Praeothmin wrote:Again, take it up with the big guy...
Let me get this straight. We can report people with the report button but when we do so we in fact have to post here. When we have an issue with the moderation, we post in the Technical forum but in fact we have to PM mods.
<_<
>_>
We do our jobs following his rules, and no, we cannot "go around him", nor do we wish to...
am not asking for mods to go around JMS. I'd consider that extremely impolite since there wouldn't be a forum there if it wasn't for JMS's effort to set one up to begin with. I think we're just saying you've been kind enough with SWST past this point, and it's just hurting JMS' efforts, even if he doesn't realize it yet.
Now for the reminder I have no problem with the warning I got. But this is not the issue.
I will endeavour to keep this site as polite as possible, but JMS will have to decide when he's tired of SWST's bullshit trolling behavior...
I know, and it's his board, etc.
You think it's pleasant to complain so as to obtain something from a mod or the admin? I don't even begin to use the report button until several threads when dealing with some member that starts to become problematic.
It's not the way I deal with things personally, but I think we have a "serious" problem here.
Now if JMS is so attached to free debate as to let anything get inside, even the worse, so be it, but with doors so wide open, I don't see how he'll manage to retain several members inside any longer either.
Mike DiCenso wrote:Just a point of order Breetai. It was Praeo that issued the warning to Mr. Oragahn, not me. The problem with the insults thing is that once you allow it, you open up a whole new can of worms. The other problem here is that we have to treat everyone the same, regardless. You break a rule, you get a "friendly" or "official" warning, and or a ban.
And believe me, I don't like any of this any more than you do. But I'm playing by the rules here because I don't want SWST to martyr himself on my watch. That's what I think this all is coming down to. Trolling to see if he gets a permaban so he can proclaim us all hypocrites.
-Mike
But that's the point. Who the hell is going to pay attention to his claims of martyrdom? SDN? So they can attempt to strawman this whole position on netiquette and point fingers at us as they can finally show that JMS also silences the opposition? We know it's bullshit and as I said, if anything, if they read this, they could already be chuckling for how ridiculous this is getting because of a lack of strong management of this board when exceptional cases such as when obvious trolls manifest.
When are you going to deal with my report, btw?
Look it up, Mojo quoted that part of the rules which are relevant to my report. SWST has ran the ICS thread in the mud. He has not been reasonable. He's hardly informative.
If JMS bails him out, that still doesn't prevent mods from applying rules down to the letter. Then it's JMS' responsability to keep a member who's been warned and banned several times.
I'd say do your job regardless of what JMS says. From there, the situation will be clearer for everybody, including JMS, and he'll be in a better position to assess SWST's quality.
mojo wrote:maybe i'm misunderstanding something here, but if the mods here admit that they all realize that swst is trolling the board and has been trolling the board from his very first post, and that there is effort being expended toward the goal of removing him, why in the world isn't he getting warnings every time he pulls the same crap over and over again? the explanation that there are no rules specifically forbidding the things he does is laaaaame. there is only one damn rule!
JMS wrote:In truth, this board has one rule:
All discourse is to be reasonable, polite, and informative.
that is the vaguest rule i've ever seen in my life, and what's worse, it seems to me that the purpose of that vagueness is probably to allow staff to interpret the law for themselves. there's no specific rule against this thing or that thing BECAUSE WHAT'S IMPORTANT IS THAT YOU WON'T BE BOUND BY RULES THAT WOULD INHIBIT YOUR ABILITY TO MODERATE AS YOU SEE FIT. YOU choose what constitutes reasonable, polite, informative debate. you admit that he's a problem and that he does not debate in a reasonable way. isn't that enough right there? oragahn just gave you a huge list of complaints and he backs it up with evidence. if you really do want to deal with swst, why didn't you give swst a warning for each of those? i'm not a mod and i don't mean to tell you your job, but that seems like an awful wasted opportunity to move forward toward that goal. warn him for each point on oragahn's list and that's a freaking ban right there and your concern that he could make a case for the idea that sfj is a bunch of hypocrites falls apart! how can he argue that he didn't deserve what he got if even the most cursory glance at his posting history shows otherwise? EVERYONE is aware of what he's doing. and i understand that jms is not particularly thrilled with the idea of permabanning and that makes your job harder, but if you keep throwing warnings at swst every time he ignores evidence or passes all thresholds of rudeness or reboots arguments or argues a definition of a word with a dictionary jms will be forced to keep bailing him out every other day or eventually let the ban go through. it's not as if your hands are completely tied.
as mods and as members who love this board you staff have a responsibility to protect the board from harm. even if that means stretching the boundaries a bit when necessary. if jms does not see that swst is worthy of banning, you have a responsibility to make him understand or even to go around him if you must. this is his forum, of course, but when you accepted the position as a mod, wasn't it because you love this place and don't want to see it hurt? is the loyalty, in the end, for jms or for sfj? if the answer is jms then we're fucked. if it's sfj, though, it's time to stop complaining about how hard it is to do anything about swst and use the authority you've been given for the good of the board. interpret every dumbass dirty debate tactic he uses as 'unreasonable' and warn him for every fucking use of those tactics. he'd be gone in a week as the warnings hit him by the dozen! i could give you at least ten examples from the fsm thread.
What I see with this rule is that SWST is violating it anytime he approaches his keyboard and post something here.
What is reasonable and informative in his posts?
True, there is *some* stuff, some times, that is literally drowning in a sea of urine.
I can't even understand how the rulings were reversed when all warnings, save perhaps one, were all fair and non biased.