SEARCH

Enter your search query in the box above ^, or use the forum search tool.

You are not logged in.

#151 2013-10-31 17:29:11

snowpine
#!-a-roo
Registered: 2008-11-24
Posts: 2,984

Re: How we moderate your forum - feedback encouraged

When I was a moderator here, I banned who I wanted, when I wanted, and didn't feel a need to justify it to anyone (other than corenominal). I fully support chillicampari in this case (even without knowing the details). smile


/hugged

Offline

Be excellent to each other!

#152 2013-10-31 17:43:32

anonymous
The Mystery Member
Registered: 2008-11-29
Posts: 9,419

Re: How we moderate your forum - feedback encouraged

intoCB wrote:

One thing that could be rethought is the need to close threads in the off-topic section for going off-topic. Perhaps given the nature of that section, threads there could be allowed to wander.

I would add that if that the number of off-topic posts are significant and themselves about a singular topic, they should be split off as necessary. The resulting thread will have their main topic, no threads are closed, and everyone is happy.

snowpine wrote:

When I was a moderator here, I banned who I wanted, when I wanted, and didn't feel a need to justify it to anyone (other than corenominal). I fully support chillicampari in this case (even without knowing the details). smile

Except for the justification to corenominal, your post reads like your really enjoy the power of being a moderator ]:D

Offline

#153 2013-10-31 19:23:25

snowpine
#!-a-roo
Registered: 2008-11-24
Posts: 2,984

Re: How we moderate your forum - feedback encouraged

^ Don't make me ban you, too, Anonymous!  ]:D


/hugged

Offline

#154 2013-10-31 21:27:58

ew
#! Die Hard
Registered: 2012-09-27
Posts: 1,975

Re: How we moderate your forum - feedback encouraged

pvsage wrote:

Regarding Linuxephus™'s ban:  It wasn't just his comments here, or in PM, or in the DDoS threads, or his rather condescending attitude toward chillicampari or his personal insults directed at lcafiero - it was the aggregate of his posts across many threads, and it did not happen without some debate amongst the moderators.  It also had nothing to do with his writing style, which smacked not of high intelligence but a massive ego, and which I found frightfully dull.  Suffice to say that we gave him many opportunities, dating back to before the DDoS attacks, to make nice.

I think sorcerer's_apprentice summed things up well in the post above, and thank him for the kind words.  I also think everyone has said their piece regarding this particular issue. cool

Problem is that I have never seen anything in any post across here, that would legitimate banning him. Not even to warn him. Having a big ego isn`t a reason. The problem is that you mods are evaluating anyone in this way, because you should have guidelines to follow, and not put your own opinions into it. Whether someone is modest or displays a big ego should be totally irrelevevant. Being likeable shouldn`t be a criteria, as we all like different types of people, and I like Linuxephus way more than  I like the users that you probably like. A big ego works very well for me, if the person can back it up. If not, it gets stupid, but even then it`s ok, because you mods shouldn`t evaluate our personalities. Quite frankly,it isn`t your business smile


- apt-mark hold account

Offline

#155 2013-10-31 21:29:11

ew
#! Die Hard
Registered: 2012-09-27
Posts: 1,975

Re: How we moderate your forum - feedback encouraged

snowpine wrote:

When I was a moderator here, I banned who I wanted, when I wanted, and didn't feel a need to justify it to anyone (other than corenominal). I fully support chillicampari in this case (even without knowing the details). smile

If you are supporting someone without knowing the details, then you are only demonstrating stupidity...


- apt-mark hold account

Offline

#156 2013-10-31 21:36:53

lcafiero
The #! Guy
From: Felton, California, USA
Registered: 2011-07-21
Posts: 2,225
Website

Re: How we moderate your forum - feedback encouraged

Seriously, ew, you need to get past the sadly mistaken idea you harbor that it was his personality that got him banned. It wasn't that, as outlined numerous times in this thread.


Res publica non dominetur | Larry the CrunchBang Guy speaks of the pompetous of CrunchBang

CrunchBang Forum moderator

Offline

#157 2013-10-31 21:38:21

ew
#! Die Hard
Registered: 2012-09-27
Posts: 1,975

Re: How we moderate your forum - feedback encouraged

sorcerer's_apprentice wrote:
ew wrote:

@ lcafiero

Because then the community would be filled with only "modest humble" people that excuse themselves for breathing, or stupid people unable to think for themselves. Nothing wrong with being either of the two, but it isn`t the followers that should "lead" the pack...

