Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 86 (8943 total)
27 online now:
Newest Member: LaLa dawn
Post Volume: Total: 863,988 Year: 19,024/19,786 Month: 1,444/1,705 Week: 250/446 Day: 48/98 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures 11.0
Omnivorous
Member (Idle past 1258 days)
Posts: 3808
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005


Message 241 of 304 (414121)
08-02-2007 8:46 PM


Itchy Trigger Finger?
The recent 24 hour suspension of brenna and spidey for being too chatty seems a bit much, esp. without any moderator warning.

They were, after all, discussing the difficulties of dealing with a specific creationist in the context of a topic concerning what makes a good creationist interlocutor.

You can find a dozen examples of chat in the current top ten topics, but no suspensions for it.

Was there something peculiarly odious about this instance?

Edited by Omnivorous, : No reason given.


Real things always push back.
-William James

Save lives! Click here!
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC!
---------------------------------------


  
jar
Member
Posts: 31519
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 242 of 304 (414123)
08-02-2007 8:50 PM


Moose really losing it re: spidey and brenna
Well, Moose, I read their posts in that thread and they were all dealing with the subject matter of the topic. Sorry but I see no chatlining unless you think actually responding to someone is a chat.


Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Replies to this message:
 Message 243 by Adminnemooseus, posted 08-02-2007 9:13 PM jar has responded

Adminnemooseus
Director
Posts: 3896
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 243 of 304 (414127)
08-02-2007 9:13 PM
Reply to: Message 242 by jar
08-02-2007 8:50 PM


Re: Moose really losing it re: spidey and brenna
B, message 13:

also, i'd like to point out again that we have banned our most articulate vocal creationist -- faith. i know there's bad blood with the mods, but i still don't think banning her normal account was in good taste. i still say we let her back.

considering popular opinion, probably. but jesus someone needs to block her posts from my screen.

A, message 15:

considering popular opinion, probably. but jesus someone needs to block her posts from my screen.

you neither have to read nor post here. nor does anyone.

B, message 17:

no. but it's so hard to resist replying to her even though i know how it always results.

A, message 18:

no. but it's so hard to resist replying to her even though i know how it always results.

agreed, your actions in response are not a good reason to prevent someone else from doing something.

B, message 19:

i agree and in fact my statements above demonstrated this. but, someone needs to tell me how to block specific input on my monitor lol.

it was a joke, get it.

A, message 20:

yes, dear, but it's also a very serious point. banning people because we don't like what they have to say or are tired of dealing with them isn't a good thing -- and i think that was the reason she was banned.

B, message 21:

yes.

but i think the question was whether what she had to say amounted to abuse or not. but i guess it never really did because it was always in conversation and never an unsolicited attack. maybe. i dunno. i think i blocked it out.

You're calling this quality on-topic debate? I certainly don't. And A and B have a history of such behavior. Especially B, maybe not so much A.

Others chipped in a bit also, but A and B were the catalysts and main participants.

I was going to make it a 6 hour suspension, but neither are currently on line, making a short suspension rather meaningless. Thus 24 hours. Kind of like a 6 hour while on-line suspension.

Adminnemooseus

Added by edit: And why should they need a warning? They're both intelligent people that should know better. Besides, I'm pretty sure both have been warned (directly or indirectly) about such things in the past.

Edited by Adminnemooseus, : See above.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 242 by jar, posted 08-02-2007 8:50 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 244 by jar, posted 08-02-2007 9:16 PM Adminnemooseus has not yet responded
 Message 245 by Chiroptera, posted 08-02-2007 9:24 PM Adminnemooseus has responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 31519
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 244 of 304 (414128)
08-02-2007 9:16 PM
Reply to: Message 243 by Adminnemooseus
08-02-2007 9:13 PM


Re: Moose really losing it re: spidey and brenna
Whatever Your Grace.


Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 243 by Adminnemooseus, posted 08-02-2007 9:13 PM Adminnemooseus has not yet responded

Chiroptera
Member
Posts: 6805
From: Oklahoma
Joined: 09-28-2003
Member Rating: 6.2


Message 245 of 304 (414130)
08-02-2007 9:24 PM
Reply to: Message 243 by Adminnemooseus
08-02-2007 9:13 PM


Re: Moose really losing it re: spidey and brenna
...neither are currently on line....

