Spiderman

Steve

What's with all the spiderman pics lately?

Have I missed an internet meme or something*?

*be careful how you answer that- banhammer is on a hair trigger.

The real point of this thread is why?

Are you not man enough to give some feedback about the forum without resorting to childishness and getting banned?

If you want to discuss stuff like adults then, *big surprise*, we'll listen .
If you want to be assh0les about it then - well you know what'll happen.

Work with us here please.

TheDoc

What did I miss?

I'm so confused

On the point of feedback. We have been providing feedback here for a number of years. With a number of threads. And nothing ever comes from it. Its gone through every possible boards.ie channel. And nothing gets done, its the same old same old.

So probably the reason people act like children, is because people felt like they are being treated like it? But if we are going to be man enough and adults, then why dont you post some sort of indication of what spurred this thread and post? Because it looks like there is clearly something there and something happened...

But then again, I'm sure when the men do come and start posting some serious questions, pants will be wet and posts deleted and threads locked?

Work with us here please

The reason most people probably dont, and there is the ever feeling off " the mods against us" , is ironically, any feedback provided in the past that was spot on, and on the money, was completely ignored, and the tough decisions were bottled.... it goes both ways, and whilst doing something like opening up IAA discussion is a really positive step, you can still make a mess of it ( not you personally, mod team in general) for what is an absolutely 100% obvious reasoning......

Le sigh

I apologise if this is off the beating track, but since you've been a bit cryptic, I've had to read between some lines

War Machine 539

The mods here aren't very nice for the most part, Steve. Constant smart arsed comments when bans are being handed out, sticking the oar in when no rules are being breached and handing out permabans for the silliest of things and then ignoring ACTUAL problems.

Its hard to think why anyone would try to make the mods lives harder . . . .

People keep posting them because it annoys the mod team. Thats my theory.

Lemming

/sigh

We've had quite a few moderator changes over the years on the airsoft forums, and the same accusation always exists. QED it's not the moderators that are the problem, but the community - or parts therein - itself.

Seriously, the biggest problem on any internet forum is ego: "Who the f*ck does he think I am?", "Doesn't he know who I am?!!", "Why can't he tell I'm joking, he should get a f*cking clue/sense of humour/whatever", "Nobody tells me what to do", "This is not a fascist dictatorship, I can say what I want", etc. etc. etc. The above applies to every forum, ever.

TheDoc

Lemming wrote: »

/sigh

We've had quite a few moderator changes over the years on the airsoft forums, and the same accusation always exists. QED it's not the moderators that are the problem, but the community - or parts therein - itself.

Seriously, the biggest problem on any internet forum is ego: "Who the f*ck does he think I am?", "Doesn't he know who I am?!!", "Why can't he tell I'm joking, he should get a f*cking clue/sense of humour/whatever", "Nobody tells me what to do", "This is not a fascist dictatorship, I can say what I want", etc. etc. etc. The above applies to every forum, ever.

I'm not buying that one Lem sorry,

The same issues have been levelled again and again and again and not from the same group either, the threads are still very much available through the search function and the main points being brought up every time are from pretty much every sector.

Considering we have gone through numerous mod changes and the same issues persist, it would indicate to me that there is a fundamental flaw in the moderation process of election. Considering moderators nominate candidates it stands to reason that if there is an issue rooted in a moderation group, by them bringing in people they see fit, they will most likely be the same type of individual with the same thought process and personality, therefore pro longing the problem.

And there is no denying that the last few mod cycles have been mates bringing in mates, I don't care how anyone wants to break down the mod process (although I know from other forums how it works) and when new moderators coming into play are being brought in as the current form, it just disrespects the whole moderation process.

I also wouldn't agree that the mods are horrible people, they are just getting alot of push back because of the various poor and in equal treatment segments of the community receive.

At this point I can literally tell when I'm going to get a ban/warning and infraction, and if I do get one, its knowingly, and its because the point is worth making. And typically because I know it will further, is most cases, highlight the inequal moderation various groups receive on this forum.

Lemming

TheDoc wrote: »

I'm not buying that one Lem sorry,

I'm not playing quote tennis on my phone because it is a ball-ache. So I'll be back later to give a more thorough reply.

Suffice to say, that is my opinion and I am not asking you to buy it, snort it, or post it to China. We have had a variety of mods across the community and the same problem exists becausr someone, somewhere, takes umbrage at being 'moderated' and then this miraculously transforms into the charge of the light brigade to free the oppresses masses.

The same charge of mates volunteering mates can be levelled at users too, with concerted and consistent behaviour levelled against mods on nothing other than bruised ego or personal grudges brought in from outside these forums.

So where does corrective action start?

TheDoc

Lemming wrote: »

The same charge of mates volunteering mates can be levelled at users too, with concerted and consistent behaviour levelled against mods on nothing other than bruised ego or personal grudges brought in from outside these forums.

So where does corrective action start?

That's wildly inaccurate. And considering that typically in the past feedback threads on moderation has come from the likes of myself, and the mates you refer, we have gone through every channel appropriate within the boards.ie structure when appropriate and every single time it was resulted in absolutely nothing happening, just fluff replies that " it will be looked into" as if we are twelve years old and that we buy that crap.

The problem is people think there are grudges or egos involved. I've particularly not a care in the world for the moderators as people, where they play, what they eat or what music they listen to, I've genuinely no interest. The interest goes as far as how the forum is moderated and at the best of times its inept.

Its also, in my view, just site wide aswell. I just notice that moderation on this website attracts a certain type of person, and its typically just the wrong kind for moderation. I'm not going into how to properly moderate, but suffice to say its also a site wide problem, so maybe our moderators are working off a very poor set of guidelines, which is totally plausible.

MagicIRL

Boards.ie needed a hero to relieve us from the tyranny of the mod team.

<SNIP
I understand rules are there for a reason- But the mod team just love to whip out the banhammer when things go slightly astray. Would it not be better to educate rather than punish? Even now, in this thread, in the first damn post, Steve has already threatened us with a ban before discussion even began.

