Suspension

[C T]

Here, MH, a little deviation which you might enjoy...

 

 

 

 

now, back to biznaz!

Edited February 21, 2013 by C T

[Marblehead]

Here, MH, a little deviation which you might enjoy...

Yes, I know this song. I don't get all teary-eyed when I hear things like this. But yes, the admiration of my brothers is always there.

 

Been a long time since I heard the song though so thanks for the memories.

 

I and we did our government's wishes. All we can do is hope we have the support of the American people.

[dawei]

I'll put on my mod hat from another forum I help with.

 

First, if there is a reason (and that would be only because the member has made a post that violates the board rules) for a member to be warned, suspended or banned the reason is already totally apparent in what (s)he posted. However, it may not be apparent to many of the members (because of misunderstandings of the rules).

 

I would typically agree. Some exceptions might be the 'history' of a poster where mods know the trend and word games, etc which are not as apparent in a post but amounts to a pattern of baiting, belitting, etc.

 

I feel that a public warning should always be given before a suspension or banning is enforced if at all possible. I realize that all posts are not monitored in real time. When the violation is realized (generally as result of a report by another member) a warning or announcement of temporary suspension should be made as soon as possible. This will stop and/or prevent any gossiping.

 

I agree with this. I rarely can recall a time when a warning was not issued as a first step. Now, it is possible that a fast exchange occurs where all hell breaks loose and no mods are online. And then it cools down and nobody is fighting anymore. I think what should be considered is if it has already cooled off, then mods have to be careful not to 'stoke the fire'.

In such cases, a cool warning or acknowledgement that things have cooled off and lets get back to topic and not have such outbreaks. etc.

 

I will say once mods get involved in 'explaining' and exchanging, it can easily turn south. What happened with Turtle I've seen 100 times. It was a predictable outcome. Not because he deserved it but because that is simply a typical outcome when nobody takes a step backwards (including mods).

 

There is a mod on our board who when he gets in a tit-for-tat with a member will often go to the mod forum and say he doesn't want to make a suspension decision as he knows his emotional buttons have been pushed. So mods vary. And that is a microcosm that posters vary too.

 

The Mod Squad will then have time to discuss whether or not further action needs be taken. If a suspension or banning is in order one of the Mods can then start a thread stating the facts relating to the event.

Yes, public warnings should always be followed by a PM to the offending member. This should be private unlss the offending member wishes to make it public and this can be done in a thread in the "Moderator Logs" sub-forum started by either the offending member or a moderator.

 

I am not a fan of mods stating facts like they need to be completely transparent. Like you said: Most of the time, the post itself shows the problem and a warning shows the mods are aware. A PM is actually a good idea because a poster may decide to walk away from a post and not really see any warning directed to them. So what happens is they go to another thread and the emotion is still high and the post something there which appears they are ignoring a warning they never saw.

 

If a temporary suspension (no more than 48 hours) is transformed into a 7, 10, whatever day suspension then both sides will have had time to present their facts according to their understandings. This would prevent gossip of favoritism of certain members and gossip of witch-hunts by the moderators. This would also allow time to present the offending post(s) in the "logs" thread so that there are no questions as to what "really" happened.

 

This is not a court of law. Rarely are both sides presenting any facts, particularly publicly. IMO, such exchange should be in PM as one doesn't need to start a match of picking sides and ganging up. But I do think the general point made by this entire thread is a need to show in a timely fashion some action has occurred. In light of no warning, a thread like this starts in honest concern but becomes a proving ground to tear apart the policies and causes issues you mention and end with someone suspended. It would be good to remember this pattern in the future.

[Owledge]

In my opinion there are 2 or 3 people here who are Neo nazis wannabees who cut and paste from rascist sites. To each there own and conspiracy nuts tend to build a sad paranoid life around themselves, but its sad to see their bile piling up here.

Boring conspiracy theory.

 

 

I got a couple more that are a bit worse, but I'm holding back. Some people bring out the worst in me.

