Are you speekin for all the mods when you refered to "administration".???
Its a positive discusson concernin the beterment of Sciforums... but do you consider it pontless to clarify who you'r speekin for.???
Mods that care... speek up.!!!
- Thread starter cluelusshusbund
- Start date
Are you speekin for all the mods when you refered to "administration".???
Its a positive discusson concernin the beterment of Sciforums... but do you consider it pontless to clarify who you'r speekin for.???
Bells
Staff member
You mean be what it is now, but just automatic?
Ermm okay.
Nope.
Because if someone is banned for a homophobic tirade or racist tirade against another, telling them to 'enjoy your vacation' is being nice about it, to be honest.
Contrary to what you may believe, I actually do have better things to do with my time then to contemplate draqon's ban. I can understand that it is important to you. And that is fine. If you want to partake in navel gazing over his ban, knock yourself out. But I really don't think about it at all.
Are you saying that moderators should be allowed to wilfully ban people they don't personally like without any real reason? For example, if I thought one member wasn't contributing to this forum, was a troll, etc, do you think I should be allowed to ban them based on my own personal views of the individual?
I disagree. A person should only be banned if they have breached the rules of this site and have done so repeatedly. Then of course we have the few choice individuals such as spammers and those who threaten harm to members or threaten to commit other illegal acts against members or their families, etc. Such individuals tend to be banned immediately. I would hope that I do not have to explain why such members are banned immediately...
When mods ban someone, they need to show their reasons why and they need to state what rules were breached, etc. Saying 'well I don't think he contributed to this forum so I decided to get rid of him' won't wash. That is an abuse of power. What is annoying to me and non-contributory to me won't be viewed the same by others.
For example, I could say you should be banned because I don't think you contribute anything to this forum and we should not be made to suffer your presence on this forum and we'd be better off without you and use that as the basis for your ban. You have not broken any rules and had not received any warnings for breaching the site's rules in the past.. Would that be fair? No. It would be an abuse of power and if I did such a thing, I should be removed immediately.
Origionaly posted by clueluss husbund
Anuther suggeston... that mods not make smart-azz remarks when a person is baned... such as... "enjoy you'r vacation"... do you agree.???
What diference does it make what they was baned for???... what im suggestin is... that if mods perform ther mod duties respectfuly... they are mor likely to be treeted wit respect... so i will simply put it this way... do you thank its benificial to Sciforums when mods make smart-azz remarks when they ban somone.???
--------------------
“ Are ther curently people you thank Sciforums woud be beter off wit-out... but dew to the curent system... Sciforums has to continue to sufffer ther presence.??? ”
I didnt say anythang of the sort... i meerly ask this queston:::
"Are ther curently people you thank Sciforums woud be beter off wit-out... but dew to the curent system... Sciforums has to continue to sufffer ther presence.???”
Its ether a YES or a NO (an of course you coud have qualified that yes or no)... but this is at leas twice you have refused to answr... so nevermind.!!!
Anuther suggeston... that mods not make smart-azz remarks when a person is baned... such as... "enjoy you'r vacation"... do you agree.???
What diference does it make what they was baned for???... what im suggestin is... that if mods perform ther mod duties respectfuly... they are mor likely to be treeted wit respect... so i will simply put it this way... do you thank its benificial to Sciforums when mods make smart-azz remarks when they ban somone.???
--------------------
“ Are ther curently people you thank Sciforums woud be beter off wit-out... but dew to the curent system... Sciforums has to continue to sufffer ther presence.??? ”
I didnt say anythang of the sort... i meerly ask this queston:::
"Are ther curently people you thank Sciforums woud be beter off wit-out... but dew to the curent system... Sciforums has to continue to sufffer ther presence.???”
Its ether a YES or a NO (an of course you coud have qualified that yes or no)... but this is at leas twice you have refused to answr... so nevermind.!!!
That is a very good observation. I suspect that if posters are treated with equality and dignity when the rules were enforced, they would not continue to 'troll' (ie. do anything which the moderators consider to constitute causing trouble, such as complain). Instead, moderators love to enforce the rules in a slanted manner while daring you to do something about it.
What I've realised is that the moderators LOVE trolls. Moderators and 'veteran' posters delight in being able to belittle and harass those who fall out of the herd by expressing opinions that differ from their own. They continually provoke with snide insults, bad attitude, unsupported claims, infractions, and short bans.
If the moderators on this forum (or any forum) didn't like trolls, they would simply ignore them, instead of stringing them along with abuse and short period bans. But the truth is that 'trolls' give people (including the moderators) a seemingly legitimate outlet for them to express their darker nature against. They are the ideal individuals for those in power to bully in order to feel better about themselves.
Also remember that if we got rid of all the 'trolls', 3/4's of the discussion on sciforums would cease. 'Trolls' are one of the biggest provokers of discussion. S.A.M has caused more discussion on sciforums than all the uppity pseudo-intellectual veteran members combined.
