Boards.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more x
Post Reply  
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
27-07-2018, 12:38   #16
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 8,933
This post has been deleted.
....... is offline  
Advertisement
27-07-2018, 13:24   #17
LoLth
Special
 
LoLth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 1998
Posts: 9,826
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Nal View Post

But hey, this is a place who banned all talk of MCD gigs once and banned users for discussing it. Open internet forum apparently.
that was on the back of legal advice.

Despite the big banner asking users not to discuss this, some continued to do so. Users were banned for discussing MCD. they were not banned for questioning the ban on discussion (not that i can recall, I was not an admin at the time).
LoLth is offline  
Thanks from:
13-09-2018, 09:38   #18
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,585
Hi all,

Related content that I've seen.

I think it's inherently unfair for Mods/Cmods/Admins/Staff to be bringing up successfully appealed sanctions when passing judgement on a situation which a user is trying to get looked at.

Link

Quote:
During the past 2 months alone you have made 61 posts in the Manchester United Superthreads, and in doing so you have picked up 4 yellow cards plus a ban. Another ban was overturned in the DRP

Your red card was subsequently reduced to a yellow, basically giving you the benefit of any doubt. That resulted in the ban referred to above being overturned. I think you were very lucky to get that result
This type of thing undermines the whole appeal process, basically stating that even if an appeal is successful sure we can still bring up the incident and throw it in your face if we feel like it.

Either an appeal is successful, or it isn't. If it is then there's no way it's fair to bring it up when looking at subsequent sanctions.
Kenzie Uneven Lettuce is offline  
13-09-2018, 09:53   #19
Beasty
Administrator
 
Beasty's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 35,195
It was not an appeal within the DRP as the DRP does not deal with thread bans. I had moved it to Help Desk where the DRP rules do not apply and, in theory, anyone can input
Beasty is offline  
13-09-2018, 14:49   #20
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,585
yeah, thanks for not addressing the points made

standard.
Kenzie Uneven Lettuce is offline  
Advertisement
13-09-2018, 17:57   #21
Beasty
Administrator
 
Beasty's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 35,195
I have been discussing this with other Admins, and accept your points are valid

I would just add that in this case I do not consider it would have changed my conclusion, but agree those particular examples were not appropriate to support my reasoning
Beasty is offline  
(2) thanks from:
13-09-2018, 20:24   #22
end of the road
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 23,365
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beasty View Post
It was not an appeal within the DRP as the DRP does not deal with thread bans. I had moved it to Help Desk where the DRP rules do not apply and, in theory, anyone can input
why are thread banns not dealt with in the drp out of interest? they would surely operate along the same lines and disputing them would operate along the same lines as well?
would there be scope to change this? i personally think so.
end of the road is offline  
13-09-2018, 20:40   #23
Beasty
Administrator
 
Beasty's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 35,195
Quote:
Originally Posted by end of the road View Post
why are thread banns not dealt with in the drp out of interest? they would surely operate along the same lines and disputing them would operate along the same lines as well?
would there be scope to change this? i personally think so.
DRP was only ever set up to deal with sanctions that were visible on a user's "record", i.e. cards and forum bans.

There remains an avenue to request thread bans to be overturned, but that involves attempting to resolve it directly with the mod and then a CMod, before starting a thread in Help Desk.

Thread bans usually have quite a finite life as most threads in which they are applied will naturally reach an end reasonably quickly.

It is different in Soccer, where thread bans are being issued following discussions in this year's feedback thread. The main difference is that team Superthreads can last for an extended period (in some cases a number of years), or in the case of a couple of clubs can turn over in a matter of weeks. In most cases I would expect local mods to review such bans after a period and if the poster has shown better behaviour elsewhere and gives assurances over future behaviour in the relevant threadthey may consider lifting the thread ban
Beasty is offline  
Thanks from:
14-09-2018, 02:17   #24
Canis Lupus
Registered User
 
Canis Lupus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 9,255
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenzie Uneven Lettuce View Post
Hi all,

Related content that I've seen.

I think it's inherently unfair for Mods/Cmods/Admins/Staff to be bringing up successfully appealed sanctions when passing judgement on a situation which a user is trying to get looked at.

Link



This type of thing undermines the whole appeal process, basically stating that even if an appeal is successful sure we can still bring up the incident and throw it in your face if we feel like it.

Either an appeal is successful, or it isn't. If it is then there's no way it's fair to bring it up when looking at subsequent sanctions.
Not sure it's that black and white. Everyone has a different take on a given matter. One mod action appears harsh to another mod but another mod might think an action isn't severe enough. If his first mod action was overturned because he was given a chance and then goes on to get a further 4 yellows and a ban in 2 months then I think it's relevant to take overturned history (if it relates to the same issue) into account.

