- I wasn’t speaking as a moderator.
- Where did I deny anything?
Don’t you think that justifying something that has yet to be brought forward is kind of impossible?
Two posters have said it happened. How am I to judge the verasity of their claims? Am I supposed to crank up my super hacker skills and find emails and pm’s I’ve never seen?
And it WAS brought forward. In post 4 and post 7, which were BEFORE my post. I think that meets the definition of “yet”.
Now maybe every mod here will come in an swear they have never done such a thing, and to be honest, if they did DO that I would likely believe them and just surmise the two posters are mistaken.
On the other hand, given how some mods here are rather professional and “just the facts mam” types while others are (cough) not, it would not surprise me to find anonymity is not a given.
Having said all that, let’s move forward. Can we now at least assume that in the future anonymity will be respected both technically and in spirit? In other words, some mod doesnt actually reveal your name but ALSO does NOT drop hints as to who it was.
Wouldn’t it be much less complicated and time-consuming if the posters who made the claims simply provided cites for their claims? If they can, then the mods in question have something solid to respond to, and if they can’t, then the mods can just go about their business, right? This approach sounds more than fair to me.
Why are you reluctant to deny it ever happened, if it never happened? Maybe you’re thinking, “Yeah, it’s possible, it could have happened.” You’re issuing what looks like a non-denial denial to me.
I think the point that Czarcasm was making was that, in a situation like this, your first step should be to ask the people who made those claims for some evidence, rather than making complaints that take the accuracy of the claims for granted.
The next step in this thread should be for Shodan and/or Cub Mistress to back up their claims. If tomndebb has actually publicly outed someone who reported a post, it should be available somewhere on this message board. And if Cub Mistress was told by a mod, via PM, who made a complaint about her, she could also provide more details that would allow people to assess the veracity of the claim.
On preview: Czarcasm beat me to it.
The general way things work around here is that, if you are the person making a factual claim, you should be willing to back it up.
Personally I’d like to assume most posters usually tell the truth about these things (though I am sure you could document everything you’ve ever seen, heard, or experienced in your lifetime).
That’s funny either way you read it 
What?
Christ, this is dim.
I’ve been perfectly willing, only recently, to criticize moderators around here (including Czarcasm), but this is just silly. How can he be expected to know the result of every single interaction between mods and users? All he’s saying is that he isn’t aware of it happening, and that, if it has, he would like to see some evidence.
The only thing he Czarcasm could possibly help us with right now is to tell us whether it is policy to keep the identity of reported posts secret, or not.
I agree. Shodan is probably misremembering. That would have been an epic shitstorm.
Cub Mistress’s claim is more troubling. Unless the reportee gave explicit permission, I can’t see how disclosing their name would be appropriate.
Personally, I would hope you would give the moderators the same benefit of the doubt, since they were the ones originally accused in this thread.
twickster pretty much already answered this in Post #3. Now it’s up to someone to show that she is mistaken.
I did say I’d take their word OVER the other two posters. But they actually have to use words (text) first.
Again. Let’s move forward. Is anonymity guaranteed? Is it official policy? If it isnt, why not?
Speaking as a Moderator(for the first time in this thread), what she said goes for me, also.
Yep, i missed that. I agree; in the absence of actual evidence, there’s no reason to conclude that names have been made public.
So, ISTM, we either need a mod to come forward and say that they’ve told the accused who reported them* or or someone needs to provide a screen shot of a PM in which it happened (accusers name and other important info redacted). Barring either of those things happening, this is just going to go around in circles.
*The thing is, in all the years this board has been around and with all the mods it’s had, I’m sure it’s happened a few times. Either by accident or in a heat of the moment type thing or in a ‘will you to stop bickering’ type situation or just a mod who didn’t realize they shouldn’t do it.
Hereis one case. A poster accused another poster of being a sock. A mod gave them a warning and indicated they had already reported the post in question.
In this case by publicly accusing the sock the poster was already going on record with their opinions so I don’t think it was a betrayal of confidence. But everyone is asking for examples so there you go.
I don’t consider that one a problem. It was like, “Ok, dude, we heard you the first time.”
Here (I believe) is the one Shodan is talking about. Tomndebb pretty strongly denies that this counts as outing someone who reports posts. Shodan claims it does.
I’m not interested in getting involved beyond providing the cite.
Right. That’s what I wanted to know–if it’s contrary to policy for a mod ever to reveal the identity of someone who reported a post, then I expect he could categorically deny it, with the exception of noting that, if it ever did happen, he condemns the practice. The fact he hasn’t (ETA: hadn’t) yet issued a categorical denial was what I found fishy. Now, less so.
I agree with tom here. All he did was confirm what Shodan said about himself. This isn’t telling some random poster that Shodan reported one of the posts that they made.