Banned from immigration thread.

This issue amongst many others was raised on the Site is a Graveyard thread:

Apparently this rule against anecdote is applied on certain specific threads and these must be a warning on Page 1 of same. If it were applied across the site, it would collapse within a couple of days for obvious reasons.

It doesn't make any sense to me but it does apparently to those who moderate. You need to avoid anecdote, so instead of saying 'my student daughter lost her job to a non national who was happy with less wages' you write something like 'young people are being disadvantaged in lower paid jobs by non nationals undercutting them'. When asked for proof & reports by the obvious trolls, you simply ignore them or reply - 'sorry, no anecdote allowed'.

Of course it's noticeable that some posters of certain views seem to avoid the anecdote sanction as their stories are deemed valid..

No white smoke as promised I note yet as a result of the above extensive thread…

See, this is part of the problem.

I dare say that most posters have never reported a post. They read it, reply to it (maybe exposing themselves to mod actions in the process which is often the intent), or they ignore it and move on.

However, I'd be pretty confident that those doing the reporting are the same ones who are often behind many of the in-thread problems in the first place, or who are "known" generally for disruptive behaviour/posting under the guise of balance.

How far back do mods read when they get a report? How much is the context/intent/provocation/responded to poster's history factored into a decision to threadban someone.

In the thread in question I would say there are up to half a dozen regular posters whose only real contributions are to cause disruption to the discussion though this applies to most of the longer running "controversial" threads. It's very obvious from the tone and content of their posts, the repetitive and selective nature of their responses, the "funny"/dismissive/one-line type response etc.

Again it's very obvious from reading through the thread who they are, yet while the threadban list in the OP's continue to grow, these posters (often the same ones across multiple threads) seem to escape unscathed. It doesn't go unnoticed either, and THAT is what annoys others who are trying to engage honestly.

"Report them" is a cop out that relies on users to do the work. If mods haven't the time to review in the manner suggested above, or aren't familiar with the posters I refer to (hard to believe as it carries over between threads) then that's a bigger issue probably best addressed by simply adding more mods (and as I've repeatedly said, preferably from outside the normal limited gene pool that is usually the well for such things).

It's also fair to say that personal bias or even conflicts of interest may be a factor in some of the decisions, but in that case I would certainly hope that mods (regardless of level) would refer the report to someone else to review.

If posters are asked and indeed expected to use and trust in the process, that process needs to be as transparent as possible, and demonstratably balanced and fair - something which the current approach often fails on. You/mods may disagree with that statement, but the onus is on the mod team to improve that perception, not push it back on the users.

So mods don't moderate a 'forum' they only moderate reported posts?

To be honest iv started to lately out of curiosity.

The only conclusion I can come to is that I must be doing something wrong.

Just because it's not, doesn't mean it can't be. Bang of arrogance off this reply too.

The poster is giving some feedback, maybe take some of it on board instead of "like it or shove it"?

There are certain agitators in this thread that would tell you it's black when they know it's white. It's a game to them. Posters with some sense shouldn't need to depend on the report button, but these agitators are painfully obvious to see, and can derail pages of discussion with deflection and citation requests (followed in formulaic fashion with dismissal of author once handed to them). There isn't one post specifically that can necessarily be referred to, nor am I bothered enough to go constantly reporting, but you just need to give it a read every once in a while to see the bad faith posting (trolling?) from the half dozen as someone referred to above.

Just another disgruntled mods are bullies thread. They keep picking me .....😭

Now duplicating the same ground as was only recently discussed in detail in this very active thread...

I don't know if it's an Irish thing about not wanting to report, or if people just think that the mods are vindictive as well as biased.

But it's stupid, having to rely on that.

From the look of it getting threadbanned is an honour system, just remember not to post here again.

But pretty sure if the OP posted again in that thread he'd be fully banned in minutes, and yet there's a couple of thread banned posters who it seems the ban is optional.

The deleting posts is BS, whatever about spam getting deleted but if you're just deleting stuff rather than the old card and edit then it's likely to come up again and again.

Maybe someone else post it now it's reported on a different news site, or people who who say the original start talking about it again, or the original poster posts a follow up.

The status quo on boards suits you because your beliefs and opinions align with the editorial slant preferred on this platform.

I see a number of more left leaning posters on this thread guffawing at the complaints being made by others about moderation etc, as per usual.

If boards is to thrive it needs to be on the fence straight down the line all the time. Currently that isn't the case, boards leans left, if you don't like it get ready to run the gauntlet because your opinion most certainly isn't welcome.

I'm not excusing poor behaviour of anyone, but I know that if you have a particular set of beliefs that you express on this site you get a much greater amount of leeway than others, that's the reputation the site is garnering for itself right now and it's biggest challenge to overcome going forward.

CA posters are basically given enough rope to hang themselves. At which point one of these threads starts. Again:-)

Its not a democracy here, it's a moderated forum and if you don't agree with the moderation style the answer is simple - **** off.

The left wing posters have always gotten a lot more leeway, they've also always been of the opinion that boards is turning into storm front, yet they're happy with the moderation (as evidenced on this thread) whilst others have issues which they characterise as childish.

Boards is left leaning and always has been. It should have no affiliation and come down hard on loons on either end of the spectrum.

If you think that is lovely then you should see some of the vile abuse that left leaning posters deal with. Get over it.

Vile abuse in posts get deleted.

Then typically the poster gets threadbanned.

Other posters see that poster has been threadbanned and think it is for the posts they have seen. So take away a misleading impression.

If you havent seen vile abuse on CA its because the mods deleted it.

How do you know thats the full reason why they were banned?

I often see posters threadbanned without specific post citation.

Clearer comms from mods would clarify things.