Modesty doesn't equate to people being brainwashed fan-girls/boys. It simply means that you stick to a certain courtesy that comes along with public communication.

You should know from your experience here that arguments do take place all the time. If they get out of hand or a thread is going in circles a mod will intervene. And I very much appreciate that. Although I have - more than once - sat in front of my screen cursing the mods for closing down the threads that were the most interesting to me at that moment. ]:D But because I know that this is primarily a forum committed to a particular linux-distro I can accept that for the sake of the overall quality of the experience here.

ew wrote:

Anyway, perhaps this community isn`t for me. I more and more get that feeling. Sure, I can post a question about a linux-issue or help others with their linux-issues, and for that purpose the forum functions well. But for all other purposes it`s kind of redundant because of it`s policy and some of the staffs attitudes and perceptions in some issues.

Not trying to take sides here I think that you are making false assumptions here - or at least are jumping to conclusions.

You don't know what have been the contents of any private messaging that has been going on here - as you have already pointed out. So I think it would be fair to apply the benefit of a doubt to both sides:

Maybe Linuxephus was out of line - maybe a mod. We can't know that since the content of these messages is private - and should stay that way as far as I am concerned. In the case that Linuxephus overstepped a line you also wouldn't do him a favor if you wanted it to be disclosed and not having it disclosed also is a forum-policy which I find highly valuable. In this case it might bother you - but in another case you would totally agree that "what happens in PM should stay in PM". In that sense I find your reasoning kind of arbitrary...

You know the people who moderate the forums: I don't know if I overlooked someone there - it seems as if all of them have appeared in this thread and commented on the matter - and all of them basically agree with the protocol of events chillicampari has given. So you can ask yourself how trustworthy they are and how trustworthy Linuxephus has been. I am not saying that you should have a certain outcome to that thought-process - but it would be fair to consider that before accusing people of incompetence, inadequate sensitivity or spoiling the party.

The problem is the lack of transperency. They are putting together lots of different small things that lead to this, but as I`ve seen nothing wrong from Linuxephus at this community, it`s quite clear that I don`t agree with the policy they are moderating. If there is a policy, that is. It seems to be more up to each mod and what he /she likes/dislikes.

But there is no point in debating this anymore. I understand that I`m the odd one here, and draw my conclutions from that.


- apt-mark hold account

Offline

#158 2013-10-31 21:44:50

ew
#! Die Hard
Registered: 2012-09-27
Posts: 1,975

Re: How we moderate your forum - feedback encouraged

lcafiero wrote:

Seriously, ew, you need to get past the sadly mistaken idea you harbor that it was his personality that got him banned. It wasn't that, as outlined numerous times in this thread.

Quite funny considering that you mods have explained it with his personality in several posts now. He isn`t modest enough, he has a big ego etc.... etc... Read your own posts and the posts from the other mods and say that his personality hasn`t got anything to do with it. Well, if you don`t want me to speculate as to why he was banned,  then you could choose to be transparent enough to tell me exactly why he was banned. Who knows, I might even agree. But when you don`t reveal the real reasons, at least not any reasons that are valid, then I get suspicious. There have also been signals from the moderating-staff on several occuations that could imply that this forum is being moderated as if it was a forum for tubbies in lala-land.

Last edited by ew (2013-10-31 21:46:06)


- apt-mark hold account

Offline

#159 2013-10-31 22:01:49

Unia
#! Octo-portal-pussy
From: The Netherlands
Registered: 2010-07-17
Posts: 4,634
Website

Re: How we moderate your forum - feedback encouraged

Lcafiero, this topic is for feedback. Ew is giving exactly that and I'm not liking that you are getting more "aggressive". I too did not like Linuxephus, but on the other hand I also fail to see a reason for banning him. For that reason, I applaud ew for wanting some clarification and I too, would like to see something more than this. If you don't want to make it public, do it in a PM - but to ask for feedback and then not doing anything with what is being asked (without a valid reason, you never mentioned why you're not opening up those PMs), is stupid.


