What is up with the moderator vendetta against Gustav?

Discussion in 'Site Feedback' started by quadraphonics, Oct 19, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. wynn ˙ Valued Senior Member


    Because attempts to actually discuss something are merely "shit-stirring." Of course.

    Everything is clear.

  2. Guest Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. seagypsy Banned Banned

    Personally, I think Gustav was the only honest person on this forum. He said what he was really thinking, political correctness and butt kissing bedamned. The rest of us walk on egg shells afraid to express ourselves for fear the pc police will get us for some innocuous remark that they twist in order to declare someone, sexist, racist, homophobic, or what have you. Certain realistic, common, but unpleasant personality traits are ignored on this forum. These things cannot be addressed if we just shove our lampshade cousins into a closet. We all have prejudices. And we all have rage. And quite frankly there is plenty of flaming from all participants on this forum, mods and members alike, that can drive any person to saying really obnoxious things. I don't think it was right to give Gustav an infraction for that joke. I don't think it was right to ban him for questioning the infraction point.

    Obviously, he has made remarks encouraging suicide and that is not acceptable, but maybe mods need to learn about a little thing called diplomacy rather than just waiving a heavy mallet of dominance over the members.

    Btw, thanks for the visual. I actually saw the molestation of the bear, It was disturbingly funny in my mind. But only because I saw the bear as the current state of moderation being displayed recently.
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. wynn ˙ Valued Senior Member

    Oh, wait.

    Just behold the word: Shit-stirring.
  6. Guest Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. RealityCheck Banned Banned

    Hi Kittamaru.

    Did you learn nothing from your unintentional confirmation of what my Mars Rover experiment highlighted about mod-troll tactics and unreasonableness when it suits them as a tool to punish others who have no such 'protection' against equally outrageous tactics/comments from those trolls and mods who think they have impunity to interfere and skew the reputation and the discourse?

    If yu were so outraged by his comments you could have DELETED them and continued to do so while stating quite clearly why in open forum. Why take the easy option of banning him and so effectively denying him the right/opportunity to RETRACT and explain his frustration without being behind the eightbal and banned for making quite clear his view of the mod-troll problem which you still have not addressed and instead take every 'cheap shot' EXCUSE to ban rather than discuss the problem which led to his outburst?

    You probably mean well, I can tell; but that is cold comfort to someone who is being affected adversely by the shortcomings pointed out in 'the system' here and its so-called mod-troll abusers of it when it suits them 'by the book' but not in the interests of fair play which a banned person cannot get to explain 'in mitigation' etc.

    Try not to be so trigger happy because of preconditioned prejudicial impressions. Treat each instance on its merits and discuss fully and allow extra fair play to the other guy before banning, hey?

    No personal grudges on my part, mate; merely fair play observations where it is needed badly. Cheers!
  8. billvon Valued Senior Member

    No. Attempts to discuss things are fine. "Just fucking die" is shit stirring.

    Glad I could help!
  9. seagypsy Banned Banned

    The accusation of shit-stirring came before the invitation to die. So maybe at the point where he was finally banned, he was shit stirring... ah hell, I liked Gustav just because he was bold enough to speak his mind. But I can't remember any posts he made that were more than one liners or quips of some kind. He just seemed to be the person willing to say what we all might be thinking at any given moment but didn't have the guts to say. If that's shit stirring than so be it. It's just sad that hte rest of us have to cower in fear that if we say what we really think the pc police will have us nailed to a cross.

    I like honesty, even when it's ugly.
  10. Balerion Banned Banned

    No, Gustav really was a shit-stirrer. The impetus for the defense of his moderation came strictly--at least for me--from a disagreement with a particular instance in which he was moderated unfairly. (Again, unfair so far as we perceived) It was never meant to be a defense of Gustav, of his posting style, or of his contributions, and to attempt now to make it such is wrongheaded. He was a corrosive presence here, and we are better without him.
  11. RealityCheck Banned Banned

    It would have strengthened the reputation and community of this site if instead of taking the expedient mod-troll double-standards and banning such people, we could actually address the problems highlighted, and thereby actually discuss and 'win over' the person through meeting them halfway and making it unnecessary for anyone to 'shit stir' as a way of highlighting the problems.

