~~~ WHO Was Banned Today??? ~~~

[GodFearinGunTotin]

You should be DogFearinGunTotin. Same letters!

Maybe Orville Redenbacher

 

[88GT]

Well, it's becoming more consistent right? I'd say that after the latest rash of bans, I'm much clearer on what to avoid.

And I'm okay with that. I'm okay with the rules too.

You've not been here long enough to notice the cyclical nature of this beast. We'll go extended periods of time where people can behave when discussing race and religion and the "prohibition" on these topics isn't enforced because people are behaving and no one is getting (overly) offended. Then someone will say something that pushes the envelope, or someone new will forget where he's at (namely, the internets) and start complaining that so-and-so said this and he thinks it's horrible, he's offended, blah, blah, blah. So the mods double down and start enforcing the rules to the letter. People get back in line and race and religion stay out of the limelight for a while. Eventually, race/religion sneak back into the conversation. Again, most people are perfectly capable of discussing it without insulting others, and as long as that's the case, we're generally free to behave like adults even if the topic is prohibited. Then someone does something stupid again and we start the whole ****ing drama all over again.

The thread that started it this time around was no different than the plethora of other threads that came before it discussing Islam the religion and its connection to violence. But bans were handed out and it got locked. Why was that thread different than the others?

 

[Expat]

Easter threads? Prayer request threads. Yes, they violate the rules. Do I care? No, not one bit. I think it is pretty easy to guess what I'll find when I open a thread titled "Happy Easter". I'm going to find like-minded people wishing each other well on their chosen holy day. These threads do not create problems...so I leave them alone.

But even here it seems like in most years someone tries to get the thread closed with some comment or complaint about it.

I understand what you mean by passion. Some people do some to get pretty worked up about stuff.

 

[Expat]

Maybe Orville Redenbacher

I can shout Orville in the same tone as Wilber then. That would be good.

 

[SkullDaddy.45]

You should be DogFearinGunTotin. Same letters!

I used to be " HardRockinGanjaSmokin" now I'm " ProstateFearinLimpDickin"

 

[88GT]

Would you care to provide more detail, perhaps actually answer my question?

consistent



[kuh n-sis-tuh nt]


2.constantly adhering to the same principles, course, form, etc.:a consistent opponent.

As it stands this is just another of your snarky, pointless comments.

It's not even close to snarky. It's just the plain simple truth.

I can find example after example of these comments from you. Always directed at the staff, always snarky, never helpful as to how to actually address any specific issue. Believe it or not complaining about an issue is not the same as helping to solve it. What, exactly are you trying to accomplish?

Have at it!

Do you have anything constructive to add? Are you only interested in digging at the mod staff?

Can mods enforce the rules consistently?

I'll ask again...straight up: From your perspective, what is the proper course of action for the moderator staff to take in this situation?

I answered you. If the rules state no discussion on race or religion, then don't allow half a dozen threads with those topics and then out of the blue start banning people and closing threads for behavior that for the previous 6 months was perfectly acceptable. You created the mess in this situation by allowing the same exact type of conversation to go on for the last 6+ months.

If you are not willing to help the staff,

What do you want me to do? I have been clear on the issue I have. It's not the rules. It's not the consequences. It's the inconsistent enforcement. What's fine to post one day is going to result in a ban the next. That's bull****.

why the continued comments?

Because of the continued inconsistent enforcement.

If you are treated so unfairly here why do you continue to post on INGO?

Good question. But it's not really germane to the issue.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

At least you have an animated gif for your backup first name -- sort of like Prince

So we'd have to call him " - the poster formerly known as Churchmouse"??

 

[PaulF]

I don't have any problem with what you said here, Paul. But I think you can see it doesn't jibe with your previous post (ref. post 950). I'm really not trying to be obstinate but this points out the problem with zero tolerance rules such as not posting anything of a religious nature on INGO. What you just wrote seems "fair" but strictly speaking, it doesn't comply with the policy.

I agree. Zero Tolerance is philosophically untenable. Alternatively, on a pragmatic level we do not have the manpower to design, implement, and maintain a more robust scheme. Those who implemented this policy did not have access to a perfect solution, and decided this was the best way forward. Now we all do the best we can.
Again, I argue that this is primarily an issue within one sub-forum here...not a site-wide issue.

And I'm okay with that. I'm okay with the rules too.