And that is the problem.

Again, this isn't a personal attack on anyone- But if you wear the moderator badge, you'll be used as an example to illustrate my point.

MagicIRL

Case in point. I give feedback- it gets snipped.

Here we go again. A certain mod, if you look at his recent mod posts, has banned more users then I've had hot dinners, and for what?! I noticed one poor lad bumped his thread 21 hours after his post and he got banned for a 3 hour time gap. 3 HOURS! Honestly.

Here's my next problem.
OP states:

If you want to discuss stuff like adults then, *big surprise*, we'll listen .

I make a post, like an adult, and it gets snipped by the mod team. Lets have a discussion! Oh, that user has said something that I as a mod disagree with, better remove it! Gimme a break.

Simples.

This is a part of boards.ie.

Boards.ie made the mods,er, mods.

Got a problem with them? Bring it to the admins.

Keep bringing it up the chain & boards.ie sides with the mods? Aww, too bad. Put up or get out.

That's the way it is. Don't like it? Here's your coat, door's over there.

Stercus Accidit

It's far too authoritarian around here and has been for a long time. The party line seems to be all discussions will run smoothly or not at all, which is ludicrous, because any discussion worth having will not run smoothly. Arguments aren't even a problem in the first place, it is part and parcel of the reality of differing opinions. If you stifle discussion because there will be arguments it is censorship, if you view arguments as something that must be avoided at all costs you will never have true discussion, and you will never have a forum that is worthwhile.

I've replied to so many of these threads, several orchestrated by you Steve, and always along the same lines. Grown men have zero motivation to be treated like children, they don't tolerate it IRL and they wont tolerate it here, and arguments and so on are not the end of the world, they are how progress is made, and using moderator tools should be a last resort, it is a lopsided power to stifle the ability of another to express themselves and is taken too lightly here, not least of which weighing in with warnings is taken too lightly too, it is an active threat, not a passive action.

Imagine I had a tool via which I could ban the mods, shut them down and shut them up permanently, and then I bold texted I don't like this, banned. It is an awful thing to do, even wading in with bold text warnings is a way to tell people that this isn't a place where hobbyists are all equal and free to engage each other, it is a place where a slip up will cost you a ban and the embarrassment of being treated like a child.

tl;dr the moderation is too heavy handed, the degradation of this forum went linearly with the loss of good posters due to their lack of interest in being treated like spas.

Southern Dandy

The vast majority of people on this forum get on fine here, without any hassle from the mods and for the simple reason that they adhere to the rules of this forum. And yes it is the vast majority.

The new mods in question are not here because a friend got them this position, they are here because the have been members of this forum for quite some time, they know the run of this place. They are sticking to the guidelines that are set out for them and to be honest I have zero issue with them.

Lemming hit it on the head I think with the "ego" of some people and it is always the same people (well for the most part) who pop up, getting a rise out of slating the mods when any bit of controversy arises. Personal vendettas always play a part in it and this is from a completely outside perspective. I have been on this forum probably 1-2 years on and off and the difference in that short space of time it is just astounding with regards peoples attitudes.

What is the bloody point of you being here if you don't want play by the rules? Do ye have this same attitude with your boss at work if he does something that you do not like?

Of course it is easy to say the mods are trigger happy with dealing out infractions and bans when you push and push the boundaries with what is deemed acceptable behavior on the airsoft forum. This is not "After hours" where anything goes.

TheDoc

Southern Dandy wrote: »

The vast majority of people on this forum get on fine here, without any hassle from the mods and for the simple reason that they adhere to the rules of this forum. And yes it is the vast majority.

I adhere to the rules also. I'm typically subject to "moderation interpretation2 which is a mod identifying things off topic or back seat modding. And a fair amount of the time incorrectly. We dont have serious breaches of rules around here. What we have is moderators interjecting when they are not needed. I applaud the proactiveness, but not when its destructive.

The new mods in question are not here because a friend got them this position, they are here because the have been members of this forum for quite some time, they know the run of this place. They are sticking to the guidelines that are set out for them and to be honest I have zero issue with them.

typically a shortlist is created for candidates for mods. This is created by mods. Its then passed onto the upper ranks and fed back down with comments and cuts, typically people with too much previous activity in the sense of bans etc.

So in a roundabout way, yes, they are here because they are mods mates(although I dunno bout Deburca tbh). And they are relatively new to the forum going by their account stats, when compared against some others.

Lemming hit it on the head I think with the "ego" of some people and it is always the same people (well for the most part) who pop up, getting a rise out of slating the mods when any bit of controversy arises. Personal vendettas always play a part in it and this is from a completely outside perspective. I have been on this forum probably 1-2 years on and off and the difference in that short space of time it is just astounding with regards peoples attitudes.

I'm one of the people most commonly associated with "anti mod behaviour" simply put, as Addict said, I don't like being treated as a child. I also don't like having my account consistently tarnished with infractions and warnings that are completely incorrect and un warranted. Shock horror, I post on other forums here, long before airsoft was even on this site. And I've missed the mod list for so many forums around here, thanks to unwarranted and rubbish warnings, infractions and bans.

What is the bloody point of you being here if you don't want play by the rules? Do ye have this same attitude with your boss at work if he does something that you do not like?

Again, rules arnt being broken, its inept interpretations of a moderators intervention. If I go being racist in work or injecting heroin, yeah sure, I'm fired. But if my boss keeps intervening in my work where its no required, and when they are incorrect, or to the best of times mis understanding the situation, there is a process I go through to have that matter resolved.

I talk to my boss directly and outline the problem.
I can then speak to my department head, or finally HR. The same sort of thing is here in boards, except when you go up the line, you just get the wagons drawn in, and everyone are defensive children. No one wants to just sit down, find the problem, then action on it.

Of course it is easy to say the mods are trigger happy with dealing out infractions and bans when you push and push the boundaries with what is deemed acceptable behavior on the airsoft forum. This is not "After hours" where anything goes.

