Tribe Forum Moderation

[Urban]

Guys, knock of the stuff that really doesn't have


Disagreement is fine. But if that morphs into a self-appointed quality control police pressuring others not to post because they're not "up to standards", that will not be tolerated.

And on the other end, neither will trolling.

I think you have wildly misinterpreted me if that is your takeaway from my post. If people feel that way, respectfully, that is a direct result from this forum being largely ignored from moderation up until 2 weeks ago.

Happy to have you here though and getting this section in better shape

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

Personal attacks on other posters are not permitted, and that includes implying condescendingly that another poster is mentally ill. The offending party in the 2019 thread has been given a short vacation to contemplate his mistake.

Just try to be decent to each other even when you disagree. Shouldn't be that tough.

 

[BMAN]

.

 

[The Oi]

.

I disagree with this post but I’m going to let it go to set an example

 

[Out of the Rafters at the Q]

http://imgur.com/a/r42R3QS

 

[The Wizard of Moz]

I don’t get it

 

[Out of the Rafters at the Q]

I don’t get it

Eh, I have a problem with people stating unknowns as facts, then shouting down people who call them out on the hypocrisy.

When a mod throws out a 30 day ban over it, then purges the records, I want to make sure it's out there.

The link is also two images--feels like the forum only shows one. Q-Tip taunting "I hear the Upper Peninsula is lovely this time of year. Perhaps you'd like to see for yourself?" is super shitty, no matter what light you want to put it under.

 

[King Stannis]

I don't think starting an argument in the open is the most constructive way to go.

Surely you two can talk over together, in private.

 

[Out of the Rafters at the Q]

I don't think starting an argument in the open is the most constructive way to go.

Surely you two can talk over together, in private.

There's no argument. I don't have anything to say. I just want to keep what he posted on this forum, then deleted along with my post, out there for others.

He banned me from RCF for 30 days over it. I couldn't post, couldn't PM, couldn't read, couldn't engage. Any chance for discussion was lost at that point.

A significant amount of respect was obviously lost as well.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

He banned me from RCF for 30 days over it. I couldn't post, couldn't PM, couldn't read, couldn't engage. Any chance for discussion was lost at that point. A significant amount of respect was obviously lost as well.

As I have explained before, I don't have the authority to ban anyone. All I can do is make a recommendation that is discussed by others who have the power to actually do that. They then look at the thread -- and they can see posts that were deleted -- and make a decision. And the Admins don't rubber stamp those recommendations. So if you or anyone else is suspended or banned from this forum, it is because more people than just myself believed you deserved it.

None of us get paid for any of this -- we do it because websites need moderators and Administrators to try to keep them from going into the toilet. It is a pain in the ass of a job, which is why I have repeatedly tried to offer olive branches to people in here in the hopes that they could police themselves, and make bans/suspensions unnecessary. I also wish to point out that you made zero effort to discuss any of this with me privately first. No PM, nothing. You decided instead to make it public so that I have to take the time to address it regardless of my personal schedule.

In terms of deleting posts, you may have noticed that throughout the site, threads are cleaned up an non-topical/problematic posts are removed so that everyone else can enjoy the website without having to read a bunch of bickering. However, I'll leave your post up in here for a short period as an example (albeit incomplete) of the kind of thing that earns vacations.

Finally, it does not appear that you believe you did anything wrong that resulted in your suspension, which suggests you're going to keep doing the same thing in here moving forward.

 

[Out of the Rafters at the Q]

As I have explained before, I don't have the authority to ban anyone. All I can do is make a recommendation that is discussed by others who have the power to actually do that. They then look at the thread -- and they can see posts that were deleted -- and make a decision. And the Admins don't rubber stamp those recommendations. So if you or anyone else is suspended or banned from this forum, it is because more people than just myself believed you deserved it.

None of us get paid for any of this -- we do it because websites need moderators and Administrators to try to keep them from going into the toilet. It is a pain in the ass of a job, which is why I have repeatedly tried to offer olive branches to people in here in the hopes that they could police themselves, and make bans/suspensions unnecessary. I also wish to point out that you made zero effort to discuss any of this with me privately first. No PM, nothing. You decided instead to make it public so that I have to take the time to address it regardless of my personal schedule.

In terms of deleting posts, you may have noticed that throughout the site, threads are cleaned up an non-topical/problematic posts are removed so that everyone else can enjoy the website without having to read a bunch of bickering. However, I'll leave your post up in here for a short period as an example (albeit incomplete) of the kind of thing that earns vacations.

Finally, it does not appear that you believe you did anything wrong that resulted in your suspension, which suggests you're going to keep doing the same thing in here moving forward.

Thank you for communicating that out. I was unaware.

If you're specifically referring to my rebuttal towards you, no, I do not feel it was in the wrong. Making psychological assumptions you couldn't possibly know, and then stating them as fact, is unacceptable in my book. That's not a value I'm willing to compromise on, and it seems like a point that everyone whose posts are still in that thread agrees with. As Daddywags eloquently put it, if you state "I think they were on cruise control" that's cool. That's an opinion. We can discuss that. If you state "They were on cruise control" that is something you can't possibly know, and is incredibly disrespectful to say about someone else without having any facts to back it up. Can you see that?