If you can't sit by a cozy fire with your code in hand enjoying its simplicity and clarity, it needs more work. --Carlos Torres

I am a #! forum moderator. Feel free to send me a PM with any question you have!

Offline

#160 2013-10-31 22:19:43

snowpine
#!-a-roo
Registered: 2008-11-24
Posts: 2,984

Re: How we moderate your forum - feedback encouraged

ew wrote:

If you are supporting someone without knowing the details, then you are only demonstrating stupidity...

Kissing moderator ass is never stupid, why else would they let me hang around here?  {)

Last edited by snowpine (2013-10-31 22:22:14)


/hugged

Offline

#161 2013-10-31 22:21:34

sorcerer's_apprentice
#! Junkie
From: oblivion
Registered: 2013-02-09
Posts: 293

Re: How we moderate your forum - feedback encouraged

Unia wrote:

I too did not like Linuxephus, but on the other hand I also fail to see a reason for banning him. For that reason, I applaud ew for wanting some clarification and I too, would like to see something more than this. If you don't want to make it public, do it in a PM - but to ask for feedback and then not doing anything with what is being asked (without a valid reason, you never mentioned why you're not opening up those PMs), is stupid.

I guess the main reason why the content of the PM is held back simply is not to support the accusations being made by repeating them publicly.

The important thing is that the reason for the ban has been made clear to Linuxephus and I trust it has been.

ew wrote:

Quite funny considering that you mods have explained it with his personality in several posts now. He isn`t modest enough, he has a big ego etc.... etc... Read your own posts and the posts from the other mods and say that his personality hasn`t got anything to do with it.

If you yourself would go back and read those posts that you refer to carefully you would also find other reasons which add much more weight to the decision:

pvsage wrote:

[...]his rather condescending attitude toward chillicampari or his personal insults directed at lcafiero[...]

Which I myself also found extremely out of line, insulting and not fit for the general tone of discussion here.

chillicampari wrote:

I banned them from the forum was due to a personal attack on another member and deliberately misleading information in private messaging regarding current events that did not check out with the facts.

This in itself - if true - is enough to justify the ban in my opinion. But I already stated the difficulty of making these accusations public and thus fully comprehensible.

pvsage wrote:

Suffice to say that we gave him many opportunities, dating back to before the DDoS attacks, to make nice.

If this is true then to me it appears as if there has been enough conflict management been applied to this by the mods. If you were to say that this didn't take place - you are basically accusing the mods of lying which leads back to the question of trust I brought up in my earlier post...

Last edited by sorcerer's_apprentice (2013-10-31 22:25:31)

Offline

#162 2013-10-31 22:41:54

pvsage
Internal Affairs
From: North Carolina
Registered: 2009-10-18
Posts: 13,970

Re: How we moderate your forum - feedback encouraged

ew wrote:
lcafiero wrote:

Seriously, ew, you need to get past the sadly mistaken idea you harbor that it was his personality that got him banned. It wasn't that, as outlined numerous times in this thread.

Quite funny considering that you mods have explained it with his personality in several posts now. He isn`t modest enough, he has a big ego etc.... etc... Read your own posts and the posts from the other mods and say that his personality hasn`t got anything to do with it.

If you'll re-read my post on this, which you quoted here, you'll see that I specifically said "it had nothing to do with his writing style".  Let me repeat that:  His writing style and our opinion of it had nothing to do with his banning.

I have nothing further to say on the matter.

Offline

#163 2013-10-31 22:44:32

pvsage
Internal Affairs
From: North Carolina
Registered: 2009-10-18
Posts: 13,970

Re: How we moderate your forum - feedback encouraged

snowpine wrote:

When I was a moderator here, I banned who I wanted, when I wanted, and didn't feel a need to justify it to anyone (other than corenominal). I fully support chillicampari in this case (even without knowing the details). smile

@snowpine:  "You are so random!" lol

Offline

#164 2013-10-31 22:50:20

ew
#! Die Hard
Registered: 2012-09-27
Posts: 1,975

Re: How we moderate your forum - feedback encouraged

sorcerer's_apprentice wrote:

If this is true then to me it appears as if there has been enough conflict management been applied to this by the mods. If you were to say that this didn't take place - you are basically accusing the mods of lying which leads back to the question of trust I brought up in my earlier post...