So they were suspended for something that ceased to be a problem?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 243 by Adminnemooseus, posted 08-02-2007 9:13 PM Adminnemooseus has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 246 by Adminnemooseus, posted 08-02-2007 9:32 PM Chiroptera has not yet responded
 Message 247 by Taz, posted 08-02-2007 11:16 PM Chiroptera has not yet responded

Adminnemooseus
Director
Posts: 3896
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 246 of 304 (414132)
08-02-2007 9:32 PM
Reply to: Message 245 by Chiroptera
08-02-2007 9:24 PM


Re: Moose really losing it re: spidey and brenna
So they were suspended for something that ceased to be a problem?

They were suspended for doing something they should have known better. They were suspended to try to teach them and others not to do such again in the future. Pretty much like any other non-permanent suspension.

Adminnemooseus


This message is a reply to:
 Message 245 by Chiroptera, posted 08-02-2007 9:24 PM Chiroptera has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 248 by arachnophilia, posted 08-03-2007 3:06 AM Adminnemooseus has not yet responded

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 1582 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 247 of 304 (414143)
08-02-2007 11:16 PM
Reply to: Message 245 by Chiroptera
08-02-2007 9:24 PM


Re: Moose really losing it re: spidey and brenna
Not meaning to look like I'm kissing up to adminmoose, but I'd have to agree with moose on this one. In fact, right before the suspension, I did notice the chat-like conversation A and B were having and only by the grace of Zeus did I stop myself from pointing it out myself.


Disclaimer:

Occasionally, owing to the deficiency of the English language, I have used he/him/his meaning he or she/him or her/his or her in order to avoid awkwardness of style.

He, him, and his are not intended as exclusively masculine pronouns. They may refer to either sex or to both sexes!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 245 by Chiroptera, posted 08-02-2007 9:24 PM Chiroptera has not yet responded

arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 269 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 248 of 304 (414169)
08-03-2007 3:06 AM
Reply to: Message 246 by Adminnemooseus
08-02-2007 9:32 PM


not to whine, but.
just a clarification.

does every post here need to be a lengthy, well-reasoned formal argument? is there a minimum post length i should try to adhere to in the future? and is quantity the same thing as quality? i thought my points were precisely on-topic, and sufficiently, not to mention effectively argued the point (singular) that needed to be addressed.

i'm not upset, i just don't totally understand. there are other posts in that same thread where i practically asked to be suspended in fairness, and i'm not exactly sure any of the line of discussion i started was on-topic for your thread. even if it is my post in objection in this thread that started the whole thing. basically, of all the things i thought i might be suspended for, i wasn't expecting punishment without warning for a short, on-topic discussion that had already ceased, for reasons of quick response time and minimum post length.

Edited by arachnophilia, : typographical error


אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 246 by Adminnemooseus, posted 08-02-2007 9:32 PM Adminnemooseus has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 249 by Admin, posted 08-03-2007 8:21 AM arachnophilia has not yet responded

Admin
Director
Posts: 12631
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002


Message 249 of 304 (414197)
08-03-2007 8:21 AM
Reply to: Message 248 by arachnophilia
08-03-2007 3:06 AM


Re: not to whine, but.
I haven't had a chance to "talk" with Moose, but with the 300 post limit on threads it can frustrating to see a thread being used as a chatroom, especially since the conclusion of any thread is always followed by new thread proposals which moderators must review, and Moose is one of the consciencious reviewers. At the next moderator meeting I'll raise the issue of whether a warning should first be issued for chatroom behavior.


--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 248 by arachnophilia, posted 08-03-2007 3:06 AM arachnophilia has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 250 by macaroniandcheese, posted 08-03-2007 10:13 AM Admin has not yet responded
 Message 252 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-03-2007 4:45 PM Admin has not yet responded

  
macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 2219 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 250 of 304 (414198)
08-03-2007 10:13 AM
Reply to: Message 249 by Admin
08-03-2007 8:21 AM


Re: not to whine, but.
i think there should be some consideration as to whether or not an admin can moderate his own thread.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 249 by Admin, posted 08-03-2007 8:21 AM Admin has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 251 by PaulK, posted 08-03-2007 10:26 AM macaroniandcheese has not yet responded

PaulK
Member
Posts: 15461
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 251 of 304 (414201)
08-03-2007 10:26 AM
Reply to: Message 250 by macaroniandcheese
08-03-2007 10:13 AM


Re: not to whine, but.
Generally speaking a mod should be careful when moderating a thread they are active in.

