Unjustified Ban

jaggiebunnet

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=55428394#post55428394

From this I have been banned - now I don't care about having the ban rescinded - I would just like the jumped up little hitler to explain why I was banned - did I abuse anyone after my silly little "infraction" - is calling someone sad now abuse?

AnimalRights

Your wasting their time, they've already locked the thread because I had the "cheek" to question it. :rolleyes:

Its like all the mods here are bots who all have being programmed with the George Orwell 1984 guide.

tman

I don't remember asking whether it did anything for you - I don't really care if it does anything for your pompous arse or not - I asked for pointers so if you don't have any then don't post anything!

Yeah... totally unjustified...

keystone

I had a look at the content of the thread itself and this is exactly what we have come to expect from the boards Mods......

Take comments in context please, look at the complete thread.

jaggiebunnet

tman wrote: »

Yeah... totally unjustified...

That is what the infraction was for - the ban happened after the infraction.


The nonsense spouted that if you don't like it bugger off doesn't wash - this site has a responsibility because it has become the biggest site of it's type in Ireland and simply always closing ranks behind a moderator leaves it with no credibility. Users should feel that their feedback will be taken seriously and not simply dismissed as one by one the mods come out to back their own.

Fajitas!

Following that, you called me sad.

Which made me very sad

Tbh, your attitude is completly unacceptable. You started off insulting people, I gave you chance, you didn't take it.

Animal Rights, it was nothing to do with the fact you had the 'cheek' to question it. You were informed if you wanted to question it, to take it here. You continued to go off topic. The thread was not going back on topic. I locked it.

_blank_

Jumped up little hitler.

That attitude won't get you very far in Feedback buddy.

_blank_

jaggiebunnet wrote: »

this site has a responsibility because it has become the biggest site of it's type in Ireland and simply always closing ranks behind a moderator leaves it with no credibility.

Wah wah wah.

No credibility?

ORLY?

Is that why press and journalists are increasingly coming and seeking opinions from users?

jaggiebunnet wrote: »

Users should feel that their feedback will be taken seriously and not simply dismissed as one by one the mods come out to back their own.

Users' feedback is only summarily dismissed if they come along with a fúckhead attitude, calling people hitlers and acting the absolute dickhead.

Which you seem to have done here.

jaggiebunnet

Fajitas! wrote: »

Tbh, your attitude is completly unacceptable. You started off insulting people, I gave you chance, you didn't take it.

to be honest your attitude is completely unacceptable - I asked during the day for the thread to be locked and where were the mods then? not doing their job that's for sure.

I did not start off insulting people, I asked for pointers I received 2 posts that gave nothing and to ensure no one else did the same I told them I was not interested in this kind of critique which offered nothing in the slightest.

jaggiebunnet

DesF wrote: »

Wah wah wah.

No credibility?

ORLY?

Is that why press and journalists are increasingly coming and seeking opinions from users?




Users' feedback is only summarily dismissed if they come along with a fúckhead attitude, calling people hitlers and acting the absolute dickhead.

Which you seem to have done here.

ok so calling me a dickhead is acceptable is it.

That is exactly the problem that many users of this site has.

again, if you have nothing constructive to add please don't post.

_blank_

jaggiebunnet wrote: »

to be honest your attitude is completely unacceptable - I asked during the day for the thread to be locked and where were the mods then? not doing their job that's for sure.

lol. Job?

And just because you ask for a thread to be locked, doesn't mean it is going to happen.

Who the fúck do you think you are?

You are acting like a spoiled kid.

I ASKED FOR SOMETHING, IT DIDN'T HAPPEN, I'M HAVING A TANTRUM.

Grow up. Act civil, and maybe something can happen.

You have no idea how the site works, so shut the fúck up will you.

jaggiebunnet wrote: »

I did not start off insulting people,

You did in this thread.

watna

Being a mod is not a "job". Mods are volunteers. They have real lives too you know. They don't sit on boards all day (well, some may do!)

_blank_

watna wrote: »

Being a mod is not a "job". Mods are volunteers. They have real lives too you know. They don't sit on boards all day (well, some may do!)

I do :pac:

Fajitas!

jaggiebunnet wrote: »

to be honest your attitude is completely unacceptable - I asked during the day for the thread to be locked and where were the mods then? not doing their job that's for sure.

