More AH madness

bonzai bob

seamus wrote:

No, the subtlety is lost on a lot of people. If you read his post again, you will see the purpose of the insult. Is it called for? Perhaps. Is it allowed? Kind of. This is feedback, different rules apply here. If the situation was reversed, and The General had posted that exact thing at WWM, he wouldn't have been banned either. WWM is big enough to look after himself..

I don't think subtlety comes into the equation, it's simple black and white, you either do or don't, in this case WWM DID abuse The General, which is apparently, SHOCK HORROR!!, against the rules.

seamus wrote:

Are there double standards? To a degree.

I think you'll find the answer is Yes.

seamus wrote:

WWM has proven himself a helpful, useful poster. I (and many others) enjoy his participation. He's a positive influence on the community. A newbie on the other hand, has to earn the community's respect. Coming on guns blazing and abusing people would not be the ideal way to start, and it's a sure fire way of getting yourself recognised as a troublemaker. And guess what? 99 times out of 100, those who are troublemakers from the start end up getting banned. Surprise that.

So if Bill Gates turned out to be a kiddy lover, should we go easy on him because he doesn some good, gives money to charity?

I don't think The General came out guns a blazing, all he did was express his opinion. Then of course everyone jumped on their high horse, here are his 4, yes, only FOUR posts on this thread.

oh my god the madness


just to point out fellas boards has so many parts to it that everything in after hours could possibly be posted somewhere else instead, i think you guys have to ease up a bit on after hours, just my opinion

ye the threads were good but there was not half as many people around so it took ages for replys/posts

I think its much better at the mo, its simple "Don't Read What You Don't Want To"

I used boards a while before my join date i didnt sign up straight away for some reason, but back then it was good but there wasnt many people around

ALSO TROJAN, HALF THE REASON WHY BOARDS IS GETTING **** THESE DAYS IS THAT ALL THE OLD TIMERS LIKE YOURSELF SEEM TO TALK TO NEWER MEMBERS DISRESPECTFULLY, AND IMO IT SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED, SAYING SOMETHING LIKE "PISS OFF" ISN@T REALLY CIVILISED NOW IS IT

see this should be banned, not people posting stuff in the wrong forums

Will this person be banned?

Do you really think all this warranted being called a '****'?

seamus

bonzai bob wrote:

I don't think subtlety comes into the equation, it's simple black and white, you either do or don't, in this case WWM DID abuse The General, which is apparently, SHOCK HORROR!!, against the rules.

Really? Where?
As you'll find, it's not always black and white. Take the other thread you replied to - Karl Hungus did in fact abuse someone to a degree, but he wasn't and shouldn't be banned.

So if Bill Gates turned out to be a kiddy lover, should we go easy on him because he doesn some good, gives money to charity?

It should certainly be taken into consideration in this completely fictional situation. Believe it or not, people can do wrong things and still be nice people.

Do you really think all this warranted being called a '****'?

Perhaps he was basing his opinion on more than the 4 posts in this thread. Or perhaps it's not his opinion at all, and he said that purely to get a rise out of him and you, and the rest of the righteous indignation brigade?

petes

I was banned from after hours for calling someone a knacker. I dont usually post in this manor but I had the hangover from hell. But wwm didnt get banned from feedback for calling someone a c unt. No matter what context it was in it still constitutes as personal abuse. And that is double standards and not just to a certain degree.

seamus

petes wrote:

And that is double standards and not just to a certain degree.

As I pointed out already, the rules on After Hours and the rules on Feedback are different regarding personal abuse.

kaimera

the rules differ regarding flaming is what I gather from the sticky above but isn't 'personal_abuse' against the overall boards.ie rules ?

Why should the vast majority of main fora have it but not feedback? [I understand private_fora will differ]

seamus

kaimera wrote:

the rules differ regarding flaming is what I gather from the sticky above but isn't 'personal_abuse' against the overall boards.ie rules ?

Why should the vast majority of main fora have it but not feedback? [I understand private_fora will differ]

Flaming and personal abuse are more-or-less the same thing imo
Perhaps the admins haven't seen WWM's post yet?
(Yes, I could ban him, but as I already outlined, I don't think it's worthy, and I don't have the final call here).

kaimera

okey dokey.

Wasn't sure SMods didn't have said Final_Call on feedback.

I was just wondering anyway Shay.

fade2black

I admire and respect your attempt to protect other mods Seamus that's two different mods this morning you're defending for abusing other users. The rules are there and the mods, given there position of "authority" should be setting an example rather than getting away with it just cause you think they're generally nice people. I have nothing against you or whitewashman, in fact my opinion would be much to the contrary but rules are rules.

seamus

fade2black wrote:

I admire and respect your attempt to protect other mods Seamus that's two different mods this morning you're defending for abusing other users. The rules are there and the mods, given there position of "authority" should be setting an example rather than getting away with it just cause you think they're generally nice people. I have nothing against you or whitewashman, in fact my opinion would be much to the contrary but rules are rules.

It's nothing to do with protecting fellow mods really, I'm trying to prevent witchunting. If WWM had said that on After Hours, I would have banned him, and he would have PMed me calling me a bitch, but all in good jest.

Actually, the issue here is involvement. By and large, Smods won't get involved in day-to-day running tasks on a board unless they've been asked. I would consider flaming on a forum a day-to-day task, something which should be left up to the moderator of the board. If a single user is consistently abusing others or causing hassle, then we'll step in. It's all about not stepping on toes.

As I say, the final call here belongs to the admins though. I'm reluctant to dish out much justice on Feedback even though I could, becuase this is where all users should be equal - Smods, Cmods and Mods included.

Trojan

The General wrote:

TROJAN, HALF THE REASON WHY BOARDS IS GETTING **** THESE DAYS IS THAT ALL THE OLD TIMERS LIKE YOURSELF SEEM TO TALK TO NEWER MEMBERS DISRESPECTFULLY, AND IMO IT SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED, SAYING SOMETHING LIKE "PISS OFF" ISN@T REALLY CIVILISED NOW IS IT

The large font, caps and bold really make this post seem completely childish. Oh, wait, and the content. Yes, forgot about that.

Telling people to p!ss off is "not civilised"? Yes, this might be true, although it does depend on your definition of "civilised".

However, as Ecksor has already pointed out, I am not telling all and sundry to p!ss off. I;m telling those idiots who do not have the common decency to follow some basic directions, like reading something called "READ THIS FIRST".

So, if you can't be bothered following the quite liberal rules, then p!ss off and find another bulletin board to post on.