Australian Politics Forum - Abuse....'Personal Criticism'

cods

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 88048

Re: Abuse....'Personal Criticism'
Reply #15 - Aug 9^th, 2016 at 1:52pm

Redmond Neck wrote on Aug 9^th, 2016 at 1:24pm:

Aussie wrote on Aug 9^th, 2016 at 12:54pm:

However, there is a balance to be had, as a 'free for all' will deliver another dead Forum like elsewhere.

I think quite the opposite!

The reason this forum survives is because it it not operated like a bloody nannie state with nit picky rules being applied all the time!

"All play nice or you will be banned!"

No leave well enough alone!

Let the offended complain to a Gmod if they are offended!

do you know what the difference is between abuse and an opinion red????>.....

can I call you all the names under the sun and say its just my OPINION of you?....you can be offended but dont bother reporting it...

do you think its ok for a gmod to use their own opinion of what is said.....without explaining to the person who either complains or is banned...

WHY they did what they did, or didnt do...

ok that may not be easy to understand... Roll Eyes

Back to top

IP Logged

Redmond Neck

Gold Member

Online

OzPolitic

Posts: 21739
ACT
Gender: male

Re: Abuse....'Personal Criticism'
Reply #16 - Aug 9^th, 2016 at 3:19pm

cods wrote on Aug 9^th, 2016 at 1:52pm:

Redmond Neck wrote on Aug 9^th, 2016 at 1:24pm:

Aussie wrote on Aug 9^th, 2016 at 12:54pm:

However, there is a balance to be had, as a 'free for all' will deliver another dead Forum like elsewhere.

I think quite the opposite!

The reason this forum survives is because it it not operated like a bloody nannie state with nit picky rules being applied all the time!

"All play nice or you will be banned!"

No leave well enough alone!

Let the offended complain to a Gmod if they are offended!

do you know what the difference is between abuse and an opinion red????>.....

can I call you all the names under the sun and say its just my OPINION of you?....you can be offended but dont bother reporting it...

That's true

Quote:

do you think its ok for a gmod to use their own opinion of what is said.....without explaining to the person who either complains or is banned...

WHY they did what they did, or didnt do...

ok that may not be easy to understand... Roll Eyes

Well the Gmod is given the job of the arbitrator and has to make a decision and I suspect if he has to explain his ruling on each occasion bedlam would ensue with everyone having their two bobs worth in opinions.

He could decide to give you a private ruling but with some that would still start a PM war with him.

So if I was the head honco I would leave it up to the Gmod to decide if he wanted to discuss his ruling but as a general rule "no correspondence will be entered into". That is he would read your PM and act or not act as he saw fit!

Back to top

BAN ALL THESE ABO SITES RECOGNITIONS.

ALL AUSTRALIA IS FOR ALL AUSTRALIANS!

IP Logged

Aussie

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 38865
Gender: male

Re: Abuse....'Personal Criticism'
Reply #17 - Aug 9^th, 2016 at 3:42pm

Quote:

Well the Gmod is given the job of the arbitrator and has to make a decision.....

Agreed.

Quote:

......and I suspect if he has to explain his ruling on each occasion bedlam would ensue with everyone having their two bobs worth in opinions.

Disagree, and that is because the Rules preclude revealing the content of PMs, thus, the matter of the explanation is kept private.

Quote:

He could decide to give you a private ruling but with some that would still start a PM war with him.

Mr Hicks has posted, many times, that a PM explaining any Ban is sent to the Member.

Quote:

So if I was the head honco I would leave it up to the Gmod to decide if he wanted to discuss his ruling but as a general rule "no correspondence will be entered into". That is he would read your PM and act or not act as he saw fit!

I look at it from the perspective of developing consistency. Members ought to have a gauge they can measure against. "I see Fred got kicked in the nuts for saying.....blah blah blah.......so I better not tempt fate."

If Harry got a ban for saying 'Boo', and Anne, who also said 'Boo,' not not get disciplined, then we have identified a clear problem with consistency.

Back to top

IP Logged

Redmond Neck

Gold Member

Online

OzPolitic

Posts: 21739
ACT
Gender: male

Re: Abuse....'Personal Criticism'
Reply #18 - Aug 9^th, 2016 at 4:15pm

Aussie wrote on Aug 9^th, 2016 at 3:42pm:

Mr Hicks has posted, many times, that a PM explaining any Ban is sent to the Member.

I was actually referring to complaint handling rather than a banning, yes an explanation to the perp should follow a banning

Quote:

I look at it from the perspective of developing consistency. Members ought to have a gauge they can measure against. "I see Fred got kicked in the nuts for saying.....blah blah blah.......so I better not tempt fate."

