Skinwalker banning Scifes unacceptable

I don't, but there are certainly a fair amount out there. And then there are those who believe that there's more than one too...

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

There is 7 pages over here, is scifes banned?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

I checked his profile, he isn't banned (or perhaps not anymore). Pls don't ban him, he is very entertaining (original thinker).

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

He was banned for just one day. It hardly justifies a thread, me thinks..

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

^^What he said.

The Whine is strong in this forum.

 

Thanx for summarizing the info. Well, one day is a start of a cycle: 1 day, 3 day, 1 week, 1 month, then permanent ban. I personally against banning, I feel kinda pity for people who got banned. I am in favor of moderation, in the sense that, if a person keep breaking rule of a forum, his posts could be filtered as in, posts should pass moderator approval before can be posted. But I assume it's too much work, especially that moderators are doing voluntary jobs.

 

Whether or not it's the start of said cycle is up to the poster..

 

i come to sciforums for a number of reasons, entertainment isn't one of them.

 

Sorry Enmos, but you can't pretend that the moderators have nothing to do with it. The issue presented here is essentially the same one I presented a while ago, which is essentially, what constitutes good reasons for banning or deleting posts. In both this thread as well as in my own, we singled out Skinwalker in particular. I fully admit that I didn't see the post that this scifes was banned for, but I have been warned a few times by Skinwalker for what were absurd reasons. It's all up and posted and few if anyone has defended Skinwalker in the thread I posted; it's more that the moderators can do what they wish so long as they do lip service to the rules (that is, finding some inane reasons to issue a few warnings and then they're allowed to ban).

My solution has been to avoid Skinwalker's forums at all costs; if I see an interesting post there, I'll simply respond via PM or not do so at all. Many believe that Skinwalker isn't fit to be a moderator, but ultimately that's a decision that only the higher ups can make. If they're happy with him, we have to either avoid his forums or deal with the consequences of posting there.

 

Scott: we singled out Skinwalker in particular

Who's 'we'?

Scott: Many believe that Skinwalker isn't fit to be a moderator

I see only a few. Usually SAM, you and very few others.

 

sorry scott, your attempts to set the rules in stone is going to fail.
the moderators MUST have leeway to make judgment calls.
the only two areas that get consistent moderation is illegal software and spam. even spam must be allowed some leeway.
what would not necessarily be spam actually is.

i beg to differ:
http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2261238&postcount=20

has it ever occurred to you that the mod team doesn't tell you everything they know?

 

What ? If you post according to the rules you won't get banned, simple as that.
If you get banned for something, don't do that something again. It's pretty straight-forward.

Look, all of us are guests on this forum. The admin appointed some people moderator to make sure things don't get too messy.
If anything, I think they are very forgiving.

You don't need to do that if you adhere to the rules.

Who are these many people ?

I'm dealing with the consequences, which are non-existent.

 

S.A.M., me and Diamondhearts for starters. There are others but I think us three have been the most vocal about it.

And how many support him? Perhaps we should have an anonymous poll on it?

 

I support Skin.

This is my entire infraction history:

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

A little leeway is one thing; but Skinwalker can take the most innocuous of posts and issue a warning. I already created a thread exempifying the absurd claims he's put in warnings.

People who are trying to sell you shoes are definitely spam. I have no idea how far your idea of spam goes but feel free to elaborate.

That's this thread. This is my thread where I speak of 2 deleted posts of mine that Skinwalker deleted and accompanying warnings from Skinwalker:
Clarifying when mods are entitled to delete posts

One for merely questioning the judgement of moderators in general and the other for branching out on a theme in a manner that Skinwalker himself did.

Are you suggesting that it's possible that not all the high ups are happy with Skinwalker's performance? If so, good point. If not, what is your point?

 

Sure, and the rules in Skinwalker's forum are:
1- Don't dare suggest that moderators, and certainly Skinwalker himself could be wrong (as evidenced by his deletion of my post where I essentially do this).

2- Anything that could possibly be construed as off topic can be deleted and you can get a warning. Skinwalker, ofcourse, can do exactly the same branching from a topic, but hey, he's Skinwalker, so it's acceptable.

And here I'm only talking of -my- problems with him. S.A.M., DiamondHearts and scifes clearly have their own.

Bow to the leader, that about sum it up? I'd prefer to simply avoid Skinwalker's forums, thanks. What I'd prefer even more is if he'd be replaced by someone who understands that it's ok for someone to disagree with you, so long as they do so in a civil manner, and who isn't hypocritical about what is considered "off topic".

I have no problem with Tiassa. He's my favourite moderator. Just about the only other moderators/admins that have, say, closed threads that I've participated in are Stryder and James. I've had a bit of trouble with both, but I feel that they have some respect for rules that apply to everyone, not just everyone but themselves. I believe that James may actually be the main reason that I'm still here instead of banned and I definitely respect that.

Yeah, I know, bow to the leader. No thanks.

