Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01-24-2020, 10:31 AM
filmore is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,835

There should be some penalty for protesting your warning and not having it overturned


While it's okay to discuss board moderation in a general aspect, I think it's detrimental for the board's culture for people who get a warning to then start a thread in ATMB to complain about the warning. Getting a warning is not the end of the world. The person should take the lesson to heart and move on. If they feel like they have been wronged, then an official complaint thread in ATMB may be warranted, but it should only be done after careful consideration. If they are just complaining to complain, then it seems like there should be some additional penalty for complaining about the warning. Having some downside to making a complaint will help to ensure that the complaint is valid.

This is similar to how the NFL allows coaches to ask for a review of a call by the officials. The coaches can't just ask for reviews whenever they feel like it. They have a certain number of challenges allowed per game. If the call is not overruled, they lose one of their timeouts. This format ensures the coaches will only make a challenge when they feel there has been a mistake made that's worth a second look.

So I would propose something similar here. If someone wants just complain and blow off some steam about their warning, they can create a thread in the Pit and rant to their heart's content. But if they want to make an official complaint about the warning in ATMB, then they should be risking something if the warning is not overturned. It could be that they lose the ability to post in the forum where they got the warning for a certain amount of time or something like that. This would help deter people with warnings from creating complaint threads in ATMB just to stir up more trouble.
  #2  
Old 01-24-2020, 10:34 AM
Turek is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Inara's shuttle
Posts: 4,055
That's absurd.

If the protest thread gets to be "too much" trouble, all the mods have to do is say "this is done" and close it.
  #3  
Old 01-24-2020, 10:40 AM
Joey P is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 29,870
100% disagree. Penalizing someone for protesting a warning gives the mods far more power. If the warning is overturned, nothing changes from the current system. If the warning isn't overturned, you're punished twice.
I also have never understood the idea that you should just accept the note because it's only a note. If you got pulled over while driving 30 in a 30mph zone and the cop gave you a written warning for going 55 in a 35, would you not want to contest that? Sure, it's just a warning, but the next time you deal with the police, that warning is going to show up.
Same thing here. You get a note for insulting someone when you didn't insult anyone, the mod simply misunderstood what you said (lets take that at face value). The next time there's an incident, they'll see the previous warning and take that into consideration with how to handle the current issue.

If, like in football, someone contests a warning in order to prevent or cause something else from happening, that's entirely different. Timeouts in football are/can be done for strategic reasons, otherwise the last 5 minutes of the game wouldn't take 20 minutes. I can understand penalizing people when they're using timeouts to game the system.

My suggestion would be that if a poster is consistently getting notes (or warnings) and consistently starting ATBM threads about them and the mods are consistently not overturning them (and other posters agree with that) then that seems like a one on one issue between that poster and the staff. Otherwise, this just seems like a solution in search of a problem.

ETA, the only way this system would make sense is if it's reciprocal. If a certain percentage of a mod's notes and warnings are overturned, they're forced to step down.

Also, with your system, what prevents a mod from just writings warnings and notes for the fun of it to see what sticks. Considering how many people will be afraid to contest them for fear of getting punished.

Last edited by Joey P; 01-24-2020 at 10:43 AM.
  #4  
Old 01-24-2020, 10:59 AM
filmore is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,835
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joey P View Post
Also, with your system, what prevents a mod from just writings warnings and notes for the fun of it to see what sticks. Considering how many people will be afraid to contest them for fear of getting punished.
What would prevent that is the board in general would start to complain about the moderation. The people getting the warnings would not need to start their own thread. Other people would be starting threads saying the mod is being a bad mod.

In threads where someone gets a warning for a misunderstanding, it's common for that person or other people to clarify that issue. But it's not an official thread in ATMB or anything. It's something like "I didn't mean to say it like that." and the thread moves on.

