Locking of the Purge Thread in AH

A few weeks ago Ken set up a thread in AH where we basically vote for the poster we would like banned for 24hrs. The banned poster could "buy" their way out with a donation. It turned out that most of the participants made donations and we all had a bit of craic doing so.

The basic premise was slagging each other and trading insults. Some were hardcore and others not so much but it was obvious that it was done in jest. Times are difficult right now and that thread was fun.

Earlier a poster was carded then him and another person were banned from the thread. Now the thread is closed. I see it as very heavy handed and unnecessary. Ok card the post. Or take it in the spirit and the context of the thread.
This is where modding can run in to problems and create the feeling of a diluted and rigid Boards moderated beyond all recognition.

Leg End Reject

I don't think I've seen that mod before, perhaps they're not familiar with the tone of the purge threads?

There wasn't anything out of the ordinary in this one compared to the last 2.

Just to clarify I do know that Baggly did give a thread warning before banning the two posters.
I still think the whole thing was completely unnecessary. A lighter touch would have done the trick.

Baggly

With respect Perse, the warning was the light touch. If people ignore it we go through the cards system.

Leg End Reject

Baggly wrote: »

With respect Perse, the warning was the light touch. If people ignore it we go through the cards system.

Have you read the previous purge threads? The posts were the norm for the thread.

rapul

Yeah I got a red for saying harsh times, power tripping going on there considering the nature of the thread and previous

Edit, ok I'll be fair it was taken back just so all know

Better Than Christ

Absolutely pathetic behaviour from the moderator, tbh, hiding behind the "don't discuss mod actions" rule to prevent people from politely explaining the whole point of the thread to him. And then locking it like a child taking his ball home.

A simple "sorry guys, I was wrong - carry on!" would have sufficed.

retro:electro

Agree with Perse and others here.
The tone had been set on that thread weeks ago- it’s the type of thread where you don’t get involved of you can’t take it. Have you even read the other threads? Rape jokes, affair jokes, insulting one another’s genitals- you name it, it’s been joked about. So maybe a little more understanding that perhaps some people may have taken the tone and ran with it and pushed boundaries a little in an attempt to be funny and shocking, and not necessarily meaning any harm in the process.

An absolutely ridiculous decision made by the moderator and I cant believe people have been banned and a brilliant thread closed because the mod has failed to understand that.

The thread has raised a lot for charity over the last few weeks and it’s been a great addition to AH and I feel it was somehow “taken over” today by a mod who didn’t quite “get” the tone.

Baggly

Leg End Reject wrote: »

Have you read the previous purge threads? The posts were the norm for the thread.

I've seen the other threads. There is plenty that is too far beyond the original thread and the OP in the current thread. Im discussing this with my comods. Are you arguing that the rules weren't breached or that enough warning that the rules were being unforced wasn't given?

rapul wrote: »

Yeah I got a red for saying harsh times, power tripping going on there considering the nature of the thread and previous

I've responded to your pm BTW.

rapul

I've also responded to yours

Deebles McBeebles

Baggly wrote: »

With respect Perse, the warning was the light touch. If people ignore it we go through the cards system.

Do we? I never saw a card, just a ridiculous 24 hour ban.

Leg End Reject

Baggly wrote: »

I've seen the other threads. There is plenty that is too far beyond the original thread and the OP in the current thread. Im discussing this with my comods. Are you arguing that the rules weren't breached or that enough warning that the rules were being unforced wasn't given?


I've responded to your pm BTW.

I'm arguing that the tone was the same in the latest purge thread, yet this one has cards, thread bans and a 1 day ban. The tournament threads were another example of insults being permitted.

If that was my first purge thread I would have been surprised (not shocked or offended) but everyone who got involved knew the score. One poster who got a lot of "abuse" donated €1000 to charity, there were a lot of other donations as well.

It just seems like you weren't aware of what to expect and typical posts were actioned.

Baggly

retro:electro wrote:

An absolutely ridiculous decision made by the moderator and I cant believe people have been banned and a brilliant thread closed because the mod has failed to understand that.

