How appellants are treated in DR

FreudianSlippers

Beasty wrote: »

Good behaviour, in my own experience as a mod and CMod, is considered all the time

In terms of how long should mods go back, it is a judgement call. If someone has half a dozen actions in a forum in a year, a pattern emerges. If someone only has 3 actions over that period all in the first 6 months, but was unable to post due to a 6 month ban in the last 6 months, I would consider that a worse record. If someone has picked up a "technical" through, say, chat in a "no-chat" thread, I would pretty much ignore it unless they were going out of their way to contravene that rule. There is so much that is subjective, there can be no hard and fast rule.

Even at site level, when we put posters on probation, it will usually be because of a poor overall record including a number of recent actions. If a poster has only had one mod action in the past 6 months, if they were not posting because they were banned, that's one thing. If they were posting away without being a bother, they would not be a "candidate" for probation. Indeed there have been one or two occasions when considering probation in the Admin forum, where we have taken the view that behaviour has been improving and have therefore left the poster alone. On other occasions I have PM'd posters warning them that further trouble was likely to lead to probation then being invoked

We are all different, and the above are simply examples of the type of thing that goes on, and certainly not intended to lay down any "rules"

I'm more thinking of someone that was banned, say 2 week ban or something... then nothing for like a year or more and then suddenly the next "infraction" (using it in its true sense rather than the red card sense) isn't a card, it's a straight 1 month ban because the last "infraction" was also a ban... no consideration given of time since last ban.

I.e. why don't bans expire from people's records?

Beasty

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

I'm more thinking of someone that was banned, say 2 week ban or something... then nothing for like a year or more and then suddenly the next "infraction" (using it in its true sense rather than the red card sense) isn't a card, it's a straight 1 month ban because the last "infraction" was also a ban... no consideration given of time since last ban.

I.e. why don't bans expire from people's records?

I can't comment on the system and how it records sanctions

Personally if it was a 2 week ban over a year ago I would be unlikely to use it to "escalate" any new sanction.

However I do think it is helpful knowing someone has picked up 60 mod actions over a 10 year period including 6 in the past year when considering probation

If 50 of those actions were picked up in a single forum I might speak to local mods about removing access to that particular forum

Again though I do not see how we could have hard and fast rules. Judgement will always come into it. Some of us are worse/better at exercising judgement than others. That's the world we live in. If we think a mod/CMod or indeed Admin was consistently exercising bad judgement you can expect someone will have a word. If that does not improve things we can then think about removing their "powers".

s3rtvdbwfj81ch

Are you suggesting that I should come on to Feedback and point out where the system is working as it should?

And no, that last example wasn't pointed out as a dig at you, it was pointed out because as shown, some poor fella was left hanging with no update for weeks while discussions were ongoing in the background, and nobody thought to update the person who was being discussed.

I've no reason to have personal digs at you Beasty, and anyone reading this thread would be hard pushed to find me personally digging at anyone, you are once again attacking me, and getting away with it in a way that nobody else would on this forum.

What you'd like here is for me to piss off and stop pointing out the times the process fails or breaks down, as if nothing ever goes wrong. My beef is not with anyone in particular, as much as you'd love it to be, but no, it's not, it's with the way the system and it's hierarchy treats people in a less than stellar war, fairly regularly. You are looking for a way, a reason, to shut this legitimate feedback down by making me out to be an axe grinder, but as you've (eventually) admitted yourself on one occasion in this thread, my points are not without merit, yet you continue to harass and bully me in an attempt to get me to go away and stop pointing out the failings of this process.

I'd like for you to stop attacking me in this fashion, because I'm not doing it to anyone, not on this thread, and not anywhere else on this, or any other, website.

Beasty

Kenzie Uneven Lettuce wrote: »

I'd like for you to stop attacking me in this fashion, because I'm not doing it to anyone, not on this thread, and not anywhere else on this, or any other, website.

Touche - not very nice is it?

s3rtvdbwfj81ch

At every turn in this thread you've attacked me instead of addressing my points, you are an expert at it, an expert at denigrating people who have something to say not in keeping with your own worldview, especially when it comes to this website. Eventually, after this is pointed out for the umpteenth time, you may get around to admitting that the point raised is merited, but not until you've gotten your dig in first, like clockwork.

