Unfair infraction for kdouglas

Tigger

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=56672788&postcount=20

how does that deserve an infraction

this is deliberate bias because i dare to ask whether the iaa is in the hearts of the airsoft community

Tigger

Tigger wrote: »

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=56672788&postcount=20

how does that deserve an infraction

this is deliberate bias because i dare to ask whether the iaa is in the hearts of the airsoft community

i'm told its because i'm modding

yet this guy who acually tells me to go to a different forum gets thanks from the same mod

Dades

Q: Where was the "name calling", exactly?

And what is an infraction these days, one-ninth of a ban or something?
Hardly worth a feedback thread I would have thought.

kdouglas

As per my reply to you in PM:

kdouglas wrote:

The posts between yourself and Lethal were bordering on starting an argument between the two of you on-thread, I handed out infractions to prevent this. The reason I thanked robster for pointing out the IAA had a forum was because that is where questions for the IAA committee should be placed, not on here where the core members of committee explicitly have a policy of not posting on.

I placed a warning on-thread that there will be some very heavy moderation in that thread due to the history of IAA-related threads on the forum, and I'm keeping with that heavy moderation because otherwise the thread will descend into chaos as they always do when it's about the IAA.

kdouglas

Dades wrote: »

Q: Where was the "name calling", exactly?

And what is an infraction these days, one-ninth of a ban or something?
Hardly worth a feedback thread I would have thought.

Yup, personally I've seen people get really offended by an infraction, to me it's the equivalent of being caught talking in school and the teacher saying Ssshh! rather than a ban/detention


Oh, and how exactly am I being Bias?

leninbenjamin

back seat modding. perfectly justified infraction. report the post next time if you have a grievance with it.

FruitLover

You should be infracted for opening a feeback thread about an infraction.

Tigger

the reaon you have seen people get annoyed is that you are unfairly pulling rank

i don't deserve an infraction for backseat modding or if i do so did rob
yet you thanked him and infracted me

blatant bias

making light of it proves my point

Tigger

FruitLover wrote: »

You should be infracted for opening a feeback thread about an infraction.

i likz feedbak so please make the catz big and funniez

kdouglas

actually, you're assuming robs post was directed at you, it was directed at anyone who had questions for the IAA, your own question was directed at both IAA members and non-members alike.

tallaght01

You infracted him for that?

I have on several occasions told people not to be wanky towards me on a thread or whatever.

Is that really back seat modding? Is that really a post that deserves a warning??

In fairness, I don't know what an IAA or an airsoft is, so I might have missed someting profound i there.

Tigger

kdouglas wrote: »

actually, you're assuming robs post was directed at you, it was directed at anyone who had questions for the IAA, your own question was directed at both IAA members and non-members alike.

yes and it was also directed on boards as boardsies


stating that the place to discuss the iaa is the iaa is unhelpful it was back seat modding


also it started with oh yeay and wasn't helpful

you infracted whydave for not being helpful but you thanked rob

kdouglas

tallaght01 wrote: »

You infracted him for that?

I have on several occasions told people not to be wanky towards me on a thread or whatever.

Is that really back seat modding? Is that really a post that deserves a warning??

In fairness, I don't know what an IAA or an airsoft is, so I might have missed someting profound i there.

As I said, ordinarily it wouldn't be an infraction, but given the history of the way IAA-related threads go on the Airsoft forum, I announced on-thread that there would be some very heavy moderation in place over that thread and as such I decided to give out infractions for stuff that I ordinarily would barely notice.

As I said on-thread, stuff that you'd ordinarily get away with is gonna be an infraction, stuff that would normally be an infraction will be a ban. (just for that thread, mind)

tallaght01

kdouglas wrote: »

As I said, ordinarily it wouldn't be an infraction, but given the history of the way IAA-related threads go on the Airsoft forum, I announced on-thread that there would be some very heavy moderation in place over that thread and as such I decided to give out infractions for stuff that I ordinarily would barely notice.
As I said on-thread, stuff that you'd ordinarily get away with is gonna be an infraction, stuff that would normally be an infraction will be a ban. (just for that thread, mind)

Just looks a bit lame. Especially if the guy here wasn't involved in the previous threads.
I'd have said "heavily moderating" a thread still doesn't mean you have to infract people for that kinda thing!
But it's nothing to do with me, I guess. I'm just passing through, stickin me nose in :pac:

Tigger

kdouglas wrote: »

As I said, ordinarily it wouldn't be an infraction, but given the history of the way IAA-related threads go on the Airsoft forum, I announced on-thread that there would be some very heavy moderation in place over that thread and as such I decided to give out infractions for stuff that I ordinarily would barely notice.

