[alpha-rulez] Moderators are not being disciplined enough and are very naughty

[spuriousmonkey]

I invoke Alpha-rules for this thread.


Several of the moderators, James R, (Q), and avatar have been very naughty lately and seem to be spending most of their time baiting and trolling members to elicit negative responses.

I have reported at least 20 offending posts and have received absolutely no feedback on the disciplinary actions taken against these offenders.

1. Sciforums is an Internet community that, foremost and among other things, values
intelligent discussion, scientific method, critical thinking and sound
reasoning.

5. Sciforums is run and managed by a team of administrators and
moderators who:
5.1. act in accordance with this policy;
5.4. take action to enforce and promote this policy among the members
of the community.

Clearly moderators that insult are violating the rules and not acting in accordance with the sciforums policy. Moreover they do exactly the opposite of enforcing and promotong this policy among members of the community. They are constantly trying to elicit negative responses and abuse their powers to get away with it.

Moreover, ignoring valid reports (we have all seen the insults and we can still see them because they are still there) clearly promotes only anarchy and sets ill blood.

It has become clear that the moderator team has failed time after time to clean their own house and this has led to setting a standard that seems to be in straight contradiction with the rethoric spewing from the mouths of the administration and moderators.

 

[Avatar]

You report almost any of my posts, because you see insults and other big meanies everywhere, some would call your perception delusional. So maybe you should consider that the problem is within you, not outside?

Matthew 6:22 “The eye is the lamp of the body. If then your eye is healthy, your whole body will be full of light.
6:23 But if your eye is diseased, your whole body will be full of darkness. If then the light in you is darkness, how great is the darkness!"

You're a fallen angel that seeks to return to heaven through hate and violence, but all you accomplish in result is that you create more hell to yourself. Till it will destroy you.

Other members seem to have a good time and have no big problems. Of course there are some isolated cases, but you can't make an omelet without breaking any eggs.

Mods are humans not robots, and we are doing the best we can. We could do nothing and give up on Sciforums, but we are not doing that.
But it is you who lifted his tail, gave up and resigned. So who's the failure here?
And now you try to look big and powerful by trying to cause strife and conflict.

Oh and I am fully aware you are trying everything you can so that I reply to you and you can then twist my posts to fuel your propaganda warfare, but I'm not going to stand quiet just because you seem to be having a bad case of thought diarrhea. Handle me, o princess! Mods are not kittens you can kick about.

p.s. The policy is still a draft and hasn't been finalized yet.

 

[spuriousmonkey]

You report almost any of my posts, because you see insults and other big meanies everywhere, some would call your perception delusional.

May I remind you that alpha rules are in place! It is rather a disgrace that you enter this thread completely unprepared and moreover, start with an insult by insinuating that my reports are based on delusion.

I ask the administrator therefore to invoke some discplinary action on this moderator.

And to show that I am not delusional I will post some posts I reported that are clearly not delusional. I present you hard facts. Not opinions.

post no.1 http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=1421476&postcount=46

Hey spurious, eat another bowl of stupid for breakfast?

An insult from the moderator (Q) out of the blue.

After baiting by the moderator a negative response was elicited by spuriousmonkey. Which was immediately punished with an infraction by the moderator bells.

http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=1422582&postcount=68
Clearly, the offending party should have been punished and not the victim.

Does the police go out on the streets to sell drugs and then arrest people who buy the drugs?

http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=1425101&postcount=72
Avatar in his example function of mod continues to bait another member and insults her, knowing very well it will set her off.

More later.

 

[Avatar]

Avatar in his example function of mod continues to bait another member and insults her, knowing very well it will set her off.

Insults?! :bugeye:

So this by you is a post that requires a disciplinary action?

How stupid do you think we, the mods and admins, are?
You clearly have an axe to grind with the mod team, so you have chosen to get back to us by (poorly) trying to make us fight and divide among each another, so, when the dust settles, you're on the moral high ground.
Sorry, dramming sociopath queen, won't happen.

Ha! Reporting that for an insult is nothing but delusion in my eyes. I was stating the truth. And that was TOR I was referring to.

 

[spuriousmonkey]

Please refrain from turning this thread into one of your trollfests.

I asked for alpha rules and would at least expect a moderator to stick to them.

So please do not post your excuses of your own actions. They do not diminish the action, you merely admit and gloat. According to your post it is ok to call avatar a fucking maggot with no nipples if you think he is one. Surely you are not suggesting this kind of policy.

Now please. Have some thought first before you post something.

 

[Avatar]

I have showed others what you are, so my job here is done. Speak what you wish and have fun.