Nope, you can not logically draw that conclution. There are several other possibilities. Like the fact that I could perceive his posts in another way than the mods do, and/or that we draw the line at a different degree of "insult". Many people(mods included) doesn`t understand ironi and doesn`t accept sarcasm as a way to debate. But I do accept sarcasm, and it could be there our perception takes different directions...

The mods mentioned that he had received several warnings for his behaviour in posts across here. Well, I just want you to link me to a couple of posts that would legitimate banning him. I`m not interested in posts that explains why you don`t like him, because to me that is irrelevant.

I need these answers, because at this stage I DO NOT KNOW what kind of behaviour that could lead me to get banned some day. As I don`t find a single thread where I feel that Linuxephus are on the wrong side of what should be tolerated. That line can not be drawn according to each mods personal likes/dislikes, but be drawn from objective criterias that are understandable for everybody.


- apt-mark hold account

Offline

#165 2013-10-31 23:01:52

ew
#! Die Hard
Registered: 2012-09-27
Posts: 1,975

Re: How we moderate your forum - feedback encouraged

pvsage wrote:

I have nothing further to say on the matter.

That`s fine, but then you have to accept that I don`t find that you have provided any valid reasons for banning him. I just have to take your word for it. Not that I trust Linuxephus as I don`t know him, but I don`t know any of you mods either, and therefore it`s word against word for me, but the lack of transperency is providing me with valid reasons to be suspicious..., so at this stage I`m siding with Linuxephus, and will continue to do so, until someone can provide a real reason for banning him. As I don`t even find a post that should be deleted, it`s very hard to grasp that his behaviour should cause him to be banned.

But as I said, there`s no point discussing this any more. I`m drawing my own conclutions based on the mods behaviour in this thread, and quite frankly. It doesn`t paint a pretty picture.


- apt-mark hold account

Offline

#166 2013-10-31 23:07:04

pvsage
Internal Affairs
From: North Carolina
Registered: 2009-10-18
Posts: 13,970

Re: How we moderate your forum - feedback encouraged

ew wrote:

I need these answers, because at this stage I DO NOT KNOW what kind of behaviour that could lead me to get banned some day. As I don`t find a single thread where I feel that Linuxephus are on the wrong side of what should be tolerated. That line can not be drawn according to each mods personal likes/dislikes, but be drawn from objective criterias that are understandable for everybody.

Well, for one thing, if a mod (EDIT: or any forum member) asks not to be addressed as "young lady", it's a bad idea to persist.  For another, if a mod (EDIT: ibid.) posts a photo of himself, it's probably a bad idea to poke fun at his appearance.  These were contributing factors, but PMs (and Linuxephus was referring to these PMs in one of his last posts here) were the main issue.  PM trolling is as objectionable as trolling in public threads.

EDIT to add:  This applies for all forum members, not just mods.  The single most important rule is one that, I would hope, does not need to be stated:  All forum members are to be treated with at least a modicum of respect.

Last edited by pvsage (2013-11-01 05:53:50)

Offline

#167 2013-10-31 23:09:40

sorcerer's_apprentice
#! Junkie
From: oblivion
Registered: 2013-02-09
Posts: 293

Re: How we moderate your forum - feedback encouraged

ew wrote:
sorcerer's_apprentice wrote:

If this is true then to me it appears as if there has been enough conflict management been applied to this by the mods. If you were to say that this didn't take place - you are basically accusing the mods of lying which leads back to the question of trust I brought up in my earlier post...

Nope, you can not logically draw that conclution. There are several other possibilities. Like the fact that I could perceive his posts in another way than the mods do, and/or that we draw the line at a different degree of "insult". Many people(mods included) doesn`t understand ironi and doesn`t accept sarcasm as a way to debate. But I do accept sarcasm, and it could be there our perception takes different directions...

I need these answers, because at this stage I DO NOT KNOW what kind of behaviour that could lead me to get banned some day. As I don`t find a single thread where I feel that Linuxephus are on the wrong side of what should be tolerated. That line can not be drawn according to each mods personal likes/dislikes, but be drawn from objective criterias that are understandable for everybody.