I did not start off insulting people, I asked for pointers I received 2 posts that gave nothing and to ensure no one else did the same I told them I was not interested in this kind of critique which offered nothing in the slightest.

You do realise that being a moderator does not mean being on boards 24/7?

What do you mean "ensure no one else did the same"? As in abusing members so that everyone else would tell you what you wanted? That's not going to be effective. You asked a public opinion, you got one. I don't see why anyone should be told

I don't really care if it does anything for your pompous arse or not

_blank_

jaggiebunnet wrote: »

ok so calling me a dickhead is acceptable is it.

About as acceptable as calling someone a "jumped up little hitler".

So again, if you expect certain standards, then apply them to yourself first.

6th

jaggiebunnet wrote: »

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=55428394#post55428394

From this I have been banned - now I don't care about having the ban rescinded - I would just like the jumped up little hitler to explain why I was banned - did I abuse anyone after my silly little "infraction" - is calling someone sad now abuse?

I reported you posts because you attitude stinks and you were coming across a tad assholey. If you attitude was to change I'm sure the mods (who are among the most friendly & helpful on this site) would be happy to have you back.

Beruthiel

jaggiebunnet wrote: »

to be honest your attitude is completely unacceptable.

No, as a Mod of that forum, his attitude is exactly what is expected when faced with an agressive poster who doesn't know how to behave in a civel manner.
The ban was justified.

jaggiebunnet

DesF wrote: »

About as acceptable as calling someone a "jumped up little hitler".

So again, if you expect certain standards, then apply them to yourself first.

:rolleyes:

seamus

jaggiebunnet wrote: »

this site has a responsibility because it has become the biggest site of it's type in Ireland

Why? What kind of responsibility and to whom?

What makes you think that you deserve respect when you clearly don't show it to anyone who makes you even a little unhappy?

The facts here are that you lost the head a little and got an infraction. Then you abused the moderator. What did you think was going to happen?

AnimalRights

DesF wrote: »

lol. Job?


Who the fúck do you think you are?

If Mods are going to be consistent surely this is a bannable offence on 2 sep counts?

_blank_

jaggiebunnet wrote: »

:rolleyes:

Ah yes, good aul Mr Rolleyes.

A great point, well made.

You are acting like an idiot now.

Have you nothing else to say?

Go on, I'm enjoying this immensely.

6th

Jaggie you photo was shit and I think you're really angry at yourself for taking a shit photograph .... I would be too. So just sit back for a while and realise that you can do better next time. Its not Faj's fault you're not very talented.

Oh look, I'm not a mod but I think you are in the wrong! Maybe, just maybe, you are in the wrong?

Xavi6

jaggiebunnet wrote: »

:rolleyes:

Good contribution Diane. Look, we can all do that :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

_blank_

AnimalRights wrote: »

If Mods are going to be consistent surely this is a bannable offence on 2 sep counts?

Why the fúck are you saying that?

Different people Moderate this Feedback Forum than the forum you are getting hot under the collar about.

Calm down, stop trying to get other people banned, because, seriously, you are looking more and more stupid with every post.

Take a step back, re-assess the situation, deep breaths, and see what you come up with.

jaggiebunnet

seamus wrote: »

Why? What kind of responsibility and to whom?

What makes you think that you deserve respect when you clearly don't show it to anyone who makes you even a little unhappy?

The facts here are that you lost the head a little and got an infraction. Then you abused the moderator. What did you think was going to happen?

a responsibility to it's users as described above.

I did not abuse the moderator. If you want abuse have a look at DesF postings.

As expected the ranks are closed. But that is fine. I never expected anything less.

Xavi6

jaggiebunnet wrote: »

a responsibility to it's users as described above.

I did not abuse the moderator. If you want abuse have a look at DesF postings.

As expected the ranks are closed. But that is fine. I never expected anything less.

You might wanna stop suckin on that lemon buddy. Leaving an awful bitter taste.

norrie rugger

Fajitas! wrote: »

Following that, you called me sad.

Which made me very sad

Tbh, your attitude is completly unacceptable. You started off insulting people, I gave you chance, you didn't take it.

