Amendment to Rule 8.
- This topic has 74 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 3 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
lindanesocialist wrote:moderator1 wrote:without prior permission from the moderators.”
May I ask via what channels would permission be requested and on what grounds would permission be granted/decided upon? How long will it take to come to such a decision?
Good point, Vinda. And yet another reason why this proposed amendment to the forum rules (which would only ever need to be applied to one user) should be dropped — it will provide an opportunity for further skirmishes between users and moderators. I can't think why the moderators want to create this rod to beat their own backs. Maybe they're masochists or enjoy a game of cat and mouse?
ALB wrote:lindanesocialist wrote:moderator1 wrote:without prior permission from the moderators.”May I ask via what channels would permission be requested and on what grounds would permission be granted/decided upon? How long will it take to come to such a decision?
I can't think why the moderators want to create this rod to beat their own backs.
It's the power which appeals, at least to some. Which is why, in the past, I've argued for an unmoderated forum. Let's face it, things couldn't have really been that much worse, and in all likelihood a great deal better, than over the past few years. The almost constant public wrangling cannot have had anything but a deleterious effect. How many visitors to this forum, does one suppose, have left in dismay, never to return?
ALB wrote:lindanesocialist wrote:moderator1 wrote:without prior permission from the moderators.”May I ask via what channels would permission be requested and on what grounds would permission be granted/decided upon? How long will it take to come to such a decision?
Good point, Vinda. And yet another reason why this proposed amendment to the forum rules (which would only ever need to be applied to one user) should be dropped — it will provide an opportunity for further skirmishes between users and moderators. I can't think why the moderators want to create this rod to beat their own backs. Maybe they're masochists or enjoy a game of cat and mouse?
By allowing this practice to continue the moderators were faced with the possibility of being confronted with an even bigger dilemma. Namely, what action could we apply under the old Rule 8. which was appropriate and acceptable if the "Vin said" messages contained a further breach of the rules?Do we suspend Vin for a second time? Which would literally mean applying a double suspension! And if and when Vin decided to appeal to the EC would this not be unpleasant reading for them? Also, to ensure there's no reoccurrence do we take a major step and suspend Linda without issuing any warnings? Neither actions are appropriate and acceptable and undoubtedly inflammatory.Rather than go down that road it was decided to close this loophole in Rule 8. so that in extraneous circumstances a party member could still gain access to the forum despite being on a suspension.May I take this opportunity to remind users that the present situation has been unusually prolonged due to Vin failing to appeal to the EC since May of this year. Also the lessons learned from this episode and others are currently being addressed by the IC which if adopted by the EC will make positive inroads on forum moderation and indirectly on party democracy.
moderator1 wrote:By allowing this practice to continue the moderators were faced with the possibility of being confronted with an even bigger dilemma. Namely, what action could we apply under the old Rule 8. which was appropriate and acceptable if the "Vin said" messages contained a further breach of the rules?I would have thought that I (the account holder) would be responsible if the 'Vin said' comments broke the rules. I do'nt think they did before the mods changed the rules. Now of course it is against the rules.So there will be no more 'Vin saids'. Not from me anyway
moderator1 wrote:May I take this opportunity to remind users that the present situation has been unusually prolonged due to Vin failing to appeal to the EC since May of this year.To be fair comrade, this EC would not have reinstated Vin
lindanesocialist wrote:moderator1 wrote:May I take this opportunity to remind users that the present situation has been unusually prolonged due to Vin failing to appeal to the EC since May of this year.To be fair comrade, this EC would not have reinstated Vin
That's a supposition which may or may not be borne out when then EC considers the appeal which he's now made at last.
gnome wrote:ALB wrote:lindanesocialist wrote:moderator1 wrote:without prior permission from the moderators.”May I ask via what channels would permission be requested and on what grounds would permission be granted/decided upon? How long will it take to come to such a decision?
I can't think why the moderators want to create this rod to beat their own backs.
It's the power which appeals, at least to some. Which is why, in the past, I've argued for an unmoderated forum. Let's face it, things couldn't have really been that much worse, and in all likelihood a great deal better, than over the past few years. The almost constant public wrangling cannot have had anything but a deleterious effect. How many visitors to this forum, does one suppose, have left in dismay, never to return?
Out of interest, have you ever used the report feature of the forum?
SocialistPunk wrote:gnome wrote:It's the power which appeals, at least to some. Which is why, in the past, I've argued for an unmoderated forum. Let's face it, things couldn't have really been that much worse, and in all likelihood a great deal better, than over the past few years. The almost constant public wrangling cannot have had anything but a deleterious effect. How many visitors to this forum, does one suppose, have left in dismay, never to return?Out of interest, have you ever used the report feature of the forum?
Of course. I wanted to see if reporting a post that I deemed 'offensive' would bring a meaningful response from the moderators. On each and every occasion I experimented with this feature I was singularly unimpressed with the outcome and thus had my predilection confirmed.
gnome wrote:On each and every occasion I experimented with this feature I was singularly unimpressed with the outcome and thus had my predilection confirmed.As was I, comrade
Weird how two forum users who don't like the forum rules, but still choose to post, have used the report feature of this forum for, "experimentation" purposes only. I guess it must be scientific socialism at work?
SocialistPunk wrote:Weird how two forum users who don't like the forum rules, but still choose to post, have used the report feature of this forum for, "experimentation" purposes only. I guess it must be scientific socialism at work?and why is that important? There are loads of things we could be doing. I havent noticed 'reprort' being used. can you show me?and who would those two forum users be. Why not name them?
gnome wrote:On each and every occasion I experimented with this feature I was singularly unimpressed with the outcome and thus had my predilection confirmed.Predilection? Is this a misprint or Freudian slip for "prediction"? Or do you like being singularly unimpressed? No need to aswer that
gnome wrote:On each and every occasion I experimented with this feature I was singularly unimpressed with the outcome and thus had my predilection confirmed.ALB wrote:Predilection? Is this a misprint or Freudian slip for "prediction"? Or do you like being singularly unimpressed?Predilection (noun) – 'a preference or liking for something'. In this instance, an unmoderated forum. So for all intensive purposes, not quite the malapropism you pacifically had in mind…
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.