As I said on-thread, stuff that you'd ordinarily get away with is gonna be an infraction, stuff that would normally be an infraction will be a ban. (just for that thread, mind)

so why then di rob not get an infraction for this

The Master wrote: »

Yipee another thread about the IAA.
Haven't had one of these in a while.

If only the IAA site had its own forums where people could discuss IAA matters:rolleyes:

when whydave got one for this

unhelpful comment

because you are being biased

i started the thread
i asked for it to stay on topic

you came up with this rule

kdouglas wrote: »

<mod hat on>
As pointed out above, IAA threads are generally quick to turn into flame wars on here, anyone caught de-railing the topic, pushing a personal agenda or just generally being unhelpful in this thread will be banned instantly.

</mod hat off>

QUOTE]

and then you push yopur own agenda

how was robs post not off topic
how was it not back set modding
and why did you thank him
bias

Puding

Its hard to understand the mods chooses in this case unless you understand the iaa issue, but i can understand why a hard line was taken as any thread involving discussion of the iaa turns into a nightmare.

Tigger

tallaght01 wrote: »

Just looks a bit lame. Especially if the guy here wasn't involved in the previous threads.
I'd have said "heavily moderating" a thread still doesn't mean you have to infract people for that kinda thing!
But it's nothing to do with me, I guess. I'm just passing through, stickin me nose in :pac:

well i have come to feedback because i feel that there is a bias against me in the airsoft forum

here is the last iaa thread i dared post

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055326828&highlight=iaa

it was locked before it started

i flamed no-one
i troll no where

yet i get an infraction

Tigger

Puding wrote: »

Its hard to understand the mods chooses in this case unless you understand the iaa issue, but i can understand why a hard line was taken as any thread involving discussion of the iaa turns into a nightmare.

so i should not ask the community what is on their minds

i toyed with the idea of putting a poll only (can you do that here?)

but i thought that the flames could be punished and would stop
butt then i get infracted

nope its unfair thats what it is

kdouglas

Tigger wrote: »

well i have come to feedback because i feel that there is a bias against me in the airsoft forum

here is the last iaa thread i dared post

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055326828&highlight=iaa

it was locked before it started

i flamed no-one
i troll no where

yet i get an infraction

That thread has nothing to do with this? gandalf locked it because in the first 8 posts in the thread, no one posted anything relevant to the topic at hand and people started talking about tin foil hats? Had people started discussing your original subject matter in a mature and well mannered way, it would have been allowed to stay, so far, the current thread in the forum is staying reasonably well mannered and will stay open as long as it continues to do so.

Boston

tallaght01 wrote: »

You infracted him for that?

I have on several occasions told people not to be wanky towards me on a thread or whatever.

Is that really back seat modding? Is that really a post that deserves a warning??

In fairness, I don't know what an IAA or an airsoft is, so I might have missed someting profound i there.

Airsoft forum is special.

Tigger

it is the last thread i started on the iaa
it was sabatauged

then locked

i don't flame and i don't back seat mod

rob did

you thanked him

you are biased and should admit as much

someone is agressive to me and i tell them there is no need to be 'gressive and i get infracted

someone else thread spoils and they get thanked

and as before gandalf sked that discussionson the iaa be on the iaa forum
why because only iaa pepople would be there

same line as rob followed
same line ye all follow no real discussion of the iaa is allowed or when it it tollerated ye act with bias

Tigger

Boston wrote: »

Airsoft forum is special.

yes its biased
its run by people who also run the iaa and act like they own airsoft
as long as one behaves and vdosent test them they may stay
otherwisr they are called whingers
moaners
trolls
and politicians

gandalf

OK here is the relevant section from the charter.

