Banned from the Weather forum

Gaoth Laidir

I would like to appeal my 1-month ban from the weather forum. I have spoken to CMod Black Swan but still feel my ban is not warranted and totally over the top with regard to its duration. I reported several off-topic, political and slanderous posts in a weather forum and for this I received the ban.

Here's the timeline:

Mod Lumi gave me a warning for the following post I made in the Storm Frank thread after several people had posted pages of off-topic comments about people from Dublin, RTE, politicians, migrants, etc. I was frustrated with having to wade through pages of these off-topic posts to find actual informative posts related to the storm:

Originally Posted by Gaoth Laidir View Post
So much waffle to have to wade through this morning. People still posting about the Dublin vs The Rest of the Country bull. Please start up a separate thread if you want to have a whinge

.

Lumi stated the following reason:

Uncivil and backseat moderation - cut it out please

to which I replied by PM to Lumi:

It is very frustrating to have to wade through 40-odd pages of off-topic comments such as those complaining about RTE, politicians, etc, when there is a thread dedicated to Weather in the Media. Apart from moderating my posts there seems to be very little other filtering of such posts. I was not back-seat moderating, I was merely making a suggestion that people take their comments elsewhere

Many other people backed up this opinion in future posts. Her reply was

We have received a number of reports in the last few hours regarding your posts hence the moderation.
Suggesting that other contributors take their comments elsewhere is back-seat moderation.
Report any posts you have an issue with and let the mod team deal with it - that's our job not yours.
The warning stands.

Ok, I'm not sure which other posts (plural) she refers to (take a look at my posting history, you will find it exemplary), and don't fully agree with this decision, but I accepted it, took the slap on the wrist, and no big deal. The problem arose with the part highlighted in bold.

I proceeded to do as advised and reported a selection of the posts with which I had a problem. I reported several within a short space of time and it is for this that I learned from Black Swan that I received a 1-month ban. The reason given was

It appears that you inappropriately reacted to the yellow card warning with your flurry of reports; and furthermore, the spirit and intent of those reports exhibited a continuation of backseat modding in violation of your earlier yellow card warning, as well as an attempt to bury our mods in reports in an extraordinarily short time span.

"It appears..." This is one opinion of my reaction and makes the assumption that I was reporting the posts in some sort of fit of rage. I totally refute this opinion. I was following the advice of both Lumi and Point 7 of the Weather Charter, which states:

7. If you have a problem with a post then report it

On querying the ban with Black Swan the reply was

This was incredible, excessive, mod-labour intensive, and violated the spirit and intent of posting behaviour on boards to such an extent that a permanent ban would have been justified. You drew not only mod attention, but also Cmod and Admin attention through your inappropriate actions.

I apologise for any extra workload that this generated for any members of the site. It was definitely not my intention and not done under the spirit that Black Swan makes out. Examination of the Rules does not mention anything about what defines excessive Mod workload, therefore this argument has no basis. In my opinion it is certainly not back-seat modding as it was not done on-thread but through the proper procedure. On Back-seat Modding the rules state the following:

Sitting back as a user and consistently directing the moderator like a minion is going to get you kicked off the pitch. The correct way to bring something to our attention is to report the post.

But do not abuse this feature. Report posts which clearly break the rules not just posts you don’t agree with or from people you don’t like. That’s just being a dick.

Again, this is what I did. I reported the posts and no longer referred to them on-thread. I did not do it because I didn't agree with the posts or didn't like the posters, I did it because they were derailing the thread with political moaning and taking from enjoyment of myself and several other posters (note the thanks my post received). If that makes me a dick then ok.

Sorry for the long-winded "summary" but overall I want to apologise for the extra workload my actions generated. This was not done for some devious reasons, as in the opinion of the CMod who banned me, but what now seems to be a genuine misreading of what Lumi orinigally meant. If you look at my posts both before and since then (both in Weather and other forums) you will see that they have contributed to the forum and were all made in the spirit required.

I would respectfully ask that this ban be lifted so that I can further contribute in a proper way to the forum on a subject that I love.

Thank you.
GL

trout

This is what I see.

30/12/2015 12:09:14

You got a warning. You don't fully agree with it, but you are willing to accept it. As part of the conversation, you were advised to report posts that cross the line. At the same time, you were advised to not abuse the report post feature, with some clarity provided on what "abuse" means in this context.

Shortly thereafter @ 12:30, you started reporting posts. 14 posts, within 30 minutes ... all with the comment "Off topic. Not related to weather."

This activity led to the month long ban, which brings us to this conversation.

Is that how you see it?

Gaoth Laidir

trout wrote: »

This is what I see.

