Thread Closings

[Jennywocky]

It would be hilarious if this thread was closed.

In for the lolz, in before close

 

[Cavalli]

I'm not going to respond to anything directly, however I will add that I agree with you for the most part Mr Apple Pi.

I definitely think an attempt should be made to 'put water on the flames' as you put it. If the thread is plain stupid/off topic/irrelevant/whatever then attempts could be made to steer it back on track and if a thread has turned into a flame war, attempts should/could be made to de-escalate it. It can be done, I've seen it be done plenty of times. Often these flame wars just occur when what started as a friendly argument/debate/discussion gets out of hand.

This is not to say however, that there are not times when it's not possible and/or practical for this to happen, because there are.

I know that (speaking as someone who's moderated on a forum before) some people with the authority to close said threads won't want to waste their time attempting to de-escalate these problems, and I don't believe that it should be something they're required to do, merely it is an option that available to them - should they choose to embrace it.

In conclusion; I don't believe anything 'official' should be done, nor do I believe that the forum would benefit from anything 'official' being done. I do however think that the Mod's should just take a minute (I'm not saying you don't already) and consider whether or not said flame war/whatever could be 'dealt with' in another way.



So it's nearly 5am here and I'm not able to sleep and I really, really hope all that made sense.

 

[BigApplePi]

I'm not going to respond to anything directly, however I will add that I agree with you for the most part Mr Apple Pi.

I definitely think an attempt should be made to 'put water on the flames' as you put it. If the thread is plain stupid/off topic/irrelevant/whatever then attempts could be made to steer it back on track and if a thread has turned into a flame war, attempts should/could be made to de-escalate it. It can be done, I've seen it be done plenty of times. Often these flame wars just occur when what started as a friendly argument/debate/discussion gets out of hand.

This is not to say however, that there are not times when it's not possible and/or practical for this to happen, because there are.

I know that (speaking as someone who's moderated on a forum before) some people with the authority to close said threads won't want to waste their time attempting to de-escalate these problems, and I don't believe that it should be something they're required to do, merely it is an option that available to them - should they choose to embrace it.

In conclusion; I don't believe anything 'official' should be done, nor do I believe that the forum would benefit from anything 'official' being done. I do however think that the Mod's should just take a minute (I'm not saying you don't already) and consider whether or not said flame war/whatever could be 'dealt with' in another way.



So it's nearly 5am here and I'm not able to sleep and I really, really hope all that made sense.

I thank you for that post Cavalli. You are one of the very few to address this issue. I feel personally wounded and alone in it because I haven't stated my personal feelings. The ousted poster happened to be in the field of sociology and statistics. I would have liked to have made his acquaintance. Who else knows what he would have had to offer? By rejecting him, I am indirectly rejected. Such an affect diminishes the entire Forum. An explanation for why it happened was given by Jennywocky. She pointed out he had made very few posts and was not well known. Therefore he had no points in his favor. (paraphrased jenny).

I will point out that there may be inward bred communities existing on the Forum which agree with and support each other. That is not what the INTP Forum is. It is a Forum of MANY communities. All should (notice I say "should") be allowed on an open Forum. When moderators are so limited that they are not open to non-conformists to their communities or do not even see that is the case, I will have to disagree with their policies.

On the other hand I can see why the moderators do what they do. They don't have time and are limited in their scope. So they have to act quickly. Such action can be remedied by bringing in moderators with different views who can round out what is happening overall. I see that as the only way to achieve fairness and keep our Forum at maximum creativeness.

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

By rejecting him, I am indirectly rejected. Such an affect diminishes the entire Forum.

I agree with this, but I also don't think it should change. I don't think there's a better structure available.

She pointed out he had made very few posts and was not well known. Therefore he had no points in his favor. (paraphrased jenny).

I also agree with this. Lurking is a dying art.

I will point out that there may be inward bred communities existing on the Forum which agree with and support each other. That is not what the INTP Forum is. It is a Forum of MANY communities. All should (notice I say "should") be allowed on an open Forum. When moderators are so limited that they are not open to non-conformists to their communities or do not even see that is the case, I will have to disagree with their policies.

On the other hand I can see why the moderators do what they do. They don't have time and are limited in their scope. So they have to act quickly. Such action can be remedied by bringing in moderators with different views who can round out what is happening overall. I see that as the only way to achieve fairness and keep our Forum at maximum creativeness.

The mods here are ridiculously hands-off, you know. Very, very, very rarely is it ever what someone says that gets them banned. Shameface is the only example that comes to mind. 99.999repeating% of the time it's how they go about saying it that draws the banhammer.

It's like making soup. You can throw a bunch of ingredients haphazardly into a pot, boil it to death, and attempt to choke it down after a few hours; or you can prepare the ingredients, follow a recipe as an outline, cook it carefully, and taste test & season as you go.

And we all should know by now that chicken feet make the best broth. If this forum were a soup, I wouldn't hesitate for a moment to deem it chicken feet soup.

 

[Cavallier]

The mods here are ridiculously hands-off, you know. Very, very, very rarely is it ever what someone says that gets them banned. Shameface is the only example that comes to mind. 99.999repeating% of the time it's how they go about saying it that draws the banhammer.

