Do the moderators play favorites in deciding who to ban?

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

That will only work if someone takes notice rather than dismissing it as whining.

If you read my posts, I tooks Ron's suggestion as a good suggestion. I haven't seen anyone else post a good suggestion, just whining.

Derek

[freakbrother 0]

Quote

Quote

That will only work if someone takes notice rather than dismissing it as whining.

If you read my posts, I tooks Ron's suggestion as a good suggestion. I haven't seen anyone else post a good suggestion, just whining.

Derek

"Houston, we have a problem" isn't whining.

.
.
www.freak-brother.com

[Tf15 0]

Quote

Quote

That will only work if someone takes notice rather than dismissing it as whining.

If you read my posts, I tooks Ron's suggestion as a good suggestion. I haven't seen anyone else post a good suggestion, just whining.

Derek

Billvon has told us dozens of times during the last year that you can't move on until you admit there's a problem. (His context is, of course, President Bush).

The moderators here are steadfastly denying any problem. They just tell those who suggest that everything in the garden may not be lovely to leave, and not let the door hit them in the ass on the way out.

Why are you asking for suggestions when they (and you) haven't admitted there's a problem? That's premature. Why is Ron's idea a good one if there's no problem to be fixed?

Three times is enemy action

[PhreeZone 20]

John... I don't know why you are posting under 2 other ID's in here since your main one was banned. But what if the issue is only being percieved as an issue by those that get kicked out?

If 99% of the community is'nt up in arms and voicing their concerns you have to wonder where the issue really is.

Personally, I'd think it would solve issues to have a sticky at the top of the fourm listing anyone perm banned, those on a short term break, and those that have racked up a lot of warnings, who kicked them and a link to the specific post (or series of posts). Everyone can learn just where the community standerds line is drawn that way. So they learn if person X says "You are a spineless weasle" and gets kicked then they know what is acceptible. But if someone gets kicked for "You have no class if you think that" then a different line is drawn. But at least everyone knows the line now.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

Why are you asking for suggestions when they (and you) haven't admitted there's a problem? That's premature.

I didn't say there is a problem, nor did I ask for suggestions. People responded that what I called whining was actually suggestions to make things better. I reponded that there had been only one suggestion, which I happen to like. The rest is whining.

Also, you don't need a problem to improve things. My reserve pack jobs are great, but I am always trying to make them better. I'm not trying to fix a problem as I am striving for perfection.

I have made it very clear that:

1) There isn't a problem.

2) If there was a problem and you don't like it, too bad. Some people say that adding the content to this site, that makes them owed something from DZ.com. That is a false assumption.

If I thow a party and supply all the food, etc and you don't like the party, leave. Don't come back. But don't tell me that I am being unfair because I kicked out the loud mouthed drunk, but not the quiet drunk and if I have to change how I decide who I kick out of my house. If you do that at my house, I'll throw you out with the loud mouthed drunk.

HH is under no obligation to be fair. He, and the Moderators are as fair as humanly possible out of their sense of right and wrong and just plain being good people. They do a thankless job just to make DZ.com the place it is. And this is how they are thanked. People ought to be ashamed of themselves.

Derek

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

But don't tell me that I am being unfair because I kicked out the loud mouthed drunk, but not the quiet drunk and if I have to change how I decide who I kick out of my house. If you do that at my house, I'll throw you out with the loud mouthed drunk.

But if they want to hang out with the load mouthed drunk in the first place, then everyone is happy.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[wmw999 2,587]

Quote

If I thow a party and supply all the food, etc and you don't like the party, leave. Don't come back. But don't tell me that I am being unfair because I kicked out the loud mouthed drunk, but not the quiet drunk and if I have to change how I decide who I kick out of my house. If you do that at my house, I'll throw you out with the loud mouthed drunk.

This applies even if the loud mouthed drunk, the quiet drunk, or the complainer are the wittiest, funniest, most intelligent and insightful people at the party.

If he ends up with a party that sucks, people will leave. Those guys' friends might leave. But it is his house.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[peregrinerose 0]

Isn't this thread so dead it has decomposed and fed the surrounding plant life yet?

Do or do not, there is no try -Yoda

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

But if they want to hang out with the load mouthed drunk in the first place, then everyone is happy.