    There should be proper treatment not immediate ridicule and bans. Only by deleting unwarranted/extreme content WHILE EXPLAINING WHY it was deleted, will anyone ever change their way of getting heard. If the system is stacked against even the reasonable person, then what chance reason and understanding and compromise?

    Good luck to the site, I like it but cannot turn a blind eye to its current faults, for the greater good. Cheers all!....and goodnight!
  12. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    There comes a point when you realize certain people cannot be ... rehabilitated isn't the word, but at 2am I can't think of the word I'm after.

    Excluding obvious spammer/adbot accounts, Gustav is the first person I have permanently banned... and one of only three total I have banned in any form. I much prefer to converse with the offender via private messaging, find out what in the world is going on, and resolve the issue. In my opinion, removing someone entirely from the forums is only suitable in a case where said person has demonstrated an incredible desire to not obey even the simplest of rules.

    Sadly, Gustav did just that with his final comment... he showed that he had no desire to be a productive member of this board. He also showed a blatant disregard for both life and basic dignity. Plus, let's be fair, if we let such posts become "acceptable" here... well, so much for even a pretense of being a community of scientific discussion and intent.


    @ Seagypsy - I don't pretend to be PC 24/7 (though working in a service industry, I have to maintain an air of neutrality even when I want to simply look at a client and explain to them what an incredible moron they are) - however, some level of civility is (or at least, should) be expected. This includes such basic things as not wishing death upon others and other such juvenile things. In an ideal world, this would be a bastion of the scientific method and pure debate... but fallacy and emotion runs high in the human tongue; as a species, we will do anything we think we can get away with in order to gain the upper hand, even when that means deception or misdirection. It is a shame, really, that we can't naturally refrain from such things. Telling someone to commit suicide, though, is just in poor taste and has no place in a board like this.
  13. RealityCheck Banned Banned

    Hi Kittamaru. I had just logged out when I glanced and saw this, so I had to log in again to reply in the interests of further explaining some subtle aspects/problems which you may have been missing so far.

    The point is that in your view and the view of the mod-troll combos, it is always the other guy who has to kow-tow to your version of what it is to become a 'good boy/girl' and "just do what you are told or get out". That is the problem. What you see as 'correcting' is not always the case, because the problem is not always the 'offender' whom you ban, but the troll-mod etc who created the circumstances to which 'the offender' is reacting. Because you don't address the root causes, then naturally 'the offender' and everyone LOSES CONFIDENCE in the system and mods who apply double standards to 'correct' and make people 'kow-tow' or be banned. And the PM route is useless, and may even be exacerbating the problem, because not only is the problem/issue not aired out 'transparently' for all to see so that one can make up one's own mind on the matter, it is a way for the troll-mod combo to keep/distort the dynamics of problem solving which needs to be open and precise as to what is actually being taken issue with ON BOTH SIDES. Before now, such ways of skewing and characterising people/issues 'expediently' by the mods/trolls who have the upper hand and use (abuse) 'the rules' to ban as they like but never themselves for similar offenses (not the 'die' stuff, but close to it sometimes!).

    If one is driven to distraction and has lost all trust in 'the system' as used and abused here in some instances, then what do you expect? People will take/say all sorts of things to get through to you the seriousness of the problem which you are NOT addressing while making the victim the problem instead of the troll-mod types whose behaviour CREATES these 'offenders' in many cases. And as Seagypsy has already piinted out, making people 'afraid' and 'compliant' to mod-troll abusers of the system is no way to garner respect. Especially if in your view the problem is always the offender instead of the mod-troll which usually applies and survives 'double standards' to incite, bait, abuse etc another into reacting and then getting him banned and characterized such that there is no hope of 'reputational recovery'. Hence the problems you face which are not always the way you 'read' them.

    Anyhow, just DELETING offensive content and explaining WHY you did so in open forum and only banning people AFTER they have had a proper chance to defend/explain/retract etc will change the dynamics and frustration. Also, it would help greatly if the mod-troll problem I highlighted some time back is actually addressed openly and honestly and not just assume that the victim is always/solely to blame etc. (which seems to be the default mod-troll position/preconclusion even before any due diligence may say otherwise but is not done properly before blaming/banning....as my Mars Rover Experiment confirmed was the case as observed).

