Calgarypuck Moderator Team

[Rubicant]

I don't know if this is where to ask this, but it seems to be about reporting posts and such, so - is the post reported the instant you press the 'report post' button? Or do you have to fill out that comment and press submit on the next page to actually report it?

I ask because I hit that button all the time while scrolling on a tablet and wonder if it's causing unnecessary effort for the mods reviewing perfectly fine posts.

[Jiri Hrdina]

You have to fill out the report and submit it, so no worries if you hit it in error.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Dion

Report the posts and don't enflame the situation further by attacking posters. It often becomes a ying yang of posters going back and forth and taking the thread further off topic. Let the mods do their job of defusing the situation.

The problem he is referring to is reporting to the post and nothing happening, the reported post is left up and the person who crossed the line walks away with no repercussions. It happens, I said the same thing earlier and was confirmed action should have been taken. I also was told it was two posts since I returned and that is probably accurate but before I took my break there were numerous times I reported a clearly personal attack post of which nothing came about. WildGM you can say you guys don't play favourites or there is no bias toward posters but I think history on here shows there is. I have been a poster in the past who is not afraid to go against the popular opinion and I have been piled on many times for it. The latest one had the mod team send me a PM telling me to stay off the off topic board. If that difference of opinion was posted by one of the other regulars who generally go with the flow would they have received the same PM? Of course not. That is called being bias and discriminatory against someone for having am opinion you might not agree with. Let's put it in a real life scenario. A guy owns a private amusement park. His park is in a town that has had a recent election and an evil tyrant was elected, everybody hates him. A person who is over by the ferris wheel is overheard saying something bad about the evil tyrants opposition and a bunch of people kick the crap out of him. The security team shows up and calms everything down, then tells the guy who got the crap kicked out of him he can no longer access that part of the park, the other offenders are told to behave and carry on as they were with zero repercussions.

[zamler]

Originally Posted by Dion

Pin a medal on that poster

A medal for complaining.

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

The problem he is referring to is reporting to the post and nothing happening, the reported post is left up and the person who crossed the line walks away with no repercussions. It happens, I said the same thing earlier and was confirmed action should have been taken. I also was told it was two posts since I returned and that is probably accurate but before I took my break there were numerous times I reported a clearly personal attack post of which nothing came about. WildGM you can say you guys don't play favourites or there is no bias toward posters but I think history on here shows there is. I have been a poster in the past who is not afraid to go against the popular opinion and I have been piled on many times for it. The latest one had the mod team send me a PM telling me to stay off the off topic board. If that difference of opinion was posted by one of the other regulars who generally go with the flow would they have received the same PM? Of course not. That is called being bias and discriminatory against someone for having am opinion you might not agree with. Let's put it in a real life scenario. A guy owns a private amusement park. His park is in a town that has had a recent election and an evil tyrant was elected, everybody hates him. A person who is over by the ferris wheel is overheard saying something bad about the evil tyrants opposition and a bunch of people kick the crap out of him. The security team shows up and calms everything down, then tells the guy who got the crap kicked out of him he can no longer access that part of the park, the other offenders are told to behave and carry on as they were with zero repercussions.

Unfortunately, I think that adding physical violence in your analogy really diminishes its persuasive value.

[the2bears]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

The problem he is referring to is reporting to the post and nothing happening, the reported post is left up and the person who crossed the line walks away with no repercussions. It happens, I said the same thing earlier and was confirmed action should have been taken. I also was told it was two posts since I returned and that is probably accurate but before I took my break there were numerous times I reported a clearly personal attack post of which nothing came about. WildGM you can say you guys don't play favourites or there is no bias toward posters but I think history on here shows there is. I have been a poster in the past who is not afraid to go against the popular opinion and I have been piled on many times for it. The latest one had the mod team send me a PM telling me to stay off the off topic board. If that difference of opinion was posted by one of the other regulars who generally go with the flow would they have received the same PM? Of course not. That is called being bias and discriminatory against someone for having am opinion you might not agree with. Let's put it in a real life scenario. A guy owns a private amusement park. His park is in a town that has had a recent election and an evil tyrant was elected, everybody hates him. A person who is over by the ferris wheel is overheard saying something bad about the evil tyrants opposition and a bunch of people kick the crap out of him. The security team shows up and calms everything down, then tells the guy who got the crap kicked out of him he can no longer access that part of the park, the other offenders are told to behave and carry on as they were with zero repercussions.

People have died, others have been seriously injured and maimed in protests. Please tell me you're not trying to draw a comparison to your own experience on this board?

