HUGE DOUBLE STANDARD ON WP

Post Reply New Topic

well thats the kinda point to it as a moderator the clarrification allowed them to clearly understand that discussion of that would be an actionable offense. There was no if ands or but if anything was an infraction you knew what you dd and any punishment really didn't even need a justification. Again I did anyways because thats the type of mod I was and I spent up to 45 mins explaining my decisions on certain actions to the member involved but it was never any problem. So I'm not just saying there should be a standard for members' benefit but also for the benefit of the mods. It makes the work alot easier.

it is correct that the mods can't delete accounts. It's Alex's site and he says 'no'. So the mods don't.

It is correct that the mods ask (as per the rules : Personal attacks against people or other sites are not permitted. If you have an issue with someone, talk to them about it somewhere other than our forum*.) and ask for things to go to PM or off the site. Just because you met each other here, doesn't mean you deal with it here. Any cafe or bar would ask you to "take it outside."

*behavior intended to provoke or belittle other members; and anything else that purposely causes conflict with other members. so, attacks are not allowed. If you are trying to provoke others in frustration, it is not allowed, so the mods worked with you.

Now, maybe it's just me, but I never tell one member that I am reprimanding another member, because frankly, it is nobody's business but the mod and the member. I get members asking me all the time and I tell them 'I don't inform the other member of what we talk about, so I don't give you information about them, either."

Not telling members the other member is catching hell, too, seems to be a big complaint about me. Now you know, I guess I just don't see why that is important for the other person to know.

I don't know if that other member went away after I worked with her, and if she is banned, then I don't know it with out the user name.

I am glad you are back Vexcaliber, I sent you a PM (since deleted) but you never picked it up.

Merle

Anyway, the mod's job isn't to create the rules, but to see that they are followed. I believe this is why WrongPlanet.net is what it is. A community.

its amusing but I never asked to know about the other person. Though I know through precendence nothing was done but the threats of banning was done publically which is highly unprofessional just like you indicated moderator action should be private as its only the business of those involved. I have never commited the infractions your suggesting I did but thats a matter of opinion. If its not something as moderators you can address (making a clear and active code of conduct) then I would suggest bringing it up as a potential point to address. As it stands now theres a reason why there is so many reports of being treated unfairly because as this post suggests theres a double standard and if you have a clear code of conduct the dissagreements would be minimal and it would not appear as though there is selective moderation. Where I'm sitting that sounds like a win/win situation.

Got to laugh at the people here taking his side because of this situation.

Open your eyes a bit and you will see why people have lost patience with Ken. He attacks people all the time, riles them up, makes blatent generalisations and rufuses to take anyones advice to his moaning and yells at them for "judging" him. I don't think it has anything to do with who posted it, I've lost patience with his bullsh*t.

You can't honestly make a thread and expect people not to have opinions on what you say. You can't make quite drastic comments in a thread and expect every reply to be in your favour.

Making a thread then having a tantrum because they "judged" you is pathetic. If you want to live like that, fine.

Better burn the bridge off your property, beter nail up all the doors and windows, too. Better get your computer and throw it into an inferno of streaming lava if you expect internet people to not have an opinion on your thread simply because you're "not asking for advice".

No matter where on the internet anyone goes, it will be the same.

Pardon me for wanting to see this man actually improve his life.

Most of you haven't noticed, by pandering to people and telling them their beliefs are right are just drilling them straight into a negative spiral into the ground and making them worse. (certainly for this case, anyway) For the love of anything, for once, help them help themselves instead of doing this.

Does anyone here actually want to help people with problems? Or do you just want to bury the pile of dirt in a coating of flowers?

Yeah I probably shouldn't have gotten as angry. I was fed up with him going in a downward spiral and ignoring everyone and continuing to do so.

Not my problem? Maybe not, but watching repetitive whine threads taking over a board I used to love is my problem.

Abangyarudo, I do not know why the poster you refer to (let's just call her "E") got away with so much for so long, and I agree her conduct was persistently in obvious violation of the TOS. But I also know that I failed to report her on so much as a single occassion. It makes sense to consider that maybe she slipped through the gaps because moderators did not have sufficient information to work with.

