Staff Feedback Moderator Feedback - CE&P

[muvolution]

Comparing being banned to rape, a horrific and brutal crime, is disingenious at best and terribly mysoginistic at worst. If we are going to have this conversation, we need to have it as respectful and realistic adults. Perhaps re-read Alasdair's post above?

Your continued personal attacks in this thread only show that you are disrespectful of both the User Agreement and of the people who volunteer their time at this site. We are 20 posts deep and you are still playing the victim card. I think part of this is that you need to take responsibility for your posts. I have reviewed them and would absolutely infract you again for every single one of them. Apostacious acted absolutely appropriately. If you ever felt that he was abusing his power, you could have come to me, the Senior Moderator for that forum. You never contacted me. That is just one of the options you had for rectifying this issue, but instead of persuing these, we are now discussing it in public and you are doing nothing but demonstrating to everyone how correct we were in issuing each and every one of those infractions.

You had a problem with Papasomni accidentaly banning what he thought was an alt? He seems to have rectified that issue without any personal attacks or bitching.
You had a problem with Folley's behavior? It is being addressed (and already was) with absolutely no intervention on your part.

I know you think we are somehow grossly incompetent because you cannot seem to follow the simple rules laid out for you, but I promise, we know what we are doing. We run the site.

 

[Alex007]

Comparing being banned to rape, a horrific and brutal crime, is disingenious at best and terribly mysoginistic at worst. If we are going to have this conversation, we need to have it as respectful and realistic adults. Perhaps re-read Alasdair's post above?

And here you are telling me to be respectful (which I have been) while calling me a mysoginist at the same time, great stuff. The rape scenario was just an anaology to describe my situation, nothing more. It's obvious that it's an extreme example but I don't see how u turned it into something malicious.

You said I been resorting to personal attacks in this thread, could you please show us those personal attacks?

Also please try to answer every single question that i posed to ebola above, before u say anything about was is fair and what is not. You haven't answered a single one of my arguments.

You had a problem with Folley's behavior? It is being addressed (and already was) with absolutely no intervention on your part.

You haven't understood anything that I've said. Why did i get an infraction in that exchange with Folley, yet Folley did not get an infraction? That's my argument. Try to explain that. You won't be able to.

 

[Tommyboy]

Every single one of those infractions in CE&P was handed to me by Apostacious. Like i said in my initial post no other moderator in CE&P has ever given me an infraction other than Apostacious, coincidence? I guess not. Please help us try to understand why ever single infraction I've ever received in CE&P has been issued by Apostacious and no other moderator? Escher has never given me an infraction, neither has Cyc, neither have you.

It is very possible that Apostacious just came across your infraction-worthy posts before the other mods did. People have different schedules, so it is not uncommon for one mod to get to a lot of things first. By the way, Escher's Waterfall gave you a warning for your first infraction, so Apostacious was not the only CE&P mod to infract you. He infracted you twice, which is not an alarming amount. There are plenty of people that I gave two infractions to before anybody else infracted them, and they apologized and moved on.

All infractions are reviewed by senior staff, so if they were deemed unjust, they would have been reversed.

At the same time as this several other members were also verbally abusing me in the same manner. Not once did Apostacious stop or ban or even take the time to address any of the other members who were engaging in this kind of barbaric behaviour.

Instead of dealing with members like Folley who were viciously ganging up on me for the sole reason of not sharing the same view as them

This is irrelevant. I couldn't care less what happened in other situations. We are discussing my situation.

and then back to

Why did i get an infraction in that exchange with Folley, yet Folley did not get an infraction? That's my argument.

You went from comparing your treatment to that of other problematic members, and now you are posting saying that you don't care what happened in their situations. Why did you bring their situations up in the beginning of your post then? Are you now retracting those statements since you now know that those other members have been disciplined?

 

[Alex007]

Tommyboy I think you're misunderstanding what I said. Yeah, you're right, I think Escher gave me a simple warning when i first joined the site, your point? Every other warning and infraction that I've ever received in CE&P was from Apostacious! It's bullshit if you really think he only happened to come across my posts before any other moderator, look at all the warnings and infractions he's issued to me and then tell me that's all coincidental lol. Especially when you look at the fact that the other parties attacking me were not given any infractions, did he just happen to miss the other vile posts in the thread and only spotted mine?