The system I'm proposing would not prevent people from complaining about their warnings, but it would make it less likely that people would be complaining just because they didn't like the warning. If there has truly been some misunderstanding, then the person can make a thread knowing that they may have another penalty if it doesn't work out. And it's not the end of the world if they get a 2nd penalty. It doesn't have to be another warning or ban. If a person feels so strongly that the warning was done incorrectly, they can still do it.
  #5  
Old 01-24-2020, 11:51 AM
kopek's Avatar
kopek is offline
born to be shunned
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Southwestern PA
Posts: 16,171
Quote:
Originally Posted by filmore View Post
What would prevent that is the board in general would start to complain about the moderation. The people getting the warnings would not need to start their own thread. Other people would be starting threads saying the mod is being a bad mod.
We already have a fair amount of that now. Sometimes by friends and sometimes not but it's not that uncommon.


I understand the OPs point and position and I will admit to getting frustrated myself at seeing the same people complaining about the same "points of Moderation" over and over again. But as at least one other has said, when that becomes the case the Mod for this forum can (and has) shut threads down. And at times the Mods and us learn things even from the clearest cases of a just warning being protested; it allows the board to grow and change with the times. So while I understand the theory of the OP I would be against its implementation.
  #6  
Old 01-24-2020, 11:56 AM
Jasmine's Avatar
Jasmine is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 2,585
I disagree for the same reason that I disagree with the policy of charging a defendant a "court fee" for appealing a moving violation and failing to win that appeal. It's a very intimidating policy, and people who might otherwise win in court are discouraged from even trying because of fear of punishment.

I remember appealing a "fixed camera" violation I got in the mail for speeding past a park. No speed was listed. My appeal was based on the fact that they couldn't even tell me how fast I was going. I basically got a picture of my car and an accusation. Their reply was that I could file a law suit for a fee of $360. Really?!
__________________
"The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance -- it is the illusion of knowledge."
--Daniel J Boorstin

Last edited by Jasmine; 01-24-2020 at 11:58 AM.
  #7  
Old 01-24-2020, 11:57 AM
kayaker's Avatar
kayaker is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Rural Western PA
Posts: 33,833
Likewise, I think someone creating a thread saying there should be some penalty for protesting your warning and not having it overturned should face some consequence if their suggestion is not acted upon.
  #8  
Old 01-24-2020, 12:10 PM
wolfpup's Avatar
wolfpup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 11,343
You're proposing a solution for a problem that doesn't exist. The ability to discuss moderation, including objecting to warnings, is one of the unique features of this board that makes it a better place. Many sites strictly prohibit any discussion or criticism of moderation, leaving moderators full scope for bias and capriciousness with zero accountability.

Even if an objection has no merit, explaining that fact -- which is often done by regular posters as well as mods -- helps others, especially the OP and new joins, understand the board culture better. I have rarely if ever seen an objection to a warning that was entirely frivolous, in that it lacked any kind of even semi-coherent explanation that usually merited at least some discussion, but any such posts can be quickly closed. Those who truly revel in trolling and sealioning are dealt with in other ways. I think the ATMB forum and its intended purposes are useful and important.
  #9  
Old 01-24-2020, 12:12 PM
GreysonCarlisle's Avatar
GreysonCarlisle is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 1,506
I agree. In fact, I think that trying to get something about the board's rules or culture changed should get dinged if the suggestion isn't implemented. After three dings, it's obvious that the poster isn't happy here, so the mods should help the poster move on.

Passive-aggressive surreptitious commentary on another poster under the guise of a suggestion should get two, maybe three, dings.
  #10  
Old 01-24-2020, 12:21 PM
filmore is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,835
Quote:
Originally Posted by kayaker View Post
Likewise, I think someone creating a thread saying there should be some penalty for protesting your warning and not having it overturned should face some consequence if their suggestion is not acted upon.
I actually agree with that. I am making a suggestion in the part of the board meant for official business. This request will take time and energy by the mods and admins to review and discuss. Someone making such a suggestion should feel strongly enough about the idea to make it worthy of that time and effort. If the person did not feel that strongly about their idea, they should make the suggestion in a part of the board with more casual discussions where the admins would not feel the need to respond.

