How appellants are treated in DR

Cookie_Monster

Chips Lovell wrote: »

I believe its reasonable that serial troublemakers should get heavier sanctions compared to first timers or posters with a relatively clean track record.

thats not how it works in Ireland mate. :pac:
I mean if you eventually dealt with a poster once he had racked up 400 odd points then maybe it'd be ok to give him a suspended ban at that stage

FreudianSlippers

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

They should disappear for mods as well as the rest of us after a while.

Cards and bans should be entirely expunged after a certain period of time.

.......

Beasty wrote: »

Please provide a link

Thanks

This isnt court, its feedback. So I dont particularly feel obliged to provide you with proof.

The search function isnt very good on the site and I havent got the time to go through lots of disputes for you.

However, I do recall a moderator, Corinthian (sp?) I think it was, who ended up leaving entirely because of this - if you can find the particular dispute then well done.

Chips Lovell

....... wrote: »

So I dont particularly feel obliged to provide you with proof.

The search function isnt very good on the site and I havent got the time to go through lots of disputes for you.

If Beasty or one of the other admins made a vague accusation and, when challenged about it, responded with "I don't particularly feel obliged to provide you with proof...." I doubt the reaction would be stellar.

If you hold people to certain standards, you should adhere to them yourself.

xi5yvm0owc1s2b

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Cards and bans should be entirely expunged after a certain period of time.

Agreed.

Even penalty points are removed from your driving licence after three years.

Beasty

....... wrote: »

This isnt court, its feedback. So I dont particularly feel obliged to provide you with proof.

The search function isnt very good on the site and I havent got the time to go through lots of disputes for you.

However, I do recall a moderator, Corinthian (sp?) I think it was, who ended up leaving entirely because of this - if you can find the particular dispute then well done.

You think you can come here and throw out allegations like that without being able to substantiate them?

Do not post in this thread again unless it is to provide such a link.

Big Bag of Chips

People have come making broad, generalising statements. People have said there's "quite a few" examples of cards being upheld not because of the specific issue, but past issues. If there are quite a few examples, they should be easy to find. A poster has admitted to generalising. Meaning the issue isn't as widespread as this thread would have you believe.

If there is a specific issue, with a specific post/moderator/Category Moderator then please highlight it. Then it can be address and the specific people dealt with.

But generalising, vague statements don't help. As I said, I have never belittled anyone in the DRP. And I have overturned a number of decisions. So I take exception to being included in a vague "I don't know why anyone would use the DRP" jibe.

Highlight specific issues which can be dealt with. Otherwise this thread isn't actually feedback and is just for people with no specific complaint to just have a dig.

s3rtvdbwfj81ch

Big Bag of Chips wrote: »

But generalising, vague statements don't help.

And I'm being, once again, castigated for coming in and posting actual examples.

Once again, heirarchy folk post lines that suit themselves for whatever agenda they want to follow.

Post specific examples and you are looking for chances to "feign offence" - I'm not actually offended, just interested in pointing out the inherent unfairness in the system and how the heirarchy do anything they can to stack the process against people who are stupid enough to raise DRPs.

Post general examples and not specifics and you aren't doing enough.

.......

Beasty wrote: »

You think you can come here and throw out allegations like that without being able to substantiate them?

Do not post in this thread again unless it is to provide such a link.

All right. I find the search function pretty useless in this regard - if you can suggest a better way of searching I am agog.

However, simply searching on the term "past transgressions" throws up:

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057892879&page=13

As I already stated, My behaviour since the last ban is being ignored, and I'm being punished simply based on past transgressions..

This is the one I recall from The Corinthian:
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=97450695

The bit that stuck in my memory is:

A ban, warning or infraction is for the purposes of transgressions, not for past transgressions that have already been acted upon. The moderator has already admitted that it was not personal abuse, so in essence I have received a ban for transgressions I've already 'served time for' in full knowledge by the moderator that I did not actually carry out the very act that I was punished for.

This one that you yourself were involved in - bringing up past transgressions and using an aggressive tone with the poster:
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=99895573


This more recent one - ban upheld on the basis of past transgressions.
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=108845344


Heres another one, no rule broken but punished on past transgressions:
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=107685030

Do you need more?

