you get banned anyway, can't you set up another account??

Setting up a new account to evade a ban automatically qualifies for a permanent site ban. If you have a temporary ban from one forum, it's far better to serve it out, rather than re-regging.

Stheno

Pasta411 wrote: »

What's it matter if you get banned anyway, can't you set up another account??

Not if it's to get over a ban tbh.

Tell me, have you had previous banned accounts on boards?

Special Circumstances

It's a trap!

Stheno

Special Circumstances wrote: »

It's a trap!

Ah jeez give over.

It's against the rules to rereg to avoid a ban.

Widdershins

Pasta411 wrote: »

What's it matter if you get banned anyway, can't you set up another account??

Personally I would be put off the site if I felt the ban was unfair, which is probably how most people feel about their ban!

If I were to get banned it from a very rapid accumulation of infractions I wouldn't be back to the site, either way. Whether I deserved it or not.

Special Circumstances

Stheno wrote: »

Ah jeez give over.

It's against the rules to rereg to avoid a ban.

Wow I thought that star wars meme was the one thing we could all agree on on the Internet.

Stheno

Widdershins wrote: »

Personally I would be put off the site if I felt the ban was unfair, which is probably how most people feel about their ban!

If I were to get banned it from a very rapid accumulation of infractions I wouldn't be back to the site, either way. Whether I deserved it or not.

To be fair, it's very very rare to get banned straight up, that usually applies to people who have previously been banned and are rereging to get over that ban, there is one such person who has had several thousand accounts.

There are also different kind of bans.

In relation to the immigration thread in the politics cafe, any breach of the charter is subject to a, ban, but only from the forum itself, not from boards, and generally it starts off as a one day ban so people can reconsider their posts.

For some posters who have a persistent record of infractions and bans they face further sanctions.

You have two infractions on that thread and any further breaches of the rule on that thread will likely lead to you getting a one day ban from posting in the cafe forum, but hopefully you've realised why you got the infractions, so that won't occur.

If you think you've been unfairly sanctioned, you also have the Dispute Resolution forum to go to, where you can argue your point.

jameorahiely

Stheno wrote: »

To be fair, it's very very rare to get banned straight up, that usually applies to people who have previously been banned and are rereging to get over that ban, there is one such person who has had several thousand accounts.

.....

If you think you've been unfairly sanctioned, you also have the Dispute Resolution forum to go to, where you can argue your point.

I got a ban for asking a question (not on politics), brought it to dispute resolution. Admin didn't even read what was wrote. Accused me of saying something else (even though what was said was quoted in the thread), upheld the ban and closed the dr thread.


The ban I recieved was later brought up by posters in another thread and I was told by mod if I didnt like it, stop posting. The posters that brought up my ban in an AH thread wheren't given any sanction, although the mod did tell them on thread it was a dickish thing to do.
A total farce :rolleyes:

Stheno

jameorahiely wrote: »

I got a ban for asking a question (not on politics), brought it to dispute resolution. Admin didn't even read what was wrote. Accused me of sayimg something else (even though what was said was quoted in the thread), upheld the ban and closed the dr thtead.


The ban I recieved was the brought up by posters in another thread and I was told if I ddidnt like it, stop posting. The posters that brought up my ban im an AH thread wheren't given any sanction, although the mod did tell them on thread it was a dickish thing to do.
A total farce :rolleyes:

Bring it up on another thread, this one is about politics tbh.

jameorahiely

Stheno wrote: »

Bring it up on another thread, this one is about politics tbh.

I was adressing your point about bans and the dispute resolution process.


But whatever

Stheno

jameorahiely wrote: »

I was adressing your point about bans and the dispute resolution process.


But whatever

This is a thread about moderation in the politics forums and you keep bringing up other forums.

Start a new thread.

Widdershins

I can't take issue with the two infractions in light of the moderator warnings about immediate bans, but what I am a bit concerned about is something Alf mentions in the OP here. I tend to only post in After Hours because of its informality and Politics Cafe because I had a similar idea to Alf's about it being a more lighthearted section of the Politics forum. The point about backing up claims with links is perfectly fair, but what about lighthearted comments? Are they allowed or is the Politics Cafe more formal than I thought?
I mean comments that don't contain any claims.

jackofalltrades

Quin_Dub wrote: »

It's got nothing to do with "unacceptable views" and everything to do with "unacceptable ways of expressing their views"

No there definitely are unacceptable views on this website.
You can clearly see that through the saga that is the moderation of migration threads.
Threads seem to be closed or moved when they aren't going the way Boards.ie wants.

So - tl;dr - I couldn't care less what your opinions or political persuasions are , but if you aren't prepared to operate within the guidelines then expect to be sanctioned.

But I've already show that this is not the case.
A poster made a claim without backing it up and wasn't infracted.
Has it gotten to the stage where every claim no matter how obvious and widely accepted has to have a link attached to it or you get a red card?
You've brought in vague rules with severe punishments for transgressions and ignored people when they asked for clarification.
It seems like the new rules are designed to scare people off posting in the thread.

ancapailldorcha

jackofalltrades wrote: »

No there definitely are unacceptable views on this website.
You can clearly see that through the saga that is the moderation of migration threads.
Threads seem to be closed or moved when they aren't going the way Boards.ie wants.