You've not been here long enough to notice the cyclical nature of this beast. We'll go extended periods of time where people can behave when discussing race and religion and the "prohibition" on these topics isn't enforced because people are behaving and no one is getting (overly) offended. Then someone will say something that pushes the envelope, or someone new will forget where he's at (namely, the internets) and start complaining that so-and-so said this and he thinks it's horrible, he's offended, blah, blah, blah. So the mods double down and start enforcing the rules to the letter. People get back in line and race and religion stay out of the limelight for a while. Eventually, race/religion sneak back into the conversation. Again, most people are perfectly capable of discussing it without insulting others, and as long as that's the case, we're generally free to behave like adults even if the topic is prohibited. Then someone does something stupid again and we start the whole ****ing drama all over again.

The thread that started it this time around was no different than the plethora of other threads that came before it discussing Islam the religion and its connection to violence. But bans were handed out and it got locked. Why was that thread different than the others?

You covered this pretty well, I agree that this is cyclical in nature.

The answer to your question ("What was different about this thread") is: Nothing. The other threads were just as much against the rules as that one was. None of those discussions should have been allowed. A valid question to ask is why. Why does this inconsistency exist?

We have 35,000+ users here, and 10 Moderators. We were all users here before we were moderators (except for one). We don't all want to have to play the "Heavy" every time we log on to INGO. Sometimes, when I log on, I refuse to go to the break room or the GPD forum...I just don't want to deal with what I'm going to find there. Often, my hands are tied...my inbox if full of reported posts. Sometimes I will see a thread that crosses the line...but not too bad. So I let it slide. Maybe I'm lazy. Maybe I hope one of the other moderators will step in and "take the bullet". Maybe I just want to enjoy INGO for a few minutes.


The users know what the rules are, and will operate within them when they know they are being watched. I don't want to be the bad guy every day, and neither does anyone else. We see that our users are capable of operating withing our rules, but often choose not to. Sometimes we have to remind users that we are here, and we are watching. This isn't something any of us want to have to do every day, forever. I don't think the users want that, either.

 

[Dead Duck]

Bless You PaulF.

 

[BigBoxaJunk]

...my inbox if full of reported posts.

I think there should be some way you can tell how many posts a given user has reported. Like rep points. That might change how some feel about others. I can see the need to report a post, but that makes me wonder who these people are who are filling the mod's inboxes on a daily basis.

I feel like I'm still a newbie here and I look at my participation on this forum as being like a guest in someone's house. I don't have any feeling of ownership of this forum, and I can't see ever reporting someone for a post, and I really can't say that I've ever felt any satisfaction over hearing about someone being banned (not even TROOPER). But I know rules are rules and I also suspect that most, if not all of those recently banned knew what they were doing and did it anyway.

 

[MisterChester]

Maybe Orville Redenbacher

GodFearinGunTotinPopcornEatinThreadLurkin

 

[bradmedic04]

GodFearinGunTotinPopcornEatinThreadLurkin

You forgot to take out God. BANNED!

In some amount of seriousness, I tend to agree with CM/head about the P/C creeping in. It's a shame that everyone gets subjected to tighter rules as a result of a relatively small number of people who just have to cross the line from snarkery into hateful douchebaggery to feed some narcissistic insecurity. I'm all about fun and really don't mind being insulted directly (it's almost sport, and no one laughs harder at jokes about me than I do), but also understand there are some basic decency guidelines out there with which one can guide oneself, and which are largely expected of adults. However, some people just can't leave alone that slightest bit of subjectivity, and just have to push and push until they've created a big scene and **** in everyone's cereal.

This reminds me of talking to my dad about work some years back when he was an executive at a bank. He told me that the P/C movement had started to make it impossible to be truly effective in the workplace, and that a relatively small number of people (who usually got fired anyway) had really ruined it for everyone else. His words seem to ring truer everyday, and looking at the "discourse"some people have on the internet, it's a shame we can't fire them from society.

 

[88GT]

I agree. Zero Tolerance is philosophically untenable. Alternatively, on a pragmatic level we do not have the manpower to design, implement, and maintain a more robust scheme. Those who implemented this policy did not have access to a perfect solution, and decided this was the best way forward. Now we all do the best we can.
Again, I argue that this is primarily an issue within one sub-forum here...not a site-wide issue.

Not directed at me, but I wanted to let you know that this is exactly what I meant when I made the post that you commented on recently that seemed to put your panties in a twist. The zero-tolerance nature of the rules is a recipe for failure. And one of the more likely consequences is exactly this.

You covered this pretty well, I agree that this is cyclical in nature.

The answer to your question ("What was different about this thread") is: Nothing. The other threads were just as much against the rules as that one was. None of those discussions should have been allowed. A valid question to ask is why. Why does this inconsistency exist?

That's what I've been asking. In all seriousness, I am fine with moderator discretion It has worked well when the standard has been along one of two lines: Members may not insult other members, this includes references to race or religion and blanket statements of condemnation regarding all members of a race or religion are prohibited. When we're in the part of the cycle where the rules are relaxed because people behave, this is essentially how INGO operates. And it works. And generally works well.

