[moggser]

[Quote=TheDoc;77686510]

Originally Posted by Beruthiel

You should probably drop Wil an e-mail and tell him.

Habbit to write "Will", there is about three instances a year I type "Wil"


But yeah his surname, is spelt wrong. But I've now ascertained that it still wasn't the cause of my grievance.[/

Dick head ..... There feel better

[TheDoc]

[QUOTE=moggser;77687032]

Originally Posted by TheDoc

Habbit to write "Will", there is about three instances a year I type "Wil"


But yeah his surname, is spelt wrong. But I've now ascertained that it still wasn't the cause of my grievance.[/

Dick head ..... There feel better

Its just not the same coming from you though....

[Cardinal Richelieu]

Originally Posted by Spear

They're stock text pieces auto added to the PM, and not the mods choice. A lot of people don't like it, it's inflammatory and the references will be lost on most.

Exactly, isn't it time it was changed?

[Steve]

Originally Posted by TheDoc

However it can be frustrating when I've no recollection of being a dick recently. A link to the post indicating why would be fairly useful.

There's a link to the post in the infractions tab on your profile:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/member.php?userid=36571
Only yourself and mods can see this.

Especially around the airsoft forum, there is blatant target reporting, where users kinda gang up and report posts together to have someone banned, infracted or a post removed. This is usually done when someone spouts bollox or is flat out lying and they get called up on it.

If someone posts crap that shouldn't be in the forum then we remove it. Yes, we consider the arguments put forth in a reported post, but, the decision is nothing to do with the volume of reports.

As regards 'blatant target reporting', the Conspiracy Theories forum is that way ---->

If you have any actual evidence to support what you are claiming there, as always, my PM inbox is open. I've always advocated transparency in the Airsoft forum and if a local feedback discussion is warranted then you know well I'll facilitate that.

Just curious, how come you didn't take offence the first time you were warned with this reason?

FTR, Doc, I also disagree with the 'being a dick' term as the default ban/infract/warn reason.
There are changes afoot to actually stop mods sending (more) offensive reasons for their mod actions, this is one of the results and I hope it gets changed a bit before the new system goes fully live.

[TheDoc]

Originally Posted by Steve

There's a link to the post in the infractions tab on your profile:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/member.php?userid=36571
Only yourself and mods can see this.

If someone posts crap that shouldn't be in the forum then we remove it. Yes, we consider the arguments put forth in a reported post, but, the decision is nothing to do with the volume of reports.

As regards 'blatant target reporting', the Conspiracy Theories forum is that way ---->

Not being bad but I guess your relatively new to the scene, and you could say I've made a few enemies. Without seeing, I could probably name the same people that report my posts time after time after time. Simply just to try get me banned in all honesty.

It was brought up in a feedback thread last year or the year before, and tbh as typical with feedback threads against mods, moderators band around together and it continues as normal. Thats not a conspiracy theory, that is simply the way it is.

Just curious, how come you didn't take offence the first time you were warned with this reason?

The first time was fine, had no issues really. I always despised the "being a dick" template, but getting two in quick succession just annoyed me. Not the reasoning, the actual template. Granted the second reason was a bit harsh, it was just having a pop at someone jovially. The same person/site has made their fair share of threats against me in the past.

I guess I just understand the internet, and dont get my nickers in a twist over forum posts, maybe I should just report stuff more, but I just dont see the point in fairness. However when its at the stage any retorts are punished, I guess i should just report.

The airsoft forum is a tight community, everyone knows each other, and everyone knows the tinfoil hat wearers, who claim to have solictors etc and threaten legal **** all the time.

While it doesn't bother me, because its boards users, threatening legal action over boards posts, I know the solicitors they hire for cake wont be up to much.

FTR, Doc, I also disagree with the 'being a dick' term as the default ban/infract/warn reason.
There are changes afoot to actually stop mods sending (more) offensive reasons for their mod actions, this is one of the results and I hope it gets changed a bit before the new system goes fully live.

I dont have a problem with being called a dick, and dont want to appear to be getting cotton wool over it, the reasoning behind it is sound enough. The template is just epic cringe. And as I've said boards isnt a quake gaming community anymore, you just need to read most of the general forums to see the tripe that gets posted so probably best to just post a template that contains the infracted post and appeal process'.

Plus unless you've got permission from Wil wheaton, you might g3t shut down by the p0w3rs.

And for the record, I've no issues with MODs tearing me a new one. Lemming used to be pretty good at it.

But when its scripted templated ****, its cringy and just turns me off moderators and boards in general

If I was to name them in order

Wil Wheaton being a dick
Enjoy your break/holiday
Mods calling people names after editing their post and banning them

As I said though, thats a different thread, this is the " down with the not funny after ten years Wil Wheaton ****"

[Steve]

Doc, I don't want to get off the point here which is the wording of the 'being a dick' warning. I've already stated my view there.

However, as you are alluding to being targeted here, I'd like to point out some facts.

In the last three years or so you have made 2,254 posts in Airsoft (including subforums). This fact is available to all using the general boards search.

