Banned from Parenting Forum

TequilaMockingBird

I was banned from the Parenting Forum for a week. I don't agree with this. (Surprisingly enough.)

Thead has asked me to take it to Feedback, so may I jump aboard your thread Ludo?

EDIT: New thread started as per Theadydals request.

That was a nasty, troll-filled thread, and in my opinion would put alot of parents off posting in Parenting. I have looked and I can't see where I broke the charter, except by perhaps not reporting enough threads.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055329029

ntlbell

sueme wrote: »

I was banned from the Parenting Forum for a week. I don't agree with this. (Surprisingly enough.)

Thead has asked me to take it to Feedback, so may I jump aboard your thread Ludo?

EDIT: New thread started as per Theadydals request.

That was a nasty, troll-filled thread, and in my opinion would put alot of parents off posting in Parenting. I have looked and I can't see where I broke the charter, except by perhaps not reporting enough threads.

calling someone a troll for a start, personal abuse?

Nevyn

If you have an issue with a post you are ment to report it not respond to it with futher inflamatory posts which were personally abusive and derailing the thread.

Sherifu

sueme wrote: »

That was a nasty, troll-filled thread, and in my opinion would put alot of parents off posting in Parenting. I have looked and I can't see where I broke the charter, except by perhaps not reporting enough threads.

The only thing I will say is, try to ignore posters you think are trolls and just report them. Instead you started arguing in your own thread and I think you even posted 'in before the lock' which made me smile.

ntlbell

Sherifu wrote: »

I think you even posted 'in before the lock' which made me smile.

Yup funny, but more deraling off topic another breach, how many do you want to be pointed out before you're happy with the ban

TequilaMockingBird

Thaedydal wrote: »

If you have an issue with a post you are ment to report it not respond to it with futher inflamatory posts which were personally abusive and derailing the thread.

Perhaps I'm wrong, or terribly insensitive but I don't believe I was personally abusive towards anyone. I did report a post and the thread as a whole.

Marcus.Aurelius

There was an awful lot of trolling on that thread, and frankly I'm shocked by the amount of backbiting still going on against and for your case here in feedback.

You should not have derailed the thread with personal attacks, I can see no administrative issue with the ban, it was issued according to the charter, a common rule throughout most of the forums here. Thaedydal was right to ban.

TequilaMockingBird

Sherifu wrote: »

The only thing I will say is, try to ignore posters you think are trolls and just report them.

I did try to ignore them when the trolling became obvious, and I did report it.

Sherifu wrote: »

Instead you started arguing in your own thread and I think you even posted 'in before the lock' which made me smile.

Arguing or debating? I felt I was debating.
"In before the lock"... well once it had a Feedback thread of its own, I figured it was just a matter of time.

pirelli

Thaedydal wrote: »

If you have an issue with a post you are ment to report it not respond to it with futher inflamatory posts which were personally abusive and derailing the thread.

Thaedydal, If you felt I was personally abusive, which you obviously would considering you deleted my posts because you took the high ground and lectured everybody on the child protection act. Could you please explain to everyone what right you have to inform everyone about an act that doesn't exist. There are guidelines that state child protection but these are only guidlines and they were not relevant to the thread and if you find one that has a rule that supports your view,please post it here. I attacked your errouneous post. I did not attack another poster.

I hope you did not ban Sueme because of me. She merely told me not to challenge your knowledge of the law.

Nevyn

sueme wrote: »

Perhaps I'm wrong, or terribly insensitive but I don't believe I was personally abusive towards anyone. I did report a post and the thread as a whole.

Ok lets have a look at your posts in that thread.

sueme wrote: »

...and you don't need to look under a bridge to find a troll.

sueme wrote: »

Lord above this is all very silly. If it was my daughter, I'd tell her to grow up.

sueme wrote: »

I read your posts as trolling, others read your posts as trolling, and the mod of this forum read your posts as trolling.

I shall not comment to your posts on this thread anymore as there are warnings about that type of thing.

sueme wrote: »

*waves to the Feedbackers*

ibtl

sueme wrote: »

This is the second time I've asked you to stop with the personal abuse.

sueme wrote: »

I'm afraid there is only one response to that: :rolleyes:

In hindsight maybe I should have given you a month.