Animal Rights, it was nothing to do with the fact you had the 'cheek' to question it. You were informed if you wanted to question it, to take it here. You continued to go off topic. The thread was not going back on topic. I locked it.

I believe he called you "a sad little person"
On the topic of the posting, while maybe I do not agree with the way he said it, I can understand why he said it.

The poster asked for pointers, not a statement of how it made someone feel.
TBH, reading that I actually agreed with the "pompous" comment. If someone asked for a comment on how it evokes emotion in you, then that's a fine comment. If, however, someone askes for help in improving a picture/setting/style then it is not an appropriate comment to leave. It is derisive and insulting (please do not mix this up with constructive critisism) and of course the original poster immediately went on the defensive. The fact that so many people excused the comment, as a valid response to the actual topic being raised, would have made me feel just as frustrated as the OP evidently was.

I sometimes feel that the Mods here are slightly too quick with the infractions, it is just as easy to have a stock PM to warn people that comments like that will result in punishments, especially when taken in context.
Also, basically, telling people to "F**k O** if you don't like it" is not a friendly way to run things and does nothing to enhance the image and reputation of Boards.ie. Which has an, incorrect, image of being "over-modded" anyway

_blank_

jaggiebunnet wrote: »

I did not abuse the moderator.

Yes you bloody well did, you liar.

jaggiebunnet wrote: »

I would just like the jumped up little hitler to explain why I was banned

You think it's OK to compare a moderator of a website to the most evil man in history? You don't consider that to be abuse?

Are you simple?

jaggiebunnet wrote: »

If you want abuse have a look at DesF postings.

Wah wah wah.

Someone else did it, it's all so unfair.

get over it mate, you're banned, is it affecting your life this much?

A ban from one forum on the internet is causing you this much concern and distractment?

And you called the mod sad?

Beruthiel

jaggiebunnet wrote: »

As expected the ranks are closed. But that is fine. I never expected anything less.

I gave you a clear and exact reply.
What else did you expect?

jaggiebunnet

As I said I never expected anything less, but I have had my say, and have given my feedback.

Now I will leave it the real little children to run around and continually abuse their users.

_blank_

jaggiebunnet wrote: »

Now I will leave it the real little children to run around and continually abuse their users.

Cheerio then.

By the way.

Moderators don't "own" you, or any other users.

So they aren't "their users".

Beruthiel

jaggiebunnet wrote: »

Now I will leave it the real little children to run around and continually abuse their users.

I am far from being a child jaggiebunnet and your attitude is making it very difficult for me to take you seriously.

norrie rugger

Fajitas! wrote: »

You do realise that being a moderator does not mean being on boards 24/7?

What do you mean "ensure no one else did the same"? As in abusing members so that everyone else would tell you what you wanted? That's not going to be effective. You asked a public opinion, you got one. I don't see why anyone should be told

In all fairness, he did not ask for a public opinion, he asked for pointers.
I would take that as looking for constructive critisism, not "it does nothing for me".
Why did it do nothing for the poster? What could have improved it?
If that comment had be made with these thought patterns, I imagine that the poster would not have lashed out as he did

seamus

jaggiebunnet wrote: »

a responsibility to it's users as described above.

You didn't describe anything except the requirement to do what you wanted done. Why don't you detail this "responsibility" that you believe this site has?

I did not abuse the moderator. If you want abuse have a look at DesF postings.

Infraction for insulting other members eh Fajitas - what a sad little person you must be - you are right, it is a pity you didn't see this post sooner , you would have given me a good laugh.

Looks like abuse to me.
This is a different forum. A certain amount of abuse (such as what DesF has posted) is tolerated here. Interestingly, you don't seem to be drawing a parallel to the amount of abuse you give and the amount you get in return. Adds a new meaning to "negative feedback". Why don't you post with a little civility, and shock, horror, people will actually respond with civility?

As expected the ranks are closed. But that is fine. I never expected anything less.

The "ranks closing" would mean that we would be defending Fajitas despite overwhelming evidence that he was in the wrong. As I posted above, the evidence shows overwhelmingly that you were in the wrong. Just because you don't get the answers that you want, doesn't mean that there's another agenda. It's a lesson that all of us have to learn in life, often harshly - learn to realise when you're wrong and bow out gracefully.

