Banned from Airsoft, post silently deleted, user who mentioned post given warning

gerrowadat

I followed up to this post: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=79053570&postcount=25

I quoted the last sentence in o1s1n's post, changed 'mellow' to 'dead', and added 'FTFY' (as in, "Fixed that for you"). Bit of a flippant remark, but on-topic I think (Boards Airsoft is fairly quiet these days). I'm a regular poster on Airsoft so people would know it's a genuine opinion, and a valid one (unfortunately).

My post was deleted, and I received a 1 month ban.

I've followed up with andy_g, the mod who banned me, and didn't get anywhere. The mod in question was condescending in PMs, and suggested "your trolling can be considered from your post of "correcting" Oisins post into something that infact he had not said" and "Therfor possibly forcing your own opinion's to the community". He's claimed "That you have failed to learn from your previous bans of 1+ week so hopefully the month will give you time to reflect on yourself and learn that the above mentioned actions will not be tollorated here".

My post was completely innocuous, on-topic, and I think andy_g just got confused about the 'FTFY' thing. I don't think there's anything to 'learn' here, and I don't think the ban is in any way warranted. It's a misunderstanding at best.

(as a side-note, a followup that mentioned my post that was deleted was editied and the user warned for 'back seat modding'. I think that's kind of disappointing for a thread that's asking feedback on a moderation policy).

the drifter

Hi gerrowadat i will have a look at this. Please be patient though.

First off could you post the content of the PM's please.

gerrowadat

Just to be clear, you want me to post the PMs from the mod here, or PM them to you?

the drifter

Send them onto me..

gerrowadat

Done.

the drifter

Cheers. I'll review this when i get a chance.

Thanks

D

the drifter

Ok I've had a look at this

First off the thread is about "IAA Discussion - ground rules. Feedback wanted."

In the first post in this thread the mod says

Steve wrote: »

Please stay on-topic, the floor is yours.

Your contribution to the thread was

Quote:

Originally Posted by o1s1n
It does seem a bit more dead in here now though. So it's probably time to give it another go.

FTFY

This contributes nothing to the thread. It baffles me as you were contributing to the thread fine up until then.

Normally i would see a month ban as a bit harsh for this. Especially if it was a first offence but...

50% of your posts are in Airsoft. You have received 11 Bans in the forum.
I would advise to serve your ban. Read the forum charter and think before posting another off topic post like this.

I would also advise not to clock up any more bans in Airsoft.

As always you are welcome to have this reviewed by admin.

Thanks

D

gerrowadat

the drifter wrote: »

Ok I've had a look at this

First off the thread is about "IAA Discussion - ground rules. Feedback wanted."

In the first post in this thread the mod says




Your contribution to the thread was



This contributes nothing to the thread. It baffles me as you were contributing to the thread fine up until then.

Normally i would see a month ban as a bit harsh for this. Especially if it was a first offence but...

50% of your posts are in Airsoft. You have received 11 Bans in the forum.
I would advise to serve your ban. Read the forum charter and think before posting another off topic post like this.

I would also advise not to clock up any more bans in Airsoft.

As always you are welcome to have this reviewed by admin.

Thanks

D

I don't agree my post contributed nothing. I could have said "Actually it is because the forum is kind of dead", but I said it that way. Another user has gone on to say it in as many words as well. He doesn't get banned of course.

I guess what I'm 'learning' from this is that if I'm going to be posting on boards again, I need to only ever say things that are absolutely benign and uncontroversial, and always say exactly what I mean in a very plain fashion so even the slow kids down the back can understand.

The ban is constructive -- a subset of the moderation team, and andy_g in particular have pretty much started handing out bans to me and a small subset of users for saying anything that's not absolutely on-topic or uncontroversial. andy_g gets away with calling me a dick in the infractions he hands out for the tiniest of things, and hrta (a friend of 3 of the moderators) gets away with accusing me of a criminal act repeatedly. But no, I go offtopic and I get a months ban.

There was talk a year or so ago of change here, but nothing happened. Suggestions were solicited and ignored. The moderation team here have also recently appointed more of their mates (clientele of one particular site), which has been pointed out and ignored.

11 bans of course makes me a troublemaker and a crackpot, that's the only way you can get banned on this forum. I could escalate this to the admins, but the admins and community manager have done nothing about these very issues (victimisation, mod nepotism, no repurcussions for charter breaches done by mod's mates) in the recent past anyway. Up to you.

gerrowadat

Also your advice to 'not clock up any more bans' is kind of baffling. Given the quality so far, It's like advising me not to get caught in the rain. The process of getting banned in the Airsoft forum (fr me, anyway) seems pretty non-deterministic.

Black Swan

gerrowadat wrote:

Admin review please.

REQUEST:

Would the Admin please consider reviewing this DRP at their earliest convenience per the PM request of gerrowadat?