You don't understand the point I was making about the Folley situation. Folley attacked me in a specific thread countless times, so vicious were his attacks that another member had to point it out, and instead of giving him an infraction during that particular exchange with me, Apostacious gave me the infraction. Care to explain that? The bias does not get more obvious than that. I don't care about the infractions he's received months later in some other event with some other parties. I'm talking about my case with him, and how Apostacious was unfair.

The other thing is, and I find this very interesting and I'm not the only member complaining about this, is the fact that no one ever scrutinizes the moderators. Instead of cross examining Apostacious and looking into the evidence that I've provided, every one of you moderators is ganging up on me and trying to paint me as some evil troublemaker while at the same time you are all defending Apostacious at every cost, even to the extent that one of you tried to defend his racial comment, "smug white people." Not a single one of you has had the courage to stand-up and question Apostacious' unjust moderation. This is the support section, and members come here for support, not to be attacked. I'm here to shed light on the situation so that no other member ever receives this kind of unfair treatment from Apostacious.

 

[muvolution]

We don't question moderators in public. Staff forums are private. I believe Alasdair even addressed this in an earlier post in this very thread.
Again, thank you for pointing this out. I think your intervention has stopped a catastrophe from destroying bluelight. And at the last second, too!

After monitoring this thread, it is pretty clear to me that you want "justice" in the form of us publicly humiliating apostacious and giving him a dressing-down the entire site can voyeristically enjoy. That is never going to happen. This is not a major issue, and even if it was, we try to be respectful towards everyone. Apostacious is a volunteer, he gives his time so bluelight can function, doesn't get paid, and has to deal with posters who want everything done right now and never ever gets thanked. Forgive us if we show a preference towards him, but he works his ass off for this place.

 

[Alex007]

^ Wow. You are extremely disrespectful. First you mock my case "Again, thank you for pointing this out. I think your intervention has stopped a catastrophe from destroying bluelight. And at the last second, too!" Then you make up some shit about me wanting to see Apostacious publicly humiliated???? WTF. This is exactly what members can't stand.

 

[muvolution]

I thought that maybe since alasdair's first two explanations of how we operate were not enough, I would try sarcasm. Sometimes it is exceptionally difficult to get through to people who don't want to be.

And you are continuing to ask why we are not addressing this staff issue in this public thread, so tell me, if not to see him publicly called out, what DO you want? No explanation seems to have satisfied you thus far, nor any of our actions. Pretty much the only thing left, and what you have been angling at this whole time is that someone needs to dress him down publicly. If I am misinterpreting your words and attitude, let me know, but don't just tell me I am wrong, tell me how, in your eyes, we can make it right.

 

[Alex007]

I will not engage in this exchange with you because not only are you being utterly disrespectful but at the same time you are making incorrect assumptions about what my intentions are.

Just look at what you said:

"After monitoring this thread, it is pretty clear to me that you want "justice" in the form of us publicly humiliating apostacious and giving him a dressing-down the entire site can voyeristically enjoy."

I love how you tried to make me look all malevolent and vile, nice try buddy.

Newsflash: Just incase you havent read the thread, my situation is still pending and hasn't been dealt with. As Alasdair alluded to earlier, they are looking into the situation. I'm just replying to all the comments made thus far in this thread since they are directed towards me. I don't want you guys to deal with Apostacious in public but I think it's important that an admin speak to him, especially since the evidence against him is pretty well corroborated. I've provided more than enough evidence.

I just don't like it when a moderator bullies me. We all have rights. Members and moderators. But let's be direct here, it is the members who make this site possible, not the moderators, you have it all wrong.

 

[ebola?]

Every single one of those infractions in CE&P was handed to me by Apostacious.

There was thorough discussion about the vast majority of those infractions, and there was mutual agreement over the decisions to infract. Apostacious just happened to be more diligent in oversight of the forum at that moment and more prolifically participated in threads where you posted. It might have been that Apostacious more readily brought up your behavior as a topic of discussion, but it's not like anyone disagreed with him.

This is irrelevant. I couldn't care less what happened in other situations. We are discussing my situation. If a girl gets raped she wouldn't care if her rapist got punished for some other crime, she cares about the injustice she suffered, why was the rapist not found guilty in her crime?

