Captain Ewok - an idea to help with moderation

[Ban Hammer 12,842]

LOL, c'mon man... if we wanted to hijack that thread (and the info therein was good), we could have been meaner.

But it was your thread so no spilt milk.

the partisan rhetoric on both of your parts was unnecessary. rather than discuss the topic, both of you hijacked it with partisan remarks. what could have been an interesting discussion went down the tubes. thanks for nothing.

[HAL 9000 96]

the partisan rhetoric on both of your parts was unnecessary. rather than discuss the topic, both of you hijacked it with partisan remarks. what could have been an interesting discussion went down the tubes. thanks for nothing.

Lets remember to be consistent when, say... someone gets all hysterical about the Democrats or Republicans in any thread.

Have some chocolate Chuck. Like I said... I did mention something about the merits of having some additional security properly addressing the matter... that was ignored. Lets not cherry pick posts... nevertheless, like I said... it was your thread and I'm sorry if you're not having a great day.

[Ban Hammer 12,842]

Lets remember to be consistent when, say... someone gets all hysterical about the Democrats or Republicans in any thread.

Have some chocolate Chuck. Like I said... I did mention something about the merits of having some additional security properly addressing the matter... that was ignored. Lets not cherry pick posts... nevertheless, like I said... it was your thread and I'm sorry if you're not having a great day.

that in bold was the first post, the other 3 by you was a partisan heckle and jeckle act by you and aj. 25% on topic isn't what i had in mind with that thread.

[Kathryn41 3,205]

Let's not hijack this thread, ok - this is to recognize El Buscador's great idea. I wanted to add that I really enjoyed the link to the "Jail thread' for the investors' forum . I would love it if we could 'borrow' this post for here

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=44101015

[HAL 9000 96]

that in bold was the first post, the other 3 by you was a partisan heckle and jeckle act by you and aj. 25% on topic isn't what i had in mind with that thread.

like I said... sooooowy.

I don't think I've ever read you so sensitive before. I also get sick of having other posters inject retarded commentary that goes way beyond jest, and I don't see the same level of sensitivity from most posters.

Sorry guys, for butting in that drama in this thread. End of discussion for me and back to congratulating Steve for his excellent idea. I see it already has produced a healthier debate in OT and the more vitriolic and consistently ill-natured folks have bit their fingers a bit more before posting their usual senselessness.

[The_Dude 1,142]

I think what the moderation team needs most of all is consistency and unambiguous enforcement of the ToS. I recently received a ban because I flamed another poster who had posted a racist and bigoted political rumor that was patently false. Yes, I called him an ignorant bigot, and yes, I said that he was academically lazy for posting unverified drivel that as it turns out is a blatant falsehood. I don't disagree with my suspension, I did use colorful language and call someone ignorant. But I think insults pale in comparison to racism and bigoted falsehoods. My complaint is that I get a 2 day ban, and the poster who regularly posts bigoted posts has been posting merrily the last two days.

So what can I surmise from this set of circumstances? Well, the only conclusion that I can draw is that in the eyes of VJ, and Kathryn in particular, calling someone who posts racist matter an ignorant bigot when he does so, is a far worse offense than actually posting racist material. Nice.

[TBoneTX 43,064]

what could have been an interesting discussion went down the tubes. thanks for nothing.

Agreed 100%. I might have had something to contribute to that thread, but it was already closed when I found it. Thanks anyway to Charles for posting something of interest that I hadn't seen elsewhere.

[Jenn! 918]

I think what the moderation team needs most of all is consistency and unambiguous enforcement of the ToS. I recently received a ban because I flamed another poster who had posted a racist and bigoted political rumor that was patently false. Yes, I called him an ignorant bigot, and yes, I said that he was academically lazy for posting unverified drivel that as it turns out is a blatant falsehood. I don't disagree with my suspension, I did use colorful language and call someone ignorant. But I think insults pale in comparison to racism and bigoted falsehoods. My complaint is that I get a 2 day ban, and the poster who regularly posts bigoted posts has been posting merrily the last two days.