Why do you have such a problem with people pointing out where the system has failed, or not worked optimally?

Beasty

I don't think the system has failed. I see a serial complainant looking for examples to support their complaints.

Now I actually do believe you do feel there are issues that you think need addressing. I understand that you feel somehow let down by the site, and that as a result you look for opportunities to provide "feedback" in a way that you can get your digs in. Maybe you do not realise you are doing it, but I have witnessed it throughout my time as CMod and Admin

I don't have much doubt that you believe you are right, and equally I acknowledge to often you have a valid point. Sometimes I simply do not agree, and sometimes the good points are drowned out by the way they are presented

On some of the specifics of this thread, I can actually recall an example where you appealed a 1 day ban in Soccer and I made sure I dealt with that as a CMod (overturning the ban) before the ban was up. Alas it's not the type of example you would ever quote because it does not support your "cause"

Now perhaps this should have been said to you some time ago. Rather than looking to "escalate" any issue you perceive with the site, perhaps be a bit more selective "battles" you decide to fight. That way your feedback gains a lot more credibility

Anyway, I know this is taking things off topic, and indeed personalising things. I am doing it precisely because it is an approach you have adopted. I'll leave that there in the hope it gives you an opportunity for reflection, and in the bigger hope that we could see a return to you as a constructive poster across the site and indeed giving credit where it is due rather than looking on things so negatively so much of the time

And yes, bottom line here is I am holding my hand out as a "peace" signal in the hope that you could perhaps do the same (not just to me, but generally to the people who do volunteer to try and make this a better place, and do not go out of their way to create or indeed encourage issues and problems)

Scott Tenorman

Beasty wrote: »

I don't think the system has failed. I see a serial complainant looking for examples to support their complaints.

Now I actually do believe you do feel there are issues that you think need addressing. I understand that you feel somehow let down by the site, and that as a result you look for opportunities to provide "feedback" in a way that you can get your digs in. Maybe you do not realise you are doing it, but I have witnessed it throughout my time as CMod and Admin

I don't have much doubt that you believe you are right, and equally I acknowledge to often you have a valid point. Sometimes I simply do not agree, and sometimes the good points are drowned out by the way they are presented

On some of the specifics of this thread, I can actually recall an example where you appealed a 1 day ban in Soccer and I made sure I dealt with that as a CMod (overturning the ban) before the ban was up. Alas it's not the type of example you would ever quote because it does not support your "cause"

Now perhaps this should have been said to you some time ago. Rather than looking to "escalate" any issue you perceive with the site, perhaps be a bit more selective "battles" you decide to fight. That way your feedback gains a lot more credibility

Anyway, I know this is taking things off topic, and indeed personalising things. I am doing it precisely because it is an approach you have adopted. I'll leave that there in the hope it gives you an opportunity for reflection, and in the bigger hope that we could see a return to you as a constructive poster across the site and indeed giving credit where it is due rather than looking on things so negatively so much of the time

And yes, bottom line here is I am holding my hand out as a "peace" signal in the hope that you could perhaps do the same (not just to me, but generally to the people who do volunteer to try and make this a better place, and do not go out of their way to create or indeed encourage issues and problems)

Hand of peace? You eviscerated him/her! :eek:

The OP has made some valid points, that's all that should be discussed not sending them off to reflect and come back as a more constructive poster.

Big Bag of Chips

The poster's orginal question was why do posters have to try discuss it with the mod before coming to DR.

The simple answer is because in a lot of cases, doing this works and the mod and poster come to an agreement and it never gets as far as DR.

In some cases it won't work and a DR will continue. However, if that first step wasn't a blanket rule, then it would increase the DR work load of a lot of people, much of the time unnecessarily. So yes, it might be a 'box ticking exercise' but it is a necessary step to make the DR forum more efficient.

As for why the onus is on the poster to approach the Moderator.. The poster is the person looking for the decision to be changed. So it's up to them to ask for it to be changed.

It's a system that works. It means from step 1 the process for everyone is the same. It might not be ideal from some people's perspective, but if there's an alternative then suggest it and I'm sure it would be considered.