The perspective I'm coming from is that moderation is done by volunteers. They have normal lives with TV to watch, family to be with, errands to run, etc. Moderation takes time and energy. It doesn't seem like it would be a fun or easy task to look at reports and rule on them. And often, that's met with lots of complaining no matter how they rule. All of that makes me wonder why anyone would be a mod anyway. I would think that greatly reduces the pool of people willing to be a mod and makes it much harder to find good mods . If someone makes an official complaint about their warning where the expectation is that the mods need to respond, that's more hassle the mod has to deal with. So I feel that a person making an official protest should have to make some sacrifice for creating that extra work for the volunteer mod who has to take time out of their day to respond.

This doesn't mean people can't complain about their warnings. They could do it in other parts of the board. And it doesn't mean they can't complain about moderation in general. That could still be done in ATMB. But if someone is starting a thread in ATMB of the form "I am protesting about my warning", then there should be a difference between a complainer just complaining and a person who got an unjust warning.
  #11  
Old 01-24-2020, 12:46 PM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 40,572
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfpup View Post
You're proposing a solution for a problem that doesn't exist.
I concur.
  #12  
Old 01-24-2020, 12:51 PM
Teuton's Avatar
Teuton is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Plymouth, UK
Posts: 1,799
Quote:
Originally Posted by filmore View Post
So I would propose something similar here. If someone wants just complain and blow off some steam about their warning, they can create a thread in the Pit and rant to their heart's content. But if they want to make an official complaint about the warning in ATMB, then they should be risking something if the warning is not overturned. It could be that they lose the ability to post in the forum where they got the warning for a certain amount of time or something like that. This would help deter people with warnings from creating complaint threads in ATMB just to stir up more trouble.
Allowing people to bitch about warnings in the Pit would be a mistake.
  #13  
Old 01-24-2020, 12:54 PM
bump is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 19,191
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfpup View Post
You're proposing a solution for a problem that doesn't exist. The ability to discuss moderation, including objecting to warnings, is one of the unique features of this board that makes it a better place. Many sites strictly prohibit any discussion or criticism of moderation, leaving moderators full scope for bias and capriciousness with zero accountability.

Even if an objection has no merit, explaining that fact -- which is often done by regular posters as well as mods -- helps others, especially the OP and new joins, understand the board culture better. I have rarely if ever seen an objection to a warning that was entirely frivolous, in that it lacked any kind of even semi-coherent explanation that usually merited at least some discussion, but any such posts can be quickly closed. Those who truly revel in trolling and sealioning are dealt with in other ways. I think the ATMB forum and its intended purposes are useful and important.
I agree... the mods are human, and can/do make mistakes, both in determining infractions and penalizing those infractions, and pointing those out and inviting debate about them gets us all to a better set of rules we all agree to.

After all, while it's not a democracy exactly, it isn't a totally top-down endeavor either, and we, the moderated do and should have some say in how that moderation is accomplished.
  #14  
Old 01-24-2020, 12:58 PM
CairoCarol is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Hawaii
Posts: 5,217
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfpup View Post
Even if an objection has no merit, explaining that fact -- which is often done by regular posters as well as mods -- helps others, especially the OP and new joins, understand the board culture better.
Exactly. I have plenty of sympathy for mods who have to take the time to patiently explain over and over why a particularly note or warning makes sense, but no one accepts the role of moderator here without knowing that responding to ATMB complaints is part of the deal.
__________________
If I waited for memory to serve, I'd starve.
  #15  
Old 01-24-2020, 12:58 PM
Joey P is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 29,870
It also seems to me that your system would inventive not overturning warnings and notes. If a mod warned someone and they formally object to it, the mod gets a two for one deal by letting it stand.
  #16  
Old 01-24-2020, 01:29 PM
filmore is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,835
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joey P View Post
It also seems to me that your system would inventive not overturning warnings and notes. If a mod warned someone and they formally object to it, the mod gets a two for one deal by letting it stand.
I've never thought of the mods being vindictive like that. And in any case if they were, acting like that in ATMB would likely lead to the mod's expulsion as a mod. I would suspect the board members would be very vocal if a mod was acting that way and the admins would take action.
  #17  
Old 01-24-2020, 01:48 PM
Joey P is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 29,870
Quote:
Originally Posted by filmore View Post
I've never thought of the mods being vindictive like that. And in any case if they were, acting like that in ATMB would likely lead to the mod's expulsion as a mod. I would suspect the board members would be very vocal if a mod was acting that way and the admins would take action.
I feel like you should take the same attitude towards the posters as well. Most of them/us aren't inundating the mods with requests to have warnings and notes overturned and the ones that are getting that many warnings/notes and constantly trying to get them overturned can be dealt with under other rules that won't hurt the rest of us.

