More uselessness from DBC

[Asthehills]

2 minutes ago, Albert Tatlock said:

That's a very eloquent way of simply arguing for 'anything goes'.

That's not how the world, and the T&Cs we all sign up to, work unfortunately.

Remember, this ban was based on multiple abusive posts, reported by numerous members and nothing more.

 

How many members does it take to report a post to get someone banned?

Who determines of posts are abusive?

[Viddy well]

7 minutes ago, Albert Tatlock said:

That's a very eloquent way of simply arguing for 'anything goes'.

That's not how the world, and the T&Cs we all sign up to, work unfortunately.

Remember, this ban was based on multiple abusive posts, reported by numerous members and nothing more.

 

No.

I'm arguing that there are some of us who have a passion for our cause but don't know best how to articulate it. There are some of us who think that the best way to advance an argument is through personal attacks. Hell, if that was a condition of continued participation on Manx Forums, there wouldn't be anyone left.

You've banned a person who had something to say but didn't know how to say it.

I found his direction to John Wright to "fuck off" highly distasteful. John has been a stalwart and infinitely patient, stabilizing presence amongst the often lunatic threads on Manx Forums and certainly did not deserve that attack. But I also think John's strength to have been to know when the line was crossed.

By contrast, you've made an emotional line call and I think you're wrong. You played the man, not the message. It's incumbant upon you to be the adult in the room.

Edited December 14, 2022 by Viddy well

[HeliX]

21 minutes ago, Asthehills said:

How would you know that unless you were collecting data that should probably be declared in the T&C’s ?

It is in the T&C, I read it the other day.

[HeliX]

30 minutes ago, BriT said:

It just sounds farcical. What have these mystery people done? I’ve never heard of any of them apart from the one who started this thread. Why are you concerned about what they post enough to deleted it? Most of it looked fairly harmless to me. 

It probably predates your joining, but there have been a number of posters who have been serial multi-accounters, and one in particular who's had dozens if not hundreds of accounts spanning what is probably the thick-end of a decade at this point.

[kevster]

14 minutes ago, Passing Time said:

Seems to be a few on here hell bent on destroying this forum and others trying to defend their actions. The mods are here to do a job FOR WHICH THEY ARE NOT PAID and to be fair they are being more than lenient

Just thought I'd add this bit 

[Gladys]

4 minutes ago, Viddy well said:

No.

I'm arguing that there are some of us who have a passion for our cause but don't know best how to articulate it. There are some of us who think that the best way to advance an argument is through personal attacks. Hell, if that was a condition of continued participation on Manx Forums, there wouldn't be anyone left.

You've banned a person who had something to say but didn't know how to say it.

I found his direction to John Wright to "fuck off" highly distasteful. John has been a stalwart and infinitely patient, stabilizing presence amongst the often lunatic threads on Manx Forums and certainly did not deserve that attack. But I also think John's strength to have been to know when the line was crossed.

By contrast, you've made an emotional line call and I think you're wrong. You played the man, not the message. It's incumbant upon you to be the adult in the room.

No, they played the man not the issue and it is not incumbent on the mods to be the adult, that is the responsibility of every poster on here. 

[Amadeus]

 

6 minutes ago, Viddy well said:

No.

I'm arguing that there are some of us who have a passion for our cause but don't know best how to articulate it. There are some of us who think that the best way to advance an argument is through personal attacks. Hell, if that was a condition of continued participation on Manx Forums, there wouldn't be anyone left.

You've banned a person who had something to say but didn't know how to say it.

I found his direction to John Wright to "fuck off" highly distasteful. John has been a stalwart and infinitely patient, stabilizing presence amongst the often lunatic threads on Manx Forums and certainly did not deserve that attack. But I also think John's strength to have been to know when the line was crossed.

By contrast, you've made an emotional line call and I think you're wrong. You played the man, not the message. It's incumbant upon you to be the adult in the room.