Boundaries arnt being pushed, but are utterly grey and transparent considering the unequal treatment of one poster to another, aswell as the most often then not misunderstood, heavy handed and un required moderation.

Moderator intervention
1) Extreme personal abuse to another poster
2) Potentially libellous or criminal undertoned posts
3) Any boards.ie local rules

And thats it, everything outside of that is simply dealing with reported posts.

A mod doesn't decided what's off topic, through people reporting posts in numbers as " Off topic" then we know its off topic. The user and posters dictate the threads and the direction of a conversation, not the moderators, you enforce the rules, not the direction of chatter flow.

Example 1

Gerrowadat banned for a month for what was perceived as trolling. For a second I'll forget it was just a mod waiting to ban him, but we will look at it subjectively, to outline how the issue could have been dealt with better.

Gerrowadat responds " FTPFY" a well known internet reference to " I fixed that for you", most noticeably posted in forums around the world, and in our own soccer forum. I would have gathered that a website that still references " Wil Wheatons Dick reference" and still thinks its funny, would get this.

What happened
A) Moderator interjects and provides a ban for 1 month based on previous transgression. I'm going to make the assumption no one reported that post, cause no one is that ****ing stupid to not get the joke. So this would be an unnecessary moderation intervention.
In the event the post was reported by the OP, it still does not warrant a ban, as one person reporting a post, isn't conclusive. If 50 people reported the post as offensive, I see the point ( bar the fact there is 50 gob ****es posting).

The outcome? More threads, more disputes and more feedback to inevitably fall on deaf ears.....

What should have happened?
I'm going to assume for this part that the mod just didnt understand what happened.

So fire a PM,
"Hi Gerrowadat,
Sorry I dont understand the reference, can you outline it to me, it looks a bit sarcy to the OP"

Issue explained, take it from there.

Or an alternative?

"Hi Gerrowadat,
To be honest that is a bit sarcy and I dont want the thread erupting up into a row, do you mind elaborating the point or alternatively just remove the post?"

Youd be shocked hos responsive people will be. Dogwatch fired me a PM asking me to change or remove something, cant remember. But he outlined the post, what he wanted removed and the reasons why. I obliged and there was no problem.

It was good moderation, posters see I made the edit, and we move on.


The above, simply using your PM's and using your noodle before applying infractions, warnings and bans is something I mentioned when The Master was on the loose, so we are talking nearly three years. And I've mentioned it every single feedback thread, as have others.

And when has it happened, sweet **** all....

Example 2
My most recent warning for what was deemed off topic and back seat moding. I will admit I didnt understand why it was OT since it was related, and there was no backseat modding. In confusion I had some friends take a look, who are mods on the gaming forum, sports etc. and they concured. So I humed and haughed and just said I'd forget about it

But on reflection

What happened?
I cant remember the specifics, the paragraph was cut, but it was essentially pointing out that the above ban was a bit harsh, explained the reference, and then essentially made the point out in my long post. I think that was it, it got snipped : /

I then got a warning, no big deal, but yet another mark on my account history.

What should have happened?
PM
"Hi Doc,
I don't really want previous mod decisions or bans being brought into the discussion. I've reviewed your post, and while the majority is fine and ok, can you just remove the first paragraph, I feel its taking away from the topic and we don't want the mods decisions openly challenged, the Dispute forum is for that"

Might I contest back with the mod? I probably would, but what I would do, for the short term, is remove the paragraph until we concluded proceedings over PM.

Its about treating people with respect and as adults, there is no need for the animosity. But when as originally stated respect and work goes both ways, and there needs to be some work together. And I guess the above might simply be my mod style, but if I was able to send PM's and resolve disputes on forums which traffic in a day was more then boards sitewide gets in a week, I see absolutely no reason why it cannot be done on a sub forum here.

TheDoc

Deleted User wrote: »

Keep bringing it up the chain & boards.ie sides with the mods? Aww, too bad. Put up or get out.

That's the way it is. Don't like it? Here's your coat, door's over there.

That doesnt say much for a site that blows its horn about being community driven and building and developing from the community.

I think we all know when it comes to having issues with moderation, instead of people being calm and level headed and talking it out, the wagons are drawn in and its backs against the wall, and then the epic games of quote tennis begin on the feedback forum...

But there is possibly a part of me that feels its there because it works, but might be a place for admins to blow fluff and act like they do stuff, I dunno. But I think that when what was the HIGHEST visited forum on the site and contained the HIGHEST daily traffic for the guts off over a year, suddenly dies off, youd think there might be some investigation as to what caused the downtunrn, so lessons, if any, can be learned

Southern Dandy

TheDoc wrote: »

I adhere to the rules also. I'm typically subject to "moderation interpretation2 which is a mod identifying things off topic or back seat modding. And a fair amount of the time incorrectly. We dont have serious breaches of rules around here. What we have is moderators interjecting when they are not needed. I applaud the proactiveness, but not when its destructive.

Oh don't get me wrong, I'm referring to breaches on airsoft adverts and on some instances pointless posts that do nothing but causing a stir, good example being an individual using a meme saying "death to" so and so. Debates get heated on this forum even before mod intervention. I am not pointing the finger at you so your own personal dilemma with mods is something I can't comment on.

TheDoc wrote: »

typically a shortlist is created for candidates for mods. This is created by mods. Its then passed onto the upper ranks and fed back down with comments and cuts, typically people with too much previous activity in the sense of bans etc.

So in a roundabout way, yes, they are here because they are mods mates(although I dunno bout Deburca tbh). And they are relatively new to the forum going by their account stats, when compared against some others.

I really do not think its a friend thing, they might have some relationship outside of this but I cant see this being true. They get selected probably as they fit the criteria, just my opinion really. You have been in this game longer than me but I'm looking at this from my logical sense.

TheDoc wrote: »

I'm one of the people most commonly associated with "anti mod behaviour" simply put, as Addict said, I don't like being treated as a child. I also don't like having my account consistently tarnished with infractions and warnings that are completely incorrect and un warranted. Shock horror, I post on other forums here, long before airsoft was even on this site. And I've missed the mod list for so many forums around here, thanks to unwarranted and rubbish warnings, infractions and bans.