What this rule does is turn every ATMB thread about a warning/note into a game of double or nothing.

It should be noted that as much as I prefer rules to be mostly clearly defined. I don't like rules created and applied to an entire group because of the actions of a single person. It's like your boss telling all the employees that they can no longer use their cell phones at work, but we all know it's because of those two people that are never not playing with theirs.
  #18  
Old 01-24-2020, 01:56 PM
Exapno Mapcase is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NY but not NYC
Posts: 32,035
While we're at it, I propose that anyone who takes a case to an Appeals Court and gets turned down should be strung up by their thumbs until the Supreme Court overturns the ruling.
  #19  
Old 01-24-2020, 02:00 PM
Tamerlane is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: SF Bay Area, California
Posts: 14,009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teuton View Post
Allowing people to bitch about warnings in the Pit would be a mistake.
Eh, people used to do it all the time when it was still allowed. It got tedious sometimes( often ), just like bitching in here gets tedious sometimes( often ). But I can't say the board ran much worse, particularly. It was just different.

But yeah, I agree with others that this proposal is a solution in search of a problem.
  #20  
Old 01-24-2020, 02:18 PM
Unreconstructed Man is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 556
Stupid idea
  #21  
Old 01-24-2020, 02:48 PM
MrDibble's Avatar
MrDibble is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cape Town, South Africa &
Posts: 27,398
We have too few mods as it is, and the OP's solution (to a non-existent problem, I might add) is to make more work for mods? Naah. The OP's idea is bad and they should feel bad for having it.
  #22  
Old 01-24-2020, 02:57 PM
Cheesesteak's Avatar
Cheesesteak is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Lovely Montclair, NJ
Posts: 13,997
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrDibble View Post
We have too few mods as it is, and the OP's solution (to a non-existent problem, I might add) is to make more work for mods?
They'll be OK with it if we double their pay.
  #23  
Old 01-24-2020, 02:58 PM
TruCelt's Avatar
TruCelt is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Near Washington, DC
Posts: 11,783
What are we, Nazi Germany? (Sorry, the Godwinian suspense was killing me.)

As annoying as they may be to the Mods (and I note that I haven't seen a Mod say so) I have often seen a lot of good come from these threads. Rules that made no sense to me get explored and explained. Important guidelines are delineated and minority points of view are expounded upon. I find them pretty interesting and tend to read them closely.

Last edited by TruCelt; 01-24-2020 at 02:58 PM.
  #24  
Old 01-24-2020, 04:03 PM
John DiFool's Avatar
John DiFool is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 18,531
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfpup View Post
You're proposing a solution for a problem that doesn't exist. The ability to discuss moderation, including objecting to warnings, is one of the unique features of this board that makes it a better place. Many sites strictly prohibit any discussion or criticism of moderation, leaving moderators full scope for bias and capriciousness with zero accountability.
I will hand it to the mod system here. In many of the other boards I frequent, NO warnings or bannings are announced formally, people all of a sudden have a new tag next to their name, with absolutely no explanation. In these same boards (+ others), protesting a warning gets you additional demerits, as does asking why your friend has suddenly been banned. I find such secretive underhanded hijinks to be hugely annoying, utterly pointless, and defeating the whole purpose of having any sort of discipline system in place to begin with.

