Moderation in Moderation
Quote: redietzRegarding the tales of winning 50 out of 52 times and all that, is MDawg a fraud? Interesting question. It's a very different question from "Is MDawg lying?"
link to original post
Now let me break down the "Is MDawg lying" question first. If I reported to you every time I made 10 out of 10 free throws in practice, and skipped reporting every time I did not, is that lying? Technically, it's not lying.
And if I then went on bragging about my free throw shooting and how people were always watching me and complimenting me on my foul shooting, would I be lying? Who knows, but possibly not. If I only tell you the comments made by people who watched me sink 10 out of 10 and skipped the comments (like "you suck, loser") when I made 6 out of 10, is that lying? No, it's self-serving, biased reporting, but it's not technically lying.
Where it turns into lying, and being a fraud, is if somebody directly asks, "So, your foul shooting includes every session you practice?" and you say yes when the answer is no. Then you are a liar and a fraud. But up to that point, you're just guilty of seeing how gullible people are.
Now as to fraud, if I give a lecture to Emily's School for Morons, Imbeciles, and Idiots (using the old formal IQ classification categories -- look it up) and I tell Emily's students that I ride a dragon and kill evil casinos for a living, and all of Emily's students believe me, is that fraud? If people are incapable of ascertaining reality from fairy tales, then the issue, I suppose, really is not on my end. It's on the end of the Morons, Imbeciles, and Idiots.
In conclusion, selective reporting of reality isn't really fraud unless you pin the person down with a statistical, not an anecdotal, series of questions, and then they lie.
And second, if people are unable to grasp what is and isn't possible when the claims are outrageous, that's partly because they are attending, whether intentionally or not, Emily's School for Morons, Imbeciles, and Idiots (using the old formal IQ classification, of course, and not meant as any judgement).
I admire anyone who is willing and does speak their opinions openly, the thing is when does a person go too far.
Someone agreeing or disagreeing with the individual should have no bearing on the matter. Will the administration review the above-quoted post? Why? Because I believe it carries some significance by where a line is either drawn or crossed for future references. That's the hard part of being an Administrator. The reason for this post is that I think that all that the membership is asking for, or for that matter deserves is a semblance of consistency in Administrations Decisions. Any future inconsistent decisions or what the membership considers insignificant nitpicking and someone may point out the previous actions or non-actions that were taken on another previous post, thank you.
I'll have more to say in a bit, real life takes precedent at the moment.
I believe this means that every administrative response should be adaptable to suit the offense.
In general, people seem to want minimal enforcement on themselves ("Aww, c'mon, it was a JOKE", etc), and maximal enforcement on their detractors ("How can you not NUKE him for his 'joke'?").
Mandatory minimums are probably unfair.
Maximums are removed, due to martingale precedent.
Incessant petty bickering that devolves into offensive impropriety really isn't what administrators want to deal with.
So... based on these disparate principles, what system is simple to administer yet effectively curtails problems?
The lines between accepted behavior and unacceptable behavior have been shifting constantly since well before the forum's inception.
If the administrators have to call a full quorum to concur on a response, there will surely be complaints from people about how we aren't enforcing the rules swiftly enough, and how so-and-so is getting away with repeated troublemaking while we're making up our minds.
The only consolation I can offer is that individual administrative actions are subject to review and adjustment by the quorum.
I'm certainly open to suggestions.
I might go play $25 min. tables. I might play $100 min. tables later. I might play several hands or none at all. I might watch football or the Giants vs Dodgers game later. I might bang (cant say that here).
But one thing is for certain. I wont give a thought worth a thimble of crap as to what RE Dietz thinks.
If he is granted something divine or luck? He probably deserves it. Just being healthy, wealthy, and wise is reward enough at 89..🤔
Oh, one more thing. Anyone care to hear his secret?
wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain
Fraud
When someone wrongfully touts their record of winning at a casino game and offers to sell a system or to give lessons for a fee, that is fraud. That is certainly forbidden on this site (Indeed offering any system of wager sizing for fees is strictly forbidden on WoV.)