If Harry got a ban for saying 'Boo', and Anne, who also said 'Boo,' not not get disciplined, then we have identified a clear problem with consistency.

Again I was referring to handling a complaint.

If a Gmod had to give an explanation every time he made a decision , he would be driven mad by by nitpicking types like yourself Aussie, saying you said this three months ago, and something else some other time.

So no correspondence will be entered into would be my approach.

KISS principle again.

Back to top

BAN ALL THESE ABO SITES RECOGNITIONS.

ALL AUSTRALIA IS FOR ALL AUSTRALIANS!

IP Logged

Aussie

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 38865
Gender: male

Re: Abuse....'Personal Criticism'
Reply #19 - Aug 9^th, 2016 at 4:20pm

Quote:

If a Gmod had to give an explanation every time he made a decision , he would be driven mad by by nitpicking types like yourself Aussie, saying you said this three months ago, and something else some other time.

I would regard it as due process in the dispensation of natural justice that a decision maker be reminded of an earlier decision or earlier relevant comments. Why are you wanting to protect hypocrisy?

Back to top

IP Logged

Redmond Neck

Gold Member

Online

OzPolitic

Posts: 21739
ACT
Gender: male

Re: Abuse....'Personal Criticism'
Reply #20 - Aug 9^th, 2016 at 4:23pm

Aussie wrote on Aug 9^th, 2016 at 4:20pm:

Quote:

If a Gmod had to give an explanation every time he made a decision , he would be driven mad by by nitpicking types like yourself Aussie, saying you said this three months ago, and something else some other time.

I would regard it as due process in the dispensation of natural justice that a decision maker be reminded of an earlier decision or earlier relevant comments. Why are you wanting to protect hypocrisy?

A good manager doesnt have to explain his every move to the office boy Aussie, that is why he is in charge.

Back to top

BAN ALL THESE ABO SITES RECOGNITIONS.

ALL AUSTRALIA IS FOR ALL AUSTRALIANS!

IP Logged

Aussie

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 38865
Gender: male

Re: Abuse....'Personal Criticism'
Reply #21 - Aug 9^th, 2016 at 5:32pm

Redmond Neck wrote on Aug 9^th, 2016 at 4:23pm:

Aussie wrote on Aug 9^th, 2016 at 4:20pm:

Quote:

If a Gmod had to give an explanation every time he made a decision , he would be driven mad by by nitpicking types like yourself Aussie, saying you said this three months ago, and something else some other time.

I would regard it as due process in the dispensation of natural justice that a decision maker be reminded of an earlier decision or earlier relevant comments. Why are you wanting to protect hypocrisy?

A good manager doesnt have to explain his every move to the office boy Aussie, that is why he is in charge.

If he is a complete idiot, he will be held accountable by somebody, probably a Union.

And this is not an Office, and I acknowledge it is not a Court Room either. The Members are what really counts, not the GMods. Elsewhere is made up up almost 100% Managers, and zero others.

Members will react, perhaps with their feet, to what happens to them and to others at any Forum.

Back to top

IP Logged

Emma

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 9853
OZ
Gender: female

Re: Abuse....'Personal Criticism'
Reply #22 - Aug 9^th, 2016 at 6:07pm

Aussie wrote on Aug 9^th, 2016 at 12:09pm:

[

This Thread was commenced in the General Section, and moved here by freediver about Noon on the 9th August, 2016. Mod.

]

Is this abuse/personal criticism within the Rules, or not? It does not matter who the poster is or who it was directed at.

Quote:

...you can be one-eyed, vacuous and vicious..

Here is the Rule:

Quote:

Personal criticism

Do not post personal criticism of other members. Do not respond to personal criticism of yourself or other members. This is the biggest problem on OzPolitic. Too many members are easily baited into off-topic personal exchanges. If you participate in any kind of flame war you will be suspended, regardless of who started it or who you think ‘deserved it’.

Do not post personal criticism of other members.

Seems very clear to me.

Well I think the rule is badly written. It really should say

Personal abuse. Why? Because there is a huge difference between criticism and abuse. All criticism is not abusive.
Criticism can definitely be something to learn from, whereas ABUSE is always a negative, and Please note I said CAN BE... not ARE.
So the Rule is too vague to be easily understood.
Quite rightly - context is important also.. so Aussie your taking up the cudgels on this is pretty pointless, but no doubt a bit of fun for you..