*nods vigorously*

In other words...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0la5DBtOVNI

Also, it's okay to like things. We don't judge.

 

[crippli]

Very, very, very rarely is it ever what someone says that gets them banned. Shameface is the only example that comes to mind. 99.999repeating% of the time it's how they go about saying it that draws the banhammer.

That's normal. With police/government etc as well, it's generally just to spin a sugar sweet fairytale. And it's fine, even if it was murder/war etc.

Why is it like this, how come the action is irrelevant?

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

That's normal. With police/government etc as well, it's generally just to spin a sugar sweet fairytale. And it's fine, even if it was murder/war etc.

Why is it like this, how come the action is irrelevant?

I have no power here. Never did. Just degrees of influence.

Murder and war involve... real death.

For the most part people aren't permabanned and have the opportunity to adapt when it expires. It's sort of a small dog meets spray bottle type of thing. Our own coolydudey is a success story!

This most recent one immediately created accounts to circumvent the ban (I'm assuming either through a proxy or through Tor). I'd call the initial ban more questionable than the final one if it was longer than a week, but hey, it is subjective. I'm guessing the turning point for the initial one came in at around post #40 when responses started to turn sour after the supposed trolling was revealed. I think Kuu said it best.

I'm assuming if he really wants back in, he could ask (with clear overtones of humility). Other such theoretical requests have been considered in the past, from worse offenders.

 

[Ex-User (9086)]

I'm guessing the turning point for the initial one came in at around post #40 when responses started to turn sour after the supposed trolling was revealed. I think Kuu said it best.

I feel bad, you are right that author of post #40 should reconsider before posting.
That is usually something I lately fail at.
I see how it could be viewed as impulsive.
Who knows how would he behave if I was more reasonable and gathered. This post can be viewed as agressive and inconsiderate, I suggest that you note this example of increasing conflict as bad. I want to be punished so badly, partly I am, by this despicable spam filter.
Maybe he could be brought to repent and be a good user forever after?
So many variables. I hope he has found a place where his jokes are understood and he can commute joyfully. (It's no laughing matter, poor my engleeish poor ist)

 

[Cavalli]

I think we also have to remember that this post wasn't intended as (at least I didn't understand it as) specific to this post. There will be other circumstances in the future where perhaps a minute should be taken where the mods involved can step back and consider whether or not it's possible to alleviate or completely fix the problem thread in an alternate way (I for one know that numerous flame wars/arguments/off topic issues etc. would have been resolved had a mod just taken a couple more moments to listen to both sides of the story, not just shut it all down straight away).

For the most part people aren't permabanned and have the opportunity to adapt when it expires. It's sort of a small dog meets spray bottle type of thing. Our own coolydudey is a success story!

I understand that for the most part people aren't perma-banned, but I still agree with Big Apple: the forum would benefit from people taking time to try and resolve the problem just through talking/giving a cooling off period instead of shutting it down straight away, for good.

I haven't been on this forum all that long - I'm new - so I can't attest that this isn't happening here, but I don't believe it happened on the thread 'Just Saying...'. I think that the only reason he said he was trolling was because he just couldn't be bothered arguing about it anymore. After all, the topic of his thread seemed legit to me - I understood it perfectly (even if the wording was a bit off).

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

I understand that for the most part people aren't perma-banned, but I still agree with Big Apple: the forum would benefit from people taking time to try and resolve the problem just through talking/giving a cooling off period instead of shutting it down straight away, for good.

I haven't been on this forum all that long - I'm new - so I can't attest that this isn't happening here

I think you'll find that I generally share your sentiment here, circa post #82.

There have been perhaps 5-6 permabans all year that didn't involve spamming (sometimes a dozen spammers are banned a day, mostly Chinese or Russian ad bots trying to sell you generic Viagra).

 

[crippli]

I have no power here. Never did. Just degrees of influence.

This reminds about Keyser Söze...

Murder and war involve... real death.

I was thinking about universal situations, and thought your notion may be general truth. That what you wrote applies in most situations. And important to understand.

For the most part people aren't permabanned and have the opportunity to adapt when it expires. It's sort of a small dog meets spray bottle type of thing. Our own coolydudey is a success story!

Great. Good work.

 

[Cavalli]

I think you'll find that I generally share your sentiment here, circa post #82.

There have been perhaps 5-6 permabans all year that didn't involve spamming (sometimes a dozen spammers are banned a day, mostly Chinese or Russian ad bots trying to sell you generic Viagra).

That's great I'm glad you agree, like I say, I haven't been around long enough to know the ins and outs of this stuff - all I can do is share my thoughts

 

[BigApplePi]

I notice a good many moderators have spoken up here, though I'm not sure I've ID'd them all correctly. Are these moderators speaking as moderators giving warnings of warnings or are they speaking as posters who are simply speaking freely with their opinions? I would like this to be a serious thread for I have more to say with various outlooks, sometimes pleasant and sometimes painful. I would like to act as sort of counsel for Gargamel's defense and then abandon that role if I'm convinced he should not be defended. Is that allowed without being called names? Or is that not permitted? I see this as a thread for open discussion.