Mr Magnolia

norrie rugger wrote:

In all fairness, he did not ask for a public opinion, he asked for pointers.
I would take that as looking for constructive critisism, not "it does nothing for me".
Why did it do nothing for the poster? What could have improved it?
If that comment had be made with these thought patterns, I imagine that the poster would not have lashed out as he did.

If the mod warned the posters to adhere to responding as you put it then we'd all be crying oppression. How is this to be regulated? If the mod was to try and inforce this the whole board would become over-moderated would it not?

Fajitas!

norrie rugger wrote: »

I believe he called you "a sad little person"
On the topic of the posting, while maybe I do not agree with the way he said it, I can understand why he said it.

The poster asked for pointers, not a statement of how it made someone feel.
TBH, reading that I actually agreed with the "pompous" comment. If someone asked for a comment on how it evokes emotion in you, then that's a fine comment. If, however, someone askes for help in improving a picture/setting/style then it is not an appropriate comment to leave. It is derisive and insulting (please do not mix this up with constructive critisism) and of course the original poster immediately went on the defensive. The fact that so many people excused the comment, as a valid response to the actual topic being raised, would have made me feel just as frustrated as the OP evidently was.

I sometimes feel that the Mods here are slightly too quick with the infractions, it is just as easy to have a stock PM to warn people that comments like that will result in punishments, especially when taken in context.
Also, basically, telling people to "F**k O** if you don't like it" is not a friendly way to run things and does nothing to enhance the image and reputation of Boards.ie. Which has an, incorrect, image of being "over-modded" anyway

Of course, the first 2 comments could very well have been more in depth. Unfortunatly they weren't, however the correct way to deal with this would quite simply have been to say "Would you mind telling me why" - I'd moreso say the OP went on the offensive than the defensive, he was infracted for this... Now, infractions are not harsh, moreso saying "here,look, don't do that again". The reason I'd use infractions is to record the warning in case it happens again. If I had banned immediatly, it would have been an overreaction. When I posted, I did so quite civilly.

I never said "F**k off", nor would I use that kind of language. I told the Animal Rights to use this forum if he felt he needed to. He had been previously banned from the forum for flaming. If he had such an issue with the site, I'm not going to make him post here by any means - I think that's quite fair.

In all fairness, he did not ask for a public opinion, he asked for pointers.
I would take that as looking for constructive critisism, not "it does nothing for me".
Why did it do nothing for the poster? What could have improved it?
If that comment had be made with these thought patterns, I imagine that the poster would not have lashed out as he did

I can't nor would I want to control peoples responses to a thread like that. It is very much personal opinion. By asking for C&C, you are asking for a public opinion, that's what C&C is.

norrie rugger

Mr Magnolia wrote: »

If the mod warned the posters to adhere to responding as you put it then we'd all be crying oppression. How is this to be regulated? If the mod was to try and inforce this the whole board would become over-moderated would it not?

I know, different forums here means different styles of modding but it works very well elsewhere.

The replies were off topic and snobbish.
Obviously, not being a mod, I can only look at this from a posters point of view. Where as I do not agree with what was said, I can understand why it was said

seamus

Assuming that C&C stands for "Comments and Criticism", then "It does nothing for me", is exactly that, a comment, even if it is low on substance.

It's a bit like putting a sign on your back saying, "Kick me in the arse", then losing the rag when someone kicks you in the arse.

I can understand annoyance or frustration when someone gives you feedback that's not very constructive, but there's no need to turn into a complete arsehole about it.

Fajitas!

seamus wrote: »

Assuming that C&C stands for "Comments and Criticism", then "It does nothing for me", is exactly that, a comment, even if it is low on substance.

It's a bit like putting a sign on your back saying, "Kick me in the arse", then losing the rag when someone kicks you in the arse.

Lol! Indeed.

Mr. Incognito

User put up picture for feedback.

User got honest feedback, i.e. photo is not up to scratch.

User abused other users.

User got banned.

User abused Mods.

Mods abused User.

Dades

norrie rugger wrote: »

In all fairness, he did not ask for a public opinion, he asked for pointers.

In fairness, the OP asked for "C&C" - i.e. comment & critique.