You specifically brought up the unfairness of disproportionate infractions you incurred compared to EnigmaticFreak and Folley. You can avoid future miscommunications by avoiding bringing up topics that you consider irrelevant.

The nature and brutality of Folley's attack against me went unnoticed and he was never restrained.

Honestly, in retrospect, Folley should have received infractions for what he said to you. However, given that I am not a fan of Folley's posts by any means, I often skim over them unless they are reported. Did you report his posts? This is a good way to avoid their oversight. That, and the thread was going to hell anyway, so it was better simply closed, which I did, IIRC.

When laws and rules are created they are based on their communal benefits rather than their individual benefits. If the N word doesn't bother you, does that mean it shouldn't bother other people? "smug white people" is no different than "smug black people," the context is insignificant. By saying this kind of behavior is ok you are setting a precendent for much more worse things to come. Nobody's skin color should ever be targeted under any given circumstance, especially not by a moderator who is there to assure that no one gets hurt. It's utterly wrong.

When assessing prejudice and hurtfulness of speech, context is crucially decisive. A white person jokingly quipping about fellow discussants (in general) being "smug white people" is hardly hateful, as long as intentions are understood.

ebola

 

[Tommyboy]

Tommyboy I think you're misunderstanding what I said. Yeah, you're right, I think Escher gave me a simple warning when i first joined the site, your point? Every other warning and infraction that I've ever received in CE&P was from Apostacious! It's bullshit if you really think he only happened to come across my posts before any other moderator, look at all the warnings and infractions he's issued to me and then tell me that's all coincidental lol. Especially when you look at the fact that the other parties attacking me were not given any infractions, did he just happen to miss the other vile posts in the thread and only spotted mine?

How would you even know what was done to the other parties involved? That is taken care of behind the scenes by staff.
You got one infraction from Eschers Waterfall, and 2 infractions from Apostacious. Owl Eyed gave you 4 infractions totaling 2 points. There are others that I will not mention right now. So tell me, does it really seem like Apostacious was picking on you? 2 out of the 8 infractions is not a lot from one mod.

You don't understand the point I was making about the Folley situation. Folley attacked me in a specific thread countless times, so vicious were his attacks that another member had to point it out, and instead of giving him an infraction during that particular exchange with me, Apostacious gave me the infraction. Care to explain that? The bias does not get more obvious than that. I don't care about the infractions he's received months later in some other event with some other parties. I'm talking about my case with him, and how Apostacious was unfair.

It isn't my place to explain that. I have a good idea of the reasoning, but I'm not going to speculate on another moderators actions.

The other thing is, and I find this very interesting and I'm not the only member complaining about this, is the fact that no one ever scrutinizes the moderators. Instead of cross examining Apostacious and looking into the evidence that I've provided, every one of you moderators is ganging up on me and trying to paint me as some evil troublemaker while at the same time you are all defending Apostacious at every cost, even to the extent that one of you tried to defend his racial comment, "smug white people." Not a single one of you has had the courage to stand-up and question Apostacious' unjust moderation. This is the support section, and members come here for support, not to be attacked. I'm here to shed light on the situation so that no other member ever receives this kind of unfair treatment from Apostacious.

This is a public thread. Where are the other complaints? The whole point of allowing these threads is so that we can address issues as a community.

 

[muvolution]

Let me clarify a small error. I said we "do not question mods in public," which is what we are doing here, but I meant, "we do not discipline mods in public."


So, this thread is a request that senior staff speak with apostacious? That is being taken care of.
Is there anything else?
If not it seems this thread has run its course as we are reviewing the situation and both myself and at least one administrator will be further speaking with him.

As an aside, you should remember that you actually don't have any rights. There is a user agreement that you agree to abide by in using this site, and it does lay out your "rights" as given to you by bluelight, and is a guide for interaction on the site. But please do not think that Bluelight is a democracy nor a political institution. It is instead a private website run by volunteers for the benefit of the public. You can be banned for any reason at any time, especially after you have violated the BLUA repeatedly. Again, it helps to remember that it isn't exactly srs business and we are not affecting your human rights or anything like that. It may be helpful to take a small break from the site to get some perspective.

Again, thanks for alerting us to this issue. I would encourage you to use the PM function next time something like this comes up, but I sppose the idea of this new forum is giving people the option of doing it in public.
Are you satisfied that your issue is being addressed, or do you have more to add?

