I’ve started this as a new thread because I believe it goes beyond the minor discussions of the “comments about the moderators”. This is more about the entire moderation style of this board, which I believe is broken and thoroughly dysfunctional.
I notice that “stormchaser”'s account has been suspended. Earlier, he posted something about having been harrassed by Mordeth via PM.
Some of you may recall that a month or so back, Toe Save’s account was suspended. This was because he had harrassed and threatened me repeatedly via PM. In the end, nothing was done about him by the moderators; Maoman told me that he considers PMs to be the equivalent of “carrier pigeon” and so not part of Forumosa, and so he and the other mods really don’t give a crap about what people do via PM.
I don’t know whether Mordeth really was harrassing the other guy or not. However, this strikes me as a truly fucked up way to run a website – allow people free rein to harrass, intimidate, and threaten others as long as they don’t do it publicly?
Then of course there is the current bit with “banshette”. At first I thought, wow, she really went off the deep end. Then I recalled that only a couple of days ago, about 90% of the “racism” thread was deleted because the mods got tired of it. A few odd-sounding messages were left in, much like when Toe Save was harrassing me back in August via his “38” alter-id (it definitely wasn’t an alter-ego, although he clearly has several, or perhaps simply one giant inflated superego).
So now I’m left to wonder, did “banshette” go off the deep end, or were there a whole shitload of messages that got deleted by the Niceness Police, which I never saw, and which left her swinging in the breeze, much as has happened to me in the past?
Overall, I’m becoming more and more disillusioned about the people running/ruining this board.
Is there any way to prove that a person is being harrassed via PM’s? I don’t agree with anything Mordeth has said or done but don’t you think Stormchaser could have handled it in a different way? Could he have proved that he was being harrassed? I read his “Mordeth” post this afternoon and I couldn’t believe how angry and violent it was. Of course, I don’t have the whole story…
Something was done and I talked to him in person. I think you mean to say he didn’t get banned like you wanted him to . I believe things turned out just fine. I personally think that private messages should stay private. If it got to be a “real” problem the whole PM system could just be turned off and everyone could just stick to using email. The PM function can also be turned off on a case-by-case basis if needed (as I’m sure you already know).
I think some people just need a healthy serving of Act Right Juice.
To help me understand this, do you both think that the moderating style is broken because it is a flawed process (i.e. no process, broken process, unclear process, enforcement problems etc) or that the results of such processes are difficult to understand (i.e. nonsensical, wrong etc) ?
i think forumosa should do something about threats on the PM, but also about general lack of courtesty in response to posts. also some of moderators have made brash decisions about some posts. look make up your minds: is this a " think like me" forum or a forum where ideas no matter how different, can be discussed?
you guys are making me think my decision to stay the heck away from the foreign community all these years was the right one. why should i waste my time on a bunch of smart aleck i"'m more sophisticated than you" posters?
The only way we can verify a PM is to look into a person’s inbox, and we can’t do that without their permission (i.e. they have to tell us their account password!). We don’t have the time or inclination to do that, except under the direst circumstances. MaPoSquid, you’ll recall that I did in fact take your complaint seriously and I dealt with it promptly and thoroughly. If you disagree, you can call my cell phone number anytime. I’ll never dodge your questions. Same goes for anyone else here. PM me if you need admin help, and I will respond.
What do you suggest? Delete the PM function? How about the ICQ icon? AIM address? MSN/Yahoo messenger? They can all be used to “harrass, intimidate, and threaten”. :s If you display contact information, people will contact you. It’s none of our business. If you don’t like it, don’t display your contact information. It’s that simple. :s
Not normally, no. It is possible to go in through a “back door”, but this involves expertise with the database that neither Gus nor I possess. So for all intents and purposes, PMs are what they say they are - Private Messages.
Some people post from static IP addresses, and they are fairly easy to identify. Many people, however, have dynamic IPs that are inconclusive with regards to a persons’s location/IP address. Many dynamic IP addresses wil have 30 or 40 Forumosan names, so we don’t put too much stock in them.