"* If you have a problem with a post, use the "Report Bad Post" link (it's marked on the left side of each post with a symbol) to report it to the moderators. Do not take it on yourself to regulate the forum."

Now you can either follow the charter or not. If you can't stop posting.

My personal feeling on the IAA is you should direct all queries to them on their own forum. If you haven't got the balls to ask them directly then don't expect the mods or other members of the airsoft forum to put up with the drivel those threads normally generate. Thats why I closed that last thread.

gandalf

Tigger wrote: »

yes its biased
its run by people who also run the iaa and act like they own airsoft
as long as one behaves and vdosent test them they may stay
otherwisr they are called whingers
moaners
trolls
and politicians

Jesus you are some muppet. Ask anyone if I support the IAA in its current form and they will say NO.

All I see with you is a whinging **** who has done absolutely nothing for airsoft. Couldn't make the AGM, couldn't make the EGM and snipes from the sidelines. Get involved and shut up.

The Master

Tigger wrote: »

i don't flame and i don't back seat mod

rob did

I most certainly did not flame or back seat mod

tallaght01

gandalf wrote: »

Jesus you are some muppet.

All I see with you is a whinging **** .

good effort on setting an example of how posters should conduct themselves, too, btw.

Boston

tallaght01 wrote: »

good effort on setting an example of how posters should conduct themselves, too, btw.

Jesus you are some muppet.

All I see with you is a whinging **** .

tallaght01

Boston wrote: »

Jesus you are some muppet.

All I see with you is a whinging **** .

That's different, though, coz I wouldn't have expected anything better from you.

zero19

Jaysus there's always trouble with any IAA thread, always, haven't seen one end civilly...

Marcus.Aurelius

gandalf wrote: »

Jesus you are some muppet. Ask anyone if I support the IAA in its current form and they will say NO.

All I see with you is a whinging **** who has done absolutely nothing for airsoft. Couldn't make the AGM, couldn't make the EGM and snipes from the sidelines. Get involved and shut up.

With respect, mod or not, that sort of speech directed at another user is not tolerated on Boards.

randylonghorn

/wonders if there are any primary teachers around with time on their hands to sort this one out

gandalf

Marcus.Aurelius wrote: »

With respect, mod or not, that sort of speech directed at another user is not tolerated on Boards.

It is on feedback when you have a serial whinger like this guy. If you don't like it complain.

Marcus.Aurelius

gandalf wrote: »

It is on feedback when you have a serial whinger like this guy. If you don't like it complain.

I think it's between you and the users and I have hardly any right to complain about it. I was only referring to the level of respect users should have for each other, especially those who have duties to discharge.

I won't make a complaint as I can understand why you said it, I just think it might have been a mistake.

To Tigger, an infraction is a tiny fraction of a ban, while you might not agree with it, it isn't the end of the world if it stays.

bunny shooter

Does the Mod have a conflict of interests ?

leninbenjamin

bunny shooter wrote: »

Does the Mod have a conflict of interests ?

the real question is; do the users have a conflict of interest?

Gatling

welcome to playschool better known as airsoft -where if people dont get there way they cry to feedback ,

its only an infraction ,

bunny shooter

leninbenjamin wrote: »

the real question is; do the users have a conflict of interest?

Do they both have a conflict of interests ? Now that should be fun alright

bunny shooter

Gatling wrote: »

welcome to playschool better known as airsoft -where if people dont get there way they cry to feedback ,

its only an infraction ,

Try the shooting forum, makes ye look like grown-ups

randylonghorn

Gatling wrote: »

welcome to playschool better known as airsoft -where if people dont get there way they cry to feedback

bunny shooter wrote: »

Try the shooting forum, makes ye look like grown-ups

Which just goes to show, guys who feel the need to go around shouting "my gun is bigger / shoots further / packs a bigger load than yours" have real issues about their ... self-confidence! :pac:

bunny shooter

Randy,

You may have a point there

gandalf

randylonghorn wrote: »

Which just goes to show, guys who feel the need to go around shouting "my gun is bigger / shoots further / packs a bigger load than yours" have real issues about their ... self-confidence! :pac:

This from someone whose nick is Randylonghorn

Boggles

Just checked my profile and I have 2 infractions, what the hell is an infraction?