You may feel that these are unwarranted and you could very well be right, but if mods deem this warranted and infract you because you may have said/done something then hey might have reason and hopefully it is down to the "rules" and not just because they don't get on with you., but having said that if a mod is being harsh on you for the simple reason he has in for you for what ever reason then I can understand where you are coming from.

TheDoc wrote: »

Again, rules arnt being broken, its inept interpretations of a moderators intervention. If I go being racist in work or injecting heroin, yeah sure, I'm fired. But if my boss keeps intervening in my work where its no required, and when they are incorrect, or to the best of times mis understanding the situation, there is a process I go through to have that matter resolved.

I talk to my boss directly and outline the problem.
I can then speak to my department head, or finally HR. The same sort of thing is here in boards, except when you go up the line, you just get the wagons drawn in, and everyone are defensive children. No one wants to just sit down, find the problem, then action on it.

The point I made here was mods being of an authoritative position some people don't respond well to being told what to do and like you if I had a problem with my boss I would go higher. Has this mod-ing been reported to admins or who ever it is that is in charge if you feel that you are being improperly treated ?

TheDoc wrote: »

Boundaries arnt being pushed, but are utterly grey and transparent considering the unequal treatment of one poster to another, aswell as the most often then not misunderstood, heavy handed and un required moderation.

Moderator intervention
1) Extreme personal abuse to another poster
2) Potentially libellous or criminal undertoned posts
3) Any boards.ie local rules

This is what I meant at the beginning of my post with my thoughts on breaching rules etc.:)


I'm basing my assumptions from personal experience with mods here just like you, and all's good my end never had any issues with them that does not seem the case on your end . All it takes sadly, is one comment to start uproar, then this escalates to something more serious, all this started somewhere and I doubt it will be resolved on both ends for the shear reason that it has now gone too far and boarder line personal for some be it mod or member.

I really do hope this ends, for the sake of airsoft boards, yeah sure everyone loves a bit of drama and a debate for want of better word's including myself but it sadly we are stuck in a rut.

On a side not that was one long ass response you wrote

hightower1

Am I the only one that thinks there is no issue with the moderation round here? From my POV a lot of this sections issues stem from an overabundance of ego and self superiority complexes.

Maybe its because airsoft is relatively small and has an even smaller group of folks who have had a noticeable presence since the beginning or there abouts maybe they feel their opinion is move valid or is entitled to be served by different rules than the rest?

Ether way I personally dont think the mods here have been unfair... but then again this is just my opinion.

TheDoc

Why does everyone assume, when someone points out their views which arnt streamlined, or has issues with the hierarchy governing the forum, its viewed as egotistical and the likes.

Its the same with the "elitist" thing people used for so long.

Its a gross misuse of the word and simply aims to try belittle the views of those providing genuine honest feedback, from having vast experience on this forum and others.

There is nothing egotistical about it

If there was to be an accurate description of ego, it would be the years upon years that feedback and issues that have been raised, have been ignored.

So seriously, drop the ego talk, your all using it wrong, and trying to belittle the posts of those in opposition.

hightower1

TheDoc wrote: »

Why does everyone assume, when someone points out their views which arnt streamlined, or has issues with the hierarchy governing the forum, its viewed as egotistical and the likes.

Its the same with the "elitist" thing people used for so long.

Its a gross misuse of the word and simply aims to try belittle the views of those providing genuine honest feedback, from having vast experience on this forum and others.

There is nothing egotistical about it

If there was to be an accurate description of ego, it would be the years upon years that feedback and issues that have been raised, have been ignored.

So seriously, drop the ego talk, your all using it wrong, and trying to belittle the posts of those in opposition.

Doc, Im not trying to belittle anyones views. Im only expressing my own, asking those to stop expressing their views as you feel it belittles those whom it opposes is the very issue you feel exists.... censorship.

I have no agenda or aligences. I honestly just dont have an issue with the mods decisions by and large, I have seen some folks banned, have had infractions myself but I dont honestly feel anything was uncalled for.

Its just my opinion and observation that those who seem to have a gripe with mods decisions seem to also have a large ego here. Perhaps the length of time here they have served has exposed them to a longer period of some mis moderation if it does in fact exist or perhaps the length of time here has developed said ego - its not up to me to decide that but I am inclined to believe its the latter tbh and I am entitled to say so.

To give some contrast I think the mods have been too light handed in regards to a female poster that used to be here. The poster regularly had a coarse attitude and was nearly always flaming arguments or starting them. TBH I felt the mods were always a little light handed when dealing with those situations but again thats the mods prerogative. Im just trying to illustrate that my opinion on mods and community may differ from what seems to be the general tone but its just my own opinion mate.

Its good to see a discussion on the subject, whether anyone feels an issue exists or not its always good to have a frank and open discussion about things like this.

*I hope the tone doesnt get lost in this post and doesnt sound confrontational in anyway...its def not.

TheDoc

But thats my point, its not an ego, its based of experience. And the poster you refered too had numerous feedback threads created, and discussions with admins and cmods which again fell on deaf ears and was again very much appearing to be unequal treatment and favouritism. It possibly wasn't, but what matters is how its perceived.

And there appears to alot of narrow minded short sighted decisions made that will inevitably cause suspicion and for good reason.

@Southern Daddy : It very much is friends nominating friends, or those of a certain group. No point beating around the bush about it. There has been countless opportunities for the mod team to make the right choice and install members that the community respect, are impartial, or even bringing someone in that might be contraversial, but can do the job and will provide some balance.

Every new moderation announcement raises more eyebrows and detracts ever more so from the position, removing respect from it. And for many its probably oblivious, many people, maybe outside of Dublin, dont know that three of our mod team are pals, and play on the same site and have done for some time. While that in itself is not an issue, it cannot be ignored to be a clique in itself, and what also cannot be ignored is the very destructive nature and tendancies of that sites old owner, who many could and perhaps do believe, our moderation team are influenced by.