Be seeing you

 

[spuriousmonkey]

I have showed others what you are, so my job here is done. Speak what you wish and have fun.

Be seeing you

You have indeed showed that you are a shallow person not capable of mounting an argument. Moreover you ignored the other pieces of evidence completely. I cannot wait till the day arrives when you are in court as a lawyer and base your defense on a single piece of evidence (which still stands) and ignore the rest.

It merely confirms that you have no serious interesting in counterarguing the proven accusations and know that you are guilty and merely gloat in this because you know you cannot be touched.

I sincerly hope you will put more effort in your future posts on sciforums because clearly this forum is not meant for you if I read the new policy correctly.

 

[The Devil Inside]

pwnt.

 

[Plazma Inferno!]

What's happening with you spuriousmonkey?

Honestly?

I doubt moderators are problem. I doubt forum is problem also.

Really spurious, tell me, I'm curious.

What's your real problem?

 

[Nickelodeon]

Maybe its hormonal...

 

[leopold]

I have reported at least 20 offending posts and have received absolutely no feedback on the disciplinary actions taken against these offenders.

i have recieved no feedback on the following thread:
http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=67416

am i to assume that no action was taken?
i too would like some answers but in my case it isn't really necessary because of the either or clause i put at the end of the post.

i can assume from the fact that i am not perma banned the the post has been reviewed and the information it contains is indeed correct. i do not have any easy answers spurious.

i guess one answer would be that if one or two posters effect a mod ban then all or most of the others will cop the same attitude and look for errant mod behavior to the point that's all they do instead of talking about science.

another answer would be that mods are human and humans make mistakes.
but i do believe that errant mod behavior should warrant a private infraction that never expires. yes, mods need to be held to a higher level of perfection than posters.

 

[leopold]

What's happening with you spuriousmonkey?

Honestly?

I doubt moderators are problem. I doubt forum is problem also.

Really spurious, tell me, I'm curious.

What's your real problem?

i suspect something along the lines of a new addition to the family.
a pay cut. demotion.
his wife was caught cheating.

i'm also curious, what's up monkeyman?

 

[darksidZz]

Pretty f'in weird thread :shrug:

 

[Bells]

I invoke Alpha-rules for this thread.

All this big red bold font... Reminds me of someone...

Anywho..

Several of the moderators, James R, (Q), and avatar have been very naughty lately and seem to be spending most of their time baiting and trolling members to elicit negative responses.

You mean like you are doing now? This thread appears to be designed specifically to elicit negative responses from moderators and members alike.

I have reported at least 20 offending posts and have received absolutely no feedback on the disciplinary actions taken against these offenders.

As you know, there is no policy in place that states moderators and administrators have to give feedback when a report is made. That is usually up to the moderator if they feel it is needed. And if you've sent 20, well that's a lot to wade through, don't you think? Tell me SM, when you moderated the Biology forum, did you give feedback to Meta and ToR when they clicked on the report button to every single one of your posts and actions (as a moderator) in that forum? I believe there were many.

Clearly moderators that insult are violating the rules and not acting in accordance with the sciforums policy. Moreover they do exactly the opposite of enforcing and promotong this policy among members of the community. They are constantly trying to elicit negative responses and abuse their powers to get away with it.

So when they are insulted first, they should just shut up and say nothing, lest members get offended at the reply? Interesting line of thought.

Now why don't you tell us what we should do SM? Since you have suddenly decided that the moderation is no longer good enough. What should the moderators do. Because at the moment you're all talk and no action (aside from repeated clicks on the report button). If you were a moderator (again), how would you react to a member continuously baiting you (just think back to when ToR decided to do what you are doing now and remember or scroll back through your reaction to her baiting you)?

Hindsight might be beneficial for you.

Moreover, ignoring valid reports (we have all seen the insults and we can still see them because they are still there) clearly promotes only anarchy and sets ill blood.

What makes you think the reports are being ignored?

As I said before, there is no policy in place to give feedback in regards to reports given. It is usually up to the individual moderator to decide if they think feedback is warranted. And as I mentioned before, if you have sent in excess of 20 reports.. well.. takes a lot of time to wade through all of those reports. So any moderator who receives 20 reports or more from only one individual might save theirs till last (if and when they get the chance) and give feedback if they are so inclined.

It has become clear that the moderator team has failed time after time to clean their own house and this has led to setting a standard that seems to be in straight contradiction with the rethoric spewing from the mouths of the administration and moderators.

Of course it is dear.

I have an idea! Why don't we all adopt the same moderation style you employed when you were a moderator.

