About Moderation (old original thread)

[Jalfrezi]

Personally I’ve always found the safest way of achieving détente is by banning someone for a week under jumped up charges, then refusing to acknowledge how badly I fucked up and how unsuited to moderating a community-empowered forum it makes me.

[MrWookie]

I stated what I wanted in clear and direct terms

[Jalfrezi]

You mean less “naked racism”, a phrase that you seem to have a unique definition of, pertaining only to posters named “jalfrezi” and that no one else here shares?

You’ve got some fucking nerve talking about what YOU want, haven’t you?

This isn’t your forum, and neither does it belong to a private cabal of white supremacists you volunteer to help out.

This isn’t the first time this has had to be pointed out to you.

[MrWookie]

No, I mean I stated what I wanted for de-escalation directly in response to fidget. It is nonsense to insinuate that I’ve been repeatedly asked to de-escalate while being unwilling to.

@anon31529671

Question for Jal and Wookie - totally understandable if you don’t feel like answering.
What’s the desired end result here?
Because aside from arguing for argument’s sake nothing is being achieved.
Do we want to reach a detente and stop this endless circle of nonsense or has it gone too far for that?
Are there reasonable requests we can make of each other to facilitate a detente are are we too firmly entrenched in our positions and just wish to relitigate ad nauseum?
Are we prepared to compromise for the good of the community or are we too addicted to the fight?

I’m quite happy to listen to suggestions on how I can modify my behaviour if it’s adding to this shit show as long as it’s reciprocated.

@MrWookie

I want the mods to be able to mod without being subject to a perpetual harassment campaign from the permanently resentful.

And no, I don’t think this is my forum. I think we should both respect community sentiment.

[anon10396289]

@MrWookie

I want the mods to be able to mod without being subject to a perpetual harassment campaign from the permanently resentful.

You should have a vote on it or something.

[Jalfrezi]

@MrWookie

I want the mods to be able to mod without being subject to a perpetual harassment campaign from the permanently resentful.

Let me get this straight - you’re calling this conversation a harrassment campaign against you after you unilaterally impose a week long ban on a poster for no good reason simply because you and your partner in crime hold a grudge against him?

[MrWookie]

@Jalfrezi

@MrWookie

I want the mods to be able to mod without being subject to a perpetual harassment campaign from the permanently resentful.

Let me get this straight - you’re calling this conversation a harrassment campaign against you after you unilaterally impose a week long ban on a poster for no good reason simply because you and your partner in crime hold a grudge against him?

No, obviously. It strains credibility that you would think I’m referring only to the conversation that started in response to your most recent ban.

[Jalfrezi]

Ok, at least that’s clear.

So you want to reserve the right to carry out harassment campaigns against individual posters, while demanding they treat you respectfully?

[MrWookie]

Also no. Perhaps instead of rewriting what I want so as to deliberately make me look bad, you look at what I actually said?

[Jalfrezi]

I’m putting what you stated into the wider context of a months-long campaign by you to ban people you don’t like for offences that Jman was also guilty of but who you’ve never banned (unlike two other mods who have banned him), and of your total support of a mod who broke forum rules, because the target of her rage and threats was the same individual.

Do you accept that this sort of long-standing harassment by you can only result in a lot of bad feeling?

[MrWookie]

I do not accept your premise that your offenses were equal to jman’s at the time of your ban. Subsequently, jman clearly escalated and got a due timeout. That Chads got him first is not an indication that I don’t think he deserved it.

[Jalfrezi]

OK, you’re not arguing in good faith and we can drop this dishonest idea of “détente” now. The implied claim that you were about to ban Jman is risible.

I thought for a moment there you might have some regrets about your atrocious modding, but obviously not.

Carry on with the campaign if you want. I don’t understand why mod status is so important to anyone so incapable of impartiality, but people, huh?

[jmakin]

Why would we erase something from the moderator log?

[jmakin]

To keep an accurate log of events. That is what the point of a log is, to keep track of things that happened. Would you rather it be forgotten about?

[pyatnitski]

This is getting really funny now.

[pyatnitski]

I dunno, not even understanding the problem of having a post about someone being banned for a week for racism, when they were not banned for a week for racism, did raise a proper chuckle.

[jmakin]

If I said anything that could be construed as racist or any other kind of ist, I would apologize and try to be more careful at the language I used.

If it were a case of someone falsely accusing me, and it went in the moderator log, if the ban were reversed I’d probably ask that it be amended in the log. Like put an entry “ban reversed because ______”.

Deleting seems weird and achieves the opposite of what you want here.

[Jalfrezi]

This is so obviously correct.

Either delete the entry that says I was banned for a week (because it’s false, ldo) or add an entry saying the ban was overturned because a community vote found it invalid.

[jmakin]

See the post I just made

[All-InFlynn]

@jmakin

To keep an accurate log of events.

So why hasn’t the rescinding of the ban been logged? That’s not a rhetorical question. A lot more effort has been put into resisting either amending the original log or making a new entry reflecting the change, so presumably some crucial principle requires that neither of those be done. What is it?

ETA never mind, pretend I didn’t quote you lol.