Easy One - RobFowl Health Sciences

sleepyheadh

Hi guys,

This should be an easy one to deal with.

Ban issued from Robfowl, in Health Sciences.

Rob claims that I was banned for not following Mod instruction.

I asked Rob, where the mod instruction was issued, and Rob said it was in a PM Robfowl sent me. Thats all fine except, that the PM Rob sent me, was the PM to inform me that I was banned from the health sciences forum permanently.

So apparently, according to Rob, I have been banned because I failed to follow a mod instruction which was issued after I had been banned.

Thanks guys.

Black Swan

Hi sleepyheadh,
The first stage in the Dispute Resolution process is to attempt to resolve your complaint with the mod issuing the ban by an exchange of PMs. If it cannot be resolved between the mod and yourself through these PMs, then let me know here and I will examine this issue.

Sincerely,
Black Swan

sleepyheadh

Oh I have PM'd Rob, no resolution in sight.

Thanks

Black Swan

sleepyheadh wrote: »

Oh I have PM'd Rob, no resolution in sight.

Thanks

Hi sleepyheadh,
All our mods are volunteers that have extensive commitments outside of boards, so your patience towards the resolution of this issue will be appreciated.

Thanks,
Black Swan

sleepyheadh

Black Swan wrote: »

Hi sleepyheadh,
All our mods are volunteers that have extensive commitments outside of boards, so your patience towards the resolution of this issue will be appreciated.

Thanks,
Black Swan

Black Swan, I know how long these things can go on for, check out my thread in the help Desk!

This is however, a much more simple case than that, and shouldn't take more than a message or two to sort out.

Thanks

sleepyheadh

Ignore this post, but please do not delete!

sleepyheadh

Hi guys, it appears that everything I had in quotes has been deleted, not sure what is going on?

Can anyone confirm that this is the case, or is it just a problem on my end? there should be a link in the first line, which doesn't appear to be on my post?

sleepyheadh

I have had a look and it appears that an edit on made on the post, from my phone, resulted in the loss of information..is there anyway to revert the post to the original or will I have to repost. Thanks guys

Spear

The original comments are restored, along with the newer lines, formatting may be slightly off.

Black Swan

sleepyheadh wrote: »

Hi guys, it appears that everything I had in quotes has been deleted, not sure what is going on?

Hi sleepyheadh,
I am not aware of any deletions, rather it may be a technical issue in terms of how you loaded your quotes, or something else technical? Alternatively, you may PM me with your post quotes if you wish. Post links would be helpful too, if you do so. If quoting a PM exchanged between you and a mod, the PM should be forwarded to me, as I cannot open PM links.

As an update, I am still in the process of collecting and reviewing information. When that has been completed, I will reply here with a summary review. Monday I have a heavy real world work day, and must address this DRP when time permits. Once again, your patience in this process will be appreciated.

Sincerely,
Black Swan

sleepyheadh

Black Swan wrote: »

Hi sleepyheadh,
I am not aware of any deletions, rather it may be a technical issue in terms of how you loaded your quotes, or something else technical? Alternatively, you may PM me with your post quotes if you wish. Post links would be helpful too, if you do so. If quoting a PM exchanged between you and a mod, the PM should be forwarded to me, as I cannot open PM links.

As an update, I am still in the process of collecting and reviewing information. When that has been completed, I will reply here with a summary review. Monday I have a heavy real world work day, and must address this DRP when time permits. Once again, your patience in this process will be appreciated.

Sincerely,
Black Swan

Thats great BlackSwan, can I just ask, when you say that you are collect and reviewing information. I take it that you are referring to information from RobFowl? Am I right in saying that Rob, will be outlining his argument on this forum? Or will Robs evidence be given in secrecy?

sleepyheadh

I am going to have to repost my evidence, as it has been completely ruined by the technical fault.

sleepyheadh

This is the thread in Question - http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057076545&page=2

@18:12 30/5/15 - RobFowl made this comment :

Questioning Mod actions in thread is not allowed
Rob

Up until this point the only mod action which had been given on this thread was a action issued by Rob, back in 2013

@18:21 - I replied to RobFowls comment, quoting the charter for the Health Sciences Forum.