And when that associate blatantly started posting about another site "stealing" his quad or something, there was no infractions or bans, I think the posts were just deleted. So you can see how its easily perceived that some receive different treatment. And at the end of the day its only human nature in fairness, help out a mate. But when its becoming so obvious that its impairing judgement, causing fractures and a mass exodus of posters, that person should be big enough to step away due to clashing interests, or those above should be proactive enough to intervene

So I still think its wrong to label it as having an ego, when its anything but. And it does, even if not intended, detract from the points being made. By labbeling someone as egotistical that brands them as unwilling to obtain assistance, listen to other views or accept constructive feedback, which in turn could be labbeled against the moderation team aswell as posters.

But ego is not the word to be used, at all, and I'd like it to stop as its a gross mis use of the word and has a negative effect, as did elitist in threads gone past.

War Machine 539

In fairness lads, I hate to say this, even though I agree with every syllable Doc has wrote, we are I fear a vocal minority. The simple fact is people don't really care about who moderates, unless they have had a gripe with them.

The thing that has been pissing me rightly off is the smart arse posts added onto the end of the ban. Its unnecessary. Give the ban if its earned but don't be a nob about it. The ban is the punitive measure, not the two cents of some mod having a bad day. Even reading it on someone elses post is infuriating. Its childlike. And a mod has the temerity to ask us to behave like men? Pull the other one please.

Doc kudos for highlighting the real problem. The clique that for too long has been causing problems.

Funny thing is they asked ANOTHER of their mates in but he sensibly refused!

The electoral process for mods needs to change. Simple as.


Just a quick note on ego. The word has been thrown around with regards to users disagreeing with mods. Spin that on its head. Mods have egos too I am sure.

Power does indeed corrupt. And will be abused.

Give a mod an inch...

MerryDespot

War Machine 539 wrote: »

The thing that has been pissing me rightly off is the smart arse posts added onto the end of the ban. Its unnecessary. ... Even reading it on someone elses post is infuriating. Its childlike. And a mod has the temerity to ask us to behave like men?

Agreed.

If you step up as a mod in the best interests of 'the community' then should you really need to get a kick out of putting the boot in?

90% (to put a guesstimate on it) of the posters I know and respect from my time here on boards since 2009 have all disappeared. It's not natural attrition, it's deterioration of the community that boards was when I joined (though I'm sure there are those who would say that it was better in 07, 08 ... whenever).

I post here the odd time or when I want to sell something. Most of those old users now only come on here to sell kit. Shame.

horgan_p

Mystery to me why someone like Puding wasn't asked to do it.

Prolific poster , excellant tech. knowledge and more or less gets on with everyone.

Captain Chaos

horgan_p wrote: »

Mystery to me why someone like Puding wasn't asked to do it.

Prolific poster , excellant tech. knowledge and more or less gets on with everyone.

Because he's not in the clique that has been here since 07-08 as has been pointed out. It's the root cause of what has this forum the way it is since it started going to pot since early 09 and never recovered. It got little highs now and again but now it's 6 feet under.

Witcher

horgan_p wrote: »

Mystery to me why someone like Puding wasn't asked to do it.

Prolific poster , excellant tech. knowledge and more or less gets on with everyone.

+1

War Machine 539

MerryDespot wrote: »

Agreed.

If you step up as a mod in the best interests of 'the community' then should you really need to get a kick out of putting the boot in?

Because to most users mods are faceless. Why not put the boot in?

Steve wrote: »

I actually put your name down but we reckoned you'd be too busy with modding the IAA forums to have time for here..*


*Warning: the above post may contain traces of sarcasm.

Sarcasm or not, if anyone can prove to me that that was not said to make Gerrowadat feel like a thick, I will eat their shoes.

I and every other user have seen month long bans handed out for less.

On a related note, anyone ever see friends of the mods getting infracted? Food for thought.

TheDoc

horgan_p wrote: »

Mystery to me why someone like Puding wasn't asked to do it.

Prolific poster , excellant tech. knowledge and more or less gets on with everyone.

Mental

Whenever I refer to someone outside the clique, hes the first name I think off. Maybe he has been asked and said n

If he hasnt it says everything

TheDoc

War Machine 539 wrote: »

Because to most users mods are faceless. Why not put the boot in?




Sarcasm or not, if anyone can prove to me that that was not said to make Gerrowadat feel like a thick, I will eat their shoes.

I and every other user have seen month long bans handed out for less.

On a related note, anyone ever see friends of the mods getting infracted? Food for thought.

Lets not turn this too much into a witchunt.

We have an opportunity here ( granted, another one, where probably nothing will happen) to air our views and have a civilised discussion.

There needs to be some credit for allowing this to run, lets be frank, there is probably itchy fingers wanting to close it. So while there is a genuine point of the moderation selection process, I think we need to realise that its a boards.ie policy and not the mods here.

And I guess what we really need to instill some confidence, is a moderation appointment that wont raise eyebrows and cause suspicion. Granted since two new mods just got appointed I doubt this will happen.

Unless kdouglas is being replaced, and the mods have an ideal opportunity to make a statement.

I'd like for some moderator input, perhaps they have been sitting by with instructions to let us have a chat, but some input from them would be cool. And hopefully others will respect their thoughts and not turn it into a flame war,

And me saying that is a serious ****ing thing, I'll be the first onto someone for spouting bollox

War Machine 539

Itchy fingers? There probably down the pub watching the match. Give it forty mins, an hour tops.

Either way, my only complaint are the sly digs from mods on specific users and the lack of manners while dishing out bans or warnings. A mod sets the example and people are wondering why the forum is slowly drowning.

Manners cost nothing.

On a personal note, I have met a few of the mods and they seem pleasant enough, why they turn into goblins behind their keyboards baffles me.


I hope Puding avoids being a mod at all cost. He would probably do a fantastic job, but if he is handing out bans, he will be ruffling peoples feathers and the negative attention he draws to himself will cancel out the tremendous amount of positive input he brings to the forum.

Steve

I can't speak for the other mods but I am following this intently.