Out of that, 60 of them were reported.
Of those reported (excluding mod 'heads-up' reports):
7 were reported by user 1
5 were reported each by user 2 and 3
4 were reported each by user 4 and 5
3 were reported user 6
2 were reported each by users 7 thru 13
1 were reported each by users 14 thru 31

Out of those 60 reports, 12 were upheld and action taken.

I could have pretended to be a politician and made up some lame statistics about the above instead of just posting the facts - That's not me, if I wanted to massage the figures to suit my own opinion then I'd be no better than the gobshítes that are currently running the country or the eejits in California that claim eating red meat increases your chances of getting cancer by 50% (because a 0.000000000015 chance is 50% greater than a 0.00000000001 chance or whatever..).

Point is, you need to stop claiming you are being targeted by the mod conspiracy and, as we both know, your posting style has never really been totally passive so those figures only represent the fact that we are giving as much leeway as we can (as we do for everyone there).

Now,
Back on topic.

I agree to disagree with the wording of 'being a dick' as the default reason for an infraction - I further disagree that going forward the mods will have no option to post an explanatory note as part of the warning / infraction message and I think this is just the first of many threads that will arise because of it.

[AboutTwoFiddy]

Maybe "acting like a dick" would be more appropriate, attack the posts not the poster.

[K-9]

I joined in early 2007 and I get the "dick" reference, I'd have thought members who signed up earlier than that would too.

I wouldn't use it myself unless it was a poster who would know the term. Unfortunately with the growth of Boards and you've alluded to it yourself The Doc, this isn't a Quake forum anymore or indeed a Boards forum with maybe 10/20 regulars, that you could send a PM to saying "stop being a dick" and they got it, no Wheaton reference needed.


I never use it myself, it can add another reason for a poster to get irate, when usually you are just trying to calm a thread.

[pickarooney]

The message is, in fairness, utterly cringeworthy. It's like "No offense you smell, double jinx, no comebacks" in template form.

[TheDoc]

[QUOTE=Steve;77694061]..................QUOTE]

Appreciate the post Steve.

But the top of my tinfoil is still burning red so I'm going to continue assuming I'm being targetted by the Russians

[Phoenix]

Originally Posted by TheDoc

Appreciate the post Steve.

But the top of my tinfoil is still burning red so I'm going to continue assuming I'm being targetted by the Russians

This red?
http://images.wikia.com/cybernations...fc/GCUflag.jpg

[minidazzler]

Originally Posted by K-9

I joined in early 2007 and I get the "dick" reference, I'd have thought members who signed up earlier than that would too.

I wouldn't use it myself unless it was a poster who would know the term. Unfortunately with the growth of Boards and you've alluded to it yourself The Doc, this isn't a Quake forum anymore or indeed a Boards forum with maybe 10/20 regulars, that you could send a PM to saying "stop being a dick" and they got it, no Wheaton reference needed.


I never use it myself, it can add another reason for a poster to get irate, when usually you are just trying to calm a thread.

I never heard of Wil Wheaton until this thread, but I always thought of don't be a dick as being a good rule. However, in a user warning report or for a ban, simply saying "being a dick" isn't good enough. That doesn't tell the user why they were warned or banned, it's too general. Maybe being a dick and then reference the post and a brief message of why that was dickish, but just being a dick in general shouldn't get you a warning. That just screams to every mod who looks at his profile "this guy is a dick, just take my word for it"

And while most mods will probably be right about a poster acting the dick, they need to tell the other mods why they're right rather than just making simple assertions with no real reason.

[K-9]

Originally Posted by minidazzler

I never heard of Wil Wheaton until this thread, but I always thought of don't be a dick as being a good rule.

It is a good rule and often I've thought this user is just being a dick, but had to pick a warning that is more palatable and pc. With the DRP procedure it becomes hard to defend, enough posters will employ charter lawyerism anyway, though in fairness, posters who get "stop being a dick" don't need the term, don't need charter rules, give your reasoning in a pm, they usually take it on the chin.

However, in a user warning report or for a ban, simply saying "being a dick" isn't good enough. That doesn't tell the user why they were warned or banned, it's too general. Maybe being a dick and then reference the post and a brief message of why that was dickish, but just being a dick in general shouldn't get you a warning. That just screams to every mod who looks at his profile "this guy is a dick, just take my word for it"

And while most mods will probably be right about a poster acting the dick, they need to tell the other mods why they're right rather than just making simple assertions with no real reason.

Its a phrase that has outlived its usefulness, a shame really, I associate it with cop on, myself, some get it, some don't!

[tbh]

surely common sense would dictate that if you have to add text to the warning assuring the user that you don't mean any offense and explaining where the phrase comes from, then it would be better to just use a different friggin phrase?


That text is awkward, unwieldy and is guaranteed to cause problems.

Wouldn't "Acting the maggot" be more relevant to an irish site than "being a dick"?

[Dav]

The text has been changed as a part of an update we rolled out to ModUtils yesterday.