Moderators

[Alpe d'Huez]

I think I understand but the lack of consistency here is confusing even to an educated person such as myself.

This is what baffles me. How would you possible know all the PM's, warnings and infractions or bans we have handed out? You obviously had no idea that Scott had been given two previous infractions, and warned in PMs before, and had other direct PM discussions with mods on this and other issues.

The same goes for numerous other posts and members. For some strange reason though people see things through a filter. They see one person get banned, or they get a warning, and they automatically assume we're not being consistent, making broad assumptions and assuming if something doesn't exist at this very moment in front of their eyes and match their perception, it doesn't exist. And then they expect the volunteer mods to muster up the time and energy to justify it to them with some sort of proof.

 

[ChrisE]

This is what baffles me. How would you possible know all the PM's, warnings and infractions or bans we have handed out? You obviously had no idea that Scott had been given two previous infractions, and warned in PMs before, and had other direct PM discussions with mods on this and other issues.

All I know is when I report posts all I hear are crickets.

 

[180mmCrank]

All I know is when I report posts all I hear are crickets.

...yes I can see that to you it would appear nothing has happened.

What we are saying that it is quite rare that a reported post is not acted on or discussed in some way. We often receive between 5-10 reports a day... AND it is true that sometimes a decision is made to do nothing other than note the nature of the report. When we do follow up it is often done behind the scenes (posts edited, posters warned by PM, infractions handed out etc.)

... what we have never committed to doing is to writing back to the person who originally reported the post. I think partly because of the extra work involved but also because of the complexity around privacy with respect to moderation... we are not typically public about who receives what warnings or infractions. We did sometime ago choose to share who had been banned, for how long and why. The idea was to reduce the amount of noise and chatter created when a poster was banned (even just for a week) - I am not sure if this really worked or not.

I don't mind discussing this in general terms in the moderation thread BUT please don't expect universal truths or principles about why decisions are made - moderation is as much art as science - the one consistent fact is that we try our best to be consistent.

Terry

 

[Amsterhammer]

Serious question, and I honestly ask this without having anyone specific in mind - at what point are the PMs that we don't see, the infractions that are sanctioned in some way, which we also don't know about, converted into the bans that we see reported at the top of this page?

And how many warning PMs, infractions, discussions among the mods, temporary bans, etc. does it take for anyone to be banned permanently?

Because to the neutral, uninformed reader, it looks very much like some posters are treated far more harshly than others, while others appear to get away with endless trolling havoc with no 'apparent' sanction, i.e. a 'visible' ban that is reported above.

 

[180mmCrank]

Serious question, and I honestly ask this without having anyone specific in mind - at what point are the PMs that we don't see, the infractions that are sanctioned in some way, which we also don't know about, converted into the bans that we see reported at the top of this page?

And how many warning PMs, infractions, discussions among the mods, temporary bans, etc. does it take for anyone to be banned permanently?

Because to the neutral, uninformed reader, it looks very much like some posters are treated far more harshly than others, while others appear to get away with endless trolling havoc with no 'apparent' sanction, i.e. a 'visible' ban that is reported above.

Serious answer to serious question - there is no general answer to that question because we don't think about it in that way. It just doesn't work to treat it as some simple formula of numbers of this equals numbers of that. Sometimes we act with individual judgement, sometimes we have conversations collectively before we act BUT we always and often discuss choices and decisions that get made sometimes during sometimes after. There is a lot of dialogue that goes on.

We even discuss how some decisions will look like we are being inconsistent. We also discuss that certain posters have been historically given more wiggle room than others. There are reasoned conversations that play out in terms of our actions overall.

I absolutely hear you when you say that posters are treated individually ... It is because you are all individuals... How a poster reacts to a warning, what their history of posting and overall contribution to the forum has been, their tenure short or long, as well as previous infractions AND finally we make a judgement call.

I imagine it is frustrating to some to hear there is no hard and fast criteria. But again I say no one is not given warning if they are heading off track ... And there are many many readers and posters of this forum who are able to enjoy participating without pushing the fuzzy boundaries of what is acceptable.

I am not sure my answer will really help because I think you are asking for something that does not exist ... But curious to hear you thoughts.

Terry

Ps. I don't see you as a neutral or uninformed reader so it is conjecture on your part that such a reader sees it this way - small but important point. This doesnt make your question any less relevant AND I don't consider my self neutral either - I might try to be objective but we all have our own pre-dispositions and natural bias.

 

[oldborn]

Ok Susy it must be stopped!

I decided to bring it publicly cos it is clearly conflict of interest here. I must remind you that you banned me for month, just because you want me just for you, I must say that.

I am sorry if I somehow broke your heart acting as a child, but those my intentions was just friendly. I was trying to help you cos that marriage crisis you have been experienced lately, but it is obvious you could not control yourself anymore.