Sleepyheadh wrote:

RobFowl again in the sticky, on a comment posted by Sam34

Sam34 wrote:

Originally Posted by sam34
"OK, charter update.

there is a zero tolerance policy on medical advice here, irrespective of how innocuous or general it seems. there will be no coments made/advice given on peoples personal health/medical situations.

all such threads will be locked.

however, that has been policy for some time and we still get the advice threads.

so, we have decided to infract posters seeking medical advice from here on in. (obviously, if any poster gives medical advice prior to a thread getting locked, they too will be infracted).

there is no point PMing us afterwards saying "ah come on i wasnt looking for advice as such..." - zero tolerance is zero tolerance.

the reasons for this have already been explained in this thread and in the charter.

no further warnings. dont PM telling us you werent aware - its in the charter and in the big sticky."

To which RobFowl responded

RobFowl wrote:

"Can I just remind everyone of this !!
PS asking for peoples "experiences" of a certain treatment, doctor or hospital etc IS asking for medical advice no matter how much you protest it isn't ....."

In response to Robs post, I ask which mod action he was referring to..

Sleepyheadh wrote:

And has a mod actually made an action Rob that I have gone against?

Since no Mod had actually given an action, I was quite bemused as to what Rob was referring to when he told me I was apparently ignoring a Mod instruction.

That was my last action in Health Sciences - Quoting the charter, and asking RobFowl to explain what mod action I had ignored.


My next interaction with RobFowl was through PM

=================================

@18:22 on the 30/5/15

I received a PM informing me that I had received a permanent ban.

RobFowl wrote:

You have been banned

Dear sleepyheadh,

You have been permanently banned from Health Sciences for ignoring a moderator's instructions.

Discussion can become heated, we don't object to that, but when a moderator issues a warning on a thread to reign things in, it stops a heated discussion from turning into a mess.

For more information please refer to the Boards.ie FAQ.

If you wish to appeal this ban you can see details on how to do so here.

RobFowl

Moderator Note

Despite numerous informal and formal warnings you continue to question mod actions in thread. You also cannot jet the issue of medical advice go. clearly this forum is not for you.

@18:28 30/5/15

I replied to a another PM sent by RobFowl, looking for the exact mod instruction I had ignored, which lead to my ban.

Sleepyheadh wrote:

Leaving it to me Rob? Right so. Would you like to point out the mod action that I was apparently ignoring just so I can outline the details please x

@18:31 30/5/15

RobFowl replied:

This one (the last of many I intend to have to deal with) was refusing to stop questioning mod actions in thread.

RobFowl had quoted a the PM interactions between him and I, as the Mod instruction I was ignoring.

A PM which I had sent to him @18:25, on the 30/5/15.


=======================================
Ok so lets just take a step back and look at what RobFowl has done in this case.


He has banned me from the Health Sciences Forum, for not following a Mod instruction. When Questioned as to what mod instruction I ignored he indicated that I ignored an instruction that was given 4 minutes, after I had been banned.

=======================================
After realising his obvious mistake, Rob proceeds to try and change the story, so as to try and justify his actions..However, I think it is fairly clear from the PM which I have provided that Rob issued the ban for the reason PM he sent me four minutes after the ban.


He even confirmed this at 18:35 30/5/15 in a PM:

Mod instruction via PM...
In retrospect should not have been so generous and should have issued it as infraction

sleepyheadh

There I have reposted my evidence, could I ask that the previous version remain, as I may have made a mistake in correcting it, and would like to refer back to it, if necessary in the future.


Thanks

Black Swan

sleepyheadh wrote: »

Thats great BlackSwan, can I just ask, when you say that you are collect and reviewing information. I take it that you are referring to information from RobFowl? Am I right in saying that Rob, will be outlining his argument on this forum? Or will Robs evidence be given in secrecy?

The typical DR forum process is for you to first attempt to resolve your dispute through an exchange of PMs with the banning mod. My mailbox was filled with an extraordinary number of PMs exchanged between you two that pertained to this DR, and I have read these PMs. We share the same exchanged information at this point, it's exhaustive, and because it is exhaustive, I see no merit, and will not ask the banning mod to post here in DR. Furthermore, if you have any future questions about this permanent ban, they should be addressed to me and not the banning mod. The ball is now in my court.

The first DR stage has been passed without resolution. We are now in the second stage of DR, whereupon I review the data provided by all parties concerned, review relevant Health Sciences threads and posts, do a summary review, and make one or more decisions. Since this was a permanent forum ban, I will also review all your posts in Health Sciences to assess if permanent exclusion was deemed or appropriate, along with any in-thread posted mod warnings. This will take time, so once again please be patient.

