banned from commuting and transport

horseburger

I have been banned from Commuting and Transport by moderator monument and would like to appeal that ban.

It was stated by monument that I was unnecessarily focusing on a poster, but I contend that I was directly responding to deliberately incorrect statements made by that poster regarding comments I made.

In my post, that monument took particular issue with, I was directly responding to comments made by the forum user in response to an earlier post that I had written.

The point I was making was that things I had written were being deliberately misrepresented by the forum user, repeatedly, in the particular Bus Éireann strike thread and the previous BE Strike thread.

monument took issue with me editing posts. Yes, I edited posts, to correct spelling, punctuation and to add detail to substantiate what I was saying, all within the two day limit given for editing posts.

Yes, I did ask the poster to whom I was referencing, why they get defensive whenever the NTA are mentioned, but I then edited that out,

Despite that, monument mentioned that in his/her post on the forum notifying other users that I was banned, where I note he misspelled matter (he wrote matted).

Why would he/she mention that, considering I had deleted that particular question long before other users would have seen my comment?

I have sent a message to moderator BuffyBot expanding on this point, and gave observations in that message, based on the reply I received from the forum user, of whom I asked the question.

monument also took issue with me highlighting that when I type E Fada, when the message is posted, the e fada becomes a couple of weird symbols.

That is hapenning. I don't know why, but after I edit my posts, and repost, the e fada doesn't publish properly. I do not know why that is occurring, so I included that as one of the reasons for typing.

monument previously took issue with me editing posts, but any post I edited was within the two day period available for editing posts.

monument has charged me with diverting the discussion off topic.

I bring up issues, which I don't consider to be off topic. I highlighted posters describing the job of bus drivers as being "unskilled".

I suggested that stating that is very ignorant and ill-informed. I asked in response to that comment, whether or not people who say that would describe an emergency vehicle like an ambulance or fire engine, as "unskilled".

My point was that no one would describe driving an emergency vehicle as "unskilled" because if anyone is in the unfortunate position of needing urgent medical assistance, that they would be so grateful, that someone drove such a vehicle to come to their urgently needed aid.

monument and others, who did not take the time, to read what I had written, completely and utterly incorrectly interpreted hat I was doing was comparing the job of a paramedic, to that of a bus driver

That is not what I was doing

I never made a comparison between the duties of those employed in paramedic services and that of bus drivers.

My comment was about the driving of the vehicle, that is central to fulfilling the role in both professions. I asked, if people consider driving a public transport bus as being "unskilled", would they also consider driving a fire engine or ambulance as "unskilled".

Taking into consideration the negative attitude of posters, who describe driving buses as "unskilled" is vital, when assessing what they state, on forums.

Indeed, some public representatives, who speak in support of the Bus Éireann drivers, have regularly highlighted ignorant comments made by Minister for Transport Shane Ross about the CIE group, and stress that his attitude is central to his approach to the issue of the bus strike over the last 19 days.

https://www.tv3.ie/3player/show/41/123519/0/Tonight-with-Vincent-Browne

I was making an observation about the condescending ignorant attitude that some posters have about bus drivers.
The posters, to whom I refer, say things to the effect of 'they get paid enough for what they do and should put up with it'

I was making the point that, if these posters think so little of Bus Éireann drivers, well then it follows that they also have a condescending ignorant attitude against bus drivers employed by the various private coach companies.

I consider these points very relevant to the discussion, as they highlight the attitudes underlying the comments made by the posters, to whom I have referred in my posts.

here is the message, where I wrote my response, directly responding to deliberately misleading and incorrect assessments by the forum user, of what I had written earlier.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=103170851&postcount=2209

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=103170851#post103170851

and here is the message from monument which he suggested I include, if I decided to post a ban appeal in this dispute resolution forum

"Hello horseburger,

I'm CCing BuffyBot on this.

You were banned for continued disruption posting, not understanding warning after warning, editing posts in major ways (and claiming it was just for minor edits, this time "E fada not typing, punctuation") and for attacking posters / trying to imply they work for a body involved (doesn't matted that it was deleted afterwards).

You got more than enough warnings:

09/04/2017 10:42:14 -- infraction
30/03/2017 13:45:07 -- one week ban
28/03/2017 23:51:03 -- one day ban
28/03/2017 15:13:40 -- warning
24/03/2017 15:24:07 -- three day ban
04/03/2017 10:18:46 -- warning

You were also warned in-thread and in PMs, and there are more than enough general warning which referenced the crackdown in C&T -- if anything I have given you far too many chances but you refused to take them.

DO NOT PM me about this -- if you want please go straight to the next stage of the dispute resolution process: SEE: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=1397 -- if you use dispute resolution please feel free to copy this PM straight into the thread".

tricky D

Hi horseburger

I've spoken with the mod who is willing to try to resolve this via PM despite the last line of your post. So please give that a go first.