Bringing out the worst in people is a great opportunity for them to get rid of it, but very few take it.

 

 

My point and ire is at what I'll call Active Bigots <more descriptive then M*th&% FK&*%NG S*&KM>. We all have prejudices and in conversation they'll come out. And that's a good thing because it gives us a chance to learn from each other. The Active Bigots have a dark repeated agenda; it may be to convince the site that-'Homosexuality is dirty and immoral' or 'Jews are Evil' or more politically correct 'Christianity is the root of all Evil'. If it pops up once or twice its some ones view, we can take it or leave it. When its repeated often and in unlikely topics it's the mark of a nasty racist.

The most hilarious thing is a bigot rant about the evils of bigotry. It is also very in accord to the wisdom: You become what you fight. Although sometimes one is that in the first place and then sees it everywere but inside himself.

 

You said "his 'truth' are another's hateful rhetoric" about someone, but you fail to apply the same awareness to yourself. You can justify every ugly word and insult as 'speaking out against evilxyz', thereby claiming that your beliefs are truth. This is the basic and worn-out process that led to so much war in the world - belief systems fighting each other because they all think beyond a doubt that they are right and thus all means are justified.

 

Your writings are no less amusing than the joke phrase: "I am totally nonviolent, and if you say anything different, I will punch you in the face!"

 

I'd just like to mention, purely to underline my point, not to gloat, that one guy who recently got suspended after making baseless accusations against me and misrepresenting my point wasn't reported to the mods by me, and not by someone else either, but HE reported ME to the mods and got suspended for his behavior. Afterwards his hipocrisy was pointed out by the admin and he still doesn't see what he did. People who fight for principles without living up to them, sometimes even contradicting themselves in one sentence, really need to reflect on their own actions and stop their war against differing viewpoints, otherwise they might become radical fanatics.

 

I don't report people who get nasty towards me to the mods because 1) that would go against the standards I set for myself, 2) it is virtually impossible to insult me, and 3) I see the potential healing process behind it. Repressing stuff is not healthy. Fighting that process can make the problem worse.

Why should I bother when someone calls me names? I know better, and their lack of evidence and rational presentation to underline their point confirms it. And if some people equal slander with truth ... well, that's their problem really. People see what they want to see. Many times in the past someone has said to me: "Why are you so negative all the time?" And my response is: "Why do you choose to see only the negative?"

Edited February 27, 2013 by Owledge

[Aaron]

I'd just like to mention, purely to underline my point, not to gloat, that one guy who recently got suspended after making baseless accusations against me and misrepresenting my point wasn't reported to the mods by me, and not by someone else either, but HE reported ME to the mods and got suspended for his behavior. Afterwards his hipocrisy was pointed out by the admin and he still doesn't see what he did. People who fight for principles without living up to them, sometimes even contradicting themselves in one sentence, really need to reflect on their own actions and stop their war against differing viewpoints, otherwise they might become radical fanatics.

 

I don't report people who get nasty towards me to the mods because 1) that would go against the standards I set for myself, 2) it is virtually impossible to insult me, and 3) I see the potential healing process behind it. Repressing stuff is not healthy. Fighting that process can make the problem worse.

Why should I bother when someone calls me names? I know better, and their lack of evidence and rational presentation to underline their point confirms it. And if some people equal slander with truth ... well, that's their problem really. People see what they want to see. Many times in the past someone has said to me: "Why are you so negative all the time?" And my response is: "Why do you choose to see only the negative?"

 

I've gotten a lot of support from others regarding my suspension and so far I have failed to hear anyone say they felt it was justified nor have I been provided with any evidence of a direct insult or violation of the ToS, new or old. Sean has apologized for my suspension and admitted that it was questionable. I'm not going to pursue it since he apologized. I have also added you to my ignore list and I recommend anyone that finds your speech offensive to do the same. With that said, I bid you adieu. Just remember I wont be reading any reply from you, so you'll just be wasting your breath if you do.

 

Aaron

Edited February 27, 2013 by Aaron