Wrongfully accused of trolling

cyberhog

Dear CMods

I started a perfectly reasonable thread on recent developments in Syria and to my disbelief Scofflaw has accused me of trolling and banned me from the forum.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056932638

I'm posting here because I feel I have been wrongfully accused of posting in "intentionally provocative fashion in order to gain a reaction from other members."

I want to assure the CMods that I have no interest whatsoever in "gaining a reaction" from other members, and I strongly reject that nasty assertion. All I am interested in doing is sharing what I feel is important information that gets very little attention in the Irish media.

Scofflaw also claims my OP "is factually inaccurate, and one of quite a series of similar threads."

However he makes no attempt to explain why he thinks my post is factually inaccurate. He needs to give reasons why, not just a blanket statement.

I also found his parting words to me to be deeply offensive.

he says:

"I'm not sure why we've been chosen to be part of a propaganda effort on behalf of the Syrian government, but I think we've had enough of it"


I'm not sure why he thinks he can insult me in this way when the information I provided about the Syrian forces gains has also been reported by anti-regime sources.

"Loyalist troops backed by Hezbollah have taken control of important villages near Qusayr," said Rami Abdel Rahman of the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jBaR8wTDxdgMqufusrn-QYW_MkjA?docId=CNG.4f8b4932c3f5b7d4bcc89ebb91551bee.3d1

Scofflaw's attempt to smear a me as a mouthpiece for the Syrian government is completely out of line. In my opinion he is not capable of acting impartially when it comes to certain topics in the Politics forum and I think it's time someone spoke to him about it.

The ban imho is wholly unjustified and I would like it to be lifted please.

regards

cyberhog

Ickle Magoo

Hi there cyberhog,

I'll take a look at this for you.

Can you confirm if you contacted Scofflaw to discuss the ban as per the first step in the process detailed above?

cyberhog

Hi Ickle Magoo

Due to the hostile nature of the PM Scofflaw sent me, I don't feel comfortable sending a PM back to him. In any case he made it very clear to me why he felt I needed to be banned and so I would just like to hand it over to you now if you don't mind because I am too stressed to take any more of his verbal abuse.

Thank you.

oscarBravo

cyberhog wrote: »

...I am too stressed to take any more of his verbal abuse.

We take accusations of verbal abuse very seriously. If you feel the PM was abusive, please report it.

cyberhog

I will do that, thank you.

I don't know if you've ever been accused of being a troll after expressing your honest opinion on a topic but I can tell you it is about as demoralising as it gets, and then to be banned on top of that, I feel is very unjust. Sofflaw has no idea the stress he is causing me, the intimidation is so bad that I feel the only way I will be able to avoid his wrath in the future is to not express an unpopular opinion.

I used to feel welcome to express my opinion in the Politics forum but now I feel I'm being bullied and silenced.

cyberhog

Ok I have gone ahead and reported Sofflaw because calling someone a troll is a personal attack like any other, it is a way of dehumanising someone and of putting their decency into question, and it is very distressing.

I think any honest observer would agree I was not being intentionally provocative in my post. That just seems to be the way Sofflaw interprets an unpopular opinion.

Zaph

I've just seen your reported PM. When a mod issues an infraction, warning or ban the system requires a reason to be included. A list of 12 pre-designated reasons are available in the system, and the mod is unable to change these or add anything different. It's clear that of the reason chosen by Scofflaw - Trolling - was the one he felt most closely indicated why you were being banned. It's not intended as an insult in any way, it's merely a descriptive statement so that you, and other mods, know exactly why the ban was issued.

Ickle Magoo

Alrighty cyberhog.

The vast majority of your posts are made in the Politics forum and nearly all appear to centre around the same or related topic ie Syria. The threads you have started are also about Syria and in the main consist of bulletin type posting with little personal opinion/detailed discussion given on the situation in question, instead usually consisting of limited and fairly biased commentary in tandem with links and articles which are sometimes deliberately selectively quoted.

Such threads have a tendency to require moderation ie HERE, HERE & HERE and/or contain questionable claims such as the thread which ultimately led to your ban and this DRP.

In terms of your public treatment on the forum, I think it has been fair & consistent - evidenced by your 16 actions in the Politics forum by 4 different mods so far.

The bottom line is the Politics charter clearly states [and I have highlighted the references to "trolling" as that appears to be something you have taken exception to but it is relevant in the context of the Politics charter]:

If your posts consists of little more than a statement that some group of people or other are bad people and/or deserve prison/execution as traitors, think long and hard before pressing "submit", because we'll be treating that as trolling from here on in.

If your OP consists of nothing more than a two-line thought that just popped into your head, don't start a thread. Again, that will be treated as trolling - the thread will be deleted, and you'll be banned or infracted, depending on how egregious the example is.

This forum is not a newsdump, blog or somewhere to post copy & pastes from other sites. All OP's and posts require some input of your own.

and just too many of your posts skirt around those points.

Given your numerous past actions in Politics and that you have publicly acknowledged posts from moderators that have quoted the areas of the charter your posts are falling short in relation to, you must have been aware that your posting style was becoming/already an issue. Actions of increased length/severity are inevitable if you don't take heed of prior actions.

Given all of the above, I can see why the ban was given and given both clear moderator and charter posting guidelines, I can see no justification for over-turning it.

You can, of course, ask an admin to review further.

All the best.

oscarBravo

Like Zaph, I've read your reported PM. It is entirely disingenuous to describe it as "abusive", to the extent that to mis-characterise it as such looks suspiciously to me like an attempt to prejudice this process.

If, on the other hand, you genuinely feel that it was abusive, you might want to avoid online discussion forums completely for your own peace of mind.

cyberhog

Good of you all to take the time to reply.

Let me just say I do not feel it is disingenuous to call Scofflaw's PM abusive. He acuses me of being a troll and a mouthpiece for a dictator, these are clearly personal attacks.If you don't agree that is fine but please do NOT accuse me of being disingenuous. I do not call Scofflaw names so is it too much to ask that he afford me the same courtesy?

One final point, despite what Scofflaw thinks not everyone in the Politics forum agrees with his POV. There are quite a few members that respond in the Syria threads that agree with the points I put forward. I'm disappointed that you can't see things from my POV but I respect your decision and I won't be asking an admin to review further. You may close this topic now if you wish.

regards

cyberhog