New topic
PrintableCarrieMpls said: gemini13 said: I'd rather argue out in the open or through orgnotes than have someone covertly try to shut me up while they, at the same time, are just as offensive to me as I am to them. And some would rather not engage, hence they use other measures to get someone to simply leave them alone. Not saying that's the case here, just that not everyone handles every situation the same way. Personal issues should not be dealt with ON threads anyway - unless it has much to do with the thread's topic at hand - in most cases it's not | |
- E-mail - orgNote -  Report post to moderator |
CarrieMpls said: Karla, in this case, you may want to take up with the mod in question. We're going over "what if" scenarios when it appears you have a question on specific mod decisions. When that's the case it's always best to go back to the source. You may not always be happy with the outcome, but it won't be resolved by talking theoretically on a thread in here. If you feel yuo were unjustly treated, you can always take up with Ben as well. Though most of the mods here will often bring other mods into the process for a second opinion if someone challenges them. I know Mach, Sweeny, sosgemini and I all have before (not to say others haven't, just that those are the ones I have experience with). We really do try to make sure we're being fair.
I think that the moderator in question should at least give you a valid response rather than simply dump it onto another moderator as Ive found to my cost. Out of respect if anything else. There's Joy In Expatriation. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
JDInteractive said: CarrieMpls said: Karla, in this case, you may want to take up with the mod in question. We're going over "what if" scenarios when it appears you have a question on specific mod decisions. When that's the case it's always best to go back to the source. You may not always be happy with the outcome, but it won't be resolved by talking theoretically on a thread in here. If you feel yuo were unjustly treated, you can always take up with Ben as well. Though most of the mods here will often bring other mods into the process for a second opinion if someone challenges them. I know Mach, Sweeny, sosgemini and I all have before (not to say others haven't, just that those are the ones I have experience with). We really do try to make sure we're being fair.
I think that the moderator in question should at least give you a valid response rather than simply dump it onto another moderator as Ive found to my cost. Out of respect if anything else. I did give Karla a valid response - she even wrote me back stating it was "Fair" 
I never dump issues onto another mod - I do share though to gain other perception and better balance on issues | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
It's not really the mod that I'm questioning. It's the intent of overtly aggressive orgers who do chickenshit reporting behind the scenes. It's basically that old saying "If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen".
If someone engages me openly and with offensive intent, they should not be allowed then to go behind the scenes and report me as if they were afraid or upset. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
| Ex-Moderator |
JDInteractive said: CarrieMpls said: Karla, in this case, you may want to take up with the mod in question. We're going over "what if" scenarios when it appears you have a question on specific mod decisions. When that's the case it's always best to go back to the source. You may not always be happy with the outcome, but it won't be resolved by talking theoretically on a thread in here. If you feel yuo were unjustly treated, you can always take up with Ben as well. Though most of the mods here will often bring other mods into the process for a second opinion if someone challenges them. I know Mach, Sweeny, sosgemini and I all have before (not to say others haven't, just that those are the ones I have experience with). We really do try to make sure we're being fair.
I think that the moderator in question should at least give you a valid response rather than simply dump it onto another moderator as Ive found to my cost. Out of respect if anything else. I agree, and that's not what I'm talking about at all. No mod should dump anything on another. I'm just saying if someone challenges a decision I've made, I'll take another mod into it for another opinion, that's all. |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
The long number of years I've been on this site and particularly in P&R, I've reported a few things. I think somethings are valid and should be reported. I've even had mods ask my opinion and there are times when I say let it work itself out or put a stop to the madness.
Excessive reporting shouldn't be tolerated at the same time, there is a purpose for having moderation on a site. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I have noticed, when an orger has gotten my attention, their profile has no data, and the sign-on date is within a few months. My gut feeling is, it's an altar whose intent is to cause problems.
I'd like to think the mods are on to that.  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
CarrieMpls said: JDInteractive said: I think that the moderator in question should at least give you a valid response rather than simply dump it onto another moderator as Ive found to my cost. Out of respect if anything else. I agree, and that's not what I'm talking about at all. No mod should dump anything on another. I'm just saying if someone challenges a decision I've made, I'll take another mod into it for another opinion, that's all. What Im saying is, the moderator in question should give you a response before bringing another in for their opinion. There's Joy In Expatriation. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
| Ex-Moderator |
JDInteractive said: CarrieMpls said: I agree, and that's not what I'm talking about at all. No mod should dump anything on another. I'm just saying if someone challenges a decision I've made, I'll take another mod into it for another opinion, that's all. What Im saying is, the moderator in question should give you a response before bringing another in for their opinion. Absolutely. The majority of the time, anyway. I generally only ask someone else if I've had a few back and forths with the person and want an outside opinion. But sometimes we aren't sure and ask others for help too, though. But it should still be a timely reply. |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
| Moderator
|
gemini13 said: It's not really the mod that I'm questioning. It's the intent of overtly aggressive orgers who do chickenshit reporting behind the scenes. It's basically that old saying "If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen".