Thanks

horseburger

thanks tricky D

horseburger

hello tricky D

With which mod, do I engage, in the furtherance of this issue?

The one that banned me instructed me to not send them any more private messages.

tricky D

Monument is who you need to contact, despite him previously saying otherwise.

horseburger

thanks tricky D for your reply

horseburger

tricky D wrote: »

Monument is who you need to contact, despite him previously saying otherwise.

Hello tricky D

I am writing here to appeal my ban, that was put in place, by monument, a few weeks ago.

I have sent private messages, to monument, indicating that I will not be posting in the way that was objected to by monument, in future, but monument is not entertaining the idea of reconsidering the ban, so I guess writing here is the next stage of the appeals process?

Is it possible that my appeal to the ban can be considered here?

regards,
horseburger.

tricky D

Sure. I'll have a look at this tomorrow.

horseburger

tricky D wrote: »

Sure. I'll have a look at this tomorrow.

Thank you tricky D

Thanks for replying to me about this

regards, horsebuger

tricky D

We have had a good look at this and here's our feedback.

Recent record
In a period of 5 weeks you picked up 2 Warnings, 1 Infraction and 10 days of bans for: Ignoring mod instructions, being uncivil, personal attacks, topic derailing. That is an appalling record and your posting showed zero signs of improving.

I have gone through a lot of the thread and your posting style leaves much to be desired.

On the matter of editing posts, we can see the edit history of posts and it is clear that many of your edits are way beyond your claim that they are mere spelling, punctuation etc. edits. The last edit which you made before you were banned added about extra 1100 characters and removed a personal attack aimed at another poster. You also tried to pretend that the edit was due to a problem with ? being miscoded in your edit note which is just trying to hoodwink us. As we can see edits that was a bad move. monument was spot on in the call and had warned you at least once before re post #877. Other instances include posts #1995, #2167, #2209, #672, #877, #139, #141 where you clearly make a change in order to misrepresent devnull.

devnull wrote: »

At 00:59 you never said that, you edited it, after I quoted your post and are now claiming that i misrepresented your post, I replied to what was there at the time I replied to it, the fact you edited it later to attempt to score a cheap point by misquoting me proves quite the reverse.

That's just a sample of these edit tactics; there might some more I've missed..

Then there's multiple personal attacks which started with your very first posts in the thread without an iota of anything contributing to the discussion. Here's a few samples:

horseburger wrote: »

You sound like a delightful person

horseburger wrote: »

You're gorgeous too!

Thanking a post that calls people morons, suggesting the employees are striking for the fun of it.

#672 has you having a go at devnull again

horseburger wrote: »

You really should desist from getting all emotional and offended by using such terms as "making someone feel like a criminal".

#725, #888, #906 confrontational personal attack again vs devnull

Again that is just a sample of these attacks; there might some more I've missed.

Then there's the persistent derailing of threads with the use of the word 'unskilled' being a prime example where you continue to argue the matter after it has been long put to bed and despite a mod instruction. There are more instances of similar dragging off-topic.

At post #2155 monument clearly states a last warning after derailing again which you ignore and get banned.

As for him misspelling matter as matted - seriously??

So from the above we have:
persistently dishonest editing to the point of trolling
persistently dishonest edit notes which don't kid us
an inability to heed mod instructions and take a hint from the various sanctions
persistent derailing
persistent attacking other posters with a definite focus on devnull for opinions that are valid despite you calling them condescending ignorant, etc...

So parsing it out:

Were rules broken?
Yes many times and despite many mod instructions and sanctions, you should have.

Was the sanction appropriate?
Your record in other forums is clear of sanctions since you joined years ago and so it appears that a single topic has been your undoing. While we are very reluctant to cut you any slack due to your being less than truthful, what I propose is to change the ban to 2 months after which you may post. However you will need to improve your posting style considerably and probation will be applied meaning any further sanction of any kind will lead straight to a permanent forum ban.

horseburger

hello tricky D

Thanks for your reply

If you can implement your proposal, I would appreciate that.

I wasn't trying to hoodwink anyone, The various reasons I gave for editing posts were sentence construction, punctuation, and I also, on a number of occasions gave the issue of the e fada, which was happening and I don't know why, but after I edited a post, or copied it from another page, the letter with the fada would publish in the posts as a weird symbol. I don't know why that was happening.

I never denied editing posts, I edited posts, within the two day limit for editing posts.

Would you accept, or perhaps concur with my assessment - that in the posts, where you deem that I was being uncivil - that the posts to which I was responding, were equally uncivil?

In one of the posts you highlight, I was replying to someone who called the striking drivers "moronic" and another who endorsed the calling of drivers "moronic".

