I got banned from a thread

I think plenty would debate whether the latter was in fact more inflammatory. Would you be more offended by a 'go fuck yourself' or by a comment implying, seriously or otherwise, that you agree with the "mercy killing" of Palestinians?

That’s fair but like I said, Tesco backed off after I warned him. At the point when Zen stepped in, it was clear that the thread was going rapidly downhill.
 
I think plenty would debate whether the latter was in fact more inflammatory. Would you be more offended by a 'go fuck yourself' or by a comment implying, seriously or otherwise, that you agree with the "mercy killing" of Palestinians?

Abso-fuckyou-lutely.

And in the context of Moopy, “Fuck You” is not an unusual retort.
 
Well yes, the Government are a target of criticism as a result of the defence of Gaza civilians. But it's not "pro-palestine" as in a thread about Palestinian independence. There's enough tragedy going on for us to be distracted from that at the moment.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that the thread wasn't created as a reflection of the Pro-Palestinian marches, where genuine support for Gaza is being muddled by extreme views on Israel. I don't think that's the intent of moopy anyway.
I was more referring to Israel as a country, as a right to exist… but I take your point
 
I disagree with that entirely too. Kate made a generic comment which could have been aimed at anybody (as evidenced by funky’s immediate response) and Zen’s doesn’t constitute a warning in the slightest.

Yeah sorry mods but those 'warnings' were not directed at anyone in particular. Whenever I see them I never know who they are aimed at, if anyone, so I largely ignore them :D
 
I’m incensed by this. It’s almost universally agreed that this was a mistake and whilst everyone tiptoes around the mods and doesn’t want to upset anyone for doing what is a thankless task, the mods are doing nothing to rectify it.

Why?
 
To be fair, you were. Both Kate and Zen asked you to be civil, and you continued anyway. Tesco's posts were relatively close together and then he went quiet. Also, and I hate to harp on this point, what he said was an unfair characterisation of Suedehead's position, but he didn't outright tell him to go fuck himself or similar.
Ahh got it, so if you hide your personal attack in a veil that’s fine… but calling out bullshit explicitly isn’t? Got it. Cheers.
 
That’s fair but like I said, Tesco backed off after I warned him. At the point when Zen stepped in, it was clear that the thread was going rapidly downhill.
This isn't the point that was being made. It has been quite clear since the banning occurred that it was a response to the post with the swear word.

There is quite clearly different weight and consequence being given in accordance to particular viewpoints and I think that's a problem.
 
We're not doing nothing. We're listening and taking ownership of the decision we made. What we're trying not to do is follow a reflexive action with another reflexive action.

Also, with respect, a handful of posters being vocal in this thread doesn't constitute a plurality of opinion. We need to weigh up what we do next carefully, and that's exactly what we're doing. There's no right answer that isn't going to upset anybody.
 
Tbf I’m probably just going to disappear for another three months when this excitement dies down.
 
We're not doing nothing. We're listening and taking ownership of the decision we made. What we're trying not to do is follow a reflexive action with another reflexive action.

Also, with respect, a handful of posters being vocal in this thread doesn't constitute a plurality of opinion. We need to weigh up what we do next carefully, and that's exactly what we're doing. There's no right answer that isn't going to upset anybody.

To be fair, I take my point back. You are doing something.

But this could have been solved a lot easier with a simple “fair enough, we misjudged the feeling here, we’ll lift the ban, go away and debate this and come back to you” rather than this mess which appears to have opened a much bigger can of worms.
 
I disagree with that entirely too. Kate made a generic comment which could have been aimed at anybody (as evidenced by funky’s immediate response) and Zen’s doesn’t constitute a warning in the slightest.

I repeat- why did Tesco getting explicitly reprimanded which was then ignored not result in a ban when this did?
Beyond the clear difference in the tone and intent of both posts? One received reports from other community members, the other didn't. I hadn't seen Tesco's comments until well after the fact, but my attention was drawn to gggggg's post by the fact that other posters reported it as unacceptable. I don't like the way Tesco spoke to Suede, but it wasn't flagged and had already been addressed directly by another mod.
 
