CE&P Rules / Moderation

[alasdairm]

Decisions made by staff can cause far worse damage and disruption to bluelight than any one post or pattern of posts a single member ever can...

i disagree.

Should some things not be seen fair it should be ok to ask questions.

who's saying it's not ok to ask questions?

alasdair

 

[JahSEEuS]

i disagree.


alasdair

Can you expound on why you disagree? I think it's fair to say that certain decisions by staff can have more impact than one post or series of posts from a user who doesn't have any effect on decisions...

 

[alasdairm]

i disagree because, in my experience, the damage and disruption caused by a persistent troublemaker outweighs, often significantly, the staff's decisions and subsequent actions when trying to deal with such a troublemaker.

alasdair

 

[zephyr]

i disagree because, in my experience, the damage and disruption caused by a persistent troublemaker outweighs, often significantly, the staff's decisions and subsequent actions when trying to deal with such a troublemaker.

alasdair

What about if a person gets infractions because of a mod on a drug fuelled rampage personal agenda ?


How could a single problematic poster close down a forum for example?

 

[zephyr]

I feel that asking questions about such things may put self in the firing line and be seen as a troublemaker. Also troublemakers such as droppy have existed so long because of staff decisions to defend and help despite others being sick of his shit.

There is a need for transparency but none will be given so there is no trust at all from me to you.

 

[tathra]

I feel that asking questions about such things may put self in the firing line and be seen as a troublemaker. Also troublemakers such as droppy have existed so long because of staff decisions to defend and help despite others being sick of his shit.

Are you suggesting that we ban people based on popular vote rather than violations of rules everyone agrees to follow when they sign up?

 

[alasdairm]

What about if a person gets infractions because of a mod on a drug fuelled rampage personal agenda ?

we have oversight and review for those cases. i can't think of a case where that's happened and infractions haven't been overturned.

How could a single problematic poster close down a forum for example?

we're talking about forum posting and associated discipline. of course somebody - me for example - could have a bad night and close forums but that's not what we're discussing.

I feel that asking questions about such things may put self in the firing line and be seen as a troublemaker.

simply asking questions about site administration has never got anybody into trouble, as long as it's done civilly.

Also troublemakers such as droppy have existed so long because of staff decisions to defend and help despite others being sick of his shit.

simply making people sick of ones shit has never been grounds for infractions. we strive to be consistent, fair and civil when it comes to site discipline and i think we do a good job. droppersneck is a great example of a user who's been around long enough to push the boundary and game the system so that infractions expire. an example of why permanent (non-expiring) infractions make sense.

there are people claiming we're power-mad nazis and others - you - claiming that we're too lenient with persistent troublemakers who should have been gone a long time ago. you can't both be right.

There is a need for transparency but none will be given so there is no trust at all from me to you.

i guess we'll just have to find a way to live with that.

alasdair

 

[zephyr]

As for ppl thinking you are power mad nazis or too lenient is based on perspective.

Im just saying there is a lack of consistency over a period of time and asking some questions about it has resulted in different answers privately to whats said publically.

I see what you are saying about civil discussions . I have been a part of a few and tried to not lose my temper however there are some things that have been impossible to discuss without emotion and would have thought you would have some kind of emotional response. But you dont. How do you do that?

 

[alasdairm]

As for ppl thinking you are power mad nazis or too lenient is based on perspective.

of course it is. i guess my point is that we're just doing our thing and people have a very different view of that looks like. the conclusion is that, no matter what we do, some people are going to have a problem. so we just try to be as consistent as possible.

I see what you are saying about civil discussions . I have been a part of a few and tried to not lose my temper however there are some things that have been impossible to discuss without emotion and would have thought you would have some kind of emotional response. But you dont. How do you do that?

because i have been doing this a while and i've seen some absolutely horrible shit said about me and other staff at bluelight. truly vitriolic stuff. you can't take stuff like that personally. this book has helped me a lot: the four agreements.

alasdair

 

[Droppersneck]

Yeah certain former admins were pretty vitriolic, I've tried to get him to remove it. Just gotta roll with the punches Alasdair, I'll have to check that book out.
On topic, I'm honestly at a loss as to why I received the perm infraction. My opinions are disliked, I get that, but clearly the decision was more personal in nature and not objective. Though I guess targeting conservative thought does fall in with being 'consistent'. No matter, I've enjoyed my time on this site and agree with your sentiments about wanting to go a certain direction.
You guys should push for more transparency, I've found that it's harder for the infracted party to be disagreeable when all the cards are on the table jmo though.

