Wrongly accused of 'insulting' and 'ridiculing' by mod

Monty Burnz

Hi there - there's a thread in the Ladies' Lounge on abortion. Ickle Magoo has made this post:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=73116852&postcount=550

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

And deliberately engineering a completely unrealistic scenario in order to force a comparison is hardly a worthwhile thought experiment - especially given you completely ignore the mother and her welfare in the process.

This is a public discussion forum aimed at the lady posters of boards - I am free to reply to whomever I like. If you have an aversion to petty point-scoring, insults or ridicule then might I suggest you refrain from dishing it out?

Here I am accused of 'dishing out' insults and ridicule to other posters. Throughout this thread, bearing in mind its location (Ladies' Lounge) and the extremely sensitive subject area, I have done my level best to be scrupulously polite and fair to other posters. Not once have I insulted or ridiculed another poster.

I pointed this out to Ickle Magoo, asking her to provide examples of this ridicule or these insults, and of course she could provide none. But she did not acknowledge this and has not apologised for her false accusation.

I think it is disgraceful that this false accusation from a mod is allowed to stand, whereas if I had made a similar accusation as an ordinary poster I would be looking at a ban.

In addition, clearly there has been some discussion behind the scenes with the other mods because I have since been accused of trying to 'bend' the conversation by another mod in this post:

Silverfish wrote: »

Because we would rather try and discuss the reality of the situation rather than imaginary scenarios involving babies in jungles or whatever.

This debate is regarding the 'right to choice' regarding unwanted pregnancies, not the survivalist abilities of babies in jungles.
If you wish to discuss this, perhaps another forum would be more suitable.

If you wish to try to bend the conversation back to this, or bend the conversation into discussing WHY nobody wanted to discuss this with you, then please read the charter.

Note the contemptuous tone regarding my posts in the first sentence. This particular post was prompted when ANOTHER poster referred back to an earlier post of mine and I made a comment on it. I didn't bring the post up myself.

And just to complete the set, another mod helpfully jumped in with this contribution:

Stheno wrote: »

If you've a problem with a post report it. I don't see where anyone hounded you on the thread, several posters did point out the fallacy in your thought experiment.

Note that all the mods agree that there was a 'fallacy' in my thought experiment, but I'm not allowed to discuss whether or not a fallacy exists (if I wanted to so).

Now, I don't know if it's normal for mods to gang up and level false accusations at an ordinary member, and all back each other up, but I'm really not at all happy with how I've been treated on that thread. I've come here rather than derail the thread with discussion of the moderation.

And as all the mods are lined up on one side, there's no point in me PMing them to discuss this (although I tried with Ickle Magoo yesterday and it was a total waste of time).

Is there any way I can get redress for this bullying behaviour and these false accusations, or am I just wasting my time here?

Spear

Were you banned or infracted?

Monty Burnz

Spear wrote: »

Were you banned or infracted?

Neither - just falsely accused. Should I argue with the mods in thread until they ban me, and then come back?

Spear

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Neither - just falsely accused. Should I argue with the mods in thread until they ban me, and then come back?

I don't recommend that, it just means that this doesn't come under the DRP and is for the more general Helpdesk.

Monty Burnz

Spear wrote: »

I don't recommend that, it just means that this doesn't come under the DRP and is for the more general Helpdesk.

Ok, thanks for that. Let's see if anyone cares or does anything.

Stheno

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Hi there - there's a thread in the Ladies' Lounge on abortion. Ickle Magoo has made this post:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=73116852&postcount=550/QUOTE]


Monty,

Your second post in the thread was extremely glib, and you did edit it and apologise, but not before three posters had picked up on it.

Here I am accused of 'dishing out' insults and ridicule to other posters. Throughout this thread, bearing in mind its location (Ladies' Lounge) and the extremely sensitive subject area, I have done my level best to be scrupulously polite and fair to other posters. Not once have I insulted or ridiculed another poster.

I pointed this out to Ickle Magoo, asking her to provide examples of this ridicule or these insults, and of course she could provide none. But she did not acknowledge this and has not apologised for her false accusation.