However, when they aren't involved in a particular sub-discussion within that thread it isn't necessarily out of line to act on that. Especially if all participants in the sub-discussion are treated the same.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 250 by macaroniandcheese, posted 08-03-2007 10:13 AM macaroniandcheese has not yet responded

  
Hyroglyphx
Member
Posts: 5829
From: Austin, TX
Joined: 05-03-2006
Member Rating: 2.0


Message 252 of 304 (414257)
08-03-2007 4:45 PM
Reply to: Message 249 by Admin
08-03-2007 8:21 AM


Re: not to whine, but.
At the next moderator meeting I'll raise the issue of whether a warning should first be issued for chatroom behavior.

Please do, because neither of them deserved to be suspended for any length of time for such a minor infraction.

Now, I do agree with Moose's premise, that treating a forum like a chatroom should be discouraged, but at the same time, Brenna and Arach should have been warned prior.

Had they disregarded a clear warning, then all bets are off.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 249 by Admin, posted 08-03-2007 8:21 AM Admin has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 253 by arachnophilia, posted 08-03-2007 5:14 PM Hyroglyphx has responded

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 269 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 253 of 304 (414262)
08-03-2007 5:14 PM
Reply to: Message 252 by Hyroglyphx
08-03-2007 4:45 PM


Re: not to whine, but.
Brenna and Arach should have been warned prior.

Had they disregarded a clear warning, then all bets are off.

we have been warned on previous occasions, but this wasn't an instance i was expecting to be punished for -- all the posts were precisely on topic, just short logical arguments. they weren't wasting thread space with off-topic banter, in-jokes, or any of that sort of thing. they were just on-topic arguments. albeit short ones.


אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 252 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-03-2007 4:45 PM Hyroglyphx has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 254 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-03-2007 5:24 PM arachnophilia has responded

Hyroglyphx
Member
Posts: 5829
From: Austin, TX
Joined: 05-03-2006
Member Rating: 2.0


Message 254 of 304 (414267)
08-03-2007 5:24 PM
Reply to: Message 253 by arachnophilia
08-03-2007 5:14 PM


Re: not to whine, but.
we have been warned on previous occasions

Well, then that might change the dynamic of the situation. But I can't really say for sure, being that I didn't witness any of the dialogue in context.

all the posts were precisely on topic, just short logical arguments. they weren't wasting thread space with off-topic banter, in-jokes, or any of that sort of thing. they were just on-topic arguments. albeit short ones.

Yeah, I agree. Jar was right when he made mention of you being on topic. I don't think the length of a post is a good criteria, otherwise, somebody with as much brevity as Ringo would be off topic all the time!


"It is not the critic who counts, not the man who points out how the strong man stumbled, or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena; whose face is marred by the dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs and comes short again and again; who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions and spends himself in a worthy course; who at the best, knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who, at worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly; so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory or defeat." -Theodore Roosevelt


This message is a reply to:
 Message 253 by arachnophilia, posted 08-03-2007 5:14 PM arachnophilia has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 255 by arachnophilia, posted 08-03-2007 6:55 PM Hyroglyphx has responded

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 269 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 255 of 304 (414306)
08-03-2007 6:55 PM
Reply to: Message 254 by Hyroglyphx
08-03-2007 5:24 PM


Re: not to whine, but.
Yeah, I agree. Jar was right when he made mention of you being on topic. I don't think the length of a post is a good criteria, otherwise, somebody with as much brevity as Ringo would be off topic all the time!

well, yes. what happens when you or i post one-sentance replies to little one-sentance snippets of another post, such as right now?

is it better when there are more snippets per post? why?


אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 254 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-03-2007 5:24 PM Hyroglyphx has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 256 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-03-2007 7:00 PM arachnophilia has not yet responded

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019