[IrishSpring2013]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

WildGM you can say you guys don't play favourites or there is no bias toward posters but I think history on here shows there is.

we are all just humans.. of course personal bias.. enters into what their doing..
hopefully they are aware of this.. and know.. to correct it.. or step back.. when personal conflict enter decision making... I dont know enough to comment more!

for the record.. kootaneyflamesfan.. has been super nice and supporive.. but I find textcritic to be rude and a bully.. a bully. i dont like the way he acts towards other.. and i think if he wasnt a mod.. well.. ill stop there. ive never seen someone tell another to "shut the hell up!" here without action taken.. but him.

rude mean bully.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by the2bears

People have died, others have been seriously injured and maimed in protests. Please tell me you're not trying to draw a comparison to your own experience on this board?

Of course not, is that actually what you got out of that? It is a made up story man to show a point, it has nothing to do with protests.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Makarov

Unfortunately, I think that adding physical violence really diminishes its persuasive value.

OK, maybe I should have changed kicking the crap out of to bullying. Physical violence was not the point of the post at all obviously.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Diss your situation is unique in that it was directly tied to an understanding of what would happen if you returned. I would suggest you PM the moderator account so we can discuss that understanding together. This isn't about what happened in that thread. It is about the fact that you asked to be suspended, and when you asked to return, we thought we had a mutual understanding of how that would work and how you would participate on the site.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Wild GM

Diss your situation is unique in that it was directly tied to an understanding of what would happen if you returned. I would suggest you PM the moderator account so we can discuss that understanding together. This isn't about what happened in that thread. It is about the fact that you asked to be suspended, and when you asked to return, we thought we had a mutual understanding of how that would work and how you would participate on the site.

Fair enough.

[jammies]

Originally Posted by Pizza

You might dismiss it, but what you just described there are justifications of a typical Bully.

Ah, but I don't care that you're (indirectly)calling me a bully because I understand that people are sometimes going to disagree with me and put interpretations on my actions that I don't feel are warranted. Some people doubtless dislike me due to my posting style or my opinions, and sometimes those people will take especial issue with one or more of my posts and vehement disagree with me, or call me out. Does this constitute "bullying", even if several of them take issue with me on the same post, in the same thread?

No. They exert zero power over me and thus cannot effectively "bully" me. Power is the essence of bullying, not collective disagreement. The only ones who can really bully anyone are the mods, as they have the power to edit posts, suspend, and ban. The rest of us have nothing but words, and those can be entirely ignored, using the exact same "ignore" feature you suggest I use to weed out the incoherent and dramatic.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by jammies

Ah, but I don't care that you're (indirectly)calling me a bully because I understand that people are sometimes going to disagree with me and put interpretations on my actions that I don't feel are warranted. Some people doubtless dislike me due to my posting style or my opinions, and sometimes those people will take especial issue with one or more of my posts and vehement disagree with me, or call me out. Does this constitute "bullying", even if several of them take issue with me on the same post, in the same thread?

No. They exert zero power over me and thus cannot effectively "bully" me. Power is the essence of bullying, not collective disagreement. The only ones who can really bully anyone are the mods, as they have the power to edit posts, suspend, and ban. The rest of us have nothing but words, and those can be entirely ignored, using the exact same "ignore" feature you suggest I use to weed out the incoherent and dramatic.

I have to disagree with you. Yes, the rest of us have nothing but words but words can hurt. Sure you might have a thick skin but not everyone does. If several people disagree with a poster in a constructed way is that ok? Absolutely. If several people belittle a person and pile on with targeting the poster is that ok? No, it is not.

[stone hands]

Ignore them or stay off the internet man

It’s painfully obvious in this thread you take internet debates far too seriously for anyone to enact any type of discipline that wouldn’t be handled much better than by just using the ignore button

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by stone hands

Ignore them or stay off the internet man

It’s painfully obvious in this thread you take internet debates far too seriously for anyone to enact any type of discipline that wouldn’t be handled much better than the ignore button

Well the problem with that is if posters can think they can personally attack other posters and their only repercussion is for those posters putting them on ignore you will end up with little productive conversation and chaos. I don't take debates on here too seriously, I just don't see the need to attack the poster and not debate the topic civilly.

[the2bears]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Of course not, is that actually what you got out of that? It is a made up story man to show a point, it has nothing to do with protests.

You compared actual violence to what you went through. Your character who criticized the "opponent" was protesting in a way.

But my point stands. You were comparing your experience here to someone actually getting physically assaulted.

[stone hands]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Well the problem with that is if posters can think they can personally attack other posters and their only repercussion is for those posters putting them on ignore you will end up with little productive conversation and chaos. I don't take debates on here too seriously, I just don't see the need to attack the poster and not debate the topic civilly.

They can't, you just have unfathomably thin skin. Use the ignore feature for it's intended purpose and move on from seeing toxic posters

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by zamler

It's bigger than that. Now someone can say, hey this member only reported two posts and they are complaining about the moderating. They should have reported more instead of complaining publicly. I can't use said info about anyone else in this discussion because that info is not normally available. You don't see this as a problem?

