I'm confused

[Melkor Unchained]

I'm not expecting perfection. Honestly, I see your role in this as a very minor error. But you've been jumping down people's necks that you and the Mod Team committed no mistakes. I beg to differ.

Kryo seems to have apologized for one; my case is simply that Rep and I didn't do anything wrong.

Fixed.

You can climb down off that high horse any time you want. I'm not going to drop everything to Mod NS if I have a job to be at in 35 minutes. At the time, it didn't seem like an out-of-the-ordinary complaint. It only became one while I was gone.

[Marcuslandia]

May I make an observation?

Having followed the anger (an easy path to track), I get the impression that there are actually two points that bug the NSG regulars the most:
1) That had it not been for the persistence of the complainants, Parthenon would have ultimately received NO chastisement.
2) That the punishment handed down to Parthenon was inadequate to the offense committed.

Forgive this poor analogy, but it is as if while traveling in the Deep south of the USA, upon seeing both a black man and a white man committing similar crimes, it is then noted that the local police come down like a ton of bricks on the black man while later simply cautioning the white man, "Don't let us catch you doing that again!" That is, either others seem to receive greater punishment for a given offense while for whatever reason the authorities seem to bend over backwards to NOT punish a given individual for doing essentially the same thing.

Just meandering the breadth of NSG, one cannot help but encounter frequent posts by Parthenon. It seems obvious that his preferred missive is to be belligerent, provocative, and deliberately as insulting as he can get away with. And when called to account, his defense strategy is to play rules lawyer, frequently asserting, "Well according to this definition, you'll see that the #4 definition makes the use of that term in the way I did entirely acceptable." And on such defenses, he usually walks unscathed.

Apparently, intent to deliberately irritate others, no matter how obvious, is not actionable. And when Parthenon succeeds in making someone pop their cork -- which I suspect was his primary intent all along -- it is those others that get soundly slapped down. [I imagine that in the Parthenon household there is a scorecard somewhere showing a tally of just how often he has provoked such circumstances.]

Well, this was unsolicited and will probably be termed "uncalled for." So I suppose I'll just wander off to a corner somewhere in anticipation of a time-out.

[RoI2]

Kryo seems to have apologized for one; my case is simply that Rep and I didn't do anything wrong.

Fixed.

You can climb down off that high horse any time you want.

No, I like it up here.

I'm not going to drop everything to Mod NS if I have a job to be at in 35 minutes. At the time, it didn't seem like an out-of-the-ordinary complaint. It only became one while I was gone.

Just saying. I did seem to take an abnormally long time cosidering how many of you there were online at the time.

[The Cat-Tribe]

I'm not going to repeat my disclaimers about my respect for the Mods in general. Here are my specific concerns about how this particular situation was handled:

1. Yes, it is unfortunate that Parthenon's comments didn't generate direct Mod action prior to Jordaxia's explosion, but Mods can't be expected to be everywhere.

2. When Parthenon complained about Jordaxia's post, immediate action was taken against Jordaxia. This was fair and warranted, IMO. But it begs the question of whether and why the context of Jordaxia's outburst wasn't looked at first (which was apparently required before any action could be taken against Parthenon). And this part of Reppy's post appeared to be something of a ruling on Parthenon's posts:

Parthenon is entitled to whatever opinion he has, no matter how abhorrent you may find it. To use your own example, a player could try and argue a racist opinion without getting the banhammer, provided they could argue it without resorting to inflammatory language. They would probably get thoroughly reamed by other posters, but they would be allowed to argue their position. That's why we don't automatically kick out Nazi posters and other extremist viewpoints; if they can argue it without flaming/trolling, they're allowed to post those opinions.

EDIT TO ADD: Additionally, Parthenon, you can express your disgust with transvestites without using inflammatory terms such as "monstrosity." I really don't want to end up locking this thread so I can go through the entire damn thing and hand out a boatload of warnings.

This was posted, btw, about 13 minutes after I had posted my complaint about Parthenon's comments.

3. The first direct Mod response to my complaint was Melkor's comments, which have been discussed.

4. Another 10 minutes later, Reppy posted this in the Moderation thread:

Addressed.
Parthenon is allowed to express an opinion, even an extreme one. That in no way excuses Jordaxia's flaming tirade. Argue Parthenon's opinion if you don't agree with him. We aren't here to shelter everyone from mean opinions, we're here to smack down people who break the rules.

This ruling was wrong. If Reppy hadn't looked at Parthenon's posts I had complained about and/or didn't have time to rule, Reppy shouldn't have ruled.