We leave them open. We want people to debate constructively, that's why. When people say that we only want certain views, it makes it difficult for us to engage as we're already in the wrong in your eyes.

Pasta411

dudara wrote: »

Setting up a new account to evade a ban automatically qualifies for a permanent site ban. If you have a temporary ban from one forum, it's far better to serve it out, rather than re-regging.

If your banned for good I meant though?

Crann na Beatha

This post has been deleted.

Stheno

Widdershins wrote: »

I can't take issue with the two infractions in light of the moderator warnings about immediate bans, but what I am a bit concerned about is something Alf mentions in the OP here. I tend to only post in After Hours because of its informality and Politics Cafe because I had a similar idea to Alf's about it being a more lighthearted section of the Politics forum. The point about backing up claims with links is perfectly fair, but what about lighthearted comments? Are they allowed or is the Politics Cafe more formal than I thought?
I mean comments that don't contain any claims.

The PC charter states:

This forum is for discussion of Politics in a less formal manner than in the Politics Forum. A certain amount of light hearted banter is allowed but this is not to be confused with derogatory comments. Light discussion though does not mean light moderation, the site rules, FAQ and charter all still apply and should posters breach those rules they must accept that the mods can and will action as appropriate.

The normal rules of the site are valid here. You can find these in the FAQ and Terms of Use.

That should answer your question.

Crann na Beatha

This post has been deleted.

Stheno

jackofalltrades wrote: »

No there definitely are unacceptable views on this website.
You can clearly see that through the saga that is the moderation of migration threads.
Threads seem to be closed or moved when they aren't going the way Boards.ie wants.

But I've already show that this is not the case.
A poster made a claim without backing it up and wasn't infracted.
Has it gotten to the stage where every claim no matter how obvious and widely accepted has to have a link attached to it or you get a red card?
You've brought in vague rules with severe punishments for transgressions and ignored people when they asked for clarification.
It seems like the new rules are designed to scare people off posting in the thread.

Back up your posts and you will be fine

Pasta411 wrote: »

If your banned for good I meant though?

Yes if you are banned for good re reging is an auto ban

Crann na Beatha wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

As someone else who identifies as right wing on taxes and immigration and am anti Sinn Fein as can be seen from my posts, and my recent posts in the immigrant thread, I ask the same.

Crann na Beatha wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

No he didn't.

So so far we have mods being classed as left wing or pro immigration when not when that is not the caser

Next we will all be pro sinn fein

CrazyHorseFrog

Do mods get paid for doing all this work or what is in it for them?

Special Circumstances

jameorahiely wrote: »

I was adressing your point about bans and the dispute resolution process.


But whatever

Indeed. Proffering the kangaroo court as the last check and balance against unfair sanctions is a bit naive. Somebody mentioned posters "rule lawyering" back along... dispute resolution is the greatest example of it on the whole site.

Going to Dispute Resolution is only cutting off your nose to spite your face. You'll rattle a few cages if you're lucky but boy will you pay for it. And the result is a foregone conclusion. Thanks to rule lawyering. Or just plain selective and biased review of the situation.

"Well you said this xxyyzzz, decision upheld, thread closed no comebacks naaaaaa"

Actually I didn't say that. At all. You knowingly misrepresented my post and then shut the thread before I could point that out. How professional and mature.

Stheno

CrazyHorseFrog wrote: »

Do mods get paid for doing all this work or what is in it for them?

No it's a voluntary thing

CrazyHorseFrog

Stheno wrote: »

No it's a voluntary thing

Do you really find it that enjoyable of a pass time modding…? I personally fail to see what anyone gets out of it

Stheno

CrazyHorseFrog wrote: »

Do you really find it that enjoyable of a pass time modding…? I personally fail to see what anyone gets out of it

Well to be honest what I enjoy is:
1. I contribute to an online community
2. I get to encourage people to voice opinions
3. I get to advise on moderate debate, and to counter extreme opinion which detracts from moderate posters contributing.

So yes I enjoy moderating, just tonight I posted in quite an anti immigration way that I expect people being granted refugee status to be vetted.


Yet I'll still have people claiming I'm left wing

If we weren't around to moderate imo boards would be a worse place.

dudara

OK - it's time to remind us all that this thread is for discussion of the Politics Cafe forum, not other topics. Let's try to stick to one topic at a time.

No further off topic posts please.

dudara

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

CrazyHorseFrog

<SNIP> Off topic

Stheno

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Report the posts?
You can't expect action without reporting.

What forum is that post from?

Lovely Bloke

Widdershins wrote: »

I can't take issue with the two infractions in light of the moderator warnings about immediate bans, but what I am a bit concerned about is something Alf mentions in the OP here. I tend to only post in After Hours because of its informality and Politics Cafe because I had a similar idea to Alf's about it being a more lighthearted section of the Politics forum. The point about backing up claims with links is perfectly fair, but what about lighthearted comments? Are they allowed or is the Politics Cafe more formal than I thought?
I mean comments that don't contain any claims.

they aren't allowed.