Last edited by John DiFool; 01-24-2020 at 04:04 PM.
  #25  
Old 01-24-2020, 04:44 PM
Omar Little's Avatar
Omar Little is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Within
Posts: 13,372
Quote:
Originally Posted by filmore View Post
It could be that they lose the ability to post in the forum where they got the warning for a certain amount of time or something like that.
This should be the penalty for starting debate threads and losing the debate.
And for asking a General Question, that could be easily answered with a simple google search.
And for lame pittings.
  #26  
Old 01-24-2020, 05:21 PM
Atamasama's Avatar
Atamasama is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,180
Quote:
Originally Posted by filmore View Post
While it's okay to discuss board moderation in a general aspect, I think it's detrimental for the board's culture for people who get a warning to then start a thread in ATMB to complain about the warning.
I disagree with this statement which makes the rest of the suggestion moot.
  #27  
Old 01-24-2020, 05:57 PM
Atamasama's Avatar
Atamasama is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,180
Giving this more thought, I think this suggestion is unnecessary also because there is already a penalty for protesting a warning in ATMB.

Firstly, you’re highlighting your warning and inviting anyone and everyone to comment on it, opening yourself up to criticism and potentially harming your reputation (if you have one to harm). I’d rather let a warning go with no response other than “sorry, won’t happen again” for that reason alone, unless I felt it was particularly incorrect or confusing.

Secondly, by defending the behavior that led to the warning you’re demonstrating that you are likely to repeat it. If I made a slip in a thread and was warned not to do it again or risk suspension, and didn’t reply or apologized then that shows acceptance. If I protest, then it increases the likelihood that I might do it again. If mods are trying to establish whether I will be a habitual problem and should be banned then logically they should factor that in.

Finally, it’s possible that in protesting the warning I might reoffend. For example, in a conversation about cultural preference for hair colors I go on a rant about blondes being stupid. I get warned, and start an ATMB thread to defend myself by insisting that my statement was factual and as evidence I begin listing various blonde people I find to be stupid. That’s just digging the hole deeper.

So essentially, there’s no need to create penalties for these protest threads because there already are penalties, just not formal ones.
  #28  
Old 01-24-2020, 06:05 PM
Joey P is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 29,870
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atamasama View Post
Giving this more thought, I think this suggestion is unnecessary also because there is already a penalty for protesting a warning in ATMB.

Firstly, youíre highlighting your warning and inviting anyone and everyone to comment on it, opening yourself up to criticism and potentially harming your reputation (if you have one to harm). Iíd rather let a warning go with no response other than ďsorry, wonít happen againĒ for that reason alone, unless I felt it was particularly incorrect or confusing.

Secondly, by defending the behavior that led to the warning youíre demonstrating that you are likely to repeat it. If I made a slip in a thread and was warned not to do it again or risk suspension, and didnít reply or apologized then that shows acceptance. If I protest, then it increases the likelihood that I might do it again. If mods are trying to establish whether I will be a habitual problem and should be banned then logically they should factor that in.

Finally, itís possible that in protesting the warning I might reoffend. For example, in a conversation about cultural preference for hair colors I go on a rant about blondes being stupid. I get warned, and start an ATMB thread to defend myself by insisting that my statement was factual and as evidence I begin listing various blonde people I find to be stupid. Thatís just digging the hole deeper.

So essentially, thereís no need to create penalties for these protest threads because there already are penalties, just not formal ones.
I think you're missing the point of protesting a warning or note. It's not an admission of guilt, it's explaining to the mod in question that you didn't deserve the warning because you didn't break a rule. What you're speaking about is like going to traffic court to explain to the judge why you were driving so fast. On the other hand, questioning a warning here is more akin to going to traffic court to explain to the judge that you weren't speeding at all and you shouldn't have received the speeding ticket in the first place.
  #29  
Old 01-24-2020, 06:31 PM
Senegoid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Sunny California
Posts: 15,595
The mods should implement a totally randomized process for mod notes and warnings. They could decide upon some parameters, like maybe 1 post (statistically) out of 100 should get a mod note, and 1 out of 500 should get a warning. Then use random-number generators to determine which posts get those.