I think it is disgraceful that this false accusation from a mod is allowed to stand, whereas if I had made a similar accusation as an ordinary poster I would be looking at a ban.

Secondly in relation to your behaviour on the thread, several times prior to Ickle you accused other posters of petty point scoring, and told one poster to refrain from engaging with you as well as accusing one of not being "nice"

here

and

here

Hardly behaviour to back up a claim of

B]Not once have I insulted or ridiculed another poster. [/B]

In addition, clearly there has been some discussion behind the scenes with the other mods because I have since been accused of trying to 'bend' the conversation by another mod in this post:



Note the contemptuous tone regarding my posts in the first sentence. This particular post was prompted when ANOTHER poster referred back to an earlier post of mine and I made a comment on it. I didn't bring the post up myself.

And just to complete the set, another mod helpfully jumped in with this contribution:



Note that all the mods agree that there was a 'fallacy' in my thought experiment, but I'm not allowed to discuss whether or not a fallacy exists (if I wanted to so).

Now, I don't know if it's normal for mods to gang up and level false accusations at an ordinary member, and all back each other up, but I'm really not at all happy with how I've been treated on that thread. I've come here rather than derail the thread with discussion of the moderation.

And as all the mods are lined up on one side, there's no point in me PMing them to discuss this (although I tried with Ickle Magoo yesterday and it was a total waste of time).

Is there any way I can get redress for this bullying behaviour and these false accusations, or am I just wasting my time here?

Multiple posters also commented on the fallacy of your thought experiment and how it wasn't a comparable scenario.

You then later pointed out that you felt a post by Ickle was inappropriate as you've quoted above, and as per the forum charter, I advised you to report it.

Stheno

Also can I just point out that contrary to the post you quoted, Ickle Magoo posted in plain rather than bold text, not as a mod, but as a user in a thread where she had posted repeatedly as a user.

Monty Burnz

Stheno wrote: »

Monty,

Your second post in the thread was extremely glib, and you did edit it and apologise, but not before three posters had picked up on it.

Incorrect in fact. I edited that post so fast (within 1 minute of posting it) that it does not even show up as an edited post. The posts that picked up on my post were posted after my edit, but it is possible (in fact, almost certain) that the first person to reply to my post did not see that I had amended it. In the case of Ickle Magoo's post, hers is timestamped 7 minutes after mine. Make of that what you will. But the fact is that my post had been amended between 5 and 7 minutes before Ickle Magoo posted. And I think you will find that your claim that 3 posters picked up on it is incorrect (or a fabrication for the benefit of those who wouldn't bother to check). I count 2.

Interestingly, Flourescence, the first one to reply (5 full minutes before Ickle Magoo), accepted my apology with no problem, and I thanked her post. That is an ordinary member demonstrating how I would hope a mod would behave in that situation.

But of course that is not the issue here - I let that particular episode pass by, although I could have complained about Ickle Magoo's behaviour, because I prefer to live and let live. I don't actually enjoy investing the time and effort required by this (probably pointless) attempt to get some redress for how I have been treated.

Stheno wrote: »

Secondly in relation to your behaviour on the thread, several times prior to Ickle you accused other posters of petty point scoring, and told one poster to refrain from engaging with you as well as accusing one of not being "nice"

here

and

here

Are you seriously citing:

It's not helpful (or nice) to accuse me of ignoring an answer when the aspect that I'm trying to examine hasn't been addressed.

and

So we are going down the point scoring road, thanks for clarifying that. Well it's a road you can travel on your own. I'm interested in a serious discussion on this subject, not some childish shouting match. Please ignore the rest of my posts, I won't be addressing or engaging with you.

...as evidence of insulting or ridiculing? Seriously? Those posts are absolute models of how to deal with posters who are being offensive to you without resorting to ridicule or insults. I state clearly what the problem is, and in the second case I state that I'm not interested in engaging with a poster who is not willing to treat the subject with the respect it deserves.

Stheno wrote: »

Multiple posters also commented on the fallacy of your thought experiment and how it wasn't a comparable scenario.

Yes, a couple did - and I let the issue die rather than trying to take over the thread to explain how they were wrong. Which made it all the more galling to be falsely accused of trying to 'bend' the discussion by a mod when replying to a post from someone else who raised it!

