[Social & Fun] unfair modding of sinn fein thread mod beasty

Not what I asked for.

What I asked for is an acceptance that CA is a robust forum where posters robustly challenge each other. I repeat, there are numerous posts similar to and worse than mine across CA and always have been.

Only acting on reported posts is therefore effectively allowing the 'reporter' to do the moderation.

It is unfair for somebody to get threadbanned for 'discussing other posters' when two posters have a discussion among themselves about another poster and escape sanction and deletion of the post by virtue of the fact that nobody reports them and when 100's of posts of a similar nature are made.

You changed the how you modded the forum Beasty after the launch of the new site, the posters haven't changed. If a poster lies or maliciously attacks another poster then of course a mod should step in. But the arbitrary way sanctions are being handed out is wrong.

And the extent to which you are being over worked is an internal matter for Boards.ie, I honestly don't know why posters should suffer because of it.

Clearly not going to get a fair hearing here.

I repeat...every comment you quoted by me above has multiple (in the hundreds) similar comments by other users right across CA. You refuse to recognise this or understand why only acting on reported posts is simply bad or inadequate moderation.

You say 'I am a problem' on a thread that has seen me accused of 'supporting the killing of children' and the 'repeated rape of a child'. Allegations freely made several times and still unactioned publicly despite being reported. The posters making those allegations STILL free to make them and not deemed to be 'problems. To be robust Beasty, up the yard on that. Not to mention the repeated 'shinnerbot' allegations made on thread by anyone who feels like it (discussing other posters Beasty?) and even here by mike. Who incidentally, I didn't report and don't think should be threadbanned either.

As I said, it is your act that is out of kilter with the very obvious culture of CA's, which is robust comment on other users at times. IT IS EVEN HAPPENING THIS MORNING.

I am not going to start quoting other posters to prove this and just hope an admin with an open mind can take a look at the posting styles in CA and adjudicate on this and come up with a policy that can allow debate without people falling foul of an arbitrary interpretation of the rules by somebody who admits to being swamped by the work load and ONLY moderates when somebody reports.

P.S. And a very big P.S. I am not for a second trying to pretend that my posting is not uncivil, it is at times. And if it gets malicious or slanderous it deserves sanction.

The point I am making is that uncivil posts are part of the culture of CA, if you look.

This again is completely refusing to address the point made which is why are you taking action on reported posts that contain nothing more uncivil than is happening across CA everyday of the week.

There is either a consistent rule or there isn't. Only actioning reported posts hands moderation to the reporter.

I asked you to define what was uncivil about the post you banned me for, (here it is):

and I pointed out to you if you read the exchanges that mike had indeed 'evaded'(still hasn't outlined what was 'propaganda' in the letter) 'deflected' and made 'spurious claims' (about me knowing who the letter writer was, which was completely irrelevant one way or the other)

You decided to threadban me for that because it was reported, YET I said nothing untrue in the post, and I still don't see anything particularly uncivil in it.

Mike's claim about me being a shinner bot and mods being pro SF is indeed preposterous and completely unfounded, but that doesn't get away from the fact you are not dealing with moderation fairly Beasty by only reacting to reports. Not in a way anyone can navigate anyhow. It's arbitrary and seems to be based on how tired or overworked you are.

The above is verifiably untrue.

You did not and still haven't pointed out what was 'propaganda' in the letter. A letter I read and judged on it merits and didn't even look at who wrote it and posted to the thread for that reason alone. Discussion.

I asked you to judge it on it merits or lack of, and point out where the writer was using 'propaganda'.

You point blank refused to do that. Why? Because there is no propaganda in it.

Also, I HAVE NEVER used the 'FFFG' tag EVER on this site.

This is ridiculous.

I didn't know who the writer was. Believe it or not I don't know a lot of the personnel in SF or what they did in the past.

I didn't know Lynn Boylan and Eoin O'Broin were married or partners until a tweet today.

You refuse to take my word on that, nothing I can do but keep saying it. And it neither has anything to do with the content of the letter...it is irrelevant if I knew or not.

I have asked precisely NOBODY for proof Varadkar was not on the jet.

This is just hilarious lying and twisting what is happening - discussion of a breaking story or (as I stated in my first post on it, what might be a non story).

There is NO pattern, except in your head and as a means of deflection from things you are asked to back up. Like propaganda in a letter...still NOT addressed.

How is that 'demanding proof' that he wasn't on the flight?

It is asking for the poster to cut and paste what he/she said was a statement from the Air Corp and the matter of the flight was closed.

As another poster pointed out later there was NO mention of the return flight and the poster was wrong to say the matter was closed.

The Air Corp until this moment - 8.27pm - have not said anything official about who was on the flight home.

Again, you are reading things into a post that are just not there.

Sure Beasty, just ignore the fact that it is shown clearly that Mike sees posts in his own way. He wades in with the Gatling gun making accusations but when you actually look at the posts he is referencing there is nothing to it. He thinks you are pro-SF ffs.

You STILL haven't addressed why one or two posters can face punitive measures when the culture of CA is robust posting. Take a look at it this morning, robust debate with plenty of posts similarly uncivil to the one's you took action with here and worse. Plenty of 'discussion' of other users too. A mockery of your arbitrary and inconsistent moderation in fact.

I'll stick to what I said, there will be no fair hearing here or feedback taken seriously.

I didn't come here to appeal the threadban and haven't.

I came to give feedback, (as soon as it was moved to 'Feedback') on how CA is being moderated.

It isn't Dispute Resolution anymore was the point. I am not appealing the threadban here.

The Help Desk charter says it has nothing to do with threadbans (why is Beasty ruling on them so?) and that it is for dealing with issues with Mods and moderation.

Permanent and Site Bans I took to include any ban issued on the site. A bit unnecessarily confusing. Anyway, I wasn't appealing my ban and only got involved when the thread was moved from DR.

My issue is with arbitrary modding which leaves every poster's posts at the whim of a report while similar posting goes unsanctioned and indeed is the culture of CA. I note another poster fell foul of this arbitrary system today in an exchange involving me. I didn't report them, because I didn't find what they said offensive. May have been robust and uncivil but that is the culture of the site. Plenty more similar posts today. Reporting just because your feelings are hurt is a ridiculous way to moderate and should not be cause. Offensive and malicious posting can then be dealt with properly.

I've said my piece. I don't see any point discussing it further with the mod who is causing the issue, particularly since the new site went live.