[Discussion]Using Mods as Weapons!

[The Andromeda Island Group]

If there is a heated discussion on one of our boards, and one of the posters sees poor behavior from another poster, might a warning about going to moderation stop that poor behavior? Are Mods being used as weapons, or is the poster showing courtesy by warning the offending poster that their poor behavior could result in further action? Where I come from, that's called courtesy.

If a poster sees poor behavior from another poster, reports that poster, then thinks better of it after thinking it over, is that poster really using Mods as weapons? Or did the reporting poster have a change of heart? Or was the reporting poster being forgiving? There is a gray area here.

If the Moderators really want to see a decrease in their work load, perhaps they should let us regular posters do what we can to curtail poor behavior before reporting it. If we're allowed to do this, one of two things will happen:

1) The poor behavior stops, or

2) The poor behavior continues, giving the reporting party more justification for their complaint.

So, this whole Reporting Mods as Weapons charge shouldn't be used as much as it is. It should only be used when the person giving the warning is clearly doing it in bad faith. Otherwise, we should assume that the warning from a fellow poster is a genuine attempt to keep the peace without involving the Sheriff.

[The Reformed American Republic]

I'm not for changing the rule but more consistency would help. I know a poster who reports in bad faith constantly, got called out for it, but never got smacked for that.

[Juristonia]

For god sake, man. You got warned for something. Who cares?
Just move on.

[The New California Republic]

Seriously?

You got warned for using mods as weapons, and the evidence clearly shows that's exactly what you were doing. Just deal with it.

[The Andromeda Island Group]

Discussion threads. These should clearly labelled with [DISCUSSION] in the thread title, and are for discussion of moderation policy. You should not use Discussion threads to re-open discussion on specific incidents that have already been handled - they are for discussing wider policy. Anyone may post in Discussion threads; however, we expect people to express their opinions in good faith. Bad faith posts will be removed.

Some could interpret my inclusion of the above quote post as an attempt to use mods as weapons. However, anyone with the slightest bit of objectivity and common sense can see that it's a reminder of what this thread is really about: Wider discussion of a policy.

[The Reformed American Republic]

Seriously?

You got warned for using mods as weapons, and the evidence clearly shows that's exactly what you were doing. Just deal with it.

Partially agree here. OP's case is a pretty clear cut violation of that rule.

[The New California Republic]

Discussion threads. These should clearly labelled with [DISCUSSION] in the thread title, and are for discussion of moderation policy. You should not use Discussion threads to re-open discussion on specific incidents that have already been handled - they are for discussing wider policy. Anyone may post in Discussion threads; however, we expect people to express their opinions in good faith. Bad faith posts will be removed.

Some could interpret my inclusion of the above quote post as an attempt to use mods as weapons. However, anyone with the slightest bit of objectivity and common sense can see that it's a reminder of what this thread is really about: Wider discussion of a policy.

The thread premise is a thinly-veiled reopening of a specific incident, we can all see it.

[Giovenith]

Locked. We're not going to be making a habit of creating disingenuous "Discussion" threads every time you want to complain about getting warned.