Stheno wrote: »

You then later pointed out that you felt a post by Ickle was inappropriate as you've quoted above, and as per the forum charter, I advised you to report it.

I am reporting it. This is my report. It's pretty clear that the mods have formed a united front against me - three have taken issue with me on the thread in question (although nobody has found anything in any of my posts worth infracting at the time of writing).

And I acknowledge that in the initial Ickle Magoo post I quote that the bolded bit was bolded by me. I didn't think it would cause any confusion as mods usually bold the whole message when speaking as mods. Apologies if you were so confused.

Anyway, I'm glad that you've nailed your colours to the mast Stheno, I wonder whose side the other mods will fall on? :rolleyes: I hope they come up with rather better examples of insults and ridicule than you did, or this will be an open and shut case.

Stheno

Monty Burnz wrote: »

I am reporting it. This is my report.

And much like your behaviour on the thread you are ignoring a valid point, which is that I simply posted on the thread and told you to report a post you didn't like as per the forum charter.

Given that I've banned and warned other posters on the thread, I can't see how you interpret that as taking against you.

Monty Burnz

Stheno wrote: »

And much like your behaviour on the thread you are ignoring a valid point, which is that I simply posted on the thread and told you to report a post you didn't like as per the forum charter.

This is more of it. What 'valid point' was I ignoring? My 'behaviour' on the thread has been impeccable, as any reading of the thread will demonstrate. Will you please stop making this sort of unsubstantiated smear? It's just more bullying.

On the point that you are making (alongside the smear attack) - I actually agree that you did not say anything out of the ordinary or wrong. But it was your sudden appearance in the thread as the third mod/admin to take issue with me directly that confirmed in my mind (and in fact, unless you wish to deny it?) that talks had gone on behind the scenes and a united front was being constructed against me.

What chance does an ordinary poster stand against 3 mods? What chance do I have of getting redress for this false accusation of wrongdoing?

Monty Burnz

Stheno wrote: »

And much like your behaviour on the thread you are ignoring a valid point, which is that I simply posted on the thread and told you to report a post you didn't like as per the forum charter.

Oh, and just to try to keep everything above board and to demonstrate that I am doing my best to play by the Boards.ie rules, I have taken your suggestion on board and have now reported some of the offensive posts in the thread.

I don't expect anything to come of it because I'm sure the mods (i.e. you, Silverfish and Ickle Magoo) have already read these offensive posts and didn't bother doing anything, but it's all I can do. Especially so when you consider that Silverfish is an admin and is in a position to adjudicate on her own moderation.

Stheno

Monty Burnz wrote: »

This is more of it. What 'valid point' was I ignoring? My 'behaviour' on the thread has been impeccable, as any reading of the thread will demonstrate. Will you please stop making this sort of unsubstantiated smear? It's just more bullying.

As I've already said I don't believe your behaviour on the thread was impeccable. My valid point was in relation to why I posted in response to your post on the thread telling you to report the post. The valid point on the thread I am referring to is what imo several posters correctly pointed out, i.e. that your thought experiment argument was flawed.

On the point that you are making (alongside the smear attack) - I actually agree that you did not say anything out of the ordinary or wrong. But it was your sudden appearance in the thread as the third mod/admin to take issue with me directly that confirmed in my mind (and in fact, unless you wish to deny it?) that talks had gone on behind the scenes and a united front was being constructed against me.

What chance does an ordinary poster stand against 3 mods? What chance do I have of getting redress for this false accusation of wrongdoing?

Err I took issue with a few posters in that thread to be honest, in response to different issues, warned and banned users, and posted as a mod in response to your post on thread complaining about another users posts. No mod conspiracy there tbh. I can't agree that I took issue with you when all I did was to advise you of the correct action to take regarding your complaint, and didn't do anything incorrect or wrong, as you've said above.

Monty Burnz

Stheno wrote: »

As I've already said I don't believe your behaviour on the thread was impeccable. My valid point was in relation to why I posted in response to your post on the thread telling you to report the post. The valid point on the thread I am referring to is what imo several posters correctly pointed out, i.e. that your thought experiment argument was flawed.

