Appeal PM Warning C Mod

I’d like to appeal a PM warning given to me by this guy-

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/member.php?u=139193

He’s C mod

We’ve pmed and he’s upheld the warning

It’s in relation to a post I made in the election thread comparing Donald Trump to Citizen Kane
For the life of me, I don’t know why this has become such an issue so more than willing to be educated.

Thanks

Beasty

Are you appealing the yellow card received on 7 November?

Yes that’s the one.

I didnt see any mod warnings that were in the thread as I didn’t follow that thread per-se - but also I don’t understand how my post was irrelevant to the topic a hand- So even had I seen such a warning, I’m not sure I would have related that warning to what I posted- It’s in the context of Trump refusing to admit defeat and going on a triad of baseless allegations of voter fraud that all sounded like he was having a nervous breakdown of some kind. I thought my post captured that essence with my Citizen Kane reference.

If such posts are not allowed in Politics, then fine- like I said, I’m happy to be educated- but a yellow warning was I thought a bit much - it’s not like I called Trump a name or something- I was just trying to capture the madness of it all.

This is the post in question:

I was told it wasn’t “constructive” and “ I just don't see what this reference and a smiley add to the thread”
It’s a view- an opinion- my opinion- it’s how I felt at the time. It expressed the feeling a lot of posters felt- the bizarreness of Trumps approach-

Originally Posted by PlentyOhToole View Post
I have this image of Trump rocking back and forth in a corner shouting Rosebud, Rosebud.

Hi guys- just wondering if someone will be looking at this at some stage?
Many thanks

Mickeroo

Sorry, this one appears to have slipped through the cracks. Did you engage with the mod who gave you the yellow card via private message before coming here?

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

I’d like to appeal a PM warning given to me by this guy-

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/member.php?u=139193

He’s C mod

We’ve pmed and he’s upheld the warning

It’s in relation to a post I made in the election thread comparing Donald Trump to Citizen Kane
For the life of me, I don’t know why this has become such an issue so more than willing to be educated.

Thanks

Mickeroo wrote: »

Sorry, this one appears to have slipped through the cracks. Did you engage with the mod who gave you the yellow card via private message before coming here?

See my opening post.

Thanks.

Dizzyblonde

Hi PlentyOhToole, I'll look into it for you.

I'll need to see the exchange via PMs that you had with the moderator please, you can copy and paste them here or send them to me in a PM.

Dizzyblonde

Dizzyblonde wrote: »

Hi PlentyOhToole, I'll look into it for you.

I'll need to see the exchange via PMs that you had with the moderator please, you can copy and paste them here or send them to me in a PM.

This has already been looked at by a C mod- that’s why I’m here in this forum- the DRP process states that if upheld by a C mod then an admin must look at it.


Dear PlentyOhToole,

You have been warned for a breach of the forum charter.

Every forum on Boards.ie has a charter which lists any specific rules that forum may have and it is really important that you read this as it'll help you familiarise yourself with how that forum works. You should also understand that every forum is different and that charters are how you learn the differences.

Please see the Boards.ie FAQ for more details.



ancapailldorcha

Moderator Note

Not remotely constructive.

Your post:
Quote:
Originally Posted by PlentyOhToole View Post
I have this image of Trump rocking back and forth in a corner shouting Rosebud, Rosebud.


I’ve tried to PM you twice in relation to your warning on a post I made - it doesn’t appear to be sent to you in my sent items - hence this additional pm
I am totally confused as to the warning - pleas explain further.
My reference was to Citizen Kane - an Orsen Welles film- please explain what was wrong with my post?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizen_Kane


Originally Posted by ancapailldorcha
I know what the reference was to. I just don't see what this reference and a smiley add to the thread.

There were plenty of mod warnings about the standard of posting in the past week. Snappy comments such as this add absolutely nothing.

There was a mod warning just above your post here:

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/show...postcount=4958

There's only so many times we can ask that people post constructively.

Upheld.

Firstly I didn’t see that previous post but regardless my post was, IMHO, very relevant given the topic at hand. I dispute your decision and wish to appeal





It wasn't. It's at best a silly comment. Being relevant doesn't mean that it's constructive.

You can appeal in the DRP forum.


You’re going through all of this nonsense for “a silly comment”?

Seriously?