I'll use kinder language when expressing ideas moving forward.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

I'm a lawyer by profession, which means I'm paid to craft my words very carefully. However, the vast majority of posters are not. More importantly, even for those of us who can wordsmith when necessary, we don't come to message boards to have every single word picked apart and hyper-analyzed by overly-literally people who lash out at those who don't meet their standard. I certainly don't do that with all of my posts because it would be a huge pain in the ass.

So sure, it's probably more accurate for someone to say "I think they're on cruise control" rather than just "they're on cruise control"...but so what? The "I think" whose omission you deem of such importance is implicit in most of the posts people make here anyway because they're just expressing opinions. Some people are posting quickly on a break, or maybe just on a phone, so they shorthand it rather than type out every last word. We should all be considerate of that rather than becoming offended or angry at literal interpretations of what other people happen to post.

So here's my suggestion for you and everyone else here:

Rather than looking at everyone else's posts and interpreting it in the most critical light possible, how about just taking the general sense of what you believe they're trying to get at, and just addressing that in a friendly, or at least non-aggressive manner? That's a courtesy most of us grant to people whom we encounter in everyday life, so why not do it here as well?

Now, to the extent you disagree with that as "a value I'm not willing to compromise on", I suggest you may want to rethink that position in terms of continued posting in this forum, and on RCF in general.

I'll use kinder language when expressing ideas moving forward.

Great! And that's good advice for everyone moving forward.

 

[Out of the Rafters at the Q]

I'm glad you posted that because it gives me a chance to make a point that is incredibly important when it comes to posting on message boards in general. And it also happens to be directly relevant to things that have happened in this forum, and in RCF more generally.

I'm a lawyer by profession, which means I'm paid to craft my words very carefully. However, the vast majority of posters are not. More importantly, even for those of us who can wordsmith when necessary, we don't come to message boards to have every single word picked apart and hyper-analyzed by overly-literally people who lash out at those who don't meet their standard. I certainly don't do that with all of my posts because it would be a huge pain in the ass.

So sure, it's probably more accurate to say "I think they're on cruise control" rather than just "they're on cruise control"...but so what? The "I think" whose omission you deem of such importance is implicit in most of the posts people make here anyway because they're just expressing opinions. Some people are posting quickly on a break, or maybe just on a phone, so they shorthand it rather than type out every last word. We should all be considerate of that rather than becoming offended or angry at literal interpretations of what other people happen to post.

So here's my suggestion for you and everyone else here:

Rather than looking at everyone else's posts and interpreting it in the most critical light possible, how about just taking the general sense of what you believe they're trying to get at, and just addressing that in a friendly, or at least non-aggressive manner? That's a courtesy more of us grant to people whom we encounter in everyday life, so why not do it here as well?

Now, to the extent you disagree with that as "a value I'm not willing to compromise on", I suggest you may want to rethink that position in terms of continued posting in this forum, and on RCF in general.

I'm sure you'd agree that the things you say are important.

When someone states "They were on cruise control," I don't agree that it's something that everyone should interpret to mean something else. When bad arguments go unchallenged, then they stand and earn credibility.

If someone puts down something that's blatantly false, I would expect that point to be brought up and challenged. If the response is that the individual did not mean what he actually wrote, then cool. All parties have come to an understanding and we move forward. That's a perfectly fine discourse to have.

Am I off base here?

I'll rethink that position, but only to reaffirm it. Things that are not facts should not be stated as facts. I'm struggling to see how someone is willing to take an opposing view to that.

Moving forward, contentions will probably come from me less. It just feels like an uphill battle--when discourse and debate shouldn't even be a battle at all.

 

[Chris]

I'm glad you posted that because it gives me a chance to make a point that is incredibly important when it comes to posting on message boards in general. And it also happens to be directly relevant to things that have happened in this forum, and in RCF more generally.

I'm a lawyer by profession, which means I'm paid to craft my words very carefully. However, the vast majority of posters are not. More importantly, even for those of us who can wordsmith when necessary, we don't come to message boards to have every single word picked apart and hyper-analyzed by overly-literally people who lash out at those who don't meet their standard. I certainly don't do that because it would be a huge pain in the ass.

So sure, it's probably more accurate to say "I think they're on cruise control" rather than just "they're on cruise control"...but so what? The "I think" whose omission you deem of such importance is implicit in most of the posts people make here anyway because they're just expressing opinions. Some people are posting quickly on a break, or maybe just on a phone, so they shorthand it rather than type out every last word. We should all be considerate of that rather than becoming offended or angry at literal interpretations of what other people happen to post.

So here's my suggestion for you and everyone else here:

Rather than looking at everyone else's posts and interpreting it in the most critical light possible, how about just taking the general sense of what you believe they're trying to get at, and just addressing that in a friendly, or at least non-aggressive manner? That's a courtesy more of us grant to people whom we encounter in everyday life, so why not do it here as well?

Now, to the extent you disagree with that as "a value I'm not willing to compromise on", I suggest you may want to rethink that position in terms of continued posting in this forum, and on RCF in general.



Great! And that's good advice for everyone moving forward.

Thank you. Been trying to make this point (your second paragraph) forever and finally just gave up. Can’t believe it took a lawyer finally.