Just because an idea or suggestion is dismissed, doesn't mean it hadn't been considered. Suggestions and feedback are constantly being discussed, teased out and decisions made as to what will/won't work better.

If a moderators attitude is unacceptable to posters then PMs should be reported. A one off instance may not warrant much action, but if a pattern emerges (much like with normal posters) the Moderator will be dealt with.

McMurphy

Big Bag of Chips wrote: »

The poster's orginal question was why do posters have to try discuss it with the mod before coming to DR.

The simple answer is because in a lot of cases, doing this works and the mod and poster come to an agreement and it never gets as far as DR.

In some cases it won't work and a DR will continue. However, if that first step wasn't a blanket rule, then it would increase the DR work load of a lot of people, much of the time unnecessarily. So yes, it might be a 'box ticking exercise' but it is a necessary step to make the DR forum more efficient.

As for why the onus is on the poster to approach the Moderator.. The poster is the person looking for the decision to be changed. So it's up to them to ask for it to be changed.

It's a system that works. It means from step 1 the process for everyone is the same. It might not be ideal from some people's perspective, but if there's an alternative then suggest it and I'm sure it would be considered.

Just because an idea or suggestion is dismissed, doesn't mean it hadn't been considered. Suggestions and feedback are constantly being discussed, teased out and decisions made as to what will/won't work better.

If a moderators attitude is unacceptable to posters then PMs should be reported. A one off instance may not warrant much action, but if a pattern emerges (much like with normal posters) the Moderator will be dealt with.

Dealing directly may have its upsides, but there's also downsides to it too.

If, for example a poster has just been reprimanded, (in their eyes unfairly)from a moderator they might have previous with, polar opposite views with that moderators views on anything from football to political discussion, and may go at it hammer and tongs on other threads/forums.

They are then expected to engage politely with same mod, basically asking them to reconsider their actions.

Taking into consideration that they A, might be still reeling from whatever sanction they were given, and B, might not particularly have any time for the mod to begin with, it could be the perfect recipe for disaster too.

Another thing needs looked at too is moderators who are seen to be taking a particular side in a discussion, banning/carding posters on the same thread with opposing views to their own.

Stinks to the high heavens when someone is judge, jury and executioner all at the same time.

If someone is perceived to have stepped out of line in a thread you have entrenched views on, for Christ sake have a bit of cop on and ask a colleague to intervene if you have a dog in the race.

Otherwise, looks like you're silencing your critic and abusing your position.

Edit, this isn't aimed at you BBOC, it's a general observation/thought of my own.

Big Bag of Chips

Johnny Dogs, you raise excellent points. A moderator outside of his/her own forum is just an ordinary poster. So disputes or differences in other forums should not influence a moderators actions in their own forum. But, we are all human! And it can be difficult to separate the two. Which is why your suggestion of a moderator having the good sense to step aside and ask one of the other moderators to have a look instead is definitely how it should be done. And indeed, I know personally from the forums I moderate is something that we regularly do. I might have history with a poster and I have occasionally called my own judgement into question. In instances like that I, and my co-moderators have gone to our 'colleagues' and asked them to throw an eye on it instead. Sometimes action results, sometimes it doesn't.

And, moderators shutting down opinion they don't agree on and handing out cards/bans is also something that is regularly discussed. It's not right and it's not how any forum should be run. Again, if it is a regular problem in a forum it needs to be brought to the attention of the category moderators, who simply cannot oversee all forums. Reported posts will generally be dealt with by the forum moderators so if posters feel they are not being dealt with appropriately and are getting no satisfaction from the moderators, a PM to the category moderators or a post on Feedback will start dialogue. Action mightn't be immediate or apparent, but all complaints are investigated and forums and moderators are then monitored more closely, and advice given. We hope the advice is taken on board. If its not, as mentioned by Beasty, moderator privileges are taken away

droidman123

Enough of the "report button" please,its meaningless

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Has a mod decision ever been overturned as a matter of interest? I've only ever seen things reversed where the initial mod makes that decision.

The very thread that Rasta posted.

I’ve seen admins overturns things a bit down the years. Not too often but honestly, most of the infractions and bans seem richly deserved.

Beasty

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

The very thread that Rasta posted.

I’ve seen admins overturns things a bit down the years. Not too often but honestly, most of the infractions and bans seem richly deserved.