All replies received were either one or the other.

norrie rugger

seamus wrote: »

Assuming that C&C stands for "Comments and Criticism", then "It does nothing for me", is exactly that, a comment, even if it is low on substance.

It's a bit like putting a sign on your back saying, "Kick me in the arse", then losing the rag when someone kicks you in the arse.

I can understand annoyance or frustration when someone gives you feedback that's not very constructive, but there's no need to turn into a complete arsehole about it.

Ha Ha, completely agree with ya. He did indeed become a git.
I just can understand why he did.

OK, I am going to be the pedant. Comments & Criticism not Comments OR Criticism.
TBH the ban was warranted as he did insult the mod but he was evidently getting more riled up throughout the thread.

C&C, again this is only in my opinion, should be treated as a review structure.
I don't post there but i do like to look;) , as i do have an interest in how to frame pictures etc (in a social setting)

OK I don't want to be seen as arguing for the sake as arguing. I just think that if you go to the trouble of posting a reply, you can go to the bother of justifying that reply, especially as that is what was requested

Just my 2c

Lord Nikon

Tbh, I'm surprised the original thread got as far as it did without it being locked. I am furthermore surprised how long this thread has become, without being locked, or for all parties involved to call a spade a spade, and to stop adding fuel to the fire.

norrie rugger

neuromancer wrote: »

Tbh, I'm surprised the original thread got as far as it did without it being locked. I am furthermore surprised how long this thread has become, without being locked, or for all parties involved to call a spade a spade, and to stop adding fuel to the fire.

True.
Ban was justified, just because I understand the OP frustration does not mean I condone his actions

CuLT

Honestly, I think the first couple of replies were a bit snooty, and if it were me and if I was in the wrong mood I might not have bothered posting again.

You've gone about resolving this in entirely the wrong manner though, jaggiebunnet. You got what you deserved for your reaction, and your reactions continue to be unfathomably venemous here.

Fajitas!

C&C is a review structure, but, as mentioned in the thread about giving C&C at the moment, you get what you put into it. If you just post up photos and say "comments and pointers pls", people won't know where you are coming from. If you give background info, if you tell your audience what you were looking for when taking the photograph, that's where you'll find your most constructive C&C.

It takes effort to give C&C aswell. Comments can be just that - I don't always have the time to give indepth C&C, so I might just say "I like 1 & 2, 4 needs more *whatever*". I try to come back to these threads, usually I do.

smashey

Fajitas! wrote: »

C&C is a review structure, but, as mentioned in the thread about giving C&C at the moment, you get what you put into it. If you just post up photos and say "comments and pointers pls", people won't know where you are coming from. If you give background info, if you tell your audience what you were looking for when taking the photograph, that's where you'll find your most constructive C&C.

It takes effort to give C&C aswell. Comments can be just that - I don't always have the time to give indepth C&C, so I might just say "I like 1 & 2, 4 needs more *whatever*". I try to come back to these threads, usually I do.

What do you know about photography anyway?

norrie rugger

Fajitas! wrote: »

C&C is a review structure, but, as mentioned in the thread about giving C&C at the moment, you get what you put into it. If you just post up photos and say "comments and pointers pls", people won't know where you are coming from. If you give background info, if you tell your audience what you were looking for when taking the photograph, that's where you'll find your most constructive C&C.

It takes effort to give C&C aswell. Comments can be just that - I don't always have the time to give indepth C&C, so I might just say "I like 1 & 2, 4 needs more *whatever*". I try to come back to these threads, usually I do.

Did you have that comment under your name before or after this event?
He may have not been insulting you at all:)

You were right to ban him. Maybe a definition of what C&C is, in the charter. It might be there but I have been acused of selective vision when reading charters before. For me posting C&C would mean criticism and qualitative comments

jaggiebunnet

norrie rugger wrote: »

Maybe a definition of what C&C is, in the charter.

and don't forget to add to it that Pompous and Sad are considered abusive terms :pac::pac::pac: - oh and venomous too

Thanks for brightening up a dull morning guys.

Mr Magnolia

AAAaaaargh....

*MUST NOT FEED TROLL*

norrie rugger

Mr Magnolia wrote: »

AAAaaaargh....

*MUST NOT FEED TROLL*