James R's Independent Review Process

[Gustav]

Where do the site rules specify a time limit or lack thereof for how long an offending post can earn infraction points?

there is no specific instance. the fact that we do not go on banning sprees on old content has always been a matter of convention based on commonsense and an idea that it would be very crass to do so

since james is allowing the infraction to stand on a year old post, you can safely assume that infractionable posts no longer have the protection of antiquity or some semblance of a statute of limitations

all content ever posted in sci is fair game
james encourages the trolling of our forum by opening up a new front in the incessant attempts to provide the most hostile environment possible for this community

Is a post reportable, regardless of how long ago it was posted?

technically, yes
nor is there any mechanism by which one can force a member not to report old posts. we, with the sole exception of james, just hope for decency and commonsense on the part of both member and mod.

 

[wynn]

I have addressed this in the forum rules update thread:
http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2831829&postcount=170

 

[Enmos]

what do you infer from the italicized portion...

...?

What about what preceded that?

i think james r is doing some data mining

Seems pretty clear to me.

And this:

"i am informed" vs "i have been informed"

distinct and two very different animals
a third party is implicit in the latter while in the former, it is not.

It's suggestive.

 

[Gustav]

What about what preceded that?

Seems pretty clear to me..

what preceded that was an opinion that was at the same time held to be improbable by way of the qualifier. why does that not work for you. does unlikely signify impossible to you?

is it possible that you might do the same since your silence defaults to a position of agreement with the infraction? i say yes

what do you say?

It's suggestive.

and?

 

[James R]

Signal:

Where do the site rules specify a time limit or lack thereof for how long an offending post can earn infraction points?

They don't specify a time limit.

Moderators do, however, have discretion as to whether to act on a report or not (and that's in the rules).

If I had known that the post was from last year, chances are I might not have done anything. Nevertheless, given that the language used was qutie extreme in this case, I'm going to let the warning I gave stand.

Is a post reportable, regardless of how long ago it was posted?

Any post is reportable. I'd venture to say that most moderators won't act on reports concerning posts pulled from the ancient mists of sciforums past.


Gustav:

Are you still going on about this?

you could have similarly sent me a polite pm querying me on the post. instead you issued an infraction right off the bat simply because of a single accusation. you were prejudiced right from the outset and you expect me to be magnanimous? your overt hostility demands polite restraint on my part?

I did send you a PM. That was the warning you got. It was not an infraction. It carries no infraction points. I was not prejudiced. I responded to a report I received. Moreover, the reported post was in breach of the site rules. What more do you need?

lets eyeball your request for a translation....

what can be inferred from that? you did not know what the offending text meant? you just assumed the complaint was truthful and accurate and went ahead with the infraction?

I asked you to confirm the translation that had already been given to me by the person who reported your post. Turned out that the report was accurate.

will this be a normal practice? i know others have posted content in foreign languages. will you be demanding translations under the pain of death at your whim and fancy?

In this instance, the offensive language was reported by a member who knows the language.

sciforums is an English language forum. In general, unless there is good reason, people ought to post in English. Otherwise, moderation becomes difficult.

 

[Gustav]

I did send you a PM. That was the warning you got. It was not an infraction. It carries no infraction points. I was not prejudiced. I responded to a report I received. Moreover, the reported post was in breach of the site rules. What more do you need?

please reverse my infraction

this bogus crap will be used against me in the future. its how you roll, james.
my infraction record is full of petty and vindictive bullshit and this is just the latest one

you should be ashamed

I asked you to confirm the translation

stop lying
you violently threatened me....

Please provide me with a translation of what you posted, or I will assume that you require a 3 day ban.