30/12/2015 12:09:14

You got a warning. You don't fully agree with it, but you are willing to accept it. As part of the conversation, you were advised to report posts that cross the line. At the same time, you were advised to not abuse the report post feature, with some clarity provided on what "abuse" means in this context.

Shortly thereafter @ 12:30, you started reporting posts. 14 posts, within 30 minutes ... all with the comment "Off topic. Not related to weather."

This activity led to the month long ban, which brings us to this conversation.

Is that how you see it?

Thank you for the quick reponse.

You are correct except for the part in bold. I was never told by Lumi or anyone else about abusing the report tool. The first reference to abuse was made by Black Swan after issuing my ban one day later. So at the time I reported the posts I was purely working under what I had received from Lumi.

Correct that they all contained the same message, except maybe for one in which I also included something like ("back-seat modding?").

GL

trout

Within minutes of the warning, you reported 13 posts in 15 minutes.

30/12/2015 12:44:44 Reported Posts Weather > STORM FRANK, Tuesday 29th-Wednesday 30th. Heavy rain and strong winds.
30/12/2015 12:43:31 Reported Posts Weather > STORM FRANK, Tuesday 29th-Wednesday 30th. Heavy rain and strong winds.
30/12/2015 12:42:21 Reported Posts Weather > STORM FRANK, Tuesday 29th-Wednesday 30th. Heavy rain and strong winds.
30/12/2015 12:41:14 Reported Posts Weather > STORM FRANK, Tuesday 29th-Wednesday 30th. Heavy rain and strong winds.
30/12/2015 12:39:52 Reported Posts Weather > STORM FRANK, Tuesday 29th-Wednesday 30th. Heavy rain and strong winds.
30/12/2015 12:38:45 Reported Posts Weather > STORM FRANK, Tuesday 29th-Wednesday 30th. Heavy rain and strong winds.
30/12/2015 12:37:25 Reported Posts Weather > STORM FRANK, Tuesday 29th-Wednesday 30th. Heavy rain and strong winds.
30/12/2015 12:36:18 Reported Posts Weather > STORM FRANK, Tuesday 29th-Wednesday 30th. Heavy rain and strong winds.
30/12/2015 12:35:10 Reported Posts Weather > STORM FRANK, Tuesday 29th-Wednesday 30th. Heavy rain and strong winds.
30/12/2015 12:33:57 Reported Posts Weather > STORM FRANK, Tuesday 29th-Wednesday 30th. Heavy rain and strong winds.
30/12/2015 12:32:44 Reported Posts Weather > STORM FRANK, Tuesday 29th-Wednesday 30th. Heavy rain and strong winds.
30/12/2015 12:31:30 Reported Posts Weather > STORM FRANK, Tuesday 29th-Wednesday 30th. Heavy rain and strong winds.
30/12/2015 12:30:25 Reported Posts Weather > STORM FRANK, Tuesday 29th-Wednesday 30th. Heavy rain and strong winds.

Does this not seem excessive to you?

Gaoth Laidir

In hindsight, yes, but as I said, I was doing as Lumi instructed, reporting the offending posts. If it seems excessive then that could be that there were an awful lot of them to report. I only reported some of those from the preceding hour. There were pages of them from before that too. That is how bad the thread had become. I had merely asked for people to maybe stop derailing the thread as no moderator had been doing it. Back-seat modding? Maybe, and for that I got a warning. No problem.

So yes, I misinterpreted the instruction from Lumi, but surely that does not warrant a ban?

Gaoth Laidir

Just to add, looking through other disputes in this forum I am amazed that, not only did I get a ban, but also the severity of it. It does not seem consistent with those issued for other more serious offences. I would deem trolling, spamming and repeated ignorance of mod warnings to be of a greater severity than merely following the rules on reporting posts, yet these only picked up warnings, infractions and 1-day bans.

I know these have no bearing on this case but still, I would hope that fairness, consistency and common sense prevail throughout the whole site.

trout

Are you new to Boards?

Gaoth Laidir

No, I have been a member for a few years. I re-registered recently as my other I felt my other name was not secure.

trout

What is the name of the other account?

trout

Thanks for the PM confirming your previous accounts.

I can only take it you responded by PM as you wish to keep such details out of the public eye.

Respecting that wish, I won't publish the PM here.

I would ask that you return the courtesy and understand that I am reluctant to spend any more time on this dispute.

Considering all the circumstances, including previous identities and their relationship with the weather forum, I believe you knew exactly what you were doing.

I see no reason to lift / reduce this ban.

Gaoth Laidir

I request an Admin to review this.

