Splinter Discussion - Hypothetical Question: If Bugs Aren't Worth Fixing

[Kittamaru]

Is that what he does? Strange individual. I had a fairly sensible exchange with him on another thread, a few days ago. Perhaps he was waiting for some infraction points to expire.

"lays low" doesn't mean "doesn't post"... and a quick peek at his infraction log shows 15 infractions issued in the last year alone.

 

[Yazata]

deleted.

 

[dumbest man on earth]

"lays low" doesn't mean "doesn't post"... and a quick peek at his infraction log shows 15 infractions issued in the last year alone.

So...is it proper for "Moderators" to "publicize" the details of any members "infraction log"?

Kittamaru, you evidently have some sort of problem with me - this "Splinter" would not exist if you did not.
Another example is when you just had to ARGUE that I was "... trying to blame Chrome", in the Thread : http://sciforums.com/threads/google-chrome-spyware.145655/ .

This Forum is supposed to be for discussions - yet you and your ilk use it to "Bully" and make personal attacks on any "Member" that you choose to disrespect.

 

[Kittamaru]

So...is it proper for "Moderators" to "publicize" the details of any members "infraction log"?

Kittamaru, you evidently have some sort of problem with me - this "Splinter" would not exist if you did not.
Another example is when you just had to ARGUE that I was "... trying to blame Chrome", in the Thread : http://sciforums.com/threads/google-chrome-spyware.145655/ .

This Forum is supposed to be for discussions - yet you and your ilk use it to "Bully" and make personal attacks on any "Member" that you choose to disrespect.

You're right, I do have a "problem" with you - my problem is that you seem to have a problem adhering to the rules that YOU agreed to when you signed up, and that you take being called out on your bullshit as "bullying".

You don't like the rules you agreed to?

 

[dumbest man on earth]

You're right, I do have a "problem" with you - my problem is that you seem to have a problem adhering to the rules that YOU agreed to when you signed up, and that you take being called out on your bullshit as "bullying".

You don't like the rules you agreed to?

So, Kittamaru, are you trying to tell me that one of the "Rules" is for "Moderators" to "publicize" the details of any members "infraction log"?

 

[Kittamaru]

So, Kittamaru, are you trying to tell me that one of the "Rules" is for "Moderators" to "publicize" the details of any members "infraction log"?

Kindly point out to me where I publicized any details - now, if I were to post, say, a screenshot of it, then you might have a case... but while we are at it:

Please point out to me where I said it was a rule that Mods have to publicize details of a members infraction log.

AND


Please point out to me where it says that moderators CANNOT publicize this information?

Yeah... I'll wait while you go looking; after all, surely you aren't trying to troll me by making unsubstantiated and unsupportable claims, right?

 

[dumbest man on earth]

Kindly point out to me where I publicized any details - now, if I were to post, say, a screenshot of it, then you might have a case... but while we are at it:

Please point out to me where I said it was a rule that Mods have to publicize details of a members infraction log.

AND


Please point out to me where it says that moderators CANNOT publicize this information?

Yeah... I'll wait while you go looking; after all, surely you aren't trying to troll me by making unsubstantiated and unsupportable claims, right?

...Kittamaru, can you read...

 

[Kittamaru]

...Kittamaru, can you read...

Indeed I can; the question is, can you:

You said:

So, Kittamaru, are you trying to tell me that one of the "Rules" is for "Moderators" to "publicize" the details of any members "infraction log"?

To which I challenged you to show me WHERE I said anything remotely similar to "there is a rule that moderators must publicize the details of a members infraction log".

I also challenged you to show me where there is any rule saying a moderator COULD NOT post information about a members infraction log, as well as where I provided "details" - do recall the definition and meaning of "details" - here, I'll help you out:

Per our friends at Merriam-Webster:
Full Definition of DETAIL
1: extended treatment of or attention to particular items
2: a part of a whole: as
a : a small and subordinate part : particular; also : a reproduction of such a part of a work of artb : a part considered or requiring to be considered separately from the wholec : the small elements that collectively constitute a work of artd : the small elements of a photographic image corresponding to those of the subject
3 a : selection of a person or group for a particular task (as in military service)
b : the person or group selected (2) : the task to be performed
— in detail
: with all the particulars <explained the job in detail>

What I gave was a small, vague, and honestly quite nondescript piece of information about your infraction log - no particulars were mentioned. Now, if you are ashamed of the fact that you have racked up fifteen infractions in less than a calendar year, well... I have a simple statement for that:

Now - to be as blunt and "to the point" as I can possibly be:

Put up or shut up. Quit yer whining, quit pretending to be a victim, quit lying through your teeth, and quit making unsubstantiated, falsified, inaccurate, and otherwise libelous claims about people and perhaps you will find that you won't get infractions anymore.