I do believe it was impeccable. And I do not accept that my thought experiment was 'flawed', and I would be happy to debate that with you if you want to open a thread on the subject. I have already been warned about trying to discuss a philosophical question about abortion on a thread about...abortion, and I'm not going disobey a command from an admin, even if it was patently ridiculous. You can't start to argue with somebody and, when they have been silenced on the issue by an admin, declare victory. Well, clearly you can, but you are not correct to do so.

But this is a side issue: the question remains - how do I get redress for being wrongly accused of insulting and ridiculing people by a mod?

Dav

Some points:

1) You can believe your behaviour was impeccable all you like, the mods who we entrust to look after that forum do not. I happen to agree with them.

2) If you are you are alleging that Silverfish in her dual role as Admin and Mod of that forum will somehow act inappropriately in relation to any disputes that arise then you owe her an apology. Admins who mod do not get involved with a dispute - this is one of our rules.

3) Your thoughts on what is the right and wrong way are not Boards.ie policy or Ladies Lounge rules no matter how much you think they should be. WRITING IT IN BOLD DOES NOT MAKE IT TRUE - it just looks really silly and by extension, makes you look really silly. I don't think you are by the way, you seem to be reasonably capable of constructing an arguement, but you seem incapable of realising that discussions don't have a winner and a loser and that the forum operates how the mods enforce it which is decided by the community in the first place. The Ladies Lounge in particular has regular discussion and feedback with its community on how it's being moderated.

4) Mods are perfectly entitled to be involved in any and all discussions on their forum and a general rule of thumb is unless they're posting in bold text, they're just another user. Another general rule of thumb is that a mod doesn't get involved in "modding" a discussion they're involved in either and after (what I admit is a very brief) read of the thread, I don't see where Ickle Magoo did this.

I recently said in another thread that I am sick and tired of seeing these threads bashing the mods of the Ladies Lounge who I happen to think very highly of. That thread isn't directly related to this issue, but it's not a million miles off it either.

If you do not agree with this then you will need to reconsider posting in the Ladies Lounge. I will not be drawn into an arguement or discussion on this, I've already made this decision and until such a time as people learn to accept that the Ladies Lounge and it's mods are getting along just fine, this won't be changing.

Monty Burnz

Dav wrote: »

Some points:

Dav, before I invest further time going through your post point by point (particularly the couple of points that are actually relevant), would it be fair to summarise your position as this:

It is ok for a mod to falsely accuse another poster of 'dishing out' insults and ridicule if you hold the mod in high regard?

Monty Burnz

Is this issue being ignored? Is there any way I can get redress for being falsely accused by a mod?

Shield

Strictly from an observational standpoint, and without being involved in it whatsoever, it looks like it has been addressed and adjudicated already by a boards.ie employee. I don't think anything further will be added, and once a boards.ie has made a decision on a matter, that is usually the end of the dispute.

Monty Burnz

Shield wrote: »

Strictly from an observational standpoint, and without being involved in it whatsoever, it looks like it has been addressed and adjudicated already by a boards.ie employee. I don't think anything further will be added, and once a boards.ie has made a decision on a matter, that is usually the end of the dispute.

I'm sorry, what? Dav's patronising contribution where he repeats falsehoods is the 'adjudication'?? He hasn't even read the thread! He has not shown any examples of me 'dishing out' ridicule or insults - because he can't find any!

If I can get confirmation that this is all the 'help' that I can expect, I'll pick his post apart and then leave this thread as a monument to the farce that is Boards.ie 'justice'.

Show me my 'insults', show me my 'ridicule', or just admit that Boards.ie don't give a rat's ass about their ordinary posters.

Cheers.

Shield

I will attempt to find out what the status of this issue is, and I will get back to you when I know something.

Monty Burnz

A refutation of this ridiculous post:

Dav wrote: »

Some points:

1) You can believe your behaviour was impeccable all you like, the mods who we entrust to look after that forum do not. I happen to agree with them.

You agree with the mods without reading the thread? Well that's open-minded of you. I suggest you do read the thread. My contributions don't start until half-way through, so it's not as bad as it looks.