Doesn't matter, if I don't want the loud mouthed runk at my party, then I'm kicking him out. If anyone or everyone decides that is unfair and wants to hang out w/ the loud mouthed drunk, you are free to leave and go hang out with him. If everyone at the party tells me that if I kick him out they are leaving, the party is over. No people no party, by being there, they make the party. But that doesn't mean that they can tell me who I kick out and who I don't. If you don't like who I invite to the party and who I throw out, don't come to my party. My party, my rules.

If you stand up in the middle of the party and whine to everyone I am being unfair by throwing out the loud mouthed drunk, I'm tossing you out too. If you feel strongly that I am being unfair and my party sucks bacuase I am unfair, you are free to leave and it won't hurt my feelings one bit. In fact, it would probably be better if you did.

Derek

[rehmwa 2]

No,no - I was on your side and I found your post funny as follows:

If you kick out the 2nd guy, then he's with the loud mouth drunk (LMD) you already kicked out. Everyone's happy - whiner and LMD are together outside - party goers are happy inside - house owner is happy

I should have tossed in a or maybe a .

Didn't realize you were writing angry, I was thinking you were just showing an example.

I like HH's house, he doesn't even get upset over a little spilled whine, just sprays on some Resolve and soaks it up with a chamois.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[TomAiello 26]

Quote

The moderators here are steadfastly denying any problem.

DZ.com is a continuously evolving, almost organic, system. There are numerous minor tweaks being made all the time, and all of the moderators "evolve" in their moderations styles as well. Discussions in the moderators forum, threads like this one, suggestions made via PM, comments over beer, etc--they all have some impact on everything that happens here.

It's not that there is or isn't a problem. Things just keep changing, and getting a little bit better (we hope) at a time. The system grows, and experiences growing pains, then adjusts and tries to rebalance.

This isn't a science. Heck, it probably isn't even an art. It's more of an ongoing growth process, or a community building experiment.

Sure there are problems--and good things. And they are talked over, addressed, worked on, and changed almost constantly.

-- Tom Aiello

Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com

[Nightingale 0]

probably a lot of the percieved "bias" comes from a bit of fuzziness on the part of the members as to what exactly the rules are, and how they are being inforced.

For example, the "no personal attacks" rule... it says don't do it, but it doesn't define it.

Perhaps, when a thread is locked or a post removed, there could be a statement saying, for example, "post removed due to personal attack" or "thread locked due to topic drift", just to clarify what's being done and why.

I don't think the moderators are biased, just that the members are sometimes confused over the reasons behind a moderator's actions.

[jakee 1,594]

Quote

HH is under no obligation to be fair. He, and the Moderators are as fair as humanly possible out of their sense of right and wrong and just plain being good people. They do a thankless job just to make DZ.com the place it is. And this is how they are thanked. People ought to be ashamed of themselves.

[Applause] Harrumph! Harrumph! Harrumph! [/Applause]



("Hey! I didn't get a Harrumph! out of this guy."
"Give the Governor a Harrumph!"
"Harrumph!")

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[LouDiamond 1]

Quote

the "no personal attacks" rule... it says don't do it, but it doesn't define it.

I beg to differ. Perhaps those who feel there is not enough definition or guidance should go back and re-read the rules as I think they are quite clear. If you are un sure about anything, feel free to PM one of the moderators and we will help you.

excerpt from the rules ref personal attacks

Specific Forum Policies

No Personal attacks, Flaming and Trolling.
Personal attacks and hate posts will not be tolerated in any forum. Personal attacks on another user are a great way to earn some time off, as is posting inflammatory material specifically to provoke a negative response from someone (aka trolling). If you are unclear about what a 'troll' is, a description can be found here.

Posts that contain material that we deem to be blatantly or unnecessarily racist, sexist, homophobic, bigoted, pornographic, or otherwise offensive, will be removed. While discussion of certain social and political issues may require the use of sensitive or potentially offensive terms, outside of those limited contexts the use of such terms is not allowed on this board and may be removed.

Dropzone.com is a worldwide community. We expect that you'll show respect and sensitivity to the beliefs and views of all users regardless of whether they are part of a specific geography or not. (Note in particular that this is not a US site or forum, nor is it intended to serve or promote US values and beliefs per se. Be tolerant of diversity.) A member who is rude, excessively profane, or disruptive may receive a warning or may be suspended or banned immediately.

