Infraction on Ciara Kelly Thread

Tell me how

Hi,

Can this infraction be reviewed.

I feel that it should be rescinded for two reasons.

A - The perceived intent by the moderator is untrue and could not have been construed by general readers of the thread to have been unsuitable.
B - If the logic applied in giving me an infraction was valid then I should not have been the only one to receive one over this incident.

I have discussed with the moderator involved via PM before starting this.
You can review that interaction if you wish.

Thanks,

Tokyo

I'll inform the local CMods.

Sad Professor

Hi, Tell me how. If you forward me the relevant pms, I'll have a look at this for you.

Tell me how

Sad Professor wrote: »

Hi, Tell me how. If you forward me the relevant pms, I'll have a look at this for you.

Sent those on.

Sad Professor

Sorry, Tell me how, but I didn't receive any pms from you.

However, I've had a look at the infraction in the meantime. From what I can see, yourself and Rennaws were bickering on thread. The mod told you both to quit it, which you acknowledged by thanking the post. But within hours you posted a sarcastic snipe at Rennaws for which you received an infraction for ignoring the mod warning.

Am I understanding this correctly?

Tell me how

Sad Professor wrote: »

Sorry, Tell me how, but I didn't receive any pms from you.

However, I've had a look at the infraction in the meantime. From what I can see, yourself and Rennaws were bickering on thread. The mod told you both to quit it, which you acknowledged by thanking the post. But within hours you posted a sarcastic snipe at Rennaws for which you received an infraction for ignoring the mod warning.

Am I understanding this correctly?

I don't think so.

Have tried to resend PM interaction with Mod.

Sad Professor

I got it, thanks.

Okay, so I've read your pm conversation with the mod. Your defence is basically that the other user reignited the discussion with you. I don't accept that. But even if I did, that does not justify you ignoring the mod warning. The mod posted a warning to quit it. You ignored it. You were infracted.

I am not concerned with the other user in this instance as this is your infraction that's being appealed. But if I were and if I accepted your argument that they reignited the back and forth with you, then I would have expected them to be warned too. However, they didn't reignite it. They returned to the topic you were both discussing, yes, but they didn't directly quote or refer to you. You reignited it by quoting them and making a sarcastic snipe at them.

I am sympathetic to users who feel provoked, but I don't see anything provocative in what they posted to justify your response to them. I understand that you felt annoyed about them returning to the topic. But if you felt this was in contravention of the mod warning you should have reported their post or pm'd the mod. Instead you decided the mod warning didn't apply to you anymore.

From your pm you express issues with negativity in the forum and your annoyance with this seems to have played into your interaction with this user. I understand this, but that still doesn't justify ignoring a mod warning. Please channel such concerns into reporting posts or offering feedback that might help the mods deal with negativity rather than create more of it.

I'm afraid I have to uphold the infraction. However, if you would like to appeal this decision I can ask an Admin to look at it.

Tell me how

Sad Professor wrote: »

I got it, thanks.

Okay, so I've read your pm conversation with the mod. Your defence is basically that the other user reignited the discussion with you. I don't accept that. But even if I did, that does not justify you ignoring the mod warning. The mod posted a warning to quit it. You ignored it. You were infracted.

I am not concerned with the other user in this instance as this is your infraction that's being appealed. But if I were and if I accepted your argument that they reignited the back and forth with you, then I would have expected them to be warned too. However, they didn't reignite it. They returned to the topic you were both discussing, yes, but they didn't directly quote or refer to you. You reignited it by quoting them and making a sarcastic snipe at them.

I am sympathetic to users who feel provoked, but I don't see anything provocative in what they posted to justify your response to them. I understand that you felt annoyed about them returning to the topic. But if you felt this was in contravention of the mod warning you should have reported their post or pm'd the mod. Instead you decided the mod warning didn't apply to you anymore.

From your pm you express issues with negativity in the forum and your annoyance with this seems to have played into your interaction with this user. I understand this, but that still doesn't justify ignoring a mod warning. Please channel such concerns into reporting posts or offering feedback that might help the mods deal with negativity rather than create more of it.

I'm afraid I have to uphold the infraction. However, if you would like to appeal this decision I can ask an Admin to look at it.

I do not agree with your assertion that the other poster did not reignite the discussion or that I decided that the Mod instruction did not apply to me but I understand we have a difference of opinion on that and I must accept that point.

Can you please review posts 1734 to 1746 on the same thread. 1734 is the same Mod making the same request as prior to my infraction. The content after their post indicates that it was ignored. The mod was online and posting in Radio threads while these further interactions were going on. I feel this is evidence that I was selected and reprimanded unfairly.

Sad Professor

Tell me how wrote: »

I do not agree with your assertion that the other poster did not reignite the discussion or that I decided that the Mod instruction did not apply to me but I understand we have a difference of opinion on that and I must accept that point.

Can you please review posts 1734 to 1746 on the same thread. 1734 is the same Mod making the same request as prior to my infraction. The content after their post indicates that it was ignored. The mod was online and posting in Radio threads while these further interactions were going on. I feel this is evidence that I was selected and reprimanded unfairly.

Those posts aren't relevant to your appeal, but I can tell you that at least one user involved has been banned and a few others have been warned/infracted. If you come across any other posts then please report them.

As I said, let us know if you want an Admin to review my decision.

Tell me how

Sad Professor wrote: »

Those posts aren't relevant to your appeal, but I can tell you that at least one user involved has been banned and a few others have been warned/infracted. If you come across any other posts then please report them.

As I said, let us know if you want an Admin to review my decision.

They are relevant in that they relate to mod behavior which I feel is unbalanced.

Consider this please or forward to admin.

Sad Professor

No problem. I'll flag this for Admin review.

Thanks Tell me how.

Tokyo

Cheers SP. I'll take a look at this later today. In the meantime, would you mind forwarding me the aforementioned PMs?

Tokyo

Hi Tell me how,

I've taken a look through the thread, the mod warning prior to the infraction, and the events afterwards that led to your infraction. Unfortunately in this instance it's pretty open and shut.

Tell me how wrote: »

A - The perceived intent by the moderator is untrue and could not have been construed by general readers of the thread to have been unsuitable.

I don't think there is any latitude for misinterpretation here. Back and forth bickering was going on between posters. A moderator posted a warning in the thread to cut it out. Two hours later you responded with a personal jab against the person you had been bickering with before the mod warning. It's pretty clear from this that you were given fair warning, and chose to ignore it.

Tell me how wrote: »

B - If the logic applied in giving me an infraction was valid then I should not have been the only one to receive one over this incident.

Actions taken against other posters are not factors in your DRP. That being said, I can see firsthand that other people were carded in that thread for similar behaviour, so you argument that you were singled out doesn't hold water.

The card stands. Please be more considerate in how you post in future.