Inconsistent ban policy?

Discussion in 'SF Open Government' started by funkstar, Dec 29, 2011.

  1. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238
    Really?

    I am impartial, but I am not a Robot. A judge in a court of law should be trained to be impartial as well.
     
  2. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,938
    Hardly - it is psychologically IMPOSSIBLE to be 100% impartial for 100% of topics... because that would mean you feel NOTHING for ANY topic.

    You cannot honestly expect me to believe you feel no emotion for any particular topics (say, the maths and sciences) at all...
     
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238
    What would my opinions on the math and physics matter anyway? If I was studying the behaviour of an arguement to discover who has been out or order, surely the topic at hand is fundamentally irrelevant?
     
  6. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,938
    Not necessarily - if you have ties to the topic in question, and one of the people involved was fundamentally wrong, you might find it difficult to stay impartial because of your background knowledge. It isn't a conscious decision, it just tends to creep into your interaction. The same can be said for virtually anyone - I have yet to meet someone who can stay truly impartial in ANY situation. Now, that's not to say you can't recognize when you aren't being impartial and strive to keep that personal bias out... but that is oft easier said than done.
     
  8. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238
    Well, to be honest, I would see the position as a job (not that I'd ever be offerred, or that I'd want), but I really would see the fact moderating someones behaviour as a job. If I had seen someone in a science thread who was messing up the physics but had not started the arguement, I think you are saying I would become biased, and punish the one who started the bad physics and not the arguement, right?

    Well no I wouldn't. The main reason why is because I don't see any point in trying to fix a system when at the same time I am fucking it up myself. Put it this way, if I corrupt the attempts at a moderation on behaviour then I am not doing or suggesting the moderation to fix the place at all. It would be an abuse of power. A trait which no moderator should express.
     
  9. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    23,121
    There are warnings issued. Quite a few actually.

    Those warnings will not always be public and will usually be private and documented so that the rest of the 'staff' is aware.

    You bring up an interesting idea. However, the greater majority of those banned do not believe they have done anything wrong and will sometimes open threads in Open Government and spam their complaint over and over again when their ban ends.

    And then there are the members who will report every second post and then get cranky when they receive an infraction or warning for wasting our time. And those individuals then come to Open Government and man, do they spam..

    So we have to strike a balance. A ban should be a ban.

    No you are not.

    And judges are rarely personally impartial. But the manner in which they hand down decisions and preside over cases has to be impartial. If it is not, then they can get into big trouble and the case goes to appeal and they get that nasty nasty appeal decision with their name written in it for not being impartial or fair, which is a bad thing.

    No.

    You would need to correct the bad physics that you know is wrong and you know you can get evidence as to why it is wrong and you need stop the argument and if that failed to work, you would need to issue infractions and moderate.
     
  10. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238
    Yes I am.

    I will give you a good example. Recently myself and prometheus had a few arguements concerning moderation. Yet, I still managed to try and crack a few jokes with him the other day.

    If I was not impartial, I would have held a grudge, no?

    In what way do you think I am not impartial. :shrug:
     
  11. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238
    No I wouldn't, because that would not be my job. If I was a behavioural moderator, my job is not to weigh the science or any other content of a post. It would be to moderate behaviour, not the content!

    Why don't you understand this? Leave the job of moderating the science of other content to the mods in charge of that. Those who are asked to moderate behaviour impartially can do their own job.

    That way a mod cannot be held to be blamed for any biased behaviour. This is to stoo bullying, no more and no less.
     
  12. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    23,121
    Your behaviour.

    No one is 100% impartial. It is impossible to be, especially about matters that matter a lot to people or to individuals.

    Reiku, your job, if you wish to call it that, would be to stop flame wars, to stop all in brawls that often occur and to stop people goading. And sometimes you will have to correct someone if they are being blatantly false on purpose, specifically to flame and goad people into responding angrily.

    I will give you an example. Lets say 10 people are participating in a thread. Out of those 10, only 1 is deliberately posting something that is wrong. You know it is wrong and you have the proof and evidence to back your stance up. So do the 9 other people posting in it. But this one individual continues to post this false information and refuses to back up his stance and he continues to goad and flame everyone else in that thread by persisting in his dishonesty.

