No action taken on issue that breaches DIATRIBE CoC


#1

[quote]Hello Xcerus,

You are receiving this notification because the report you filed on the
post “Re: Questions: Poison” in “Questions: Poison” at “DIATRIBE” was
deleted by a moderator or by an administrator.


Thanks,

Diatribe Administrator
NZLARPS Information Technology Officer[/quote]

This is not an acceptable response to the issue reported - would the administrator responsible for deleting this please message me before the end of May about this issue or I will be forced to raise the issue at the next committie meeting.


#2

Hi Adam,

Muppet deleted your report, he’s the moderator of the Teonn board. Hosted boards are moderated by the people whose game or project it is.

As an admin I occasionally close or delete reports that I consider frivolous without contacting the complainant or taking action. I haven’t spoken to Muppet, but it’s possible that is what he did. He would be entirely within his rights to do so, but you are welcome to take the issue further if you feel it hasn’t been handled correctly or given sufficient weight.

If you have an issue with the moderation of a hosted board, I recommend you raise it with the hosted board’s moderator (Muppet in this case), the overall Diatribe sheriff (currently Derek) and/or with the overall Diatribe administrator (currently myself). If you’re unsatisfied with the response you get, you could raise the issue with the National committee, who appoint and oversee the Diatribe administrator and sheriff.

Ryan


#3

So - for clarity - does the diatribe CoC apply to hosted boards such as Teonn and Starwars?


#4

I’m sorry Adam but what exactly were you expecting to happen that hasn’t?


#5

Yes, the guidelines for posting from the Introduction to Diatribe do apply to hosted boards. They are:

Additionally, we moderate some other obvious irritants like spam and trolling. Moderators can identify additional disruptive behaviour as they see fit.

It is usually the moderator of the hosted board who enforces the guidelines. The sheriff may step in if they feel something hasn’t been handled.

I can’t see anything in the topic you reported on that I’d consider necessary to moderate. One user was mildly sarcastic with another. If that sort of thing was protracted or part of a pattern of problematic behaviour from a user I could see the need for moderation, but not in an isolated incident.


#6

The same that would happen to any one in breach of the CoC - a warning given and / or perhaps a reminder of the CoC and posting standards on diatribe. Unless this was a repeat offence…


#7

The same that would happen to any one in breach of the CoC - a warning given and / or perhaps a reminder of the CoC and posting standards on diatribe. Unless this was a repeat offence…[/quote]

Most warnings happen in private messages, not in the public forum. As far as I’m concerned, this is over.

Feel free to bring it up at the committee meeting, if you feel you must.


#8

The same that would happen to any one in breach of the CoC - a warning given and / or perhaps a reminder of the CoC and posting standards on diatribe. Unless this was a repeat offence…[/quote]

Most warnings happen in private messages, not in the public forum. As far as I’m concerned, this is over.

Feel free to bring it up at the committee meeting, if you feel you must.[/quote]
I would imagine that a deleted complaint means that the issue has been ignored / dismissed rather than delt with? As the admin responsible has not marked the complaint as handeld but has deleted it. Judgement in either direction cannot be determined and as such I am happy to assume neither has occured until such time as a responce is met or the akl committie meeting.

However the assumption that neither has occured would be easier to reach if the origional complaint about conduct had not been deleted. It is hard to find the system fair and unbiased when an issue is reported is apparently ignored.
I can only use the evidence that the admin responsible has not replied to support that statement.


#9

There’s no requirement on moderators to respond to reports. If a moderator thinks a report is without merit, they can delete or close it as they see fit.

The logical conclusion is that the moderator thought your report was without merit. Which it was. You can bother the national committee next, or you can drop this nonsense and stop wasting people’s time.

Why are you making a fuss about a mildly sarcastic comment?


#10

There’s no requirement on moderators to respond to reports. If a moderator thinks a report is without merit, they can delete or close it as they see fit.