5. When I and others complained that this ruling was wrong, Reppy's response was: "I'm going to have to lock and sift through the entire damn thing, aren't I? " When we pressed further, Reppy locked the thread, but added "Reppy is not a happy admin right now." These comments are both independently inappropriate IMO, but also created/added to the perception that Parthenon's comments weren't the problem -- the problem was those of us who complained about them.

6. Reppy apparently had Kyro review the thread. Kyro's ruling was:

After waddling through this sticky quagmire, I concur fully with Reppy's initial ruling. While I found nothing that needed to be directly addressed, I do believe this thread is better off remaining locked, especially given the course it has taken.

Kyro also said in the Moderation thread:

This is Moderation, not a discussion forum.

Also, the thread has been locked and thoroughly reviewed. As much as Parthenon's opinions are VERY unpopular, he is still allowed to express them. This is just one of the many ways one receives "freedom of expression" is our beloved Father Knows Best State.

7. After being asked to reconsider, Kyro kindly agreed to do so and Parthenon was eventually warned. I thank Kyro again for taking another look at the matter. One could argue Parthenon got off light, but that isn't my complaint.

At bottom, there is frustration that what many of us saw as clear violations of the rules seemed to be dismissed by 3 different Mods. (Yes, only 2 Mods officially ruled and I'm including Melkor in the perception.) It bothers me further that the response to criticism that the Mods erred (in at least the first two official rulings) has been rather hostile and dismissive. This was a screw-up. Let's admit that and move on.

EDIT: fixed smilie quoted in point 5. Sorry for clicking the wrong one.

[Reploid Productions]

1. Yes, it is unfortunate that Parthenon's comments didn't generate direct Mod action prior to Jordaxia's explosion, but Mods can't be expected to be everywhere.

As I've nothing to add or argue here, I won't.

2. When Parthenon complained about Jordaxia's post, immediate action was taken against Jordaxia. This was fair and warranted, IMO. But it begs the question of whether and why the context of Jordaxia's outburst wasn't looked at first (which was apparently required before any action could be taken against Parthenon). And this part of Reppy's post appeared to be something of a ruling on Parthenon's posts:

Parthenon is entitled to whatever opinion he has, no matter how abhorrent you may find it. To use your own example, a player could try and argue a racist opinion without getting the banhammer, provided they could argue it without resorting to inflammatory language. They would probably get thoroughly reamed by other posters, but they would be allowed to argue their position. That's why we don't automatically kick out Nazi posters and other extremist viewpoints; if they can argue it without flaming/trolling, they're allowed to post those opinions.

EDIT TO ADD: Additionally, Parthenon, you can express your disgust with transvestites without using inflammatory terms such as "monstrosity." I really don't want to end up locking this thread so I can go through the entire damn thing and hand out a boatload of warnings.

This was posted, btw, about 13 minutes after I had posted my complaint about Parthenon's comments.

Jordaxia's post was a quick and clear-cut thing to handle, and when I started out I initially thought I would have more time to go over everything else than I did. Once it became clear that 1) I would not have such time, and 2) That Parthenon's commentary had me sufficiently angry to hamper my ability to render a fair judgement, I had to pass it off and didn't have enough time to say as much on the forums; it was more of a "I can't handle this, can somebody else take it?" on IRC.

3. The first direct Mod response to my complaint was Melkor's comments, which have been discussed.

It has been discussed, but I also hope you can understand why it's been coming off to us that people are out to get Melkor for whatever reason, resulting in our agitation in response.

4. Another 10 minutes later, Reppy posted this in the Moderation thread:

Addressed.
Parthenon is allowed to express an opinion, even an extreme one. That in no way excuses Jordaxia's flaming tirade. Argue Parthenon's opinion if you don't agree with him. We aren't here to shelter everyone from mean opinions, we're here to smack down people who break the rules.

This ruling was wrong. If Reppy hadn't looked at Parthenon's posts I had complained about and/or didn't have time to rule, Reppy shouldn't have ruled.

I admit, the entire situation could have been handled better. Kryo went over it more thoroughly and overturned my initial ruling. We're only human, we made a mistake, and it has since been rectified. If I'd known I was about to get dragged off, I would have tossed it to Kryo from the get-go instead of even starting on it. But between that and finding myself uncharacteristically wanting to bash a poster's head in from the commentary, I had to leave it after dealing with the easy part and just starting into Parthenon's posts.

5. When I and others complained that this ruling was wrong, Reppy's response was: "I'm going to have to lock and sift through the entire damn thing, aren't I? " When we pressed further, Reppy locked the thread, but added "Reppy is not a happy admin right now." These comments are both independently inappropriate IMO, but also created/added to the perception that Parthenon's comments weren't the problem -- the problem was those of us who complained about them.