Exactly.[/quote]
Considering the amount of personal attacks and flames the two of you have contributed to the flame forum, I find your comments bizarre. :eh: The moderators of this board are some of the most professional, dedicated, volunteers you could ever hope to meet. If you don’t like the board, try TeaLit. Or TaiwanHo. You keep coming back, so we must be doing something right. :loco: If we’re so lousy, vote with your feet. And if you do decide to stick around, welcome, but please abide by the rules. Please.
PMs should only be for friendly stuff like arranging get-togethers with people, or asking for information. PMs should not be used to abuse fellow forumosans. If someone sends an abusive PM it is fair game for posting. Very very simple - the rules should state that PMs become public once they become abusive.
How f@@king simple is this? PMs are for hooking up is folks that you like, not for bad-mouthing people.
Something was done and I talked to him in person. I think you mean to say he didn’t get banned like you wanted him to . I believe things turned out just fine.[/quote]
Hmm. Let’s see:
First he attacks me on the board over some political issue that he doesn’t like. He does it from a second ID that he created for the purpose of making personal attacks on people (e.g., one of his former coworkers).
Along the way, his business practices and behavior come up. I repeatedly tell the unadulterated truth about his actions; he repeatedly lies and keeps tripping himself up, continuously blowing himself out of the water on multiple occasions. Maoman and Gus insist on intervening. I was told that he had been talked to about his posts, and that he would stop harrassing me on the boards. I am also told that if I don’t comply with their “request” to let it drop, they will ban ME. To quote Maoman, “you can go find another web community to belong to.”
Wow, that’s really addressing the problem.
Then Toe started sending me harrassing PMs.
I complained, and the result was a policy decision that “you are not allowed to post anything negative about another Forumosan on the board. Your problem wasn’t with him, it was really with his school!” Huh? What the hell is this addressing??
Let’s see: if they’d bothered to look at anything that was discussed, his school behaved in a perfectly honest manner, and they were beyond fair – even though he had never told them about anything that I had done, they offered to pay me, no questions asked other than to explain to them what it was I had done. So how did this “policy” – call it the “Toe Save Protection Act of 2004” – address any problem? Other than protecting the one asshole who was causing the problem in the first place, that is?
So, fine, I’m assured that if I shut up, he’ll shut up, and everyone can go away happy and live their lives separately.
Then, out of the blue, with no provocation whatsoever, he sent me a truly fucked up PM actually threatening physical violence against me, if he ever runs across me anywhere at any time.
So Maoman EVENTUALLY deigns to start the banning process about four days later.
Then, you folks decided not to ban him, but instead to implement a policy that neither of us were allowed to contact each other in any way, including not responding to each other’s posts – that in fact if we did so, the posts would be deleted and we would be banned.
So, a week or two later, I get another truly fucked up PM telling me that he didn’t understand what the problem was, that I had volunteered my time ever so graciously to him, and that he had insisted on paying me, and even had paid me. (Man, what drugs is he smoking this time?)
I comment to Maoman, who says Toe sent him a copy too for some unknown reason, and he “alerts the mods”. Oooooooh!
Maoman reiterates to me that if I dare to say anything in reply to a Toe Save post, I will be banned, and vice-versa.
So then, Toe Save starts “calling me out” on the boards, demanding a response to some drivel he posted, and “awaiting your reply in the flounder forum”.
I point it out to Maoman, as usual, and . . . nothing happens.
In short, you idiots have never once actually enforced ANY of the edicts that you have laid down. [color=red]XXX comments Deleted by admin.[/color]
What exactly has turned out fine?
Actually, I think I’m missing at least one more instance of Toe’s bad behavior. Can’t think of what it is offhand – I had it a second ago, but lost it. Oh well. I’ll edit it in, assuming this doesn’t get nuked the way that any other uncomfortable discussion of board policy seems to get vaporized around here.