Beasty

Your first link is a link to this thread

Your second link is to a DRP for someone who had called another poster a racist bigot

Your third link is to a DRP for someone who picked up a yellow card for trolling

Your fourth link is to a DRP for someone who had picked up a ban for ignoring a mod instruction

Your final link was to a DRP for someone appealing a ban for ignoring a mod instruction

In all these cases "current" transgressions triggered the mod action. It may well be that past transgressions influenced the nature of the sanction, but in none of these cases was a poster sanctioned for past transgressions, All those transgressions were current and specific

You stated these are examples of DRPs where it was found someone didn't break the rules but the sanction was still upheld because of their previous record.

That is clearly wrong. In all these cases users broke the rules and the sanctions were upheld in the DRP

But of course you knew that. What surprises me is you must have believed I would not click on any of those so-called examples

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

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

Nah, I never bothered with it because I was able to see that my infractions were deserved. The most I ever did was lash out at a mod via PM, probably because of it being deserved. Sometimes I’ve read disputes in DR and prison where the ban seemed heavy-handed but usually it’s plainly obvious why the infraction happened and it’s amusing/eye-rolling to watch users act all indignant or wide-eyed because they weren’t allowed to be a jackass. Take some responsibility, people.

As for the bolded bit. Mods and Admins can’t win here. Too much time spent dealing with disputes and they have “too much time on their hands”. Take ages to respond to disputes and they are lazy or don’t care.

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Cards and bans should be entirely expunged after a certain period of time.

Maybe but I bet most infractions go to repeat offenders so the ol’ record probably remains pretty current anyway.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

droidman123 wrote: »

This is a regular feature in the drp.i often wondered why anyone would put hours of work in for a private profit making company for no pay.over the years it has become clear that the "payment" is their little control panel and the free reign to belittle people in the drp.this is not my opinion,its a fact,its there for everyone to see.the prison forum used to be a free for all for them until we got that stopped.the last (and only) feedback thread i started warning them about their behaviour was abruptly closed with some tinpot excuse.i really dont understand why anyone would use the drp at all

Yeah, the Prison forum used to a good read. It always seemed to me that the prison inmates getting attitude and slagging from Admins were blatant persistent re-reg trolls. Who honestly feels sorry for them?

Necro

Reading this thread it just seems that some people want to be eternally outraged and shake their fists at the powers that be.

But imo, worse than that are the serial post thankers that haven't the gumption to put their own thoughts on the thread in relation to the matter at hand.

I'll freely admit to having absolutely no dealings with the DRP system (not to say I haven't been naughty, but when I do cross the line, I take it on the chin) but reading the threads I honestly don't know why the mods actually bother.

It seems that it's fine to throw out accusations of bias and bullying which wouldn't be allowed in any other forum on the site - well except maybe here.

FreudianSlippers

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Maybe but I bet most infractions go to repeat offenders so the ol’ record probably remains pretty current anyway.

In that case they will be a perpetual repeat offender and will be punished accordingly. As it stands, someone with a few cards and bans over 10 years is treated the same as a repeat offender with the same number over less time.

Beasty

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

In that case they will be a perpetual repeat offender and will be punished accordingly. As it stands, someone with a few cards and bans over 10 years is treated the same as a repeat offender with the same number over less time.

I have never treated a poster like that. Indeed if someone has half a dozen sanctions in quick succession they may well be looking at Probation. If that's over 2 years or more it's not going to happen, unless they do something that results in a site-ban

Of course your own statement is as easy to make as mine. Posters who disagree with mine can try and find examples. I suspect you have little if any evidence to back up your statement

FreudianSlippers

Beasty wrote: »

I have never treated a poster like that.

Just double-checked as I was positive my post was not directed at you, and turns out it wasn't. You're taking this all very personally for some reason when it's certainly not my intention to have a go at you - rather the site moderation (which has become much worse in the past year or so) and DRP in general.

Indeed if someone has half a dozen sanctions in quick succession they may well be looking at Probation. If that's over 2 years or more it's not going to happen, unless they do something that results in a site-ban

In your view, but that's not standard across DRP in general is it?

Of course your own statement is as easy to make as mine. Posters who disagree with mine can try and find examples. I suspect you have little if any evidence to back up your statement

You may suspect whatever you want; you'd be incorrect to do so, but you may. In any event, I'm entitled to post my opinion on this website based on my experiences without having to justify my posts (which are not even directed at you) to you.

I am, however, glad to see you admit that like everyone else you are simply posting your opinion without any actual evidence to back up your opinion.