I hear a lot of protestation here about moderators treating people like children - if you refer to the opening post in this thread, my question to you was to explain why some people here felt the need to childishly post pictures of spiderman with derogatory quotes about moderators recently.

If people want to be treated as adults then the least they could do is act like adults. Is this an unreasonable request?

As for claims of 'sly digs' from mods whilst issuing bans or warnings, can you give me an example or examples please and I will advise whoever received it on how best to bring it to the attention of those higher up in the chain of command here.

War Machine 539

Steve I am not going trawling through here looking for examples, however I have mailed you directly about it, and was responded with '' personality sometimes gets through in a post'' or something to that effect, if you can find the mail feel free to quote it. I am clearly not the only one who notices this as the posts above show.

Steve

OK, I'll have a look for that - there is no mechanism in vBB to search sent pm's by username and I've 7500 of them, received pms can be searched so it would be easier if you did it and reminded me.

ElSniperino

I've been on this forum for a couple of years, I have quite a small post number because I mainly enjoy reading the threads, and a lot of information I want is already available.

From what I've seen of the moderating of this forum, there does seem to be a rather high proportion of unjustified punishments. Now I'm not saying all the punishments were over-zealous or unwarranted, but it gives me the innate sense that if I post, I have a much higher chance of being penalized for it when compared to many other forums. I'd say with a high degree of confidence that I'm not the only one who feels this, and if that's the case there's a fundamental error somewhere in the system.

I wish to make it clear that I don't make this point about all moderators or all moderating that goes on, just to make it clear that it does happen and it does have an effect.

My two cents.

War Machine 539

I had to clear mine out I had 500 in the inbox about a month ago!

TheDoc

Steve wrote: »

why some people here felt the need to childishly post pictures of spiderman with derogatory quotes about moderators recently.

If people want to be treated as adults then the least they could do is act like adults. Is this an unreasonable request?

When or where did this happen?

Steve

War Machine 539 wrote: »

Steve I am not going trawling through here looking for examples, however I have mailed you directly about it, and was responded with '' personality sometimes gets through in a post'' or something to that effect, if you can find the mail feel free to quote it. I am clearly not the only one who notices this as the posts above show.

OK - I found a way to search it - we have exchanged 78 PM's since boards began - there is nothing in there that is remotely like this.
Mostly it was you asking for and getting help on the adverts forum with stuff you were selling or users you had problems with.

Other than that it was mainly you criticising the moderation here up to and including you saying to me "Hope I get to meet you personally someday, so I can tell you what I think of the job you do around here to your face" - I won't quote the context there as it would involve another user that is not connected to this discussion but as you asked me to quote PM's, I'd just like everyone to know what we're dealing with.

Please feel free to publish any pm that I sent you (on the same condition that it does not involve any other identifiable individual) that you feel was biased or unfair in any way.

If I wanted to be a b0llox here, I could make this all go away with a few clicks and would be perfectly justified in doing so under site rules - but no - I want this forum to work - and I want everyone to have their say and get listened to as far as is practical so I don't ban those just because the hold different views to mine, I don't ban people for their opinions, I do, however, ban people that are intent on consistently disrupting the forum and if I die by that sword then so be it - at least I will die with honour.

To summarise, Phil, and with the greatest of respect, if you have something tangible to bring to the table then bring it. If you want to act like a scolded child then expect to be treated like one - I really don't appreciate the time lost that I spent trawling through thousands of pm's to find that what you accused me of was not there. I shall treat any further claims of yours with a proportional amount of credibility.

Steve

TheDoc wrote: »

When or where did this happen?

Here - but the posts concerned have been removed.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=79089048

War Machine 539

Interesting choice of posts here. I have had issues with you in the past, and have been made felt like a scolded child therefore I don't believe my responses to be unreasonable. I let them go.

Despite that, I am not the only one who feels that mods are being smartarses when dishing out bans, no matter what my responses to previous PMs regarding different topics say.

There is no point misdirecting my opinions with exchanges we have had on totally UNRELATED issues Steve.

And anything I post here should be treated with the same regard as anyone elses. Or your moderation is no longer impartial. Regardless of your opinion of me at a personal level.

Is that not where this whole problem stems?

War Machine 539

Steve wrote: »

Other than that it was mainly you criticising the moderation here up to and including you saying to me "Hope I get to meet you personally someday, so I can tell you what I think of the job you do around here to your face" - I won't quote the context there as it would involve another user that is not connected to this discussion but as you asked me to quote PM's, I'd just like everyone to know what we're dealing with.

To what purpose does this serve btw? Other than making me look bad? It has nothing to do with the current topic, if it was a problem at the time a sanction could have been given but wasn't.

Steve

War Machine 539 wrote: »

To what purpose does this serve btw? Other than making me look bad? It has nothing to do with the current topic, if it was a problem at the time a sanction could have been given but wasn't.

So, what you're saying is it's fine to have a pop at the mods but when a mod gives some feedback about a user then it's not cool??

If you want equality then it works both ways.

Lemming

I have returned. Reports of my death by mud are greatly exaggerated. On the other hand, Black Sabbath were awesomely awesome, along with Soundgarden, the Dropkick Murphys, Ugly Kid Joe, Megadeth, Anthrax, Black Label Society, and a whole wedge of other bands that my mind has just melted and failed to remember at this moment in time.

On a more relevant note, I'm absolutely knackered so trying to form a proper response to Doc (and everything since that I want to respond to) that doesn't make him think "wtf was that incoherrent sh1te about?" can wait until I've had some kip. On that note; sleep tight, bed bugs, etc.

War Machine 539

Steve wrote: »

So, what you're saying is it's fine to have a pop at the mods but when a mod gives some feedback about a user then it's not cool??

If you want equality then it works both ways.

I can't dish out sanctions here Steve. So absolutely when someone has the right to judge when a ban is dished out, I can most certainly have a ''pop'' at them. Still trying to figure out what ''pop'' means, as I understand it you mean question them. Well then yes, I will most certainly question any decision that does not appear to be based in logic and fairness.