I have done some thinking about what to express and am not sure how ready I am. Just like any other INTP poster I need time. I'm in no hurry if you aren't ... unless someone gives me a summons.

 

[Ex-User (9086)]

It may seem pointless, but we could have a structure of banning.

If someone is violating rules and doesn't deserve explanation he/she/it could be banned normally.

As for those that cause conflict but are not clearly perceived negatively there could be a thread where people affected can vote/discuss how they view the matter, also said user could provide explanation and avoid injust punishment.

I understand how this could be a hassle for mod/adm people that most likely don't have time to investigate everything.

In that case some respected and usually veteran members could be lent a partial mod status so that they could move a user and start explaining things and later it could be reported to the actual authority that could ban/unban etc.

Let's play society here

edit: I didnt read every post, it could be proposed, in that case i will remove it and agree

 

[crippli]

It may seem pointless, but we could have a structure of banning.

If someone is violating rules and doesn't deserve explanation he/she/it could be banned normally.

As for those that cause conflict but are not clearly perceived negatively there could be a thread where people affected can vote/discuss how they view the matter, also said user could provide explanation and avoid injust punishment.

I understand how this could be a hassle for mod/adm people that most likely don't have time to investigate everything.

In that case some respected and usually veteran members could be lent a partial mod status so that they could move a user and start explaining things and later it could be reported to the actual authority that could ban/unban etc.

All this was tested at the other INTP forum. Non of it worked. Actually, as was mentioned, there are not many bans on here. That Gargamel with few posts get this amount of attention, is quite good imo. If we want him back, we must put pressure on the mods. There is no other way. If forgotten, then one is forgotten. But as was pointed out. We must make a case. If our reasoning is valid, I have no doubt it will be heard.

And I think these last posts should be split into a new thread. Not sure what it has to do with the closing of threads?

 

[BigApplePi]

Alternative Action

Here is an alternative to a thread which might never have been closed. One doesn't have to be a moderator to do this. I invite you to look at my phraseology:

Spoiler

This was an experiment. I wanted to see the reactions to a baseless opinion criticizing what I think is the trait less liked by INTPs: Procrastination.

Early conclusions of the experiment:

The comment touched a nerve.
Some took the opinion personally and turned to ad hominem fallacies
Others showed off how they are planning to be famous while I’ll be grinding the hamster wheel
Somehow the topic turned to slavery, capitalism and communist discussion... I really can't explain how did this happen
A couple of guys took a big picture approach and realized that this post did not make much sense.

In short, I'm a fellow INTP who was bored and curious so decided to come back trolling an experiment to the forum.

Hello again!

Short reply if one lacks time:
If you are trolling that is against the rules. Do you really mean to be trolling or do you want the OP (original post) to be taken seriously? If your intention is to deceive posters, you will have to sit out a ban.

Longer reply:
Can you rephrase your intentions here, especially with the OP? The way you say things are too cryptic to be clearly understood. Could that be why posters are digressing and being disrespectful? How can you blame them?

I took a look at some of your posting history and your interest in sociology and statistics says you have a lot to contribute. You don't seem to be a real troll (someone who creates a disturbance solely to get attention). Perhaps you might notice that your OP reflects one of the greatest plays in the English language: Hamlet. Hamlet is indecisive. He can't directly go after the murderer of his father. He has to think it over:

To be or not to be
Whether tis nobler in the mind
To suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles
And by opposing, end them.

Could this be the tension you see in your OP below?

"I rather be a little bit dumber and be able to accomplish what I want to do than being a little bit smarter and be sitting on my ass all day doing nothing."

I interpret your OP to mean is it dumber to take a chance on action than to think of all the right possibilities and do nothing? That is a common INTP flaw. No wonder you called yourself an INTJ when you may not be.

Notice in the longer reply I don't call him names or threaten him with banning. He is given a chance to turn the thread around. The shorter one forces him directly to reply.

 

[Cavalli]

What if we create a sub forum within Crime and Punishment and so when something breaks out, perhaps people can be temp banned straight away (from everthing but said sub forum) thus defusing the situation (without closing the thread) and giving them a place to appeal or discuss the issue.

This does however mean that there will need to be strict rules within this sub forum - I.e. You are given an opportunity to discuss the issue and resolve it, if you turn around and spit in the mods face by continuing to do whatever you were doing wrong in the sub forum, then (in my opinion) repercussions will be worse.


I'm not sure if that's what the forum Crime and Punishment is for or not but idk feel free to enlighten me.
Like I say - I'm still finding my feet.

Thought?

Sent from my GT-I8190N using Tapatalk

 

[redbaron]

Is there really a problem?

Garbagemelo had a temp ban. If he so chose he could have returned to the forum and been constructive. I'm actually amazed how much of a big deal gets made out of this.

 

[BigApplePi]

Is there really a problem?

Garbagemelo had a temp ban. If he so chose he could have returned to the forum and been constructive. I'm actually amazed how much of a big deal gets made out of this.

redbaron. You called him a name?