Bannings likewise could be done entirely by a randomized lottery, like in that short story by Shirley Jackson. This would be as fair and unbiased as can be, and totally uncontestable. (Which isn't even all that radical a proposal, as bannings are already uncontestable as it is.)

This would entirely eliminate any suspicion or appearance of bias on the part of the mods. For example, the politically conservative posters on this board, who sometimes complain of an anti-conservative bias, could be assured that they are treated as fairly as anyone.

The process could even be entirely automated with robomods. Rather than increase the workload of the live moderators (if any remain), this would certainly lighten their duties considerably.
  #30  
Old 01-24-2020, 06:48 PM
Do Not Taunt is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Seattle
Posts: 2,199
A few people have made the assumption that the sanction for challenging a warning and losing is another warning. But that isn't how it needs to work. If you challenge the call of Incomplete Pass and lose, you aren't penalized with another incomplete pass!

So here's what we do. If you challenge and lose, you lose one of your friends. You don't choose - they're lost at random. You're never allowed to make friends with that particular poster again. If you do not have any friends, you are not allowed to challenge any warnings until you make one. Finally, a use for the board's silliest feature!
  #31  
Old 01-24-2020, 07:00 PM
kanicbird is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 1999
Posts: 20,040
From my protesting my warning, which I believe was not overturned, there was a benefit that came out of it. More mods are highlighting their warnings in red text, which makes it much harder to simply miss and easier to follow mod's instructions.
  #32  
Old 01-24-2020, 07:55 PM
Frank Burly's Avatar
Frank Burly is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tamerlane View Post
Eh, people used to do it all the time when it was still allowed. It got tedious sometimes( often ), just like bitching in here gets tedious sometimes( often ). But I can't say the board ran much worse, particularly. It was just different.

But yeah, I agree with others that this proposal is a solution in search of a problem.
Why was the rule changed?
  #33  
Old 01-24-2020, 09:59 PM
Joey P is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 29,870
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank Burly View Post
Why was the rule changed?
IIRC, due to pit rules (or lack thereof) those threads got really, really vile.

I think there was an attempt to 'fix' that which led to a bunch of confusion and eventually threads discussion mod actions were to be started in ATMB and kept considerably more civil.
  #34  
Old 01-24-2020, 10:25 PM
Tamerlane is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: SF Bay Area, California
Posts: 14,009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank Burly View Post
Why was the rule changed?
It was part of a wider attempt by the former head administrator to try and "Marquis of Queensberry" up the place. It was also a very contentious change - there were staff resignations, angry flounces, splinter communities generated and all sorts of related sturm and drang that emerged from the whole thing.

The rules against bad language in the Pit( soon kinda eeled around and more recently mostly rescinded )attracted the most heat, but there were and are definitely folks that preferred to be able to rip moderators a new one over shitty mod calls. I was always pretty neutral on that myself. But even though it didn't impact me much the language-policing in the Pit as installed back then was pretty bullshit IMHO. Thankfully the worst of that is now gone.

Last edited by Tamerlane; 01-24-2020 at 10:28 PM.
  #35  
Old 01-24-2020, 11:20 PM
Moriarty's Avatar
Moriarty is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Denver, CO, USA
Posts: 3,243
I think the OP is right: If you protest a warning and it’s not overturned, you lose a timeout.
  #36  
Old 01-25-2020, 01:33 AM
Senegoid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Sunny California
Posts: 15,595
We've all got plenty of time-outs around here and we'd love to lose them. I want to protest some warnings so I'll lose some of those time-outs.
  #37  
Old 01-25-2020, 01:47 AM
Atamasama's Avatar
Atamasama is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joey P View Post
I think you're missing the point of protesting a warning or note. It's not an admission of guilt, it's explaining to the mod in question that you didn't deserve the warning because you didn't break a rule. What you're speaking about is like going to traffic court to explain to the judge why you were driving so fast. On the other hand, questioning a warning here is more akin to going to traffic court to explain to the judge that you weren't speeding at all and you shouldn't have received the speeding ticket in the first place.
Often the people protesting the warning or note are missing the point. I see people doubling down on the same behavior more than once. In effect, many times they are saying they were speeding but had a good reason for it.