In other words - quite breaking the rules, and you won't get infractions. What a bloody concept that is!

EDIT - now, it is three minutes till 1am, I have bronchitis and am on more medications than I'd really like to be on, and I have to be up at 7am to prep for mothers day breakfast... so if we're done beating this dead horse, I bid you adieu.

 

[dumbest man on earth]

1. - in Post #43, I asked the QUESTION : So...is it proper for "Moderators" to "publicize" the details of any members "infraction log"?
You answered it in Post #44 : "You're right, I do have a "problem" with you - my problem is that you seem to have a problem adhering to the rules that YOU agreed to when you signed up, and that you take being called out on your bullshit as "bullying"."
Your "REPLY" was why I then ASKED the QUESTION in my Post #45 : So, Kittamaru, are you trying to tell me that one of the "Rules" is for "Moderators" to "publicize" the details of any members "infraction log"?

2. - I never said there were any "Rules" about "Moderators" Posting information about any members "Infraction Log" - I ASKED QUESTIONS about whether it was "proper".

Meh...Kittamaru, either you cannot read and comprehend Punctuation Marks, or you are merely "playing".
At any rate, once again, it seems that you are simply ARGUING WITH YOURSELF.

 

[dumbest man on earth]

Is that what he does? Strange individual. I had a fairly sensible exchange with him on another thread, a few days ago. Perhaps he was waiting for some infraction points to expire

No, exchemist, that is NOT "what he does".

All anyone has to do, including you, exchemist, is to simply read the Posts.

We had a "fairly sensible exchange" precisely because we SIMPLY READ what each other had Posted.

I Post here to participate in Honest and Open discussions about various Sciences.
You seem to follow a similar impetus.

 

[Kittamaru]

1. - in Post #43, I asked the QUESTION : So...is it proper for "Moderators" to "publicize" the details of any members "infraction log"?
You answered it in Post #44 : "You're right, I do have a "problem" with you - my problem is that you seem to have a problem adhering to the rules that YOU agreed to when you signed up, and that you take being called out on your bullshit as "bullying"."
Your "REPLY" was why I then ASKED the QUESTION in my Post #45 : So, Kittamaru, are you trying to tell me that one of the "Rules" is for "Moderators" to "publicize" the details of any members "infraction log"?

2. - I never said there were any "Rules" about "Moderators" Posting information about any members "Infraction Log" - I ASKED QUESTIONS about whether it was "proper".

Meh...Kittamaru, either you cannot read and comprehend Punctuation Marks, or you are merely "playing".
At any rate, once again, it seems that you are simply ARGUING WITH YOURSELF.

And here you are lying, again. Here is what you ACTUALLY said in Post 43:

So...is it proper for "Moderators" to "publicize" the details of any members "infraction log"?

Kittamaru, you evidently have some sort of problem with me - this "Splinter" would not exist if you did not.
Another example is when you just had to ARGUE that I was "... trying to blame Chrome", in the Thread : http://sciforums.com/threads/google-chrome-spyware.145655/ .

This Forum is supposed to be for discussions - yet you and your ilk use it to "Bully" and make personal attacks on any "Member" that you choose to disrespect.

I chose to ignore your attempted "poking the bear" in your first sentence (as one, you do not get to decide what is "proper" for a moderator in any way, shape or form, and two I did not provide any details, but rather a simple statement of fact. Don't like it, see above - stop breaking the gorram rules).

I then clarified your concern that I "had a problem with you" in that my problem is that you keep breaking the rules and generally making yourself into an abundant waste of moderator time and effort... which, again, is against the rules:

Repeat offenders

29. The moderator team have limited time and resources. We reserve the right to ban members who require continual policing by the moderators, those who contribute little useful content, and those who spend their time on the forum criticising it or its leadership. We similarly reserve the right to complain to a member’s ISP and/or to take legal action against a vexatious member.

Again, let me be clear and simple:

Where, at all, did I give the impression I "publicized details of any members infraction log"?
Where, at all, did YOU get the impression moderators could not "publicize details of any members infraction log"?
Stop trying to obfuscate the issue just because you don't like getting called out on your bullshit.

P.S. - for anyone interested:

Sciforums - Rules, posting guidelines and advice to members
D. Moderation and Penalties
1. Posting on sciforums is a privilege, not a right. All material published on sciforums is at the discretion of the moderator team.

2. Any post may become the subject of moderator or administrator action in accordance with these rules and guidelines. Moderation may include editing, moving or deletion of posts or threads. Members are not always contacted personally when their posts are moderated, but moderators ordinarily document their actions in some way that informs the members affected (e.g. by posting a note in the relevant thread). Moderation that leads to an official warning or ban is always accompanied by a personal message to the member concerned.