Dav wrote: »

2) If you are you are alleging that Silverfish in her dual role as Admin and Mod of that forum will somehow act inappropriately in relation to any disputes that arise then you owe her an apology. Admins who mod do not get involved with a dispute - this is one of our rules.

I've done a little research. It seems that you are not telling the whole truth here. In this thread, Outlaw Pete has an issue with some moderation by Silverfish. The thread is closed by an admin who decides it's gone on long enough - which admin? Silverfish. So admins who mod DO get involved in disputes.

Dav wrote: »

3) Your thoughts on what is the right and wrong way are not Boards.ie policy or Ladies Lounge rules no matter how much you think they should be. WRITING IT IN BOLD DOES NOT MAKE IT TRUE - it just looks really silly and by extension, makes you look really silly. I don't think you are by the way, you seem to be reasonably capable of constructing an arguement, but you seem incapable of realising that discussions don't have a winner and a loser and that the forum operates how the mods enforce it which is decided by the community in the first place. The Ladies Lounge in particular has regular discussion and feedback with its community on how it's being moderated.

I wrote parts in this thread in bold so that casual readers would quickly see which bits are particularly important. When I link to this thread in future, it will pay off.

"You seem to be reasonably capable of constructing an arguement" - thanks. That's more than a little patronising and insulting, as I'm sure you are aware. I won't embarrass both of us by listing my academic and professional achievements, but suffice it to say that I am confident they are rather more impressive than yours.

"you seem incapable of realising that discussions don't have a winner and a loser" - this is when I realised that you hadn't even read my posts. This is not and never was an issue for me on the thread. I was not one of the people arguing one side of the debate, I was one of the people in the middle putting questions to learn the views of others and learn how they came to their views. I don't blame you for this huge goof - the mods should at least have come up with some plausible ammunition for you, but I guess they couldn't think of anything either.

And for what it's worth, I've no problems with the LL charter - which is why it was easy not to breach it.

Dav wrote: »

4) Mods are perfectly entitled to be involved in any and all discussions on their forum and a general rule of thumb is unless they're posting in bold text, they're just another user. Another general rule of thumb is that a mod doesn't get involved in "modding" a discussion they're involved in either and after (what I admit is a very brief) read of the thread, I don't see where Ickle Magoo did this.

Yes, your read was very, very brief indeed, wasn't it? Do you not even feel slightly embarrassed to be declaring that I have no cause for complaint without even seeing the evidence? Seriously?

I mean, I thought this was going to be a waste of time, but this is actually funny. At least we can dispense with the pretence of fairness or respect for posters on the part of admins.

Dav wrote: »

I recently said in another thread that I am sick and tired of seeing these threads bashing the mods of the Ladies Lounge who I happen to think very highly of. That thread isn't directly related to this issue, but it's not a million miles off it either.

I'm sorry, but this is no concern of mine. I appreciate that it may have been more convenient for you if Ickle Magoo falsely accused me on another forum, but it happened where it happened.

In passing, I will observe that if you keep getting complaints about the mods on a certain board, at a certain point you will have to ask whether it's the posters who are the problem, or it's something else.

Dav wrote: »

If you do not agree with this then you will need to reconsider posting in the Ladies Lounge. I will not be drawn into an arguement or discussion on this, I've already made this decision and until such a time as people learn to accept that the Ladies Lounge and it's mods are getting along just fine, this won't be changing.

So - freely admitting that you had 'a very brief' read of the thread (?) and having been shown not to have read my posts, and having failed to demonstrate any evidence that Ickle Magoo's accusation was correct, you are washing your hands and declaring justice done?

Bravo sir. Bravo.

Like I said, I expected a farce, but I didn't expect it to be quite so blatant.

Cheers.

Silverfish

Okay, it's as simple as this.

You accused other posters of 'Childish point-scoring', more than once.


You said

I'm not here to be insulted or ridiculed, I'm here to learn.

All Ickle Magoo did, posting as a poster, was ask you not to insult or ridicule posters yourself, by calling them "childish" or "petty", which you did in two prior posts.