Last edited:
Bells
Staff member
Depends on the comment and the situation involved. Sometimes it can help lighten the mood a bit and end quite a bit of the hostilities that resulted in the ban and other times it can result in more problems.
And what you cannot seem to understand is that you asked me if I thought there were currently people on sciforums who we would be better off without.. So you are asking me if I think there are people here I personally think should be banned permanently for whatever reason I may have. What I think does not matter.
I may think someone on sciforums shouldn't be here for whatever reason and the current system does not allow or justify a ban (in that they have had no warnings in the past). Now, tell me, how do you think I would justify banning such an individual or convincing the moderators that they should be banned? Do you understand how that would be a breach of ethics and an abuse of my mod powers?
If the answer does not satisfy you, then I would suggest you pose your question properly instead of asking me if I think there are members that sciforums would be better off without and the current system doesn't allow them to be banned and whether sciforums should be made to suffer their presence based on my personal feelings.
Last edited:
Origonaly posted by cluelusshusbund
...this is at leas twice you have refused to answr... so nevermind.!!!
What i do understan is... that i said nevermind... ie... i except it that you refuse to answr "my" queston...
"Are ther curently people you thank Sciforums woud be beter off wit-out... but dew to the curent system... Sciforums has to continue to sufffer ther presence.???”
...an even tho i didnt ask for a 3rd time.... you seemed compeled to create a 3rd strawman-queston which cant be answrd... an act as if its the queston "i" asked.!!!
But i will answr my queston... No... i dont know of anybody i thank Sciforums woud be beter off wit-out... but if i did... my answr woud be Yes :shrug:
...this is at leas twice you have refused to answr... so nevermind.!!!
What i do understan is... that i said nevermind... ie... i except it that you refuse to answr "my" queston...
"Are ther curently people you thank Sciforums woud be beter off wit-out... but dew to the curent system... Sciforums has to continue to sufffer ther presence.???”
...an even tho i didnt ask for a 3rd time.... you seemed compeled to create a 3rd strawman-queston which cant be answrd... an act as if its the queston "i" asked.!!!
But i will answr my queston... No... i dont know of anybody i thank Sciforums woud be beter off wit-out... but if i did... my answr woud be Yes :shrug:
Bells
Staff member
And I want you to understand something. How can a mod answer yes and continue to be a moderator without having any of their decisions queried based on that "yes"?
Do you actually understand the enormity of what you are asking? If I answer "yes", then any time I ban anyone or give a warning, I will be asked if this is someone I think sciforums can do without. You don't realise that whether I think someone should be here or not is really beside the point? It is a moot point. My personal opinions about certain members should never ever enter into the equation in whether I moderate them or not. My personal wishes has to be kept separate.
The point system exists to make sure that the above does not occur. And that is what you're not quite grasping. Do you understand now why your question is impossible for a mod to answer?
It is easy for you to simply say yes. But if you're given the ability and the powers to ban someone, you can't say yes. More to the point, you shouldn't say yes. Because if you moderate based on your personal feelings towards members, then you're a bad moderator.
Origionaly posted by clueluss husbund to Bells
Anuther suggeston... that mods not make smart-azz remarks when a person is baned... such as... "enjoy you'r vacation"... do you agree.???
I woud have sniped som of you'r long post out but its all worthy of bein repeted... an what goes rite along wit what you said is... that ever time ive suggested get-tuff measures to rid Sciforums of the riff-raff "managment" has seemed to be so troubled by... im met wit a stone wall... ie... no discusson about changes wanted or needed... managment wants to keep thangs jus as they are... an my guess as to the reason why... is because of the reasons you stated above.!!!
Anuther suggeston... that mods not make smart-azz remarks when a person is baned... such as... "enjoy you'r vacation"... do you agree.???
I woud have sniped som of you'r long post out but its all worthy of bein repeted... an what goes rite along wit what you said is... that ever time ive suggested get-tuff measures to rid Sciforums of the riff-raff "managment" has seemed to be so troubled by... im met wit a stone wall... ie... no discusson about changes wanted or needed... managment wants to keep thangs jus as they are... an my guess as to the reason why... is because of the reasons you stated above.!!!
Origonaly posted by cluelusshusbund
...this is at leas twice you have refused to answr... so nevermind.!!!
I expected an honest answr from you the firs 2 times i ask my queston... an what youv'e jus admited is... that youv'e been blowin smoke wit you'r strawman-remake of the queston i asked.!!!
PS
Stay honest or im not interested in you'r responses.!!!
...this is at leas twice you have refused to answr... so nevermind.!!!
I expected an honest answr from you the firs 2 times i ask my queston... an what youv'e jus admited is... that youv'e been blowin smoke wit you'r strawman-remake of the queston i asked.!!!
PS
Stay honest or im not interested in you'r responses.!!!
So what you really want is for the mods to run site by whim and personal likes/ dislikes?
Forget the rules as stated and posters should simply take their chances on how much of an impression (good or bad) they make on the mods?
How well do you think that would run?