 

[alasdairm]

nice try buddy.

you said earlier in the thread that you were "providing nothing but constructive feedback". i think we both know that's not what you're doing with a comment like that? you can't have your cake, and eat it.

We all have rights.

bluelight is a privately owned and operated site. you have no rights here at all.

that said, we all have the privilege of participating and it's the responsibility of all of us to do that in a respectful manner with the site's mission in mind, first and foremost. if the site administration felt like it, we could go through the member-list tomorrow simply deleting the accounts of people we don't like. but we don't because that's not why any of us are here.

further, we're under no obligation to address your complaints at all. we could respond with "suck it up, buttercup" and issue another infraction just to annoy you. but we don't because that's not why any of us are here. but, as a staff, we thin it's important to discuss what we do and how we do it. we think it's important that we try to take criticism impersonally and with the site's best interests at heart. if this weren't true, we wouldn't even be having this discussion.

But let's be direct here, it is the members who make this site possible, not the moderators, you have it all wrong.

the site relies on both members and moderators (who, let's not forget, are also members). to suggest that one group is wholly responsible for bluelight's very existence is inaccurate and not a little arrogant.

the main points of your complaint have now been address by ebola in a civil and honest manner. your response is up to you but continued antagonistic responses will, in my very humble opinion, just convince observers that you're not sincerely interested in a dialog, that no response on our part is adequate and that you play a significantly larger part in the issues of the past than you're trying to demonstrate.

if you'd like to respond, go ahead and the senior staff associated with that forum will review.

regards

alasdair

 

[papa]

I understand alasdair but the reason i said this was because I was recently banned for over one month by Papasomni who made the false claim that some other member on this forum by the handle name, Tilt, was an alt. Which is not true and this is the second time he banned me for this in spite of the fact that he admitted to mistaking that mistake the first time. Here is the proof:

I see that Tilt is not an alt, but a seperate account.... ban lifted..


oops..

And then he makes the same mistake again and this time bans me for several weeks??? I just got unbanned yesterday after like 5-6 weeks, I wasnt here to address the issue at the time, I was out of town. Talk about a major major mistake.

it wasn't a mistake,...the mistake was made the first time when I listened to you about how tilt was a friend's account. later, during your ban, it became quite evident that tilt was you.. fool me once,...etc etc..

 

[Tilt]

it wasn't a mistake,...the mistake was made the first time when I listened to you about how tilt was a friend's account. later, during your ban, it became quite evident that tilt was you.. fool me once,...etc etc..

You're wrong again, sir and that would be strike number 3. I'm not Alex as you can see from the IP address of this post - Alex and I are nowhere near each other. Additionally, we have entirely different writing styles -It should be pretty obvious. Feel free to private message me everyday so u could confirm this everyday lol

 

[Alex007]

LOL Thanks Tilt!

Anyways I made my points:
1- every single warning and infraction I've received in CE&P has been from Apostacious.
2- Everyone that attacked me never got the infraction, only I did.
3- Apostacious is in no position to refer to white members on this forum as "smug white people"

Nuff said.

Keep the Boy Scouts attitude going. We love watching the mods and admins powertrip on a drug forum lol. Thank god none of you has ever, and never will hold any position of power in the real world.

I'm sure all the members on this site are very happy that they can now safely refer to all white members as "smug white people." Good Job. You guys are working hard, indeed.

 

[Tommyboy]

Yup, completely different posting styles. 8)

 

[muvolution]

This is getting rediculous. Alex, I am pretty sure it is obvious to everyone except you that you are tilt. You are only hurting your case.

 

[Alex007]

Yup, completely different posting styles. 8)

You have by far the weakest arguments and poorest reading skills I've seen on this thread. It's been mentioned already that during the ban his account was used. Is that Rocket science for you?

Let the admins check the IP addresses. We can all come on msn as well and have a conference chat.

 

[Alex007]

anyways, I appreciate alasdair's attempt to solve this case. He seems like the only guy in here that has some people skills. I think I made my complaint and hopefully this doesn't happen again in the future. I think we could put it to rest now?

 

[Tommyboy]

I'm going to close this since it's getting off topic. I think that we have accomplished everything that we can in this thread. Senior staff will be happy to take it from here.