You don't get it? Do you? This isn't about interpreting shit differently - but about pretty blatant breaches of forum-policy. To me it appears as if you were the only one here that interprets things according to his personal likes.

Offline

#168 2013-11-01 00:21:12

ew
#! Die Hard
Registered: 2012-09-27
Posts: 1,975

Re: How we moderate your forum - feedback encouraged

sorcerer's_apprentice wrote:

You don't get it? Do you? This isn't about interpreting shit differently - but about pretty blatant breaches of forum-policy. To me it appears as if you were the only one here that interprets things according to his personal likes.

That`s because I`m one of the few that`s not only pretending to be tolerant and liberal. To me this especially means to be tolerant towards opinions and behaviours that I don`t like. If anyone calls me a young lady I would just find it funny, and if anyone would make fun of my appearance, it would bother me either. It`s the nature of things. If you put your photo up there, people will make fun of it, regardless if you look good or bad. There`s always something to make fun of.

Anyway, if that`s the reason and the truth then I understand the ban, but I don`t understand all the sidetalk that only confuse the situation. Why not simply say that he was banned because he bullied a mod by attacking his appearance, together with other ill behaviour towards that moderator.

Why talk about behaviour across here, when no bad behaviour is to be seen. You`ve obviously warned him before, also for his posts, and it`s those that I`m interested in, because I can`t find any, or remenber that I have read any that crosses the line of what should be accepted.

As a sidenote. If one at all should have moderators, it`s not a good idea that they post their real profile picture or present themselves with a real identity. It`s good practice that the mods separate their roles as moderators from their role as common users, by having two different profiles for those two roles. A moderator should never participate in any debates with the sheriff-star strapped on his/her chest. It`s a provokation in itself having to debate with a opponent that posses both the ban and delete buttons. The best thing is if the mods doesn`t participate at all in the debates, but simply do their task in the background so that no one even notice that they are there.


- apt-mark hold account

Offline

#169 2013-11-01 00:29:18

ew
#! Die Hard
Registered: 2012-09-27
Posts: 1,975

Re: How we moderate your forum - feedback encouraged

pvsage wrote:

[
Well, for one thing, if a mod asks not to be addressed as "young lady", it's a bad idea to persist.  For another, if a mod posts a photo of himself, it's probably a bad idea to poke fun at his appearance.  These were contributing factors, but PMs (and Linuxephus was referring to these PMs in one of his last posts here) were the main issue.  PM trolling is as objectionable as trolling in public threads.

I agree that it`s bad to make fun of someones appearance, but I don`t agree that all trolling is objectionable. It depends on your defination. Because trolling can also be a way to bring life  and engagement to a forum. It`s possible to be a nice troll.


- apt-mark hold account

Offline

#170 2013-11-01 00:39:33

sorcerer's_apprentice
#! Junkie
From: oblivion
Registered: 2013-02-09
Posts: 293

Re: How we moderate your forum - feedback encouraged

ew wrote:

Anyway, if that`s the reason and the truth then I understand the ban, but I don`t understand all the sidetalk that only confuse the situation. Why not simply say that he was banned because he bullied a mod by attacking his appearance, together with other ill behaviour towards that moderator.

...because that wasn't the main reason as stated so many times before. But you successfully blend out the relevant "sidetalk" in order not to recognize that.

We are moving in circles here.

Offline

#171 2013-11-01 01:26:32

ew
#! Die Hard
Registered: 2012-09-27
Posts: 1,975

Re: How we moderate your forum - feedback encouraged

sorcerer's_apprentice wrote:
ew wrote:

Anyway, if that`s the reason and the truth then I understand the ban, but I don`t understand all the sidetalk that only confuse the situation. Why not simply say that he was banned because he bullied a mod by attacking his appearance, together with other ill behaviour towards that moderator.

...because that wasn't the main reason as stated so many times before. But you successfully blend out the relevant "sidetalk" in order not to recognize that.

We are moving in circles here.

But there is no other main reason. You are only saucing together a lot of reasons, and each mod puts different weight on any of the reasons. So far it`s the claimed bullying that is the only reason that I find valid. He hasn`t written a single post as far as I can see that qualifies to ban him, and even if I add every post together, there is still no reason to ban him. So the activity across here isn`t valid.