Beasty

You were making a statement of "fact" (a "fact" that I have not seen any evidence of, and was highlighting was not my own experience), not posting an opinion. I caveated my own statement accordingly

FreudianSlippers

Beasty wrote: »

You were making a statement of "fact" (a "fact" that I have not seen any evidence of, and was highlighting was not my own experience), not posting an opinion. I caveated my own statement accordingly

I'm not going to get into a conversation with you about what the difference between a statement of fact and opinion; it's not a productive use of my valuable time. Unfortunately however, despite many people here giving their opinions on how DRP and treatment of posters is poor (both objectively and subjectively) and could be improved, your consistently defensive and terse posts highlight exactly the issues you're looking for posters to provide factual evidence of - in fact your two posts directed at me in the past 26 hours highlight exactly the attitude and issue that many people have with the moderation (administration, etc.) of this website.

Beasty

So basically you are saying you have nothing to support this statement:

As it stands, someone with a few cards and bans over 10 years is treated the same as a repeat offender with the same number over less time

It is simply your "opinion"

FreudianSlippers

Beasty wrote: »

So basically you are saying you have nothing to support this statement:


It is simply your "opinion"

If one isolates that out of the general conversation of the expiry of cards/bans then it could be perceived that way. It would be a completely disingenuous thing to do, but I suppose if one wanted to do so they could do so.

It is, however, my experience that under the current situation historic bans and cards are disproportionately weighed when considering present decisions as to whether to card or ban and as to the length of such a ban - furthermore, this is normally upheld except in rare circumstances in the DRP process.

If you would like me to investigate these facts on your behalf and report back to the admins with the results of same and an opinion, I'm happy to do so if you provide me will all of the supporting evidence of cards/bans of all DRP cases in the past 6 months. Otherwise, you could simply take the suggestion on board as opposed to taking it so personally and going on the defensive.

Or are you seriously suggesting that I'm not allowed to form an opinion based on what I perceive?

Beasty

You are entitled to from an opinion. My concern was your "opinion" was being presented as "fact". I therefore challenged you as I thought that was an unfair and biased way to present your own views (or "opinion" as you like to call it), as my experience (which arguably involves dealing with more disputes than anyone else on this site) is different. I therefore chose to offer my own experiences to counter what it appeared to me to have been presented as a fact

FreudianSlippers

Beasty wrote: »

You are entitled to from an opinion. My concern was your "opinion" was being presented as "fact". I therefore challenged you as I thought that was an unfair and biased way to present your own views (or "opinion" as you like to call it), as my experience (which arguably involves dealing with more disputes than anyone else on this site) is different. I therefore chose to offer my own experiences to counter what it appeared to me to have been presented as a fact

So what you're going to attempt to tell us all is that you've been across all cases of bans/cards and ensuing DRP threads and there is zero evidence of what I outlined?

I don't believe that at all, sorry. I've personally had years old infractions/bans used against me in fact.

I was also a moderator of Legal Discussion for a number of years and can see the deterioration in moderation quality and general attitude across the site generally.

FreudianSlippers

I now see, unfortunately, that this thread is proof of nothing less than the site admins saying:

1) We don't care about your concerns;
2) We don't care about your suggestions;
3) We don't care about our users.

All whilst taking a tone that is, frankly, unwarranted and undeserved.

Now that is actually not my opinion, that is fact based on the way this thread has gone.

Beasty

Anyone reading our respective posts can take their own view

s3rtvdbwfj81ch

Beasty wrote: »

Posters who disagree with mine can try and find examples.

But not too many, otherwise you'll be targetted.

robarmstrong

To be devils advocate here in a sense, I can agree with how some individuals are treated in DRP, there does appear to be an inconsistency there yes, at least in my opinion absolutely.

However I have been sitebanned and racked up numerous infractions and I personally have never had them used against me, by any moderator, CMod or admin, including Beasty, who has personally bestowed me with a whack of the ban hammer.

The problem is the difficulty in reading a tone over text, which I can see there being a problem with tat may lead to the feeling of disdain being thrown towards those in DRP. It all depends on how we as individuals interpret the moderators/CMods/admins posting style and I think once you’ve interacted with them (not in the DRP) you get a sense for how they post, if you get me?

My experience is obviously not the same as others but there’s reasons for that and we should all be in agreement that these reasons exist and we need to work on addressing them.