banned from aviation forum

737max

I'd like it simply recorded on thread that I have been permanently banned by the moderator, Tenger so that other participants in the forum can draw their own conclusions.
Obviously this was a unilateral decision not discussed with the other Moderators because another moderator had the opportunity to infract me and had stated on thread it was not needed.

The other participants in the forum would have a fair idea why the moderator acted as they did.

Zaph

Are you disputing your ban or just complaining about it? If you are disputing it then please confirm that you have unsatisfactorily attempted to resolve the issue with the mod by PM. Your appeal cannot proceed without this step. If you are not disputing the ban please let me know so that the thread can be closed.

737max

The ban is totally unjustifiable. The moderators in the forum aren't even in agreement with each other and it is a unilateral action by a moderator who appears to work in the industry and is anything buy impartial.
I want the moderator exposed as impartial. At the moment I'm just muzzled so that the discussion can develop in the direction that is toward the interests of the person with a bias.
the moderators have captured the forum. It would be nice for this to be exposed.
You have bigger problems with your forum than just dispute resolution for indvidual threads.

Zaph

OK so, can I take it that you're not disputing the ban and that this thread can be closed?

737max

Nah, let it play out. I've gone this far so carry on.

Zaph

OK, but should you change your mind and wish to appeal your ban in the future then you can start another thread, but you will need to try to resolve the issue with the mod first before a CMod will review the ban.

If you have issues with forum moderation then you can start a thread in Help Desk outlining your complaint and a CMod will take a look for you.

Zaph

Apologies 737max, I understood from your post that you wished me to close this thread. I've re-opened it, but as stated above please contact the mod to try to resolve the issue between yourselves. If you are unsuccessful then come back to this thread and a CMod will review the ban.

737max

Why should I engage with the moderator any further when the moderator made no effort to engage with me before unilaterally banning me. The moderator and I are not on speaking terms.
The moderator didn't even see fit to note that I was banned in the thread. I assume he didn't want anyone being aware of it or commenting on it or having to explain to other moderators why he over-ruled their decision.

Zaph

Because the rules of this forum state that you must and that your appeal cannot proceed without this step.

737max

As yet, no response from Moderator.

737max

Still no response.

The other moderator is now placed in the undignifed positon of having to say that he fully supports the actions of the moderator.

If ever a thread was going to get me banned that was it. I was making the contrarian case for an unpopular company.
The moderators are sick of me because the other posters on the forum keep reporting my posts purely because they run contrary to the collective world view in the sub-forum.
I'm pro-consumer and the majority are either pro-industry or actually industry members themselves.
You can look at the progress of that thread and the tag team take down of me.

dudara

I am not going to engage with you in discussion on the moderators. That is not the action required at this stage of the process. As you have not heard from the moderator, we will move to the next stage in the process and request review from a CMod.

Please have copies of your PM conversation with the mod ready. You can either post them here, or share in private with the CMod who picks up this appeal. I will notify the CMods now that there is a DRP requiring their attention. Please be patient.

tricky D

I'll look at this for you. Please forward PMs to me by PM or here: your choice. I will try to assess this tomorrow but please be aware that mod work patterns might cause some delay. Thanks.

737max

You can look at the discussion from page 108 thru 114 of the thread. Uncivil Comments aimed at me were deleted by the moderator but none from me. In the face of tag team attacks on me, concocted statistics, moderator calling my position insane but not taking the continued incivility of others in hand over the space of many hours I ultimately decide to leave the thread as I was becoming exasperated with the aggressivity of the discussion and announce my intention to depart the thread, this was acknowledged by the moderator. The moderator was very much on the other side of the discussion to me and he can wave a ban stick so discrtion before valour and what not... I leave the thread with no ban in place and then another Moderator with no communication to anyone that I'm aware of bans me shortly afterward. No communication to me to tell me I was uncivil, no on-thread or off-thread discussion; straight ban.
I leave the thread at 19:13 without having to be told to and at 19:37 the moderator bans me. What's worse is that he Thanks the post from the other moderator posted at 19:20 so he knows that this voluntary departure from a contentious discussion has been acknowledged by the other moderator.

Zaph

737max wrote: »

You can look at the discussion from page 108 thru 114 of the thread.