I was quite abrupt in some of my replies to devnull, because in another thread, of which the moderator monument is aware, devnull deliberately misrepresented a comment I made in reference to a press release by Bus Éireann management in relation to the possibility of the company becoming insolvent.

devnull suggested that I had said that the company would make the company insolvent.

I never said that. My comment about a Bus Éireann management press statement was in relation to the idea that the company management was threatening that if the employees did not go along with the proposed cuts, that the company would become insolvent.

In my post, I was making the point, that the purpose of the press statement was to divert responsibility for the financial situation of the company from the management, on to the bus drivers, which I considered unfair to the employees of the company,

I also made the point that the aim of the press statement was to reflect negatively on the striking employees and their reasons for striking, while at the same time to divert responsibility of the financial situation of the company away from the company management.

I never said the company would take a decision to make the company insolvent. which is what devnull implied that I had said. As a result, a number of other posters, who accepted without question, what devnull had incorrectly stated about my post, started questioning me about what I had written, despite the fact that what I had stated about the press statement, had been clearly written.

If you can implement your proposal and change the ban from a permanent ban to a temporary ban, I would appreciate that.

Would that be two months from now, or two months from the date of the first notification of the permanent ban, which I think was 9th April?

thanks again for your reply.

regards
horseburger

tricky D wrote: »

We have had a good look at this and here's our feedback.

Recent record
In a period of 5 weeks you picked up 2 Warnings, 1 Infraction and 10 days of bans for: Ignoring mod instructions, being uncivil, personal attacks, topic derailing. That is an appalling record and your posting showed zero signs of improving.

I have gone through a lot of the thread and your posting style leaves much to be desired.

On the matter of editing posts, we can see the edit history of posts and it is clear that many of your edits are way beyond your claim that they are mere spelling, punctuation etc. edits. The last edit which you made before you were banned added about extra 1100 characters and removed a personal attack aimed at another poster. You also tried to pretend that the edit was due to a problem with ? being miscoded in your edit note which is just trying to hoodwink us. As we can see edits that was a bad move. monument was spot on in the call and had warned you at least once before re post #877. Other instances include posts #1995, #2167, #2209, #672, #877, #139, #141 where you clearly make a change in order to misrepresent devnull.

That's just a sample of these edit tactics; there might some more I've missed..

Then there's multiple personal attacks which started with your very first posts in the thread without an iota of anything contributing to the discussion. Here's a few samples:



#672 has you having a go at devnull again

#725, #888, #906 confrontational personal attack again vs devnull

Again that is just a sample of these attacks; there might some more I've missed.

Then there's the persistent derailing of threads with the use of the word 'unskilled' being a prime example where you continue to argue the matter after it has been long put to bed and despite a mod instruction. There are more instances of similar dragging off-topic.

At post #2155 monument clearly states a last warning after derailing again which you ignore and get banned.

As for him misspelling matter as matted - seriously??

So from the above we have:
persistently dishonest editing to the point of trolling
persistently dishonest edit notes which don't kid us
an inability to heed mod instructions and take a hint from the various sanctions
persistent derailing
persistent attacking other posters with a definite focus on devnull for opinions that are valid despite you calling them condescending ignorant, etc...

So parsing it out:

Were rules broken?
Yes many times and despite many mod instructions and sanctions, you should have.

Was the sanction appropriate?
Your record in other forums is clear of sanctions since you joined years ago and so it appears that a single topic has been your undoing. While we are very reluctant to cut you any slack due to your being less than truthful, what I propose is to change the ban to 2 months after which you may post. However you will need to improve your posting style considerably and probation will be applied meaning any further sanction of any kind will lead straight to a permanent forum ban.

tricky D

Your response is disappointing as you doggedly insist on matters which are clearly not the case. What's the point in shortening your ban if you persist in claims which are just not true?

You edited at least 5 posts to change your arguments with one edit adding over 1100 characters/about 200 words. Another edit was a similar length and they had nothing to do with spelling, punctuation or sentence construction, despite your continued claim. The 2 day limit is not the point as you were substantially changing your points to misrepresent another user. That's plain trolling.

With regards to being uncivil and responding to the same. Firstly uncivil posts should be reported not responded to in kind. Secondly while others called strikers morons, that was not a personal attack at other posters but your response was. That's the problem.

On your beef with devnull. devnull managed to behave whereas you were continually disruptive.

As for points you make in relation to the discussion, I am not concerned with those. What I concern myself with is your conduct of the argument which left much to be desired.

I don't really want to argue this much further as the pertinent points have been made and I fear another circular and pointless rehashing of points already made and dealt with due to your doggedness in not letting go of arguments go which is your downfall. If you are unable to recognise this, we risk being back in the same waters at a later date, so what's the point in easing your ban? Until you are able to realise this and accept that your posting left much to be desired, I am now inclined to think upholding the permanent ban is warranted.

horseburger

tricky D wrote: »

Your response is disappointing as you doggedly insist on matters which are clearly not the case. What's the point in shortening your ban if you persist in claims which are just not true?