It’s not even a silly comment- it was a parody comment on what in real life, he was quite possibly doing anyway, in some shape or form- I’m off to DRP as this level of moderation is just stifling

Beasty

To be clear, even if issued by a CMod, the first level of appeal here is with another CMod. That applies equally, for example, to cards or bans issued by Admins

Dizzyblonde will undertake this review, and if you are dissatisfied with their decision you then have the option of appealing to an Admin

Dizzyblonde

PlentyOhToole your exchange matches the one the moderator showed me. I've read through it, and also through the relevant thread and the post you received the infraction for.

The previous mod warning post wasn't the first in the thread regarding one-line posts. Your post was in the form of a one-line joke with a grinning face emoji, and even if it was a "parody comment", it added nothing constructive to the thread. I'm not sure you realise that Politics is a serious forum, and there are standards of posting as mentioned in the charter. Of course there will be quips along the way but the discussions are taken seriously, and throwing a witty one-liner in tends to derail a thread. The moderators work really hard on these huge threads, and posts like yours add to the workload.

I'm wondering if you read the charter before posting, and whether you understand why you got the infraction?

Beasty

Beasty wrote: »

To be clear, even if issued by a CMod, the first level of appeal here is with another CMod. That applies equally, for example, to cards or bans issued by Admins

Dizzyblonde will undertake this review, and if you are dissatisfied with their decision you then have the option of appealing to an Admin

Thanks- i read the diagram thingy above this thread as stating if a C mod makes a decision, it's then appealed to an Admin - Happy for Dizzyblonde to take a look.

Dizzyblonde

Dizzyblonde wrote: »

PlentyOhToole your exchange matches the one the moderator showed me. I've read through it, and also through the relevant thread and the post you received the infraction for.

The previous mod warning post wasn't the first in the thread regarding one-line posts. Your post was in the form of a one-line joke with a grinning face emoji, and even if it was a "parody comment", it added nothing constructive to the thread. I'm not sure you realise that Politics is a serious forum, and there are standards of posting as mentioned in the charter. Of course there will be quips along the way but the discussions are taken seriously, and throwing a witty one-liner in tends to derail a thread. The moderators work really hard on these huge threads, and posts like yours add to the workload.

I'm wondering if you read the charter before posting, and whether you understand why you got the infraction?

Thanks for looking at this.

So a few things here:

While i read the charter previously, I haven't posted that often in Politics, so I'm not that familiar with the standards and culture expected as you outline.

I've looked at the charter this morning and what strikes me, is that it talks a lot about abuse, lying, racism, soapboxing, illegal links etc- the sort of standard stuff charters are made of -it's very long, and buried within the charter, I can now see the following sentence:

"Repeated one liner, low quality style posts will result in a ban."

My posting wasn't "repeated" , and obviously, I'm of a different view to you, as to the quality of my post. It certainly wasn't posted with a view to derailing. It put forward the notion that Trump was behaving like a spoilt child, a view put forward by many respected news media outlets at that time.

This view could be counter-argued, if someone so wished, that far from being the behaviour of a person on the edge, it was in fact, a very deliberate strategy aimed at disrupting the election to such a degree, that an alternative method (vote in House of Representatives) may be forced (this has also been documented by respected media outlets such as The Washington Post.

However, we never got to that stage as my post was deleted and yellow card issued.

I didn't see the earlier thread warning around one-line posts- as I said to the other C mod, my post was a an attempt at thinking out loud, just what exactly was happening in this very strange post-election environment.

If such one line posts are not allowed in Politics, fair enough but it would be good if it's made clearer in the charter - getting a yellow warning card for a post that's not racist, trolling, lying, abusive etc, is a bit much.

Beasty

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Thanks- i read the diagram thingy above this thread as stating if a C mod makes a decision, it's then appealed to an Admin - Happy for Dizzyblonde to take a look.

The Cmod was acting as a mod. Same as when I moderate the CA or Coronavirus forums

Dizzyblonde

PlentyOhToole, I'm afraid I don't see your argument about not seeing the relevant part of the charter and the on-thread warnings as good enough reason to remove the infraction. The charter itself is very clear on the standard of posting required for the forum. So my decision is to leave it in place.

You're entitled to have an Admin look at it now if you like.

Dizzyblonde

Dizzyblonde wrote: »

PlentyOhToole, I'm afraid I don't see your argument about not seeing the relevant part of the charter and the on-thread warnings as good enough reason to remove the infraction. The charter itself is very clear on the standard of posting required for the forum. So my decision is to leave it in place.

You're entitled to have an Admin look at it now if you like.

Yes I’d like that - let’s get the final word since I’ve come this far

hullaballoo

I will review this if that's ok. Please bear with me.

hullaballoo

hullaballoo wrote: »

I will review this if that's ok. Please bear with me.