Trojan

Black Swan wrote: »

REQUEST:

Would the Admin please consider reviewing this DRP at their earliest convenience per the PM request of gerrowadat?

I'll look at this.

Trojan

Hi gerrowadat,

How I'm going to approach this is simple: first I'm going to determine if *any* mod action was warranted. Then I'm going to determine if the action taken was warranted, and finally I'll look at future options. This is an interactive discussion as much as a ruling, and your feedback is requested.

Firstly, do you agree that there is no room to misinterpret this request, other than you must stay completely on topic regarding "facilitation of IAA discussion" only?

Steve wrote: »

please post your thoughts on how we could facilitate IAA discussion here without it descending into madness as it has in that past.

Please stay on-topic, the floor is yours.

gerrowadat

Trojan wrote: »

Hi gerrowadat,

How I'm going to approach this is simple: first I'm going to determine if *any* mod action was warranted. Then I'm going to determine if the action taken was warranted, and finally I'll look at future options. This is an interactive discussion as much as a ruling, and your feedback is requested.

Firstly, do you agree that there is no room to misinterpret this request, other than you must stay completely on topic regarding "facilitation of IAA discussion" only?

It was a thread about facilitation of IAA discussion on boards. I think the distinction is important.

Trojan

gerrowadat wrote: »

It was a thread about facilitation of IAA discussion on boards. I think the distinction is important.

Ok, so to clarify, you are interpreting this:

Steve wrote:

please post your thoughts on how we could facilitate IAA discussion here without it descending into madness as it has in that past.

Please stay on-topic, the floor is yours.

as this:

Steve wrote:

please post your thoughts on how we could facilitate IAA discussion here on boards without it descending into madness as it has in that past.

Please stay on-topic, the floor is yours.

If that's correct, do you then believe that (including o1s1n's post for context) your posting this:

o1s1n wrote: »

It does seem a bit more sedate in here now though. So it's probably time to give it another go.

gerrowadat wrote:

o1s1n wrote:

It does seem a bit more dead in here now though. So it's probably time to give it another go.

FTFY

is okay given the interpretation of the second, but it's not, given the original quote from Steve?

In either case, I don't see how your post is a representation of your thoughts on how to facilitate IAA discussion here on boards.

gerrowadat

I posted my other thoughts elsewhere on the thread. This was actually my 7th post on the thread, so I had been participating as normal. I don't think it's fair to ask me if this one post 'represents my thoughts', as it was far from my only contribution.

This post does represent a valid view on the discussion of the IAA on boards, which is that the Airsoft forum is a lot less busy than it used to be, and therefore more likely to be able to house discussion without massive polarisation or a bunch of people jumping into every discussion. It's an honestly held view. I honestly thought that o1s1n was using 'sedate' as a synonym for how quiet things were, too. If that was a mistake, then fair enough, I got it wrong.

I've been on the Airsoft forum for any years, and most of the people who would have turned IAA threads into giant ****storms in the past are no longer on boards (why is outside the scope of this DRP). I was making a point, albeit obtuse. I would have been happy to clarify it if it became clear people didn't know what I was trying to say.

Trojan

I'm looking at this issue in two lights:

On the surface the ban seems harsh and unwarranted. The post in context is fine, and you were a positive contributor earlier in the thread. Benefit of the doubt would have me dismiss the ban.

On the other hand, you're "known to the moderators" to paraphrase a euphemism. You've been banned 11 times previously - actually it's only 9, because I see one of those was me reducing a 6 month ban down to 1 month, and not counting this one. That said, 9 bans is still far too many.

I can understand if the local mods just wanted rid of you because they believe you're a trouble maker and they believe that you don't intend to be a positive contributor. On the flip side, I believe that you were making a good contribution on that thread.

Ruling:

1) Letter of the law, the mod was correct.
2) Spirit of the law, it's a 50-50 call, most mods would let it go but your history swayed it against you, and the ban was harsher than normal based on that.

Technically I could uphold the decision, but what I'm going to do is say this: I believe it's a judgement call, the ban is a tad too harsh and I'm giving you benefit of the doubt. I'm going to reduce your 1 month ban to a 1 week based on the above two points.

It's over two weeks now so I'll unban immediately.

My recommendation is that you do keep your Airsoft posts as benign and uncontroversial as possible.

Resolved.

Trojan

I was asked to clarify my reasoning for this decision.

I believe that the ban itself was justified based on the mod instruction in the first post of the thread. Another user might have got a warning but the original ban length of 1 month is justified on the basis of gerrowadat's previous behaviour in Airsoft.

However, gerrowadat's positive contributions on this particular thread - before the post in question - were a mitigating factor for me and this positive contribution is the primary reason I reduced this ban from 4 weeks to 1 week.