Moder refuses to ban offensive poster based on agreement

GarIT

The Moderator Mr E has decided that the user Old Hippy should not receive a ban for directing the title of "shameless bastard" at me on the basis of this "being an emotive subject" for the user Old Hippy. The thread is here http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=88341605#post88341605

In my opinion this calls for a system of infractions to be introduced against moderators where there powers should be removed for abuses of those powers such as this.

Spear

Moved from DRP as this isn't DRP related.

LoLth

GarIT wrote: »

The Moderator Mr E has decided that the user Old Hippy should not receive a ban for directing the title of "shameless bastard" at me on the basis of this "being an emotive subject" for the user Old Hippy. The thread is here http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=88341605#post88341605

In my opinion this calls for a system of infractions to be introduced against moderators where there powers should be removed for abuses of those powers such as this.

actually, he didn't call you a "shameless bastard" read the thread and that post again, he said "those of you who use that term are shameless bastards". And the Admin decided not to infract for a mild transgression (just as Jap is short for Japanese and you use it in a non-racist context I'm sure old hippy was just guessing that users of that term in a racist context are without shame and were born outside of wedlock - which used to be grounds for ostracism but today its a lot more common than one would think).

(removed overly polite sign off because in hindsight its a bit smart alecky )

bottom line: its context again. just like Jap is not deemed offensive depending on the context , I don't think old hippy was targetting you specifically with that insult. It reads to me like "people who use that term offensively are shameless bastards".

Dades

GarIT, for a user who posted coherently on another poster's overreaction to a single comment, I find your own call for a "system of infractions" for "abuse of power" over another single post somewhat bemusing.

GarIT

LoLth wrote: »

actually, he didn't call you a "shameless bastard" read the thread and that post again, he said "those of you who use that term are shameless bastards". And the Admin decided not to infract for a mild transgression (just as Jap is short for Japanese and you use it in a non-racist context I'm sure old hippy was just guessing that users of that term in a racist context are without shame and were born outside of wedlock - which used to be grounds for ostracism but today its a lot more common than one would think).

(removed overly polite sign off because in hindsight its a bit smart alecky )

bottom line: its context again. just like Jap is not deemed offensive depending on the context , I don't think old hippy was targetting you specifically with that insult. It reads to me like "people who use that term offensively are shameless bastards".

It wasn't direct at me personally, but at a group including myself. The group context shouldn't change the repercussions, in the past I have seen people banned for saying things like "Capitalists are scum" or "religious people are all ignorant/stupid" even I myself have received a ban before for saying something about transgender people (which was honestly out of ignorance and not malice). In each of these cases a member of the offended group stepped forward and the offensive comments dealt with.

I don't believe someone should be allowed use a term like that when they are clearly and purposefully using it in an attempt to cause offence. I have that it is fine to use terms like jap, paddy, yank etc on the condition that you are not using them to cause offence but it is not ok if you are trying to cause offence. From my reading of Old Hippy's post it is clear that it was made out of frustration/anger and was meant to cause offence, the post was even made in a 'suicide by cop style', Old Hippy admitted that purpose of the post was to receive a ban by causing offence to get an escape from the discussion.

You have manipulated the post by Old Hippy to make it seem OK when it is not. In your post you have added the word offensively, the purpose of this change was to make it seem like Old Hippy was targeting a bad group of people which would make the post seem less offensive. Socially offending a group of bad people is more acceptable than a group of people without and good reason. Its like if a poster said "babies are *****" and an Admin decided that the poster really meant "Hitler is a ****" and then the affect it has is that collectively it is decided that the comment was OK because everybody hates Hitler. However in this case Old Hippy made it clear that the comments made were about anyone who used the term Jap including those that would only ever use it without intending to cause offence.

What this seems like to me is that two Admins now have manipulated language to make a post seem not as bad as it is based on their sympathising with the poster. While I would believe that in general Old Hippy wouldn't mean harm I think the post in question was made with the purpose of causing harm. I was in a similar situation before which I mentioned earlier where overall I didn't intend to cause harm but my post did, even though in my case the post was mostly out of ignorance the mods decided that a ban should stand on my record because I said what I did and the punishment fits the crime. I think this case should also be treated the same.

GarIT

Dades wrote: »

GarIT, for a user who posted coherently on another poster's overreaction to a single comment, I find your own call for a "system of infractions" for "abuse of power" over another single post somewhat bemusing.

That was possibly an over reaction, at the time it felt like the Admin used his power to agree with what I saw as an offensive post and then close off the discussion.