"E" is not the only poster who has appeared to have avoided enforcement of rules against them over the long term. One thing I note is that the posters where I have observed what might be construed (based on our limited view; we have no access to other poster's PM in-box) as bias in the form of refusing to enforce rules, tend to not share any common underlying similarity or theme, and have views and present as personalities across the spectrum. This makes very little sense if bias rather than slipping through gaps is an accurate explantion. Indiscriminate bias is not a meaningful concept; by definition bias is discriminative.

Have you stopped to think how these kinds of accusations might make the moderator concerned feel if they are erroneous? She is a poster here too and should be allowed to feel safe and comfortable just like the rest of us surely?

Abangyarudo, it's quite plausible that contrary to your beliefs some moderator atttention did go E's way. It would explain her sudden departure as she did not seem the kind to cope well with such a warning and could easily have "taken the pip" and left when someone (ie you) brought an instance of her violating the TOS to the attention of a moderator (perhaps even the moderator you are making allegations in respect of). Just something to think about, and something more plausible than the moderator you are making allegations about being biased in favour of the poster you are describing. Do you really believe the particular moderator you are accusing (who is so often accused of aggressively over-reacting to sexism against women) would endorse and support a woman being called a slut in a derogatory, personally and gender-denigrating manner? Ask Ken how realistic he thinks that is.

I myself have been involved in incidents where it could be construed that a trouble maker was provoking and stalking myself and others, and was told off equally and publicly along with them when I responded in a manner that did not appear to me to violate the TOS. I did not percieve this as bias, but rather an attempt to be "even-handed" (it's harder to tango solo), and a genuine attempt to work with the newer member to assist them to participate in a way that is consistent with the TOS (which is more easily achieved if the poster is not made to feel picked on or singled out); conceivably I was in violation of the TOS even if I did not perceive as much. Bias seems a very unlikely explanation; I do not think I violated the TOS on that occassion, but I do believe that its much more plausible that I misunderstand the TOS and did inadvertently violate it than that there was some bias on the part of the moderator concerned.

Moderation is not actually about who gets told off (so far as I can see) or one-upping another poster that has annoyed or upset us, but rather maximizing everyone's safe and beneficial access to the resources Alex has kindly provided for us all. That's something I can appreciate and work with.

I think posters should consider the feelings of moderators when they make these kinds of accusations. In the event that the accusation is erroneous (and that seems plausible to me) what effect do you think this has on the moderator so accussed? Moderators are people too.

I was a forum/chat moderation I know how hard their jobs are. Thats why I suggested a change in how the code of conduct is worded so it can't be considered shady moderation. Its not so much that I'm annoyed at the situation because its long dead and gone but at anything you have to improve and I'm saying for them to improve they need clear standard rules and a standard for their enforcement. E had been reported by other people several times and I am not against any of the moderation team. The problem is the community team is not up to par with other free sites and thats not a pointing the finger thing. I've volunteered for all different forms of community management and its not there yet here. So I'm saying they need stricter moderation, a clear set of rules and behaving consistantly. I can only speak for the moderators I dealt with. As a former community mod I do apperciate the hard work they put in but I do see a real need for them to improve.

Well I asked the mod that told me EVERYONE has a right to feel welcome and not feel like they are attacked here about the double standard. She has posted in this thread. I am going to post what she said in Her reply to me. I know I am not suposted to, but I want everyone on WP to see what She said:

KenM wrote:
You were the one that told me that even if what someone wrote was not meant to be an attack, if can be perceved and felt like an attack by a member, it will be dealt with. Now I feel like someone attacked me and the mods are not doing anything about it. Then people wonder why I am so upset?

She wrote:
What is it, KenM? Do you want me to tell you what my business is with other people? I don't tell other members what I post to you, but you want me to post my conversation to other people to you? What gives you the idea the people you report are not being moderated for their attacks? Because you are not part of the convo? You want me to bring them before you and chastise them so you can gloat? Absolutely not, KenM.

I am of the opinion you bring a lot of the 'attacks' onto yourself. I read your posts and see a man that wants attention, whatever way you can get it. At that point, KenM, you become a troll. I think you do it on WrongPlanet.net because here you can play your game without getting your face punched in.