Just look here:
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/...d.php?t=888777
Thatís one of the latest protests and they practically admitted to trolling in the process of arguing they werenít trolling. Itís not at all unusual.
  #38  
Old 01-25-2020, 09:32 AM
kopek's Avatar
kopek is offline
born to be shunned
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Southwestern PA
Posts: 16,171
OK but it needs being said

https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/001ee2e...6-d2498122ab31
  #39  
Old 01-25-2020, 10:22 AM
Joey P is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 29,870
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atamasama View Post
Often the people protesting the warning or note are missing the point. I see people doubling down on the same behavior more than once. In effect, many times they are saying they were speeding but had a good reason for it.

Just look here:
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/...d.php?t=888777
Thatís one of the latest protests and they practically admitted to trolling in the process of arguing they werenít trolling. Itís not at all unusual.
That's sort of what I'm getting at. The OP is attempting to stop a certain subset of posters from contesting every mod action directed at them. However, that's a pretty wide net to cast and it's going to cause problems for a lot of other people.

I'm not saying the problem doesn't exist, I'm saying that we don't need a solution for it. What the mods currently do seems to work just fine.
  #40  
Old 01-25-2020, 11:46 AM
Horatio Hellpop is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Jeju-si, S. Korea
Posts: 9,958
A lot of times, a moderator will post "Poster X has been banned" and listed all the times in the past the poster has been warned, so it's not as if letting an unjustified warning stand has no consequences.

If a specific poster starts a lot of threads about "I want to protest my warning," yeah, that's excessive, but I don't see that often enough to think something needs to be done.
  #41  
Old 01-25-2020, 12:08 PM
Jonathan Chance is offline
Domo Arigato Mister Moderato
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: On the run with Kilroy
Posts: 23,396
Yeah, I wouldn't support that change if my fellow mods proposed it.

I think one of the strengths of the SDMB is that feedback - polite feedback - is allowed in terms of protesting and discussing moderation decisions and policies. And sometimes things to get changed and policies remade. It's not often but it does happen.

I've seen other fora where moderation is both draconian and non-appealable. That's really not something we want to encourage. I'd prefer to have the back-and-forth - even if it's sometimes testy - and see those gains and refinements happen over time.

Of course, it appears that Trump may just be able to handle things better and draft recalcitrant moderators into the service. So we got that going for us.
  #42  
Old 01-25-2020, 01:34 PM
Atamasama's Avatar
Atamasama is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joey P View Post
That's sort of what I'm getting at. The OP is attempting to stop a certain subset of posters from contesting every mod action directed at them. However, that's a pretty wide net to cast and it's going to cause problems for a lot of other people.

I'm not saying the problem doesn't exist, I'm saying that we don't need a solution for it. What the mods currently do seems to work just fine.
Agreed 100%.
  #43  
Old 01-25-2020, 01:49 PM
Spectre of Pithecanthropus is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Transplanted!
Posts: 19,533
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tamerlane View Post
Quote:
Allowing people to bitch about warnings in the Pit would be a mistake.
Eh, people used to do it all the time when it was still allowed. It got tedious sometimes( often ), just like bitching in here gets tedious sometimes( often ). But I can't say the board ran much worse, particularly. It was just different.

But yeah, I agree with others that this proposal is a solution in search of a problem.
When I joined, just before the turn of the century, the Pit was the designated forum for complaints and questions about specific moderator actions. One problem with that arrangement was that other posters could just pile on against the OP if they were feeling particularly snarky, because the Pit tends to foster that kind of behavior.