Well, it isn`t caused by his writing style according to Pvsage, it`s not that he has a big ego and lack modesty, it isn`t the bullying of the mod according to you. Well, what`s left? The infamous PM`s that you will not reveal anything from. I guess you are quite right. We are moving in circles. Because you beat around the bush. You can`t talk me around. Unless you can provide the full and detailed reason as to why he was banned, without any bs, boiled down to the core issue, and that alone, I will never be satisfied, and if you can`t provide that, you might as well leave me with no reply, which is much less insulting.

The mods can thank themselves for this mess, because when you serve a plate to full of soup, it will become messy. Have the respect and decency to answer questions properly, or if the details can not be revealed, say "no comment". It`s much better than saucing  together a lot of reasons that`s supposed to legitimate the ban. If there isn`t ONE ISSUE that on its own qualifies for a ban, then there isn`t any reason to ban anyone. You can`t keep piling together lots of small issues, and make a big deal of them together...


- apt-mark hold account

Offline

#172 2013-11-01 01:56:37

anonymous
The Mystery Member
Registered: 2008-11-29
Posts: 9,419

Re: How we moderate your forum - feedback encouraged

ew wrote:

The best thing is if the mods doesn`t participate at all in the debates, but simply do their task in the background so that no one even notice that they are there.

I don't know if I would want the mods to make all their actions in secret. While some actions could be performed silently (deleting spam), sooner or later mods will do something that a bit more noticeable and then someone is gonna ask what happened to person X or post Y or thread Z, etc. Might as well have disclosed your actions from the beginning.

Offline

#173 2013-11-01 02:20:01

ew
#! Die Hard
Registered: 2012-09-27
Posts: 1,975

Re: How we moderate your forum - feedback encouraged

anonymous wrote:
ew wrote:

The best thing is if the mods doesn`t participate at all in the debates, but simply do their task in the background so that no one even notice that they are there.

I don't know if I would want the mods to make all their actions in secret. While some actions could be performed silently (deleting spam), sooner or later mods will do something that a bit more noticeable and then someone is gonna ask what happened to person X or post Y or thread Z, etc. Might as well have disclosed your actions from the beginning.

Not in secret. But when a moderator is doing a good job, then you hardly notice them. They are not supposed to take much space. Of course, with professional moderating like this, it`s wise to have a stricky thread where people can ask questions about the things you mention. But if you are pissed on a moderator from debating with him in ordinary topics, then it`s very hard to respect them in their role as moderators.


- apt-mark hold account

Offline

#174 2013-11-01 05:32:25

intoCB
Scatweasel
Registered: 2012-10-25
Posts: 2,412

Re: How we moderate your forum - feedback encouraged

This thread is now a spidermod thread.

Offline

Help fund CrunchBang, donate to the project!

#175 2013-11-01 09:27:53

iMBeCil
WAAAT?
From: Edrychwch o'ch cwmpas
Registered: 2012-03-22
Posts: 1,026
Website

Re: How we moderate your forum - feedback encouraged

I must say that I do not understand what ew is trying to accomplish ...

A particular forum is not a democracy. Nor it should be, in my opinion.

#! forum is meant to have particular purpose and role (crunchbang), created by corenominal, and 'controlling' by mods. Mods maybe right or wrong, but from my standpoint, they did no harm so far.

As for the Linuxephus, I soon realized that it is not worth to read/understand his posts, since they did not contain nothing interesting as 'defined' in forum's  purpose. (Call it a trolling, or not ... it is not about terminology.) So I skipped his posts. I also skip useless ponies topic (one mod should really ban himself smile ). There are several other users I do not really read, some of them simply because I am not interested in their stuff, even if they are fully compatible with forum intent. If the number of posts I do not have interest in grows too large (for example, all people suddenly post only in ponies topic), I will simply leave the forum. And no one will miss me, I am sure.

So, what exactly are you trying to accomplish, ew? Redefine purpose of this forum?


Postpone all your duties; if you die, you won't have to do them ..
--> The very new BL forum! <--

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB

Copyright © 2012 CrunchBang Linux.
Proudly powered by Debian. Hosted by Linode.
Debian is a registered trademark of Software in the Public Interest, Inc.
Server: acrobat

Debian Logo