Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

How appellants are treated in DR

13567

Comments

  • #62
    s3rtvdbwfj81ch
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,691 ✭✭✭s3rtvdbwfj81ch


    Steve wrote: »
    No, it's a non issue.
    .
    Beasty wrote: »
    Having noted some of the comments about a current DRP thread I've had a look at that particular appeal and drawn it to a conclusion by overturning the ban given the length of time the appellant had been left waiting

    I would just add though that in all my time as a CMod I don't recall a DRP being left like that for so long. It is certainly not "typical" or "fairly typical" as someone suggested above

    .


    :confused:

    :rolleyes:


  • #63
    droidman123
    Registered Users Posts: 5,389 ✭✭✭droidman123


    Steve wrote: »
    If you are unhappy, you should demand your money back. Oh wait, you did't pay anything to use this site ... maybe the cmods should be docked wages for shoddy voluntary workmanship? How would that work?

    There is a working system of accountability between mods cmods admins and office staff. Sometimes an 'issue' is not worth our time and so is ignored.

    This comment more or less sums up this site and why its a laughing stock


  • #64
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users Posts: 25,396 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    Steve wrote: »
    If you are unhappy, you should demand your money back. Oh wait, you did't pay anything to use this site ... maybe the cmods should be docked wages for shoddy voluntary workmanship? How would that work?

    There is a working system of accountability between mods cmods admins and office staff. Sometimes an 'issue' is not worth our time and so is ignored.

    It's comments like this that really get posters backs up, you have literally insulted a poster and then fobbed off people claiming "an issue is not worth our time".

    It may not seem that way to you but for posters who do not wish to have cards/infractions against there name then it is an issue to them and the professional way to deal with them would be to engage with them and not just decide it's not worth your time and ignore them.


  • #65
    .......
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,057 ✭✭✭.......


    Beasty wrote: »
    It is certainly not "typical" or "fairly typical" as someone suggested above

    The fairly typical was in reference to the mod claiming to have to go through thousands of posts.


  • #66
    .......
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,057 ✭✭✭.......


    Steve wrote: »
    If you are unhappy, you should demand your money back. Oh wait, you did't pay anything to use this site ... maybe the cmods should be docked wages for shoddy voluntary workmanship? How would that work?

    There is a working system of accountability between mods cmods admins and office staff. Sometimes an 'issue' is not worth our time and so is ignored.

    Fairly typical attitude displayed towards the users of the site here also.


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 75,196 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    ....... wrote: »
    The fairly typical was in reference to the mod claiming to have to go through thousands of posts.

    I dealt with over 150 DRPs as a CMod, and never had to, or indeed claimed to, go through that scale of posts, and I've never seen another DRP where a CMod said something like that


  • #68
    .......
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,057 ✭✭✭.......


    Beasty wrote: »
    I dealt with over 150 DRPs as a CMod, and never had to, or indeed claimed to, go through that scale of posts, and I've never seen another DRP where a CMod said something like that

    How would going through 1000s of posts be relevant at all?


  • #69
    Pkiernan
    Registered Users Posts: 4,315 ✭✭✭Pkiernan


    Steve wrote: »
    If you are unhappy, you should demand your money back. Oh wait, you did't pay anything to use this site ... maybe the cmods should be docked wages for shoddy voluntary .....

    That's quite a rude and condescending post.


  • #70
    Scott Tenorman
    Registered Users Posts: 508 ✭✭✭Scott Tenorman


    Steve wrote: »
    If you are unhappy, you should demand your money back. Oh wait, you did't pay anything to use this site ... maybe the cmods should be docked wages for shoddy voluntary workmanship? How would that work?

    There is a working system of accountability between mods cmods admins and office staff. Sometimes an 'issue' is not worth our time and so is ignored.

    Jaysus the mask fairly slipped there! :eek:


  • #71
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 75,196 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    ....... wrote: »
    How would going through 1000s of posts be relevant at all?
    You are the one claiming it's "fairly typical" - I am simply pointing out it is nothing of the sort


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    Dial Hard
    Registered Users Posts: 13,367 ✭✭✭✭Dial Hard


    Beasty wrote: »
    I dealt with over 150 DRPs as a CMod, and never had to, or indeed claimed to, go through that scale of posts, and I've never seen another DRP where a CMod said something like that

    Pretty sure she was referring to this comment: https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=109004313&postcount=11


  • #73
    .......
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,057 ✭✭✭.......


    Beasty wrote: »
    You are the one claiming it's "fairly typical" - I am simply pointing out it is nothing of the sort

    Its a fairly typical attitude and it is fairly typical in DRP to be subjected to such an attitude along with long delays.

