Banning of Principle of Q'uo

[8856brother]

... 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.

Reported. There is absolutely no place on this forum for common sense.

[st.byron]

67 reports now in the last calendar month. Been a busy little button today.

[stinger]

67 reports now in the last calendar month. Been a busy little button today.

you are never going to win st b.........let offensive behaviour go unpunished and the forum deteriorates once more....then when you do issue a warning some poster is going to pull you up and say...i've seen worse let go before....issue a warning for a clear breach of the rules and you see the carry on that's currently being posted in this thread....the stuff of nonsense.....as i said you can't win.....

[Bunk_Moreland]

67 reports now in the last calendar month. Been a busy little button today.

you are never going to win st b.........let offensive behaviour go unpunished and the forum deteriorates once more....then when you do issue a warning some poster is going to pull you up and say...i've seen worse let go before....issue a warning for a clear breach of the rules and you see the carry on that's currently being posted in this thread....the stuff of nonsense.....as i said you can't win.....

BM agrees with stinger.

The forum rules were tightened to stop the baiting and the trolling and the abuse. Unfortunately to police the rules reporting has to occur until posters are brought to heel.

BM still cant see why posters cant abide by mod decisions????? No use crying about fairness or not, this is not a democracy, it is benevolent dictatorship and whatever the mod says goes.

So if the mod says go, the poster goes.

Really not that hard to understand.

[Bunk_Moreland]

... 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...?

BM will only report when warranted like when BM has repeatedly asked a poster not to call BM another nic that is now disabled. BM will continue to report posters who do this. If the mods believe it is vexatious or used as a political tool, then they will contact me and reconsider the arrangement I currently have with them.

This has not occurred so BM is of the opinion that BM's reporting is not vexatious. BM's reporting has slowed to a trickle as posters come to heel and abide the decision of the mod, as it should be in the new improved SS.

[plugger66]

67 reports now in the last calendar month. Been a busy little button today.

you are never going to win st b.........let offensive behaviour go unpunished and the forum deteriorates once more....then when you do issue a warning some poster is going to pull you up and say...i've seen worse let go before....issue a warning for a clear breach of the rules and you see the carry on that's currently being posted in this thread....the stuff of nonsense.....as i said you can't win.....

100% true but how do you know that some of those 67 reports are just crap. I have seen a few examples of some posts reported and they wouldnt qualify for anything more than plain banter. I would actually worn the sooks for reported banter that is obvious banter.

[HitTheBoundary]

I would actually worn the sooks for reported banter that is obvious banter.

Agreed. It could be called the Lindsay Thomas rule.

[stinger]

I would actually worn the sooks for reported banter that is obvious banter.

Agreed. It could be called the Lindsay Thomas rule.

fortunately that is for the mods to decide....not the poster you have quoted......

[st.byron]

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...?

It means that much reporting is perhaps not vexatious, but not really close to being warning-worthy. One of the ways personal agendas between posters play out is the use of the report button. i.e 80% of reports in the past month were not taken any further.

I think making a rule about 'vexatious reporting' could lead to further accusations of bias, because there is no forum wide oversight of the report panel. The mods are the only ones with access to the 'Reports' panel so there would be no check or balance from the forum about a rule like that. A warning could be given without there being any knowledge of why or what for by forum members. This thread is an example of someone disagreeing with a mods decision and having the place to put it forward and everyone can make their own minds up based on evidence that's available and clear.

Also, it's probably not really necessary. A previous case of someone going a bit heavy on the report button was managed through PM's and that's worked OK. If it comes up again, the same track can be taken.

Having said that, I reckon that there are too many reports that are clearly not warnings. People get caught up in personal 'battles' with other posters and now that they're not free to let fly with abuse, they sometimes use the report button as a way of 'getting back' at the other. People are of course free to report as much as they want and if it becomes a problem with any poster the mods can deal with it through PM. It would be great though, if posters could maybe just hold off for a few minutes and take a broader view before hitting the button. Each report takes time to assess and deal with that could otherwise be spent reading the forum and all the mods have other lives to get on with.

[plugger66]

I would actually worn the sooks for reported banter that is obvious banter.

Agreed. It could be called the Lindsay Thomas rule.

fortunately that is for the mods to decide....not the poster you have quoted......

And luckily they do and the mods have decided most reported stuff isnt worth a warning which suggests there are sooks just reporting banter.

[Bunk_Moreland]

I would actually worn the sooks for reported banter that is obvious banter.

Agreed. It could be called the Lindsay Thomas rule.

fortunately that is for the mods to decide....not the poster you have quoted......

And luckily they do and the mods have decided most reported stuff isnt worth a warning which suggests there are sooks just reporting banter.

BM believes that you are drawing conclusions from insufficient data. As you are not a mod and am not privy to the 67 reports mentioned by St.Byron, you cannot draw any definitive conclusion about sooks or non sooks.

You may have an opinion however that opinion is based soley on anecdote and ignorance. Now you have an absolute right to ignorant opinions, however just because you have an opinion does not make it a fact.

An alternative could be that many were warnable reports, however the moderators are reasonable and may have PM'ed the perp and told them to watch it or the next infraction will result in a warning.

It is a discretionary system. The mods are not Asperbergers sufferers who think they have to rigidly adhere to the letter of the law in every instance. Leeway and common sense may also be a part of the decision making process.

However it sounds as though, to fit your world view, most reporting is done be sooks. Cool, your right, but don't expect to be held as a universal truth when there is no evidence to corroborate it.

[plugger66]

I would actually worn the sooks for reported banter that is obvious banter.

Agreed. It could be called the Lindsay Thomas rule.

fortunately that is for the mods to decide....not the poster you have quoted......

