Banned from AH

DB10

I've been banned from AH once again, this time for 3 months supposedly for "trolling".

This "trolling" was not "trolling" at all, I believe the remark in question was an emotive response to a poster saying certain people (prisoners) deserved to be tortured to death and even worse.

This poster in question was not questioned on it by moderators.

I had a previous warning the same today for something I forget, probably a FF related comment.

I believe the AH moderators have it in for me and are treating me unfairly.

I also believe that certain remarks against celebrities have been banned, and I believe the fact some posters can say certain people deserve to die "prisoners" yet not be reprimanded, but I respond to this with a slightly emotive outburst and am punished because it was another member.

I would like to discuss that.

trout

I guess this is in relation to your ban of February 2nd?

You've made a few points - I'd like to concentrate on those relating to your AH ban.

I'm not going to discuss another posters posts or actions with you on this thread - this is about your dispute.

It's hard for me to have an opinion on warnings about comments that you can't quite remember.

I'm afraid I don't quite understand your comments about celebrities, prisoners etc. ... is that central or pertinent to this ban/dispute?

In terms of what we can or should discuss here, I'd like to concentrate on this point; if you believe that the AH mods "have it in for you" ... please show some examples and explain why you think it's unfair.

In the interest of fairness and completeness, I should point out I have sight of the 16 bans and 25 infractions you've incurred since joining the site, as well as the AH mod discussions that took place in advance of your most recent, 3 month ban.

DB10

trout wrote: »

I guess this is in relation to your ban of February 2nd?

You've made a few points - I'd like to concentrate on those relating to your AH ban.

I'm not going to discuss another posters posts or actions with you on this thread - this is about your dispute.

It's hard for me to have an opinion on warnings about comments that you can't quite remember.

I'm afraid I don't quite understand your comments about celebrities, prisoners etc. ... is that central or pertinent to this ban/dispute?

In terms of what we can or should discuss here, I'd like to concentrate on this point; if you believe that the AH mods "have it in for you" ... please show some examples and explain why you think it's unfair.

In the interest of fairness and completeness, I should point out I have sight of the 16 bans and 25 infractions you've incurred since joining the site, as well as the AH mod discussions that took place in advance of your most recent, 3 month ban.

Re - Celebrities

There has been a debate on forum on whether they maybe subject to abuse as anyone else. I myself have even seen people being told that just because a certain person isnt a forum member doesnt mean it doesnt qualify as a rule breach and abuse.

My point is thus, how a person can say people deserve to die etc and get away with it because they are not a celebrity. Saying anyone deserves to die IMO is not a very nice thing to do no matter how populist it may be and thus my reaction was fair imo, alot better than the original post.

I also have said before that I've been targeted by certain moderators because of my history of infractions, thus they see I have a list of infractions and think they can ban me for no reason.

As we seen in this forum two weeks ago I have one of those infractions and bans overturned so you can minus those from the figures.

I would also like to hear more about this moderator discussion of me, I believe it may be available under the Data Protection Act 2003.

trout

This is the post that earned the most recent ban.

Your cruelty and sheer bigot filled posts never cease to amaze. You should be glad people fought for the right for you to live in this country.

It's not just this, but a string of idiotic posts from you

This, aimed at another poster, is abusive/flaming/trolling and breaches the AH Charter.

The thread topic was the treatment of prisoners, not celebrities. The populist views you reacted to may well be populist, not abusive. You have the option of reporting posts that offend you ... you chose to react as you did, directly to the previous poster.

I note you had one ban/infraction overturned recently. Fair enough, so the count of 15 bans and 24 infractions now applies.

I also have said before that I've been targeted by certain moderators because of my history of infractions, thus they see I have a list of infractions and think they can ban me for no reason.

Yes, you have said this before ... can you back this claim up? In the case of this most recent ban, the post breached the AH charter. The ban/infraction count may have influenced the mod reaction / judgement call ... but that's secondary to the post warranting that reaction in the first place.

If you really believe the mods have it in for you ... show the evidence; unfair and unwarranted behaviour won't be tolerated, but you do have to show it exists.

I would also like to hear more about this moderator discussion of me, I believe it may be available under the Data Protection Act 2003.

I disagree. My read of the 2003 amendment to the Data Protection Act of 1998 is that it covers personal, private, sensitive data. In DP terms, the mods & cmods are not "data controllers", and have no sight of your information (name, address, age, gender, race or ethnic origin etc. etc.) other than that you choose to make available online yourself.

I'm going to ask the Admins / Community Managers for an opinion on this.

Darragh

DB10 wrote: »

I would also like to hear more about this moderator discussion of me, I believe it may be available under the Data Protection Act 2003.

It's not. The DPA, as trout says, covers personal data. Discussion about you under your username is not covered either under the Data Protection Act or the Freedom of Information act and will not be made available to you.

The only personal data covered is what you have filled out in your own profile. You can see this here yourself: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/member.php?u=238355

To be honest, for the effort it takes to go through to apply for it, even if it was applicable and you could see the posts, you'd probably be a bit disappointed. There's not much. With over 22,000 posts a day on site these days, discussions of members worthy of a ban tends to be brief and to the point.

I hope that helps

Darragh

r3nu4l

DB10, sorry this has taken so long. Often, in many forums (AH being one of them), cumulative racking up of bans, prolongs the length of the next ban.

Anyway, onto the ban. In this case you attacked the poster and not the post. That's a clear breach of the charter and a ban is warranted.

In the not too distant past you've had a 7-day ban, a 10-day ban and a 14day ban.

The mods have no reason to think that your behaviour will change. I believe that this ban is a 'wake-up' call from the mods to say that they're reaching the end of their patience.

Had you only had one or perhaps two bans previously I would be saying this is too harsh. In this case I think three months is definitely harsh but probably about right (and I'm not normally a fan of handing out lengthy bans myself!).

r3nu4l

Okay, DB10 has been online a bit since I posted this and has not responded. I'll close this now and mark it resolved. Thanks to all for their input (I include DB10 in that).