Yes he could have returned but he thought he was banned by error and wanted to explain the only way he could: use another name. He told me he didn't know that was against the rules. He wouldn't have done it had he known. So what happened is he fell under the executioner's axe. I don't think the perma ban was intended to be used this way. As his defender I'm simply defending him and want to see if I can turn you around.

Question: wasn't it you who called him an idiot right off the bat? Was it because his OP was obscure?

 

[Jennywocky]

Is there really a problem?

Garbagemelo had a temp ban. If he so chose he could have returned to the forum and been constructive. I'm actually amazed how much of a big deal gets made out of this.

Yes, it pretty much comes down to this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovwxBrIBj1w

 

[Cavalli]

I think people are misunderstanding is that this goes beyond a single instance; it's going to happen again. Fine, maybe everyone was in the right to just ban him straight away, but in the future it might not be right and perhaps the whole situation (in the future) may benefit from changes to the system.

It's not like this is going to be the only case ever..


I think we need to stop getting into semantics about Gargamel - and look at this from a broader perspective, else things will just go around in circles.

 

[redbaron]

I think people are misunderstanding is that this goes beyond a single instance; it's going to happen again.

What exactly is going to happen again? People who break the rules will be banned? Wow! You're right, it's important that we do something about this!

The whole situation (in the future) may benefit from changes to the system.

Like what? Moderators have explained the reasoning behind the way the forum operates ad nauseum. What specific, actionable ideas do you think that you or anyone else holds?

It's not like this is going to be the only case ever..

Gosh. I think you might be right. If more people break the rules, the moderators are going to ban them!

I think we need to stop getting into semantics about Gargamel - and look at this from a broader perspective, else things will just go around in circles.

On the contrary. The only reason these discussions go in circles is because no one ever has any actual realistic feedback that the moderator team can use. People just rehash the same tired arguments, to which the moderators give the same tired responses.

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

I notice a good many moderators have spoken up here, though I'm not sure I've ID'd them all correctly. Are these moderators speaking as moderators giving warnings of warnings or are they speaking as posters who are simply speaking freely with their opinions?

For the record, I am no longer a madmin. I'm just an opinion-giver. Current madmin are viewable here. I'd always take what they say as coming from a normal human being unless they tell you to stop doing something.

I would like to act as sort of counsel for Gargamel's defense and then abandon that role if I'm convinced he should not be defended. Is that allowed without being called names? Or is that not permitted? I see this as a thread for open discussion.

I'm not sure it would be worth the effort on your part to act as counsel. I think he needs to make contact and make his own case (he can apparently get around bans to register for a new account). You can't assume that he wants to come back.

But I also think that if he does make contact, he should be allowed to return.

It may seem pointless, but we could have a structure of banning.

This already exists informally. Formalizing it causes all sorts of problems.

That Gargamel with few posts get this amount of attention, is quite good imo.

If our reasoning is valid, I have no doubt it will be heard.

The best case studies are those perched right on the boundary.

What if we create a sub forum within Crime and Punishment and so when something breaks out, perhaps people can be temp banned straight away (from everthing but said sub forum) thus defusing the situation (without closing the thread) and giving them a place to appeal or discuss the issue.

That already exists: Siberia.

I do personally think it's underutilized though.

Question: wasn't it you who called him an idiot right off the bat? Was it because his OP was obscure?

Yes. He took the bait pretty hard.

Spoiler

Hard enough to pull the fisherman into the water and drown him.

 

[Cavalli]

What exactly is going to happen again? People who break the rules will be banned? Wow! You're right, it's important that we do something about this!



Like what? Moderators have explained the reasoning behind the way the forum operates ad nauseum. What specific, actionable ideas do you think that you or anyone else holds?



Gosh. I think you might be right. If more people break the rules, the moderators are going to ban them!



On the contrary. The only reason these discussions go in circles is because no one ever has any actual realistic feedback that the moderator team can use. People just rehash the same tired arguments, to which the moderators give the same tired responses.

Why don't you go back and read all my posts, together, as one big thing instead of taking them as individual statements that are in no way related to each other before you start acting like a sarcastic dick.

That already exists: Siberia.

I do personally think it's underutilized though.

Superb c~:

Perhaps awareness of this can be raised somehow?

 

[Kuu]

What if we create a sub forum within Crime and Punishment and so when something breaks out, perhaps people can be temp banned straight away (from everthing but said sub forum) thus defusing the situation (without closing the thread) and giving them a place to appeal or discuss the issue.

This does however mean that there will need to be strict rules within this sub forum - I.e. You are given an opportunity to discuss the issue and resolve it, if you turn around and spit in the mods face by continuing to do whatever you were doing wrong in the sub forum, then (in my opinion) repercussions will be worse.


I'm not sure if that's what the forum Crime and Punishment is for or not but idk feel free to enlighten me.
Like I say - I'm still finding my feet.

Thought?

We have this already and it is used occasionally, it's called Siberia. It's not utilised as often because these kinds of discussions drag on forever, and then there's always a group of people that get even more upset if their side of the issue ends up being unchosen. We find it better to just avoid the bitter aftertaste of inevitably unsatisfying discussions and keep public discussions of moderation matters to a minimum.

