|
Canada11397 Posts
So they banned him for PBU reasons when he has 3k+ posts on his current account that are fairly clean.
Regardless of what you think of the actuall perm, 'Fairly clean' for a regular poster is very different than 'fairly clean' for a formerly perm'd account that is only a year and bit old. And a poster that on a previous account, challenged the mods to perm every account he had.
And as well meaning as some of the defenders of the mod action are here, I don't think our first line of defence on controversial mod actions should be "we do whatever the hell we want because we are TL." I hope we don't come across as arbitrary as all that.
|
On October 04 2013 14:34 Falling wrote:Show nested quote +So they banned him for PBU reasons when he has 3k+ posts on his current account that are fairly clean. Regardless of what you think of the actuall perm, 'Fairly clean' for a regular poster is very different than 'fairly clean' for a formerly perm'd account that is only a year and bit old. And a poster that on a previous account, challenged the mods to perm every account he had. And as well meaning as some of the defenders are here, I don't think our first line of defence on controversial mod actions should be "we do whatever the hell we want because we are TL." I hope we don't come across as arbitrary as all that.
Most of us are not arguing that the mod action is arbitrary. We are arguing that, in spite of his previous actions, he has grown into a valuable poster on this board on his recent account. I personally ask that you weigh his current posts against his past history. They are extremely valuable to this community, even though the majority of the TL populace disagrees with him.
And all this coming from a person who is almost as far left as sam!zdat.
|
I lurk around the thread, and am quite conservative. I always thought his posts were interesting since they often had a unique (or uniquely stated) perspective on things, even if some of them didn't make complete sense. I can imagine it would be difficult to discuss things with him due to this however, it requires some out of the box reasoning.
|
On October 04 2013 14:34 Falling wrote:Show nested quote +So they banned him for PBU reasons when he has 3k+ posts on his current account that are fairly clean. Regardless of what you think of the actuall perm, 'Fairly clean' for a regular poster is very different than 'fairly clean' for a formerly perm'd account that is only a year and bit old. And a poster that on a previous account, challenged the mods to perm every account he had. And as well meaning as some of the defenders of the mod action are here, I don't think our first line of defence on controversial mod actions should be "we do whatever the hell we want because we are TL." I hope we don't come across as arbitrary as all that.
I was kind of staying out of his specific case because I haven't really been tracking his posts, but I did want to just add one point to the discussion. I read his post which was quoted by Plexa, the one calling for mods to ban him, etc. Yeah, it was pretty bad, but I kind of take that as a moment of rage that many of us have. Sure, that post was deserving of a ban, but I also think it was a temporary emotional response, and now it's being used, seemingly as the primary case, for his now perma ban.
I would hope that a year of posting, even though he wasn't supposed to, should be more factored into the decision that one moment of stupidity that he had long ago. God knows there is rage in Starcraft, and a lot of these political / general forum discussions sometimes get heated because people believe what they believe firmly. I am only suggesting that his rant is seen as just that, one temporary emotional outburst deserving of a ban, but not really something that should be considered as heavily as it is being used now.
|
sc2superfan101 was the main reason I stopped reading the forums and just kept to the Tech Support forum if ever I posted. Mods are way too nice on this site.
|
On October 04 2013 13:10 paralleluniverse wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2013 12:31 xDaunt wrote:
So they banned him for PBU reasons when he has 3k+ posts on his current account that are fairly clean. That seems rather weak. What's even worse is that the mods were looking at his history and thinking about banning him for little to no apparent reason other than that they disagree with him and considered his posts "weak." "Best" case scenario is that the mods were looking at him because a bunch of people were reporting him for rather weak reasons.
Look, his posting was far from perfect (not that mine is, either), but there clearly is a very bad double standard in terms of how the political threads are moderated. I dare someone to tell me with a straight face that his posts are demonstrably worse than some of the shit that some liberal posters throw around in the political threads without consequence. I've raised this issue before. Yes, it is TL's site, and they are free to do as they please, but I hope that they understand that they have created a very large disincentive for conservatives to post in these threads. I agree. This is not the first time this has happened, and definitely not the first time I've complained about it. Previously I said: Show nested quote +Now let's talk about TL mods. They seriously do a bad job in moderating arguments. They're biased. People get banned for making arguments that they disagree with if the argument is too controversial. People also get banned for making "flamebait" arguments, i.e. a perfectly legitimate and defensible argument that is so controversial that a horde of (often irrational and unthinking) forum posters will attack you relentlessly and call you a troll. In dealing with arguments, mods on TL have a bias against unpopular views. I stand by that. TL mods have a heavy bias against forceful, unpopular, and controversial opinions. People have a right to present unpopular argument, even if they're nonsense, wrong, persistent, and uncomfortable. It was a cowardly move to ban him.
In the interest of having more interesting discussions I generally agree with you and TL mods as all people are biased to a certain degree. However, he was a PBU and the main mistake being made here was not discovering it earlier. Even though he seemed to be less of a pain in the ass with this account his ban now is absolutely justified because of his history. Even if it looks like his political stance "helped" in that as well.
|
|
|
1001 YEARS KESPAJAIL22272 Posts
If I remember correctly he wasn't a very good poster in SC2 fora
|
Can you please keep him perma banned and shorten DEB's ban instead ?