Take your time I know you’re all busy.

At this point I’m not disputing a “warning” per se- only the fact that a yellow card was issued -if that was the only form of warning available then I’ll accept - I didn’t set out to disrupt the politics forum -just felt a yellow card was harsh but maybe from a practicality perspective this was the only option.

hullaballoo

Hi, I have had a look at this now.

Politics is renowned for being tightly moderated in favour of a level of discussion that is reflected fully in the charter. Any cursory reading of the charter would have put you on notice that glib comments would not be appreciated.

I sympathise somewhat with you because your comment would not in all likelihood received a card anywhere else on the site. However, a yellow card warning is akin to "don't do this again" and not more serious than that. It is the lowest form of sanction that can be applied by mods within the sphere of appealable sanctions.

Just to address some of the specifics you have raised and you will appreciate this is with a view to clarifying the situation rather than arguing a position:

Deleted User wrote: »

Thanks for looking at this.

So a few things here:

While i read the charter previously, I haven't posted that often in Politics, so I'm not that familiar with the standards and culture expected as you outline.

As above, any cursory reading of the charter and indeed the useful pictorial guides to expected standards would show you the benchmark for posts in Politics. Having previously read the charter, you will have been struck at that point by the higher standards applied to discussion in the Politics thread. It can't be a surprise then if you received a warning if you failed to refresh your memory of the charter before posting after a passage of time.

I've looked at the charter this morning and what strikes me, is that it talks a lot about abuse, lying, racism, soapboxing, illegal links etc- the sort of standard stuff charters are made of -it's very long, and buried within the charter, I can now see the following sentence:

"Repeated one liner, low quality style posts will result in a ban."

My posting wasn't "repeated" , and obviously, I'm of a different view to you, as to the quality of my post. It certainly wasn't posted with a view to derailing...However, we never got to that stage as my post was deleted and yellow card issued.

I didn't see the earlier thread warning around one-line posts- as I said to the other C mod, my post was a an attempt at thinking out loud, just what exactly was happening in this very strange post-election environment.

If such one line posts are not allowed in Politics, fair enough but it would be good if it's made clearer in the charter - getting a yellow warning card for a post that's not racist, trolling, lying, abusive etc, is a bit much.

It's difficult to reconcile what you've set out here. Repeated one liner, low quality style posts will result in a ban - this is perfectly in line with what has happened; you received a warning, not a ban, for a one liner, low quality post.

Then you say that you didn't see the mod warning about one-line posts and that it's not clear from the charter - but you have pointed out where it is in the charter.

Again to reiterate that I sympathise with your view that it's not the worst post and might have been well received elsewhere. But Politics is different and the yellow card warning is fair within the style of the Politics forum, terms of the charter and the surrounding mod warning etc.

hullaballoo

hullaballoo wrote: »

Hi, I have had a look at this now.

Politics is renowned for being tightly moderated in favour of a level of discussion that is reflected fully in the charter. Any cursory reading of the charter would have put you on notice that glib comments would not be appreciated.

I sympathise somewhat with you because your comment would not in all likelihood received a card anywhere else on the site. However, a yellow card warning is akin to "don't do this again" and not more serious than that. It is the lowest form of sanction that can be applied by mods within the sphere of appealable sanctions.

Just to address some of the specifics you have raised and you will appreciate this is with a view to clarifying the situation rather than arguing a position:


As above, any cursory reading of the charter and indeed the useful pictorial guides to expected standards would show you the benchmark for posts in Politics. Having previously read the charter, you will have been struck at that point by the higher standards applied to discussion in the Politics thread. It can't be a surprise then if you received a warning if you failed to refresh your memory of the charter before posting after a passage of time.


It's difficult to reconcile what you've set out here. Repeated one liner, low quality style posts will result in a ban - this is perfectly in line with what has happened; you received a warning, not a ban, for a one liner, low quality post.

Then you say that you didn't see the mod warning about one-line posts and that it's not clear from the charter - but you have pointed out where it is in the charter.

Again to reiterate that I sympathise with your view that it's not the worst post and might have been well received elsewhere. But Politics is different and the yellow card warning is fair within the style of the Politics forum, terms of the charter and the surrounding mod warning etc.

Thanks for the comprehensive reply, the time you've taken and indeed the time of the other C mods.
The intention was never to de-rail the thread nor to go against the charter. Obviously politics is a "unique' forum and I can see just how "unique" now.

Happy for this thread to be marked "resolved".