Banning of Principle of Q'uo

[stinger]

and here we all are then.
well, missing one.

[SENsei]

"Open and honest dialogue" - well done St Byron on your discussions. Even handed and maturely handled.

I also don't agree that POQ should've been POQ'd but your interpretation is your interpretation. I thought that was heavy handed. I have seen plenty worse along the journey that has gone unchallenged.

I realise Simon has been absent from the site for a while. I hope all is well. As such, I assume any progress on site updates has been stalled?

[matrix]

LOL at the jones retard comments
LOL indeed
if mods cant see its actually not the bit about calling jones a retard thats the prob and that its actually showing some respect for mentally and physically impaired people then you need to hand the badge in
so bascially youve set the bar
so we can now call jones a retatrded spastic muppet who cant kick to save his life because he has an iq of ten which is pretty much like being a spastic?

great work

secondly
no abbreviation of swearing
so what we are saying is FFS and WTF (which my mates 14 year old son uses in texts messages) is a no no but when you type the word f*** and it blanks out the last three letters this is ok?
even though its obvious that its the word f***???????

now that is just completely and utterly laughable and its stupid s*** like that being the reason the traffic around here is the lowest its EVER been
FMD

[stinger]

"Open and honest dialogue" - well done St Byron on your discussions. Even handed and maturely handled.

I also don't agree that POQ should've been POQ'd but your interpretation is your interpretation. I thought that was heavy handed. I have seen plenty worse along the journey that has gone unchallenged.

I realise Simon has been absent from the site for a while. I hope all is well. As such, I assume any progress on site updates has been stalled?

rules are rules...you break them you pay the penalty..that poster got exactly what he deserved.......some of his anti-semitic crap should have seen him banned for life...imho, that is.

..the mods have been way too lenient in their efforts to be impartial.....

[st.byron]

"Open and honest dialogue" - well done St Byron on your discussions. Even handed and maturely handled.

I also don't agree that POQ should've been POQ'd but your interpretation is your interpretation. I thought that was heavy handed. I have seen plenty worse along the journey that has gone unchallenged.

I realise Simon has been absent from the site for a while. I hope all is well. As such, I assume any progress on site updates has been stalled?

The context was also relevant in this case. This part of the rules was also relevant here :
"If you tease, mock or bait another poster, or abuse them, OR repeatedly revisit past disagreements causing or creating an ongoing dispute between one or more posters".

As I said before, if someone is taking ongoing potshots at a particular target, then that context is also taken into account. Not sure what's happening with BFUSA. Reckon he's probably off on a business tangent. Can't give you any info re updates to site except to say that I know BFUSA has a site review planned for September.

[st.byron]

LOL at the jones retard comments
LOL indeed
if mods cant see its actually not the bit about calling jones a retard thats the prob and that its actually showing some respect for mentally and physically impaired people then you need to hand the badge in
so bascially youve set the bar
so we can now call jones a retatrded spastic muppet who cant kick to save his life because he has an iq of ten which is pretty much like being a spastic?

great work

secondly
no abbreviation of swearing
so what we are saying is FFS and WTF (which my mates 14 year old son uses in texts messages) is a no no but when you type the word f*** and it blanks out the last three letters this is ok?
even though its obvious that its the word f***???????

now that is just completely and utterly laughable and its stupid s*** like that being the reason the traffic around here is the lowest its EVER been
FMD

Matrix, did you read the Third Party Abuse thread?
Exactly the issue you're talking about re calling people spastics and retards was put out for debate and there wasn't enough push to warrant changing the rules. Stop blaming the mods. It wasn't our call. My personal opinion is that I also agree it's inappropriate.

It's a no-win situation with you. You complain about heavy handedness, yet when the mods take on board a suggestion from some posters about third party abuse, put it out to the forum to gauge support, ascertain the support level for a change and act according to the feedback received, which was to not intervene, you complain because the mods are not intervening.

Not sure what you talking about with no abbreviation of swearing. Are you referencing my previous post where I expressed an opinion about the swear filter or are you talking about the rules as they stand? Either way what you've written is difficult to understand. Doesn't seem to reflect the opinion I posted or the rules as they stand. Or are you meaning something else?