    Your job as a moderator is to post the correct information and is to stop the behaviour and to issue infractions as needed.

    So not only would you be moderating behaviour, you would also be making sure that 1 individual is given the correct information.

    That is what moderators do, especially those who moderate science forums, even more so when said science forum is open for all to see. Now moderators are each given a particular subforum to moderate. Usually we will moderate the content of our own personal subforums and will at times moderate the behaviour in other subforums when we notice things are getting too far out of hand. And on a few occasions, we have had to moderate in other sub-forums when someone was clearly posting something that was clearly wrong to goad and flame people. That is the "job".

    To use you as an example. You posted something that was wrong and went on a bit of a flame war trying to flame others who corrected you, for example, the moderator of that forum corrected you and when you continued to behave in that manner, he moderated you. To you that moderator is being a bully. To me he is doing his job and doing it impartially. You see Reiku, it will always be 'he's a bully, he's not being impartial' when the object of moderation is you. Believe me, I know this personally.
     
  13. adoucette Caca Occurs Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,829
    I don't have to deal with it, so I only see it as an outsider.

    I just thought a 24 hour period of discussion in that one forum before the ban was invoked (or waived) was a possible way to avoid the occasional bans that appear to be based on either "heat of the moment" decisions or plain misunderstandings.
     
  14. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238
    Agreed, which takes wisdom to know the difference, but you cannot judge me on not being impartial. I am highly open minded AND I usually don't hold grudges. I am possibly one of the most impartial people you would ever likely to meet, if you met me.
     
  15. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238
    Agreed.
     
  16. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,890
    Then deal with Alphanumeric impartialy.
     
  17. prometheus viva voce! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,045
    This assumes that I was wrong in my moderation of you, which I don't believe I was. I've not had complaints about it from anyone else - even your best mate kwhilborn has been quiet (pre lengthy ban).
     
  18. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    23,121
    Hmmm..

    This^^...
     
  19. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238
    I have tried.

    In fact, I have on countless occasions asked for a truce which he ignores completely. Sometimes there is only left the arguements he wishes to persue.

    Not my fault.
     
  20. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238
    See above. As I have explained, I have tried countless times. He ignores it. Then persues to try and put me down, which some might say I could ignore, but then again, if someone tries to falsely accuse you of serious accusations of plaigarism among other things, you simply cannot ignore it.

    I have tried to make truces with him. He ignores these requests.
     
  21. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238
    I am not getting into this again. All that needs to be known is I am willing to put that behind me. Yet I feel sorry Kwilborn has been banned for such a long time. Some part of it I wonder if it has anything to do with sticking up for me, as it must be said, his decision could have been made by a ''non-impartial'' moderation. A good point was raised, that maybe a cooldown session would have been more lenient since he has graced this forum for many years.
     
  22. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238
    However prometheus, if you wish to debate this we can. In another thread. And maybe tackle your last post, concerning how innacurate it is. For instance, saying your moderation has never been questioned by anyone other than me and kwilborn is demonstratably false. Afterall, concerning my 'is consciousness apart of quantum physics thread' or something along that name, was taken into James' hands, and, it was removed accordingly from the trash pile in which you sent it.

    Your moderation to begin with was dubious. Let's hope that biased nature does not get the better of your powers, eh?
     
  23. AlphaNumeric Fully ionized Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,699
    I have repeatedly said that I'll stop pointing out your endemic mistakes when you stop making them. No amount of being nice to me is going to make me be nice back if you're posting nonsense pertaining to maths and physics or being demonstrably dishonest.

    For example, if you profess knowledge in an area and then demonstrate you don't know certain central, fundamental, essential bits of information which the lack of renders it impossible to have a working understanding of said area then I'll point it out. I'd point it out if it's you doing that, Trippy, Guest or Prom. I'd expect to be treated the same way but I wouldn't act in such a way because it's, IMO, intellectually dishonest.

    Another thing I'd not just sit by and watch you do, no matter how friendly and polite you are, is passing off someone else's stuff as your own understanding. For example, if you said to someone "I understand some of this stuff, let me explain it" and it transpires your explanations are riddled with gaps or mistakes or just irrelevant things then I'll say so because if someone asks an honest question they deserve an honest and correct answer. If it then also transpires that what you've posted is largely lifted verbatim from somewhere, be it a website or a YouTube video, then I'll point it out. I'll also point out how if you're having to copy someone else's words/equations line by line on a subject you previously professed understanding in then it calls into question all previous claims of understanding in this area you've made.