People attracted to these forums have a strong tendency to distrust and question and want to know everything, pushing for transparency and "democracy". However, a forum such as this can't really be run democratically (some would even argue nothing can), nor, perhaps, should be... and it would be unethical to some to make public what is expected to be private communications, sensitive information and personal issues.

Moderators here dislike hierarchy and rigid rules as much as any other poster, which is why it's such a relaxed place and mods carry no badges or titles, and rarely make "official" announcements. This comes with the caveat of turning inflexible, tedious but highly objective and predictable rules more into fluid guidelines that are followed through perilous paths of probabilities and subjectivities (which apparently works fine, since the forum's still alive and thriving).

Finally, most comments in these kinds of threads have already been taken into account by moderators before they're brought up by users, it's very rare that a new insight is brought up that was not pondered in the mod's mind or brought up by another mod and discussed in the private mod forum. Mods are chosen for being thoughtful, tactful, and having the capacity to operate both independently and as a team... sometimes it's a bit obnoxious that people seem to think they know better with the same or often less information, and be constantly pestered about things we already thought about.

I would not normally take the time to explain this all over again, but you're new so I felt obliged. BAP on the other hand, has had plenty of time to learn that these discussions rarely lead anywhere...

On the contrary. The only reason these discussions go in circles is because no one ever has any actual realistic feedback that the moderator team can use. People just rehash the same tired arguments, to which the moderators give the same tired responses.

Ok, fine. You can have my children. We'll call them redkuus. They'll be unstoppable.


Also, respect to THD for still handing the helping hand to the team from time to time.

 

[redbaron]

Why don't you go back and read all my posts, together, as one big thing instead of taking them as individual statements that are in no way related to each other before you start acting like a sarcastic dick.

Why don't you go back and find all the threads related to this topic, and read them as one big thing instead of taking this singular one that is no more useful or relevant than any of the others previous before you start beating a dead horse?

Like I said, unless you're going to post usable ideas, this isn't going to change anything - because when it comes to moderating forums, the details of each individual case actually are important. Dealing with things on a case by case basis is the best way, and this forum is probably one of the most lenient and fair you'll find anywhere.

 

[Ex-User (9086)]

We can formally introduce every permbanned user to a martyr status.
You wouldn't discuss their deeds, you would only mention their existence once in a while.

 

[Cavallier]

On the contrary. The only reason these discussions go in circles is because no one ever has any actual realistic feedback that the moderator team can use. People just rehash the same tired arguments, to which the moderators give the same tired responses.

I...I might just add this to my signature.

Cavalli, setting redbaron's sarcasm aside, someone disagreeing with you doesn't make them a dick.

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

I feel bad, you are right that author of post #40 should reconsider before posting.

Didn't see this earlier. I wasn't singling you out there, it's just that that was the approximate area where cognitive dissonance started to flare up.

Also, respect to THD for still handing the helping hand to the team from time to time.

Spoiler

 

[Cavalli]

Cavalli, setting redbaron's sarcasm aside, someone disagreeing with you doesn't make them a dick.

I was calling him a dick because of his sarcasm.

Your mistake was in assuming I called him a dick because he disagreed with me, or if that wasn't what you meant, in assuming that I'm not aware that it's perfectly okay for someone to disagree with me (I am, perfectly aware that is) - we all know what they say about assuming.

I'm not getting into a shit fight over this. I've said everything I have to say on the thread topic.

~Over and out~

 

[redbaron]

It's Cav vs. Cav in a fight to the death!

 

[BigApplePi]

BAP on the other hand, has had plenty of time to learn that these discussions rarely lead anywhere...

I like your post up to the word, "BAP." You can read my mind? I have some things on my mind.

1. Regardless of how these discussions go, there may be new people here who have fresh questions or wish to learn. True they can find this info elsewhere, but this is live. You have pointed this out.

2. Some things bother me personally. I identify with banned people. I have been an outsider and want to root for them. I realize that some people are nonconformists and must be told so. Yet dealing with this can be a painful process. Think "growing pains." Bring justice and injustice out in the open ... even if it has happened before.

3. I'm recalling the discussion of how the Forum used to be and how some have wished for the prior state. I have something in mind and wish to tell the story. It is roughly about what happens when an involved poster is banned. If they are perma-banned they carry others away who have been involved with them. Do you know that is true? It's short term positive and long them negative. While drama can get out of hand, it keeps things alive.

Let the drama and the controversies roll on ... I haven't even talked about trolls.

 

[BigApplePi]

THD.

For the record, I am no longer a madmin. I'm just an opinion-giver. Current madmin are viewable here. I'd always take what they say as coming from a normal human being unless they tell you to stop doing something.

They are human beings with super powers. I wonder what the difference is between an administrator and a moderator? Only one moderator shows.

I'm not sure it would be worth the effort on your part to act as counsel. I think he needs to make contact and make his own case (he can apparently get around bans to register for a new account). You can't assume that he wants to come back. But I also think that if he does make contact, he should be allowed to return.