No, as a matter of fact, I don’t know that. I know that it is possible to turn on “notifications”, meaning that you get an email at the address at which you registered. I am not aware of any way to block users from PMing, either on an individual or wholesale basis. Besides which, if only wholesale is avaliable, guess what – from my perspective, there is only one fucked-up loser out there who is causing problems. Most of the PMs I receive are either friends contacting me about various events, people requesting help on something, or people wishing to discuss something privately.
But why should I have to do any of that? Hey, if this were the U.S., I’d have a restraining order on the asshole, and he would already have been deported back to Canuckistan for continuing to contact me.
Care to point out a supplier? Wishing the world were a better place is fine, but refusing to do a damn thing about it when it isn’t is just pathetic.
I think that the moderating style is broken because it is arbitrary and capricious, policies about behavior are NEVER enforced, and policies which are created are often completely irrelevant to the problem. Note the above post to Miltownkid, if it hasn’t been deleted by the Niceness Nazis.
Meanwhile, in IP, which is probably what Uncle Josef is referring to, it’s broken because the mods there consistently nuke only one side of an argument. Posters are free to rant about whatever left-wing drivel they wish, but dare to post something nasty against the left, and it gets floundered or deleted post-haste.
Finally, it’s broken because, by deleting out portions of threads which have gotten heated (or even editing out sections within a post), it becomes impossible to understand the reason that someone is angry, or why someone is making a particular argument. This oftentimes has the effect of making one side look foolish or psychotic, when in fact it was the other side which caused the problem in the first place.
Another board I visit occasionally has far worse debates than this place – religious wars, arguments about nationalities and cultures, and so on. “Kill them all” is a comment that is guaranteed to get deleted quickly. When they edit, they put in a marker saying something like “Edited by moderator Cartman because I don’t like this poster’s ranting”. When they delete a post, they leave a placeholder saying “Deleted by moderator Maoman because it was just too mean-spirited.” (Well, not exactly. The standard is, “Deleted for violating conduct code 4: no attacks against racial groups”, or “Edited to make link cold: link violates conduct code 7: no hot linking to obscene material”, or “Banned for repeated violations of conduct code”.)
No offense, but you forced your way into the situation at points when you weren’t needed or wanted, and have consistently failed to follow up on your stated restrictions and threats – at least when Toe has repeatedly violated them.
You have specifically told me that I would be banned if I responded to Toe. I didn’t do so; I told you when he sent more PMs, I told you when he started “calling me out” in the forums. You have done NONE of the things to him that you told me you would do immediately to me.
Is this personal bias, or is this just U.N. Resolution 1441, Kofi?
What do you suggest? Delete the PM function? How about the ICQ icon? AIM address? MSN/Yahoo messenger? They can all be used to “harrass, intimidate, and threaten”. :s If you display contact information, people will contact you. It’s none of our business. If you don’t like it, don’t display your contact information. It’s that simple. :s [/quote]
I was not, and am not, aware that PMs can be turned off for one person, or even for the whole site. Show me what other contact information I have made available – my website? my email? my ICQ? my MSN/Yahoo Messenger?
Why do you think I don’t display them? If someone wants to contact me here, they can. From my perspective, there is exactly one person on this site who has repeatedly demonstrated the immaturity, psychosis, and desire to attack other posters at random – not just me, go look at the thread “What makes them flip?” for another, or go look at the stuff you deleted a few weeks ago for a third. I’m not the only one who gets attacked by the idiot, although one wasn’t even on the site and he seemed to have let the second drop eventually.
Not normally, no. It is possible to go in through a “back door”, but this involves expertise with the database that neither Gus nor I possess. So for all intents and purposes, PMs are what they say they are - Private Messages.[/quote]
So ask. “mysql -uroot -p_____” “use segue;” “select * from phpbb_pm where message_id = _____;” “quit”
(Disclaimer: I’m making guesses at the table name and ID-column name. If you want me to check, I’ll set up a phpBB system and look.)