And obviously there are a large number resolved behind the scenes. The ones that get to DRP are in most cases going to be ones where mods are reasonably clear that forum or site rules have been broken, so of course a large number of appeals will not succeed.

On the other hand some do get overturned at each level of appeal. There was one recent one that did go to DRP and was then resolved behind the scenes once the appellant does actually engage with the mod. Equally Cmods can discuss things directly with mods, and that can result in a mod acknowledging their action was harsh, and revoking or reducing any sanction

On the question of not reporting stuff - that's one of the main things that results in complaints of inconsistency. Particularly in fast moving forums such as AH and Soccer. People complain about inaction but then do not bother reporting stuff

Yes some reports drop down the cracks. If after a couple of reports someone feels that something has still been missed they can approach a forum Mod. If they are still not satisfied the next level is CMod.

The procedures are there for a reason, and in the main work. I'm not claiming everything is perfect. We are all human beings and we all have to accept that none of us are perfect. Sometimes we miss things, sometimes we misinterpret things, sometimes we get simply things wrong. Sometimes we exercise judgement that some are happy with and some are not. The natural tendency is to complain when unhappy, and there are many posters out there who never feel the need to complain because they are generally happy with what they see on the site

s3rtvdbwfj81ch

Is there a time limit on utilising the DRP, if there is, or has been a change in operating procedure, it might be a good idea to let people know.

Relevant Link

Beasty

No formal limit but to expect something to do looked at 6 months or so down the line is unreasonable

I personally would prefer it if we had a strict limit of a couple of weeks or so. That would also link in to certain changes over how long the site retains edit information which is likely to be strictly time limited (if it's not already in place)

blackwhite

Beasty wrote: »

No formal limit but to expect something to do looked at 6 months or so down the line is unreasonable

I personally would prefer it if we had a strict limit of a couple of weeks or so. That would also link in to certain changes over how long the site retains edit information which is likely to be strictly time limited (if it's not already in place)

Whilst I'd agree that a site-wide time limit on appeals would make sense, given how the "totting-up" process works on the soccer forum it would seem fundamentally unfair to impose a shorter time limit on appeals than the charter-defined period for "totting up".

Zaph

blackwhite wrote: »

Whilst I'd agree that a site-wide time limit on appeals would make sense, given how the "totting-up" process works on the soccer forum it would seem fundamentally unfair to impose a shorter time limit on appeals than the charter-defined period for "totting up".

If someone feels they've been unfairly carded, then why not appeal at the time, rather than waiting until they get themselves banned as a result of the totting up process? They'll know sooner rather than later whether their card has been overturned or not and consequently how close they are to a forum ban.

Beasty

blackwhite wrote: »

Whilst I'd agree that a site-wide time limit on appeals would make sense, given how the "totting-up" process works on the soccer forum it would seem fundamentally unfair to impose a shorter time limit on appeals than the charter-defined period for "totting up".

If posters wish to appeal they really should do so when the underlying issue remains fresh in everyone's minds

Posters in the soccer forum fully understand the totting up procedure. Trying to go back so long, as I've indicated above, is unreasonable. Indeed it's possible that relevant parties may no longer be on the site

McMurphy

Beasty wrote: »

No formal limit but to expect something to do looked at 6 months or so down the line is unreasonable

I don't disagree with you regarding someone initiating a DRP, but it is interesting that moderators/CMods and admin don't follow the same train of thought when it comes to a posters history on the site as a whole.

There is apparently no time limit on digging up a posters history (or past accounts) when in the DRP, and I think a line should be drawn under this also.

Beasty

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

I don't disagree with you regarding someone initiating a DRP, but it is interesting that moderators/CMods and admin don't follow the same train of thought when it comes to a posters history on the site as a whole.

There is apparently no time limit on digging up a posters history (or past accounts) when in the DRP, and I think a line should be drawn under this also.

I think you are comparing apples with oranges. The point is the DRP is available to anyone who wishes to avail of it. That can "clear" any such history. However if someone repeatedly causes trouble in a forum that record is useful on determining whether they will continue to do so

I'm not suggesting a yellow or two from a couple of years ago should influence mod actions. I do think if someone has picked up an average of a card a month in a forum over a year or so that's very relevant in assessing likely future behaviour

I'm not for one minute suggesting the DRP process is perfect, but I think it's a very reasonable process (and one which to my knowledge is not available in such a public form on other discussion sites)

.......