I completely disagree with your conclusions. I did not do the multiple reports out of malicious intent. That was his/her opinion and it was wrong. I was merely following what was asked by a mod and my only crime was misinterpreting that request. My past accounts have nothing to do with this issue.

The reason for the ban was stated as:

It appears that you inappropriately reacted to the yellow card warning with your flurry of reports; and furthermore, the spirit and intent of those reports exhibited a continuation of backseat modding in violation of your earlier yellow card warning, as well as an attempt to bury our mods in reports in an extraordinarily short time span.

There are still the following points that you have not addressed:

1) How is reporting posts through the correct channel "back-seat modding", as claimed by Black Swan, when neither the forum charter nor Boards Rules claim it as such?

2) There is no published limit on the number of reported posts allowed on either the Rules or the actual reporting tool itself. All it states is that you must wait 1 minute between reports. That is all. Why is the limit only 1 minute if you discourage multiple reporting, why was there no mention of the offence of multiple reporting, and why did it allow me to report all of these posts together, within 15 minutes?

3) How is a 1-month ban for this "offence" consistent with other much less severe reprimands handed out for more serious offences? If this offence is so serious as to warrant 1 month why is the offence not mentioned while these other offences (trolling, etc.) are?

4) How does my posting history and contribution to the forum warrant a ban? Have you looked at my post history in making your assessment of the severity? If so, what factors in these posts makes you skip the short-term bans in favour of 1 month?

If you refuse to spend more time on this I would request that the Admin please consider all of these points.

Thank you.

GL

trout

An admin has reviewed this.

Gaoth Laidir

trout wrote: »

An admin has reviewed this.

??

Which admin? When?

trout

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

??

Which admin? When?

Me. Today.

Gaoth Laidir

trout wrote: »

Me. Today.

Ok. From the flowchart at the top I was thought first CMods reviewed it, then an Admin if required.

So could you please address the 4 points above??

trout

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

Ok. From the flowchart at the top I was thought first CMods reviewed it, then an Admin if required.

As the active cmod was involved in the ban, I thought it would be best to step in early, and avoid any suggestions of impropriety.

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

I completely disagree with your conclusions. I did not do the multiple reports out of malicious intent. That was his/her opinion and it was wrong. I was merely following what was asked by a mod and my only crime was misinterpreting that request. My past accounts have nothing to do with this issue.

That's fine. You can disagree. I don't believe you and the numbers indicate otherwise.

At least one of your past accounts has quite a bearing on this issue.

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

1) How is reporting posts through the correct channel "back-seat modding", as claimed by Black Swan, when neither the forum charter nor Boards Rules claim it as such?

Directly after you received a warning, you reported 13 posts in 15 minutes. I read every single post you reported, and I believe each report was frivolous.

You've been on Boards long enough to know about the Golden Rule ... "Don't be a dick"

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

2) There is no published limit on the number of reported posts allowed on either the Rules or the actual reporting tool itself. All it states is that you must wait 1 minute between reports. That is all. Why is the limit only 1 minute if you discourage multiple reporting, why was there no mention of the offence of multiple reporting, and why did it allow me to report all of these posts together, within 15 minutes?

That's a rabbit hole. A level of discretion is required, and expected. Reporting that volume of posts, in that span of time, on any forum across the site would result in similar responses, especially taking the other circumstances into account.

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

3) How is a 1-month ban for this "offence" consistent with other much less severe reprimands handed out for more serious offences? If this offence is so serious as to warrant 1 month why is the offence not mentioned while these other offences (trolling, etc.) are?

A one month ban for breaking the golden rule is consistent.

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

4) How does my posting history and contribution to the forum warrant a ban? Have you looked at my post history in making your assessment of the severity? If so, what factors in these posts makes you skip the short-term bans in favour of 1 month?

Yes, I've looked at the posting history of all your accounts in making this assessment. You've been told what factors led to the ban, and you've disagreed with them all.

Gaoth Laidir

trout wrote: »

As the active cmod was involved in the ban, I thought it would be best to step in early, and avoid any suggestions of impropriety.

How could there be impropriety? Does Black Swan not want to contribute to this thread? Two PMs (saying the same thing) from him/her is all I get? But now that you mention it, I was wondering where you got your original idea that I had already been warned about abusing the reporting tool from when I never mentioned that in my background initially.

That's fine. You can disagree. I don't believe you and the numbers indicate otherwise.

Again, what is the limit of what is considered an acceptable number?

Directly after you received a warning, you reported 13 posts in 15 minutes. I read every single post you reported, and I believe each report was frivolous.

You've been on Boards long enough to know about the Golden Rule ... "Don't be a dick"

So you believe that posting social, political and racial slurs in a weather thread is acceptable? Interesting.

