Basic manners, keyboard warriors etc

[Barcon]

Holy precious cunts Batman.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Sounds fun, what happened to Colin?

How do you think I became a mod?

 

[GresleyChris]

I Don't like commenting on this childish bickering but to balance it a little I've said some right shit on this forum and been warned.
I've been anti-Semitic, and PB warned me, I threatened to fight somebody and I was reported.

I've been vulgar and held my hands up, accepted I had been in the wrong and tried to change my attitude.

End of the day we're in these lads Manor, it's their website so what they say goes.

So if you have been banned in the past you must have said some right crazy shit to get a ban as the Mods here are very laid back in comparison with the countless other forums I've been on over the years.

Appreciate this place.

I agree with that Ste and you are right, most people on reflection can hold there hands up and admit they were wrong when warned or banned.

The only issue and I think it's gotten lost is that no one is really calling into question the moderation or standard thereof. The issue is more the posts that moderators make.

It's important to differentiate between the two and although it's cloudy and near on impossible for a moderator to seperate their online persona two ways, there is plenty of reason to question certain moderators posts and posting styles and this is what brings CoC violations and other debatable points into the argument.

It's equally wrong for mods, Damocles in this instance, and see it as an attack on his moderating and issue threats that are for "mod abuse" when really his posts are up for as much scrutiny as anyone else's and should be vetted accordingly.

I know it's impossible but in reality the only way is to have moderators who don't post themselves. Because this is an impossibility then I'm afraid moderators dubious posts will always sail close to hypocrisy and question will always be asked.

 

[aguero93:20]

really his posts are up for as much scrutiny as anyone else's and should be vetted accordingly.

They're up for scrutiny by Ric though, not by regular users. You missed that bit.

 

[Damocles]

I agree with that Ste and you are right, most people on reflection can hold there hands up and admit they were wrong when warned or banned.

The only issue and I think it's gotten lost is that no one is really calling into question the moderation or standard thereof. The issue is more the posts that moderators make.

It's important to differentiate between the two and although it's cloudy and near on impossible for a moderator to seperate their online persona two ways, there is plenty of reason to question certain moderators posts and posting styles and this is what brings CoC violations and other debatable points into the argument.

It's equally wrong for mods, Damocles in this instance, and see it as an attack on his moderating and issue threats that are for "mod abuse" when really his posts are up for as much scrutiny as anyone else's and should be vetted accordingly.

I know it's impossible but in reality the only way is to have moderators who don't post themselves. Because this is an impossibility then I'm afraid moderators dubious posts will always sail close to hypocrisy and question will always be asked.

They are vetted accordingly.

The only difference between yours and my posts is that for volunteering for the often full time job of keeping this site running we get to have a bunch of people call us cunts all the time and say everything is ruined when we post something that they disagree with. You just have to put up with us mildly tutting at you when you write something that goes against the rules.

Our posts are not up for as much scrutiny as anybody else's, they're up for one billion times the scrutiny of anybody else's. So the only sane way to deal with this is to completely ignore it and let people report things they think violate the CoC.

All of you people laying the boot in to mod posting here, have any one of you EVER actually reported a mod's post? The only people who ever do this generally are happy with the process.

If you don't want to be part of the process then save us your pontifications on it based in the hypothetical. If you do then report things and see the process in action yourselves.

 

[GresleyChris]

They're up for scrutiny by Ric though, not by regular users. You missed that bit.

Not the regular posts.

 

[GresleyChris]

They are vetted accordingly.

The only difference between yours and my posts is that for volunteering for the often full time job of keeping this site running we get to have a bunch of people call us cunts all the time and say everything is ruined when we post something that they disagree with. You just have to put up with us mildly tutting at you when you write something that goes against the rules.

Our posts are not up for as much scrutiny as anybody else's, they're up for one billion times the scrutiny of anybody else's. So the only sane way to deal with this is to completely ignore it and let people report things they think violate the CoC.

All of you people laying the boot in to mod posting here, have any one of you EVER actually reported a mod's post? The only people who ever do this generally are happy with the process.

If you don't want to be part of the process then save us your pontifications on it based in the hypothetical. If you do then report things and see the process in action yourselves.

But most people are willing to let things and they become irrelevant quickly so it's no surprise not a lot gets reported in general and certainly no surprise yours or other admin's posts don't get reported.

Point is, when others then have posts pulled or warnings issued for similar, the hypocrisy of the situation brings those posts back into relevance.

 

[Damocles]

Point is, when others then have posts pulled or warnings issued for similar, the hypocrisy of the situation brings those posts back into relevance.

But it's not hypocrisy because no two posting offences are EVER the same and this comparison that people desperately try to draw between them is ALWAYS wrong once you look into it. Every single time, without exception.

As I explain earlier, we don't moderate collections of letters we moderate context.

 

[aguero93:20]

But most people are willing to let things and they become irrelevant quickly so it's no surprise not a lot gets reported in general and certainly no surprise yours or other admin's posts don't get reported.

Point is, when others then have posts pulled or warnings issued for similar, the hypocrisy of the situation brings those posts back into relevance.

Have you ever reported any of the mod's posts?

 

[Why Always Ste]

I agree with that Ste and you are right, most people on reflection can hold there hands up and admit they were wrong when warned or banned.

The only issue and I think it's gotten lost is that no one is really calling into question the moderation or standard thereof. The issue is more the posts that moderators make.

It's important to differentiate between the two and although it's cloudy and near on impossible for a moderator to seperate their online persona two ways, there is plenty of reason to question certain moderators posts and posting styles and this is what brings CoC violations and other debatable points into the argument.

It's equally wrong for mods, Damocles in this instance, and see it as an attack on his moderating and issue threats that are for "mod abuse" when really his posts are up for as much scrutiny as anyone else's and should be vetted accordingly.

I know it's impossible but in reality the only way is to have moderators who don't post themselves. Because this is an impossibility then I'm afraid moderators dubious posts will always sail close to hypocrisy and question will always be asked.

I see your point.
I mean take "real life" as an example... I've seen serving Police Officers, Judges and so on behaving stupidly when drunk and disorderly, taking drugs and the rest of it like people in society do.
Yet in their working day they are upholding the law, charging people with crimes they themselves have committed and yes it is hypocritical - but i'd much rather at least somebody there policing the community rather than total anarchy with nobody moderating anything.