[st.byron]

Thanks for all the answers St.Byron.

How do warnings work in practice, do only reported posts get scrutinised, or are all threads reviewed, or is it just reported posts and threads that mods happen to read? (I hope my question is clear).

I suppose the scenario I'm wondering about is if there are 1000 posts all very similar, but of those 1000 only 3 by the same poster get reported - once again by only one SS member, then are the other 977 posts also equally scrutinised?

For instance, if I continually report p66's posts, then is he more likely to get banned than non reported posts that were of similar quality? Is there some sort of mechanism to prevent vexatious or vindictive reporting, or the possibility of the person reporting having their own agenda?

My question relates to fairness, it may be that the reported posts are against the rules, but if others (non-reported) are not getting warnings because they weren't reported then the system would be imbalanced, IMO.

By the way, I understand the whole thing is never going to perfect and the mods are in a no win situation, I'm just wondering how it works in practice.

In practice, by far the majority of warnings given are the result of reported posts. In the past calendar month for example, there have been 58 reported posts with 12 warnings issued. I have on occasion come across a post where it's clear that a warning is appropriate and acted immediately, but usually posts are scrutinised more closely when reported.

It's also reality that not every post in every thread is read by the mods. We don't have enough time to do it. That's why the reporting function is there I suppose.

Re the scenario you've suggested where only reported posts get scrutinised I agree with you that the system is unbalanced because of that. The reality is that of those 1000 similar posts where only three are reported, the mods are unlikely to read all of them themselves and are to an extent reliant on posters using the reporting function to be aware of rule breaches. The only way around that would be to ensure that all posts are read by mods. It's not going to happen with voluntary mods.

Personally, if I see a post that is borderline abusive or could be interpreted as a breach of the abuse or baiting rules, I tend to wait and see what the response of the target of the abuse / bait is. If it's worth sending a PM to the poster to alert them they're treading on the line, this is also helpful rather than giving a warning. If I can find a way to navigate it without giving a warning, that's the best outcome IMO.

Once a post is reported though, it has to be assessed against the rules. It's also worth noting that there far too many reports IMO, that are not worthy of a warning...i.e 58 reports, 12 warnings. People do tend to use the report function as a political tool. When that happens and there's actually no substance to the report, it's takes time and energy to go through the assessment and response process which could be better spent reading the forum. As things currently stand there is no mechanism to prevent vexatious or vindictive reporting, except for the mods sending a PM to the reporting poster asking them to take their foot off the gas with it.

[SENsei]

"Open and honest dialogue" - well done St Byron on your discussions. Even handed and maturely handled.

I also don't agree that POQ should've been POQ'd but your interpretation is your interpretation. I thought that was heavy handed. I have seen plenty worse along the journey that has gone unchallenged.

I realise Simon has been absent from the site for a while. I hope all is well. As such, I assume any progress on site updates has been stalled?

rules are rules...you break them you pay the penalty..that poster got exactly what he deserved.......some of his anti-semitic crap should have seen him banned for life...imho, that is.

..the mods have been way too lenient in their efforts to be impartial.....

I didn't ask for your contribution. My post was directed to St Byron. I don't wish to converse with you. I'd appreciate the same courtesy.

[desertsaint]

i don't think Matriz was canning abuse of a player but rather the use of a particular offensive word.
I'm personally of a view that if a person wants to show themselves to be an idiot, or uncouth, or racist, or sexist, then let them expose themselves. But I certainly would agree that the particular word in question, used in that context, is as bad as any swear word (which we do censor).

[stinger]

"Open and honest dialogue" - well done St Byron on your discussions. Even handed and maturely handled.

I also don't agree that POQ should've been POQ'd but your interpretation is your interpretation. I thought that was heavy handed. I have seen plenty worse along the journey that has gone unchallenged.

I realise Simon has been absent from the site for a while. I hope all is well. As such, I assume any progress on site updates has been stalled?

rules are rules...you break them you pay the penalty..that poster got exactly what he deserved.......some of his anti-semitic crap should have seen him banned for life...imho, that is.

