Apparently, a high-profile forum poster was banned from posting. I do not know the specific circumstances and will therefore not take a side here. However, I do consider myself a fairly experienced forum user and also one who in general obeys the ToS.
I highly doubt that this ban was purely a formal application of the rules in the ToS because given the volume of intelligent, funny, and incisive things this user has said, I find it hard to believe that his post, which I have not yet seen, warranted more than simple removal. In fact, I would speculate that the ban was motivated by a somewhat controversial reading of the word ''offensive'' that is advocated by another person whom the banned individual told me was involved in this incident.
As evidence (not proof) that some kind of inconsistency was involved, possibly due to the controversy surrounding this person, I am going to quote posts that did not result in revoked posting rights.
QUOTED FROM VARIOUS POSTERS
Fuck you, ......
Surely you're joking. Chancremechanic, while seemingly a nice guy, is hardly the voice of reality. He tosses around peurile rubbish like Dubya at a press conference.
Do you realize that it's God-hating posts like yours and wingnutt's that make people (me) think atheists are a bunch of @$$holes?
Crazy little thing...please bite me...
You will make a great politician if you ever decide to take that path.
Sounds like you need a nighty-night tuck-in with a warm glass of milk, but be careful not to pee on yourself.
you probably have a butler tie you shoes
<<tongue in cheek>>Teenage accomplice should either receive the death sentence or spend the rest of his life in a maximum prison being someone's Hoe...<<tongue in cheek>>
OK, Idiot person, you want to keep this silly thread going, so here goes: First, I like smart women, not smart girls which you seem to be. Are you 16 yet? Women such as you are NOT, fancy me 'cause I can make them scream, scream, and scream for more, more and more of fun, fun, fun. This is my last post to you, you silly little idiot...now bugger off!
That is EXACTLY what I mean when I say that you and a lot of other philosophers deliver the necessary rationalisations that are needed to realise the techniques so much wanted by the people in the Bio-Industrial Complex. Of course you cannot deny that human life begins at conception. You and your fellow travellers are not stupid. Therefore the personhood concept was being developed. In this way it is possible to kill human beings, a necessary condition to be able to experiment on unborn human beings in the laboratories of the Bio-Industrial Complex.
By the way I'm sure you edited your post AFTER reading my two following posts. How convenient, now you don't have to addres my fundamental and fierce criticism expressed in these posts and you can continue your classes instead of debating the issues I've presented. It is so obvious ....
Man, you are naïve. Wake up !
What do you mean? Is God's forgiveness a spleen or some nails?
What kind of 'personal relationship' are we talking here...?
God isn't a hypocrite wrt the homosexuality thang, is he?
I've read the entire Bible. Have you read anything else?
END QUOTES
Each of the above contains some kind of personal attack on another poster, although some require context and others require fairly subtle skill at recognizing this sort of thing in order to find the attack. I understand that it is only the official duty of a moderator to hide posts and users which have been the subject of complaint, but one would assume moderators are on the lookout for this kind of thing.
In general, I have no complaints about the mods. They have hidden my posts on one or two occasions, but always with a note and only when deserved.
However, apparently mods have been exercising their power in a somewhat arbitrary way today because certain members of RHP have exhibited great sensitivity. I am also rather upset with a mod's post threatening another poster with the Wrath of Russ without elaborating or pointing to a specific violation.
I think a few changes should be made to the system:
*Mods should have a fixed, relatively short, term of office; a year may be appropriate.
*The ToS is apparently insufficiently explicit about what constitutes a moderable post
*The banning of a player or the restriction of posting rights (which how ''ban'' should be read in this post) should be accompanied by a thread posted by the moderator outlining the events leading to the ban and the specific reason. This should be open to discussion
(I'm sorry about the somewhat abrasive nature of this post. This has little to do with this incident and a lot to do with something else, on which subject you shold feel free to PM me.)
~Mark
Originally posted by royalchickenthis is not the way it should be done RC.
Apparently, a high-profile forum poster was banned from posting. I do not know the specific circumstances and will therefore not take a side here. However, I do consider myself a fairly experienced forum user and also one who in general obeys the ToS.