 

[alasdairm]

coming from somebody who's spent years calling me names like 'cuck', 'beta' et. al. you'll perhaps forgive me if i don't give your feedback too much weight?

i know you love to believe it but there's no agenda to rid the forum of alternative viewpoints. mgs has a definite non-liberal viewpoint and he's on staff. you're demonstrably incorrect.

maybe it's a function of right-leaning politics - and i know you (plural) love to play the martyr - but a number of the right-leaning participants in the forum seem incapable of posting without insults and not very thinly-veiled abuse.



alasdair

 

[zephyr]

Alasdairm, nothing I have said regarding actions taken or not taken by people on staff or not is actually personal . There have been some pretty nasty and damaging decisions made that have affected a lot of people and that includes me.

I cant sit by and say nothing when there has been things that simply are not right.


I argued a case for LM in this thread and I suppose that is because he didnt post anything that was out of line with anyone else. He can state his own case easily enough though and probably will.


As for anything else, Ali , maybe it is worth putting together in date format various communications with a couple of ppl just so you know whats up. But then again, why open that pandoras box? Whats done is done, skl isnt here to defend himself.

Ive had all sorts of shit about me here over the years too. I dont really care anymore as we are all a bunch of loopers anyway.

 

[Droppersneck]

coming from somebody who's spent years calling me names like 'cuck', 'beta' et. al. you'll perhaps forgive me if i don't give your feedback too much weight?

i know you love to believe it but there's no agenda to rid the forum of alternative viewpoints. mgs has a definite non-liberal viewpoint and he's on staff. you're demonstrably incorrect.

maybe it's a function of right-leaning politics - and i know you (plural) love to play the martyr - but a number of the right-leaning participants in the forum seem incapable of posting without insults and not very thinly-veiled abuse.



alasdair

I jokingly in good faith called BP a soyboy, other than that zero insults/ abuse from me. I just don't pretend to be something I'm not and it comes off as harsh to some. Everything I've said in CEP I stand behind 100%. Regardless I've always enjoyed our debate on the issues, but I'm guessing that was all one sided. Regardless, you win and there is no martyrdom, I'm choosing of my own free will not to participate. Though I think it's a shame. You have changed my mind on things on more than a few topics, next time I'm out your way I'll drop you line so you can punch me in the face and then have a couple beers from Russian river Probably will be out there late springish

 

[alasdairm]

I jokingly...

'i was joking' is a tired, disingenuous response most of the time.

...next time I'm out your way I'll drop you line so you can punch me in the face and then have a couple beers from Russian river Probably will be out there late springish

let me know.

alasdair

 

[phr]

It?s clear that no real change on this will happen as long as alasdairm is at the helm.

I?ll end this by saying this site was just fine without permanent infractions. Their institution solves no problem and they are something that was not asked for by lower level staff, who do the majority of the infracting.

 

[alasdairm]

I?ll end this by saying this site was just fine without permanent infractions. Their institution solves no problem...

that's an opinion, and certainly one to which you are entitled. i believe they do solve a problem so we can agree to disagree,

...and they are something that was not asked for by lower level staff, who do the majority of the infracting.

ideas come from many places and the fact that this one cam from a senior staffer doesn't automatically invalidate it. if staff feel a specific incident doesn't merit a non-expiring infraction, they can use their discretion and issue an expiring infraction.

alasdair

 

[zephyr]

There was a discussion thread when the infraction system was changed to temp bans and why that happened. There was no real public mention or discussion as to why the infractions then became what they are now.

 

[swilow]

Non expiring infractions were put place so repeat offenders couldn't game the system anymore.

Its ironic that at least a few of the complainants in this topic were said "gamers".

 

[zephyr]

^ Thats a good answer. Thankyou for that swillow.


SKL did say differently, in private, that he wanted a couple of people gone for personal grudge reasons and they are gone , not in this thread.


Jahseeus didnt really come under the radar until a year and a half ago.

Phr- we are not mates by any means- was a mod until the same day Jah got a few slaps.. Cant really blame ppl being upset about what happened can ya?


Droppersneck has been an on and off troll for years. Hes been defended and indulged and slapped on the wrist heaps. Tath overturned this ban of his (correct me if Im wrong) .

LM and his views are different to the admin and most mods and hes been targeted with personal attacks himself. Theres nothing visible thats unusual at all so what was unapproved must have been worth a 6 month ban yeah?


Hes seeming to pay the price for some actions by people before he popped up in cep again. This is just a different take on things.


I dont think theres a problem disagreeing with anyones viewpoint but saying personal attacks are just coming from the right is wrong.

 

[zephyr]

Are you suggesting that we ban people based on popular vote rather than violations of rules everyone agrees to follow when they sign up?

Correct me if Im wrong, I have some ppl blocked on fb but who were you referring to when you said "he will never be banned because of cep, not if I have anything to say about it"?

Does every cep mod chime in to ensure a person isnt banned based on political pov or any other subject matter?


I dont know mate.

These things are in your hands, Id really like to know why it was ok to post this screenshot of an infraction as it is, considering the trolling bullshit from droppersneck is well known and again indulged.