    Again I will ask - why would a mod have to go through 1000s of posts?

    Surely a mod action is based on perceived rule break in just one post. I am struggling to understand why a DRP would require going through 1000s of posts?


  • #74
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 75,196 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    ....... wrote: »

    Again I will ask - why would a mod have to go through 1000s of posts?
    I don't know. I have never had to do so. Hence all I can do is speculate. in this case it was in relation to a thread with many thousands of posts in it. maybe the CMod thought they needed to go through the whole thread to familiarise themself with the underlying topic. I will repeat though, that is simply speculation on my part.

    Given we are talking one DRP in the 2,000 or so that have taken place, I think your question is a little disproportionate in this discussion which is Feedback on the process and a perception that users are dealt with badly in DRP. Perhaps you could highlight some other areas of concern rather than returning repeatedly to this one example?


  • #75
    Steve
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 22,584 CMod ✭✭✭✭Steve


    Steve wrote: »
    If you are unhappy, you should demand your money back. Oh wait, you did't pay anything to use this site ... maybe the cmods should be docked wages for shoddy voluntary workmanship? How would that work?

    There is a working system of accountability between mods cmods admins and office staff. Sometimes an 'issue' is not worth our time and so is ignored.

    I apologise for this post, it can be hard to remain stiff upper lipped given that despite years of donating my free time here, all we get is criticism - after a rake of pints on a night out (where leinster pulled a win from nowhere) I think maybe y'all could cut me a bit of slack this time....:)


  • #76
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users Posts: 25,396 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    Steve wrote: »
    I apologise for this post, it can be hard to remain stiff upper lipped given that despite years of donating my free time here, all we get is criticism - after a rake of pints on a night out (where leinster pulled a win from nowhere) I think maybe y'all could cut me a bit of slack this time....:)

    One question for you, would you let a poster use this excuse if they were in DR or even worse boards prison?


  • #77
    s3rtvdbwfj81ch
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,691 ✭✭✭s3rtvdbwfj81ch


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »
    One question for you, would you let a poster use this excuse if they were in DR or even worse boards prison?

    lol of course not.


  • #78
    s3rtvdbwfj81ch
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,691 ✭✭✭s3rtvdbwfj81ch


    Link

    User left for days with Radio Silence, even though, ostensibly, discussion was in fact taking place "in the background".

    Common decency is missing here, why was the simple courtesy of letting the guy know that those discussions were happening not even done? Instead he's left hanging, and to all intents and purposes, ignored.

    Rude at best, and the guy was not rude to begin with.
    Apologies for the (5 DAY) delay, but there was discussion taking place in the background

    The mod has agreed to overturn the card, and I have just removed it from your profile


  • #79
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 75,196 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    Christ! So I'm in trouble for apologising now.

    Guess it's impossible to get any positive feedback from some:confused:


  • #80
    Scott Tenorman
    Registered Users Posts: 508 ✭✭✭Scott Tenorman


    Steve wrote: »
    I apologise for this post, it can be hard to remain stiff upper lipped given that despite years of donating my free time here, all we get is criticism - after a rake of pints on a night out (where leinster pulled a win from nowhere) I think maybe y'all could cut me a bit of slack this time....:)

    Looks like you are apologising for saying out loud what you really think and not for thinking it in the first place.

    All in all a bit of a Gerald Ratner moment


  • #81
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users Posts: 25,396 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    Beasty wrote: »
    Christ! So I'm in trouble for apologising now.

    Guess it's impossible to get any positive feedback from some:confused:

    I dont think that was meant towards you.

    Personally i find you are one of the more (pro)active mods and your apology in that thread shows that you do try to resolve situations.

    That was your one and only post in that thread whereas others who were actually involved in the infraction/thread could have taken 20 seconds to update the appellant as to the chat going on in the background instead of the said 5 days of nothing.


  • Advertisement
  • #82
    FreudianSlippers
    Registered Users Posts: 20,397 ✭✭✭✭FreudianSlippers


    Steve wrote: »
    I apologise for this post, it can be hard to remain stiff upper lipped given that despite years of donating my free time here, all we get is criticism - after a rake of pints on a night out (where leinster pulled a win from nowhere) I think maybe y'all could cut me a bit of slack this time....:)
    I was a mod here for a long time in Legal Discussion and Judges' Chambers (where we effectively doled out free legal advice to boards.ie on difficult posts). Unfortunately, I think a lot of mods act as if they'd prefer that they were moderating empty fora (heavy-handed moderation with excessive and immediate bans) - as if it's such a hassle and sacrifice to moderate; it's really not and if one feels that it is, they should just stop doing it... moderating boards.ie is hardly the most altruistic thing that someone can do.