I highly doubt that this ban was purely a formal application of the rules in the ToS because giv ...[text shortened]... a lot to do with something else, on which subject you shold feel free to PM me.)
~Mark
the mods should not be criticised publically - regardless of your personal evaluation of the situation.
if you have concerns and suggestions, contact one of the mods directly.
if you are unsatisfied, contact russ directly.
each time we get into a situation where we do a thread on the inadequacy of our mods, it shows disregard for these people who are volunteering their time here and doing what is being made to be a job more difficult than it needs to be.
in friendship,
prad
Originally posted by pradtfPrad, every time a thread like this arises, someone makes a post isomorphic to yours. I understand that the mods are volunteers, but their altruism does not automatically entitle them to freedom from criticism where the moderatees feel it is warranted. Furthermore, that criticism should take place politely and publically because this is an issue which affects all of us and which pertains to the moderating system as a whole, not to a specific moderator necessarily, because I don't necessarily disagree with the ban in question, I only feel that it looks a bit odd given that other posts on RHP have also violated the ToS and not resulted in similar treatment.
this is not the way it should be done RC.
the mods should not be criticised publically - regardless of your personal evaluation of the situation.
if you have concerns and suggestions, contact one of the mods directly.
if you are unsatis ...[text shortened]... a job more difficult than it needs to be.
in friendship,
prad
I am not showing disregard for the mods; instead, I am opening a discussion on how the system could be improved. One can't allow unquestioned behavior by the moderators just because they are volunteers, just as, to borrow a literary example, Howard Roark couldn't tolerate bad design just because the badly designed building happened to be a housing project.
I'm not saying the moderators are doing a bad job at all; they do a very good one in general. I am merely questioning the veil of secrecy surrounding this and similar incidents, as well as their operational methods, and I don't think the former is helped by posts such as yours.
Regards,
Mark
EDIT Prad, if you alerted a moderator, then you are entitled to your methodology. If they act on that alert, I shall consider it an instance of self-parody.
Originally posted by pradtfI disagree. When there are issues regarding moderation that are broader than one specific post and/or one specific moderator, then public discussion seems appropriate to me, even at the risk of publicly criticising the posters or moderator's involved. As long as we hit the ball and not the player. The moderation activity must not become a taboo suject.
this is not the way it should be done RC.
the mods should not be criticised publically - regardless of your personal evaluation of the situation.
if you have concerns and suggestions, contact one of the mods directly.
if you are unsatis ...[text shortened]... a job more difficult than it needs to be.
in friendship,
prad
edit. I hadn't seen RC's reply while posting this.
rc and mephisto,
the moderation process is not at the discretion of the members of RHP.
it is purely at the discretion of russ. he guides and advises the mods.
therefore, your wanting a public discussion on this issue is inappropriate if it is not sanctioned by russ. if russ wanted our opinions on the issue, then i'm sure he would ask. since he has not, we should at the very least ask him if he wants such a discussion, before proceeding with it.
if you really want to talk about it, why not use PM?
in friendship,
prad
Originally posted by pradtfAre you Russ' spokesman?
rc and mephisto,
the moderation process is not at the discretion of the members of RHP.
it is purely at the discretion of russ. he guides and advises the mods.
therefore, your wanting a public discussion on this issue is inappropriate if it is not sanctioned by russ. if russ asked for our opinions on the issue, then i'm sure he would do so. since he h ...[text shortened]... ceeding with it.
if you really want to talk about it, why not use PM?
in friendship,
prad
I am not questioning Russ's authority in this. But that does not make it a taboo topic for public discussion. Dealing with sensitive subjects on a bilateral, private message basis only is a highly non-democratic approach.
Originally posted by pradtfAh, but there is no official sanctioning of most topics we discuss. There is also no official statement that this topic is off limits. Just because Russ did not say ''You may discuss moderation'', it does not follow that that we may not. If we always followed such logic, many of the features of RHP would not exist for lack of having been suggested. If you would like this thread moved to ''Help and Site Ideas'', then feel free to suggest it.
rc and mephisto,
the moderation process is not at the discretion of the members of RHP.
it is purely at the discretion of russ. he guides and advises the mods.
therefore, your wanting a public discussion on this issue is inappropriate ...[text shortened]... lly want to talk about it, why not use PM?
in friendship,
prad
The point of this thread is to find out how Russ does his advising and guiding, because the very existence of RHP indicates that Russ exhibits vastly more imagination, wisdom, and forethought than the mods do in situations leading to threads like this (and it is to the mods' credit that these situations are quite rare).