It went too far for too long. I think it's plain to see to be honest. I get things have been allowed to slide before but I can't accept the 'if they don't like it they can just not read it' argument. The OP outlines thr rules and even if not enforced before now I literally posted a warning to say tone it down, which was ignored.

retro:electro wrote:

The thread has raised a lot for charity over the last few weeks and it’s been a great addition to AH and I feel it was somehow “taken over†today by a mod who didn’t quite “get†the tone.

Im delighted money has been raised, but it's not pay for the right to post the abhorrent stuff that was in there.

I feel what you have said is harsh and I disagree but sure what can you do.

retro:electro

If certain words were a no go all you had to do was issue a thread warning to reign it in a bit and not use that word. But in a thread where the main purpose is to offend by escalation of insult- an outright ban for two of the best posters and subsequent thread closure is ridiculous. For the last three Purges the threads had been running on a “the rules are, there are no rules” kind of tone and everyone who had been engaging knew the score. So to adopt such an approach at the eleventh hour on thread four makes little sense, and unfair to those participating in good faith for the last few weeks.

Baggly

retro:electro wrote:

If certain words were a no go all you had to do was issue a thread warning to reign it in a bit and not use that word. But in a thread where the main purpose is to offend by escalation of insult- an outright ban for two of the best posters and subsequent thread closure is ridiculous. For the last three Purges the threads had been running on a “the rules are, there are no rules†kind of tone and everyone who had been engaging knew the score. So to adopt such an approach at the eleventh hour on thread four makes little sense, and unfair to those participating in good faith.

A warning was issued and ignored. I can't do much more beyond that than issue cards in line with the users history.

Baggly you rarely if ever post in AH and when you do it's to lock a thread that's been going well for a while. Its unfair to the community to come in out of nowhere and take something away which wasn't causing any issues.

Mods should act objectively and be measured in their actions. It can be plain as day when a poster is being malicious. If I turned up in the Trivial Annoyances thread and posted in response to another "would you get over yourself you cùnt" I would expect a card.

The Purge thread however has a completely different tone. In fact if I posted "I think you are all wonderful" there I'd expect a serious going over. I'd know it wasn't meant to really hurt though. If I felt that way I wouldn't engage with it at all.

retro:electro

Baggly wrote: »

A warning was issued and ignored. I can't do much more beyond that than issue cards in line with the users history.

You issued a card before any on thread warning. That’s where the issue arose. All you had to do was say reign it in a bit lads, I know it’s a bit of craic but certain words are not allowed. No harm no foul. We all would have moved on. Instead you went nuclear and didn’t give anyone a chance to even adjust to this new “rule” or explain themselves.

Baggly

I'm feeling hugely attacked here and Perse has just made this personal now so with all due respect to all involved I'm out of this thread. I tried to respond in earnest but I've no interest in this being made personal.

I'll defer the thread and any further actions to the other forum mods. I don't believe I was wrong in my actions this evening and I'm OK with you guys disagreeing.

retro:electro

Baggly wrote: »

I'm feeling hugely attacked here

You can’t be serious??

Deebles McBeebles

Baggly wrote: »

A warning was issued and ignored. I can't do much more beyond that than issue cards in line with the users history.

You're making this worse for yourself, B. You banned me from AH for 24 hours for a joke which did not even address anyone on Boards. A user asked if you were retarded, that didnt even get a card. I didn't get a card, I've never been banned before. You've had a shocker here.

Baggly

retro:electro wrote:

You can’t be serious??

I am. If Perse wants to categorise my posting in ah in a sweeping generalisation that has nothing to do with my posts here, then that's attacking the poster, not the post.

I'm sorry. It isn't my intention to attack or make it personal. I'm sometimes rubbish at getting things across. AH can be a strange place and modding it is no doubt tough. All I'm trying to say is that you closing the thread seems very unfair.

Baggly

Deebles McBeebles wrote:

You're making this worse for yourself, B. You banned me from AH for 24 hours for a joke which did not even address anyone on Boards. A user asked if you were retarded, that didnt even get a card. I didn't get a card, I've never been banned before. You've had a shocker here.

I don't know why that one isn't showing up as a card but it was carded.