And luckily they do and the mods have decided most reported stuff isnt worth a warning which suggests there are sooks just reporting banter.

BM believes that you are drawing conclusions from insufficient data. As you are not a mod and am not privy to the 67 reports mentioned by St.Byron, you cannot draw any definitive conclusion about sooks or non sooks.

You may have an opinion however that opinion is based soley on anecdote and ignorance. Now you have an absolute right to ignorant opinions, however just because you have an opinion does not make it a fact.

An alternative could be that many were warnable reports, however the moderators are reasonable and may have PM'ed the perp and told them to watch it or the next infraction will result in a warning.

It is a discretionary system. The mods are not Asperbergers sufferers who think they have to rigidly adhere to the letter of the law in every instance. Leeway and common sense may also be a part of the decision making process.

However it sounds as though, to fit your world view, most reporting is done be sooks. Cool, your right, but don't expect to be held as a universal truth when there is no evidence to corroborate it.

Never said it was fact. Just using common sense from what SB has said. And never said most of the 67 reports were done by sooks. maybe you think that way. Just suggested sooks are reporting banter. Hmmm. Seems there is raw nerve. have no idea why though. I stand by that sooks are reporting banter because of evidence I have received and what SB has said. Im sure some grown ups are also reporting banter but hopefully mostly reportable offences even though I cant see why they bother. each to their own I suppose.

[HitTheBoundary]

And luckily they do and the mods have decided most reported stuff isnt worth a warning which suggests there are sooks just reporting banter.

Personally, I believe that this is a universal truth.

IMO of course.

[HitTheBoundary]

Also, it's probably not really necessary. A previous case of someone going a bit heavy on the report button was managed through PM's and that's worked OK. If it comes up again, the same track can be taken.

Fair enough.

[Dave McNamara]

... If the mods believe it is vexatious or used as a political tool, then they will contact me and reconsider the arrangement I currently have with them.

Is that the your first slip-up since returning BM?

This has not occurred so BM is of the opinion that BM's reporting is not vexatious. BM's reporting has slowed to a trickle as posters come to heel and abide the decision of the mod, as it should be in the new improved SS.

Nice recovery though.

[Bunk_Moreland]

... If the mods believe it is vexatious or used as a political tool, then they will contact me and reconsider the arrangement I currently have with them.

Is that the your first slip-up since returning BM?

This has not occurred so BM is of the opinion that BM's reporting is not vexatious. BM's reporting has slowed to a trickle as posters come to heel and abide the decision of the mod, as it should be in the new improved SS.

Nice recovery though.

Bunk_Moreland is unsure what you mean. Bunk_Moreland never went anywhere to return from.

[SENsei]

Bunk_Moreland is Stringer Bell's bitch. *TV show reference before anyone gets huffy.

I think Dave McNamara has placed a nice place kick in Bunk_Moreland's direction....and there was a slight hint of a fumble.....

[Bunk_Moreland]

Bunk_Moreland is Stringer Bell's bitch. *TV show reference before anyone gets huffy.

I think Dave McNamara has placed a nice place kick in Bunk_Moreland's direction....and there was a slight hint of a fumble.....

Bunk_Moreland does not understand the Stringer Bell reference. Omar accounted for Stringer Bell

Bunk_Moreland didn't like people giving a f*** when it was not their turn to give a f***.

[SENsei]

Spoiler alert! I am only up to season 3!!

[Dave McNamara]

Bunk_Moreland is unsure what you mean. Bunk_Moreland never went anywhere to return from.

Good point. I stand corrected. Technically, you never really went away.

[Bunk_Moreland]

Bunk_Moreland is unsure what you mean. Bunk_Moreland never went anywhere to return from.

Good point. I stand corrected. Technically, you never really went away.

Bunk_Moreland has only been on the forum for a short time. Infer that Bunk_Moreland is somebody else than Bunk_Moreland or refer to BunK_Moreland as anybody else and BM will report you.

You are beginning to bait and that is against forum rules. Desist or you will face the wrath of the moderators for breaking forum rules

[Bunk_Moreland]

Spoiler alert! I am only up to season 3!!

They all get killed in a firey explosion just like at the end of every Prince Planet episode.

[Dave McNamara]

Bunk_Moreland has only been on the forum for a short time. Infer that Bunk_Moreland is somebody else than Bunk_Moreland or refer to BunK_Moreland as anybody else and BM will report you.

You want to report Simon (sure, ok, a known stirrer)... and... report yourself???

Are you trying to confuse me, BM?


viewtopic.php?f=1&t=85468&p=1462038&hil ... l#p1462470

Point of order. I did not make joffaboy deactivate joffaboy / nextmess-stringer change his nic to Bunk_Moreland ... he requested it through a civil PM discussion.

Just clearing up any confusion that this misinformation could cause and how it may poorly reflect on my character.

[BakesFan]

Bunk_Moreland is unsure what you mean. Bunk_Moreland never went anywhere to return from.

Good point. I stand corrected. Technically, you never really went away.

Bunk_Moreland has only been on the forum for a short time. Infer that Bunk_Moreland is somebody else than Bunk_Moreland or refer to BunK_Moreland as anybody else and BM will report you.

You are beginning to bait and that is against forum rules. Desist or you will face the wrath of the moderators for breaking forum rules

No baiting, jb.... your s***'s just boring. Everyone knows who you are ...don't insult the forum by pretending otherwise...

..report me... I'll take my whack..... I have no idea what you're trying to prove... but it's pretty f*****' childish and annoying.

..f*** it... I'll ban myself for two weeks... no further comment from me until at the 6/9/14.

[SENsei]

This could take off like ice bucket challenges. Self banning.