Exactly.[/quote]
Considering the amount of personal attacks and flames the two of you have contributed to the flame forum, I find your comments bizarre. :eh: The moderators of this board are some of the most professional, dedicated, volunteers you could ever hope to meet. If you don’t like the board, try TeaLit. Or TaiwanHo. You keep coming back, so we must be doing something right. :loco: If we’re so lousy, vote with your feet. And if you do decide to stick around, welcome, but please abide by the rules. Please.[/quote]
Yes, I don’t doubt that I have. However, for the most part, the people I have flamed have been in the IP forum, and have been doing the same things themselves – or worse.
This does not invalidate the complaints we have made.
But the reason I brought this up was not to drag up the war between Toe and myself again, it was the sudden suspension of “stormchaser”, who claimed that he’d been harrassed by Mordeth via PM. I’ve had the same experience, and I find it telling that it’s coming up again, and that again, the party who was being harrassed is the one being further sanctioned by you and your “Star Chamber”.
The second reason that I brought this up is that “banshette” suddenly seemed to go berserk for no reason – and I honestly wondered if this was because others’ posts attacking her had been deleted. Again, I’ve been seeing similar problems in other threads; they suddenly don’t make sense, because half the posts were removed for “niceness”.
It is very difficult to trust in the integrity of the content of this site any more. The editing and deleting have been getting more and more heavy-handed. Last week you banned TLJ because TLJ had been editing his/her posts. Yet BroonAle didn’t get the same treatment, because it didn’t make YOU look bad or silly. A month or two ago, you banned someone else for being a jerk (something like UNSaysNoToTaiwan, I forget exactly), but mofangongren still posts attacks on Bush constantly while never giving a straight answer in any debate – I guess he agrees more with the mods’ politics.
CREATE TABLE phpbb_privmsgs (
privmsgs_id number(4) NOT NULL,
privmsgs_type number(4) DEFAULT ‘0’ NOT NULL,
privmsgs_subject varchar(255) DEFAULT ‘0’ NOT NULL,
privmsgs_from_userid number(4) DEFAULT ‘0’ NOT NULL,
privmsgs_to_userid number(4) DEFAULT ‘0’ NOT NULL,
…
CREATE TABLE phpbb_privmsgs_text (
privmsgs_text_id number(4) DEFAULT ‘0’ NOT NULL,
privmsgs_bbcode_uid char(10) DEFAULT ‘0’ NOT NULL,
privmsgs_text varchar(2000),
…
So, it should be:
select privmsgs_text from phpbb_privmsgs_text
where privmsgs_text_id = ______ ;
Fill in the blank with the ID of the private message, which is visible in the URL when the user is viewing the message in question.
If you want all messages belonging to a given user:
select privmsgs_text from phpbb_privmsgs_text, phpbb_privmsgs
where phpbb_privmsgs_text.privmsgs_text_id = phpbb_privmsgs.privmsgs_id
and privmsgs_to_userid = ______;
If you want all messages sent by a given user:
select privmsgs_text from phpbb_privmsgs_text, phpbb_privmsgs
where phpbb_privmsgs_text.privmsgs_text_id = phpbb_privmsgs.privmsgs_id
and privmsgs_from_userid = ______;
If you want all messages sent by a given user to another given user:
select privmsgs_text from phpbb_privmsgs_text, phpbb_privmsgs
where phpbb_privmsgs_text.privmsgs_text_id = phpbb_privmsgs.privmsgs_id
and privmsgs_from_userid = ______
and privmsgs_to_userid = ______;
To find a userid from a given name:
select user_id from phpbb_users where username = ‘_____’ ;
To find a name from some substring of it that you remember:
select user_id from phpbb_users where username like ‘%___%’ ;
(For instance, so you can just look for "%id’ instead of having to type “MaPoSquid” and remember which letters are capitalized.)
[quote=“almas john”]
How f@@king simple is this? PMs are for hooking up is folks that you like, not for bad-mouthing people. [/quote]Except that it’s an instrument of moderation power. Big Fluffy Matthew for example often flounders flames with the title, “Say it in a PM”.