Deebles McBeebles

Baggly wrote: »

I don't know why that one isn't showing up as a card but it was carded.

Ah c'mon!

I'm happy to take a yellow card then, you can rescind my 24 hour ban.

Baggly

Deleted User wrote:

I'm sorry. It isn't my intention to attack or make it personal. I'm sometimes rubbish at getting things across. AH can be a strange place and modding it is no doubt tough. All I'm trying to say is that you closing the thread seems very unfair.

It was closed to allow review by other mods. The exact thing people seem to be asking me to do.

In the meantime to avoid further escalation and people being carded for procedural things like ignoring mod instructions, the thread stays closed. It's standard modding procedure to respectfully honest.

Baggly

Deebles McBeebles wrote:

I'm happy to take a card then, you can rescind my 24 hour ban.

I meant a ban/red card was issued. You aren't being treated more or less harshly for basically the same thing.

rapul

I've still got a red?!

Baggly

Admins have to remove cards. Ive requested it be done though.

retro:electro

The thread was due to run its course in about two days time. It probably should have finished up last weekend but equally there was no harm in letting it drag on a bit. People were dipping in and out and it had stagnated a bit in the last few days.

A simple weighing up of “okay this word is unacceptable but you know these posters aren’t the worst bunch” while acknowledging the purpose of the thread is to inflame and offend and raise a bit of money for charity on the side. I think at this stage, the offending word could have been let slide if you were willing to look at the bigger picture. But I’m going to take a stab in the dark here and assume there’s no chance of you admitting you may have jumped the gun and could have handled it better, making this whole conversation futile.

Deebles McBeebles

Baggly wrote: »

I meant a ban/red card was issued. You aren't being treated more or less harshly for basically the same thing.

Its not the same thing at all but you know that. 24 hour ban for either post is ridiculous in the context of the thread. Very poor modding.

Baggly

retro:electro wrote: »

You issued a card before any on thread warning. That’s where the issue arose. All you had to do was say reign it in a bit lads, I know it’s a bit of craic but certain words are not allowed. No harm no foul. We all would have moved on. Instead you went nuclear and didn’t give anyone a chance to even adjust to this new “rule” or explain themselves.

Ill take the feedback on board but as ive said, rules were broken so actions made based on users history. The very basic card i can give for breakages is literally called a 'warning'.

The two cards handed out were for going way too far beyond the pale. And to try avoid further escalation i issued on thread warnings, which were ignored; hence further bans.

Sometimes you start with an on thread warning, sometimes it follows - its case by case and given the posts carded, im happy with my call on this one. As i said though, ill take the feedback on board.

Baggly

Deebles McBeebles wrote: »

Its not the same thing at all but you know that. 24 hour ban for either post is ridiculous in the context of the thread.

Hmmm....i fear i may have confused things slightly here. The same punishment (a ban) was handed out but not for the same duration. The only explanation i can give as to why is that you are both at different stages in terms of previous warnings/infractions bans. Your next step was a 1 day ban....so thats what you got.

retro:electro

Baggly wrote: »

Ill take the feedback on board but as ive said, rules were broken so actions made based on users history. The very basic card i can give for breakages is literally called a 'warning'.

The two cards handed out were for going way too far beyond the pale. And to try avoid further escalation i issued on thread warnings, which were ignored; hence further bans.

Sometimes you start with an on thread warning, sometimes it follows - its case by case and given the posts carded, im happy with my call on this one. As i said though, ill take the feedback on board.

If escalation is what you wanted to avoid then an on thread warning not to use that word and to be a bit more mindful would have been enough. Jumping straight into carding users for posting as they have been for three solid weeks was only going to result in one thing.

Baggly

With respect - that is not my experience (at least not in all cases). Some users have a habit of not stopping escalation until they see cards. Thats not specific to the posters that were carded here; but its my experience of modding AH/CA when things are spicy like in that thread.

Leg End Reject

I was thread banned in one of the tournament threads, the mod was unfamiliar with the tone of those.

I sent a pm explaining the types of posts allowed etc, the mod checked and overturned the thread ban.

No drama ensued and the insults kept flying. I really think that approach should have been applied here. There wasn't an escalation on previous posts in this purge, everyone who participated in all the purges can attest to that.

