A big thank you

KamiKazi

To keefg for not even bothering to drop me a PM when banning me, a great bit of moderating I must say.

star-pants

Did you not receive an automated message?

KamiKazi

star-pants wrote: »

Did you not receive an automated message?

Nope.

Stercus Accidit

Thread of the decade.

star-pants

KamiKazi wrote: »

Nope.

That's very odd, because it's part of the process - afaik you can't skip the automated pm to the user. So it may not be the moderators fault, might be something up with the system.

johnnyskeleton

Why did he ban you?

+1 I presume in r&r


http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=63726962&postcount=5

KamiKazi

I'm not here to argue about whether I should have been banned or not, it really isn't worth the effort. Just thought a PM was common courtesy that's all.

From a mods pov; it's impossible for me to ban someone without sending an automated pm. Sounds like a technical fault.

star-pants

KamiKazi wrote: »

I'm not here to argue about whether I should have been banned or not, it really isn't worth the effort. Just thought a PM was common courtesy that's all.

As I said - afaik that is the procedure, I don't think you can skip it - so perhaps there is a glitch. Maybe a pm to the mod in question or perhaps an admin can look into it?

KamiKazi

star-pants wrote: »

As I said - afaik that is the procedure, I don't think you can skip it - so perhaps there is a glitch. Maybe a pm to the mod in question or perhaps an admin can look into it?

I'm sure he'll stumble in here before long.

Dav

The PM is a definite and un-skippable part of the ban process, so there is most likely a technical fault here somewhere. I'll ask Conor or Ross to have a look into it.

Dav

KevIRL

Dav wrote: »

The PM is a definite and un-skippable part of the ban process, so there is most likely a technical fault here somewhere. I'll ask Conor or Ross to have a look into it.

Dav

I think it is skippable Dav. After you select ban reason you are brought to a page with the PM and the reason is automatically inserted in the 'reason for the ban' part of the PM, this reason part can then be edited and AFAIK you can close the page without the PM being sent

5starpool

Ya, it's definitely skippable. I don't PM spammers when I am banning them before posting in the feedback spamers thread.

keefg

KamiKazi wrote: »

To keefg for not even bothering to drop me a PM when banning me, a great bit of moderating I must say.

I explained why I banned you in the thread (read below why I don't send PM's). If you have a problem with my modding then you should've sent me a PM or to my Cat Mod - that is the correct procedure I believe.

Starting a silly thread hear and wasting the valuable time of our admin gods just confirms to me that I did the right thing.

Dav wrote: »

The PM is a definite and un-skippable part of the ban process, so there is most likely a technical fault here somewhere. I'll ask Conor or Ross to have a look into it.
Dav

Don't bother with the investigation Dav, the PM is very easy to avoid when banning someone. I rarely send PM's to the posters I ban because most of the time I just get a very abusive reply, so I don't bother sending them all the time anymore.

Fajitas!

Dav, I think any of the older mods would have the 'ban-without-PM' bookmarked, I used it for spammers when I was on the beat.

muffler

keefg wrote: »

the PM is very easy to avoid when banning someone. I rarely send PM's to the posters I ban because most of the time I just get a very abusive reply, so I don't bother sending them all the time anymore.

Im not sure how you can ban someone without an automated PM being sent unless of course the user concerned has their PMs turned off.

In any event its not a course any moderator should follow regardless of why the person was banned.

muffler

Fajitas! wrote: »

Dav, I think any of the older mods would have the 'ban-without-PM' bookmarked, I used it for spammers when I was on the beat.

Here you - watch your language

Mature is the word you are looking for

KamiKazi

keefg wrote: »

I explained why I banned you in the thread (read below why I don't send PM's). If you have a problem with my modding then you should've sent me a PM or to my Cat Mod - that is the correct procedure I believe.

Starting a silly thread hear and wasting the valuable time of our admin gods just confirms to me that I did the right thing.



Don't bother with the investigation Dav, the PM is very easy to avoid when banning someone. I rarely send PM's to the posters I ban because most of the time I just get a very abusive reply, so I don't bother sending them all the time anymore.

Let's skim over the fact that this is undoubtedly a great 'explanation', but thanks for not even bothering to inform me of the ban length.

5starpool

muffler wrote: »

Im not sure how you can ban someone without an automated PM being sent unless of course the user concerned has their PMs turned off.

In any event its not a course any moderator should follow regardless of why the person was banned.

Just go through the screens until the PM screen and don't send it, simples. The ban has already gone through then.

What is the point of PM'ing a clear spammer? Lots of them are automated anyhow and will be site banned in a short time. Banning them from the local forum is just a precaution in case it takes a while to siteban.

muffler

I see the OP has managed to accumulate 8 bans and 14 infractions to date so I suppose not sending a PM isnt exactly going to be the end of the world.

Apologies keefg. Had I been aware of the users history before posting my previous comment and the fact that the ban is for 1 day only I would agree with you.

Zaph

keefg wrote: »

I rarely send PM's to the posters I ban because most of the time I just get a very abusive reply, so I don't bother sending them all the time anymore.