If you have additional specific information regarding this DRP appeal and review, this would be a good time to provide it to me by PM, or here, if appropriate.

Sincerely,
Black Swan

sleepyheadh

Black Swan wrote: »

The typical DR forum process is for you to first attempt to resolve your dispute through an exchange of PMs with the banning mod. My mailbox was filled with an extraordinary number of PMs exchanged between you two that pertained to this DR, and I have read these PMs. We share the same exchanged information at this point, it's exhaustive, and because it is exhaustive, I see no merit, and will not ask the banning mod to post here in DR. Furthermore, if you have any future questions about this permanent ban, they should be addressed to me and not the banning mod. The ball is now in my court.

The first DR stage has been passed without resolution. We are now in the second stage of DR, whereupon I review the data provided by all parties concerned, review relevant Health Sciences threads and posts, do a summary review, and make one or more decisions. Since this was a permanent forum ban, I will also review all your posts in Health Sciences to assess if permanent exclusion was deemed or appropriate, along with any in-thread posted mod warnings. This will take time, so once again please be patient.

If you have additional specific information regarding this DRP appeal and review, this would be a good time to provide it to me by PM, or here, if appropriate.

Sincerely,
Black Swan

So would I be correct in saying that RobFowl, has not sent you a single message which I have not seen?

I would again, like to draw your attention to the fact that when first asked for the reason for the ban, RobFowl, outlined it was for ignoring a mod instruction which he sent to me in a PM. After, some period of time, this then changed.

I would just like to make that perfectly clear.

Is the process for dealing with permanent bans outlined, anywhere I have had a quick look and have found nothing.

And just for posterity, I will not be sending any PM's to you BlackSwan, out of courtesy to RobFowl. I have nothing to hide, and thus all my dealings with this matter will take place in the open. I hope the same courtesy will be extended to me.

Thanks.

Black Swan

Hi sleepyheadh,
Are you still experiencing technical problems quoting one or more posts for this DRP in the Health Sciences forum, or have you finished with these quotes? I have spoken with our HS mod team, and they would be willing to temporarily remove your ban to aid you in this quoting process for a couple days, provided that you did not post in HS forum while you were temporarily unbanned. If you still need to quote, and agree not to post, please advise.

Sincerely,
Black Swan

sleepyheadh

Black Swan wrote: »

Hi sleepyheadh,
Are you still experiencing technical problems quoting one or more posts for this DRP in the Health Sciences forum, or have you finished with these quotes? I have spoken with our HS mod team, and they would be willing to temporarily remove your ban to aid you in this quoting process for a couple days, provided that you did not post in HS forum while you were temporarily unbanned. If you still need to quote, and agree not to post, please advise.

Sincerely,
Black Swan

No, I think the problem happened when I tried to edit, a post on an android device..just completely messed up my post. There is no need to remove my ban just yet.

My evidence is outlined in the second long post.

Would you mind answering my previous post BlackSwan?

Black Swan

Hi sleepyheadh,
I'm glad that you were able to solve the technical problems that had been affecting your earlier collection of data for this DRP.

Please be advised that (when time permits) I will review and address all the relevant data that pertains to this DRP (process details given above), and then issue a summary report. If you agree with this report, then I will request that this DRP be closed. If you do not, you may ask for an Admin review. My next reply will be the summary report.

Thanks for your patience,
Black Swan

sleepyheadh

sleepyheadh wrote: »

So would I be correct in saying that RobFowl, has not sent you a single message which I have not seen?

This is the main question I was asking to be answered, I am not talking about you addressing my evidence.

Black Swan

Hi sleepyheadh. In this summary review I plan to focus on your in-thread discussions of moderation in Health Sciences. The additional topic of what constitutes medical advice was not necessary to this review (and may be more sufficiently addressed in the medical advice Help Desk OP you have currently open).

This below 30 May 2015 post by you in Health Sciences summarizes why there is a problem. Yes, mods have asked you not to discuss moderation in-thread for several months now, but for some reason you fail to follow these many moderator instructions and continue to do so.

sleepyheadh wrote: »

I have been castigated by countless mods, for bringing up the discussion of medical advice.