If you have any further ''feedback'' for me, I suggest you PM me if you have a problem. The same way we are expected to give feedback on you.

So to answer your question, yes its fine to give feedback on a user, but perhaps via sanctions, PMs etc. Not as a weapon to try and derail a users point or to undermine his credibility.



Steve without turning this into a back and forth, my issue with you is pretty much a non-issue, what was said was said when I believed I was being treated unfairly. It was said in the heat of the moment. Since then never had much of an issue with you.

Now I have had agreement that when bans or warnings are being handed out mods are adding their own two cents to the end, making the user being banned look like an even bigger fool.
A good moderator exercises restraint. Keeps his/her mouth shut and gives the ban and perhaps a short explanation as to why. A good moderator does not scold the user like he is a four year old child. And this happens Steve, maybe not always, but enough that users are starting to notice it. I found the PM, I didn't look to be honest, I assumed I deleted it.



In our little benevolent dictatorship, it's none of your business. It's also against site guidelines to question a mod post on thread - particularly when it has nothing to do with you.

Your choice Doc, take the red pill or the blue pill, lets see how deep the rabbit hole goes.




Sick of reading smart assed posts like this from yourself. Is it necessary? A simple question was asked. A polite answer would would have sufficed.




Hiya,

The Doc is well aware of the meaning if my post, but you're right to question it.

The 'Benevolent Dictatorship' reference was originally coined by the site founders as a description of how the site works (as opposed to a democracy) - it's probably not apparent to newer users though. It wasn't meant to be smart assed - well maybe a little - but it's either that or issue a card or ban and I try to avoid them if I can.

Doc knows well that it's general site policy to PM a mod if they wish to discuss modding, it's specifically in the forum charter as well. If it's not controlled then every thread where a mod posts will eventually turn into a discussion on the mod action and the original signal will be lost to the noise this generates - that's why the rules is there.

Hope that explains it a bit better, please feel free to pm me if you've need any more info.

Thanks,
Steve.

The above is the PM I was talking about. This attitude needs to go. Pretty much one upping the guy when it was TOTALLY unnecessary. A simple answer to what he asked would have been enough instead of the verbal you provided. And who are you to say something on a PUBLIC forum has nothing to do with someone else.




Post Script.

Been doing some reading on an old Mod here. My opinions now have perspective. Steve, I apologize, I have now seen what a sack of sh1t a mod can choose to be. I will keep my post up above just to be fair but my god we have it a lot better than we did in 2009. You have my apologies.
One note. Nobody likes being told what to do. Don't rub salt in the wound when banning or warning and I honestly think the forum will be good.

Gentlemen, say compared to 2009, we don't know how good we have it with regards to Mods. F*ck me there are some cnuts in this world.
In summation, Steve I was wrong, I apologize and I am sorry for any aggro I have stirred up!

sharpy2010

Captain Chaos wrote: »

horgan_p wrote: »

Mystery to me why someone like Puding wasn't asked to do it.

Prolific poster , excellant tech. knowledge and more or less gets on with everyone.

Because he's not in the clique that has been here since 07-08 as has been pointed out. It's the root cause of what has this forum the way it is since it started going to pot since early 09 and never recovered. It got little highs now and again but now it's 6 feet under.

Perfect point puding is over 6 feet so he can only bring it back up!!! Now that's a joke before I get banned!!

To answer steve's question I have no idea as to why everyone is using spiderman meme's

On a different note I do feel that the two new moderartors were elected would have been a good thing to the forum one in particular over the other and boy was I wrong!! The one I thought would be suited seriously took it too far, as already been highlighted, as for the other I cant fault or question his actions.
I understand at the start you have to be seen as who is in charge but they are forgetting their job title and that is too moderate not POLICE
Just my two cents

swiftblade

Maybe it's because I haven't posted much in comparison to other users, but I've never had an issue with the moderation on this forum. That said, I'm not saying it's not an issue, I just don't have any experience in it. But when I see discussions like this I always have to ask myself, Do people really care that much? The forum still works, content isn't being restricted, questions get answered etc. It's just an internet forum. It's just as place to supplement our sport and the discussion of it. It isn't our sport.


The Airsoft forum is something unique. I don't know of any other (correct me if I'm wrong) forum on boards.ie that has had issues like this. I'm not saying it's a user based issue, but perhaps it has been blown out of proportion by users. It's just an Internet forum, isn't it? The Irony here is Airsoft is and outdoor sport, yet we seem to thrive on sitting indoors and arguing over stupid issues. We always harp on about how Airsoft is a team sport and supports team-building.Can't see that reflected here. To be honest, sometimes I'm even scared to open my mouth on here for fear of getting my face smashed in, if I meet any of ye at a site.


The forum has lulled over recent years, but is that a cause of bad moderation? Maybe. But more so, it's just people being bored, not posting or moving else where for what ever reason. Sites and retailers have left boards due to financial reason, and perhaps this has drawn some of the traffic away.


In short. Don't be so quick to point the fingers at moderators for all the problems on the forum.

TheDoc

In response to War Machine.

I got the reference from the Steve on that occasion. And whilst I see how it could be interpreted as kinda sarcy towards me, I'm going to assume I was giving some jip in the first place. I dont mind getting some after giving some, I'm long enough on the internet to have pretty thick skin

I think the PM you have quoted is actually good moderating, he explained the references and what happened. But as I didn't take anything from it, no one else should, and it shouldnt be something held over anyone, in my view.

And I think thats a point I made earlier, in that the really first point of protocol is the OP having an issue, and then if there is subsequent enquiries about it.

For example if I took that the wrong way, and five other people had the same feeling, that might be grounds for a question or two over the nature of the post, but I think, in that example, it was ok.

I think there is also something to be said about understanding the posting nature of people. If you do this long enough, you can typically read between the lines. While the post was jovial and had some references to a film, it also got the point across of what Steve pm'd you. I should know better, and I know where it will go.

Also to highlight the Adverts thread where there was a ban orgy, looking at the usernames there is not one person recognisable as a regular poster.