I'm going to let the warning I gave stand.

naturally
it is the "mighty gustav"

 

[Gustav]

the scenario.......

james r: "gustav, i have already warned you once about foul language and it appears you have not heeded it. i have no choice but to ban you for a week"​

no one will be cognizant of the fact that the warning was for a year old post. they will naturally assume that it is a recent offense and agree with the new penalty.

this is how james constantly ensures that i have to endure the most hostile of environment. i must have some infractions on my record at all times so i remain in a bannable state

until this latest one, all infractions had expired with no points on my record. i was clean and i was making an effort to keep it that way.

then james sucker punched me and all was for no avail

in the past two years i had received 30 infractions.
11 of them have been reversed

and that is my lot in life. covering in fear in sfog vainly fighting for justice

 

[Gustav]

But always remember, if it comes down to a question of one person insulting an entire culture,....

indeed. i reported the post and expect james to take action...

The chinese are so backward in their mentality.

yeah, i am a cave dwelling gook and you indians are the pinnacle of civilization

 

[Me-Ki-Gal]

indeed. i reported the post and expect james to take action...




yeah, i am a cave dwelling gook and you indians are the pinnacle of civilization

Your a Cave Dwelling Gook ? Me too . Hey alright . The dwelling part is the most fun, Cave Ah O.K. Gook Look

 

[James R]

please reverse my infraction

Read your PM. It says "You have received a warning...", not "You have received an infraction...".

Splitting hairs, maybe, but that's the distinction I was making.

And no, I'm not going to reverse it. Especially after this display of histrionics.

my infraction record is full of petty and vindictive bullshit and this is just the latest one

you should be ashamed

Wait a moment.

You call somebody (in Hindi) a "cocksucker" and somehow I'm supposed to be ashamed for applying the site rules?

You need to recalibrate.

stop lying
you violently threatened me....

Get some perspective. A violent threat would be "I am going to come to your house and hit you with my fluffy pillow with all the stuffing down one end, so look out!"

this is how james constantly ensures that i have to endure the most hostile of environment

Nobody is forcing you to endure anything. You can leave any time.

But let's look at this terrible thing you have to endure. It's a warning: "Please, Gustav, try to interact without insulting other members of the forum."

Is that really so hard to do? Is that something that will prey on your mind? Why is it not some advice you can take on board and move on with your life?

If you want smooth sailing here, Gustav, it's not so hard. The vast majority of members here get along just fine without any infractions or warnings. They have no need to spend days whinging and whining about how moderators are unfair to them. They manage to express themselves without insulting other people.

So, why don't you give it a try?

 

[Gustav]

it is pointless to "reform" if you drag shit out from the past.
nothing i do in the here and now will render me immune from having the vicissitudes of the past coming back to bite me in the ass.

it is what you assure us can happen. it is what actually happened to me.

i received an infraction for a year old post

 

[Gustav]

....applying the site rules?

here you go

The chinese are so backward in their mentality.

that offends me and i reported it a few hours ago. i suppose that was what i should have done in the first place instead of the nasty response

please apply the site rules to that offensive post. indicate what actions you propose to take

 

[quadraphonics]

Gustav:

Are you still going on about this?

The pretty rich considering the context (which is you issuing warnings over year-old posts). I'd say that he has at least a year to complain about it, before you'll have standing to complain that it's an old issue.

I responded to a report I received. Moreover, the reported post was in breach of the site rules. What more do you need?

Since you are premising your position on your being a fair and even-handed applier of rules, perhaps you could let us know what actions you took in regard to the hate speech which prompted the (totally appropriate and defensible) reaction from Gustav? Has indiancurry2010 been warned, or received any infraction points, or are you happy to be complicit in his racial bigotry?

And no, I'm not going to reverse it. Especially after this display of histrionics.

Why should a member's reaction to a mod action have any particular bearing on the correctness of that action? That doesn't seem like a principled approach - either the action was defensible or it wasn't, regardless of how its object took it. If the implication is that you might well have taken a different course if Gustav had been more deferential towards your authority, then that looks a lot like petty authoritarianism, and not so much like impartial application of clear rules.

But let's look at this terrible thing you have to endure. It's a warning: "Please, Gustav, try to interact without insulting other members of the forum."

Is that really so hard to do? Is that something that will prey on your mind? Why is it not some advice you can take on board and move on with your life?

Again, that's pretty damned facepalm considering that you're addressing a year-old post.