If you could provide a link to the thread in question and state post numbers rather than page numbers it would be very helpful. Not everyone uses the same number of posts per page, and there are a number of options available, so post numbers will mean that the correct parts of the thread are looked at.

tricky D

Link not needed. Familiar with thread in question.

737max

This is the boards.ie equivalent of being told by a Gaurd to "move along now like a good lad" and complying with the instruction of the Gaurd and then finding yourself truncheoned in the back of the head anyhow...except I didn't even need to be told to move along now.

737max

Bump!

tricky D

I'll try to get to this during the afternoon.

737max

As you can see on the thread in question others who are stating the case in defence of the man everyone loves to hate are being put through the mangle at the moment.

Beasty

737max wrote: »

As you can see on the thread in question others who are stating the case in defence of the man everyone loves to hate are being put through the mangle at the moment.

This is an appeal against your ban, not an opportunity for you to complain about other aspects of moderation. Please stick to the facts surrounding that ban

If your appeal is upheld you can start a thread in Help Desk about any wider concerns

tricky D

Firstly, having a look at your points in this thread.

Initially you just want the ban to be recorded then change your mind. Then you ignore the procedure of trying to resolve with the mod. When prompted on this your engagement with the mod you come out with a totally sarcastic plea ending with a 'don't bother.' Hardly a genuine attempt to engage, quite the opposite.

You claim the action was unilateral. It was not. The thread and its posters has been discussed behind the scenes with close agreement between all. The reason an infraction was not initially handed out was because you have been on our radar for some time and a ban was imminent.

Users do have a fair idea for the action which was simply you wrecking threads, again.

As for mods being sick of your posts being reported, that is not the case. You don't have as many of your posts reported as you think. If anything, it your over use of the RP function with spurious complaints and moans that would be more at issue.

The there is your post 17 which is without foundation.



To the thread in question.

Looking at it from about 6 weeks ago.

On 29/10 you start a line of argument on contractors which doesn't hold up and you are rightly challenged on it by a few posters. You start digging yourself into a hole with the notion that RY's position is stronger than the pilots. Then there's some minor airline bashing.

Then there is quiet until 12/12 where you claim RY don't care about negative media coverage, just about money ie. revenue. That changed 3 or years ago due to shareholder pressure because the negative coverage was affecting revenue to enough of an extent for them to be concerned. Then you are called up on what you call the 79 troublemakers and start sniping at other posters who challenge your weak line of argument.

Then you start having a go at others having an agenda which is basically you dissing anybody disagreeing with your opinion which is poorly formed with sweeping and less than honest statements, the holes in which are again challenged. The most glaring example of this is the claim that the 79 voters for strike action is not overwhelming when it is 79 out of 84 which is a landslide.

Then there is a snipe at you which gets a sanction and a soft mod reminder for all posters to be civil. Within 90 mins you engage pepe dismissing his points as jabber x3 despite the previous warning about civility. Then there's an attack on a mod accusing impartiality when he pulls you up for this. Another mod, not recently or much involved on the thread, decides enough is enough and bans you.

So were rules broken?
There are multiple examples of trolling, personal attacks, poor and childish reactions when pulled up on poorly formed lines of arguments and opinions resulting to toxic discourse, having a go at mods (which you have continued in the AH thread), trite reporting of others posts, and loads of moaning and bullheadedness. This was not just on the thread in question but has been a pattern over the last year for which you have gotten 3 cards and 2x 1 week bans, without any sign of improvement - getting worse if anything.

Was the sanction appropriate?
A perma ban seems harsh and usually around a month or two would be reasonable. Initially that was what I was going to do.

However, since the ban your behaviour has become much revealing and has descended into some plain childishness, some on this thread and plenty in the PMs. This is your first attempt at engaging the mod

Ah please, please, I'll be good if you just show some mercy. Look in to your heart. I'm on my knees here. Please don't ban me. Please don't. I can't live without the sub-forum. Please don't do this to me.
Is that the response you were hoping for?
Don't bother.

Then the end of the last exchange is

If I regain access to the sub-forum I will continue making the case for the consumer with respect to the aviation industry and the airport operators. I'm going to continue enraging some people on this forum regardless of how well or politely I state my case in defence of the consumer.