3. These rules and guidelines are enforced at the discretion of the moderators. Moderators may judge in any particular instance that in all the circumstances no action is required. Sciforums is moderated bearing in mind the stated aims and ethos of the forum; we will not be bound by the letter of these rules as written, but by the spirit of the rules.

As you can see, the moderation team is given a fair amount of leeway into how things are handled... this is why certain problem members are given multiple chances to learn to behave, rather than simply being given das'boote!

As for what rules are primarily being questioned here:

Trolling
18. Trolling is the posting of inflammatory posts with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional (often angry) response. Trolls aim to disrupt normal on-topic discussion, often by raising tangential or irrelevant hot-button issues. Trolling posts are intended to incite controversy or conflict and/or to cause annoyance or offence.

Trolls are damaging to online communities because they attempt to pass as legitimate participants in discussions while actually seeking to disrupt normal conversation and debate. If permitted to remain, trolls tend to reduce the level of trust among members in an online community. One consequence may be that truly naive posts are rejected by sensitised members as just more examples of trolling.

Trolls tend to follow certain patterns of behaviour that may include:

• Posting of similar responses and topics repeatedly.
• Avoiding giving answers to direct questions put to them.
• Never attempting to justify their position.
• Demanding evidence from others while offering none in return.
• Vanishing when their bluff is called, only to reappear in a different thread arguing the same point.
• Deliberately derailing discussions onto tangential matters in order to try to control the flow of discussion.

Trolls are not tolerated on sciforums.

Warning: do not feed the trolls! Do not reply to inflammatory posts or threads and do not reply to insults. Hit the ‘report’ button on the relevant post(s) and let the moderators deal with the matter.

19. Repetitive or vexatious posting is considered trolling. Sciforums reserves the right to reject contributions that have been widely canvassed in the forum and to reject contributions from participants who seek to dominate the discussion.

Not to mention repeated stalking, harassment of a few specific members via PM (including continuing to harass members AFTER being directly and in no uncertain terms to knock it off)

To be honest, I'm not sure how you, DMoE, can even attempt to proclaim "innocence" knowing that we have the paper trail of these harassing and abusive messages... hell, it's even publicly available (one just has to take a look through your posting history) such as the following gems:

http://www.sciforums.com/threads/is-there-a-method.140497/
http://www.sciforums.com/threads/is-science-a-value-system.144053/page-15#post-3268520
http://www.sciforums.com/threads/is-science-a-value-system.144053/page-8#post-3265518

Of course, if you want further proof DMoE, I can place a request with the administration to make publicly available your private messaging history (including comments from your self proclaimed Karma Klub - that was quite an enjoyable read to be honest)

 

[dumbest man on earth]

Kittamaru, again you have my full permission to Post any and all of my PM's.

Where in this Thread have I attempted to "proclaim innocence"?

There is something that is common in the Threads that you Posted, and most who read them know exactly what that commonality is.

Meh....

 

[Randwolf]

There is something that is common in the Threads that you Posted, and most who read them know exactly what that commonality is.

Absolutely. It is quite a simple task to identify the commonality - trolling, by DMOE. Thanks for pointing it out though...

 

[dumbest man on earth]

Absolutely. It is quite a simple task to identify the commonality - trolling, by DMOE. Thanks for pointing it out though...

...

 

[Kittamaru]

...

Indeed DMOE - unless you wish to claim there is some grand conspiracy going on... the simple fact is, several members have seen (and called you out on) your trolling... several moderators have as well, and even JamesR has:

Kittamaru:

Don't feed the troll.

Sorry but... if you act like a troll, you're going to be called a troll. Don't like it? Don't act like a troll. It's pretty simple stuff...

 

[dumbest man on earth]

Really , Kittamaru..."several members"...
Meh...like you said..."simple stuff"...

 

[paddoboy]

Mountain Out Of A Molehill cartoon

 

[Kittamaru]

Really , Kittamaru..."several members"...
Meh...like you said..."simple stuff"...

Indeed - if I had any indication you actually gave a damn, I would say you would be surprised at how may different members have reported your trolling ways... I wager you hold the SciForums record for most reports against a single post AND for the most unique post reports overall... but, since garnering such reactions seems to be your modus operandi, I doubt that is very surprising to you.

 

[dumbest man on earth]

...yeah sure, and the "...self proclaimed Karma Klub..."...
...Meh!

 

[Kittamaru]

Seems this is the typical response when you cannot get your own way - play it off like no big deal. It's like when you get angry and attack someone, then ask why you cannot be friends