Matter of semantics, but at least get the smiley right " " sends and entirely different message than the actual " " I admit that my remarks were in ill taste and I do apologize for letting an unrelated matter get taken out in part here. (For those keeping score, said unrelated matter is the 121,000 acres/190 square mile out of control wildfire that's gotten uncomfortably close even though it's not necessarily an actual danger. You try being calm, cool, and collected when the air stinks of smoke and a sizable area of your near horizon is dotted with fire )

6. Reppy apparently had Kyro review the thread. Kyro's ruling was:

After waddling through this sticky quagmire, I concur fully with Reppy's initial ruling. While I found nothing that needed to be directly addressed, I do believe this thread is better off remaining locked, especially given the course it has taken.

Kyro also said in the Moderation thread:

This is Moderation, not a discussion forum.

Also, the thread has been locked and thoroughly reviewed. As much as Parthenon's opinions are VERY unpopular, he is still allowed to express them. This is just one of the many ways one receives "freedom of expression" is our beloved Father Knows Best State.

7. After being asked to reconsider, Kyro kindly agreed to do so and Parthenon was eventually warned. I thank Kyro again for taking another look at the matter. One could argue Parthenon got off light, but that isn't my complaint.

At bottom, there is frustration that what many of us saw as clear violations of the rules seemed to be dismissed by 3 different Mods. (Yes, only 2 Mods officially ruled and I'm including Melkor in the perception.) It bothers me further that the response to criticism that the Mods erred (in at least the first two official rulings) has been rather hostile and dismissive. This was a screw-up. Let's admit that and move on.

Have we admitted it enough yet to appease the masses? It's been dealt with, we've apologized and explained, and despite everything we're not perfect, we do screw up occasionally, and the screw-up has been rectified; even if it could have been done better. So can we please get to the moving on part?

[The Cat-Tribe]

*snip* Have we admitted it enough yet to appease the masses? It's been dealt with, we've apologized and explained, and despite everything we're not perfect, we do screw up occasionally, and the screw-up has been rectified; even if it could have been done better. So can we please get to the moving on part?

Thank you for your thoughtful response.

As far as I am concerned, your explanations and apologies are more than sufficient to settle the matter.

Please keep up the good work. To me, this was distressing precisely because I have come to expect a high level of fairness and professionalism from the NS Mod Team.

[UNIverseVERSE]

Just one quick question:

Jordaxia's post was a quick and clear-cut thing to handle, and when I started out I initially thought I would have more time to go over everything else than I did. Once it became clear that 1) I would not have such time, and 2) That Parthenon's commentary had me sufficiently angry to hamper my ability to render a fair judgement, I had to pass it off and didn't have enough time to say as much on the forums; it was more of a "I can't handle this, can somebody else take it?" on IRC.

(emphasis mine)

At this point, isn't it extremely likely that the posts in question have crossed the line into trolling or flamebait?

[RoI2]

*snip* Have we admitted it enough yet to appease the masses? It's been dealt with, we've apologized and explained, and despite everything we're not perfect, we do screw up occasionally, and the screw-up has been rectified; even if it could have been done better. So can we please get to the moving on part?

'Kay. i'm still not ecstatic, but tat doesn't matter.

Sorry.

[Reploid Productions]

Just one quick question:

Jordaxia's post was a quick and clear-cut thing to handle, and when I started out I initially thought I would have more time to go over everything else than I did. Once it became clear that 1) I would not have such time, and 2) That Parthenon's commentary had me sufficiently angry to hamper my ability to render a fair judgement, I had to pass it off and didn't have enough time to say as much on the forums; it was more of a "I can't handle this, can somebody else take it?" on IRC.

(emphasis mine)

At this point, isn't it extremely likely that the posts in question have crossed the line into trolling or flamebait?

It could, but it could also just mean that Parthenon's stance on the subject matter is rather ideologically opposed to mine to such a point that I couldn't in good conscience hand down a judgment without letting that bias affect it. I thought it better to err on the side of caution and hand it off due to the short time and shorter temper I had than to risk letting my personal bias interfere and go too far the other direction.

Granted, the entire thing ended up a damned if you do, damned if you don't fiasco anyway, but I tried!.

[Dyakovo]

Just one quick question:

Jordaxia's post was a quick and clear-cut thing to handle, and when I started out I initially thought I would have more time to go over everything else than I did. Once it became clear that 1) I would not have such time, and 2) That Parthenon's commentary had me sufficiently angry to hamper my ability to render a fair judgement, I had to pass it off and didn't have enough time to say as much on the forums; it was more of a "I can't handle this, can somebody else take it?" on IRC.