Beasty wrote: »

I'm not suggesting a yellow or two from a couple of years ago should influence mod actions.

Old cards are regularly (or used to be anyway) used to beat posters with in the DRP.

droidman123

Zaph wrote: »

If someone feels they've been unfairly carded, then why not appeal at the time, rather than waiting until they get themselves banned as a result of the totting up process? They'll know sooner rather than later whether their card has been overturned or not and consequently how close they are to a forum ban.

At a guess,i would imagine theres a lot of people that wouldnt bother at all with the drp to avoid being spoken down to by some random stranger with too much time on their hands.i for one certainly wouldnt give them the excuse to play at being a headmaster admonishing a pupil,i could be wrong but i,m sure theres many more too

Beasty

....... wrote: »

Old cards are regularly (or used to be anyway) used to beat posters with in the DRP.

If they have ongoing relevance they can be considered at mod level when issuing the initial sanction

Cmods can increase the sanction if they see fit

I have already indicated the sort of situation they may be used in and there is no point in repeating that

Let me draw an analogy with the real world

In court, if you lose you have a set time in which to appeal guilt or the sanction applied. However prior court sanctions that have not been successfully appealed may be taken into account when considering new sanctions

I do not feel any further need to defend this point. In my view, as I've stated above, I consider the process entirely reasonable. You may beg to differ, and that is your prerogative.

Beasty

droidman123 wrote: »

At a guess,i would imagine theres a lot of people that wouldnt bother at all with the drp to avoid being spoken down to by some random stranger with too much time on their hands.i for one certainly wouldnt give them the excuse to play at being a headmaster admonishing a pupil,i could be wrong but i,m sure theres many more too

Again if you don't want yo use it that's your prerogative

It's there for those that do

droidman123

Beasty wrote: »

Again if you don't want yo use it that's your prerogative

It's there for those that do

I,m aware of that,i just explained why i would never use it

Steve

Kenzie Uneven Lettuce wrote: »

Is there a time limit on utilising the DRP, if there is, or has been a change in operating procedure, it might be a good idea to let people know.

Relevant Link

Due to certain changes brought in to comply with GDPR to do with some data the mods can access, there is a DRP time limit being discussed. It's not fully decided yet although the data changes are already implemented.

Sorry I can't say more.

.......

droidman123 wrote: »

At a guess,i would imagine theres a lot of people that wouldnt bother at all with the drp to avoid being spoken down to by some random stranger with too much time on their hands.i for one certainly wouldnt give them the excuse to play at being a headmaster admonishing a pupil,i could be wrong but i,m sure theres many more too

+1

Having been the subject of treatment that amounted to someone trying to humiliate me and force me to grovel I would no longer ever consider it an honest and usable feature of the site.

Beasty

....... wrote: »

+1

Having been the subject of treatment that amounted to someone trying to humiliate me and force me to grovel I would no longer ever consider it an honest and usable feature of the site.

There is a certain irony with your post there. You have availed of this process twice, and on both occasions the CMod agreed to overturn the card

The details behind those appeals are, unfortunately, no longer available, but the underlying threads do exist in the Dispute Archive

.......

Beasty wrote: »

There is a certain irony with your post there. You have availed of this process twice, and on both occasions the CMod agreed to overturn the card

The details behind those appeals are, unfortunately, no longer available, but the underlying threads do exist in the Dispute Archive

Thats interesting Beasty because I requested all my posts be deleted some time ago under GDPR (when the site allowed it) - so the contents of old threads for this account should just say "post deleted".

Are you telling me that the underlying database posts were never deleted despite them appearing deleted on screen?

Beasty

....... wrote: »

Thats interesting Beasty because I requested all my posts be deleted some time ago under GDPR (when the site allowed it) - so the contents of old threads for this account should just say "post deleted".

Are you telling me that the underlying database posts were never deleted despite them appearing deleted on screen?

No I'm saying the threads are still there plastered with posts from you stating this post has been deleted

Hence I stated the underlying details are no longer available