Merle
Moderator



The fact that she thinks I have brought the attacks on myself and is not looking at each incident subjectivly proves that the mods have bias against me. She is saying peoples feelings matter here, except mine.

Double standard proved. Merle has NO RIGHT to be be a Mod if she feels bias towards members. How many other WP members does Merle have bias against?

Last edited by KenM on 29 Jan 2010, 5:58 am, edited 1 time in total.

When you(mods in general) state that the PPR forum has more relaxed moderating standards, then some time later start locking threads left right and centre, indicating it's bound by the same standards as the other parts of the site, then it's not surprising that some may doubt what you say. When many of you find it hard to hide your contempt for members, it becomes harder to believe. When you launch personal attacks when a member is trying to get information, then lock the thread to prevent reply, it becomes even more difficult, and when polite PMs* are answered in a curt and condescending tone, then it makes things almost impossible. I can provide recent examples of all those. Of course, in the time-honoured tradition of those vested with absolute power, you can tell me to just go away. And it's true, that I can decide to vote with my feet, so to speak. But as I've been here as a member almost five years, can actually remember when Alex first started this site, have made friends here, and value the interaction with others, I feel that gives me at least a moral justification to make a comment; perhaps more so than some Johnny-come-latelys who want us all bound by their over-the-top interpretation of attack, and that demand we should all communicate in some touchy-feely left-of-centre bubble of make-believe. Now, don't get me wrong, this place is a lot better than any of the other AS sites, but I feel it's again slipping into some sort of self-perpetuating cycle of despotism, where criticism is met with yet more inequitable summary judgment -- it does this from time to time. My own opinion is that moderating should be kept to a minimum. If people want to disagree and argue within a thread, then as long as it doesn't spill over to multiple threads, then what's the problem? If you don't like what someone says to you, then just ignore them. It's all very simple. There's a saying that rules are for the guidance of wise men and the obedience of fools. I think the moderators should be guided by this sentiment.

Anyway, I've no wish to enter into a discussion on this, only to have the thread locked when it suits the mods after they've launched a personal attack on my character (note, I don't mind written personal attacks on me, as long as I'm not threatened, but for a mod to do it, then go preaching on the horrors of "attacks", is clearly the pot calling the kettle black); so, I'd appreciate if you'd just read it and don't reply. This post is purely constructive criticism.

Note "you" refers to moderators/admin in general, although there are exceptions to the behaviour described as you've (DW) always seemed OK (but I still wouldn't trust you), and I recall Alex has been quite polite when I've communicated with him. Also, note that the above is not intended to be an attack, provocation, or any other infraction of the ToS.

*With reference to PMs, the ones answered recently by sinsboldly and DW have been done so in a constructive manner, and I don't refer to those.

What about personal opinions on e.g. Black people, Jews, homosexuals, drug use, drug abuse, "democracy" and many other issues if those opinions happen to be politically incorrect? I know a guy who was banned from this forum precisely for expressing his (scientifically valid) opinions on such matters. If we're talking about scientifically validated opinions, I see a major issue here.

politics are usually kept on their own board but heavily moderated due to the fact it turns into "Wait you're a <insert political party here> your an idiot". I also dislike on a personal level most of the topics I've seen detailing those things but considering that it is not my job as a community mod (again I repeat before I get the "your making it seem like you moderate here" warning for other boards I have moderated in the past) to stifle opinions on my biases the problem is I can probably tell you the topics would probably end up locked at some point. Here is the issue there is some who will rightfully take offense because science has said some pretty dumb stuff in the last 20 years and people will get heated and it will cease being a valid topic after maybe the 12th post. People will then find they are on opposite ends of ideologies and start attacking each other. What is left after I take care of any infractions is a topic that because of all the drama will always go back to being drama.

Is that your fault as the thread starter who wanted to discuss what you believe is a reasonable view on the matter? no its not but sadly most people will react that way. As an example when rape was brought up here I cautioned against letting that one traumatic incident ruin your life because I feel that you just gave away your power to that one person. I got accused of telling rape victims that they are not "trying hard enough" to get over their rape. Was my opinion valid to me? yes it was but people's perceptions ruined the discussion. Is that my fault as a person? nor Was it wise for me to post about such a topic? probably not and because of the high emotions involved with the subject it stopped being a decent thread with a few mixed in hopes for salvation after the 12th to 15 post.