I'm all for having people with strong opinion I disagree with, but I'd rather they came from someone who is actually smart.
|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
On October 04 2013 12:14 Jormundr wrote:PBU (MasterBlasterCaster). Specific reason I would assume is because he got into a mild spat with Jibba tonight.
Has nothing to do with that. A post was reported, I looked into it, found the connection to MBC, pulled the trigger. That's all there is to this matter.
On October 04 2013 13:54 paralleluniverse wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2013 13:31 Kaitlin wrote:On October 04 2013 13:27 paralleluniverse wrote:On October 04 2013 13:24 Jormundr wrote:On October 04 2013 13:10 paralleluniverse wrote:On October 04 2013 12:31 xDaunt wrote:
So they banned him for PBU reasons when he has 3k+ posts on his current account that are fairly clean. That seems rather weak. What's even worse is that the mods were looking at his history and thinking about banning him for little to no apparent reason other than that they disagree with him and considered his posts "weak." "Best" case scenario is that the mods were looking at him because a bunch of people were reporting him for rather weak reasons.
Look, his posting was far from perfect (not that mine is, either), but there clearly is a very bad double standard in terms of how the political threads are moderated. I dare someone to tell me with a straight face that his posts are demonstrably worse than some of the shit that some liberal posters throw around in the political threads without consequence. I've raised this issue before. Yes, it is TL's site, and they are free to do as they please, but I hope that they understand that they have created a very large disincentive for conservatives to post in these threads. I agree. This is not the first time this has happened, and definitely not the first time I've complained about it. TL mods have a heavy bias against forceful, unpopular, and controversial opinions. People have a right to present unpopular argument, even if they're nonsense, wrong, persistent, and uncomfortable. It was a cowardly move to ban him. They don't have a right to do so on this forum, but they should be encouraged to do so when they are able to do it in a civil manner. That is the main reason why I cannot support his ban. As I have said in the ABL thread, I think he needs to try out the rule of thumb that I use, which is to try to limit the number of posts you put in a topic in a certain period of time to ignore the repetitive bullshit that arises from too much posting and not enough thinking. People have a right to express beliefs that "aren't entirely grounded in reality" and that are "bullshit". People actually have no "right" whatsoever to post anything on TL. The mods control who is allowed to post, but just because they can ban someone for saying something they don't like doesn't mean they are correct to do so. If the mods want to get away from freedom of speech, which they've demonstrated on many occasions, then they can do so, but they are wrong, and they are doing the wrong thing. In real life, in America, people have a right to say things that you don't like, in ways you don't like. A better online community would respect that.
There are plenty of people we allow to post who say shit we don't like. I could care less about the political discussion on TL, I have no opinion on the 'rightness' or 'wrongness' of any politic position in the US (for I realise that the US is very different to where I come from and my perspective/understanding thus cannot be accurate).
|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
So they banned him for PBU reasons when he has 3k+ posts on his current account that are fairly clean.
He would have been permed earlier if the connection had been made. For security reasons, some mod tools are not available to banlings and are restricted to red/admin level. Unfortunately many reds/admins don't do report work these days and some PBUs slip through the cracks. Come to think of it, this is probably something we should address so that this doesn't happen again.
|
1001 YEARS KESPAJAIL22272 Posts
On October 04 2013 21:41 Plexa wrote:Show nested quote +So they banned him for PBU reasons when he has 3k+ posts on his current account that are fairly clean. He would have been permed earlier if the connection had been made. For security reasons, some mod tools are not available to banlings and are restricted to red/admin level. Unfortunately many reds/admins don't do report work these days and some PBUs slip through the cracks. Come to think of it, this is probably something we should address so that this doesn't happen again.
An intermediate moderator level?
Banling then... Bandralisk? 
|
On October 04 2013 21:41 Plexa wrote:Show nested quote +So they banned him for PBU reasons when he has 3k+ posts on his current account that are fairly clean. He would have been permed earlier if the connection had been made. For security reasons, some mod tools are not available to banlings and are restricted to red/admin level. Unfortunately many reds/admins don't do report work these days and some PBUs slip through the cracks. Come to think of it, this is probably something we should address so that this doesn't happen again.
Ok thanks, that makes a lot more sense then.
|
Haha, MBC, good times. Superfan posted like Chabanais from r/conservative, so I'm surprised it took him this long to slip up.
|
|
|
On October 04 2013 23:39 lichter wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2013 21:41 Plexa wrote:So they banned him for PBU reasons when he has 3k+ posts on his current account that are fairly clean. He would have been permed earlier if the connection had been made. For security reasons, some mod tools are not available to banlings and are restricted to red/admin level. Unfortunately many reds/admins don't do report work these days and some PBUs slip through the cracks. Come to think of it, this is probably something we should address so that this doesn't happen again. An intermediate moderator level? Banling then... Bandralisk?
Shellbot. 
I imagine this was the real reason they went straight to perm for sc2superfan. A 3k+ post account with a decent record is nothing to shake a stick at, even for a PBU. But he should've asked a higher-up for permission to come back on before creating the account and posting. He may have had honest intentions, but the protocol is there to prevent (certain) other nefarious, notorious PBUs from returning. It's like leaving a small pocketknife in your pants as you work through airport security: you don't intend anything malicious with it, but you still technically broke the rules.
EDIT: I guess you could say I'm playing devil's advocate here. Trying to see this subject through two views.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