Yes it would take effort. Why wait? I think we all should chip in for a full page ad in the New York Times begging him on bended knee to return. More importantly same with another long-time poster who was perma-banned and is missed.

The best case studies are those perched right on the boundary.

Exactly. They have fuzzy morality. Does that mean the worst cases are those where the whole gang rapes the guilty victim because they must have asked for it?

That already exists: Siberia. I do personally think it's underutilized though.

I wonder if once a case goes there if they are under such close watch that the intended process is interfered with?

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

*double agent mode activated*

1. Regardless of how these discussions go, there may be new people here who have fresh questions or wish to learn. True they can find this info elsewhere, but this is live. You have pointed this out.

2. Some things bother me personally. I identify with banned people. I have been an outsider and want to root for them. I realize that some people are nonconformists and must be told so. Yet dealing with this can be a painful process. Think "growing pains." Bring justice and injustice out in the open ... even if it has happened before.

3. I'm recalling the discussion of how the Forum used to be and how some have wished for the prior state. I have something in mind and wish to tell the story. It is roughly about what happens when an involved poster is banned. If they are perma-banned they carry others away who have been involved with them. Do you know that is true? It's short term positive and long them negative. While drama can get out of hand, it keeps things alive.

Let the drama and the controversies roll on ... I haven't even talked about trolls.

^^^This. All of ^this.

They are human beings with super powers. I wonder what the difference is between an administrator and a moderator? Only one moderator shows.

More importantly same with another long-time poster who was perma-banned and is missed.

I wonder if once a case goes there if they are under such close watch that the intended process is interfered with?

The difference between an admin and a mod is in title only. All active "mods" here have admin powers. Claverhouse is inactive and is sort of a special case that I don't want to have to explain. I'm not sure of Decaf's status.

Blob is a can of worms (he also isn't Voldemort. You can say "Da Blob" without being struck by lightning). I also agree with you. The "how" portion of the what vs how in that particular case is extremely difficult to justify. This is why I lobbied for the release of past modbox archives, and also believe that some aspects of a lack of transparency demonstrate that some have trouble detaching themselves from the limitations of the culture of the forum and/or the internet in general.

As far as Siberia, maybe. I think the answer would be an easy "no" if it were utilized more. But it's used less frequently than banning. Why? I have no idea. There seems to be a prevailing idea that discussion is a bad thing.

 

[BigApplePi]

The only reason these discussions go in circles is because no one ever has any actual realistic feedback that the moderator team can use. People just rehash the same tired arguments, to which the moderators give the same tired responses.

redbaron you are making some good points here. THD referred to looking at moderators as ordinary posters (paraphrase). One of the moderators (who shall go nameless) name-called. I observed you have name-called. Now I see Cavelli has named-called using the same name a moderator used. Contagious?

I suppose I could create a separate thread called, "Name-calling." Too much trouble. To me name-calling is a totally emotional thing. Do you agree? It's just the opposite of Ti. It's Fe and is bad Fe IMO. Am I wrong?

I could be wrong because what the heck is wrong with name-calling? It's funny but it hurts. Sometimes it's forgotten but other times it's not. Do you forget when you are hurt? It's a subjective way to punish ... not objective Ti thought. I'm trying not to pass judgment when maybe I should. Not to name-call is a step out of the circles you are talking about ... especially moderators who are role models. Yah ... now I'm getting emotional.

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

@BAP

Name-calling is a type of stimulus that determines the name-caller's choice of action; prodding another with a stick. It's not feeling, but extroverted sensing or intuition. It allows one to assess another's composition; to determine if they are weak/can be exploited. If, for example, I resort to sarcastic ad-hom and call you *expletive* and you respond in kind, that allows me to control where the conversation goes, allows the conversation to escalate, and ultimately allows me to play the role of good guy. If you don't respond in kind and take the high road, then you make yourself the good guy and ensure you have at least equal control.

I do this all the time. In the unending interest of shameless self-promotion:

An example of the first type of interaction.

An example of the second.

 

[Polaris]

If one invest that amount of time in fussing over some detail about a forum member nobody really knew who obviously could have chosen to behave differently (since this forum member, Gargamel, had been a member for quite some time and therefore would be likely to know the forum guidelines...what are we, babysitters?), one may want to consider the fact that the so-called "super-power" endowed mods/admins/whatever also have outside lives and responsibilities where they are so busy that they cannot possibly spend the amount of time discussing individual cases based on forum-member feedback every time. Sometimes people get banned, and sometimes they get banned as result of a rather quick process based on what appears to be obvious behaviour. This is life; get over it.

Mods are, however, not endowed with the superpowers of psychic insight, sorry. If this case was nebulous, then every case could be...and if we choose to go down that rabbit hole, decisions will never be made.

The people who seem to kick up a fuss about bannings here are usually a minority. The mods make decisions based on what they think is beneficial for the majority.

Can we just move on now?

 

[BigApplePi]

Can we just move on now?

I remember what THD said about moderators versus posters. I read everything you said as your personal view, not a moderator's view. Your personal view makes sense but it's personal.