Me, S.A.M., DiamondHearts, scifes I'm sure, to name the most vocal. I believe a few others have voiced discontent with his decisions but I don't remember their names.

I have a feeling your views are much more in line with those of Skinwalker. As a general rule, people have problems with people who disagree with them, not with people who agree with them. Let me put it to you this way; the very first post I ever saw of Skinwalker's in response to me was an obscene one. This is the way I see Skinwalker. Someone who will delete your post for simply disagreeing with a view of his, or for branching off in a way he does himself, but who will use obscene language when he feels like it as well. I personally think there are much better candidates to be a moderator. I'm definitely with Tiassa in his view that it was a big mistake to de moderate S.A.M., who I have never seen use offensive language. This doesn't mean that I've always agreed with her, but I'm fine with that; personally I believe that forums are great for working out disagreements, so long as all parties are civil.

 

yeah and neither one of you can explain why skinwalker the evil moderator managed to keep his ass out of the following thread either:
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=92941
oops, my mistake, he spoke 3 words, sorry.

 

okay. so. skinwalker can issue warnings and stuff.
my response? seriously?
stay out of his face.

as long as the moderators know what spam is it doesn't matter what i think it is.
and please don't ask me what the mods think.

my mistake, i noticed after someone else posted.
still, the thread stands on its own merit.

i wouldn't know.

that there are two sides to every story.

 

I guess the people in that particular thread generally lucked out. The problem, I think, is when he's a bit more attentive to a thread. I have stated the 2 posts accompanied by warnings that he deleted of mine. Are you defending those deletions and warnings?

 

inzomnia, the reason I created this thread was to bring attention to Skinwalker's moderation, not necessarily the specific case of scifes. Just as scifes, I believe I was also isolated for only what I can describe as harassment. I received 5 warnings, of which one I forced Skinwalker to reverse. Many of my posts were deleted with insulting comments or replies to them. I received offensive replies from this specific moderator, and when I tried to discuss the issues with him, he only became more hostile. I can only describe of what was a very deliberate attempt to either ban me or to convince me to leave these forums. As a matter of fact, this was suggested to me in a PM I received from him. Scifes is only the most recent case of a very deliberate attempt to silence views which Skinwalker disagrees with. Temporary ban is the first indication of an eventual permanent ban.

leo, you may now be supporting Skinwalker, but know that in the future you may be the victim of Skinwalker's biased moderation, as you are Christian. It is very important for this forum to retain an open and civil discourse in relations to topics concerning religion and world events. It is in the interests of all posters to see that Skinwalker is removed as a moderator.

scott, I appreciate your discussion of your own problems with Skinwalker's moderation. You must know that now that we realize the problem, we must all stick together to see this forum transformed for the better. You advised me that I should avoid the forums in which Skinwalker is a moderator. I must humbly decline your advice as my main purpose of being on the forum is the inform and clarify the Muslim position on issues in relation to Islam and Muslims. As you can see from my posting records, it is quite consistent. If I felt those forums, there would hardly be any reason for me to post on this forum. Numerous people have a vested interest in misrepresenting and demonising Muslims. I have chosen to stand against them, and explain in detail and with extensive proof the proper Muslim view to raise the intellectual standard of this forum. Unfortunately, many people have a problem with the truth of the Muslim and Islamic view coming into the open, hence why I am censored and personally attacked on this forum. Eventually truth and understanding will triumph, I believe.

Skinwalker has singled me out to silence my view, I am 100% sure of this fact, just as he has done with scifes. Those moderators who silence views which they do not agree with should not remain moderators of any forum which claims to be unbiased and open.

My thread has been allowed to remain open. This can only mean that there are some moderators who are considering our discussion and using it to judge in this matter. if anyone has any other experience with Skinwalker's moderation, please post.

 

Yeah, I get it leopold; don't dare to disagree with the moderator on anything more then a few trivialities. If you agree with the moderator in general terms, I can easily imagine how this can work out; it can, in fact, work in your favour; watch as your opponents posts' are deleted or your opponents themselves banned. It's not so good when you're on the receiving end, but hey, you're not on it, so why worry eh?

If we can set aside the 'spam' label, I think what you're going for here is what is and wasn't isn't acceptable posts. I have never had a serious problem with Tiassa's moderation. And while I have disagreed with James and Stryder, it has never gotten to the point where I've decided to leave sci forums for any extended period of time. But Skinwalker's views of what constitutes a deletable offense is, in my view, beyond the pale. Which is why I no longer contribute in any of the forums he moderates.

What merits are you speaking of?

Well I'm happy that you admit this much atleast.

Definitely. The right side and the wrong side ;-). I'm being tongue in cheek a bit here. But I think it's clear that I've had more than enough of Skinwalker and his ideas on moderation, which is why I now avoid his moderation completely. Some people may protest his moderation and yet continue in his forums. And that's fine, but it suggests that the people involved, despite everything there say, seem to have something of a dependency on the person or forum. But when someone refuses to participate altogether in a forum, that's a stronger protest I would think.