And in cases like that you simply report the PM and the poster gets a site ban.

KamiKazi

muffler wrote: »

I see the OP has managed to accumulate 8 bans and 14 infractions to date so I suppose not sending a PM isnt exactly going to be the end of the world.

Apologies keefg. Had I been aware of the users history before posting my previous comment and the fact that the ban is for 1 day only I would agree with you.

Ah OK, is there a limit on how many infractions one can recieve before PM's are no longer sent? Hasn't been in any charters I've seen.

Thanks for letting me know the ban length at least I suppose.

muffler

KamiKazi wrote: »

Ah OK, is there a limit on how many infractions one can recieve before PM's are no longer sent? Hasn't been in any charters I've seen.

Thanks for letting me know the ban length at least I suppose.

10 infractions = no PM
15 infractions = decapitation. :eek:

the_syco

keefg wrote: »

I rarely send PM's to the posters I ban because most of the time I just get a very abusive reply, so I don't bother sending them all the time anymore.

Perhaps if it was sent by the bot, as opposed by the mod, the process may work better as no-one would get abuse via reply?

Handsome Bob

We deal with a lot of traffic in R&R, and with quite a bit of negativity and charter breaches. For me it's fairly easy to tell when a poster is purposefully breaching the charter rather than making an honest mistake, so in those cases I don't see PM's as a must. Don't get me wrong I always send PMs, funnily enough though I rarely even get a response from those who I believe to purposefully breaching the charter. It almost seems like they knew what was coming. So in this sense, I understand where keef is coming from.

Dudess

I thought Keefg's approach was extremely rude - would it have killed to say something like "Banned for breaching the charter" rather than a smart comment about AH punctuated by a ?

No matter what a member's history is, if they have done something that warrants penalising, the moderator should use some bit of courtesy, especially if the "offence" isn't that problematic (very much the case here IMO) - no, not mollycoddling, just basic civility along with firmness if needed (I'm so confident that if I hadn't added that disclaimer, some genius would disingenuously make a sarky comment about how mods should be all full of the love for troublesome posters).

Stuff like this undermines the moderator and only adds fuel to the "modz iz evil" fire.

keefg

Dudess wrote: »

I thought Keefg's approach was extremely rude

My reply was very pleasant compared to how I normally deal with messers.

I can't believe this thread has gone on so long, talk about making a big deal out of nothing.


Anyhoo.........HAPPY NEW YEAR!!

Karl Hungus

Am I the only one who thinks that the PM part of the banning process shouldn't be skipable? It's obviously there for a reason, and no moderator should be undermining the system set out by the admins. I didn't even know it could be skipped in the first place, I will always give a reason when banning someone, it's common courtesy to do so.

Handsome Bob

keefg wrote: »

My reply was very pleasant compared to how I normally deal with messers.

It's true, that was keef being nice.


:pac:

Zaph

For those mods who don't visit the mod forum too often, you might want to take a look at this thread.

Dudess

The thread Zaph is referring to is one appealing for moderators not to be abusive when dealing with troublemakers.

keefg wrote: »

I explained why I banned you in the thread (read below why I don't send PM's). If you have a problem with my modding then you should've sent me a PM or to my Cat Mod - that is the correct procedure I believe.

Starting a silly thread hear and wasting the valuable time of our admin gods just confirms to me that I did the right thing.



Don't bother with the investigation Dav, the PM is very easy to avoid when banning someone. I rarely send PM's to the posters I ban because most of the time I just get a very abusive reply, so I don't bother sending them all the time anymore.

Sneering, dismissive, condescending response if ever there was one. And you didn't explain why you banned KamiKazi - that comment on the thread is not an explanation, it's actually very vague.

I can't believe this thread has gone on so long, talk about making a big deal out of nothing.

Nothing to you maybe, but I personally feel mods being rude to posters is something that needs to be addressed. A tiny handful have gotten away with it in the past and it's refreshing to see that being tackled now.

keefg wrote: »

My reply was very pleasant compared to how I normally deal with messers.

LZ5by5 wrote: »

It's true, that was keef being nice.


:pac:

Glad it's such a big joke...

Sarky

Dudess wrote: »

some genius would disingenuously make a sarky comment

I find that offensive!

muffler

Dudess wrote: »

The thread Zaph is referring to is one appealing for moderators not to be abusive when dealing with troublemakers.

Sneering, dismissive, condescending response if ever there was one. And you didn't explain why you banned KamiKazi - that comment on the thread is not an explanation, it's actually very vague.

Nothing to you maybe, but I personally feel mods being rude to posters is something that needs to be addressed. A tiny handful have gotten away with it in the past and it's refreshing to see that being tackled now.


Glad it's such a big joke...

All fair points Dudess and Id like to think that given the Op's history then this is a one off for keefg.

KamiKazi

keefg's responses in this thread have more or less proved my point TBH, it's good to see moderators with attitudes like keefg's are a minority here.

BuffyBot

and with that, we'll close this. We'll take the Feedback on board, and see what we will do with it