suspension explanation and then some...

[Guest paul walter]

Due to overwhelming moderator apathy on the thread I had been suspended on I'm posting here as Mal suggested (I haven't til now cause I thought it was easy to clear up and simply wasn't worth the time and effort. Well it's evolving into more than just my original 'gripe'. The thread was The Law Wheel one and I want an explanation and an apology re why I was suspended, then I want to know why I have to beg for elucidation on it all.I understand the nature of TTB and the work load, but that's not the issue--seems more to be now about accountability and bureuacratic buck-passing? Paul

Edited October 18, 2010 by paul walter

[Mal]

[Guest paul walter]

 

 

So the Cliff Notes are:-

 

You were, in my opinion, insulting to another member, so you got suspended.

 

 

Yes, I got that much--I don't agree it is a direct or even particularly insulting insult. Why wasn't I warned for example? If it was a straight out insult you better get over to Gauss's threads and start suspending others for defaming either him or his religion cause that's the only type of wound-up response he seems to bring out in others. And why hasn't Gauss been suspended for breaking protocol yet? Still looking for investigation and clarification, Paul.

Edited October 18, 2010 by paul walter

[Mal]

Yes, I got that much--I don't agree it is a direct or even particularly insulting insult. Why wasn't I warned for example?

I could have

done nothing -> warned you -> suspended you for up to 7 days -> (then with consensus of the other moderators) suspended you for up to 90 days -> suspended you indefinitely -> banned you.

 

Given I did check how the other moderators felt 1st, and that I could have suspended you from posting for much longer than 2 days, that should give you an idea of how I "weighted" my response to the "level" of the offence.

 

If you see others breaking the insult police please hit report so that the moderators can investigate the matter.

[Guest paul walter]

I could have

done nothing -> warned you -> suspended you for up to 7 days -> (then with consensus of the other moderators) suspended you for up to 90 days -> suspended you indefinitely -> banned you.

 

Given I did check how the other moderators felt 1st, and that I could have suspended you from posting for much longer than 2 days, that should give you an idea of how I "weighted" my response to the "level" of the offence.

 

If you see others breaking the insult police please hit report so that the moderators can investigate the matter.

 

Ah, now we're talking! Information, that's what I was after. Still, doesn't answer my questions but if it's simply about having the numbers and not being accountable to the person banned in any way then I guess that's all there is to it then? So where's the other mods on all this as it applies to me, that's why I'm here after all (in tech forum)? Of course 'something' gets lost in translation the longer I persist but...Paul

Edited October 18, 2010 by paul walter

[Mal]

but if it's simply about having the numbers and not being accountable to the person banned in any way then I guess that's all there is to it then?

 

Accountable Paul, please don't forget you were the person being insulting. That is why I decided to suspend you for 2 days.

 

Weeks later we are still discussing the matter, and you make a quip about accountability? Come on man is the sarcasm really necessary?

[Stigweard]

Hey Paul,

 

You stepped over the line and you got pinned for it. There are two mature ways you can deal with this:

 

1. You can accept our decision and modify your contributions accordingly,

2. You can reject our decision and exercise your free liberty and choose not to come here any more.

 

The third, less mature option, is for you to deny that you overstepped our policies and whinge and bitch complaining about how unfair it is. Option 1 & 2 earns you respect, option 3 makes you look like a ... well ... you know what I mean.

 

You choose.

[Guest paul walter]

Hey Paul,

 

You stepped over the line and you got pinned for it. There are two mature ways you can deal with this:

 

1. You can accept our decision and modify your contributions accordingly,

2. You can reject our decision and exercise your free liberty and choose not to come here any more.

 

The third, less mature option, is for you to deny that you overstepped our policies and whinge and bitch complaining about how unfair it is. Option 1 & 2 earns you respect, option 3 makes you look like a ... well ... you know what I mean.

 

You choose.