So to directly answer your questions I would watch the threads closely if they started depending on the interaction I may cite infractions on people who get heated. I may at some point if it gets too bad lock the thread and that would not be a mod action against you if you started the conversation but to alleviate a high emotion situation so no I wouldn't ban you from it. Since I worked with forums that had specific mods for international I would not allow any posts with "yea I smoke marijuana and it doesn't hurt me" type posts because while that may be true for you in the united states it is considered a crime except if you use it for medical purposes. Canadians would be an exception as it is legal there (scratch that I read its illegal there again as of 2003).

On a personal level I must say I have not read any scientifically valid posts on blacks, homosexuals. and Jews and the things your referring to could probably be considered discriminatory which is another common rule of internet forums. So again it's how you word it and what the intent of the message is (I'm not saying that we as moderators will get that completely right but again if we got it wrong there will be a person in one of those groups that will take it the same way) . As an example some professor or some study claimed that black people were less good at science, academics, etc.

While that is true that it was said that way I probably would not allow it on the grounds that if you were a black guy and read that you'd be teed off thinking someone attacked you based on race. I'm Hispanic and I really never felt any discrimination till I came to the south with a few incidents so I can tell firsthand I would raise a serious brow if I looked at a message board and got "Hispanics are not qualified to be scientists because of this study or their low IQ scores" or " all those dirty Mexicans (I am not Mexican btw) should go back to their side of the border". I don't believe just because science has claimed some fact in racist or homophobic that they are valid and they should defiantly not be used in a board that is available to the general public. So if I saw discriminatory comments yes I would take action if they persisted if it's just some misguided attempt at conversation I may be more lenient but delete the topics anyway.

You may be like "well that sucks the old way is better" the problem is for most nts this is their first experience with us. So will they remember the more insightful posts like how you feel about a cure for autism and etc? probably not. What they will remember is the homophobic, racist, misogynist, law breaking posts. If a forum does not act on these threads its a simple message of condoning the message you can add the "posters opinions don't reflect the community and staff opinions" but noone notices that. As it stands now if you see the hate video on youtube there is alot of people who feel that this site condones all those things whether the site does or not.

In the end you'll probably come back with good riddance to them ;the problem is this, theres a black guy who i know has AS and if he comes in and sees "oh well it shows that black men do not have the natural aptitude for science" he'd probably not feel comfortable not register and just deal with his issues alone. Mostly because hes a black scientist who works in varying fields of medical research and the very comment would be descriminatory which doesn't really give such a socially reclusive inividual the comfortable feeling to say hey outta nowhere. Then it basically becomes an unwelcome environment that is not conductive to the mission of this discussion board. So while it depends on how it was written if he would get any personal infractions but its very likely that I would delete alot of the posts that may come across as racist or homophobic.

Last edited by Abangyarudo on 29 Jan 2010, 9:46 am, edited 1 time in total.

Sorry... but I can't resist this...

Double standard?

To my knowledge, we have.... thinks... at least a quadruple standard of active moderation, at this moment. Add at least four slightly less active moderators, with differing standards. Then there's all the regular posters, who make the site reasonably self-moderating, and tend to have even broader standards.

Then we get the odd few people who consistently break the WP rules, for reasons as single standard as "I don't like the rules - they don't suit me - I want different rules." We tend to tolerate them for a while.

You have 4 mods with differnt standards? Should'nt all the mods have the same standard and go with the same rules for everyone? Having mods with different standards is not right. They all need to work from the same set of rules.

We do.

I agree thats why I believe he made the comment he did. That is why coming to a standard for the moderation team and having it posted publically available and clear and concise enough not to have to adapt vague rules to the situation will cure these issues. It will also cause some members to ragequit and then within a 6 month period we would most likely have more active members then ever before. As it stands now there should be a delete account button because we have 32,000 members with only about 2000 active on any given day.

KenM stop complaining like a little [language edited by lau]. No one gives a [language edited by lau] about you.

now why would you think you could post this, Ezio? At least Abangyarudo, Salonfilosoof, ascan and pandd are being constructive and bringing up valid points and information. But just violating the rules by blatently hurting other member's feelings . . .

Merle