That's a rabbit hole. A level of discretion is required, and expected. Reporting that volume of posts, in that span of time, on any forum across the site would result in similar responses, especially taking the other circumstances into account.

Again, discretion is open to discretion. What is an acceptable number? And what other circumstances are you talking about?

A one month ban for breaking the golden rule is consistent.

So I get one month for what you consider "being a dick"? What consitutes being a dick? Multiple reporting? Or is it trolling? Racial slurs? Spamming? These seem to only get from a warning to 1-3 day bans.

Yes, I've looked at the posting history of all your accounts in making this assessment. You've been told what factors led to the ban, and you've disagreed with them all.

I haven't really been told. You have not really properly addressed many of my questions. What about my posting history warranted keeping the ban? Multiple offenders don't get this treatment.

Gaoth Laidir

I would also just like to add that the type of posts that I reported continued well after I was banned, so much so that the Mod in question felt the need to close the thread, posting the following comment:

Judging by the number of completely off-topic and personal tit-for-tat posts I've just removed, this thread has run its course. If anyone has any further stats or images they'd like to include just pm one of the mods.

So this is the situation:

●I report several off-topic and non-weather-related posts.
●The mod removes several of these "off-topic and personal tit-for-tat posts" and closes the thread
●I get banned for reporting them through the proper channel.

Great.

trout

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

●I report several off-topic and non-weather-related posts.
●The mod removes several of these "off-topic and personal tit-for-tat posts" and closes the thread
●I get banned for reporting them through the proper channel.

Great.

That's one view of the situation.

Here's another view.

You get a card for being uncivil and back-seat modding in an active and contentious thread which was subsequently closed.

Minutes later, you report 13 posts in 15 minutes. From your own comments earlier in this thread, the only thing stopping you from reporting more posts in that span of time is the fact that the reporting function demands at least 60 seconds between posts.

While you might like to present this as the noble action of a concerned forum member, others may see it as a petty response, generating busywork for the mods at a time when it was clear to you that the forum was undergoing an increased volume of posting during the festive season.

In ordinary circumstances, a month long ban for this would be harsh, and I was initially set to reduce the ban to a more appropriate 3 days.

Then I thought it odd that a new user would follow the path you followed, in terms of forums, posts, actions and then the subsequent DRP ... which is why I asked if you were in fact a new user.

You volunteered on thread that you had re-regged as you felt your previous account was not secure.

This lead me to the discovery of at least one other account, which you subsequently confirmed by PM.

You knew exactly what you were doing when responding to yellow card with the flurry of reported posts, and you also knew exactly what you were doing with the subsequent arguments

For any poster, a 3 day ban would be appropriate. A week perhaps for a repeat offender. Given the circumstances of your previous accounts, while I came into this DRP thinking a month was too long, I now fully support that decision.

Gaoth Laidir

Minutes later, you report 13 posts in 15 minutes. From your own comments earlier in this thread, the only thing stopping you from reporting more posts in that span of time is the fact that the reporting function demands at least 60 seconds between posts.

That is a complete fabrication. I never said I wanted to report more posts and I never said that the I didn't because the system stopped me. You need to at least do me the courtesy of reading my comments properly and stop making up things that I didn't say. That is the second time you've done it, the first being in your very first post on this thread, for which I corrected you.

So, please post the text where I said the above.

The fact still stands that I reported only a selection of the offending posts from the previous hour. I have stated this already. You stated that the posts involved did not need to be reported, yet your own Mod closed the thread because of these and further similar posts. Not a lot of joined up thinking there, is there? I would like to know if you have even spoken to the mod.

Regarding previous accounts, the one you are referring to was I think 4 years ago or more so I don't see the relevance to this issue.

trout

I want to bring this to a conclusion.

I came into this DRP with an open mind, and started from the position that the month long ban was harsh, and should be reduced.

Subsequently, having considered the matter in full, spoken with the mod / cmod, viewed the related interactions, previous interactions, and the knowledge and implications of your previous accounts, I decided to uphold the one month ban.

I stand by that decision.

Gaoth Laidir

trout wrote: »

I want to bring this to a conclusion.

I came into this DRP with an open mind, and started from the position that the month long ban was harsh, and should be reduced.

Subsequently, having considered the matter in full, spoken with the mod / cmod, viewed the related interactions, previous interactions, and the knowledge and implications of your previous accounts, I decided to uphold the one month ban.

I stand by that decision.

If you're going to continue to dodge my points above and ignore my request to prove evidence of the brazen claim you made then there is no point in continuing it.

After this experience with the weather forum I will not be posting in it anymore so ban away.