(emphasis mine)

At this point, isn't it extremely likely that the posts in question have crossed the line into trolling or flamebait?

It could, but it could also just mean that Parthenon's stance on the subject matter is rather ideologically opposed to mine to such a point that I couldn't in good conscience hand down a judgment without letting that bias affect it. I thought it better to err on the side of caution and hand it off due to the short time and shorter temper I had than to risk letting my personal bias interfere and go too far the other direction.

Granted, the entire thing ended up a damned if you do, damned if you don't fiasco anyway, but I tried!.

And as always we appreciate your efforts, and that is a perfect example as to why I have no desire to be, nor could I be a Mod.
My hats off to all of you, even on those occaisions when I do not agree with your decisions.

[RoI2]

Just one quick question:

Jordaxia's post was a quick and clear-cut thing to handle, and when I started out I initially thought I would have more time to go over everything else than I did. Once it became clear that 1) I would not have such time, and 2) That Parthenon's commentary had me sufficiently angry to hamper my ability to render a fair judgement, I had to pass it off and didn't have enough time to say as much on the forums; it was more of a "I can't handle this, can somebody else take it?" on IRC.

(emphasis mine)

At this point, isn't it extremely likely that the posts in question have crossed the line into trolling or flamebait?

It could, but it could also just mean that Parthenon's stance on the subject matter is rather ideologically opposed to mine to such a point that I couldn't in good conscience hand down a judgment without letting that bias affect it. I thought it better to err on the side of caution and hand it off due to the short time and shorter temper I had than to risk letting my personal bias interfere and go too far the other direction.

Granted, the entire thing ended up a damned if you do, damned if you don't fiasco anyway, but I tried!.

If they made you angry enough not to pass comment - don't you think that the punishment was weak? Tat's why I ignored his posts - I didn't want to say anything tat I was thinking of saying.

[Reploid Productions]

If they made you angry enough not to pass comment - don't you think that the punishment was weak? Tat's why I ignored his posts - I didn't want to say anything tat I was thinking of saying.

Again, it could be that it was weak, but there's a chance it could have just been me overreacting. The subject matter is a sensitive topic for people, and prone to extremely impassioned views. How could I be sure that it was as bad as my bias made it seem to me at the time and that it wasn't just me overreacting?

[RoI2]

If they made you angry enough not to pass comment - don't you think that the punishment was weak? Tat's why I ignored his posts - I didn't want to say anything tat I was thinking of saying.

Again, it could be that it was weak, but there's a chance it could have just been me overreacting. The subject matter is a sensitive topic for people, and prone to extremely impassioned views. How could I be sure that it was as bad as my bias made it seem to me at the time and that it wasn't just me overreacting?

To me that kind of thing is just as bad as racism. Is what you gave Parth what someone who had said that about blacks?

[Reploid Productions]

If the situation had been the same, I would probably have had to hand it off to another mod for much the same reason. Would you rather I jump into a messy thread like that and moderate according to my personal biases?

[RoI2]

If the situation had been the same, I would probably have had to hand it off to another mod for much the same reason. Would you rather I jump into a messy thread like that and moderate according to my personal biases?

In this case yes - but that's my own bias that makes me feel that way.

It was a 1 day ban, right?

[UNIverseVERSE]

It could, but it could also just mean that Parthenon's stance on the subject matter is rather ideologically opposed to mine to such a point that I couldn't in good conscience hand down a judgment without letting that bias affect it. I thought it better to err on the side of caution and hand it off due to the short time and shorter temper I had than to risk letting my personal bias interfere and go too far the other direction.

Granted, the entire thing ended up a damned if you do, damned if you don't fiasco anyway, but I tried!.

Of course.

In hindsight, however, might saying something along the lines of "We're looking into it -- I can't give a fair judgement now, so it's being passed on." have been a better option than the apparent ruling?

---

More generally, where do comments about a ban come from? As far as I saw, the final ruling was a warning.

[Kryozerkia]

I'm not going to repeat my disclaimers about my respect for the Mods in general. Here are my specific concerns about how this particular situation was handled:
*SNIP*
6. Reppy apparently had Kyro review the thread. Kyro's ruling was:

After waddling through this sticky quagmire, I concur fully with Reppy's initial ruling. While I found nothing that needed to be directly addressed, I do believe this thread is better off remaining locked, especially given the course it has taken.

Kyro also said in the Moderation thread:

This is Moderation, not a discussion forum.

Also, the thread has been locked and thoroughly reviewed. As much as Parthenon's opinions are VERY unpopular, he is still allowed to express them. This is just one of the many ways one receives "freedom of expression" is our beloved Father Knows Best State.