"It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required"
Some people dream about flying, I live my dream
SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING

[Nightingale 0]

well, what you posted states that personal attacks are a way to earn time off and won't be tolerated, but it still does not define the term.

It appears (no idea if this is actually the case...I have no knowledge of what goes on behind the scenes) that sometimes, the moderators use the definition of "I know it when I see it." but sometimes, the line appears to be drawn in different places by different mods for different people.

Again, I am not discussing actualities here, but am speaking only of appearances. Like I said before, I don't believe the moderation is biased, but I do see how it could appear so to people.

[Hooknswoop 19]

Form when I was a Moderator, it simply isn't possible to draw an exact, definitive line in the sand. Sometimes intentionally flirting with the line repeately and instigating fights will be seen as crossing the line. Sometimes I would warn them in a PM. Sometimes I would get a harsh reponse and they would immediately defy the rules immediately thereafter. I think some people act like kids, seeing how much they can get away with and if they will really be punished. Posting why a thread is being locked or was deleted adds more work and can generate arguments about whether or not the thread should have been locked/deleted. Sometimes the Moderators post why they lock or deleted a thread. Sometimes not.

I think an even better idea would be for people to respect the rules. Don't even get close to the line. Make the Moderators job easy and they won't have to explain why they took the action they did.

Derek

[Zenister 0]

Quote

For example, the "no personal attacks" rule...when a thread is locked

this honestly is one of my biggest gripes... locking a thread that several people may be participating in simply because one or two get into a pissing match give those 'one or two' who are participating in the pissing match (aka trolling) more power than those who are otherwise continuing a reasonably rational discussion....

this is particularly apparent in some of the more volatile threads that are locked as soon as the first few shots are taken by some (me included at times) and prohibits further discussion on that topic... sure you can always start another thread, however the flow of the discussion is lost at that point and many are not inclined to continue it when they feel that it will simply be locked again by more immature behavior....

____________________________________
Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed.

[sangiro 26]

Quote

Generally speaking, ignoring your user base is not a smart way of conducting your business.

You should absolutely ignore some people in your user base. It is the smartest thing you can do.
Read Bill's hot dog stand post again.... That explains the moderator's "bias" very well.

I am very happy with how the moderators do their jobs. I'd still like to hear some suggestions though. How should we make it better?

Safe swoops
Sangiro

[crwslut 0]

John... I don't know why you are posting under 2 other ID's in here since your main one was banned. But what if the issue is only being percieved as an issue by those that get kicked out?

-----
Wow! What was your purpose here? Am I missing a joke? Maybe something on the order of snitching in a thread about snitches?????

What could possibly go wrong?

[LouDiamond 1]

If any of the rules are not clear to the denizens here, please feel free to PM a moderator. If you feel personal attacks are not clearly defined enough for you in the rules then I suggest you also look at the sticky thread at the top of this forum for further guidance on personal attacks and moderator actions in response to them.

"It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required"
Some people dream about flying, I live my dream
SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING

[Nightingale 0]

well, there was a post above asking for suggestions. I gave some. What you chose to do with them, I don't care. I'm done with this thread.

[crwslut 0]

People who have been banned have been pushing the rules for quite a while. Even if Kallend's final straw was pretty weak, the history was clear. Same for the others.
------------------------------------------------------------

Really? This statement intrigued me so I've spent some of this evening searching and reading Kallend's posts.

I just read everything he posted for the past year and ...I don't get it. Were his more offensive posts removed? If so, I guess I don't have an informed opinion. If not, what is going on here?

What could possibly go wrong?

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Really? This statement intrigued me so I've spent some of this evening searching and reading Kallend's posts.

I just read everything he posted for the past year and ...I don't get it. Were his more offensive posts removed? If so, I guess I don't have an informed opinion. If not, what is going on here?

The silent removal of postings is a potential problem with that sort of research. I couldn't say for Kallend in particular. His style of attack is rather polite and indirect, but make no mistake about what he's doing. He is also a very good instigator - a "master baiter" in the tradition of USENET.