The logical conclusion is that the moderator thought your report was without merit. Which it was. You can bother the national committee next, or you can drop this nonsense and stop wasting people’s time.

Why are you making a fuss about a mildly sarcastic comment?[/quote]

To be honnest - I do not see how my report was without merit. The comment was taken as a direct attack by the person it related to as can be seen by his own post.

I would also kindly remind you that you are not the modorator for that board and that you are not in a position to post accurate information about the actions of said admin. Unless in this case you are… however I doubt Muppet would tell somone else to report on his opinion. I won’t be bothering the national committie unless I do not receive a report from the administrator of said sub forum that relates to this incident.

I will however be taking your attitude and unprofessional responce up with the Diatribe Sheriff. Administrators are supposed to be both fair and unbiased. I feel that you are simply stating your opinion of an incidence in an attempt to deride from the seriousness of a breach of CoC - somthing I feel is a direct attack against myself and has no place or reason in a topic where I have asked for a simple explanation.


#11

Someone feeling that they’ve been personally attacked does not make it so. Go back and read the thread with a calm mind. You’ll find some minor sarcasm, no attack. I for one won’t be asking Muppet about it, because there’s nothing to discuss, and Derek has indicated the same.

As for my response here, it’s just the facts jack. Just as this is: your report, and your laboring of it here, seem to be more about Making A Point than any complaint you could reasonably believe has merit. Why are you complaining about “bias”? Because you think some members of the community are being treated differently than others. That seems to be the real point of your complaints, but it’s just not the case. The moderator response is different because the behavior is different.

Some time back you came in for some totally-warrented (in fact long overdue) moderation for a pattern of outrageous direct abuse of forum members, and ongoing trolling. Now you seem to be arguing that minor one-off sarcasm that someone mistook for a personal attack should be similarly moderated, and if it’s not then there is “bias” because that person is being treated differently than you were? The response is different because the situation is completely different. Thankfully you stopped abusing community members long ago (really, thank you), but now it seems to be replaced with this pointed belaboring of non-issues. Take a breath, have a cup of tea, read the topic in question again, and you’ll find there’s nothing of substance to complain about in it. If we moderated minor one-off sarcasm, people would find the moderation obtrusively heavy-handed and controlling… because it would be.


#12

[quote=“Ryan Paddy”]Someone feeling that they’ve been personally attacked does not make it so. Go back and read the thread with a calm mind. You’ll find some minor sarcasm, no attack. I for one won’t be asking Muppet about it, because there’s nothing to discuss, and Derek has indicated the same.

As for my response here, it’s just the facts jack. Just as this is: your report, and your laboring of it here, seem to be more about Making A Point than any complaint you could reasonably believe has merit. Why are you complaining about “bias”? Because you think some members of the community are being treated differently than others. That seems to be the real point of your complaints, but it’s just not the case. The moderator response is different because the behavior is different.

Some time back you came in for some totally-warrented (in fact long overdue) moderation for a pattern of outrageous direct abuse of forum members, and ongoing trolling. Now you seem to be arguing that minor one-off sarcasm that someone mistook for a personal attack should be similarly moderated, and if it’s not then there is “bias” because that person is being treated differently than you were? The response is different because the situation is completely different. Thankfully you stopped abusing community members long ago (really, thank you), but now it seems to be replaced with this pointed belaboring of non-issues. Take a breath, have a cup of tea, read the topic in question again, and you’ll find there’s nothing of substance to complain about in it. If we moderated minor one-off sarcasm, people would find the moderation obtrusively heavy-handed and controlling… because it would be.[/quote]

I am not prepared to discuss this with you - I no longer consider you to be a person I can reason with. I would request that you refrain from posting in this thread unless you have the power to directly answer the question posed. Which to my understanding - from what was posted earlier - you do not.


#13

Derek can you please lock this thread now.

I have spoken to the board moderator, the person who made the comment and the person the comment was aimed at. I think this has been dealt with now.

Cheers
Scott