...you better read this fast, because I can guarantee that this post will be deleted.

You knew you were breaking the rules in your above concluding comment, which prompted the following in-thread mod warning:

RobFowl wrote: »

Questioning Mod actions in thread is not allowed
Rob

Approximately 9 minutes following this mod warning you made another post discussing moderation in-thread ignoring that mod instruction. The 9 minute interval may, or may not be of issue, but the fact that you knew you were breaking the rules (with your above comment) was compounded with clearly violating the below Health Sciences Charter rule:

RobFowl wrote: »

No in-thread discussions or comments about moderation. If you have a question about the forum, charter, or actions taken by moderator, please PM the mod. If you feel another member violates these guidelines, do not comment in-thread, rather use the Report button [!] in their post, and the mod will review it when time permits.

Approximately one minute later the ban we are reviewing here stopped your in-thread discussions of moderation. The ban specified that "Despite numerous informal and formal warnings you continue to question mod actions in thread."

Your in-thread discussions of moderation in Health Sciences appears to be a chronic, recurrent problem. Months ago you received a yellow card (17 July 2014) noting the problem: "Despite numerous warnings you continue to question mod actions in thread." You ignored this card and consequently received a subsequent 1-week ban for ignoring mod instructions 23 July 2014. This problem resurfaced again resulting in a 1-month ban 21 September 2014, and a resultant DRP where the ban was reaffirmed with the following Cmod instruction: "Don't start a similar thread in here again" (Health Sciences) that in-thread discusses moderation... or you may be banned for longer periods of time, including a possible permanent ban."

The banning mod received dozens of PMs from you, which was a real labour-intensive time sink for a volunteer. But one comment stood out that exemplified why the mod was being flooded with PMs by you, and was of serious concern: "But I will just let you know this..I am going to a pain in your arse Rob. As you can see from my other thread that is in the help desk at the moment, I don't go away."

Such an attitude expressed in this PM comment by you was mean spirited and grossly inappropriate, and served to exemplify why your posting behaviour in Health Sciences has all too often been troublesome, and actioned accordingly by mods.

Permanent ban from Health Sciences confirmed.

Please be advised that this Cmod ban review has concluded. You have two choices at this point regarding this DRP: (1) You can learn from it and move on; or (2) you may request Admin review. Please advise.

Sincerely,
Black Swan

sleepyheadh

Thats a fine, summary BlackSwan..Now would you mind please address my question, from the previous post.

If the mod action was apparently for bringing up the discussion of medical advice, why did RobFowl not simply say so in his PM?

sleepyheadh

Actually BlackSwan, on reading that in more detail, I have to say to is a poor summary of events. There are several inaccuracies in your report which maybe you could address:

In the first post you qouted -

Originally Posted by sleepyheadh View Post
I have been castigated by countless mods, for bringing up the discussion of medical advice.

...you better read this fast, because I can guarantee that this post will be deleted.

It appears that I was just stating a fact, that I had been castigated. Maybe you misqouted?

The main issue with your report is with regards to RobFowls mod action.

You seem to believe that the mod action I was ignoring was in the thread itself. However, this is not the case, and RobFowl, himself has outlined that this is not the case. Rob clearly states, that the mod instruction was via PM

You also have appeared to have completely ignored any of my input on this thread, so maybe you could address that please.

Black Swan

sleepyheadh wrote: »

Thats a fine, summary BlackSwan..Now would you mind please address my question, from the previous post.

If the mod action was apparently for bringing up the discussion of medical advice, why did RobFowl not simply say so in his PM?

Hi sleepyheadh. You have exchanged dozens of PMs with the mod that addresses and answers your above questions (that we have both read) making the reiteration of such questions moot. As quoted below, this Cmod review has concluded. Please now make a choice:

Black Swan wrote: »

Please be advised that this Cmod ban review has concluded. You have two choices at this point regarding this DRP: (1) You can learn from it and move on; or (2) you may request Admin review. Please advise.

Trojan

Admin review

Protecting those who freely volunteer their time to make boards discussions possible is something we take very seriously on the site, and it's important that we balance this with freedom of expression for all users.

In this case the line has clearly been crossed and the permanent ban from Health Sciences is upheld on the basis that not only was it correctly given, but the user clearly intends to continue aggravating and wasting the time of site volunteers, which cannot and will not be allowed.

Ban upheld.