Your warning, which I issued, was for your repeated attempts to drag the thread off topic with some vague thought experiment, which nobody could make sense of. You continued to try to push this thought experiment, and wondering on-thread why nobody would give you a satisfactory answer to it.

I don't care what other poster brought it up again, because you posted this:

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Can you explain why it made 'no sense'? Because nobody else has (in spite of what they have claimed).

to which I responded with this:

Silverfish wrote: »

Because we would rather try and discuss the reality of the situation rather than imaginary scenarios involving babies in jungles or whatever.

This debate is regarding the 'right to choice' regarding unwanted pregnancies, not the survivalist abilities of babies in jungles.
If you wish to discuss this, perhaps another forum would be more suitable.

If you wish to try to bend the conversation back to this, or bend the conversation into discussing WHY nobody wanted to discuss this with you, then please read the charter.

You weren't infracted or banned, you were warned by myself acting as mod not to derail the thread with your thought experiment.


That's it. That's all. You weren't wrongly accused, using the words 'childish' and 'petty' IS insulting, and it IS a form of ridiculing another poster. I'm not going to debate the intricacies of that with you.

Monty Burnz

Silverfish wrote: »

Okay, it's as simple as this.

You accused other posters of 'Childish point-scoring', more than once.

The problem here is that your explanation counts on us not knowing or understanding that there is a difference between telling someone you are not interested in 'a childish point scoring' discussion and calling them 'childish'. The first is not insulting, the second is. It's the same distinction as telling someone that they have made a stupid point, and just calling them stupid.

In addition, you conveniently omit the context that these posts were made in - they are extremely polite responses to extremely rude posts addressed to me. (for example "I know that this is a bit controversial, but have you considered writing posts that stick to the point?" and so forth).

Silverfish wrote: »

Your warning, which I issued, was for your repeated attempts to drag the thread off topic with some vague thought experiment, which nobody could make sense of. You continued to try to push this thought experiment, and wondering on-thread why nobody would give you a satisfactory answer to it.

Repeated attempts to drag the thread off topic? I've dealt with this, but I see I have to do so again.

Firstly, the thread was entitled "Your right to an abortion". My 'vague thought experiment' (it was actually very specific, but I guess you had to work in an insult somewhere) was attempting to address circumstances in which it was clear that an abortion was justified - an issue at the very heart of 'your right to an abortion'. So it was not O/T, by any definition.

Secondly, I posted in post 592 about this question in response to another poster who said that my 'allegory' (sic) made no sense. You have to go back through TEN of my previous posts to get to one where I made reference to the thought experiment.

The gap between the two posts in question was 5 minutes short of 6 hours. So I didn't mention the thought experiment for 9 posts in a row, or for 5 hours and 55 minutes, and when I did mention it, it was in response to someone who dismissed it as nonsense with no explanation of why. Does this strike anyone as - in your words - "continu[ing] to try to push this thought experiment"?

Silverfish wrote: »

I don't care what other poster brought it up again

I'm sure you don't. In fact, your whole attitude to this could probably be summed up by the first three words there.

Silverfish wrote: »

That's it. That's all. You weren't wrongly accused, using the words 'childish' and 'petty' IS insulting, and it IS a form of ridiculing another poster. I'm not going to debate the intricacies of that with you.

I was wrongly accused. I did not accuse the posters of being childish or petty, in spite of your attempts to muddy the waters. I can see how it is convenient of you to declare that you will not debate the 'intricacies' of it, because you are clearly wrong.

But just to make things super-clear once again, here's a rough guide to the issue, if anyone is confused on the 'intricacies', :

"I'm not interested in a childish point-scoring discussion" = not insulting.
"You are childish" = insulting.

I have been wrongly accused of insulting and ridiculing other posters by a mod. How do I get redress?

Tom Dunne

Monty Burnz wrote: »

I have been wrongly accused of insulting and ridiculing other posters by a mod. How do I get redress?

You have not been wrongly accused, despite what you may think.

You have had answers from other Admins, Boards.ie employees and another, impartial moderator.

The simple fact of the matter is that if you don't like what we say, tough.

Deal with it.

In fact, go find yourself another website if you feel that strongly about it.

Either way, let it go and stop wasting everyone's time.

I can't make it any clearer.