    I'll also point out fallacies in your logic, or anyone else's logic, if they make them. After all if I were labouring under a mistaken conclusion I'd like someone to correct me. For example, if someone were to assert that the fact they have posted lots of equations implies they have knowledge on the subject matter I'd explain how that's like saying someone who can copy words out of a thesaurus is a good poet.

    You want a 'truce' but only on your terms. You want to continue to post stuff which is riddled with problems but not to be called on it. Sorry, no dice. That isn't a truce, that's just me shutting up. A truce is a compromise between the parties which both can live with. Now I'd have no problems with you posting in the maths and physics forum if you were honest about it. I have no problem with people who don't have degrees or beyond in physics but who want to discuss physics.

    For example, take Trippy. A chemist by training so has passing familiarity with plenty of basic physical principles and likes to talk about other physics stuff. Not only do I not have a problem with him but I think he's a pretty decent guy (as much as one call evaluate such things online). If he asked a question on quantum gravity or black holes or string theory or dark energy I wouldn't have a problem. I'd open the thread if the title had those words in the title, since I like those areas too. But I wouldn't have to because I wouldn't be thinking "Oh god, it's going to be another equation laden post about stuff he's getting mixed up about and gettings wrong all over the place!". Of course if he did make a thread asking about how to use charged anti-branes to cancel an anomaly caused by twisted Calabi Yau manifolds under S duality because he's cooked up some equation he claimed describes how toroidal orbifolds under an orientifold involution explain conciousness then I'd ask him WTF he's on about, especially if the 'equation' is mathematical nonsense, he gets several definitions wrong and refers to expressions he didn't post.

    This isn't a standard I hold people to but wouldn't expect of myself. If, for some reason, I was labouring under the impression I am much better at something than I really am but I honestly want to learn more then being corrected by someone knowledgeable is not only something I'd accept but which I'd welcome.

    If you're truly wanting to learn and develop your understanding of mathematical physics then you shouldn't be so unwilling to listen to corrections from people. You should also learn to pack it in with the lengthy essay posts where you claim to derive this or that about conciousness or quantum mechanics or whatever. By now you should have realised you always get it wrong in some very basic way. I'll happily admit I used to write a lot of layperson explanations for high level physics stuff when I was 16 or 17, having read a number of pop science books. It wasn't until I got to university I realised just how staggeringly far from any level of working understanding of any of it I was. I had to accept it and move on. If I hadn't I'd never have gotten past the 1st year. If you managed to accept your limitations then you could work on pushing them back. But until you do that, until you stop with the incessant LaTeX filled posts about Lagrangians or quantum field theory or conciousness, which descend into me listing your many errors and you refusing to accept them, you aren't giving me any reason to consider a 'truce'.

    In a 'truce' you'd want me to stop listing all the errors you make and saying you don't understand the stuff you claim to understand. You'll get that truce the day you demonstrate I don't need to do that, when you can have a discussion about quantum mechanics without professing understanding you don't have or spouting equations you just plain made up. It's like a parent and child thing. A child is allowed out on their own when they demonstrate they can be trusted not to abuse that privilege. If the child goes out and starts a fight then they'll not be allowed out without parental supervision until they can control themselves.

    As such the ball is entirely in your court. You want to be treated like an honest adult, act like one. Accept correction when errors are pointed out. Don't exaggerate or misrepresent your knowledge. Stop verbatim copying equations from places because, as the whole Susskind YouTube thing showed, you'll get caught. You might think you're picking bits and pieces in just the right way to hide the fact your posts are not entirely your own words/explanations but you're not. Just like you can tell a non-native English speaker from strange phrases they use, people like myself, Cpt, Guest, Prom etc can generally spot someone piecing together stuff from elsewhere because we're, for all intents and purposes here, fluent in mathematical physics. When you learn from the last 4 or 5 years that you'll get called on it then you get your 'truce'. Until then you have parental supervision because, quite frankly, you can't be trusted.
     

Share This Page