Nevyn

pirelli get you own I was banned thread and I will deal with you there.

Sherifu

sueme wrote: »

I did try to ignore them when the trolling became obvious, and I did report it.

Arguing or debating? I felt I was debating.
"In before the lock"... well once it had a Feedback thread of its own, I figured it was just a matter of time.

You should have stayed out of it tbh. Thaed has done the work of picking out the relevant posts above. The thread became a mess and you are partly to blame.

TequilaMockingBird

Thaedydal wrote: »

Ok lets have a look at your posts in that thread.
....

In hindsight maybe I should have given you a month.

Well, if thats the worst I came up with and is considered enough for a banning, then I think its fairly lame. God knows I could have said a lot more, but thought I was doing well keeping pretty reasonable in the face of a lot of personal abuse.

As I said before, I don't think its doing the image of the Parenting Forum any good, but hey, what's it to me.

pirelli

Marcus.Aurelius wrote: »

There was an awful lot of trolling on that thread, and frankly I'm shocked by the amount of backbiting still going on against and for your case here in feedback.

You should not have derailed the thread with personal attacks, I can see no administrative issue with the ban, it was issued according to the charter, a common rule throughout most of the forums here. Thaedydal was right to ban.

Thaedydal was not right to ban everyone and I imagine Thaedydal is desperately searching for a irish statute child protection act and cant find one. The charter is just something some people hide behind as if they own it exclusively. I think Thaedydals posts about a child protection act are more serious infringments of the charter and highlight how her opinions could seriously hurt and offend all people who use that forum, and that Thaedydal derailed the thread.

Marcus.Aurelius

May I draw your attention to the Children Act, 2001, the Child Care Act, 1991 and related Acts

Although your banning seems harsh to me

TequilaMockingBird

Hey. GET OUTTA MY THREAD. He's got his own now.

Marcus.Aurelius

Apologies, have copied to there.

Quality

pirelli wrote: »

Thaedydal was not right to ban everyone and I imagine Thaedydal is desperately searching for a irish statute child protection act and cant find one. The charter is just something some people hide behind as if they own it exclusively. I think Thaedydals posts about a child protection act are more serious infringments of the charter and highlight how her opinions could seriously hurt and offend all people who use that forum, and that Thaedydal derailed the thread.

I think thaed is refaring to "child protection policys", I am part of an organisation that would have all their members carry out a child protection information class, pass garda clearance etc, before they are allowed to volunteer with the children.

A lot of charitys/ organisations would have a child protection policy. Maybe this is what caused confusion.

KnifeWRENCH

Thaedyal wrote:

Ok lets have a look at your posts in that thread.

As a neutral observer, I don't see any personal abuse there. sueme was attacking posts, not posters. I don't see calling someone a troll as personally abusive - you yourself said those posters were trolling.

sueme I think your ban was harsh. It's obvious that you didn't start the thread with the intention of turning it into a slanging match.
If people had disagreed with you, fair enough, but it didn't warrant the abuse you got.

TequilaMockingBird

square_igloo wrote: »

As a neutral observer, I don't see any personal abuse there. sueme was attacking posts, not posters. I don't see calling someone a troll as personally abusive - you yourself said those posters were trolling.

sueme I think your ban was harsh. It's obvious that you didn't start the thread with the intention of turning it into a slanging match.
If people had disagreed with you, fair enough, but it didn't warrant the abuse you got.

Thank you, its appreciated. And I agree.

Baggly

And for what its worth, i agree too. Cant really see the abusive parts of those posts

Lollipops23

Having read plenty of Sueme's posts in the past and having read through the parenting thread, i think the ban was out of order,frankly.

She was attacked by a lot of posters offering nothing but slights on how she chooses to raise her child-i don't see any of those getting banned.

Some people just like their power.

tallaght01

Sueme, I just had alook at that thread, and you were really lambasted right from the get-go. People really get on their high horses when they want to.

You lost the rag a bit. So what? you're human.

You're a really good poster in parenting, and ,for what it's worth, I'd have reacted in the same way as you did to the trolling.

takola

I don't see any abuse in those posts tbh. Nothing was made personal and one of those posts was actually to ask someone else to stop being personally abusive.