..the mods have been way too lenient in their efforts to be impartial.....

I didn't ask for your contribution. My post was directed to St Byron. I don't wish to converse with you. I'd appreciate the same courtesy.

why are you doing so then.....anyway...

i really feel the same about you too..but in the circumstances i thought it appropriate to post what i did......after all it is a public forum...if you wish to converse with st b in private, i suggest you do so by pm.....


you were expressing an opinion on a subject that was really none of you business poq got banned for continually insulting and baiting me...not you..

[st.byron]

i don't think Matriz was canning abuse of a player but rather the use of a particular offensive word.
I'm personally of a view that if a person wants to show themselves to be an idiot, or uncouth, or racist, or sexist, then let them expose themselves. But I certainly would agree that the particular word in question, used in that context, is as bad as any swear word (which we do censor).

Perhaps we should re-visit the third party abuse question, specifically with regard to using words like spastic, retard or any others that people put forward.

It should be noted though, that doing this would be in an environment where there are several long time posters already saying that things are becoming too bland and G-rated.

Thoughts?

[stinger]

i don't think Matriz was canning abuse of a player but rather the use of a particular offensive word.
I'm personally of a view that if a person wants to show themselves to be an idiot, or uncouth, or racist, or sexist, then let them expose themselves. But I certainly would agree that the particular word in question, used in that context, is as bad as any swear word (which we do censor).

Perhaps we should re-visit the third party abuse question, specifically with regard to using words like spastic, retard or any others that people put forward.

It should be noted though, that doing this would be in an environment where there are several long time posters already saying that things are becoming too bland and G-rated.

Thoughts?

i agree...calling pollies rude names is one thing....insulting saints players in the way jones has been should never be tolerated.....

[SENsei]

"Open and honest dialogue" - well done St Byron on your discussions. Even handed and maturely handled.

I also don't agree that POQ should've been POQ'd but your interpretation is your interpretation. I thought that was heavy handed. I have seen plenty worse along the journey that has gone unchallenged.

I realise Simon has been absent from the site for a while. I hope all is well. As such, I assume any progress on site updates has been stalled?

rules are rules...you break them you pay the penalty..that poster got exactly what he deserved.......some of his anti-semitic crap should have seen him banned for life...imho, that is.

..the mods have been way too lenient in their efforts to be impartial.....

I didn't ask for your contribution. My post was directed to St Byron. I don't wish to converse with you. I'd appreciate the same courtesy.

why are you doing so then.....anyway...

i really feel the same about you too..but in the circumstances i thought it appropriate to post what i did......after all it is a public forum...if you wish to converse with st b in private, i suggest you do so by pm.....


you were expressing an opinion on a subject that was really none of you business poq got banned for continually insulting and baiting me...not you..

I request you stop baiting me. Now. This is becoming repetitive. I am requesting now that you do not respond to any of my posts. I am requesting this both publically and privately. I will not be baited by the likes of you.

As per the precedent set in the Bunk Moreland case, I wish for my position in this matter to be respected or will seek Mod intervention. I think that is clear enough.

[HitTheBoundary]

i don't think Matriz was canning abuse of a player but rather the use of a particular offensive word.
I'm personally of a view that if a person wants to show themselves to be an idiot, or uncouth, or racist, or sexist, then let them expose themselves. But I certainly would agree that the particular word in question, used in that context, is as bad as any swear word (which we do censor).

Perhaps we should re-visit the third party abuse question, specifically with regard to using words like spastic, retard or any others that people put forward.

It should be noted though, that doing this would be in an environment where there are several long time posters already saying that things are becoming too bland and G-rated.

Thoughts?

If I'm at the footy and someone is yelling out "you're useless Jones", then it's annoying, but within the realms of acceptability.
But if someone suddenly starts yelling "Jones is a retard/spastic" etc. then I would find that offensive, as I think most people would.
So I agree that it's not so much third party abuse (criticism?) that is the issue, rather the language used.

And St. Byron thanks for the info re the reports/warnings.

