Being called names on A&P Forum

gizmo81

Hi posted a simple query about what makes a rent review valid in regards to the RTB advice.

I have been accused of being a weasel twice, being treacherous or deicitful. Whether the mods consider this name calling or what, it is at the lease uncivil.

nox001 wrote: »

No you won't get off on a speeding fine for a misspelled name.

To get to court it has to remain unpaid and at which point you will get summonsed. In court the prosecuting Garda can apply to amend the name on the summons and such requests are basically never refused.

I agree technicalities are very important and there are many which will get you off on things but small slips like misspelling a name when it's clear who the person is and they commuted the offence won't. The op is looking to weasel out of a legal rent review and it's unlikely to succeed and if it does eviction is likely.

And in post 14 edited after I reported it by Paulw

I have been told by The Conductor that they can interpret posts but the posts calling me names Paul W says are just phrases.

At the very least they are uncivil.

I received an infraction for

On this thread I've been call a weasel, compared to law breakers and accusing of a lack of intelligence, posters have tried to instil a fear in me of becoming homeless for following the law, all from asking some clarity on the RTB information on What makes a Rent Review Valid?

https://www.rtb.ie/rent-pressure-zones/rent-reviews

It's disappointing but what I've come to expect.

I pay my rent on time, I keep the property in great condition. I report an issues as they arise. I am the perfect tenant.

On the other hand the landlord and their representative have abandoned their obligations, maintenance. Our goodwill is running out.

There is no right to a rent review until the expiry of 24 months for tenancies that began before 24th December 2016.
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2.../en/html#sec25

An exemption for 'substantial refurbishment' is not an exemption for fulfilling minimum standards obligations.

A landlord should make sure they are compliant with their obligations before a representative fires off a rent review notice which not only contains alleged typos but also a rent review they have not right to do.

Also trying make me fearful of becoming homeless is not going to work. Of the 6 grounds for terminating a tenancy only 2 could be invoked, selling and family members.
t

Can someone please look at this. I feel very attacked by the posters and the mods.

Thanks Gizmo

gizmo81

Yesterday I received a warning for

"Thanks for your judgement on a situation you know nothing about! Anything of value to add to my query?

I don't believe it is a mistake. "

Conductor stated

Its only a warning- to play nice- and to be civil with the other posters.

I moderated your post- on the basis of your post- which I interpreted as a hot tempered and snide snapping back at Fian.........



Therefore, I understand posts can be interpreted by mods and the conductor today tells me reporting someone for being uncivil wasn't a valid reason

When I gave you a warning yesterday- and suggested you report posts- with a valid reason, if you were incapable of refuting the posts without attacking the poster- I chose my words carefully- stating that you should use a valid reason for reporting posts. Imagining that people have some grudge or vendetta against you- is not a valid reason- you really need to read what they actually post- without reading things or imagining slights- into posts- that they patently do not say.

I believe posts #2 #14 #17 #18 are uncivil and that is a valid reason to report.

Tokyo

Hi gizmo81,

as I have been CC'd on the PM conversation between you and the A&P moderator, I can see that you have already exhausted that option. Before we proceed however, to be clear, are you disputing both cards issued to you in this thread, or are you complaining about poster/mod action within the thread.

DRP is for disputing cards only - any other complaints can be taken to feedback.

gizmo81

Thanks Mike_ie

I believe the infraction was for trolling with post #19

I honestly am at a loss to see how it's trolling.

Further to this i was accused of not having valid reason for reporting the name calling. As stated, I believe posts #2 #14 #17 #18 are uncivil and that is a valid reason to report.

Yesterday I received a warning for the post (subsequently deleted but quoted i post #3)

Thanks for your judgement on a situation you know nothing about! Anything of value to add to my query?

I don't believe it is a mistake.



The mod accused me of attacking the poster and to report not refute.

I believe the only person attacked on the thread was me, and I know the mod stated that the word weasel was used as a noun not an adjective but I felt attacked by this.

In post #27 a poster agrees that I wouldn't have bee treated in the way i was if I had given more information. But I had a simple query regarding the validity of the notice. I don't think there was any need for the reaction I got and the ganging up on me and thanking each others posts.