  • #83
    s3rtvdbwfj81ch
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,691 ✭✭✭s3rtvdbwfj81ch


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »
    I dont think that was meant towards you.

    Personally i find you are one of the more (pro)active mods and your apology in that thread shows that you do try to resolve situations.

    That was your one and only post in that thread whereas others who were actually involved in the infraction/thread could have taken 20 seconds to update the appellant as to the chat going on in the background instead of the said 5 days of nothing.

    yeah but, again, people in certain positions prefer to have a pop at me than address the points raised. It's very obvious what's going on here, again.

    Everything's fine in DRP, and no points of order should be raised, you go on a blacklist that allows constant niggling at you, in the hope you give up and piss off.


  • #84
    dudara
    Registered Users Posts: 33,519 ✭✭✭✭dudara


    Kenzie Uneven Lettuce wrote: »
    Link

    User left for days with Radio Silence, even though, ostensibly, discussion was in fact taking place "in the background".

    Common decency is missing here, why was the simple courtesy of letting the guy know that those discussions were happening not even done? Instead he's left hanging, and to all intents and purposes, ignored.

    Rude at best, and the guy was not rude to begin with.

    I’ll take this one - yes, there was a bit of breakdown there in keeping the user informed, but there was discussion taking place in the background, and I was monitoring to make sure an outcome was reached. Last week was my first week back at work after the Christmas break, and providing interrim updates was not a priority. I was focused instead on trying to get the review wrapped up.


  • #85
    Steve
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 22,584 CMod ✭✭✭✭Steve


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »
    One question for you, would you let a poster use this excuse if they were in DR or even worse boards prison?

    I'll certainly listen to any reasonable argument offered in DR, including one of 'oops, I was a bit drunk when I posted that' (within limits)

    I have no access to or influence over what happens in the prison forum.


  • #86
    El Weirdo
    Registered Users Posts: 11,646 ✭✭✭✭El Weirdo


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »
    One question for you, would you let a poster use this excuse if they were in DR or even worse boards prison?
    Kenzie Uneven Lettuce wrote: »
    lol of course not.

    I've had at least one ban and one warning reversed after explaining that I was drunk posting.


  • #87
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users Posts: 25,396 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    El Weirdo wrote: »
    I've had at least one ban and one warning reversed after explaining that I was drunk posting.

    Fair play, I've seen many people get told that drunk posting is not an excuse and people are responsible for their own actions. I guess you caught the right mod on the right day.


  • #88
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 75,196 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »
    Fair play, I've seen many people get told that drunk posting is not an excuse and people are responsible for their own actions. I guess you caught the right mod on the right day.

    Even picking out examples from the DRP archive (and I can't recall any off the top of my head) there are bound to be other factors considered. Owning up to being drunk is not likely to help if you have a poor record on the forum anyway. Equally a lot of this takes place in the first step of the DRP process and is not visible within the open threads

    Of course it is easy to pick examples to support your view and ignoring those that do not. I would say though, as a long time contributor and observer of the DRP, that the sort of thing that someone like bot42 picks are very carefully chosen and indeed carefully presented to try and get his digs in (and yes I genuinely believe he chose the above example as a personal dig at me - he has a record of doing so in this forum and indeed the Help Desk), forcing the likes of me to highlight this sort of behaviour (as I did above). I've little doubt he'll soon be back claiming victimisation, but as he carefully chooses his examples I'm doing the same here


  • #89
    FreudianSlippers
    Registered Users Posts: 20,397 ✭✭✭✭FreudianSlippers


    El Weirdo wrote: »
    I've had at least one ban and one warning reversed after explaining that I was drunk posting.
    My drunk posts are the good ones - it's the sober ones I get in trouble for... do you think it'd work if I was like "soz, wasn't drunk!"


  • #90
    FreudianSlippers
    Registered Users Posts: 20,397 ✭✭✭✭FreudianSlippers


    Beasty wrote: »
    Owning up to being drunk is not likely to help if you have a poor record on the forum anyway. Equally a lot of this takes place in the first step of the DRP process and is not visible within the open threads

    How long should a "poor record on the forum" be considered? Cards "expire" but they're still visible, bans seem to last forever and are considered no matter what... and "good behaviour" is never considered it seems.


  • Advertisement
  • #91
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 75,196 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    FreudianSlippers wrote: »
    How long should a "poor record on the forum" be considered? Cards "expire" but they're still visible, bans seem to last forever and are considered no matter what... and "good behaviour" is never considered it seems.

    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"


Advertisement