You clearly don't know the whole background of the TJ saga. This went way beyond a few abusive forum posts. It also included abusive personal messages and other things. Explain to me why we, as unpaid volunteers who pay with time and money to keep this place running, should put up with that? Seriously. 

[Albert Tatlock]

1 minute ago, Asthehills said:

How many members does it take to report a post to get someone banned?

Who determines of posts are abusive?

One member and one moderator if the post warrants it...or just one moderator if he/she alone spots something that significantly breaks these rules:

https://www.manxforums.com/forums/index.php?/terms/

People tend to get a lot of leeway on MF, and any banned members usually already have a history. They're not done lightly and often there is a debate between moderators.

Usually people just need time to cool off. Rarely are people banned immediately in my experience on here.

[NoTailT]

To be fair if I was president, or Moderator, for the day I'd just lock this thread for a day or five and let the steam simmer down. But then no doubt poor @Amadeuswould be lambasted for bias or some other nonsense.

[Viddy well]

2 minutes ago, kevster said:

Just thought I'd add this bit 

Why do you see their unpaid status as a good thing?

A journalist who works for a newspaper has to ensure that stories are factually correct and that balance is brought to an article. Too many indiscretions and they're relegated to the sports pages and then they're "looking for new opportunities".

In contrast, social media moderators are Gods. Other than their personal scruples, there is no legislative or moral obligation to report other than in alignment of their agenda.

As it happens, I think Manx Forums is, on the whole (and when the dross is stripped out), a force for good in Manx life. But don't go thinking that social media is held to the same standards as the media.

[Viddy well]

8 minutes ago, Gladys said:

No, they played the man not the issue and it is not incumbent on the mods to be the adult, that is the responsibility of every poster on here. 

Ah - then we disagree on a (rare) fundamental.

The forum is open to all.

That's specifically because while ninety percent of the group may see things one way, the minority may see the truth.

[HeliX]

7 minutes ago, offshoremanxman said:

I’ve actually met the guy you claimed to be TJ IRL. He’s not the rampant nutter that this forum made other forum members believe he was. It was nothing short of bullying the lad at one stage. And that was years and years ago anyway so nit relevant to anything happening now. 

It was his posts that made him out to be perhaps a bit eccentric.

[NoTailT]

1 minute ago, HeliX said:

It was his posts that made him out to be perhaps a bit eccentric.

I think we can all agree he became obsessed and unfortunately that detracts from the key issue which he has every right to be angry over.

I said several pages back that - in my view - @Amadeusmisplaced this because instead of treating him as an aggrieved individual and reaching out to him off the public posts to maybe hear him out some more (even if he doesn't care), I don't think spurring him on and calling him a vocal minority was particularly helpful. Dignity. It's important, for both sides of any debate.

[Viddy well]

1 minute ago, NoTailT said:

I think we can all agree he became obsessed and unfortunately that detracts from the key issue which he has every right to be angry over.

I said several pages back that - in my view - @Amadeusmisplaced this because instead of treating him as an aggrieved individual and reaching out to him off the public posts to maybe hear him out some more (even if he doesn't care), I don't think spurring him on and calling him a vocal minority was particularly helpful. Dignity. It's important, for both sides of any debate.

Human dignity is the base currency of civilisation. There are no gods before it.

[HeliX]

Just now, offshoremanxman said:

Agree but he was bullied to death on this forum. There was no real need. He was just made out to be some sort of nutter who should be universally laughed at. Really unpleasant. This forum has had its fair share of nutters over the years but deleting the content just becuase you didn’t like what was said against a local authority suggests that it’s maybe a little too close to the bone. 

Not sure the forum is the issue - he does the same on FB both under his real account and multiple fake accounts. I think the guy just has an unhealthy relationship with social media in general.

Unfortunately he made himself out as someone who shouldn't be seriously engaged with, because he'd serially delete posts/comments and would completely flip most of his core beliefs every time he started a new account. The only winning move is not to play...