I remain unapologetic. I will not degrade myself by pleading to you to get access to a forum which I had every reasonable right to partake in.

We don't like each other that is clear but that doesn't give you free rein to behave in the manner in which you do.

This is childish stuff with an admission that you will continue to enrage in a manner you say is polite but which at times is anything but.

So what we have here is a lack of good faith and childishness in this matter, derailing threads with your poor arguments in a generally toxic, bullheaded and trolling style, having a go at mods, trite post reporting, moaning and whining, accusations of bias, all on a consistent and continual basis with no sign of improvement given the PM contents. Seeing you have stated that it will be more of the same, ie. poor conduct and never knowing when to stop digging yourself into holes if the ban is reduced, I have little option to keep the ban permanent as we will just be back to the same old situation in the future which is no good for the good conduct of the forum.

BAN UPHELD.

You may appeal this to an Admin.


I also note the PM I have just received while spell checking this, which is a whine alleging Tenger as being an industry insider with vested interest and so are all the other mods by some sort of weird extrapolation. The posts by him that you trawled up from the last 6 years do not support that. It should be no surprise that some there is mod involvement in the industry as the subject matter requires it. That you saw fit to trawl 6 years of posts makes it clear that you can not let such matters go and stop digging holes. This is probably the biggest issue with your posting style.

tricky D

Additionally, I note another PM accusing mod of being a sleeper agent and attempting to drag others into the matter.

Both PMs reported.

737max

I appeal to Adminstrators.

Your sub-forum appears to be in the control of the IALPA and the industry insiders need things nice, quiet and smooth at the moment.
This is sinister.

I'm of the opinion that the moderator is a member of IALPA. I ask the Administrators if it is right that he should be moderating a sub-forum where industrial action in the Irish Aviation Industry is being discussed.

A moderator who appears to have an interest in the area of aviation was ignored by another moderator who appears to work as a pilot and I'm banned because I point out that once the IALPA gain control of Ryanair they will be able to shut down air traffic in and out of Ireland. IALPA represent pilots in Aer Lingus, Stobart and CityJet.

I have stated in my PMs that I will always be pro-consumer and as such I expect I will always be in conflict with the moderator. I'm willing to share these PMs.
I didn't say I wish to enrage them but rather that is is a natural consequence of being a consumer in a sub-forum controlled by industry insiders.

737max

Whatever about my banning from the forum you really should state your position on control of sub-forums by Unions.

737max

excerpt from one PM to moderator on which Tricky D copied:
If I regain access to the sub-forum I will continue making the case for the consumer with respect to the aviation industry and the airport operators. I'm going to continue enraging some people on this forum regardless of how well or politely I state my case in defence of the consumer.

My PM to the moderator:

Hi,
Based on your posting history as emntioned below in the sub-forum I'm going to come right out and ask;
Are you an IALPA union member flying Aer Lingus flights transatlantic?
Are you a sleeper who has been in control of this sub-forum working toward the objectives of the Union?
Rgds,
737Max

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/show...&postcount=173

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/show...postcount=1079

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/show...&postcount=121

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/show...8&postcount=23

737max

At this stage the issue isn't actually about my behaviour. the issue is who exactly is the moderator on this sub-forum and can he be expected to be impartial.
Is this beyond the scope of the dispute resolution forum and if so how do I get this issue resolved.

737max

tricky D wrote: »

your points

If this issue had been discussed and a ban was imminent I would have been told so back on 12th or even 13th not today on 16th.

This stinks. If I wanted Union propaganda I'd buy The Morning Star. It is bad enough that we have End of the Road and The Commuting forum under Union control End of the Road is so bad that I'm almost convinced that he is an agent provocateur but the Aviation Forum is under Union control too. Boards.ie has sponsored forums and forums under Union control. Where is the open and free internet on boards.ie.

The Hill Billy

Regarding your appeal to the Admin...
I find the CMod's summing up to be a good reflection of the situation.
Ban upheld.

Regarding your PM seeking information on the real-life identity of a boards member...
This contravenes the boards Terms of Use, namely:

ToU wrote:

You agree, through use of this service, NOT to use boards.ie to:

- identify or speculate as to the identity of any anonymous or pseudonymous user

Cut it out. If you persist to seek information on our members' real life identities, jobs, etc - further action will be taken.

tHB