You edited at least 5 posts to change your arguments with one edit adding over 1100 characters/about 200 words. Another edit was a similar length and they had nothing to do with spelling, punctuation or sentence construction, despite your continued claim. The 2 day limit is not the point as you were substantially changing your points to misrepresent another user. That's plain trolling.

With regards to being uncivil and responding to the same. Firstly uncivil posts should be reported not responded to in kind. Secondly while others called strikers morons, that was not a personal attack at other posters but your response was. That's the problem.

On your beef with devnull. devnull managed to behave whereas you were continually disruptive.

As for points you make in relation to the discussion, I am not concerned with those. What I concern myself with is your conduct of the argument which left much to be desired.

I don't really want to argue this much further as the pertinent points have been made and I fear another circular and pointless rehashing of points already made and dealt with due to your doggedness in not letting go of arguments go which is your downfall. If you are unable to recognise this, we risk being back in the same waters at a later date, so what's the point in easing your ban? Until you are able to realise this and accept that your posting left much to be desired, I am now inclined to think upholding the permanent ban is warranted.

Hi tricky D, if you can change the permanent ban to a temporary one, I'd appreciate that.

I have already stated to the moderator who banned me, that I wouldn't be repeating the points I made on the forum, because I have mentioned them already, a number of times.

I have stated that I won't be bringing up again, the issues that were at issue.

I have never denied editing posts and adding text to posts.

In fairness, devnull misrepresented things I had written, and was quite smart-assed to me in his/her replies.

devnull made numerous incorrect assumptions about my views on Bus Éireann and the various other private coach services, which I didn't much appreciate.

That is likely the reason that in my posts to devnull, I may have been a bit abrupt, or perhaps, less than courteous.

I have written positively about the various private coach operators, as well as Bus Éireann's services, at different times, in different threads.

I used the phrases "sentence construction" and "punctuation" as reasons for editing, to correct things I had written and rephrase sentences. For example on a number of occasions I typed sentences and did not have the correct spacing after commas, and the two spaces between sentences, and one space after a comma, things like that.

I also very often have numerous spelling errors, in my posts, which I try to correct, before the 2 day limit is up.

But, as I have said, I won't be discussing again, on the thread, the things that were at issue, regarding my banning on the forum.

If you can give me a temporary ban, I'd appreciate that.

regards,
horseburger

tricky D

I don't reckon you are taking on board anywhere near enough of what I have said. You show zero recognition of the poor posting as I have outlined and continue to peddle the innocent edits argument, which is taking the proverbial. Until you make significant progress on these, your ban will remain permanent.

horseburger

Hi tricky D

I have taken on board, what you have said. I have stated that I won't be repeating the stuff that was at issue.

I have conceded that some of my posts were less than courteous. I wasn't really defending the discourteous nature of some of my posts, but all I was saying was that I replied in that way, perhaps because of the tone, of some of the posts that were written, in reply to things I had written.

In future, if I am permitted to access the forum, I will aim to refrain from arguing, for example, if there is a post with which I might take issue. I will, as you advise, avail of the report option, rather than engaging in an argument, in a discussion that might become heated.

I didn't state that the only reason I edited things was to correct punctuation and spelling, I said that that was among the reasons.

I had stated before that I have edited items to add text to my posts. I didn't deny that I have added text to my posts when editing.

If you can consider changing the ban to a temporary ban, I'd appreciate that.

regards
horseburger

tricky D wrote: »

I don't reckon you are taking on board anywhere near enough of what I have said. You show zero recognition of the poor posting as I have outlined and continue to peddle the innocent edits argument, which is taking the proverbial. Until you make significant progress on these, your ban will remain permanent.

tricky D

I still think you are being somewhat disingenuous with your claims however I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and reduce to 2 months in total. Please note that you will be on a very short probation leash afterwards with harsh sanctions for any problems.

How the reduction will work. In a week's time I'll lift the permanent ban and apply a 1 month ban bringing it up to a 2 month total with a note of explanation. This hoop jumping is due to limitations in the ban length system.

If you are happy with that let me know briefly and I'll action accordingly.

horseburger

tricky D wrote: »

I still think you are being somewhat disingenuous with your claims however I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and reduce to 2 months in total. Please note that you will be on a very short probation leash afterwards with harsh sanctions for any problems.

How the reduction will work. In a week's time I'll lift the permanent ban and apply a 1 month ban bringing it up to a 2 month total with a note of explanation. This hoop jumping is due to limitations in the ban length system.

If you are happy with that let me know briefly and I'll action accordingly.

hi tricky D,

yes, I'd be happy with that.

Thanks for your reply, and for taking the time, to discuss and consider, my appeal to the ban.

regards,
horseburger