Back to top

live every day

IP Logged

Aussie Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 38865 Gender:	Re: Abuse....'Personal Criticism' Reply #23 - Aug 9^th, 2016 at 6:13pm The question was simple. It related to seven, but, relevantly, three words. It mentioned no Member by name. The words are clearly criticism. They breach the Rule, which, as you say, needs to be fixed.
Back to top	IP Logged

Emma

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 9853
OZ
Gender: female

Re: Abuse....'Personal Criticism'
Reply #24 - Aug 9^th, 2016 at 6:23pm

Aussie wrote on Aug 9^th, 2016 at 6:13pm:

The question was simple. It related to seven, but, relevantly, three words. It mentioned no Member by name.

The words are clearly criticism. They breach the Rule, which, as you say, needs to be fixed.

AHH haha ... wriggled out of that didn't you Aussie.

The rule is unworkable as it allows for personal interpretation, but I voted NO Not a Breach, because 'the intention ' of the Rule is clearly aimed at personal ABUSE. Nothing wrong with criticism... as long as it is merited.

Back to top

live every day

IP Logged

Emma

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 9853
OZ
Gender: female

Re: Abuse....'Personal Criticism'
Reply #25 - Aug 9^th, 2016 at 6:27pm

No it is not a simple question as framed by you. One must take into account the context, and by denying that context you make the question an apparent 'slam dunk'.

It is easy to play with words, and three words taken out of a longer post is simply trying to stack the odds in the favour of the positor of the question. So it is not a simple question, it is an unfair one. So much should be obvious to you.

Back to top

live every day

IP Logged

Aussie

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 38865
Gender: male

Re: Abuse....'Personal Criticism'
Reply #26 - Aug 9^th, 2016 at 6:36pm

Quote:

No it is not a simple question as framed by you.

That is the point exactly. It is a simple question (relevantly) about three words.

Let's take it one step at a time.

Those three words are both criticism of a Member (if directed at one) and abuse of that Member (if directed at one.)

Next step would be to deal with context.

Back to top

IP Logged

Emma Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 9853 OZ Gender:	Re: Abuse....'Personal Criticism' Reply #27 - Aug 9^th, 2016 at 6:42pm Criticism does not mean abuse, so I don't agree with the basis of your question in the first instance. All the rest is pure sophistry..
Back to top	live every day IP Logged

Redmond Neck

Gold Member

Online

OzPolitic

Posts: 21739
ACT
Gender: male

Re: Abuse....'Personal Criticism'
Reply #28 - Aug 9^th, 2016 at 7:12pm

Aussie wrote on Aug 9^th, 2016 at 5:32pm:

Redmond Neck wrote on Aug 9^th, 2016 at 4:23pm:

Aussie wrote on Aug 9^th, 2016 at 4:20pm:

Quote:

If a Gmod had to give an explanation every time he made a decision , he would be driven mad by by nitpicking types like yourself Aussie, saying you said this three months ago, and something else some other time.

I would regard it as due process in the dispensation of natural justice that a decision maker be reminded of an earlier decision or earlier relevant comments. Why are you wanting to protect hypocrisy?

A good manager doesnt have to explain his every move to the office boy Aussie, that is why he is in charge.

If he is a complete idiot, he will be held accountable by somebody, probably a Union.

And this is not an Office, and I acknowledge it is not a Court Room either. The Members are what really counts, not the GMods. Elsewhere is made up up almost 100% Managers, and zero others.

Members will react, perhaps with their feet, to what happens to them and to others at any Forum.

Freediver is the Gm Aussie, he will get rid of the Gmods if they overstep the mark as you well know from experience!

Sorry but your little ex lawyer opinion doesnt really count!

Tough titties!

Take it on the chin like a man!

Back to top

BAN ALL THESE ABO SITES RECOGNITIONS.

ALL AUSTRALIA IS FOR ALL AUSTRALIANS!

IP Logged

Andrei.Hicks

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 23818
Carlsbad, CA
Gender: male

Re: Abuse....'Personal Criticism'
Reply #29 - Aug 9^th, 2016 at 7:23pm

There are expectations of the Global Moderator.

They know what they can or can't do. There is no secret set of rules, what is expected of them is to be fair and honest, treating others as they would want to be treated themselves.

Red is right, FD is the boss. If a GMod clearly isn't up to the task and needs taking out, that will happen.
It has happened before as some of you know.

Back to top

Anyone who lives within their means suffers from a lack of imagination - Oscar Wilde

IP Logged

Poll
Question: Rule Breach or not?
It is a Rule breach 1 (12.5%) It is not a Rule breach 7 (87.5%) Total votes: 8 « Created by: Aussie on: Aug 9^th, 2016 at 12:10pm »