Yellow for using 'guff' about a posters comment

James Brown

A poster cited other comments likely made up with no quotes. I posted:

Bowie wrote: »

Made up guff off you JF. Beats engaging in discussion, right?

I got a yellow for being uncivil.
I've PM'd the Mod but he's not replied. I've PM'd him previously on another matter some months ago and he's not responded. So I'm not expecting any reply.

I can't believe calling a comment 'guff' is uncivil. I would appreciate if someone could look at this.
What constitutes being uncivil seems to change depending on who does it or who's moderating. People are regularly called liars or worse with no back up and it warrants no Mod action, so 'guff' getting a yellow seems very bizarre to me.

Thanks.

hullaballoo

From the flow chart above:

If you don’t feel satisfied with the answer, or if you haven’t had an answer in more than 2 days, you should start a new thread here in the Dispute Resolution Forum.
When you start this thread, please state what forum you have an issue with, provide links to the thread if applicable (you can get the link by logging out if you’ve been banned from the forum).

You need to give the moderator a chance to reply. If there is no response after 2 days, I will reopen this thread for you. PM me in that case to let me know there has been no response.

James Brown

Hello,
Any move on this?
As discussed I was in touch with the MOD and vice versa.

Thanks.

hullaballoo

Apologies for the delay, I have alerted the CMods to this thread.

Buford T. Justice XIX

Good morning, Bowie, I'll be looking at this for you.

Could you please forward the PM exchange between yourself and the mod or post them here when you get a chance and I'll have a look at the issue later today?

James Brown

Hello, I PM'd them to you. Thanks.
A yellow is not the biggest deal but I feel if you let unfounded sanctions, (IMO) go it can cause a skewed view on your online rep.

There's a big problem with inconsistency which I know happens and can't be helped to a certain extent however passing out yellows or thread bans for some things while doing nothing on things often far worse is a bit much. It happens a lot.

Buford T. Justice XIX

I've received them just now, Bowie. I'll have a look at those and the thread in question tonight and get back to you tomorrow, hopefully.

James Brown

Thanks.

Buford T. Justice XIX

I've been looking at this for you, Bowie. Just to note the infraction you received was for personal abuse, not being uncivil.

Looking at the post, it ignored one of the basic rules we have here, attack the post and not the poster. I see no effort by you in that post to engage with the points raised in the quoted post. Both sentences there were directed at the poster, one calling their post made up guff and the other casting aspersions on their desire to debate honestly.

I think a yellow card was the correct decision here, though I would recommend a change from personal abuse to uncivil as I don't think the post warrants being labelled personal abuse.

You still retain the option of submitting this appeal to Admin review if you wish.

Otherwise I will ask that this be marked resolved.

James Brown

Buford T. Justice XIX wrote: »

I've been looking at this for you, Bowie. Just to note the infraction you received was for personal abuse, not being uncivil.

Looking at the post, it ignored one of the basic rules we have here, attack the post and not the poster. I see no effort by you in that post to engage with the points raised in the quoted post. Both sentences there were directed at the poster, one calling their post made up guff and the other casting aspersions on their desire to debate honestly.

I think a yellow card was the correct decision here, though I would recommend a change from personal abuse to uncivil as I don't think the post warrants being labelled personal abuse.

You still retain the option of submitting this appeal to Admin review if you wish.

Otherwise I will ask that this be marked resolved.

That's what I did. The poster spoke on other posts and comments but gave no quotes. I called it 'guff'.
How am I calling the poster 'guff'? It means, "trivial, worthless, or insolent talk or ideas.".
My point was he was spinning made up yarns. I called it 'guff'. He posted no quotes, I accused him of making the comment up. That was my engagement on it. He could have responded with quotes, but there were none to post. I had been following the thread and knew he was making it up and called him on the comment. His 'points' were made up. That was what my response was about.
I accused him of making up that comment were he referenced but didn't quote other contributors. Yes, I certainly did. can we not call out people on their claims?
I would like to get an Admin involved.
Thanks.

On that note, we have people playing the man not the ball on a daily basis and it's never an issue. Goes back to the inconsistency issue.

hullaballoo

I'll review this then if there's no objection.

James Brown

hullaballoo wrote: »

I'll review this then if there's no objection.

Not at all. Thank you.

hullaballoo

From the Current Affairs Charter: "Current Affairs/IMHO is a forum where users discuss these topics, within, of course, the bounds of civil discourse."

Your post is not "civil discourse" by any definition of those words. It's a bit disingenuous to say your card was for calling the comment "guff" as you went a fair amount further than that by saying the other member wasn't engaging in discussion. Your post didn't add anything of substance either, which detracts greatly from any leeway you might have been given otherwise.

I think a yellow card is perfectly reasonable in the circumstances and would request that you ensure your posts are of a better quality in future.

James Brown

hullaballoo wrote: »

From the Current Affairs Charter: "Current Affairs/IMHO is a forum where users discuss these topics, within, of course, the bounds of civil discourse."

Your post is not "civil discourse" by any definition of those words. It's a bit disingenuous to say your card was for calling the comment "guff" as you went a fair amount further than that by saying the other member wasn't engaging in discussion. Your post didn't add anything of substance either, which detracts greatly from any leeway you might have been given otherwise.

I think a yellow card is perfectly reasonable in the circumstances and would request that you ensure your posts are of a better quality in future.

I was told by the MOD that was the sting in the tail, 'guff' played a role.
I do not deny I was accusing the poster of making up stuff in an effort to avoid discussion. He was. What he posted was made up. It was blarney to avoid discussion. There was no substance to add because what he posted was made up. I later asked for quotes and none followed.

If that's the decision we have major issues with inconsistency as regards moderation. We have posters making inferences as regards the mental state of posters, inferring racism and homophobia, suggesting public figure should be '****ing buried' (since deleted with no note included posts by others commenting on it, not quoting) and the like and no Mod intervention, so you can understand why I challenged "Made up guff off you JF. Beats engaging in discussion, right?".

hullaballoo

The appeal has already concluded.