"Can we just move on now?" I notice the word, "we." Some of us want to move on and if that is their wish, let them do so. Go to the next thread. If they are moderators, no need to watch this one unless personally addressed. Some want to continue to look at things ... seaching for new ideas. I just brought up the name-calling issue. THD commented on it but I haven't absorbed it. That makes me want to take a rest to look at it. I'd like to but I'm told I have a responsibility for this thread. What if someone closes it while I'm not looking? Then all is lost and I risk slipping into the deep dank pit of dark despair.

 

[redbaron]

Name-calling is a type of stimulus that determines the name-caller's choice of action; prodding another with a stick.

Actually no.

I figured it would be obvious to all but the most obtuse of readers that the way I drew a flawed conclusion was meant to mirror the OP on Gargamelo's thread.

I would never bother calling someone an idiot as some convoluted way of controlling conversation. Why would I feel the need to control conversation in the first place?

I don't have some delusional fantasy that it's witty or clever to manipulate people on a public forum. People on a forum are generally by default open and honest, and so take each other at face value. Manipulating people who aren't trying to hide anything in the first place, and who are prepared to take you at face value by default is too easy to be rewarding, is a waste of time and is a fucking joke.

If you honestly think that what you described is what's going on in the thread you linked then boy are you delusional.

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

I would never bother calling someone an idiot as some convoluted way of controlling conversation. Why would I feel the need to control conversation in the first place?

It's largely an unconscious process that occurs during all human interaction, online or otherwise; a mere extension of an iterated prisoner's dilemma.

boy are you delusional.

Totally, dood. This post and response isn't even an example of what I'm talking about. Nowai. o.0

 

[Decaf]

Side Note:

The difference between an admin and a mod is in title only. All active "mods" here have admin powers. [...] I'm not sure of Decaf's status.

I've been removed from admin status as I'm not really "around" and its not wise to have mostly dormant admin accounts sitting around considering how much damage they can do (I approve the change). One of the significant differences between mod and admin is that mods can't change the user level of other forum members. Not like we've ever had a problem with that before

 

[Jennywocky]

Blob is a can of worms (he also isn't Voldemort. You can say "Da Blob" without being struck by lightning).

That admittedly might be true, but I usually do throw up in my mouth a litt--

^^ comic relief

Sometimes people get banned, and sometimes they get banned as result of a rather quick process based on what appears to be obvious behaviour. This is life; get over it.

To go along with that, if people didn't dance around on the edge of the cliff, they wouldn't even have the chance to be blown off by a freak gust of wind. If you play near the crevasse too long, you might get blown in.

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

One of the significant differences between mod and admin is that mods can't change the user level of other forum members. Not like we've ever had a problem with that before

That admittedly might be true, but I usually do throw up in my mouth a litt--

To go along with that, if people didn't dance around on the edge of the cliff, they wouldn't even have the chance to be blown off by a freak gust of wind. If you play near the crevasse too long, you might get blown in.

Internet antacid equivalent.

Spoiler

In other news, my google search of "crevasse meme" led me to discover "tongue crevasses," which is truly vomit-worthy.

 

[Fukyo]

It seems that BAP cannot miss an opportunity to air his issues, no matter how trivial an admin action - which likely revolve around banning his friend. He also seems to enjoy stirring up this controversy as an attempt to manipulate the newbies.

As RB has mentioned this is a tired and exhausted dialogue and not one us admins particularly enjoys having with a persistently stubborn and obtuse person such as you BAP. Yes, this is my personal opinion. In fact, some of the madmins feel almost harassed by your attempts to engage in personal communication, especially in private.

My admin opinion is that eventually maybe we'll have to move all of this to Siberia. I'll be frank since I don't like beating around the bush. I get the distinct impression you are trying to bully us into doing what you want, and it ain't gonna happen. Sorry if you don't like it. Can't please everyone, nor we're aiming to. Deal with it - or don't. Not interested in forum drama and controversy. You are the one who is making us admins a big deal here.

This might be an ad hominem, but I find your obsession with the forum dynamics and administrators very bizarre, particularly for someone who is supposedly at least in his 40s.

 

[Cavallier]

^ Agreed.

I am a intpforum member who enjoys taking part in the discussions. I am also somebody with administrative power to ban people, move threads, and close threads. People become very focused on my Admin power and forget that FIRST AND FOREMOST I just enjoy posting here. If I keep being harrassed I'll eventually leave.

I don't go on power trips and I mostly forget I'm an admin. I just ban who I think needs to be banned. I ban because a user is causing flame wars, being overly combative, or for being an all out asshole. The admins all discuss it and then we ban. We only permaban after giving users many opportunities to cool off and calm down. We give warnings in threads where flame wars are erupting. We chop out derails and send them off to their own threads or to Siberia. We do that all the time. Then the original thread can continue unmolested. We don't ban for personal reasons such as banning because of race, creed, religion, philosophical standpoint, gender, sexual orientation, or even for being a horrible speller. Although, I've really wanted to for that last one.