Which brings up another point. Notice how you post some mild zinger at poster A and it gets floundered, when many far nastier things are posted at the (less popular) poster B and are left alone?
Funny how the only people complaining are those who want to cause trouble
“It’s not fair, if I don’t get my own way I’m going to thcream and thcream”
If you don’t like the way you are treated I suggest you look at yourselves first to see if you did anything to loose sympathy with the moderators. You’re like a bunch of Taiwanese complaining their rights have been abused when the police stop them for going through a red light.
[quote=“hsiadogah”]Big Fluffy Matthew for example often flounders flames with the title, “Say it in a PM”. [/quote]Really ? :eh: How do you know that is me ? I have never done that, not even once.
[quote=“hsiadogah”][quote=“almas john”]
How f@@king simple is this? PMs are for hooking up is folks that you like, not for bad-mouthing people. [/quote]Except that it’s an instrument of moderation power. Big Fluffy Matthew for example often flounders flames with the title, “Say it in a PM”.
Which brings up another point. Notice how you post some mild zinger at poster A and it gets floundered, when many far nastier things are posted at the (less popular) poster B and are left alone?[/quote]
[quote=“Big Fluffy Matthew”]Funny how the only people complaining are those who want to cause trouble
“It’s not fair, if I don’t get my own way I’m going to thcream and thcream”
If you don’t like the way you are treated I suggest you look at yourselves first to see if you did anything to loose sympathy with the moderators. You’re like a bunch of Taiwanese complaining their rights have been abused when the police stop them for going through a red light.[/quote]
Sorry BFM, but this disturbs me a lot. As I understand it, I believe this is the crux of the underlying problem that both MaPoSquid and Stalin are trying to point out. The moderating is too much based on the individual’s personalities and the results (to them) prove that there is an (unconscious perhaps?) slant toward those whose styles, philosophies, are more agreeable to the moderators/admins. As a result of this bias, it feels to them that a group of people are unfairly singled out and held to a different (double) standard.
I suggest you look at the number of threads and complaints regarding moderation here in the F&A forum, it’s not just MP and me. I asked a serious question not long ago if it would be possible to to simply identify the mod whenever a post is floundered or deleted. I then asked if we could see some stats as to how many posts were floundered/deleted by Tigerman when he was mod and how many have been floundered/deleted by the Present Ruling Troika. A simple enough request which was polite in both tone and wording. All I got was a smart-ass reply from Maoman about what time someone’s kids get out of school. Very professional.
Read just these 3 threads and see how many complaints there are.
[quote]The moderating is too much based on the individual’s personalities and the results (to them) prove that there is an (unconscious perhaps?) slant toward those whose styles[/quote]The style I’m talking about is abusive. But I don’t get an awful lot of that in “Living in Taiwan” so I don’t have as much first hand experience in that, most of my moderating is splitting topics when the topics diverge, and merging similar topics, which is a hanging offence I hear in International Politics.
About moderating PM’s, do people really want the moderators to look at their private messages at any time ? Even if the accusations are unfounded ? Looking at private correspondence makes me feel uncomfortable, and I’m not sure that’s a road we want to go down, but maybe it’s necessary… And wouldn’t that entail MORE moderation ? I thought the complaint is that there’s too much already ?
This thread is just going to go round and round in circles with Comrade Stalin and others just making complaints and not making any constructive suggestions, forcing the moderators just defend their actions, and nothing will get decided or improved.
. I believe things turned out just fine. I personally think that private messages should stay private. If it got to be a “real” problem the whole PM system could just be turned off and everyone could just stick to using email. The PM function can also be turned off on a case-by-case basis if needed (as I’m sure you already know).
Huh? What the hell is this addressing??
It’as as royasl psain in the asasas to fizx.
[/quote]Really ? :eh: How do you know that is me ? I have never done that, not even once.