Deebles McBeebles

Baggly wrote: »

Hmmm....i fear i may have confused things slightly here. The same punishment (a ban) was handed out but not for the same duration. The only explanation i can give as to why is that you are both at different stages in terms of previous warnings/infractions bans. Your next step was a 1 day ban....so thats what you got.

My next step? So you don't take what actually happened into account, just the users history?

retro:electro

Baggly wrote: »

With respect - that is not my experience (at least not in all cases). Some users have a habit of not stopping escalation until they see cards. Thats not specific to the posters that were carded here; but its my experience of modding AH/CA when things are spicy like in that thread.

In fairness Baggly, and I mean no disrespect with this comment. But you have already taken some valid criticism of your actions as “attacking you” and other remarks about your moderating as “personal”, so maybe, just maybe, this purge thread wasn’t the one for you.

Baggly

Deebles McBeebles wrote: »

My next step? So you don't take what actually happened into account, just the users history?

Both actually

retro:electro wrote: »

In fairness Baggly, and I mean no disrespect with this comment. But you have already taken some valid criticism of your actions as “attacking you” and other remarks about your moderating as “personal”, so maybe, just maybe, this purge thread wasn’t the one for you.

I think you have misinterpreted what i said was an attack (using my 'lack' of posting history in AH as a means to say my modding isnt valid) - albeit Perse subsequently clarified that wasnt intended that way.

You are entitled to believe certain mods shouldnt mod certain threads but in reality i dont think thats feasable to implement. SOMEONE will always have an issue with how a mod mods a thread.

retro:electro

Mods can mod whatever threads they like but arriving in at the eleventh hour and taking offence to the tone and issuing warnings and bans like smarties, when things have been running fine up to that point, is a little unfair and over the top. That’s all people are saying.

Baggly

Thats a bit facetious in terms of how things went down imo but, as ive said, ill take the feedback on board.

Leg End Reject

Baggly wrote: »

Thats a bit facetious in terms of how things went down imo but, as ive said, ill take the feedback on board.

If you read the thread from the start to the point where you jumped in you'll see it's accurate. There's nothing facetious about retro's post.

retro:electro

Baggly wrote: »

Thats a bit facetious in terms of how things went down imo but, as ive said, ill take the feedback on board.

Correct, it was actually cards, then warnings, then warnings not to discuss the warnings, then bans, then thread closure.

Issuing cards before giving people a chance and issuing a warning is grossly unfair. And saying you’ll take it on board and then actually taking it on board are two entirely different things.

Baggly

retro:electro wrote: »

Correct, it was actually cards, then warnings, then warnings not to discuss the warnings, then bans, then thread closure.

Issuing cards before giving people a chance and issuing a warning is grossly unfair.

Card for site rule breakage. You are suggesting this is grand because other slagging hadnt been actioned previously I disagree.

Panda Killa wrote: »

Ah don't worry, just like everyone else in here we are just using you to get to your dad... nobody wants the retarded offspring when you can properfck the baby gravy supplier

Same as above.

Urethral Buttercup wrote: »

Every single woman on this forum is compromised, either physically or mentally. They're the grime at the bottle of the barrel, exact same as the men.

Warning to try deter further issues given the cards above given for rule breakages.

Baggly wrote: »

Mod

Too far folks. Its supposed to be lighthearted. Keep it that way.

Warning was ignored, so thread bans handed out as well as cards. As well as another warning for everyone else.

Baggly wrote: »

Mod


Don't post in the thread again.


Don't post on the thread again.

For those unclear, just stop sledging each other and looking to rile people up. It's not what the thread is for.

Further warning.

Baggly wrote: »

Just keep it civil and follow mod instructions and you can have all the fun you like Emmet

Further warning.

Baggly wrote: »

Read the OP. Lighthearted.

Warning re: discussing mod actions on thread.

Baggly wrote: »

Mod

Lads mod actions arent up for discussion here. Follow the instructions or cards will follow.