I mus admit... you jus beat hell out of that strawman... lol.!!!
Bells
Staff member
I am being honest.
Just because you don't like the answer does not make it any less honest or your question more vague and, if I might add, a tad ridiculous. Lets say I think we (Sciforums) shouldn't be plagued by you, for example, because your lack of spelling annoys the hell out of me and many others. Do you think that would be a fair reason to ban you?
What if you have not broken any rules? Do you think your grammar and spelling, or lack thereof, are valid grounds for your removal from this forum based solely on the annoyance value it brings to the forum? You are effectively saying that we should be able to do so. I am saying we should not. Apparently you disagree.
Because based off what you are saying in this thread, mods that care would be banning anyone they felt was a plague upon this forum, broken rules or not. I say if someone is doing that as a mod, they shouldn't be a mod.
Im a guest here... i thank its fare that i foller the rules the groop owners make... or be baned if i dont... an if spellin issues becoms a banable offence then i wont need to be baned... i will no longer post here... because i atempt to foller the rules the people in charge make.!!!
Edit:::
O... an to that queston... if the people in charge determine that Sciforums woud be beter off wit my spellin an grammer annoyance gone... then i shud be insta-baned.!!!
Last edited:
Bells
Staff member
Ah. But that is where I disagree with you. I don't think you or anyone should be banned for something like spelling and you have not broken any rules in posting here. If the people in charge determined that you or anyone else who may have issues with spelling and grammar should be banned, I'd not only resign but stop posting here. It isn't against the rules to make spelling mistakes.
The point system, as they stand, allow moderators to check if anyone has been warned about something in particular recently when issuing other warnings and/or considering a ban due to breaking the rules (eg hate speech).
That is why you need human interaction instead of an automated system. You need to consider the circumstances.
But based off your proposition and your question, it doesn't matter if you follow the rules or not. It would be based solely on whether the moderators and/or admin considered the member worthy of remaining here.
Origionaly posted by cluelusshusbund
...if the people in charge determine that Sciforums woud be beter off wit my spellin an grammer annoyance gone... then i shud be insta-baned.!!!
An you woudnt be alone... but keep in mind... the people in charge have the rite to perma-ban anyone they want for any reason they want... an as you ponted out... if posters feel managment is abusin ther rites Sciforums woud go to hell... an thats the "check" which has kept thangs in balance.!!!
Edit:::
O... so you'r a mod agan... congratulatons.!!!
...if the people in charge determine that Sciforums woud be beter off wit my spellin an grammer annoyance gone... then i shud be insta-baned.!!!
An you woudnt be alone... but keep in mind... the people in charge have the rite to perma-ban anyone they want for any reason they want... an as you ponted out... if posters feel managment is abusin ther rites Sciforums woud go to hell... an thats the "check" which has kept thangs in balance.!!!
Edit:::
O... so you'r a mod agan... congratulatons.!!!
Last edited:
I'll just offer a link to the Forum Rules & Directory and repeat the invitation for all to simply respect the rules and each other- moderation follows naturally from that respect.
I think it's paramount to remember that we are all moderators here- of ourselves, with every post. Here's a more wordy (not so efficiently self-moderated) version of the same idea.
I think it's paramount to remember that we are all moderators here- of ourselves, with every post. Here's a more wordy (not so efficiently self-moderated) version of the same idea.
Last edited:
Obstinance met wit respect is mor condusive to learnin (an a mor intelegent Sciforums) than a ban.!!!
----------------
...do you thank its benificial to Sciforums when mods make smart-azz remarks when they ban somone.??? ”
Posted by cluelusshusbund
:shrug:
Obvously you "get-it".!!!
In concluson:::
Insults... whether actual ad-homs or not... are disrespectful... an for Sciforums to becom a mor intelegent community it begins wit respect from the top down... so i say to any mod who practices disrespectful behavior an yet clames to want Sciforums to be a mor intelegent comunity... lead by esample... treet "all" people mor respectfuly.!!!
How much respect is due when there's a refusal to learn (or in some particular cases even a refusal to look at links that would provide the opportunity to learn)?
We'll have to disagree on that one.
I am not of the opinion that everyone deserves respect regardless of their attitude to learning and facts.
cluluss said:
That's a good point. Everyone, in fact, every thing, I believe, deserves to be treated with respect and dignity. Even if I don't always practice this as much as I feel I should, it's something I shoot for.
It's a sign of maturity of the highest order. Some people have it and others don't. It's amazing how the people most without this are the ones that always seem to be in positions of power... how does that happen?
Why?
I've asked this question many times of people who espouse that sentiment, but so far have never received a straight, workable answer.
Why, for example should Hitler be respected? Or Jack the Ripper? Should that "respect" (that you accord these people) extend to their views on, respectively, the place of Jews in the world or the correct way to treat women?
How much respect is due to someone who, on a science forum, puts their unsupported (and in many cases totally uneducated in the subject) opinion against or above the results of decades, if not centuries, of scientific findings?