So what can I surmise from this set of circumstances? Well, the only conclusion that I can draw is that in the eyes of VJ, and Kathryn in particular, calling someone who posts racist matter an ignorant bigot when he does so, is a far worse offense than actually posting racist material. Nice.

I don't know what it is you actually said and to whom, but the problem is that personal attacks are much easier to identify. They are clear cut and there is little to argue about. "Racist matter" is not so clear cut. Like I've mentioned before, half of what I hear on talk radio and Fox News I would consider "racist matter", but a good proportion of the population would disagree. That doesn't mean that it's not racist. What it does mean is that a VJ moderator trying to curb that sort of posting will inevitably be accused of having a liberal bias.

So you shouldn't conclude that Kathryn thinks that your offense is worse. It's just easier to mdoerate.

I do think it's unfortunate that things are this way. But prohibiting what you and I think is "racist matter" would prevent a pretty significant part of the VJ population from posting, and you know the admin doesn't want that.

[William33 110]

I think what the moderation team needs most of all is consistency and unambiguous enforcement of the ToS. I recently received a ban because I flamed another poster who had posted a racist and bigoted political rumor that was patently false. Yes, I called him an ignorant bigot, and yes, I said that he was academically lazy for posting unverified drivel that as it turns out is a blatant falsehood. I don't disagree with my suspension, I did use colorful language and call someone ignorant. But I think insults pale in comparison to racism and bigoted falsehoods. My complaint is that I get a 2 day ban, and the poster who regularly posts bigoted posts has been posting merrily the last two days.

So what can I surmise from this set of circumstances? Well, the only conclusion that I can draw is that in the eyes of VJ, and Kathryn in particular, calling someone who posts racist matter an ignorant bigot when he does so, is a far worse offense than actually posting racist material. Nice.

Rob,

For clarification, I issued the suspension, not Kathryn.

[HAL 9000 96]

Rob-

As Jenn points out... racism is easier to wrap up into arguments that are not as blatantly obvious as a personal attack. My suggestion is to get your point across so as to expose certain people for what they really are. It really isn't that hard to not be disagreeable...

[^_^ 5,021]

What it does mean is that a VJ moderator trying to curb that sort of posting will inevitably be accused of having a liberal bias.

Tolerance has become a 'liberal value'. We live in interesting times.

[Ban Hammer 12,842]

Tolerance has become a 'liberal value'. We live in interesting times.

just like everyone who's bigoted is a rwn.

[^_^ 5,021]

Rob,

For clarification, I issued the suspension, not Kathryn.

May I ask a follow up question without being accused of baiting?

You considered his offense (flaming a racist) worthy of a suspension while one of your peers did not consider the other posters racism (she deleted the posts, so she agrees that they were racist) worthy of suspension. Do you see why those of us "on the outside" wonder about moderator consistency? It seems to us "on the outside" that some moderators are more likely than others to suspend. I hope you can see why we'd think that, given the lack of information from the moderation team to help us believe otherwise.

just like everyone who's bigoted is a rwn.

I don't think I've ever said that. There are lots of bigots on the left.

But when we reach the point where equating Islam to terrorism becomes so "normal" that to call those who say it bigots is deemed outrageous (when they clearly are)... we have a problem.

Oh, and congrats Steven. I do recognize this is still your thread

Edited August 20, 2010 by Legacy member

[Ban Hammer 12,842]

didn't mean to imply that you had said that - but it sure seems to be common perception nowadays.

[^_^ 5,021]

didn't mean to imply that you had said that - but it sure seems to be common perception nowadays.

The bigots on the right are making a lot more noise right now. Most of the bigotry we see in the media today is from the right. Maybe it's because they're in the opposition. We all remember BDS, derangement is a common symptom of electoral dysfunction.