Last edited by Boards.ie: David; 20-07-2019 at 15:34.
Canis Lupus is offline  
Advertisement
02-01-2019, 08:14   #25
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,585
Ho hum.

Look at this post

User is appealing a 3-day ban that had already expired by the time anyone had the time to look at the appeal, how convenient.

Anyway, is it really ok for a CMod/Admin/Staff to go rooting through the appellants post history to find the most tenuous thing they can find to have a go at the appellant about?

Quote:
I see you have a bit of a history in the last month or so with one-liners and throwaway comments. I mean posts like this are not ok
The post referenced was three weeks(!) before the CMod post, and as far as I can see was not actioned by any moderator in the intervening period - this is grossly unfair to be dragging up unrelated posts by the user in an attempt to paint them as troublemakers just for having the temerity to raise a DRP.

Again, the whole process is stacked against the appellant if CMods can do this, and oftentimes if an appellant does the same thing (point to a GOOD posting history int he forum), it is immediately shot down as irrelevant to the current action and review.

It's having mod cake and eating it really - a CMod referencing an innocuous, un-actioned post from weeks previous doesn't seem kosher, when if a user did the same, they'd be told they are wasting time.
Kenzie Uneven Lettuce is offline  
Thanks from:
02-01-2019, 10:08   #26
The Hill Billy
Prick, with a fork
 
The Hill Billy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 19,934
While not commenting on a specific appeal, what has most likely happened in a case like this is that a poster's behaviour has been noted in a mod thread. Something along the likes of "Xxxxx has been making a lot of yyy-type comments of late." Co-mod responds "Don't action now, but if it carries on it will have to be sorted."

Chats like that would come up as part of a CMod investigation into an appeal.

No digging, no probing, no nastiness, nothing underhand at all. But you know that. You've been a mod.

Unless of course you behaved differently, & now just assume that all other mods do too.
The Hill Billy is offline  
02-01-2019, 10:40   #27
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,585
The point is though, that it's unfair to bring this up as part of an appeal process where the user has zero prior clue that they are being "watched" and have not been "warned" or carded, either on-thread or in private, when that post has nothing to do with the appeal at hand, and especially when if an appellant tried to bring other posts into the equation, then they are usually told that only the post in question is relevant in any appeal.

I once again note that the go-to response from an admin is to

1. dismiss the point as if everything is rosy and nothing could ever be wrong with Boards.ie
2. obfuscate with non-relevant nonsense
3. try to belittle me personally for daring to put my head above the parapet.

At least here it's not censored like my post of a few days ago in the pre-modded forum.
Kenzie Uneven Lettuce is offline  
(3) thanks from:
02-01-2019, 10:52   #28
The Hill Billy
Prick, with a fork
 
The Hill Billy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 19,934
I've put out a couple of likely explanations for CMod behaviour in the DR Appeal & yours on the site in general - that's all.

I gotta hand it to you though. You really have a most magnificent way in which you can twist things almost beyond all recognition. Bravo!
The Hill Billy is offline  
Thanks from:
02-01-2019, 11:03   #29
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,585
Yet again, ignoring the point to have a pop, well done.

Have you absolutely no comment to make on the point that when appellants bring up "other" posts they are deemed an irrelevance, but CMods/Admin/Staff can do it whenever they feel like?

If you, and others in the heirarchy, are going to continue to refer to my "behaviour...on the site in general", can you let me know what my behaviour in the 2.5 years since this account has been active is causing the most concern?

My posts in this thread is it? Or other times where I've posted respectfully and get hounded by the likes of you? Is there something I should be doing differently on this site, on this account, in the time I've been posting under this profile?

Or can you let me know how long the likes of you are going to hold onto that grudge for?
Kenzie Uneven Lettuce is offline  
Thanks from:
02-01-2019, 11:09   #30
dudara
Administrator
 
dudara's Avatar
The poster in question received a 3 day ban on foot of a previous one day ban. This was part of escalating mod action as the poster was failing to take heed of previous warnings. In this context, it’s perfectly valid to examine their previous posts to understand if the 3 day ban was warranted.

You are making a mountain out of a molehill here IMO.
dudara is offline  
Thanks from:
Post Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Remove Text Formatting
Bold
Italic
Underline

Insert Image
Wrap [QUOTE] tags around selected text
 
Decrease Size
Increase Size
Please sign up or log in to join the discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



Share Tweet