Lying or Mental Confusion or Other
When someone tells us that they have won in 1000 of 1000 gambling sessions, with no attempt to benefit financially, that is
- lying (including exaggerating), or
- selective memory, or
- a mental/cognitive issue, or
- having an unannounced advantage over the game, or
- extremely lucky
Lying, exaggerating, selective memory or mental confusion are not against the rules of this site. All of us have lied at times in our lifetime. This is the internet, we don't know if you are housebound, never been near a casino and writing fiction about your gambling exploits, or exaggerating your prowess or whatever. Moderators are not fact checkers! Get over this!!.
It is possible that an individual is defying the statistics of perfect randomness because they have an unannounced advantage in a game. Phil Ivey would not have been required to explain edge carding to this forum; if someone was using video cameras and computer software to defeat roulette then they are not required to announce that on this forum.
There are probably at least one billion people who have gambled in the world, maybe more. So, we expect at least one person to have had good luck that is unlikely to 0.000000001. And, if they have had such good luck, I would understand if they were to publicly brag about it.
I am just describing the range of possibilities in order to educate your imagination. I am not naive. I am free to think and assign, in my mind. my own set of probabilities to the above possibilities for any given statement made on this forum. You may do this as well. But I am not sympathetic towards people who want to see another member nuked simply because they suspect them to be guilty of untruthful boasting.
Quote: gordonm888But I am not sympathetic towards people who want to see another member nuked simply because they suspect them to be guilty of untruthful boasting.
link to original post
I admit I have not read alot of MDawgs posts. For one thing, it's baccarret and I havent a clue. My method is a quick scan. For instance, I might see where Bosox made a post. His posts are often insightful, funny, and/or inspirational. At least for me.
I find MDawg to be colorful and a great sense of humor to his boo'ers. There was a thread where he took pictures of his luxury suite. It didnt mean much to me. Sorry MDawg. But my friends marveled at those pics and now love to read his posts.
Quote: billryanSo lying on this forum is acceptable, but calling out the liar isn't. What a wonderful standard.
link to original post
If I order that chili you recommended and think/say it tastes awful. Does that make you a liar?
Quote: billryanSo lying on this forum is acceptable, but calling out the liar isn't. What a wonderful standard.
link to original post
No, billryan.
I am saying that lying on this forum is not punishable by disciplinary actions under the rules. However, the forum is, to a degree, self-moderating and you may call out statements that you do not believe and challenge individuals on their statements. But you may not insult the people making these posts by calling them liars.
**************
EX: I currently interact with a community of volunteers almost all of whom are 70-88 years old. I hear statements made by members of this group that I do not believe -but I also do not believe they are lying. Instead, I believe they are suffering cognitive decline -an early stage of the onset of dementia which is not an uncommon aspect of aging. To accuse the cognitively impaired of lying -of being liars - is unfair and insulting. They are suffering from the human condition, and not a failure of integrity.
***************
EX: It is well known that witnesses to the same event (say an accident) often give conflicting accounts of what happened. Each person is often being as truthful as possible. It may be selective memory or some perception/brain failure -I'm sure there are many studies of this one can read. But "unreliable reporting" is not necessarily the same thing as lying. And glibly calling these witnesses "liars" would be unfair and insulting.
***************
I am not going to get into a Leronimab-like debate with you on this matter. The truth is that when I hear a statement that surprises me on the face of it, I try to consider whether there is something that I don't know that I don't know. My knee-jerk reaction is not to name-call in righteous anger, but to think and analyze. And if I conclude that I am highly confident that the statement is willfully untrue, I try to be mindful of the strictures and consequences of name-calling and insulting persons, given the situation and forum I am in. But, that's just me.
Quote: billryanSo lying on this forum is acceptable, but calling out the liar isn't. What a wonderful standard.
Can you PROVE a poster is IN FACT lying?
If so, the rules DO provide a remedy.
Look at rules 19 and 20:
19: Controversial Speech: In an effort to keep the focus of the forum on gambling, Vegas, and math, comments of a political, racial, religious, sexual, or otherwise controversial nature are not allowed. We recommend taking such discussion elsewhere (Added 8/13/19).
20: Nuclear option: Finally, if the site administrators feel that a member is so disruptive to the site, even while abiding by the rules above, a "nuclear option" may be invoked to permanently ban the offender. This will be used sparingly for only the worst of trolls. (Added 2/20/11)
As always, it's a judgment call by the mods, but these rules, if interpreted correctly, warrant excluding liars whose lies are controversial and / or disruptive.
No, I am not claiming that the forum's self-ordained gamblin' god is lying, as that would warrant suspending me... but if the mods think so, then ...
Quote: Mission146It would be a terrible, subjective, capricious and very results-oriented precedent to set.
"Better to burp and feel the shame than to hold it back and feel the pain."
--- old adage
Quote: MrV"Better to burp and feel the shame than to hold it back and feel the pain."
link to original post
--- old adage
Exactly what Im talking about. Of course with BR's chili is not burping and it's my lady who feels the pain.😉😲
Quote: Mission146It would be a terrible, subjective, capricious and very results-oriented precedent to set.
By my fallible math, the 212 day period from January 1 to July 31 of this year had 65 suspensions totalling 636 days.
This excludes nukes.
This likely mistabulates a few suspensions (net underreporting).
I believe a more recent data subset would be considered an inadequate sample for meaningful comparison at this time.
Quote: DieterAs these points merit discussion, I forked the thread.
Thank you. I would like to make a point on this. If a discussion does take place on the matter I hope it is not decided only by the questions that I asked in the above post, but, also a reply wrote back to me on the matter after I replied to the original post in question. That information is on the other thread that was split.
Quote: BoSoxThank you. I would like to make a point on this. If a discussion does take place on the matter I hope it is not decided only by the questions that I asked in the above post, but, also a reply wrote back to me on the matter after I replied to the original post in question. That information is on the other thread that was split.
link to original post
Well, splitting is possible; merging is not.
I suppose anything on this sort of topic could be quoted and brought over.
I am a little confused here, what happens if the person who gives the lecture at the Emily school puts his very real name and home address on the blackboard and makes note of it when he begins his lecture? Resulting in the students comprised of Morons, Imbeciles, and Idiots start laughing at him for supplying that information. Many of the students then start calling him a moron, imbecile, and idiot should those students be suspended, considering their lack of understanding?
redietz response:
BoSox, I think it's self evident I don't much care if Morons, Imbeciles, and Idiots are laughing at or with me. If you'd like me to post my name and address here, just ask. I'll oblige. No hay problema, senor.
I'm not some anonymous wannabee card counter upset that some people with a k in their name make an actual living at it.
Quote: BoSoxQuote: BoSox
link to original post
I am a little confused here, what happens if the person who gives the lecture at the Emily school puts his very real name and home address on the blackboard and makes note of it when he begins his lecture? Resulting in the students comprised of Morons, Imbeciles, and Idiots start laughing at him for supplying that information. Many of the students then start calling him a moron, imbecile, and idiot should those students be suspended, considering their lack of understanding?
redietz response:
BoSox, I think it's self evident I don't much care if Morons, Imbeciles, and Idiots are laughing at or with me. If you'd like me to post my name and address here, just ask. I'll oblige. No hay problema, senor.
I'm not some anonymous wannabee card counter upset that some people with a k in their name make an actual living at it.
1. Don't doxx yourself. Bad form. Not strictly a rules violation.
2. The instructor may indeed be in the right room, but may need a seat a little farther from the blackboard and facing the other direction. That's a personal opinion, though.
3. If you open the door, you really oughtn't complain if someone walks in. Some moderators may view that as baiting (a form of trolling).
Quote: DieterQuote: BoSoxQuote: BoSox
link to original post
I am a little confused here, what happens if the person who gives the lecture at the Emily school puts his very real name and home address on the blackboard and makes note of it when he begins his lecture? Resulting in the students comprised of Morons, Imbeciles, and Idiots start laughing at him for supplying that information. Many of the students then start calling him a moron, imbecile, and idiot should those students be suspended, considering their lack of understanding?
redietz response:
BoSox, I think it's self evident I don't much care if Morons, Imbeciles, and Idiots are laughing at or with me. If you'd like me to post my name and address here, just ask. I'll oblige. No hay problema, senor.
I'm not some anonymous wannabee card counter upset that some people with a k in their name make an actual living at it.
1. Don't doxx yourself. Bad form. Not strictly a rules violation.
If you want to suspend me on a technicality go right ahead. Although, the readers of the thread know full well who was actually doing the insulting.
Quote: BoSoxlink to original post
redietz response:
I'm not some anonymous wannabee card counter upset that some people with a k in their name make an actual living at it.
I agree. No one cares. Even funnier is posting results. You're a sports handicapper. Probably should post results. If you choose to post your address? More power to you. But what does your choice have to do with others? Do most sports handicappers put themselves in a position to have private info made public? Does it increase subscribers?
Quote: BoSoxQuote: Dieter
1. Don't doxx yourself. Bad form. Not strictly a rules violation.
If you want to suspend me on a technicality go right ahead. Although, the readers of the thread know full well who was actually doing the insulting.link to original post
The winds of fortune would seem to be kind for the moment.
my two cents worth
it would be good to give the Mod(s), especially new ones a little bit of a break
cut them a little bit of slack
a lot of this stuff is in a gray area and comes down to a judgment call
if a Center bangs away in the lane in hoops trying to get postion_________
some refs will call a foul and some won't - one is not wrong and one is not right
same deal here
getting suspended is not the end of the world - getting nuked is tougher and may require some explanation
.
Quote: DieterQuote: BoSoxlink to original post
If you want to suspend me on a technicality go right ahead. Although, the readers of the thread know full well who was actually doing the insulting.
The winds of fortune would seem to be kind for the moment.link to original post
A lot has been accomplished here where a bar has now been set, and what is considered the new standard. But should rule #1 be thrown out the window?
"Absolutely no personal insults. If you disagree with another forum member, politely attack the writing, not the writer. This policy also applies to family members of forum members, but is considered a more severe infraction, especially female family members. (Amended 2/23/14 to not allow personal insults at all. The previous policy was more lenient. Amended again 1/31/19 to include family members.)"
Quote: BoSox
A lot has been accomplished here where a bar has now been set, and what is considered the new standard. But should rule #1 be thrown out the window?
The winds of fate ebb and flow, shifting in direction and intensity.
Some days the kite will not climb from the hand, some days the string cuts a finger.
Insults are prohibited.
Sass is not.
If you sass someone, be prepared to get as good as you give.
Quote: billryanIf sassing is permissible, can razzing be far behind?
Quote: Forum Rules
The punishment for violating these rules will be meted out on a case by case basis. Options include a warning, temporary ban, and permanent ban.
As the river gradually changes its course, so too does the border realign.
Whatever. It's just variance.
Quote: billryanIf sassing is permissible, can razzing be far behind?
I don't think it would be impermissible if you record a 𝔹𝕣𝕠𝕟𝕩 ℂ𝕙𝕖𝕖𝕣 with your phone
and then uploaded it to YouTube
and then quoted the razzee and embedded it in your post________________nothing against it in the rules___________(-:\
.
Quote: lilredroosterI don't think it would be impermissible if you record a 𝔹𝕣𝕠𝕟𝕩 ℂ𝕙𝕖𝕖𝕣 with your phone
link to original post
and then uploaded it to YouTube
and then quoted the razzee and embedded it in your post________________nothing against it in the rules___________(-:\
.
Funny, I was just trying to look up the late Johnny Most in one of his highlights how some Celtic player razzled and dazzled his way to a layup.
Quote: lilredrooster________
link to original post
my two cents worth
it would be good to give the Mod(s), especially new ones a little bit of a break
cut them a little bit of slack
a lot of this stuff is in a gray area and comes down to a judgment call
if a Center bangs away in the lane in hoops trying to get postion_________
some refs will call a foul and some won't - one is not wrong and one is not right
same deal here
getting suspended is not the end of the world - getting nuked is tougher and may require some explanation
.
Interesting post. The common saying amongst officials is "the fans come to watch the game. Not you officiate." Generally speaking, tough calls like a block/charge 50% will disagree no matter what. In spite of that particular rule reading, each official has his own view and some there own philosophy.
Now, as for the Centers in the post. The old unwritten rule was allowing some banging until the player becomes a shooter. Then dont allow him to be touched. The lower the post the less banging allowed.
So, as a Coach, like in forums, we adjusted to the officials. It was the officials job to set the tone early.
A zone defense (before 3 pointers) was to allow low percentage shots from the perimeter. Deny the paint. If they get down in the low post? We give headaches. We dont get them.
Quote: BoSoxQuote: lilredroosterI don't think it would be impermissible if you record a 𝔹𝕣𝕠𝕟𝕩 ℂ𝕙𝕖𝕖𝕣 with your phone
link to original post
and then uploaded it to YouTube
and then quoted the razzee and embedded it in your post________________nothing against it in the rules___________(-:\
.
Funny, I was just trying to look up the late Johnny Most in one of his highlights how some Celtic player razzled and dazzled his way to a layup.link to original post
I personally feel there is way too much dazzling going on.
Call it, dont call it, but damn it. Be consistent. THAT's what every coach wants, expects, and deserves.
Quote: mosesYet others believe it is being called way too tight. Eventually, the majority will come to the surface and rule.
link to original post
Call it, dont call it, but damn it. Be consistent. THAT's what every coach wants, expects, and deserves.
You're not going to have a pro league ref calling your streetball game at the corner playground.
My partner didnt show which shouldve been an indicator. The men joined hands around the jump ball circle and prayed. I thought "this wont be that bad. I can do it alone."
Holy Jesus. From the time I tossed the jump until the final buzzer. It was the most intense 40 minutes of my life. They'd take a guy on a routine layup right into the wall. Guys were bleeding, swearing, grabbing, gouging. You name it.
Then, after the game,. they gathered in prayer and were hugging.
It was the damndest thing I'd witnessed.
Quote: mosesYet others believe it is being called way too tight. Eventually, the majority will come to the surface and rule.
link to original post
Call it, dont call it, but damn it. Be consistent. THAT's what every coach wants, expects, and deserves.
We are trying. One thing I did not realize when I took this moderator job is that some members use the PM system to contact the moderators and argue that certain posts by their hated enemy should result in a suspension - or in nukeing! These PMs are protected by the confidentiality rule (so we can't discuss them here in the forum) and occasionally include egregious and profane insults against other forum members - because the rule prohibiting insults does not apply to PMs.
We have 4 moderators. OD, Dieter and I each try to read almost all the new forum posts, and I really don't think we need angry PMs that are 100s of words in length to spot infractions. And we don't need help with setting the penalty for an infraction. And these PMs -which I refer to as "weaponizing the moderators" - require time on our part to respond to, they coarsen the deliberation process and make it more challenging to be consistent and objective.
So, the PM system is this "unseen world" that plays a role in all this that is not completely constructive.
Funny story: I once ejected a coaches wife during a game. Now I didnt know it was his wife until we came out for the 2nd half. The police had to escort her out.😲 She was kicking and screaming. They were a large school playing in a small school tourney. So the fans were cheering her exit.
He came in the locker room after the game. I thought "oh boy, here we go!" But he thanked me. 😄 Getting her hindparts out of the gym allowed his players to calm down and him focus on coaching. They came back and won after her dismissal.
Quote: gordonm888Quote: mosesYet others believe it is being called way too tight. Eventually, the majority will come to the surface and rule.
link to original post
Call it, dont call it, but damn it. Be consistent. THAT's what every coach wants, expects, and deserves.
We are trying. One thing I did not realize when I took this moderator job is that some members use the PM system to contact the moderators and argue that certain posts by their hated enemy should result in a suspension - or in nukeing! These PMs are protected by the confidentiality rule (so we can't discuss them here in the forum) and occasionally include egregious and profane insults against other forum members - because the rule prohibiting insults does not apply to PMs.
We have 4 moderators. OD, Dieter and I each try to read almost all the new forum posts, and I really don't think we need angry PMs that are 100s of words in length to spot infractions. And we don't need help with setting the penalty for an infraction. And these PMs -which I refer to as "weaponizing the moderators" - require time on our part to respond to, they coarsen the deliberation process and make it more challenging to be consistent and objective.
So, the PM system is this "unseen world" that plays a role in all this that is not completely constructive.link to original post
Why don't you simply stop opening them. I get PMs from some posters on a regular basis and just don't open them. Hopefully after five or six unopened letters, they get the point.
I get the feeling Mike takes these private complaints much more seriously than you do. I think this place would be much better off if he stepped back from suspending people. It's a little ridiculous when he returns after being gone for days and suspends folks for things his moderation team didn't see as suspension worthy. He put together the moderation team of his choosing. Why not let them do the work he appointed them to do.
Quote: billryanlink to original post
Why don't you simply stop opening them. I get PMs from some posters on a regular basis and just don't open them. Hopefully after five or six unopened letters, they get the point.
I get the feeling Mike takes these private complaints much more seriously than you do. I think this place would be much better off if he stepped back from suspending people. It's a little ridiculous when he returns after being gone for days and suspends folks for things his moderation team didn't see as suspension worthy. He put together the moderation team of his choosing. Why not let them do the work he appointed them to do.
Well, we do need to at least read them, on the chance that there is an issue that warrants attention.
Some merit action; some do not.
Quote: DieterQuote: billryanIf sassing is permissible, can razzing be far behind?
Quote: Forum Rules
The punishment for violating these rules will be meted out on a case by case basis. Options include a warning, temporary ban, and permanent ban.
As the river gradually changes its course, so too does the border realign.link to original post
I think a short video of a movie ending titled: "A river runs through it" Narrated by Robert Redford seems appropriate in following the theme that you set.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OsDnrFBpsBk
Administrators who are doing a very hard job. Starting with myself, a few people tend to go a little overboard at times instead of realizing that this site is an open and free forum.
"If you sit by the river long enough, the bodies of all your enemies will go floating by."
If anyone is going to go to the trouble and kindness to post content including pictures for others it is rather insulting to hide his content.
Quote: MDawgIn the spirit of moderation in moderating why not unhide any hidden threads.
link to original post
If anyone is going to go to the trouble and kindness to post content including pictures for others it is rather insulting to hide his content.
Threads get hidden when they are not deemed to align with forum goals, yet do not specifically violate forum rules.
I don't know if any of the hidden threads have somehow changed in content, but I don't feel like overriding another esteemed moderator's moderate moderation. Just seems unseemly to do so without a reasonable reason.
There were a lot of people posting that month in the thread but the topics being discussed, as I recall, didn't have much or anything to do with my content. As I recall there were general lengthy debates about betting systems going on, and all I've ever said on that topic was that I don't follow any sort of mechanical progression, so that is a debate in which I have never engaged for more than a post or two.
Quote: MDawgIn the spirit of moderation in moderating why not unhide any hidden threads.
link to original post
If anyone is going to go to the trouble and kindness to post content including pictures for others it is rather insulting to hide his content.
If you want to appeal this decision please take this up, by PM, with the moderators (Wizard or OD) that made this original decision.
Quote: MDawgWell my Adventures of MDawg thread was hidden towards the tail end of a month when I was suspended. So that decision to hide couldn't have had anything to do with my content, not for some time.
link to original post
If a thread was hidden, it was hidden for a reason.
To petition for unhiding, the moderate moderator who hid it should be contacted.
Be prepared for the answer to be no, as there are likely continuing reasons for the thread to be hidden.