If someone engages me openly and with offensive intent, they should not be allowed then to go behind the scenes and report me as if they were afraid or upset. I think you need to give us the benefit of the doubt. We are very much aware when excessive abusive reporting is going on. We take action when required. We won't kowtow to another's request for action if not merited. We look at the "big picture". Our moderator screen tells us what's going on with any particular orger - history of the orger is very available. Every report gets logged onto our screen. It's quite obvious when this is going on. My suggestion is to not do it. Only REAL moderator reports are taken seriously. We are able to tell them apart from one another. |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
moderatorCarrieMpls said: JDInteractive said: Forgive my curiosity but in such circumstances, what is their excuse for reporting such a post, what action do you take against a repeat offender and have you ever deleted someone's account for such actions? The "action" is the same as any other rule breaking. warning, "strikes" issued, temp ban, all the way up to a permanent banning if it continues. I don't know that anyone's been permanently banned for it before, but it's theoretically possible. That's laughable. Some of us don't get all of those steps in other situations | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
| Moderator
|
Janfriend said: CarrieMpls said: The "action" is the same as any other rule breaking. warning, "strikes" issued, temp ban, all the way up to a permanent banning if it continues. I don't know that anyone's been permanently banned for it before, but it's theoretically possible. That's laughable. Some of us don't get all of those steps in other situations You're right. Some don't. It depends on the violation, the severity of the situation, or the blatant disregard of the site rules. What Carrie listed was the list from mild to severe... that's not to say that someone won't go straight to severe as a result of their actions. It's all up to you. |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
| Ex-Moderator |
June7 said: Janfriend said: That's laughable. Some of us don't get all of those steps in other situations You're right. Some don't. It depends on the violation, the severity of the situation, or the blatant disregard of the site rules. What Carrie listed was the list from mild to severe... that's not to say that someone won't go straight to severe as a result of their actions. It's all up to you. Yup. I can't see someone getting a permanent ban immediately without ever having been warned/banned/etc. before, but it DOES depend on the severity of the situation. Most often I warn first before anything. But after a warning if it continues they may move to a temp ban right away. It all depends on what's going on at the given time, what rules they're breaking and how badly. |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
CarrieMpls said: June7 said: You're right. Some don't. It depends on the violation, the severity of the situation, or the blatant disregard of the site rules. What Carrie listed was the list from mild to severe... that's not to say that someone won't go straight to severe as a result of their actions. It's all up to you. Yup. I can't see someone getting a permanent ban immediately without ever having been warned/banned/etc. before, but it DOES depend on the severity of the situation. Most often I warn first before anything. But after a warning if it continues they may move to a temp ban right away. It all depends on what's going on at the given time, what rules they're breaking and how badly. 
and a public warning within the thread is a valid warning...and a temporary banning (ie, suspension) is also a warning. Space for sale... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
June7 said: Janfriend said: That's laughable. Some of us don't get all of those steps in other situations You're right. Some don't. It depends on the violation, the severity of the situation, or the blatant disregard of the site rules. What Carrie listed was the list from mild to severe... that's not to say that someone won't go straight to severe as a result of their actions. It's all up to you. Actually, it's up to the mod | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
sosgemini said: CarrieMpls said: Yup. I can't see someone getting a permanent ban immediately without ever having been warned/banned/etc. before, but it DOES depend on the severity of the situation. Most often I warn first before anything. But after a warning if it continues they may move to a temp ban right away. It all depends on what's going on at the given time, what rules they're breaking and how badly.
and a public warning within the thread is a valid warning...and a temporary banning (ie, suspension) is also a warning. So, it's up to the mod the. A temp ban is a punishment, not a warning | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Janfriend said: A temp ban is a punishment, not a warning That's not what i said. Space for sale... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
sosgemini said: Janfriend said: A temp ban is a punishment, not a warning That's not what i said. No, you said it's a warning. I'm saying it's not | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
sosgemini said: CarrieMpls said: Yup. I can't see someone getting a permanent ban immediately without ever having been warned/banned/etc. before, but it DOES depend on the severity of the situation. Most often I warn first before anything. But after a warning if it continues they may move to a temp ban right away. It all depends on what's going on at the given time, what rules they're breaking and how badly.
and a public warning within the thread is a valid warning...and a temporary banning (ie, suspension) is also a warning. Agreed | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |