I’m pretty sure I did highlight a part of the post(there were several points in it were it was made explicitly clear I was the one being accused of being a liar).
Anyway, hopefully we’ll get some guidance and if three days is considered too long after being insulted to open a thread in ATMB to ask why mod action hasn’t been taken we’ll get an idea how soon we should open a thread in ATMB after reporting the incident.
If three days is too long, then what would be more appropriate, 1 hour, 6 hours, 1 day, 2 days?
Let me just make something clear right off the bat. Barring my being away, I read every report in Great Debates everyone makes. I also get reports when a new thread is opened. I also don’t save those emails. Were I to do so, my gmail would quickly be full.
So you - and everyone else - may feel confident that SOME mod or other for the appropriate fora will see each report (I only see GD reports, for example). So there are three ways to look at this:
A report can:
Result in warning. Easy to see.
Result in a note or some other action. Also easy to see.
Result in a mod deciding not to take action. Not so easy to see.
From that, it becomes clear that opening a thread such as this one is redundant. Frankly, I do believe you came across as being passive-aggressive in the OP and in your bump right now. It may appear that you are saying ‘I reported him and you did nothing. Do something about him!’ when we have collectively decided to pass on any action.
Now doing nothing is our right, I believe. Were we required to make SOME sort of response to every report I would be able to do little EXCEPT respond to such reports. Down such a path lies madness.
If you MUST have a response to a report I encourage you to send a private message to one or all of the GD mods. I try to respond to all of them - and some are doozies, let me tell you - though it may take some time for me, at least, to respond.
But to report a thread once, then twice, then take it to ATMB begins to smack of a sense of entitlement, of an expectation that a report will result in an action or some sort of sanction in your support. It also gives off the slight vibe that you want to continue castigating the poster that you believed -rightly or otherwise - wronged you in a public forum. That’s something that I, as a mod, can’t possibly get behind as a policy. And I won’t, if anything, that should be taken to the BBQ Pit and expressed there.
Your whole post, Jonathan Chance, fails utterly to address the central issue raised by Ibn Warraq in his last few posts.
He’s not saying that you have to take action based on every report, or even that every report deserves a direct response from the moderators. His question related to the issue of delayed warnings, raised by YOU in an earlier post, to wit:
Given that you chose to mod-note someone who had initially received no note at all, and implied that he might have deserved a warning except that too much time had passed, it appears that you have acknowledged that your lack of response to Ibn Warraq’s initial complain might have been in error. That is, your subsequent actions suggest that the initial complaint had some merit.
And yet you now say:
The hubris underlying this post is staggering.
Your position here seems to be, in effect, “If you complain about a post and don’t hear back from us, you can assume that you were wrong and should just shut up and move on.” It assumes, further, that there is no possibility of a moderator making an incorrect non-call in response to a reported post.
And yet this very thread demonstrates that people, including moderators, can differ on the appropriate response to certain reports, and your decision to mod-note Second Stone would not have happened if this thread had not been opened.
I don’t know why, but i keep thinking of motes and beams.
Jonathan Chance, you yourself state that you misread the original reported incident. You admit that you passed judgement on only part of the complaint, and chose not to act because of that part. This thread pointed out stuff you missed in your original action, stuff that had you seen at the time, you admit that you might have given a Warning for.
That’s not passive aggressiveness out of Ibn Warraq, that’s you making an error. Ibn was doing what every poster has the right to do, question moderator actions.
The problem is that now you won’t take a stronger sanction against that violation because it is too late, things have moved on. But that is the trouble - you made a bad call, and by the time we get a reevaluation, it’s too late to go back and correct that bad call?
In this instance, I can see letting it go with a mod note. The remaining question is how does one get a review of a previous incident in a timely manner?
Is the answer that there is no way, and we just have to accept that if a mod makes a bad call and finds out about it later, the result may only be a Mod Note and that’s just life?
I wouldn’t interpret cuz interpreting makes an … oh wait, that’s assume :smack:
Maybe explanation about statue of limitations in the FAQs? “We’ll get away with it, Lefty, if they don’t catch us in XX days!”