Card for not doing so (which admittedly is being rescinded now).

retro:electro wrote: »

But mod sir miss your honour we’ve been doing that this whole time. Bit silly to implement such a rule at the eleventh hour on thread four

Thread closed for review due to further escalation by posters.

Baggly wrote: »

Mod

Thread closed. Lads there has been an escalation and its gone too far. You can object that it hasn't been called before now but I can't do anything about that but apply the rules since I'm here now.

I'll discuss with comods as to whether it can be revived.

So yeah you are there or thereabouts right in your more recent post - and we just disagree with regards to the initial cards? Im ok with that and happy with the cards. The standard of posting wasnt up to scratch, so i actioned it.

I cant do more than take your feedback on board at this stage, given i want to agree to disagree with you retro.

retro:electro

10 mod actions (including warnings and bans) in under one hour. You might see that as fair and warranted but I and probably most others see it as a complete and utter abuse of mod power, and completely unfair given the thread ( and the ones previous) have had very little mod intervention up to this point.
You can say you’ll take it on board until the cows come home but you’re not actually taking any of it on board. All you’re doing is justifying your decisions.

Baggly

I dont time when i have to made mod actions, but if its 10 in an hour, its 10 in an hour. I dont NOT make an action because it will look bad.

Half of them are warnings, most if not all of which were ignored....and yet you lump them all in together and say the issue is the mod action rather than the behaviour that prompted the action? I fail to see how thats an abuse of mod power or unfair. I literally gave the thread 5 warnings to change their behaviour. Thats probably far too many for most circumstances to be honest.

Im not justifying anything - im outlining my side in response to feedback - and im saying ill take the feedback on board. Would you prefer mods not do that?

You have made up your mind, so if you cant agree to disagree as i have asked a couple of times now, then i dunno what to say.

retro:electro

This is just pointless.

Leg End Reject

Baggly, your warning came after 3 previous purges and the current one which is running since the weekend.

The posts you quoted are the type of posts that were acceptable up to the point you entered the thread. You're the only one who's had an issue.

Can you see that? Can you accept that posters are confused and annoyed when all the purges had these types of insults? Why were they allowed before?

Omackeral

Literally hundreds of euro being donated to charity on the back of these threads ffs. What a daft decision to close them. That’s my major takeaway from this.

That iron fist ruling on the thread really really was ridiculous as well. People know what they’re getting into on these. Was the same with various crisp and chocolate threads I ran here. They were crazy busy and people were having the craic. Then the same mod comes in and tells us to reign it back. Warnings tattooed on the opening post and all. It’s harmless fun like. People aren’t children on here. This controlled humour isn’t wanted or welcome at all by the people contributing, from what I can see.

Omackeral

Baggly wrote: »

I'm feeling hugely attacked here and Perse has just made this personal now so with all due respect to all involved I'm out of this thread. I tried to respond in earnest but I've no interest in this being made personal.

I'll defer the thread and any further actions to the other forum mods. I don't believe I was wrong in my actions this evening and I'm OK with you guys disagreeing.

With all due respect, you’ve just made a show of yourself. Both with your rulings and with this post.

Baggly

The first purge wasn't nearly this bad to be fair leg end reject.

The others I hadn't read before this morning.

I can see the warnings were different to what had become normal in those threads so I do understand the confusion, but that doesn't mean the posts were ok. I will concede I could have issued a warning before a card but I don't accept all out heavy sledging was allowable especially after my warnings.

I have not been around those threads the last few weeks so it's not my place to comment on that.

Regardless of the previous threads it's right there in the charter and op....keep it light hearted. The mentions of rape, casual sexism and paedophilia is just not tenable. I can only mod what's in front of me so that's what I did.

Omackeral

retro:electro wrote: »

Mods can mod whatever threads they like but arriving in at the eleventh hour and taking offence to the tone and issuing warnings and bans like smarties, when things have been running fine up to that point, is a little unfair and over the top. That’s all people are saying.

Thing is, it’s a bloody Mod that runs and started the thread. Surely Ken could have handled all this himself? Tbh, this is why I had to change the tone of my tournament threads. The barbs were the best part. When they were put under the cosh, I decided to move them off to the Games Forum. They’re still decent but the craic isn’t the same.