My offer of a PM was to explain a purely peripheral issue that may excuse the tone of my posts today. I don't think indulging in a private conversation on this topic promotes open and frank discussion, which I feel is necessary.
From your tone, which differs from your nromal tone, I infer either that syou had a bad day or that your involvement in the incident in question is coloring your view of the matter.
Regards,
Mark
EDIT Mephisto2, now it's my turn to miss the reply 😉.
Originally posted by Mephisto2what a strange question mephisto2?
Are you Russ' spokesman?
I am not questioning Russ's authority in this. But that does not make it a taboo topic for public discussion. Dealing with sensitive subjects on a bilateral, private message basis only is a highly non-democratic approach.
i only suggested that if russ wanted a discussion on this from the community, he would have asked.
i'm fine with waiting till he does.
i'm even fine with asking him to.
how about you?
since when has RHP suddenly become a democracy requiring a democratic solution to processes?
in friendship,
prad
Originally posted by royalchickenwell this is a curious idea. how are you going to find out 'how Russ does his advising and guiding', by having an open discussion with all the members of RHP?
The point of this thread is to find out how Russ does his advising and guiding, because the very existence of RHP indicates that Russ exhibits vastly more imagination, wisdom, and forethought than the mods do in situations leading to t ...[text shortened]... t is to the mods' credit that these situations are quite rare).
if you want to find out 'how Russ does his advising and guiding', just ask russ or even ask the mods.
not sure what you mean about my tone or your inferences about my day or involvement.
would you care to elaborate?
in friendship,
prad
Originally posted by pradtfWhen did Russ request a discussion on gender issues or game timeouts or partial-birth abortion or floor tiles?
what a strange question mephisto2?
i only suggested that if russ wanted a discussion on this from the community, he would have asked.
i'm fine with waiting till he does.
i'm even fine with asking him to.
how about you?
since when has RHP suddenly become a democracy requiring a democratic solution to processes?
in friendship,
prad
He didn't. He did make a public forum where any discussion within certain limits is acceptable. His limits do not prohibit this thread. RHP is not a democracy, you're correct. Russ does not have to act on any conclusions he finds in this thread, but he has not prohibited us from discussing this.
If you wish to start a metathread on the subject, do so, but as it stands your latest post is off-topic, as is my current post.
Originally posted by pradtfUm... since when wasn't it?
since when has RHP suddenly become a democracy requiring a democratic solution to processes?
Are you saying that Russ and Chris are dictators? I don't understand this approach at all.
I see Russ and Chris as proprietors of an internet site for chess playing customers, all who have an equal voice, and what better way to resolve things than to have open discussions in the forums.
Surely that is why they exist in the first place??? 😕
Originally posted by pradtfI assumed such a discussion would include Russ, the moderators, and anyone who wished to criticise the methods or make suggestions.
well this is a curious idea. how are you going to find out 'how Russ does his advising and guiding', by having an open discussion with all the members of RHP?
if you want to find out 'how Russ does his advising and guiding', just ask russ or even ask the mods.
not sure what you mean about my tone or your inferences about my day or involvement.
would you care to elaborate?
in friendship,
prad
I wished to generate interest by suggesting that an injustice was committed, or at least an inconsistency.
The incident in question occurred in a thread in which, so I am told, you were a participant. Empty speculationi on my part would be that you alerted the moderator, but do not want to be taken to task for your somewhat unconventional interpretation of the ToS.
Regards,
Mark
Originally posted by Exyno, of course they aren't dictators.
Um... since when [b]wasn't it? Are you saying that Russ and Chris are dictators? I don't understand this approach at all. I see Russ and Chris as proprietors of a site for chess playing customers, all who have an equal voice, and what better way that to have open discussions than in the forums. Surely that is why they exist in the first place??? 😕[/b]
but proprietors don't have to ask their customers to vote on policy, right?
that is why i said that if russ wanted a discussion on this, then he would have asked.
in friendship,
prad