About infractions and bans

Status
Not open for further replies.
The only time I hit report is when someone personally attacks--extra viciously. That has happened maybe 3 times since I've been back. I got an infraction for making a God comment in a God thread. :confused:

There are two mods who hit me the most. I won't name names but I'm guessing they don't like CCRs. :rolleyes:

I don't think vile personal attacks should be allowed. I think you should only get infractions/banned if you viciously personal attack/threaten/troll. Otherwise it's just kind of stupid. :rolleyes:
 
I'm not surprised. She spits at me all day but God forbid anyone report any of her vicious attacks. :rolleyes:
 
The problem here, which is evident from the posts above, is that people are making the assumption that because their ideas and beliefs are attacked, they are being personally attacked. That is of course a completely wrong assumption.

If you are unable to separate your beliefs from your persona, then you shouldn't be posting on internet forums.
 
sandy said:
I have seen others but I don't care so it doesn't matter. The whole infraction thing is kind of pathetic. If someone is an annoying troll, ban them. The little infractions for the stupidest reasons are beyond insane. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Look at the date of my post when answering James R's question, July 8. The admin changed it after that so members could see others infractions. For a while after that change, members could also click on another member's profile and see how many active infractions they had against them. I would assume that some members could have used that knowledge to their advantage by starting a flame war with someone they didn't like. Like, 'Hey, I've only one active infraction in my total, so I can afford a few more without getting banned. I'll just insult Doofus who has several active infractions, and when he insults back, he will be banned'. That has been changed again, so we members cannot see others infraction total.
 
This is the About infractions and bans thread. Who is going to delete all this off-topic chit-chat, including this post?
 
2inquisitive said:
This is the About infractions and bans thread. Who is going to delete all this off-topic chit-chat, including this post?
Click to expand...
No-one. But if moderators concentrated on doing that there would be no infractions and bans threads - just a lot of deleted posts. After some initial teething troubles from the crybabies those who want a serious discussion site without any of the distractions would finally get what they want.

Be careful what you wish for though. It might come true.
 
Last edited:
I hate to be the next one to ask, but I'm curious to know whether moderators can be assigned infractions also. I'm being accused of homophobia, of all things, by a moderator whose moniker I don't want to post here, although you can locate a three-letter word for "donkey" in it. ;)

Anyway, it seems a bit unEthical (;)) to infract someone even for having a spirited argument, IMHO. If I were a mod, I'd reserve that for general "isms" and vicious personal insults. Again, if I were operating with mod hat on, if I incurred fair infractions I could certainly respect that. But the present system doesn't seem to do that, or so I hear.
 
redarmy11 said:
No-one. But if moderators concentrated on doing that there would be no infractions and bans threads - just a lot of deleted posts. After some initial teething troubles from the crybabies those who want a serious discussion site without any of the distractions would finally get what they want.

Be careful what you wish for though. It might come true.
Click to expand...
I remember a discussion conducted about chit-chat and off-topic posts on serious and science threads as being off-limits. Keep the off-topic chit-chat in subforums like About the Members and Free Thoughts. Who could complain about such stuff in a thread like 'Most Flirtatious Member?' This, however, is a sticky thread in the Site Feedback subforum.
 
And therein lies the problem. Site Feedback has no dedicated moderator. (Free Thoughts, on the other hand, has three.)

So I'm afraid you'll have to wait for James R to come in from work. Perhaps he'll attend to it.
 
"Well, Orleander, I'm glad you asked that question.

At the base of the divine heirarchy are the Nephilim - Bells, Sam, invert_nexus. Basically, just an average bunch of Joes trying to do their best to save the Intertubes using only kittens, top hats and dwarf tossing. They're mortal like you and I...but just a bit better than you and me. It's like comparing North Dakota to South Dakota...sure, they're both Dakotas, but there's something indescribably superior about the one. And I think we all know what that one is.

Then there are the Seraphim - Stryder, Plazma - responsible for ensuring that the members hear the Word of the site and obey the general rules: no swearing, no c-word, no posting huge posts with a line, and cleaning up after Nickelodeon.

Finally, you have the Archmoderators - goofyfish and James, principally. They occupy a position of spiritual duality in the SciPantheon: one, all lightness and good, and the other irredeemably and irrevocably evil and dark, the very embodiment of chaos, madness and immorality. And I think we all know what that one is.

I hope this answers all your questions about the "Moderator Heirarchy". Go with the blessing of Myuu and come again to our Spiritual World of SciDiscovery. I've been your host, GeoffP."
 
GeoffP said:
"Well, Orleander, I'm glad you asked that question.

At the base of the divine heirarchy are the Nephilim - Bells, Sam, invert_nexus. Basically, just an average bunch of Joes trying to do their best to save the Intertubes using only kittens, top hats and dwarf tossing. They're mortal like you and I...but just a bit better than you and me. It's like comparing North Dakota to South Dakota...sure, they're both Dakotas, but there's something indescribably superior about the one. And I think we all know what that one is.

Then there are the Seraphim - Stryder, Plazma - responsible for ensuring that the members hear the Word of the site and obey the general rules: no swearing, no c-word, no posting huge posts with a line, and cleaning up after Nickelodeon.

Finally, you have the Archmoderators - goofyfish and James, principally. They occupy a position of spiritual duality in the SciPantheon: one, all lightness and good, and the other irredeemably and irrevocably evil and dark, the very embodiment of chaos, madness and immorality. And I think we all know what that one is.

I hope this answers all your questions about the "Moderator Heirarchy". Go with the blessing of Myuu and come again to our Spiritual World of SciDiscovery. I've been your host, GeoffP."
Click to expand...
:huh:... I little misconception here.
goofy is more Seraphim than I am.

I'm the one who hold the trumpet.
 
holy guacamole! There sure are a lot of you.
why can't I PM Cris?
I want to be able to whine to everyone.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top