    Good luck in a hard job. But perhaps it could be made a lot easier/better for all if the way contentious issues/posters were handled: in OPEN FORUM instead of behind closed doors via PM etc which can leave the other guy effectively powerless to make his case under threat of immediate ban for even trying to explain/challenge. The rules are OK, but application of closed doors and double standards and other didgy mod-troll actions/decisions have made 'the rules' and 'the process' a laughing stock with virtually zero credibility when it comes to fairness and due process to allow proper chance at explanation, retraction etc etc.

    Cheers mate...and really, no personal agenda in this whatsoever from my end, since I don't waste time on personal stuff (life's too short) like certain others here seem to engage in as 'tactics'.

    I hope and trust to your undoubted intelligence to take this post as just 'fair play' objective and constructive observations/suggestions on my part for the greater good of Science and Humanity, especially on this site which could be better than it has been sometimes.

  14. wynn ˙ Valued Senior Member

    If someone is accused of "shit-stirring" - well that just shows what the accuser really thinks is being stirred, and what it is worth.

    It's not hearts or minds that are being stirred, no, the accuser admits that it is mere shit that is being stirred.

    And, of course, shit, when being stirred, stinks even more, so heaven forbid anyone should do it!
  15. seagypsy Banned Banned

    I do not defend his telling people to commit suicide. What I am stating is a wrong, is the way he was pushed past the brink of civility by the way mods behave. All too often we see mods throwing personal insults. Recently a mod called me a "vulgar fishwife" but do mods ever get reprimanded for their actions. If they do it isn't publicly and as you state the scientific method is what this forum should stand for. Well the scientific method says there is no evidence of god so no reason to conclude that there is one. The testimony of people who say it's true is not sufficient. This also applies to claims of moderator discipline. We see no evidence of it. You can tell us in PM, "We are addressing it in the back room" all you want, but unless we see some evidence of that we have no reason to believe you. Maybe you should make discipline against mods public like you do for anyone else. I mean surely you know the benefits of humiliation. It is a tactic used against us lowly members all the time. Ruin our reputations, claim we said things we didn't. Call us names and dare anyone to oppose you with threat of reprisal. Why not make your "back room" meetings public so we can know what is really said about us behind our backs. If you have nothing to hide, that is?

    I think it interesting that you talk about the human tongue while denying that Mods are ever guilty of the same crimes that we members are punished for. Are your mods not human? Show the members of this forum that the administration is accountable, stop working in the shadows and let us see what is really done and what is really said about us. It may just redeem some of you in our eyes.

    It also seems to be that you are fixated on this invitation to commit suicide, I think this is your way of using deception or misdirection to confuse us. Gustav was not in the habit of making such threats. YOU MODS pushed him to it. Intentionally, I suspect. When you can't get rid of someone you dislike on legitimate grounds you simply push them to a breaking point so that they will commit a ban-able offense. It's a dirty tactic and I challenge all members to put all mods on ignore. we may not be able to ignore them through the website but we certainly can pretend they do not exist in the threads rather than giving them anything to use as ammunition against us.

    If they want to control discussions so the conclusions only support their own ideas then they can chatter amongst themselves, the rest of us can get along just fine without them.
  16. Ripley Valued Senior Member

    I can imagine the penned-up frustrations... After weeks and weeks of feeling subservient with a faux decorum to clients who you couldn't give a shit for, you log on here and BAM the dam bursts and you take it out on Gustav.
  17. Captain Kremmen All aboard, me Hearties! Valued Senior Member

    Reason for ban?
    I suspect it's because you and other moderators find him irritating and time consuming.
    He doesn't have in his armoury, all the hypocritical little tools the rest of us use to avoid problems:
    keeping your head down, placating people, throwing in the odd compliment etc.

    But is this sufficient reason to permanently ban someone?
    It seems harsh for such a long standing member.
  18. kwhilborn Banned Banned

    Dang! I'm still here and I've officially been declared, "Nuttier than a port-a-potty at a peanut festival" by most of the moderators here.

    I'd actually be interested in why Wlminex keeps getting banned. He works in the science field and has his Ph.D., and has also been around forever.