[SENsei]

i don't think Matriz was canning abuse of a player but rather the use of a particular offensive word.
I'm personally of a view that if a person wants to show themselves to be an idiot, or uncouth, or racist, or sexist, then let them expose themselves. But I certainly would agree that the particular word in question, used in that context, is as bad as any swear word (which we do censor).

Perhaps we should re-visit the third party abuse question, specifically with regard to using words like spastic, retard or any others that people put forward.

It should be noted though, that doing this would be in an environment where there are several long time posters already saying that things are becoming too bland and G-rated.

Thoughts?

If I'm at the footy and someone is yelling out "you're useless Jones", then it's annoying, but within the realms of acceptability.
But if someone suddenly starts yelling "Jones is a retard/spastic" etc. then I would find that offensive, as I think most people would.
So I agree that it's not so much third party abuse (criticism?) that is the issue, rather the language used.

And St. Byron thanks for the info re the reports/warnings.

I agree with this and Matrix above too. Calling someone useless is totally different to calling them a retard, spastic or in the case of young people I have heard, calling someone a 'downie'. It's not acceptable conduct in society and shouldn't be acceptable here. Question someone's ability all you like, but don't allow abuse to do it.

[BakesFan]

Matriz?...Is that Matrix's Spanish cousin?....is he a spastic retard?

..this post should be reported for unacceptable.....something?

Bakesfan finds it highly offensive.

[stinger]

"Open and honest dialogue" - well done St Byron on your discussions. Even handed and maturely handled.

I also don't agree that POQ should've been POQ'd but your interpretation is your interpretation. I thought that was heavy handed. I have seen plenty worse along the journey that has gone unchallenged.

I realise Simon has been absent from the site for a while. I hope all is well. As such, I assume any progress on site updates has been stalled?

rules are rules...you break them you pay the penalty..that poster got exactly what he deserved.......some of his anti-semitic crap should have seen him banned for life...imho, that is.

..the mods have been way too lenient in their efforts to be impartial.....

I didn't ask for your contribution. My post was directed to St Byron. I don't wish to converse with you. I'd appreciate the same courtesy.

why are you doing so then.....anyway...

i really feel the same about you too..but in the circumstances i thought it appropriate to post what i did......after all it is a public forum...if you wish to converse with st b in private, i suggest you do so by pm.....


you were expressing an opinion on a subject that was really none of you business poq got banned for continually insulting and baiting me...not you..

I request you stop baiting me. Now. This is becoming repetitive. I am requesting now that you do not respond to any of my posts. I am requesting this both publically and privately. I will not be baited by the likes of you.

As per the precedent set in the Bunk Moreland case, I wish for my position in this matter to be respected or will seek Mod intervention. I think that is clear enough.

well stop replying to me then....you have always stuck up for those that abuse me...i will not stand idly by and allow you to whinge and whine about poq's banning without comment...you sir are a bully and you are trying to bully me into not questioning your posts....fat chance....don't like what i post ...put me on ignore....but don't threaten me with mods....

[SENsei]

Reported for baiting.

[stinger]

Reported for baiting.

ditto...for attempted bullying.....

[plugger66]

"Open and honest dialogue" - well done St Byron on your discussions. Even handed and maturely handled.

I also don't agree that POQ should've been POQ'd but your interpretation is your interpretation. I thought that was heavy handed. I have seen plenty worse along the journey that has gone unchallenged.

I realise Simon has been absent from the site for a while. I hope all is well. As such, I assume any progress on site updates has been stalled?

rules are rules...you break them you pay the penalty..that poster got exactly what he deserved.......some of his anti-semitic crap should have seen him banned for life...imho, that is.

..the mods have been way too lenient in their efforts to be impartial.....

I didn't ask for your contribution. My post was directed to St Byron. I don't wish to converse with you. I'd appreciate the same courtesy.

why are you doing so then.....anyway...

i really feel the same about you too..but in the circumstances i thought it appropriate to post what i did......after all it is a public forum...if you wish to converse with st b in private, i suggest you do so by pm.....


you were expressing an opinion on a subject that was really none of you business poq got banned for continually insulting and baiting me...not you..