You said previously that you'd probably have declined to take action if you'd bothered to note the timestamp on the post in question - and yet here you are, speaking about the issue in the present tense.

 

[Gustav]

You said previously that you'd probably have declined to take action if you'd bothered to note the timestamp on the post in question - and yet here you are, speaking about the issue in the present tense.

indeed
it all makes sense however when viewed in light of my prescient post #187 in which i outline a scenario.

 

[Enmos]

what preceded that was an opinion that was at the same time held to be improbable by way of the qualifier. why does that not work for you. does unlikely signify impossible to you?

"Though", "even though" and "although" are synonyms of "despite", aren't they?

is it possible that you might do the same since your silence defaults to a position of agreement with the infraction? i say yes

what do you say?

I would most likely have reversed the infraction, but I'm me and not James.
Your post was a breach of forum rules no matter how you look at it.

and?

And? So you were suggesting there that James was data mining.

 

[James R]

quadraphonics:

Ah. The knight in shining armour leaps to the defence of poor little Gustav. How sweet.

Since you are premising your position on your being a fair and even-handed applier of rules, perhaps you could let us know what actions you took in regard to the hate speech which prompted the (totally appropriate and defensible) reaction from Gustav? Has indiancurry2010 been warned, or received any infraction points, or are you happy to be complicit in his racial bigotry?

I don't see how that is any concern of yours. (In fact, I don't quite see why you feel the need to stick your head in here at all. Well, I can guess...) But indiancurry2010 has received an official warning, just like Gustav.

Why should a member's reaction to a mod action have any particular bearing on the correctness of that action?

It doesn't. I can affect future action or inaction, however. Go figure.

You said previously that you'd probably have declined to take action if you'd bothered to note the timestamp on the post in question - and yet here you are, speaking about the issue in the present tense.

Gustav has decided to make it very much present tense.

So have you, for that matter. I'm so glad you're going in to bat for Gustav on this. I'm sure he appreciates the support and cameraderie from such a good friend.

 

[wynn]

They don't specify a time limit.

Moderators do, however, have discretion as to whether to act on a report or not (and that's in the rules).

I think the absence of such a time limit gives moderators too much power.

 

[Gustav]

Gustav has decided to make it very much present tense.

don't be silly
you came to me....

....with that

an "insulted other members" infraction was issued on 10-4-11 and expires on 02-01-12 for a year old post.

it also was alluded if one was aware of a technicality the infraction would probably have not occurred. yet due to a bogus escalation of commitment to that erroneous action, one is insisting on maintaining the infraction for a whole 5 months

i will have that hanging over my head till february. the year old post will be taken into account if and when a new infraction is considered.

this is your notion of fair play and justice. an admission of error was made yet no attempts to either rectify or apologize is being made.

you further compound this error by infracting another old post and this time, the poster in question has been inactive for a while and is probably never coming back.

it is like a circus
a comedy of errors

saving face is your priority
doing the right thing is not

its not too late tho
reverse the infraction
it is both logical and consistent
no one here is going to crow about it
instead you will be commended

 

[wynn]

You said previously that you'd probably have declined to take action if you'd bothered to note the timestamp on the post in question - and yet here you are, speaking about the issue in the present tense.

This means that the logic of Sciforums moderation is the same as the law has it for grave crimes.
Just as there is no statute of limitation for murder, so there is no statute of limitation for taking offense at a forum post!
Every potentially offensive post is tantamount to murder.

 

[Gustav]

You could have sent a polite PM telling me that the post was from last year, for example, rather than bleating and making a big issue out of it as usual. But you wouldn't do that, would you?

yes
that could have been an alternative course of action that would have probably resolved the issue, but you erred with the "3 day ban" rhetoric. that was an unwarranted escalation for an inconsequential infraction.

please take note of that for future reference.

investigate, gather all pertinent facts
a simple pm querying me would have sufficed
what i got was an infraction already issued accompanied by a threat to escalate to a ban if requested info was not provided

it was just as well that references to the hindi expletives are still to be found on the internet or i would be begging sam for a translation or cold calling patels in the phonebook for one in order to comply with your demands and avoid a ban