We don't like to distract everybody with big announcements so we just do the announcement in the thread. If we do a ban we announce it in the Ban Thread. Anybody who keeps up with the forum can see how we work. We do what we can to continue discussion. None of us actually asked to become admins. Someone on the original admin team asked us if we'd be willing to take on the job and we did out of nostalgia and because we'd like to see the forum continue to grow.

Can we be done now with the rehashing of the same bullshit we've rehashed a million times before?

 

[crippli]

Ahh.

I am a intpforum member

Isn't that a vowel, so you should have used an?

We don't ban for personal reasons such as banning because of race, creedo, religion, philosophical standpoint, gender, sexual orientation, or even for being a horrible speller. Although, I've really wanted to for that last one.

Good call

 

[Cavallier]

Well it really depends on which language you are starting out in but you are correct in that I should have used an "an".

 

[TheScornedReflex]

First action as mod...


Thread Closed.

Get some.

 

[BigApplePi]

It seems that BAP cannot miss an opportunity to air his issues, no matter how trivial an admin action - which likely revolve around banning his friend. He also seems to enjoy stirring up this controversy as an attempt to manipulate the newbies.

As RB has mentioned this is a tired and exhausted dialogue and not one us admins particularly enjoys having with a persistently stubborn and obtuse person such as you BAP. Yes, this is my personal opinion. In fact, some of the madmins feel almost harassed by your attempts to engage in personal communication, especially in private.

My admin opinion is that eventually maybe we'll have to move all of this to Siberia. I'll be frank since I don't like beating around the bush. I get the distinct impression you are trying to bully us into doing what you want, and it ain't gonna happen. Sorry if you don't like it. Can't please everyone, nor we're aiming to. Deal with it - or don't. Not interested in forum drama and controversy. You are the one who is making us admins a big deal here.

This might be an ad hominem, but I find your obsession with the forum dynamics and administrators very bizarre, particularly for someone who is supposedly at least in his 40s.

Fukyo. Not my friend. Never was. I was just befriending him. May I reply to you as a poster not as a mod? I do not wish to manipulate and have nothing against mods. I hope they continue and do exactly what they are doing. Praise to you mods for doing the hard work I don't have the responsibility for.

You called me "obtuse." I have Ne and wish to point out alternatives not yet posted. I also have an outside life and am about to hit the road so lack time to fully express what I want. Besides I'm working on a thread Baurain (sp?) has posted on randomness. It's partly the Ne in me and partly the desire for you guys to see a broad long-term vision for the Forum. Sorry you dislike me.

Are you being provocative about "harassment?" I explained partly to Cavallier in just two PM's. But she did not reply to the 2nd. If one feels harassed but are not actually harassed, what does that say? That's quite an accusation.

I am not in my 40's. It would be something if I were. I'm 76.

 

[BigApplePi]

^ Agreed.

I am a intpforum member who enjoys taking part in the discussions. I am also somebody with administrative power to ban people, move threads, and close threads. People become very focused on my Admin power and forget that FIRST AND FOREMOST I just enjoy posting here. If I keep being harrassed I'll eventually leave.

I don't go on power trips and I mostly forget I'm an admin. I just ban who I think needs to be banned. I ban because a user is causing flame wars, being overly combative, or for being an all out asshole. The admins all discuss it and then we ban. We only permaban after giving users many optortunities to cool off and calm down. We give warnings in threads where flame wars are erupting. We chop out derails and send them off to their own threads or to Siberia. We do that all the time. Then the original thread can continue unmolested. We don't ban for personal reasons such as banning because of race, creed, religion, philosophical standpoint, gender, sexual orientation, or even for being a horrible speller. Although, I've really wanted to for that last one.

We don't like to distract everybody with big announcements so we just do the announcement in the thread. If we do a ban we announce it in the Ban Thread. Anybody who keeps up with the forum can see how we work. We do what we can to continue discussion. None of us actually asked to become admins. Someone on the original admin team asked us if we'd be willing to take on the job and we did out of nostalgia and because we'd like to see the forum continue to grow.

Can we be done now with the rehashing of the same bullshit we've rehashed a million times before?

Cavallier. Please under no circumstances should you consider leaving ... certainly not because of me. I couldn't have that on my conscience. I've seen you on video (I wish I could make one.) and think you quite a courageous person. Please do not feel harassed just because I put up arguments and show no feeling do not do well with showing feelings. (I do believe this message improves on that.) If I had better Fe I would employ it, but eventually I would learn how but just haven't as yet. Harassment I think it a theme which could be discussed. It's a matter of communication which has failed so far. If this were real life it would be done but here it's harder.

Thank you for explaining how you got into becoming a moderator. That makes you more 3D. I asked the same Q of another mod in PM but got no reply. That lost me a chance to make contact. Damn. I was tactless. I gave up on PM communication ... actually thinking I was bothering people if I got no reply. 2 msgs to you and one to the other mod.

I have never forgotten how LoveOfReason raked me over the coals for being insensitive (was that her reason or was it because she thought I was Aspergers?) to L even though L was sort of on the edge. Sometimes ... well I've gotta hit the road. My wife is expecting me upstate.