An insult from the moderator (Q) out of the blue.

After baiting by the moderator a negative response was elicited by spuriousmonkey. Which was immediately punished with an infraction by the moderator bells.

The infraction was not given because you decided to respond to Q's constant baiting. The infraction was given because of the way you decided to respond. I believe the PM accompanying the infraction was clear enough on that front. Just click on the link you supplied to everyone so they too could read infraction notice you received from me via PM.

Does the police go out on the streets to sell drugs and then arrest people who buy the drugs?

Sometimes they even go so far as to dress themselves as prostitutes and arrest those who try to hire them.

All in all SM, I am disappointed. You've become the very thing you always said you detested. *Shrugs*..

 

[James R]

spuriousmonkey:

Several of the moderators, James R, (Q), and avatar have been very naughty lately and seem to be spending most of their time baiting and trolling members to elicit negative responses.

You wanted alpha rules, remember?

That means you need to back up your assertions with evidence.

I'll accept your retraction and apology now.

 

[Ripley]

Stryder is the quiet easy going mod sitting on his ass calmly waiting to hit the Send-to-Cesspool or Lock buttons at the appropriate moment by condoning the shabby treatment of the vertical thinkers over the lateral thinkers to do the dispatching for him after allowing the degradation of a topic become irremediable: I should really call him Stryder the Spider.

 

[redarmy11]

Nope. Still can't make head nor tail of that, even at the second revision. Consider splitting your thoughts up into 2 or 3 separate sentences.

 

[spuriousmonkey]

Hello all,

I see that none of you made a serious effort. Quite disconcerting.

You wanted alpha rules, remember?

yes, indeed.

That means you need to back up your assertions with evidence.

The evidence is out there to see for all. For most reports I responded with a post stating that the previous post is reported. Not all of course. For all evidence I kindly refer you to your own email application of choice and insist you check your email.

All reports go to the email of the moderator. If there is no moderator assigned then they go to the supermod or admin. Of course I could be wrong and you could be out of this loop. However, some events in the past leads me to believe that you do see these reports. In the case that you didn't receive them I suggest you start an open line of communication with your administrator and ask him to forward the reports to you.

Clearly you assertion that there is no evidence of my reports is false.

I'll accept your retraction and apology now.

Alpha rules doesn't mean that Moderators can threaten other members in submission. I suggest you start building an argument. It has become obvious to everyone that your petty threats are a modus operandus.

Moreover, I seem to recall that I asked an apology from (Q) after being insulted by him in the moderator forum. I still haven't received it. The supermod James R and the adminsitrator Plazma stood idly by with their hands in their pockets. Now that the supermod James R feels annoyed that he is incapable of handling the situation, that is, he is confronted with his own incompetence, he suddenly demands apologies.

I clearly remember that the likes of you demanded a scientific forum. And I am trained in acting scientifically. I am trained in reasoning. And I am trained in recognizing evidence and rhetoric. I am also trained in playing the game of science. And it is indeed ugly.

And I notice you don't seemed to like science so much suddenly. You feel threatened. You feel small. You feel uncomfortable. Welcome to science my friend.

I hope you like it, because this is what you will get from now on.

 

[Ripley]

Nope. Still can't make head nor tail of that, even at the second revision. Consider splitting your thoughts up into 2 or 3 separate sentences.

Tsk.

Little Miss Muffet sat on a tuffet,
Eating her curds and whey.

There came a big spider,
Who sat down beside her. And frightened Miss Muffet away!

 

[James R]

spuriousmonkey:

Taking your post "scientifically"...

(1) Alpha rules doesn't mean that Moderators can threaten other members in submission.

(2) I suggest you start building an argument. It has become obvious to everyone that your petty threats are a modus operandus.

(3) Moreover, I seem to recall that I asked an apology from (Q) after being insulted by him in the moderator forum. I still haven't received it.

(4) Now that the supermod James R feels annoyed that he is incapable of handling the situation, that is, he is confronted with his own incompetence, he suddenly demands apologies.

(4) I am also trained in playing the game of science. And it is indeed ugly.

(5) And I notice you don't seemed to like science so much suddenly. You feel threatened. You feel small. You feel uncomfortable. Welcome to science my friend.

1. Nobody threatened you.
2. Clean your own house first; then you might be in a better position to demand that others lift their game.
3. I am not (Q). Nor is Plazma Inferno! Enough said.
4. If you're having a bad time at work, that's no reason to come to sciforums and take out your frustrations on people here.
5. I love science. Science rocks. And I'll thank you not to presume to tell me how I feel.