I think sueme kept her head quite well. In fairness she probably should have reported the posts and thread faster than she did but she did report them. People in there got alot more abusive than she did. I think the ban was harsh.

Tony Broke

Sueme shouldn't have been banned

I posted in that thread , I was the one that got it going and I didnt see much trolling tbh.

Some posters like myself asked fair questions, like why didnt you put sun lotion on the child and Sueme reacted like any parent would.

TequilaMockingBird

I'm all out of thanks Takola, but cheers.

Wether this ban is lifted or not, I feel morally in the right here, so it helps that alot of you are seeing my point, and not leaving me here alone ranting at the system!

This whole thing has been ridiculous.




*Not quite ready for the cats boys, but looking forward to them, make 'em gooduns' k?

Tony Broke

sueme wrote: »

I'm all out of thanks Takola, but cheers.

Wether this ban is lifted or not, I feel morally in the right here, so it helps that alot of you are seeing my point, and not leaving me here alone ranting at the system!

This whole thing has been ridiculous.




*Not quite ready for the cats boys, but looking forward to them, make 'em gooduns' k?

Have to...stop....cant

Your right about being unfairly banned, but not about

So about 100 kids, about 50 adults and NO-ONE thought these kids might burn??

As you should have put lotion on her.

Ludo

I feel responsible for what has happened to Sueme and Quality. I brought this issue of "trolling" into the feedback area on Thaeds recommendation. If I had realised that the offended parties would also be banned I may have gone about it another way.

It is good to know though that the people I felt were responsible actually have a history of bans for trolling. At least I know now my instincts about them were correct. In light of this though, I feel the bans to Sueme and Quality could have just been a warning maybe (even that seems a bit harsh though). Bans for a first offence seems OTT.

Heinrich

On the question of responsibility; those who were banned were solely responsible for their own banning.

Let's not lay the blame elsewhere nor indeed assume that responsibility one's self.

The Hill Billy

tallaght01 wrote: »

Sueme, I just had alook at that thread, and you were really lambasted right from the get-go. People really get on their high horses when they want to.

You lost the rag a bit. So what? you're human.

You're a really good poster in parenting, and ,for what it's worth, I'd have reacted in the same way as you did to the trolling.

+1

You got caught in the crossfire a bit there methinks. Your posts, as quoted by Thaed, I don't think warranted a ban. But the thread needed the ban-hammer & it isn't always a precision instrument.

ntlbell

Heinrich wrote: »

On the question of responsibility; those who were banned were solely responsible for their own banning.

Let's not lay the blame elsewhere nor indeed assume that responsibility one's self.

oh can we not blame it on someone else? you mean we have to take accoutnablity and resposnibility for our own actions??


OMGZOLLE :eek:

What a revilation!

I think someone's got the original point of the orignal thread..

*ching*

TequilaMockingBird

Tony Broke wrote: »

Have to...stop....cant

Your right about being unfairly banned, but not about



As you should have put lotion on her.

That is not the issue, or the case here, as has been explained again and again.

This thread is about being banned.

TequilaMockingBird

ntlbell wrote: »

oh can we not blame it on someone else? you mean we have to take accoutnablity and resposnibility for our own actions??


OMGZOLLE :eek:

What a revilation!

I think someone's got the original point of the orignal thread..

*ching*

Post reported. Yawn.

ntlbell

sueme wrote: »

Post reported. Yawn.

You know before you report a post there generally has to be a reason otherwise mods will start to get bored of your constant reports.

It is actually against the charter of most forums to abuse the report feature.

so unless the post breaks the charter dont randomly report posts

thanks for playing!

togster

you have a serious chip on your shoulder ntbell.

OT the OP was unfairly banned. Simple as

Trinity

ntlbell wrote: »

oh can we not blame it on someone else? you mean we have to take accoutnablity and resposnibility for our own actions??


OMGZOLLE :eek:

What a revilation!

I think someone's got the original point of the orignal thread..

*ching*

Bad attitude, which is what probably got up the OP's back in the first place.