I did not try to seduce you as you thinking for 6 months now, I was trying to be a friend, men friend.
It is clearly that we can not be friends, and we can not be lovers as you wanted, what else we could be, what else?

You getting wild more and more, and I can not look at you any more, it is tragic.

So please stop sending me pm, late intercontinental expensive calls, flying tickets, Campagnolo Super Record bike parts, pictures of yours, your husband schedule, and be strong.
I know it is hurting.

Yours Sincerely
Tony

P. S. I will tell your husband everything Susy!

 

[BroDeal]

Since people like LarryBudMelman are banned for being a "reincarnated banned user," when are you guys going to get around to banning flicker? Or Spartacus Rox for that matter?

 

[Cal_Joe]

Since people like LarryBudMelman are banned for being a "reincarnated banned user," when are you guys going to get around to banning flicker? Or Spartacus Rox for that matter?

Evidently LarryBudMelman was banned because his posting style was identical to a banned user, he was reported, the mods were able to look into things and determined (based on IP info, email, whatever) that he was a banned user.

The question is, have you reported posts/accounts that you think are from a banned user?

If so, there is a possibility that the supposed reincarnation was not backed up by available evidence.

If not reported, do you think the mods spend their time on this?

 

[BroDeal]

Evidently LarryBudMelman was banned because his posting style was identical to a banned user, he was reported, the mods were able to look into things and determined (based on IP info, email, whatever) that he was a banned user.

The question is, have you reported posts/accounts that you think are from a banned user?

If so, there is a possibility that the supposed reincarnation was not backed up by available evidence.

If not reported, do you think the mods spend their time on this?

It's not like everyone has not known for the last many many months that flicker was back. The mods would have to be thick as a plank not to know. I just assumed that there must be some sort of understanding between the mods and him to keep him here, but if they ban LarryBudMelman then it hardly seems fair.

 

[Ferminal]

Since people like LarryBudMelman are banned for being a "reincarnated banned user," when are you guys going to get around to banning flicker? Or Spartacus Rox for that matter?

Both were also banned recently, do you know their latest accounts?

 

[Cal_Joe]

It's not like everyone has not known for the last many many months that flicker was back. The mods would have to be thick as a plank not to know. I just assumed that there must be some sort of understanding between the mods and him to keep him here, but if they ban LarryBudMelman then it hardly seems fair.

You quoted my post but did not address the actual points.

Report what you think is a banned user or put a sock in it. There are enough tin foil hat speculations around here already.

 

[palmerq]

I banned flicker and spartacus last month, are they back again? I haven't noticed spartacus rox yet, but he is a master of disguises.... sort of :S

 

[Climeon]

bit confused as to why frandy ahs been banned,was it merely him saying he was a "bad boy" at school or was it something actually offence or obscene

 

[Susan Westemeyer]

It was due to an offensive, obscene posting, and based solely on that one posting. It was truly a nasty one.

Susan

 

[Climeon]

what was the post? I looked in his post history and couldn't find any reaaly bad post

 

[palmerq]

what was the post? I looked in his post history and couldn't find any reaaly bad post

it's been deleted :S

 

[Climeon]

fair enough

 

[Beech Mtn]

Why has the Tirreno stage 1 thread been locked?

 

[palmerq]

I don't know :S must have been some form of accident

 

[Beech Mtn]

I don't know :S must have been some form of accident

Thanks for the answer, Palmer.

 

[Susan Westemeyer]

It wasn't me this time but I will admit to confusing "close thread" and "sticky thread" in the past......

Susan

 

[Maxiton]

Why is the crank length thread still open? It's long past its expire date, IMO. I posted the following in the thread, but then decided it was more appropriate here.

This thread is great maybe for learning about male primate behavior; not so good for crank length. Nobody looking for info they can actually use on crank length is going to read all this, and if by chance they did, I doubt they'd come away feeling they'd found what they came for.

This thread is kind of a funny joke, but it's still a joke. I suggest closing it and starting something new.

 

[Boeing]

Why is the crank length thread still open? It's long past its expire date, IMO. I posted the following in the thread, but then decided it was more appropriate here.

Or; Perhaps a sticky is in order for the same reasons

 

[BroDeal]

Why is the crank length thread still open? It's long past its expire date, IMO. I posted the following in the thread, but then decided it was more appropriate here.

It's to prevent FDay from spamming other threads to promote his product. This way they can keep it all in two threads. They should probably make a move to contain it in just one like they did with Durianrider.

 

[Martin318is]

It's to prevent FDay from spamming other threads to promote his product. This way they can keep it all in two threads. They should probably make a move to contain it in just one like they did with Durianrider.

The idea was to keep PowerCranks out of the crank length thread but clearly that appears impossible.