    Wlminex has been banned no less than 3 times lately and at least twice by Prometheus. I am unsure Prometheus abilities to moderate as he or she has a temper. I know moderators must be hard to find because nobody likes doing it, but when moderators start stalking members simply to ban them then sanity becomes an issue.

    Original thoughts should be encouraged even if wrong as it may contain an inkling of accuracy to build on in the future. I know that philosophy style threads are areas meant for woo, but some moderators dislike proposals different from accepted normal..

    I would like to know the reason for his ban, but obviously cannot ask him while he is banned without searching all his posts and hoping something stands out.

    I also second the Captain Kremmen post above. Permaban is harsh.
    Note: He said it first. Don't permaban me.
  19. billvon Valued Senior Member

    So did I. But if you want to post here, on this free site, you gotta follow the rules the owner of the site has.

    If Gustav came into your house you might like him. But if he kept putting out his cigar in your coffee cup you might eventually ask him to leave. Does that mean that you are a member of the "PC police" who can't acknowledge his brutal honesty? Probably not. It probably means you just don't want him to smoke cigars and put them out in your coffee.

    I do too, but I know that if that honesty includes "fuck you, you ignorant c**t" (or choose your favorite insult) that I'm probably going to get banned.
  20. RealityCheck Banned Banned

    Hi billvon.

    Mate, if you were a mod here and that sort of language was all it would take for you to ban someone then you would have banned almost half the long-time members here by now, including some of the mod-troll combos!

    Did you read where others have pointed to the tactics used by these same mod-troll combos to harass, bait, insult and incite people so that they reach a point where they lose faith in 'the system' here and just let fly because 'due process' has been the plaything of the mod-troll combos against which an ordiunary member has no protection once 'marked' for framing and character assassination and eventual ban?

    I can recall some members here who have spread their brand of trollish egotistical poison and double-standards so persistently on the net, including here, and yet they are tolerated here and sometimes tacitly encouraged by the troll-mod combos if it suits their agendas against whom they personally dislike.

    There is the case where the troll-mod combos disrupt and skew and prematurely abort an interesting scientific discussion/thread, just because they don't like the OP or some of the participants. I just want to follow science discourses TO THEIR PROPER NATURAL CONCLUSIONS, not be dictated to and intimidated by mod-troll combo 'tactics' where they invoke discord over the personalities just so they can 'control the conversation' and have their ego-trips at the expense of open discourse on what interests members rather than what members must 'kow tow' to or get persecuted and banned.

    It's because of the mod-trolls double standards and hypocrisy and malicious intent against proper science discourse that the members have lost confidence in 'the system' and 'the rules' and 'the process' here, just as has happened elsewhere. The enemy is the mod-troll combo tactics which my Mars Rover Experiment has highlighted to the point where it is no longer able to be denied and excused away by the mod-trolls who control how the rules are applied (but not to themselves and their mates, else a few people I could mention, but who shall remain nameless, would have been perma-banned long long ago!).

    Anyhow, good luck to you and I trust this site will recover its reputation so recently damaged by careless (and sometimes malicious) application of double standards when it comes to fair play and 'correction' etc etc. Cheers!
  21. wynn ˙ Valued Senior Member

    This site supposedly encourages intellectual discussion.
    The reality is that it doesn't. And anyone who dares to even just hint at this, suffers consequences.
  22. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    *shrugs* There is plenty of intellectual discussion and conversation going on here... but for every civil and intelligent thread there are two or three worthless ones that dissolve into attacks and slander.

    None the less, all opinions aside, the majority consensus has been for a while that he did not contribute anything worthwhile to the forums in terms of discussion or content - he was kept around as he toed the line enough to avoid being banned simply by the nature of the infraction points system. Like I said though, there is no place in any civilized conversation for such outright abusive comments.

    @ Ripley - nah, I don't let it get to me - I understand that most of our clients simply don't understand the technology they are trying to use any more than "push power button, things light up" so I can look past it for the most part. Per your worries though, nah, not at all - work is work and home is home. My drive there and back consists of me, my radio, and lots of singing to get any residual frustrations out of my system

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  23. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Yes. And as a consequence must discourage non-intellectual discussion. Fortunately there are plenty of places people can go if they wish to participate in more rancorous or abusive discussions.

    You just hinted at it. Actually came right out and said it. Bet you $100 you don't get banned for it.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page