Its the smart arses that derail threads, not necessarily trolls. There was nothing wrong with people stating their 'opinion' that mother was responsible for the suncream, however its the degrading, derogatory manner in which people point this out that puts people on the defensive.

Bubblewrap kid for example. And the use of mr rolls eyes. Harsh.

The boards motto is Now Ye're talking. Who are any of you, aside from the mods, to say whether a thread is worthwhile or not. There is plenty of other ****e on here not worth the trouble of reading - so hit the back button and look elsewhere or else report it.

Overheal

Joy of hindsight eh? How much simpler life is if the Report button is used early on.

Really you have to make 1 of 2 choices when faced with a conflict on a thread: either report it, or deftly defuse the situation (or try both?). But never butt heads, because it becomes difficult to read >_> then you get this mountain out of a molehill, then you have moles, and then we have to call the exterminators because now we have a mole infestation - thanks a lot moles.

TequilaMockingBird

Well the reason I was banned apparently was for personal abuse, which I don't believe I did and quite a few people agree with me, I have already admitted I should have reported more posts, so essentially I was banned for not reporting more posts about people who were using personal abuse towards me. I was treated the same as the people who were breaking the charter.

Not the finest example of Modding I have seen here.

Nevyn

sueme I already told you it was for the tit for tat posting which was off topic and derailing the thread which got you banned.

Heinrich

sueme wrote: »

Well the reason I was banned apparently was for personal abuse, which I don't believe I did and quite a few people agree with me, I have already admitted I should have reported more posts, so essentially I was banned for not reporting more posts about people who were using personal abuse towards me. I was treated the same as the people who were breaking the charter.

Not the finest example of Modding I have seen here.

By the same token there are those who disagree with you and with perfectly valid reason!

You were banned and criticizing the modding might get that ban prolonged.

Is there something in the charter re over reporting?

tallaght01

Thaedydal wrote: »

I am happy to discuss the topic and the challenge in the parenting forum
when he is able to do so, which given his vitrollic rants unfortunately may be longer then a week.

Heinrich wrote: »

You were banned and criticizing the modding might get that ban prolonged.

Just out of curiousity, guys (I hope never to have a feedback thread directed at me, so I hope the following will be irrelevant) are we supposed to prolong bans etc for things people say in feedback? I was under the impression that feedback was somewhere where you could safely criticise mod decisions?

I'm open to correction, though.

Nevyn

This forum is a place to question modding thats not a problem.

sueme you contributed to that squabble, if you had not of reacted they way you did the squabble would not have continued, you got banned due to your participation, don't do it again it's that simple.

Sarah: That's not fair!
Jareth: You say that so often, I wonder what your basis for comparison is?

You were all behaving like children so you all got punished and given time to think about your behaviour, I suggest you do that rather then whinging on here other people were more badly behaved then you were.

Nevyn

tallaght01 wrote: »

Just out of curiousity, guys (I hope never to have a feedback thread directed at me, so I hope the following will be irrelevant) are we supposed to prolong bans etc for things people say in feedback? I was under the impression that feedback was somewhere where you could safely criticise mod decisions?

I'm open to correction, though.

Yes people can criticise and question here and seek to have decisions over turned and say all manner of things but I have also had posters demonstrate and indeed say that after the ban is up they will not play ball and abide by the rules ( as laid down in the forum charter) and display such disregard that letting them back in to the forum would damaging to the forum and to the community there.

tallaght01

Thaedydal wrote: »

Yes people can criticise and question here and seek to have decisions over turned and say all manner of things but I have also had posters demonstrate and indeed say that after the ban is up they will not play ball and abide by the rules ( as laid down in the forum charter) and display such disregard that letting them back in to the forum would damaging to the forum and to the community there.

Yea fair enough if the person says they'll continue to break rules, or if they're very personally abusive towards the moderator.

But the above quotes in my post didn't suggest those caveats. That's just what had me curious.

TequilaMockingBird

To be honest whether the ban is prolonged or not is of no concern to me, I wouldn't contribute to the Parenting Forum anyway if it continues in its current form, so whether it is a weeks ban or a lifetime ban is all the one to me at the moment. Either, are in my opinion, wrong. I didn't derail the thread, I didn't engage in any personal abuse and I have been reprimanded the same as people who did do this. Nor did I derail the my own thread.