Airsoft Adverts attracts a horde of window lickers that play airosft to sell their kit. You only have to see the

"JING GONG G36C REALLY GOOD GUN SHOOTS ANIMAL FPS LOOKING FOR 5,000 NO TRADES BUT WILL SWOP FOR COTTON WOOL" To realise that forum attracts once off posters.

I don't think its an accurate reflection of the hostility felt by the board towards moderators. I'm going to assume, being that they were new posters, they were all probably ****ters, the same ****ters you see on sites every weekend. And that their spiderman pics werent even funny or intelligently created

War Machine 539

TheDoc wrote: »

In response to War Machine.

I got the reference from the Steve on that occasion. And whilst I see how it could be interpreted as kinda sarcy towards me, I'm going to assume I was giving some jip in the first place. I dont mind getting some after giving some, I'm long enough on the internet to have pretty thick skin

I think the PM you have quoted is actually good moderating, he explained the references and what happened. But as I didn't take anything from it, no one else should, and it shouldnt be something held over anyone, in my view.

And I think thats a point I made earlier, in that the really first point of protocol is the OP having an issue, and then if there is subsequent enquiries about it.

For example if I took that the wrong way, and five other people had the same feeling, that might be grounds for a question or two over the nature of the post, but I think, in that example, it was ok.

I think there is also something to be said about understanding the posting nature of people. If you do this long enough, you can typically read between the lines. While the post was jovial and had some references to a film, it also got the point across of what Steve pm'd you. I should know better, and I know where it will go.

Also to highlight the Adverts thread where there was a ban orgy, looking at the usernames there is not one person recognisable as a regular poster.

Airsoft Adverts attracts a horde of window lickers that play airosft to sell their kit. You only have to see the

"JING GONG G36C REALLY GOOD GUN SHOOTS ANIMAL FPS LOOKING FOR 5,000 NO TRADES BUT WILL SWOP FOR COTTON WOOL" To realise that forum attracts once off posters.

I don't think its an accurate reflection of the hostility felt by the board towards moderators. I'm going to assume, being that they were new posters, they were all probably ****ters, the same ****ters you see on sites every weekend. And that their spiderman pics werent even funny or intelligently created

Hey my hands are up, I was reading the posts out of context. As I have said in a post above, I now have a different perspective. I was being a prat and I apologise again for any aggro caused. Especially to Steve my accusations leveled against him were false. I am going to bow out of this one before I make a bigger thick out of myself!

Lemming

I've spent the last few hours writing up a response. Until I got to page two, and hightower & Doc's discussion around FK (lets not beat about the bush here, everybody and their dog knows whom you refer to).

The door on what you think you know swings both ways. And you don't know an awful lot behind the scenes either on or off forum. I mean it's not as if there was any sexist carry-on, or racist remarks based on her religion, or throw-away comments of committing of sexually violent acts, or somewhat less throw away discussions by "grown men" f*cking children about "group" participation in the most taboo of sexual violence that also involved making me watch at a specific location at a specific airsoft event.

Sorry, but I cannot be bothered writing nor contributing any more to this discussion.

TheDoc

Lemming wrote: »

I've spent the last few hours writing up a response. Until I got to page two, and hightower & Doc's discussion around FK (lets not beat about the bush here, everybody and their dog knows whom you refer to).

The door on what you think you know swings both ways. And you don't know an awful lot behind the scenes either on or off forum. I mean it's not as if there was any sexist carry-on, or racist remarks based on her religion, or throw-away comments of committing of sexually violent acts, or somewhat less throw away discussions by "grown men" f*cking children about "group" participation in the most taboo of sexual violence that also involved making me watch at a specific location at a specific airsoft event.

Sorry, but I cannot be bothered writing nor contributing any more to this discussion.

Would genuinely like you to post your response, especially if it took hours, it makes me look less weird. You've genuinely being on both sides of the fence and it would be interesting to read.

I'm pretty well informed of what goes on in the community believe it or not, so while your post refers to some loose things I can vaguely recall, I think I also remember hearing the other side of the stories and also neutral sides as well.

FK was brought up in my posts simply because there was some serious impartial modding going on in relation to her time here at parts. That was brought through the channels and I believe that was actually one instance were something was done about it. And it was an example relating to similar traits that have gone on recently.

I also think hightower was ever so slightly off his timeline, as much of the mod team here currently was not active in their mod roles at the time of Firekittens attendance to the forum. And he is partially right in outlining what he said about her being dealth with light handed for some time, when during her initial time here she was brash, rude, aggressive and constantly splurting arguements, even when the lads weren't directly involved. For whatever else "you claim went on" there is no denying the above played a major role in her presence here.

To be pretty honest, I can't remember much of the specifics, but I'm going to hazard a wild guess, that some of your post is labelled at some of the guys I hang around / play with, considering they were always at each others throats. And I do remember two instances where there was stuff levelled at the lads. And when I investigated it through impartial means and avenues, it came back as fluff and utter bollox. But as you say what you "think" you know swings both ways, its pretty irrelevant to this conversation.

I'd ask you re-consider and make your point, while it will probably be defending post (considering I dont think you've seen eye to eye with the likes of me or the people mainly being subject to harsh moderation on this forum) but it will provide a different viewpoint and perhaps some topics to continue on with.

Steve

War Machine 539 wrote: »

Hey my hands are up, I was reading the posts out of context. As I have said in a post above, I now have a different perspective. I was being a prat and I apologise again for any aggro caused. Especially to Steve my accusations leveled against him were false. I am going to bow out of this one before I make a bigger thick out of myself!

It takes a big person to post something like that, I commend you for your honesty. :cool:

When you've been around a site like this for a long time it absorbs you and you kinda forget that not everyone knows the history of the whole thing along with all its quirks and foibles and may not 'get' some of the stuff that is said - I'll admit that I'm guilty of that sometimes.

I think threads like this are important to clear the air, if anything when serving as a mod here, we (well "I" - can't speak for others) never stop learning.