We have 35,000+ users here, and 10 Moderators. We were all users here before we were moderators (except for one). We don't all want to have to play the "Heavy" every time we log on to INGO. Sometimes, when I log on, I refuse to go to the break room or the GPD forum...I just don't want to deal with what I'm going to find there. Often, my hands are tied...my inbox if full of reported posts. Sometimes I will see a thread that crosses the line...but not too bad. So I let it slide. Maybe I'm lazy. Maybe I hope one of the other moderators will step in and "take the bullet". Maybe I just want to enjoy INGO for a few minutes.

And I am absolutely 100% fine with this. All of it.

The users know what the rules are, and will operate within them when they know they are being watched. I don't want to be the bad guy every day, and neither does anyone else. We see that our users are capable of operating withing our rules, but often choose not to. Sometimes we have to remind users that we are here, and we are watching. This isn't something any of us want to have to do every day, forever. I don't think the users want that, either.

Except that I think we've shown we can behave even when we "aren't" being watched. That's the "up" side of the cycle when we can behave like adults in our conversations.

The gist of the ban on race and religion is an effort to prevent hurt feelings. Let's face it. That's not going to happen. You can't control how someone is going to respond. Making zero tolerance rules in an effort to do so is an exercise in futility. I don't know why it can't be simplified down to "Don't insult/mock/condemn entire religions or other members for their religious beliefs" and "Don't make blanket statements condemning entire populations based on the actions of a sub-set of that population." And before you argue that it's a subjective standard, I'd bring your attention to the rule that prohibits members from insulting other members. That's subjective. (And I have seen some nasty insults cross my screen.) If INGO can operate on that subject standard, why can't it do the same, with the same moderator discretion for race and religion?

 

[hopper68]

I cast my vote for 88gt to be mod for a day. PaulF and her switching places would be very interesting.

 

[88GT]

I cast my vote for 88gt to be mod for a day. PaulF and her switching places would be very interesting.

They'd have to close their moderator forum or at least delete all the threads where they'd *****ed about me first.

 

[1911ly]

GodFearinGunTotinPopcornEatinThreadLurkin

Still has g-o-d in it! Reported!!!!

Seriously. I don't envy the mods there jobs. I am glad you're there to keep us civil! Thank you for your service. I enjoy this forum way to much to watch it turn in to a cesspool. I have been using forums and news groups since the early days of Yahoo. I'm am old dude. I probably belong to 30 different tech forums (Yeah I am a geek) There are forums way worse then this place just because the mods gave up. I steer away from those forums.

I like the mods & 99% percent of the people here. I I keep coughing up the sight supporter fee every year and am learning a lot about gun and the laws. I have had the pleasure to shake the hands of many of you.

Mods do your best.

 

[bradmedic04]

I enjoy this forum way to much to watch it turn in to a cesspool. I have been using forums and news groups since the early days of Yahoo. I'm am old dude. I probably belong to 30 different tech forums (Yeah I am a geek) There are forums way worse then this place just because the mods gave up.

Yeah, this could be the AK files after all...

 

[Dead Duck]

I like the mods & 99% percent of the people here.

Am I the 1%?

 

[bradmedic04]

Am I the 1%?

I've been led to believe in other posts that printcraft is the 1 percent, and the rest of us peons.

 

[Expat]

I think there should be some way you can tell how many posts a given user has reported. Like rep points. That might change how some feel about others. I can see the need to report a post, but that makes me wonder who these people are who are filling the mod's inboxes on a daily basis.

I feel like I'm still a newbie here and I look at my participation on this forum as being like a guest in someone's house. I don't have any feeling of ownership of this forum, and I can't see ever reporting someone for a post, and I really can't say that I've ever felt any satisfaction over hearing about someone being banned (not even TROOPER). But I know rules are rules and I also suspect that most, if not all of those recently banned knew what they were doing and did it anyway.

I felt the same way for most of my tenure here. I never reported offending posts because I thought it was sort of underhanded for one and not needed, second. But I saw the plea from some of the mods for help in the classifieds. They said they couldn't watch them all and would appreciate help. So I flagged a few this past year.

I also began to notice that some people were intentionally goading people to make comments that would get them banned or the thread locked. It was easy to see as a basically disinterested third party but I guess those that were in the heat of battle didn't notice or couldn't contain themselves. That kind of ticked me off to see only one side of some issues getting banned all the time. Because one side was using reporting posts as a tactic to shut down discussion. So Paul said to start reporting those offenders on the other side. So I did one so far.