And is there cream for it?

bunny shooter

Boggles wrote: »

Just checked my profile and I have 2 infractions, what the hell is an infraction?

And is there cream for it?

Apparently 10 in any one week/period leads to a one week ban ?

randylonghorn

gandalf wrote: »

This from someone whose nick is Randylonghorn

Indeed! But, d'ye see now, I didn't bestow it on myself!

Boggles

randylonghorn wrote: »

Indeed! But, d'ye see now, I didn't bestow it on myself!

Your Mother?

zero19

Boggles wrote: »

Yore ma?

Fixed

Steve

OK I'm a total outsider here - never even knew about this forum till recently.

The mods decision:

kdouglas wrote: »

Infracted for back seat modding, report the post if you have a problem with it.


This is how this thread will work folks, stuff that would normally pass unnoticed in other threads will get an infraction, things that would normally earn you an infraction will get you a ban here.

IMO while it's fair enough to say 'report the post', it seems to be bad form to infract a user and then afterwards in the same post, having said 'stuff that would normally pass unnoticed' go on to make a rule to justify it. A warning should have sufficed.

Also, has it not been shown recently that infractions or bans should be based on the post and not the history or favour of the poster? (BGRH vs Pighead)

gandalf

SteveC wrote: »

OK I'm a total outsider here - never even knew about this forum till recently.

The mods decision:


IMO while it's fair enough to say 'report the post', it seems to be bad form to infract a user and then afterwards in the same post, having said 'stuff that would normally pass unnoticed' go on to make a rule to justify it. A warning should have sufficed.

Its not bad form at all. IAA threads in particular have caused alot of problems on the board. All posters are expected to have read the charter and to abide by it. He has only been infracted. I have banned users in the past for these actions.

Also, has it not been shown recently that infractions or bans should be based on the post and not the history or favour of the poster? (BGRH vs Pighead)

As I stated in the mod forum that whole situation was a disgrace. If a user is causing disruption on a regular basis then yes proactive action should be taken against them and they should be banned. I cannot understand how the user in question has not been sitebanned.

Steve

gandalf wrote: »

Its not bad form at all. IAA threads in particular have caused alot of problems on the board. All posters are expected to have read the charter and to abide by it. He has only been infracted. I have banned users in the past for these actions.

As I said, I am a disinterested observer and I commented on the facts of this case in isolation.

Time-line as I saw it:
1. User was infracted
2. It was said that normally this stuff is overlooked
3. A rule is made to say that, in future, users will be infracted / banned.

It seems to me the infraction was applied before the rule was made and I feel that given these facts it was unfair.

If, as you say, there is a history of derailment in similar threads and the OP was active in them then maybe he should have known better - that wasn't made clear (in this thread) though.

gandalf wrote: »

As I stated in the mod forum that whole situation was a disgrace. If a user is causing disruption on a regular basis then yes proactive action should be taken against them and they should be banned. I cannot understand how the user in question has not been sitebanned.

If someone is trolling then they should be infracted each time they do so - nature will take it's course.

If you look at my stars you will see that I am but a humble oppressed boardsie paying tax to fund yore C&H and so am not privy to the mod forum to see your post. Maybe that voids my opinion, maybe it adds weight because it is unbiased. Who knows.:)

kdouglas

Actually, if you go back to post #9 in the thread, I said:

<mod hat on>
As pointed out above, IAA threads are generally quick to turn into flame wars on here, anyone caught de-railing the topic, pushing a personal agenda or just generally being unhelpful in this thread will be banned instantly.

</mod hat off>

Now I may not have said infractions will be given for things that would normally pass unnoticed, but I figured a ban would be a bit too heavy handed in this case, so that is why I gave Tigger an infraction instead. The warning of heavy moderation was given before any infractions were handed out.

bunny shooter

For the benefit of the jury KDouglas will you please state if you could possibly have a conflict of interest here. Are you involved in the running of said organisation ?