Beyond the clear difference in the tone and intent of both posts? One received reports from other community members, the other didn't. I hadn't seen Tesco's comments until well after the fact, but my attention was drawn to gggggg's post by the fact that other posters reported it as unacceptable. I don't like the way Tesco spoke to Suede, but it wasn't flagged and had already been addressed directly by another mod.

I repeat the earlier assertion- I’d be far more offended by being accused of what Tesco said than someone saying “fuck you”.

But then I’m not the sort to report anything.
 
My warning was deliberately not aimed at anyone in particular. If it had been then I'm sure that would have been used as yet more ammo in this debate. Can't win.
 
Also, it should be noted that Tesco’s post was already noted and admonished by a moderator soon after the fact and therefore that may have negated people reporting it as they didn’t feel it needed to be put on anyone’s radar.
 
My warning was deliberately not aimed at anyone in particular. If it had been then I'm sure that would have been used as yet more ammo in this debate. Can't win.

And I agree with how you handled it, but then by the same token, you can’t turn round as mods and claim it was a warning against @gggggg when you’ve just admitted yourself right there that it wasn’t!
 
Beyond the clear difference in the tone and intent of both posts? One received reports from other community members, the other didn't. I hadn't seen Tesco's comments until well after the fact, but my attention was drawn to gggggg's post by the fact that other posters reported it as unacceptable. I don't like the way Tesco spoke to Suede, but it wasn't flagged and had already been addressed directly by another mod.
I am surprised by this given that the ban occurred 3 minutes after the post was made. It is plausible that multiple reports occurred in that time but it does seem rash that the moderators came to a consensus in that time frame to enforce a ban.

Point taken though re: the role of the community. I think that the resistance to divergent opinions probably contributed to the difference in reporting between the two posts, but many of us could have taken action and didn't.
 
Also, with respect, a handful of posters being vocal in this thread doesn't constitute a plurality of opinion. We need to weigh up what we do next carefully, and that's exactly what we're doing. There's no right answer that isn't going to upset anybody.

This is a fair point, but I'll counter it by saying that if you're reacting to a couple of complaints about a specific post by issuing a temporary ban, you're doing something that really doesn't have plurality of opinion either. In fact judging by tonight's fallout, the decision supported a minority.

I'm not saying I have the answer to that, but let's also consider that reacting to a couple of complaints might suggest why moopy appears to be a bit overly cautious and over policing lately. If it was just me I'd probably just shut the fuck up. But it isn't...
 
We're not doing nothing. We're listening and taking ownership of the decision we made. What we're trying not to do is follow a reflexive action with another reflexive action.

Also, with respect, a handful of posters being vocal in this thread doesn't constitute a plurality of opinion. We need to weigh up what we do next carefully, and that's exactly what we're doing. There's no right answer that isn't going to upset anybody.
With all due respect, I think frankly this ban discourages anyone who hasn't contributed, to even consider entering into the debate for fear of saying anything even remotely contrary to the so-called moopy consensus.
 
What would be the point of lifting the ban now while we go away and debate it? We're not going to come back and retrospectively put another 24 hour ban in place after the discussion in the thread has continued and moved on.
 
With all due respect, I think frankly this ban discourages anyone who hasn't contributed, to even consider entering into the debate for fear of saying anything even remotely contrary to the so-called moopy consensus.
It's not difficult to debate without saying "fuck you" to someone.
 
What would be the point of lifting the ban now while we go away and debate it? We're not going to come back and retrospectively put another 24 hour ban in place after the discussion in the thread has continued and moved on.

Well, no, cause you were wrong to implement it in the first place, so…
 
This is a fair point, but I'll counter it by saying that if you're reacting to a couple of complaints about a specific post by issuing a temporary ban, you're doing something that really doesn't have plurality of opinion either. In fact judging by tonight's fallout, the decision supported a minority.

I'm not saying I have the answer to that, but let's also consider that reacting to a couple of complaints might suggest why moopy appears to be a bit overly cautious and over policing lately. If it was just me I'd probably just shut the fuck up. But it isn't...

