Six warnings in less than 10 months is a lot. I’ve seen posters banned with 3 or 4 over longer spans of time, IIRC. From the four warnings that I sampled, three were pretty clear cut.
There are some posters who understand the lines pretty well and manage to irk massive numbers of posters while still remaining active members. Shodan and Der Trihs are 2 examples. After much wrangling and the appointment of Jon Chance, standards in GD were risen to the point that encompassed Der’s problematic behavior. He received moderator direction and adjusted his habits accordingly.
Sticking around is pretty simple actually. Just follow moderator instructions and if you don’t understand them, seek clarification. Try not to rules lawyer: that’s just whiny. Act, you know, constructively.
The comparison with Terr is inappropriate. That said, I have never noticed bad or problematic behavior on his part before his suspension. Other posters have behavior that is more noticeable. Part of this is inevitable. Part of it is related to the fact that annoying behavior doesn’t conflict with the standards of this board per se. Personally, I don’t have a problem with that, but many here do. Also, eye of the beholder, etc.
I also argue that bad behavior generally conflicts with the goal of fighting ignorance. Of course certain clever zingers can run afoul of board rules. Luckily 99% of the warnings are not prompted by quality wisecracks.
ETA:
Yes, and mods have been accused of inflexibility (and the opposite), so the issue is real.
Unless both posters said exactly the same things in exactly the same circumstances over exactly the same period of time, it would still lead to complaints of bias and inconsistency.
If we went to some robotic model of moderation, I suspect posters would like it much less. I for one give mod notes for a lot of offenses that technically are liable for a warning. If I enforced the rules “by the book” I would probably issue five times more warnings than I currently do.
This is false. Jonathan Chance said that he chose to employ a mod note instead of a warning so that he would be taken seriously. My question is why this was done for Der Trihs and not for Terr.
True, hence my question - why is it appropriate to Warn and then mod note in one case, and Warn and then suspend in another?
Well, of course, I knew what you said and what you meant, I was trying to find an excuse not to give you an Official Warning. You seem to be saying that you did it deliberately and want the warning, so I’m obliged to comply.
That would be laughable if it wasn’t so pathetic. When you’ve come down off your power trip, try moderating some of the other, far more egregious, offences that occur on this board, such as the ongoing junior modding by [REDACTED] that spoils so many threads.
Steophan, responding to a warning by doing the same thing over again isn’t appropriate (and using the [REDACTED] ploy doesn’t obscure the intent). In addition, discussion in ATMB should remain civil. Your post is inappropriate on these grounds also. This is an additional warning for being a jerk.
If that post was your idea of “uncivil”, your job as a moderator, should you make even a vague attempt to be impartial, will be quite a large one. To put it mildly.