I don't like Thaeds modding in this particular instance, but I have never had any problems with her before and respect her position here. And I totally agree that Parenting is a large, emotive, non-lighthearted forum which shouldn't be left to one mod to police as she has plenty of other forums to mod and a real life too. I have been nothing but respectful to her either in post or PM, and I resent being treated as one of the mob. I don't like having a ban on my record here, if it was deserved, no problem, but in my and others, opinions, it is not.

tbh

sueme wrote: »

I was banned from the Parenting Forum for a week. I don't agree with this. (Surprisingly enough.)

Thead has asked me to take it to Feedback, so may I jump aboard your thread Ludo?

EDIT: New thread started as per Theadydals request.

That was a nasty, troll-filled thread, and in my opinion would put alot of parents off posting in Parenting. I have looked and I can't see where I broke the charter, except by perhaps not reporting enough threads.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055329029

just read the post. Essentially, you're as guilty as ntlbell and others who repeatedly dragged the thread off-topic despite being warned a couple of times not to react to the bait. Yes the mods often will and should step in so as you don't have to face the type of abuse you got in that thread, but they can't ban someone for going off-topic and ignore the fact that you did the same even tho you're the OP.
basically, you either ignore the posts altogether, or you report them. Trying to deal with this type of thing on-thread just fks the thread. imo.

edit, the only difference between you and quality on one side and ntlbell and magicmarker on the other is that you were on opposing sides of this argument. to us neutrals, all comments about the argument are equally off-topic and equally deserving of a ban.

tallaght01

Actually, speaking of forum charters. Who comes up with them? Do people review them regularly in light of the evolving cohort who post on a forum? Just wondering if what the posters thinik is unacceptable coincides with what's in the charter. How often do people change theirs?

Having said that, in bio+med we have had our own stickied feedback thread for ages, and it's not thrown up any big surpises.

This is way off topic, isn't it. I'm gonna get me one of them there bans or somethin. I need to get back to my boring work, in fairness.

Ignore my musings. As you were. :P

Loomis

Thaedydal wrote: »

sueme I already told you it was for the tit for tat posting which was off topic and derailing the thread which got you banned.

Can you post off topic on a thread so long as it's not in a tit for tat manner?

TequilaMockingBird

tbh wrote: »

just read the post. Essentially, you're as guilty as ntlbell and others who repeatedly dragged the thread off-topic despite being warned a couple of times not to react to the bait. Yes the mods often will and should step in so as you don't have to face the type of abuse you got in that thread, but they can't ban someone for going off-topic and ignore the fact that you did the same even tho you're the OP.
basically, you either ignore the posts altogether, or you report them. Trying to deal with this type of thing on-thread just fks the thread. imo.

edit, the only difference between you and quality on one side and ntlbell and magicmarker on the other is that you were on opposing sides of this argument. to us neutrals, all comments about the argument are equally off-topic and equally deserving of a ban.

I disagree, there was personal abuse towards me, by a known troll of many forums on boards, I did report it, and I got banned. Fair enough, I should have logged out and forgot about it after reporting, but I didn't derail the thread and I didn't use personal abuse towards anyone, but I don't believe that was sufficient enough a crime to warrant a banning. A warning would have been fair enough, an infraction at the very, very most perhaps, but not a banning.

ntlbell

sueme wrote: »

I disagree, there was personal abuse towards me, by a known troll of many forums on boards, I did report it, and I got banned. Fair enough, I should have logged out and forgot about it after reporting, but I didn't derail the thread and I didn't use personal abuse towards anyone, but I don't believe that was sufficient enough a crime to warrant a banning. A warning would have been fair enough, an infraction at the very, very most perhaps, but not a banning.

You don't worry about what I'm doing or where I'm trolling, control yourself.

You didn't; you got banned move on.

Dudess

Yeah, I have to say I disagree with tbh. At least Quality and sueme weren't resorting to the unprovoked smart-assed, aggressive, sarcastic, mean-spirited stuff ntlbell and MagicMarker were posting. If they had made their points in a civil, non-reactionary manner they wouldn't have riled sueme up and this thread would probably be non existent.