 

First: threats are hardly in order, they merely underly the "take it or leave it" attitude I'm trying to expose here. In a big universe like this I'm sure there are many more options than these three. Second, I don't seek respect from anybody, except from myself (my own harshest critic), and I will always put reputation/life and limb on the line when my integrity in relation to 'justice' is at stake. I've never had a discussion in this country (Australia) in all my years where such a fundamental stance was understood and no, I don't expect to have one now (you two Aussies )-i think the intellectual and emotional climate precludes such understanding. Just to say that online there are many things lost in terms of tenor and tone in writing and that something like intention is almost always not understood, which is something not taken into my posts to Gauss and not here either. It's interesting at least to see there is no talking back to the authority of the moderators decision, something that should be stated outright in the guidelines.

 

 

I'm just trying to hold you guys accountable for something I disagree with and that you have no good explanation for (several other members also disagreed with your decision Mal) . The way I see it is that it was Mal's emotions that interpreted me in the first place and acted accordingly. Paul

Edited October 19, 2010 by paul walter

[Guest paul walter]

Accountable Paul, please don't forget you were the person being insulting. That is why I decided to suspend you for 2 days.

 

Weeks later we are still discussing the matter, and you make a quip about accountability? Come on man is the sarcasm really necessary?

 

 

Well this is what I'm talking about--it's not sarcasm , it's covering the bases for all of us cause I'm the only one interested in the problem it seems. It was a week ago, but yes the iternet magnifies things horribly and warps our perceptions of what is and perhaps isn't important etc. You shouldn't be involved in my 'complaint' Mal, you have a vested interest and the post above doesn't make a lot of constructive sense and merely seems 'emotional', sorry. Of course the original concern is beginning to be lost (already?) in the to and fro of whatever...it's an old trick of the ego but a "goodie". I understand by the laws of authortarian/one-sided logic that if I persist I look like a trouble-maker Paul

Edited October 19, 2010 by paul walter

[Mal]

I may address the other edits at a later stage but before the edits there was

I'm just trying to hold you guys accountable for something I disagree with and that you have no good explanation for. The way I see it is that it was Mal's emotions that interpreted me in the first place and acted accordingly. Paul

 

Paul, I can't control how you interpret things, and throughout this entire exercise you seem to be missing that there are other interpretations than your view.

 

several other members also disagreed with your decision Mal

I'm aware of that, I do take note of the comments on the board. I'm also aware of people who agreed.

 

Be considerate of the other members here (the objective of our insult policy) and you will have no issues.

[Guest paul walter]

I may address the other edits at a later stage but before the edits there was

 

 

Paul, I can't control how you interpret things, and throughout this entire exercise you seem to be missing that there are other interpretations than your view.

 

Well it's a nice way of putting it back on me...Yes, interpretation, that's getting close to my original gripe. You may remember sometime back (today) I suggested your interpretation was not exactly right in the first place. "Excercise"-see what I mean Mal, you have no sense of how someone could possibly have a problem, it's merely a waste of your time, something to be "gone through" and put up with til someone tires?

 

 

I'm aware of that, I do take note of the comments on the board. I'm also aware of people who agreed.

 

Well, who is right, who is wrong? Surely an apaology is in order because of the confusion resulting from pro and contra viewpoints? or a new addition/discussion of protocol to moderator policy?

 

 

Be considerate of the other members here (the objective of our insult policy) and you will have no issues.

 

 

Yeah, right,I understand except that's not the point being brought up (though it is being swept under the carpet).

Paul

[Stigweard]

Paul

Paul,

 

Mal made the right decision to suspend you for 2-days and it's a decision all moderators agree with and support. As such you won't be getting an apology ... period.

 

You were handing out insults and that is a violation of our Moderation Guidelines.

 

And yes my friend it is very much a case of "take it or leave it".

 

[Mal]

You may remember sometime back (today) I suggested your interpretation was not exactly right in the first place.

 

and you seem to have missed that I had already checked my interpretation with the other moderators before suspending you.

 

"Excercise"-see what I mean Mal, you have no sense of how someone could possibly have a problem, it's merely a waste of your time, something to be "gone through" and put up with til someone tires?

 

No, again those are your words. By "exercise" I mean this process whereby you attempt to clear your karma

(I believe that is how you described it on the main forum) & I have done my best to help you do that. So please stop with the little inflammatory barbs like the above and "though it is being swept under the carpet"

 

Thanks.