Anyway thanks for your time and I'm sorry this is before you.

mike_ie wrote: »

Hi gizmo81,

as I have been CC'd on the PM conversation between you and the A&P moderator, I can see that you have already exhausted that option. I'll look into it for you now.

Tokyo

Hi gizmo81,

I've taken a look through that thread in its entirety, and I have to agree with the moderator's assessment of the situation in this case. I don't see any evidence of posters insulting you. DRP isn't the place to address other posters actions, but for the sake of clarification, nobody referred to you as a weasel (or any other derogatory term for that matter) - a poster used the phrasal verb "to weasel out (of something)" in the context of avoiding responsibiity for something, which is a commonly used expression, fitting of the context of the thread and is by no means a direct insult to you.

On the other hand, you created a thread asking for advice on your particular situation (Is our rent review invalid?), which by definition invites yes or no responses, and from the very first reply onwards you shot down any response that didn't agree with your view on the situation that you'd seemingly formed before even posting the thread, insulting the poster directly without actually refuting what they had to say. A yellow card was certainly warranted in this case.

The remainder of this DRP with respect to the red card has become somewhat redundant, as the A&P mods discussed your card amongst themselves, and decided to revoke it earlier this morning. The conclusion was (and I agree with this) is that you weren't trolling, however for whatever reason, you're interpreting every post as an attack upon yourself, which is very clearly not the case. You're also very much approaching the line of abusing the report post function in order to prove some kind of point in this regard, which is an infractable offence in itself.

As the red card has been revoked, please confirm that we can consider this resolved. However I'd strongly recommend revising your posting style in A&P - in future, if you open the floor to discussion, and subsequently shoot down everything except your own world view, the thread becomes redundant and will be closed.

gizmo81

Dear Mike.ie

I respectfully disagree, Fian's first contribution wasn't a contribution it was an uncivil attack intend to derail the thread, focusing on me rather than the query.

Probably.

If you invoked that type of pedantry to get around the notice your landlord is likely to actively seek to evict you. You clearly understand that it is a typo/mistake.

Secondly, I do not see anything wrong with my style in the thread but i see posters gang up on me not my query about the RTB guidelines.

Thanks for your time.

The red card is resolved I guess but I've taken your advice and queried the posters and mods in helpdesk. So will see how i get on. Thank you.

mike_ie wrote: »

Hi gizmo81,

I've taken a look through that thread in its entirety, and I have to agree with the moderator's assessment of the situation in this case. I don't see any evidence of posters insulting you. DRP isn't the place to address other posters actions, but for the sake of clarification, nobody referred to you as a weasel (or any other derogatory term for that matter) - a poster used the phrasal verb "to weasel out (of something)" in the context of avoiding responsibiity for something, which is a commonly used expression, fitting of the context of the thread and is by no means a direct insult to you.

On the other hand, you created a thread asking for advice on your particular situation (Is our rent review invalid?), which by definition invites yes or no responses, and from the very first reply onwards you shot down any response that didn't agree with your view on the situation that you'd seemingly formed before even posting the thread, insulting the poster directly without actually refuting what they had to say. A yellow card was certainly warranted in this case.

The remainder of this DRP with respect to the red card has become somewhat redundant, as the A&P mods discussed your card amongst themselves, and decided to revoke it earlier this morning. The conclusion was (and I agree with this) is that you weren't trolling, however for whatever reason, you're interpreting every post as an attack upon yourself, which is very clearly not the case. You're also very much approaching the line of abusing the report post function in order to prove some kind of point in this regard, which is an infractable offence in itself.

As the red card has been revoked, please confirm that we can consider this resolved. However I'd strongly recommend revising your posting style in A&P - in future, if you open the floor to discussion, and subsequently shoot down everything except your own world view, the thread becomes redundant and will be closed.

Tokyo

gizmo81 wrote: »

I do not see anything wrong with my style in the thread but i see posters gang up on me not my query about the RTB guidelines.

Therein lies the problem unfortunately, and I'd suggest you reconsider that or it's likely we'll end up back here again. However, considering the card is resolved, I'l close this off.