IMHO moving moderation-related discussions to ATMB was the right thing to do, and it's a good reason we can even have such conversations, unlike most other message boards.
__________________
Change your latitude, change your attitude.
  #44  
Old 01-25-2020, 05:05 PM
Spectre of Pithecanthropus is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Transplanted!
Posts: 19,533
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joey P View Post
IIRC, due to pit rules (or lack thereof) those threads got really, really vile.
Did they ever.

When I was still new around here I innocently questioned the closure of a thread I had started. I really wanted to know, and what I also didn't really know yet was the way things work around here. Some Other Poster, who I don't think is around anymore, jumped in with such insulting and aggressive language that I felt like I'd stepped on a rake.
__________________
Change your latitude, change your attitude.

Last edited by Spectre of Pithecanthropus; 01-25-2020 at 05:06 PM.
  #45  
Old 01-26-2020, 04:46 AM
BigT's Avatar
BigT is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: "Hicksville", Ark.
Posts: 37,145
Quote:
Originally Posted by filmore View Post
I've never thought of the mods being vindictive like that. And in any case if they were, acting like that in ATMB would likely lead to the mod's expulsion as a mod. I would suspect the board members would be very vocal if a mod was acting that way and the admins would take action.
How would anyone know? The mod wouldn't admit that's what they were doing. They might not even realize it themselves. There would be no proof.

Plus I've never in my history of posting seen a mod who was fired because posters complained about them. And I am aware of mods being fired, even though they always say they are "stepping down." You can tell the difference.

I could see proposing that those who contest disingenuouly get moderated, as I suggested before. On the other hand, I know that it's easy to be biased towards thinking that everyone is disingenuous. (I've even been accused of such, and everyone knows I do not lie.) So it's better that the mods err on the side of not punishing them.

Being able to contest Warnings is a good thing. You don't want a chilling effect where people would be afraid to contest even when they have a good reason.
  #46  
Old 01-27-2020, 12:07 AM
Jackmannii's Avatar
Jackmannii is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: the extreme center
Posts: 32,875
The penalty for denied protests and general whining should be an insulting smilie that appears next to your username for a designated period.

And moderators should be allowed to have an appropriate number of scalps or similar smilies next to their usernames to designate how many posters they've banned. Sort of like fighter pilots had for the number of enemy planes they shot down.
  #47  
Old 01-27-2020, 04:03 PM
kopek's Avatar
kopek is offline
born to be shunned
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Southwestern PA
Posts: 16,171
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jackmannii View Post
And moderators should be allowed to have an appropriate number of scalps or similar smilies next to their usernames to designate how many posters they've banned. Sort of like fighter pilots had for the number of enemy planes they shot down.
If you included bots and spammers in that a couple of them would need the entire screen just for their "hit parade".
  #48  
Old 01-27-2020, 04:49 PM
Colibri's Avatar
Colibri is offline
SD Curator of Critters
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Panama
Posts: 44,262
Quote:
Originally Posted by kopek View Post
If you included bots and spammers in that a couple of them would need the entire screen just for their "hit parade".
engineer_comp_geek is the current banmeister with at least 11,763 spammers (actually many more, since some of the posts document multiple spammers), 223 socks, and 118 others. So you would need a 60-page thread just to list them all.
  #49  
Old 01-27-2020, 05:30 PM
Helena330's Avatar
Helena330 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Near Seattle, WA, USA
Posts: 3,956
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colibri View Post
engineer_comp_geek is the current banmeister with at least 11,763 spammers (actually many more, since some of the posts document multiple spammers), 223 socks, and 118 others. So you would need a 60-page thread just to list them all.
Freaking superhero numbers! Wow!
  #50  
Old 01-27-2020, 07:27 PM
Jonathan Chance is offline
Domo Arigato Mister Moderato
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: On the run with Kilroy
Posts: 23,396
Truly, a mod among mods.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:54 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017