That's entirely fair, but again, that's why in my view the worst thing to do would be to follow one kneejerk reaction with another.

Not to minimise it, but gggggg is banned from one thread. This discussion is still happening out in the open and he's got this platform to make his case, as have you all. It may well be that we could have handled this better, that's something we can continue to discuss and I'm sure we will. But the intent was to prevent the personal attacks from escalating further in that thread, and for better or worse they did. As heated as this thread is, it's been a much more nuanced and respectful discussion.
 
With all due respect, I think frankly this ban discourages anyone who hasn't contributed, to even consider entering into the debate for fear of saying anything even remotely contrary to the so-called moopy consensus.
Saying 'fuck you' isn't related in any way to the conversation. It's just a personal attack.

There shouldn't be any reason people would be discouraged by mod actions to join the discussion because, as we've said repeatedly, the ban had absolutely nothing to do with the actual content of the conversation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: COB
What would be the point of lifting the ban now while we go away and debate it? We're not going to come back and retrospectively put another 24 hour ban in place after the discussion in the thread has continued and moved on.

Well fair enough and all that, the mods have their way of doing things and who are we to argue, we elected you.

But just from my own perspective, I don't really know what there is to debate two hours later, someone made an error of judgement, moopy said FUCK NO, and we should just go "oh ok sorry about that", undo it and move the fuck on. I don't understand all this policing and logistics and rules. If he did it again and he was banned, we'd all just be like, well you were warned that time you stupid cunt.

It's just a forum, we are not changing the world here.

But that's JUST ME.
 
It's not difficult to debate without saying "fuck you" to someone.
What about when somebody says something that you find personally horrid, and instead of giving it credence, you decide to (perhaps flippantly) tell them to fuck off. I would. And I would to somebody’s face too. Because some things elicit and frankly deserve that response.
 
I feel like people are turning on the Mods. If we want them to make more nuanced decisions about bans that represent our values then we should establish a protocol that lets us inform their decisions.
 
I feel that the first post in the new thread very explicitly served as a warning to *everyone*.
 
I feel like people are turning on the Mods. If we want them to make more nuanced decisions about bans that represent our values then we should establish a protocol that lets us inform their decisions.
Or how about people stand themselves seeing as elections are imminent.
 
I also think that the inference that anyone with an opinion on this subject should put themselves forward to become a moderator is unfair. We should be allowed to have an opinion and a discussion.
 
For fucks sake @KindaCool , nobody is turning on anybody. This is a community, we've all known each other a very long time (most of us anyway), and we can openly discuss mistakes and disagreements. This is not a SOAP OPERA.

Bloody hell moopy sometimes makes a very good job at turning a fuck you into a telenova.

I shall gracefully bow out now as I'm shouting at AIR. I love everyone on the mod team but I hope someone is running who can represent the irreverent side of moopy. Because I think we have the rulebook side ALL COVERED.
 
I also think that the inference that anyone with an opinion on this subject should put themselves forward to become a moderator is unfair. We should be allowed to have an opinion and a discussion.

Absolutely. That other post has made me even more angry about the whole thing.

The mods generally do a fantastic job- everyone is tripping over themselves to say so. There is no need for incendiary bollocks like that.
 
I also think that the inference that anyone with an opinion on this subject should put themselves forward to become a moderator is unfair. We should be allowed to have an opinion and a discussion.
Fine, that's fair. But expressing an opinion is one thing, insisting that your opinion should override the decision taken is another.
 
And a reminder that not everyone feels comfortable expressing their opinion in public. While there may appear to be a consensus in this thread, other people have expressed their thoughts via reports and PMs.
 
Last edited:
I'm just saying, it's easy to criticize the mods' decisions when we're not them. I agree that ggggg's ban was unnecessary (AND that Tesco's comment was much sharper), but we gotta find a solution to make the decision-making process better, not keep judging. Like, we get it, the majority (I think) of us don't agree with their decision. Now we gotta find a way to improve the process.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom