Discussion about the Suspension List

Quote: RonC

I hope that this is soon deemed a mistake and that this is not the direction this board is taking.

Agree. Given some time to cool off here perhaps a double Martingale will be thought more reasonable. The original nuke was actually for a suspected duplicate account to which was tied alleged trolling, which it was not. So now that the felony charge has been dropped does the misdemeanor still stand as capital punishment?

The board is presently suffering from over-administration and the smart money says the pendulum will swing to a happy medium at some point.

I can not speak for anybody else, but I have learned more about life from undesirables that rational people. I would prefer 7 day suspensions . And them welcome back with moderator's finger on the trigger. As for trolling, it takes 2 people to do that ! Why should only one be suspended ? Sometimes a troll is simply expressing his belief.

Quote: chickenman

...The board is presently suffering from over-administration and the smart money says the pendulum will swing to a happy medium at some point.

I would agree that we are in a period of over-administration, but that has more to do with way too many members acting like children, which in turns leads to the need for more oversight. There has been way over the top discussion regarding the new rules ever since they came out. In forcing the issue, and trying to pin down EXACTLY where the line is, you all are forcing the mods to take actions where none would have been warranted, if there wasn't such microscopic interference.
If people would just start discussing any other topic, and perhaps something related to gambling, things would quiet down, and the pendulum will naturally shift to neutral.

At this point, if the discussion does not subside, I would be in favor of a flat out moratoriunmn on rules and suspension discussions for a couple of weeks. And I know I am not alone. Sure, I could choose not to follow this thread, but bottom line is, if I was new to this board, thinking about joining, and I saw all this drama, I would probably go away.

Wiz has a brand to protect with Wizard of Odds and Wizard of Vegas, and I don't think any of this is helping that brand.

Quote: 1BB

Yes, you support the decision in keeping with the company line but in my heart of hearts I know that there is no way that you, Face or maybe even the Wizard agree with it. The tone of your post says it all. In my opinion had one of you handled this, a longtime member with over 5,000 posts would not have been summarily and capriciously kicked off this forum. He may not have been suspended at all.

Your intentions were good in giving all the moderators equal powers but I think it was a serious mistake not to have a head moderator. This is a perfect example of why. For something as serious and permanent as this there should at least be a quorum to discuss it. Please rethink this. As you say, there are only two people who can modify this suspension but, again, there's that company line which means that there is really only one.

The job of moderator is to moderate. To me that means guiding members in the right direction, pointing to their mistakes and giving clear and concise guidelines as to what is expected. Inevitably there will be discipline, hopefully meted out in a fair and unbiased manner. Kicking someone off the forum for petty reasons doesn't seem fair to me.

I intended to keep out of it, but this is well written enough to coax me into response.

Like Mission, I also supported this decision. I'll be the first to admit that B9 had a large quantity of valuable posts. Whether I agreed or disagreed with his viewpoint, he was often times an asset. But not one of you could convince me that you haven't seen the disruption that several members have pointed out.

We talk about second chances, about leniency, about opportunities for atonement. But what is a return after a suspension if not exactly that?

I'm not one to talk down to someone. I often reread and rewrite a post several times in an attempt to be as diplomatic as possible. Why? Because we are all grown folk. I won't bring absurd attention to a point just to make sure you get it, it feels demeaning to me. So my original address to him upon his return, respected member SOOPOO's comments on same, and several other members who offered critique, to me, is well beyond sufficient to advise everyone of what is expected. And what was that critique? To leave the incessant bickering be.

Within the day, he was back at rxwine. Not arguing a point of view, but repeatedly targeting him personally, in the very thread discussing the suspension of himself where such behavior was addressed. And in the middle of that, he launched into Babs. I don't care that Babs is a mod. I don't care that she's female. I wouldn't care if she was a brand new member or the Wiz's alter-ego. What he did was the exact thing I and several others had just warned him about. His point - valid. His permission to question - granted. But post after post after post of incessant questioning...it is a disruption, and was one unquestionably.

I'll remind everyone again - this is Wiz's personal and professional website. This is the face of his business that he gives to the world. He pays for site hosting, he pays for reviews and game info, he pays for website management and development, he supplies a bevy of information to make you money. WoV is a part of what puts food on his table and sends his kids to school. And it's all given to you for free. The garbage that's been occurring lately I find offensive and disrespectful. It's a slap in the face, not only to the website, but to Mike himself. I know it's no big deal and "just a website", but what if there was no WoV? Not that you got kicked off, or your best mate got kicked off, but what if the switch was flipped and everything you posted and all the friends you made here were gone?

I think my name in green is evidence of his frustration. I think his lack of participation here is more of the same. I think he's tired of it. That's not a peek into mod info; I haven't spoken to him in ages, and never about this topic. It's just a feeling I've had as the result of being here a long time. I could be wrong, but I think it's an idea worth contemplating.

All that being said, everything is being discussed and reevaluated by the mod squad. If B9 returns, I'll accept and welcome him back, same as any other. But I wouldn't expect this more aggressive modding to be a phase. I really want to make that point clear. You may view it as censorship, but we were put here specifically to bring the forum back into the polite, intelligent, and respectable place it used to be. I would never have expected that to be a difficult task. Please do your part to ensure that it is not one.

I'm very proud to say, having outlived two suspensions, that when I got back I didn't snivel about it.

Quote: mickeycrimm

I'm very proud to say, having outlived two suspensions, that when I got back I didn't snivel about it.

As the man who suspended you, your conduct has been on my mind throughout all of this. You left, came back, apologized, and never had an issue again, instead filling the forum with prime contributions.

Seriously, thank you.

Quote: Face

I intended to keep out of it, but this is well written enough to coax me into response.

Like Mission, I also supported this decision. I'll be the first to admit that B9 had a large quantity of valuable posts. Whether I agreed or disagreed with his viewpoint, he was often times an asset. But not one of you could convince me that you haven't seen the disruption that several members have pointed out.

We talk about second chances, about leniency, about opportunities for atonement. But what is a return after a suspension if not exactly that?

I'm not one to talk down to someone. I often reread and rewrite a post several times in an attempt to be as diplomatic as possible. Why? Because we are all grown folk. I won't bring absurd attention to a point just to make sure you get it, it feels demeaning to me. So my original address to him upon his return, respected member SOOPOO's comments on same, and several other members who offered critique, to me, is well beyond sufficient to advise everyone of what is expected. And what was that critique? To leave the incessant bickering be.

Within the day, he was back at rxwine. Not arguing a point of view, but repeatedly targeting him personally, in the very thread discussing the suspension of himself where such behavior was addressed. And in the middle of that, he launched into Babs. I don't care that Babs is a mod. I don't care that she's female. I wouldn't care if she was a brand new member or the Wiz's alter-ego. What he did was the exact thing I and several others had just warned him about. His point - valid. His permission to question - granted. But post after post after post of incessant questioning...it is a disruption, and was one unquestionably.

I'll remind everyone again - this is Wiz's personal and professional website. This is the face of his business that he gives to the world. He pays for site hosting, he pays for reviews and game info, he pays for website management and development, he supplies a bevy of information to make you money. WoV is a part of what puts food on his table and sends his kids to school. And it's all given to you for free. The garbage that's been occurring lately I find offensive and disrespectful. It's a slap in the face, not only to the website, but to Mike himself. I know it's no big deal and "just a website", but what if there was no WoV? Not that you got kicked off, or your best mate got kicked off, but what if the switch was flipped and everything you posted and all the friends you made here were gone?

I think my name in green is evidence of his frustration. I think his lack of participation here is more of the same. I think he's tired of it. That's not a peek into mod info; I haven't spoken to him in ages, and never about this topic. It's just a feeling I've had as the result of being here a long time. I could be wrong, but I think it's an idea worth contemplating.

All that being said, everything is being discussed and reevaluated by the mod squad. If B9 returns, I'll accept and welcome him back, same as any other. But I wouldn't expect this more aggressive modding to be a phase. I really want to make that point clear. You may view it as censorship, but we were put here specifically to bring the forum back into the polite, intelligent, and respectable place it used to be. I would never have expected that to be a difficult task. Please do your part to ensure that it is not one.

Again, Face, outstanding post on this subject, thank you. You have brought out the essence of my forum worldview, and why I agreed to do this better than I have to this point. Well said. I will leave it to stand for itself and, added to my previous long post in this thread, ask that it represent my thoughts and concerns as well.

Part of the time-consuming decision review has been my reading the past 30 days (which is the Wizard's requested time frame on any moderation consideration, and also happens to be post-rule change) of Beethoven9th's contribution to this forum, some 250 posts. Though in his long tenure here I have seen much of value, in those recent posts, I would be hard-pressed to name even 10% that were +EV. More than 100 of those posts met one or more criteria for commonly accepted aspects of trolling; off topic, insulting, inflammatory, obfuscating, disruptive, repetitively agressive questioning, and the like, and were directed towards at least 5 other members of this board besides me, so I do not think the charge of trolling is unfounded. If I were to take the individual posts and Martingale him, it would count well past the nuke threshold. I am unwilling to subject this board to that massive parsing, but if you click on his name in the suspension list, you can read back for yourselves.

I would like to see him return to valued member status, should he choose to return and provide that value after serving his suspension. I also appreciate many of the points made on his behalf, moderation standards in general, and the messages of support for the decision, especially the discussion and advice provided by the other moderators. The nuke was also invoked in part for the duplicate account status which was apparently inadvertent system information, though as I said above, there is enough evidence to nuke on trolling alone. In consideration of all that, I am reducing the suspension invoked to 30 days, but not less, including time served. I look forward to welcoming him back at the end of that time.

Thank you all for your patience with this difficult situation. Perhaps we can all move forward with a better understanding of each other from here on in.

Quote: Mission146

He's not,

Any more. He most definitely was.

Quote:

I could be wrong, but I don't believe there are any anymore. I'd have to ask Wizard to be sure, though.

Not if they're kept secret from you ;)

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes, after all.

On Beethoven9th,

I fully support and agree with the decision to reduce the Suspension to thirty days.

Nareed,

I suppose that's true, I didn't really consider the technical aspects in answering the question: I basically just looked at the, "Top Contributors," and compared it to the Suspension List. I immediately remembered that EvenBob had previously been Suspended, was surprised to see FleaStiff had ever been Suspended, which then led me to DJTeddyBear. He's not an Administrator, at this time, so I figured he would get the nod as most posts without a ban.

If we are to disclude previous Administrators (secret or not), then PacoMartin gets the nod...as far as I know. I say that because, technically, he either could have been or presently is a secret Administrator and I don't/didn't know about it.

I suppose that should about rap that up, my recent Suspension of SuperRick is about as uncontroversial as a Suspension could ever be...heck, he'd be Suspended for Personal Insult even under the old Rules. I guess there could be room for Discussion about the length of Beethoven's modified Suspension, but will say that myself, Face and BeachBumBabs are all in agreement on that one.

Quote: 1BB

I think it was a serious mistake not to have a head moderator.

There is a head moderator. His name is the Wizard.

It seems like, in a major decision like this (I'm not talking about minor suspensions -- I'm talking about nuking long-term members) the mods are all going to talk about it behind the scenes, after the fact, anyway.

So..... if I may make a suggestion: in a case like this, just suspend the person, and then, during their suspension, discuss the possibility of a nuke behind-the-scenes. That way, if the decision is "nuke", you know that you won't be going back on it, and you can just "upgrade" the suspension to a nuke before it ends. And, if the decision is made to not nuke, you don't need to go through a long public discussion and debate (you can always just increase the suspension if you initially said, say, 7 days, and after discussion with the mods, it seems like 30 would be more appropriate).

I'm not doing this to try to question the authority of any of the mods, or anything like that. My only point is that if you are making a decision that is so major that you know that there will be behind-the-scenes discussion after you announce the decision, you may as well have the discussion before the announcement instead. I think that this will end up saving you a lot of time and effort, since you are saving yourself a lot of public discussion and explanation (or at least putting it off until you are all absolutely sure that the decision will be final). It also has the added benefit of not creating the impression that the mods all disagree about these decisions (whether that's true or not, that's clearly what some people think). If, instead, someone was suspended for 7 days, and then 4 days later someone made an announcement that the mods had all discussed it and decided to upgrade the suspension to a nuke, it presents a much more "united front", so to speak. I think that people are less likely to question something that appears to be a consensus, rather than one person acting alone (again, this is more about appearances)

This is just a suggestion... please don't take it the wrong way; I truly feel that this would save you (mods) time and effort, which is the only reason that I suggested it. I could see how some people might read this and think that I am suggesting that some moderators shouldn't be making these decisions alone, and I want to stress that that is NOT my point at all. The Wizard would not have made you mods if your judgement in these matters was not good (I honestly believe that)

Quote: Mission146

On Beethoven9th,

I fully support and agree with the decision to reduce the Suspension to thirty days.

-1 ;)

Quote:

Nareed,

I suppose that's true,

No need to suppose. It is true, verified and incontrovertible. ;)

This thread takes The Internet Is Serious Business to new heights.

Quote: sodawater

This thread takes The Internet Is Serious Business to new heights.

Quote: sodawater

This thread takes The Internet Is Serious Business to new heights.

302 pages dedicated to name calling, insult defining, he said/she said, and other minutiae. Certainly not the WOV thread I'd suspect the Wizard would choose to submit for an internet time machine.

I guess it's necessary though. It's a mainstay in the Recent Threads list.

Quote: michael99000

302 pages dedicated to name calling, insult defining, he said/she said, and other minutiae. Certainly not the WOV thread I'd suspect the Wizard would choose to submit for an internet time machine.

I guess it's necessary though. It's a mainstay in the Recent Threads list.

Sometimes you just need a place to vent and discuss. It keeps this topic here and the mods can keep it here and not spread it to other threads.

One of the MODS mentioned going back 30 days to view B9 posts.

And it reminded me of something from college. In one class the professor set the rule at the beginning of the semester. If you hand back and exam complaining that a particular answer was graded incorrectly......not only would that answer be looked at...but the entire test would be regraaded.
The idea being that, before crying that you caught the professor in a mistake on question 21 that was not in your favor....make sure that you didnt get an extra 3 points by a mistake in your favor on question 24.

Maybe you might want to consider that as a rule to avoid future issues. If someone is suspended and comes back complaining. The Mods have the right to go back 30 days and if they find more violations...they can re-issue or extend the ban. If the person has a clean past posting record...then he gets to voice his/her opinions. But he/she will be taking that gamble.

otherwise...when is enough ...enough. Each person has a different view. B9 had one opinion and others had other opinions.
nothing is layed out to be correct. So we cant expect him to follow a vague rule or one that didnt exist.

Also b9 was being engaged throughout. If he was ignored but kept posting, thats trolling no doubt....but I didnt sense that. Others were interacting with him

Last post. These past several pages are quite telling about how many here think of themselves. I prefer not to associate with y'all any further.

Try to deny your urge to take the plunge off Hoover Dam, at the news of my departure.

Quote: Sabretom2

Last post. These past several pages are quite telling about how many here think of themselves. I prefer not to associate with y'all any further.

Try to deny your urge to take the plunge off Hoover Dam, at the news of my departure.

You don't have to read this thread...

Quote: Sabretom2

Last post. These past several pages are quite telling about how many here think of themselves. I prefer not to associate with y'all any further.

Try to deny your urge to take the plunge off Hoover Dam, at the news of my departure.

WOW, the suspension discussion thread has spawned a self imposed nuke.

Quote: FinsRule

You don't have to read this thread...

that is to the point.

if someone doesnt like a thread they can avoid it. There are hundreds more to view.

individuals can be ignored, so if you see someone you dont care for its easy NOT to read their post..

I get a kick out of the people(common folk) who come toa thread and post that they think its going on too long for their taste....as if the world revolves around their taste.

And by posting, they have contributed to extending the thread because then someone is going to respond to them.

Its the second time this week someone self nuked themselves right after I posted.

buts it seems like its a male....so I will not be raked over the coals

Quote: LarryS

that is to the point.

if someone doesnt like a thread they can avoid it. There are hundreds more to view.

individuals can be ignored, so if you see someone you dont care for its easy NOT to read their post..

I get a kick out of the people(common folk) who come toa thread and post that they think its going on too long for their taste....as if the world revolves around their taste.

And by posting, they have contributed to extending the thread because then someone is going to respond to them.

Its the second time this week someone self nuked themselves right after I posted.

buts it seems like its a male....so I will not be raked over the coals

It's like a train wreck, or a gruesome car accident. You know it's sad and disastrous but you can't help but look.

It's hard to believe that a group of grown adults can argue over such nonsense for 302 pages. You called me this, she called me that, Im offended by this, why was my suspension longer than his. Would this discussion ever happen in real life? Only amongst a group of 9 year olds perhaps.

As for you specifically, it seems as though you're 3 main interests are 1. Giving the mods a hard time, 2. Nitpicking every rule interpretation to the nth degree and 3. Pointing out how annoying it is when a female members comes across in her posts as though she's... A female

As for people nuking themselves immediately upon reading what you write, well I don't know what to say about that.

Quote: michael99000

It's hard to believe that a group of grown adults can argue over such nonsense for 302 pages..

It's just like a legislature with lesser goals.

I was suspended one time for this post:

https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/general/10103-wheres-paigowdan/#post152945

I was being clever and sarcastic and it didn't
go over well. I've changed a lot, I was very
young then.

Quote: Sabretom2

Last post. These past several pages are quite telling about how many here think of themselves. I prefer not to associate with y'all any further.

Try to deny your urge to take the plunge off Hoover Dam, at the news of my departure.

I'm sorry to hear that. Is anyone here concerned that one of our members is so fed up that he no longer wishes to participate in the forum. I think we should be.

Quote: 1BB

I'm sorry to hear that. Is anyone here concerned that one of our members is so fed up that he no longer wishes to participate in the forum. I think we should be.

Unfortunately, his post did not leave any specifics for me to attempt to address.

Quote: michael99000

It's like a train wreck, or a gruesome car accident. You know it's sad and disastrous but you can't help but look.

It's hard to believe that a group of grown adults can argue over such nonsense for 302 pages. You called me this, she called me that, Im offended by this, why was my suspension longer than his. Would this discussion ever happen in real life? Only amongst a group of 9 year olds perhaps.

As for you specifically, it seems as though you're 3 main interests are 1. Giving the mods a hard time, 2. Nitpicking every rule interpretation to the nth degree and 3. Pointing out how annoying it is when a female members comes across in her posts as though she's... A female

As for people nuking themselves immediately upon reading what you write, well I don't know what to say about that.

when I read A lie, all the rest dissolves into nothing

"nitpicking EVERY rule interpretation"

I know for a fact I have not discussed EVERY rule


As annoying as a lie might be to some people...I enjoy being on the receiving end of them. It lessens the credbilityof the person commenting on me and makes their post meaningless. ...and hastens their dismissal in my mind


"As for people nuking themselves immediately upon reading what you write, well I don't know what to say about that"

Thats really ok...it wasnt a question.

I have definitely cut down on my WoV time lately. The constant childlike whining and fighting is too much

Quote: Beardgoat

I have definitely cut down on my WoV time lately. The constant childlike whining and fighting is too much

the current eruption could easily have been avoided through better communication.

From what I can tell from the post by "face"....the mods were instructed to tighten up on enfiorcing the rules....and no heads up occured to us peons down below.
Now my banning whould have occured under any regime....doesnt matter about the memo. But other people were caught off guard

I did not once come back and complain about the action against me. But I was involved in reading through an avalance of other posts where inconsistancies were
shown and people didnt know why.

Untill we found out after the fact that we are in a new era of enforcement

fair enough to be in this new era....just let us know.

Quote: LarryS

Untill we found out after the fact that we are in a new era of enforcement

fair enough to be in this new era....just let us know.

If the board's membership would just follow the rules, the level of enforcement would be a moot point. As rules have continued to be broken, increased enforcement has become necessary. However, no notice of increased enforcement is necessary - the rules exist, and violations have occurred.

Quote: rdw4potus

If the board's membership would just follow the rules, the level of enforcement would be a moot point. As rules have continued to be broken, increased enforcement has become necessary. However, no notice of increased enforcement is necessary - the rules exist, and violations have occurred.

And the result is dozens of pages here that people are talking about in frustration

so how did that philosophy work out???

one person is leaving over it..just a few posts back

if people want to pretend that they are "concerned" when a member leaves.....then the answer...there is no need to communicate to members...its their fault...they should know better.....doesnt address the "concern"

Quote: LarryS

one person is leaving over it..just a few posts back

That person is leaving because some people are spending dozens of pages whining about the rules like children...

Quote: EvenBob

I was suspended one time for this post:

https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/general/10103-wheres-paigowdan/#post152945

I was being clever and sarcastic and it didn't
go over well. I've changed a lot, I was very
young Bthen.

Bob, when you were young,the internet was a chisel and a stone tablet!

Quote: 1BB

Is anyone here concerned that one of our members is so fed up that he no longer wishes to participate in the forum.

Is anyone surprised there's a human community where the members often bicker and argue?

Quote: Nareed

Is anyone surprised there's a human community where the members often bicker and argue?

Nope.

Quote: rdw4potus

That person is leaving because some people are spending dozens of pages whining about the rules like children...

and what is the root cause? And could it have been avoided. there seems to be a cause and effecthere

example
every workpalce has a bunch of rules. Some rules are strictly followed ..some arent. So lets say for argument sake that there is a rule"no personal calls while on the clock". The manager in charge of 100 people overlooks this rule for a while and doesnt enforce it strictly. The manager gets a memo from the president to start enforcing that rule.
so
1- the manager can have a meeting or send an email, or post something on the bulletin board that going forward this rule will be enforced strictly
OR
2- after reading the memo, wait to see some violations, and start to suspend people he happens to see making a personal call one day. Afterall the rule is on the books and everyone should know about it. Of course the people that got suspended wonder where the communication was, and why they are being singled out because the others were also making personal calls. But life isnt fair they are told. And its right there in black and white in the manual. BYE BYE And if u complain you will be suspended even longer. So shhhhhhhh

which of the above would garner harmony......which of the above would cause hard feelings

which workplace would be a good place to work going foward.

now look here on this board....and tell me its all the fault of the underlings....and management couldnt have prevented this situation. Its seems the same 2 choices i listed above were available here.

Management says "play nice"

playing nice could mean giving us a heads up

(I am speaking for others,.......the complaints about this threads length....not myself...as I am not complaning aboutmy personal banning as it was warranted under any set of rules..even lightly enforced)

Quote: LarryS

Management says "play nice"

playing nice could mean giving us a heads up

Okay, here's a heads-up:

When we change the Personal Insult Rule that once allowed for light Personal Insults to no Personal Insults whatsoever, that should lead one to the assumption that we are tightening the reins a little bit in terms of what is going to be permitted here because we believe things are getting a bit out of hand.

I apologize to all of those negatively affected who did not assume that Administration tightening one Rule would mean that Administration would be more strictly enforcing all of the Rules.

I would then also apologize to those who have not perused the Suspension List for the last few months, seen the comparative plethora of names on said list compared to any series of three months prior to that and made the assumption that Administration is tightening enforcement a bit.

Finally, I would then apologize to anyone who didn't notice that we promoted two new Administrators recently because there was too much going on for me to adequately keep up with working alone due to people stepping out of line.

For anyone who didn't notice, or who did notice but made no inferences of any or all of these three events, you have my apologies for having no reasonable cause to infer that the Rules are being more strictly enforced, recently.

In any event, everything will come back into balance in time. The general decorum on the Forum will improve, and as a necessary result, Administration will be less active with respect to Suspensions. Some people may be nuked in this timeframe, but I certainly hope not. Either way, a balance will be brought back about and the focus will be on gambling-related topics rather than what Administration is or is not doing.

'Heads up' was the banning of several members for personal insults over the past month.

The 'heads ups' for B9 was the three day suspension. When you come back, you are supposed to have learned a lesson and lay low and not continue to engage in the behavior that got him suspended in the first place.

He came back and all that he did was get into arguments about the original ban. BBB had had enough, and suspended him. Heads up: don't argue your suspension by engaging in the behavior that got your suspended in the first place (in your analogy, after making personal phone calls and coming back to work, the employee continued to make personal phone calls).

We were all notified that the standards and rules on this forum was changing to beyond the Stadler/Waldorf convention, and with that has been growing pains on what an insult consists of.

We also have some mods who are learning how to implement these new standards using new criteria which really isn't all that clear. That said, I have been VERY careful not cross the line especially after the JJ fiasco. And while that means the political threads aren't going to be as much 'fun', it also means a modicum of sanity on this forum.

The Wizard is making it clear that we are to be respectful to each other with low tolerance, less so for the most venerable members of this community.

[Edit: Mission, I was typing this having not seen your previous post]

Quote: Mission146

Okay, here's a heads-up:

When we change the Personal Insult Rule that once allowed for light Personal Insults to no Personal Insults whatsoever, that should lead one to the assumption that we are tightening the reins a little bit in terms of what is going to be permitted here because we believe things are getting a bit out of hand.

I apologize to all of those negatively affected who did not assume that Administration tightening one Rule would mean that Administration would be more strictly enforcing all of the Rules.

I would then also apologize to those who have not perused the Suspension List for the last few months, seen the comparative plethora of names on said list compared to any series of three months prior to that and made the assumption that Administration is tightening enforcement a bit.

Finally, I would then apologize to anyone who didn't notice that we promoted two new Administrators recently because there was too much going on for me to adequately keep up with working alone due to people stepping out of line.

For anyone who didn't notice, or who did notice but made no inferences of any or all of these three events, you have my apologies for having no reasonable cause to infer that the Rules are being more strictly enforced, recently.

In any event, everything will come back into balance in time. The general decorum on the Forum will improve, and as a necessary result, Administration will be less active with respect to Suspensions. Some people may be nuked in this timeframe, but I certainly hope not. Either way, a balance will be brought back about and the focus will be on gambling-related topics rather than what Administration is or is not doing.

But...but...I still didn't notice. That makes it all your fault, right? :-)

Quote: LarryS

the current eruption could easily have been avoided through better communication.

From what I can tell from the post by "face"....the mods were instructed to tighten up on enfiorcing the rules....and no heads up occured to us peons down below.
Now my banning whould have occured under any regime....doesnt matter about the memo. But other people were caught off guard

I did not once come back and complain about the action against me. But I was involved in reading through an avalance of other posts where inconsistancies were
shown and people didnt know why.

Untill we found out after the fact that we are in a new era of enforcement

fair enough to be in this new era....just let us know.

Do you feel the new era is unfair or unjust in any way?

I think that the mods do a great job here, given the volume of posts they need to sift through. This forum is basically nonstop action with a variety of topics being discussed and a variety of personality types to handle. The two in green I'm most familiar with, Babs and mission, always give a thorough explanation for their administrative actions and Babs in particular always gives the forum member the benefit of the doubt whenever there's any gray area or room for interpretation. That's all you can really ask from them.

Quote: rdw4potus

That person is leaving because some people are spending dozens of pages whining about the rules like children...

Sometimes I wonder... Do we lose more members due to them being sick of all the bickering and whining about the rules, than we would if there were no rules regarding personal insults at all? I mean, if the forum only banned racial slurs and sexist comments, but allowed your garden variety personal insults, what's the downside to that environment ? I don't think anyone would go out of their way to deliver more insults than they do now simply because it's legal. And I'm pretty sure I've heard many members say that they're never offended or insulted by anything someone on the internet says to them anyway. I'm certainly in that group.

I actually think that often times during a heated debate between two members, when an insult occurs, the member on the receiving end is more excited about it than offended. Reason being, the original heated debate that led to the insult has caused a personal dislike for each other, and seeing the other guy suspended makes you feel good.

I know this will never occur, and I respect the rules the Wizard has in place, but 302 pages of bickering over said rules just has me thinking out loud about what a forum devoid of personal insult rules would be like. Maybe I'm crazy, but my guess is.. Not much different.

Quote: 1BB

Yes, you support the decision in keeping with the company line but in my heart of hearts I know that there is no way that you, Face or maybe even the Wizard agree with it. The tone of your post says it all. In my opinion had one of you handled this, a longtime member with over 5,000 posts would not have been summarily and capriciously kicked off this forum. He may not have been suspended at all.

Your intentions were good in giving all the moderators equal powers but I think it was a serious mistake not to have a head moderator. This is a perfect example of why. For something as serious and permanent as this there should at least be a quorum to discuss it. Please rethink this. As you say, there are only two people who can modify this suspension but, again, there's that company line which means that there is really only one.

The job of moderator is to moderate. To me that means guiding members in the right direction, pointing to their mistakes and giving clear and concise guidelines as to what is expected. Inevitably there will be discipline, hopefully meted out in a fair and unbiased manner. Kicking someone off the forum for petty reasons doesn't seem fair to me.

It seems like I agree with 1BB on pretty much everything. This is utterly ridiculous. I could tell by B9s posts that he was an intelligent individual with potential value. Established members seem to be saying, yes, he is an asset. And B9 gets ticked off about a suspension that he doesn't agree with, so what? He argued his points civilly and with fervor. Trolling? I was conversing with him, and so were others--I thought trolling was when you just bother people out of nowhere. How about a warning or a 3 day if the moderators feel this somehow rises to that level? I don't think he was making things personal. Yet this does not seem like an objective, unbiased ban.

I hereby request to serve 1/2 of B9s remaining sentence for him. And I will make this same request for any other member who does not deserve a ban, if allowed to do so by the staff, until this nonsense ends.

No offense against B9 but he was vehemently demanding an answer from babs over the use of a so called Chinese slur. I'm sorry, but if you are vehemently demanding an answer from someone then you are trolling them. "All the nonsense" is not coming from the moderators.

Quote: Face

As the man who suspended you, your conduct has been on my mind throughout all of this. You left, came back, apologized, and never had an issue again, instead filling the forum with prime contributions. Seriously, thank you.

Thanks, Face. I try to contribute. But at the same time I live with the fact that I'm only a whiskey jug away from making a buffoon of myself again.

Quote: mickeycrimm

No offense against B9 but he was vehemently demanding an answer from babs over the use of a so called Chinese slur. I'm sorry, but if you are vehemently demanding an answer from someone then you are trolling them. "All the nonsense" is not coming from the moderators.

Heck, I can't even remember now...did she ever answer the question?

Quote: Nareed

Is anyone surprised there's a human community where the members often bicker and argue?

No surprise at all. It reminds me of family gatherings with relatives that you only see once or twice a year. Everyone knows the topics that should be avoided, at least at the table. Good old uncle Joe just can't help himself, however, and brother in law Bob is only too happy to pour gas on the fire. It seldom ends well unless one of them passes out early.

Quote: 1BB

No surprise at all. It reminds me of family gatherings with relatives that you only see once or twice a year. Everyone knows the topics that should be avoided, at least at the table. Good old uncle Joe just can't help himself, however, and brother in law Bob is only too happy to pour gas on the fire. It seldom ends well unless one of them passes out early.

The good thing about "family bickering" here is that you can avoid any thread that contains it by simply ignoring the thread. Don't want to hear discussions of the suspension list? Don't care to weigh in on Obamacare? Tired of dice setting conversations? Just don't click on those threads is a simple answer, as is blocking it.

Don't care for a member for some reason? Block them.

So quitting just because a couple of people are bickering is a little over the top. Coming to this thread is kind of like going to a NASCAR race...we all want to see who wins, but we are really looking for the big wreck 9while hoping no one gets hurt...oh...we might not always feel that way here!!)...but no one has to watch NASCAR and no one has to visit any thread.

You can't do that very well at a family gathering!!

Quote: michael99000

Sometimes I wonder... Do we lose more members due to them being sick of all the bickering and whining about the rules, than we would if there were no rules regarding personal insults at all? I mean, if the forum only banned racial slurs and sexist comments, but allowed your garden variety personal insults, what's the downside to that environment ? I don't think anyone would go out of their way to deliver more insults than they do now simply because it's legal. And I'm pretty sure I've heard many members say that they're never offended or insulted by anything someone on the internet says to them anyway. I'm certainly in that group.

It doesn't matter that people are or are not insulted, per se, the main aspects that matter are the appearances of the quality of the Forum to those looking to join as well as the continued enjoyment of the Forum for valuable Members. If you were to go to a Forum, and even if the Personal Insults aren't too heavy, all you see is people sniping back and forth and trading insulting barbs with one another, then your impression of the Forum is going to be that it is just a place that permits unchecked immaturity and where the Members do not behave with decorum.

The purpose of this Forum is to be a gambling and Vegas Discussion Board, and a good one, at that. In order to be a good Forum, we must:

1.) Be topical.
2.) Retain our current Members, especially high-quality Members, AP's, and Members with industry recognition.
3.) Be attractive to potential New Members who can become high-quality Members.

It's enough of a challenge to go to a new Forum, one in which some of the highest posting Members have thousands and thousands of posts, and try to make a place for yourself there, so hats off to all who have done that and who will do that here. Now, if you add to that the annoyance of having someone flinging barbs at you and sniping at you when you are brand new to a place, that's going to drive people off.

I'm not saying that we want to go out of our way to be especially accommodating to new Members, but to have an environment where, "You start with respect, and you earn disrespect."

Quote:

I actually think that often times during a heated debate between two members, when an insult occurs, the member on the receiving end is more excited about it than offended. Reason being, the original heated debate that led to the insult has caused a personal dislike for each other, and seeing the other guy suspended makes you feel good.

There are only two things that satisfy me in an argument:

1.) Being proven right.
2.) Being conclusively proven wrong.

If I have the wrong answer, I want to know the right one and I want to know why I was wrong so I can improve and become more intelligent. If I am correct in the argument, then I have no interest in insulting anyone or in seeing someone Suspended, my interest is in demonstrating the accuracy of my position in order to educate others as to what I know. Knowledge, above all else, should be shared, and again, an atmosphere that tolerates insults and disrespect takes away from the sharing of knowledge.

I would suggest that, in addition to the company, people come here to learn. They want to know about Vegas, or Math, Rules, Comps, Gaming conditions...etc

Do they allow Personal Insults to be traded back and forth in the classroom? Of course not, people are there to learn and that distracts from the learning. I would suggest that people are also here to learn, and also to share, which is a bit different than the classroom because one is taught to in the classroom. An individual can have a dual (and often changing) role here, sometimes I am the student, and sometimes I do the teaching.

Quote:

I know this will never occur, and I respect the rules the Wizard has in place, but 302 pages of bickering over said rules just has me thinking out loud about what a forum devoid of personal insult rules would be like. Maybe I'm crazy, but my guess is.. Not much different.

It would be, I've seen it. It doesn't work. The Forum might still be active, in such an event, but would have no value. We would lose almost all high-quality Members.

302 Pages

I'm going to bring it up with the Wizard, but I may be Locking this baby up in the next few days and starting a NEW Discussion About the Suspension List thread. I can see where this gives a poor appearance to the site. We may have a new thread for it every month.

Quote: 1BB

No surprise at all. It reminds me of family gatherings with relatives that you only see once or twice a year.

And there's a reason why you don't see them more often. OK, several reasons. But one main one.

Surprisingly one can do the same thing here: use the block function.