Originally Posted by zamler

A medal for complaining.

I like how the poster who brought up how info on # of reports can be used against others being problematic is the same one who immediately used that info to take a jab at another poster.

It’s a wonderful world.

[MarkGio]

Originally Posted by IrishSpring2013

we are all just humans.. of course personal bias.. enters into what their doing..
hopefully they are aware of this.. and know.. to correct it.. or step back.. when personal conflict enter decision making... I dont know enough to comment more!

for the record.. kootaneyflamesfan.. has been super nice and supporive.. but I find textcritic to be rude and a bully.. a bully. i dont like the way he acts towards other.. and i think if he wasnt a mod.. well.. ill stop there. ive never seen someone tell another to "shut the hell up!" here without action taken.. but him.

rude mean bully.

I don't think anyone could intelligently argue against bias being a factor in the moderatoring. These are actual people who are volunteers; for all we know they are just nerdy teenagers in their parents basement. When I was a mod, there was several conflicts I had to face regularly:

-- Really good members who made a mistake. An example would be if Sureloss needlessly insults someone. This site is pretty much loses half its value without Sureloss, so what is a mod to do? You just delete it and leave it be. Its not likely to be repeatable.

-- Bad members hoarding off attacks from a good members. Yes, some guys are jerks and start their day insulting people. And some guys are great and make mistakes. As much as a jerk might deserve social negative reinforcement, it becomes a slippery slope (it becomes the current state of CP) when you allow people to become punishers through posts. Action needed: The bad poster gets a PM explaining why people are quick to attack them, the good poster gets deletes and a PM reminding them they're better than that.

-- New/Young members make goofy posts. An example would be "Let's trade Johnny Gaudreau for the 1st overall pick". The new user is just having fun, in a place we hope they can, but the dogpile afterwards is disgusting unless moderated well. New users will make socially acceptable posts over time, there's no need to cast them away immediately just so people can enjoy their regular circle-jerk. Action needed: New users get a PM saying "it can be a tough crowd, here's a way to receive likes". The dogpile gets deletes, infractions, or PMs/Broadcasts reminding them this site is for everyone.

-- Repeat bad posters. How are they bad? Are they blatantly insulting people? That's easy... Infractions then bans after so many reminders. The tricky part is identifying if they're not violating the rules but create insulting discussions. An example would be "HAHAHA, Try again". The reader sees this and feels defensive because not only did they take the time to post, but the reply was not constructive or useless other than an attempt to make them feel bad. Just because it's not an insult doesn't mean it shouldn't recieve an infraction.

-- People get butthurt about their infractions, deletions or PMs. Sometimes good posters will surprise you with how butthurt they get. Just give them a fair shake and it sorts itself out.

-- Repeat infractions on a single member. Sometimes a mod just doesn't like a single guy. And sometimes that mod is now overstepping their "moral" boundaries (even though it might be allowed by the site). Because it's a volunteer position, they get away with a lot. If I don't like a member (as a mod) and that person feels personally attacked by me, I just report the post and let the other mods come to their conclusions. That way it's somewhat fair.

So for those saying it's a hard job, they're volunteers, etc etc. Its really not. You just have to be somewhat a grown up and active, as well as held accountable if you overstep. Maybe it's just me, but the actions I've posted above are not visibly noticable at this site. The dogpile gets is rampant.

For those criticizing HFboards, there was a mod forum where all infractions get publicly posted for all mods to read and comment. If a mod oversteps, all the other mods will know. There's been numerous times where mods of some East coast team have told me "I didn't think that was worthy of an infraction". I would then overturn them. Mind you, that forum carried 30 other clubs with 30 different types of fans as mods. There was lots of voices of reasoning. You learn alot about how to mod by watching others do it.

There was also mod supervisors who contacted you if questionable moderating occurs, as well as contact you if you're no longer active. Of course mods get jaded having to explain #### to people pretending they don't know what's up. That's why mods get supervised. There's always willing volunteers to replace you. No need to make it a tough job or sour place to talk hockey.

[MarkGio]

Originally Posted by stone hands

They can't, you just have unfathomably thin skin. Use the ignore feature for it's intended purpose and move on from seeing toxic posters

The ignore feature is not intended to replace moderating or poisonous discussions. Its intended to prevent posters stalking other posters. For example, for all the dogpiling we see on Calgaryblood, you would think if he's not violating the rules with his posts, more people would simply ignore him. Instead they rather wait for him to post and then attack with replies. Like it's his fault people are always butthurt when they have the option to ignore him? Hell, I sometimes see comments like "you're always spewing off negative garbage..." And wonder why an IGNORE feature hasn't been used?!? If you're always reading it stuff your don't like, who's the fool? I simply value my time too much to spend it reading #### I don't like. Its that simple.

Maybe the function doesn't exist here, but at HF we would just force-ignore two guys always at each other's throats.