OT Rules of pissy behaviour...

[Fandango 1,440]

I've been gone too long...####### is a ticket? lol

[English Muffin 59]

StillThePrettiest has managed to say exactly what I wanted to - in a way much better than I ever could.

[English Muffin 59]

I've been gone too long...####### is a ticket? lol

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...9&hl=ticket

[Captain Ewok 1,932]

Folks, what member are we talking about that was suspended. Can you also link to the thread so I can more rapidly review what happened. I can not find a record of any suspensions on the people I "think" you are talking about so I want to make sure I am researching the right stuff.

[English Muffin 59]

This is the thread in question. http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=227944

This is the member who was suspended. http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.php?showuser=39807

[Captain Ewok 1,932]

This is the thread in question. http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=227944

This is the member who was suspended. http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.php?showuser=39807

Their account has never been suspended by a moderator. After several members reported a trend of activity (five various people in three days -- and several more (7) in the past -- I just searched my email history) that was potentially skirting the TOS over a long period of time, I placed their account review for two days as I skimmed over nearly six months of posts. I requested confirmation of their understanding of the TOS and that they would abide by it and closed the review. They have no official dings on their record so any future accounts will be treated as a first time offense. They have told me that they will understand the TOS and will not instigate, pick or target any member (in general follow the TOS). I will take them at their word unless they break it. Any speculation that a moderator suspended them is wrong or being used to incorrectly support an issue.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

... I placed their account review for two days...

During this review period, was the poster unable to post?

[Captain Ewok 1,932]

During this review period, was the poster unable to post?

Correct. I will not pull punches on this. If I get a series of serious of reports over a period of time that a member has had an ongoing trend and is escalating I will temporarily place an account on hold while I review items. The review took longer than I anticipated (24-36 hours) as I was on a plane flight for about 18 hours of that plus needing sleep. I regret that extended period of time as I tried to review items via the airport but ran short of time. Unfortunately there is no wifi over many oceans. I know you may call this a suspension, but it was not. Their account has no history to base any future actions on (meaning any offense is a first time one). Additionally they are not on my 'watch list' per say unless they break the TOS.

[Captain Ewok 1,932]

I should add, my review did show some trends of behavior that were alerting. For now I directly confirmed with the member that they will follow the TOS so their word is good enough unless they break it.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

I should add, my review did show some trends of behavior that were alerting. For now I directly confirmed with the member that they will follow the TOS so their word is good enough unless they break it.

I'm actually somewhat surprised by this. You've used terms like "potentially skirting the TOS over a long period of time". If there hasn't been clear violations don't you think that placing a user under review is heavy handed? Whether "internally" being under review is not equal to a suspension, to the user it is one and the same.

[scandal 951]

Don't Exist Only in the Off Topic Forum! Venture out into the general forums and contribute when you can (especially if you have personal experience or knowledge that may help others)!

Woah. So now there's going to be a quota system of how many upper forum postings were supposed to make in order to be good VJ citizens?

I don't visit the upper forums any longer. They bore the ####### out of me. Just saying.

Spewing pointed rants against a particular race, country, religion, or political group is not allowed.

Does that include the USA? If a hypothetical poster should rag on and on endlessly about how horrible the USA is, how degraded and dysfunctional and ghettoized it has become, is that acceptable OT behavior? Or does this policy extend to and include the USA? (Rhetorical. I'm sure you mean the latter, not that former.)

When talking it is not necessary to have have every other word a four letter word. Casual and infrequent use of foul language is common in the real world and not prohibited (in context). Using foul language "just to use it" or to be a "jerk" begins to cross that gray Off-Topic line. Be sensible!

Fuсk that sнit.

Be Kind! No one here is or needs to be Mr. Rogers, but there is a difference between a disagreement and just being a jerk. Constructive criticism is expected on public forums -- try to be respectful.

Fuсk that sнit.

No nudity or sexual photos. If it is more risky (or illegal) than something you would see on a typical beach in the US then it is probably not allowed.

What about bodacious body paint on an nude woman?

[Captain Ewok 1,932]

I'm actually somewhat surprised by this. You've used terms like "potentially skirting the TOS over a long period of time". If there hasn't been clear violations don't you think that placing a user under review is heavy handed? Whether "internally" being under review is not equal to a suspension, to the user it is one and the same.

I did an initial review and saw several instances in the past that could have resulted in a suspension that were not. After that I placed the account on review to dig deeper.

[*julez* 124]

Correct. I will not pull punches on this. If I get a series of serious of reports over a period of time that a member has had an ongoing trend and is escalating I will temporarily place an account on hold while I review items. The review took longer than I anticipated (24-36 hours) as I was on a plane flight for about 18 hours of that plus needing sleep. I regret that extended period of time as I tried to review items via the airport but ran short of time. Unfortunately there is no wifi over many oceans. I know you may call this a suspension, but it was not. Their account has no history to base any future actions on (meaning any offense is a first time one). Additionally they are not on my 'watch list' per say unless they break the TOS.

If this were true, Charles' account would be under review almost constantly. Off topic supposedly has looser TOS. The Ovaltine Jenkins incident is a great example of how there is no consistency in modding OT. You take seriously complaints where one of the OT playground regs feewings got hurt, but ignore the vociferous minority who actually care about the quality of VJ as a whole when legitimate concerns are raised. Utterly pathetic. But sadly this is now the norm for VJ.

[Captain Ewok 1,932]

If this were true, Charles' account would be under review almost constantly. Off topic supposedly has looser TOS. The Ovaltine Jenkins incident is a great example of how there is no consistency in modding OT. You take seriously complaints where one of the OT playground regs feewings got hurt, but ignore the vociferous minority who actually care about the quality of VJ as a whole when legitimate concerns are raised. Utterly pathetic. But sadly this is now the norm for VJ.

The post history was assessed in all forums for this member -- not OT specifically. I found many examples of issues outside of OT.

[*julez* 124]

The post history was assessed in all forums for this member -- not OT specifically. I found many examples of issues outside of OT.

I'm sure the same would apply to charles if you performed a similar evaluation. In fact, I'm positive his offensiveness is far more egregious over a much longer period of time, and yet he was made a dep mod. Sorry, Ewok, but your judgement is really off. I'm afraid you are no longer able to be objective when it comes to Charles.