I request you stop baiting me. Now. This is becoming repetitive. I am requesting now that you do not respond to any of my posts. I am requesting this both publically and privately. I will not be baited by the likes of you.

As per the precedent set in the Bunk Moreland case, I wish for my position in this matter to be respected or will seek Mod intervention. I think that is clear enough.

well stop replying to me then....you have always stuck up for those that abuse me...i will not stand idly by and allow you to whinge and whine about poq's banning without comment...you sir are a bully and you are trying to bully me into not questioning your posts....fat chance....don't like what i post ...put me on ignore....but don't threaten me with mods....

Unlike you who threatened HTB with mods. Stinger he is politely telling you to stop so why not stop. He posted first and you replied to him.

[Dave McNamara]

... 58 reports, 12 warnings. People do tend to use the report function as a political tool...
As things currently stand there is no mechanism to prevent vexatious or vindictive reporting...

Good get Byron. I was about to raise those figures and ask if it meant that the Mods were being very liberal, or that much reporting is vexatious.

Just like staging in footy is now (supposedly) a reportable offence, could vexatious reporting be added to the list of crimes that can attract a Saintsational warning?

I realise that this would add yet another grey area re 'interpretation' to an already long list, but hey, would one more (grey area) therefore matter...?

[stinger]

... 58 reports, 12 warnings. People do tend to use the report function as a political tool...
As things currently stand there is no mechanism to prevent vexatious or vindictive reporting...

Good get Byron. I was about to raise those figures and ask if it meant that the Mods were being very liberal, or that much reporting is vexatious.

Just like staging in footy is now (supposedly) a reportable offence, could vexatious reporting be added to the list of crimes that can attract a Saintsational warning?

I realise that this would add yet another grey area re 'interpretation' to an already long list, but hey, would one more (grey area) therefore matter...?

don't agree with that....the rules are fairly clear......if you break them, then you should get a warning...this whole thread has degenerated into a whinge fest on behalf of somebody who choose to continually break the rules.....no hidden agenda here...no bias.....as i said before some posters need to build a bridge and get over it.....

[GrumpyOne]

well stop replying to me then....you have always stuck up for those that abuse me...i will not stand idly by and allow you to whinge and whine about poq's banning without comment...you sir are a bully and you are trying to bully me into not questioning your posts....fat chance....don't like what i post ...put me on ignore....but don't threaten me with mods....

I just fell off my chair.......

[HitTheBoundary]

... 58 reports, 12 warnings. People do tend to use the report function as a political tool...
As things currently stand there is no mechanism to prevent vexatious or vindictive reporting...

Good get Byron. I was about to raise those figures and ask if it meant that the Mods were being very liberal, or that much reporting is vexatious.

Just like staging in footy is now (supposedly) a reportable offence, could vexatious reporting be added to the list of crimes that can attract a Saintsational warning?

I realise that this would add yet another grey area re 'interpretation' to an already long list, but hey, would one more (grey area) therefore matter...?

don't agree with that....

I agree with Dave. It's a great idea.
It could also cut down the work for the mods if people only report if they're really upset, rather than just using it as a mechanism to get back at a poster they don't like.

[plugger66]

... 58 reports, 12 warnings. People do tend to use the report function as a political tool...
As things currently stand there is no mechanism to prevent vexatious or vindictive reporting...

Good get Byron. I was about to raise those figures and ask if it meant that the Mods were being very liberal, or that much reporting is vexatious.

Just like staging in footy is now (supposedly) a reportable offence, could vexatious reporting be added to the list of crimes that can attract a Saintsational warning?

I realise that this would add yet another grey area re 'interpretation' to an already long list, but hey, would one more (grey area) therefore matter...?

don't agree with that....

I agree with Dave. It's a great idea.
It could also cut down the work for the mods if people only report if they're really upset, rather than just using it as a mechanism to get back at a poster they don't like.

Its a fantastic idea. maybe because i mentioned it earlier. Some people, not many at all, just report for the sake of it like a 10 year child who has his favourite toy pinched.