7. After being asked to reconsider, Kyro kindly agreed to do so and Parthenon was eventually warned. I thank Kyro again for taking another look at the matter. One could argue Parthenon got off light, but that isn't my complaint.

At bottom, there is frustration that what many of us saw as clear violations of the rules seemed to be dismissed by 3 different Mods. (Yes, only 2 Mods officially ruled and I'm including Melkor in the perception.) It bothers me further that the response to criticism that the Mods erred (in at least the first two official rulings) has been rather hostile and dismissive. This was a screw-up. Let's admit that and move on.

Having read this, and reflected on the comment and my initial reaction... I was honestly out to lunch and stupidly missed the context. I had read the last sentence, in Parthenon's post, in a general way instead of in the context of the entire post. Happens after a long day of doing thankless work for the government. This is probably the entire reason I went back to review it because I had a chance to relax and clear my head. Had I been stressed, I probably would have wound up reacting as Reppy felt like reacting.

[Reploid Productions]

Ah hindsight. 20/20. Probably.

[The Cat-Tribe]

Ah hindsight. 20/20. Probably.

Although this discussion serves a venting function, I hoped one purpose of this thread was to provide feedback that would inform future misunderstandings or mistakes. Hence, hindsight is appropriate.

[The Cat-Tribe]

*snip* Having read this, and reflected on the comment and my initial reaction... I was honestly out to lunch and stupidly missed the context. I had read the last sentence, in Parthenon's post, in a general way instead of in the context of the entire post. Happens after a long day of doing thankless work for the government. This is probably the entire reason I went back to review it because I had a chance to relax and clear my head. Had I been stressed, I probably would have wound up reacting as Reppy felt like reacting.

Thank you, again.

I was prepared to drop this, but your comment raises one point that bothers me. Apparently, Parthenon's reference to transsexuals as "trash" was trolling and you didn't spot that the first time around.

But his use of "it," "disgusting," and "mostrosity," to describe "trannies" raised no flags?

[Jordaxia]

I'm just glad that the situation received a resolution, though I feel that many people (not the mods, in this case) are clueless as to what are slurs, and what is acceptable abbreviation to the trans community. Given we're such a small community, I'm unsurprised, but I hope the uproar I caused (somewhat knowingly, I'll admit) will encourage people to pick their words more carefully. A single protip, though. If you hear the tabloid press use it, it's insulting. I'll leave it at that. For the moderation forum, anyway, since all I really wanted to say was that I'm glad the situation has seen the beginnings of being sorted.

[Grave_n_idle]

The voluntary nature of the position is irrelevant.

The whole issue was completely mishandled, there was an obvious double-standard applied, and the bulk of moderation response is (2) members making inapprpriate comments, and excuses.

Excuses are inappropriate. If a player gets a ban for calling christians filth, then someone who calls transvestites 'trash' should also recieve a ban. It doesn't matter if the first ban is downgraded or revoked - the INITIAL reaction, for a 'crime' of that magnitude, is apparently a ban.

So applying a warning in the other case, (and under duress) is evidence of a double standard.

I don't want to see Scolopendra being sarcastic and attacking the validity of DI's concerns ('they hate me'? Seriously?)

I don't want to see Melkor 'taking exception' to things.

I want to see equal proportion for equal action.

[True Sparntz]

tl;dr

[Kryozerkia]

*snip* Having read this, and reflected on the comment and my initial reaction... I was honestly out to lunch and stupidly missed the context. I had read the last sentence, in Parthenon's post, in a general way instead of in the context of the entire post. Happens after a long day of doing thankless work for the government. This is probably the entire reason I went back to review it because I had a chance to relax and clear my head. Had I been stressed, I probably would have wound up reacting as Reppy felt like reacting.

Thank you, again.

I was prepared to drop this, but your comment raises one point that bothers me. Apparently, Parthenon's reference to transsexuals as "trash" was trolling and you didn't spot that the first time around.

But his use of "it," "disgusting," and "mostrosity," to describe "trannies" raised no flags?

"It" didn't raise flags. At least not for me. The others did, but my systems were experiencing some downtime due to corruption of the i.interpret system files due to a system wide virus.

tl;dr

Don't spam Moderation.

[The Imperial Navy]

I've been here almost since the beginning. I've seen mods come and go, I was there when Myrth was seen as a god... Yeah, i've seen the mods in action, and have even felt their wrath at times. But here I agree that they did what they felt was right, and we all make mistakes. In this case they learned from it and progressed. For this we should be proud.

Keep up the good work! *Flees the forum before being beaten with the stick of common sense*