IMO, the only moderator action that deserves any criticism whatsoever is Hari_Seldon’s latest post for Peter_Morris to take it to ATMB,
Which was a good 18 hours after Peter_Morris had already posted
But even so, Hari_Seldon’s post serves a purpose in warning others not to discuss moderation in-thread.
@Peter_Morris, the way I see it What_Exit’s mention of “a belligerent tone” and Hari_Seldon’s explicit warning for insulting others do appear cover basically the same “offense”, so you have a point there. If it was up to us to decide why the warnings were issued… but it’s not our interpretation of a warning that matters. What_Exit has clarified that his warning was for ignoring moderator instructions to stop a hijack, distinct from insults. So as far as the mods are concerned the two warnings are for different offenses. And IMO it’s their opinion of their own warnings that matters, because they are the ones who review warnings to decide on suspension or banning.
So long as mods say the two warnings cover distinct offenses I have no issue with the fact that two warnings were issued for the same post.
Not a mod, but if I were I would reserve the right to mod people for making insults then editing them away in bad faith to circumvent the rules. I think letting people delete their posts in good faith after realizing they are perpetuating a hijack, and not warning them, is perfectly consistent.
It’s like, are you going to kick a kid out of church who keeps mooning the parishoners while you aren’t looking, versus are you going to kick out the people who were gossiping during service but shut up when gently reminded a second time?
I think what some here are missing is a point I failed to make last night.
There were four flags, and they were for different posts. What_Exit modded three of those. While he was busy with that, Hari_Seldon modded the fourth. Different flaggers raising separate issues for separate posts.
If I had been around to follow through with the initial mod note violation and the flags kept coming as they did, I would very likely have issued two separate warnings for the two separate offenses. Just the fact that What_Exit and Hari_Seldon issued them does not invalidate the distinct reasons for which two separate warnings were made. As others have pointed out, you don’t get a two-fer just because you were warned in one thread by one mod.
FWIW I’m confused after reading this mess why no one has brought up the obvious. This is yet another case of most of the mods being unwilling to point out when another simply made a mistake. It’s quite obvious Hari just hadn’t noticed the first warning and issued a second, unnecessary one. A mistake so simple and so minor that it could have been dispensed with in mere seconds of effort saying “ah, there was already a warning, my bad.” But instead, there’s convoluted discussion going on for over a day about whether two versus one warning was necessary and all kinds of other nonsense.
I post stuff that I delete within the allotted time frequently. Sometimes I realize it might have broken a rule. Sometimes I realize I posted to the wrong thread. Sometimes I realize the thread wasn’t in the forum I thought it was. If I thought it was in the Pit when it was in P&E, I might withdraw it so I can tone it down.
If I thought it was in P&E when it was in the Pit, I might withdraw it to spice it up.
Sometimes I realize there is a broken link and I withdraw it to buy time to fix the link. Sometimes I realize it contains a statistic I haven’t cited a source for or fact-checked, so I delete it to give me more time to work on it.
I delete posts all the time. I also get warnings when I break the rules. When that happens, I don’t cry and whine like a damn Republican. Instead I accept the consequences of my actions.
Let’s be honest too–person who joined this month, already causing problems. This was like Ralphie in The Sopranos everyone knew what was coming, the question was when, not if. The minutiae of these warnings are extremely unimportant.
Perhaps it’s because that’s not what happened? We already were told that @What_Exit responded to a flag on three posts. @Hari_Seldon responded to a fourth. @What_Exit gave a Warning for one thing, and @Hari_Seldon gave one for another.
The only reason that the thread continued was that one poster decided to reject the explanation and accuse the mods of an ulterior motive.
I see no reason to assume bad faith, either in giving the Warnings or in the explanation given.
This is completely normal. And allowed. The only time it’s not allowed us when it looks like the poster is trying to make an end run around the rules. Insulting someone who is actively posting and will see it, and then deleting the insult, for instance.
But “oops wrong forum”, “oops, i didn’t see that mod note”, “oops, i want to look something up, first”… All pretty common and generally just fine.