That's actually counterproductive because it removes the thread from the "zero-reply threads" list. Some people apparently cruise that list, looking for people to help.

4 members found this post helpful.

In terms of moderation - I for one cannot understand the logic of "infractions" or why they are issued. They are a "feature" of the vBulletin software, but that doesn't mean that they should be used by default. In my opinion they should be turned off, as they come across as a "disciplinary" slap which will never achieve anything positive.

From my perspective as a member, there is nothing more off-putting than having a thread which you are participating, in locked (often by a staff member who has not been a participant in said thread, has no interest in the topic and has based their assessment on posts by a "rogue" member). I have to wonder if their intervention was based on a chance encounter or a report. I often get the impression that the staff member in question has found a suitable pretext for closure because they personally take issue with the topic and/or views expressed therein, or they believe they can predict how the thread will go and believe that preemptive action is somehow justified.

Bans like this recent one don't inspire much confidence: https://www.linuxquestions.org/quest...2/#post6079341

https://www.linuxquestions.org/quest...a2018-1105648/

A ban for what was a one off outburst related to a moderator's decision and an infraction, simply for derailing a thread is just a little is over the top. The "incitement of a flame war" reasoning also seems way off mark. From my point of view - issuing infractions and locking threads "incites" those kind of outbursts. Human beings are prone to this kind of behaviour and it has to be managed until "LQ-bot" becomes a reality, at which point there will probably be no needs for sites like this one anyway.

Staff advice to use the report button to report posts, to send a PM, to contact the admin if you want your "posting privileges reinstated", etc - all private comms, is all about the management and mechanics of running a bulletin board and not about serving a "community" - keeping the situation under wraps and not in the open where it can be scrutinised publicly, probably helps contain things, but that's about all.

Report button usage is very flawed - it means that certain posters and their posts get reported, moderators will focus on that and miss many other posts. Some members will report each other, because they simply can't get on and learn to live and let live. Some will lay bait, wait until the strategic moment, then hit the button - putting the focus on a certain post in a long thread, which many will not want to read through to gain context - effectively gaming the system.

You often see some kind of retort, chastisement or slur aimed at a certain member and it gets a few "likes" from those on the same side of the fence - again a lot of anonymous posters backing one side of an argument in a subtle and underhanded way. From my perspective these "likes" don't need to be anonymous - as they are not on many other implementations.

I may have used the report button years ago, in recent years I can only remember using it for spam - it's used as a sneaky and underhanded way of dobbing someone in, rather than dealing with the situation yourself in an upfront manner. It seems that, at this site, dealing with it yourself is frowned upon and you will be either regarded as a troublemaker and the thread will be locked or penalised just as much as the instigator / troll for responding.

Sending PMs to staff just seems like a means to keep any perceived unpleasantness out of the public eye. I don't have a problem with that, if that's what the member in question wants, but it should not be the absolute required form of communication for dispute resolution.

It's a matter of transparency and it's not unreasonable for other members of the site to want to know why another member has been banned or given an infraction.

1 members found this post helpful.

Not sure why you'd think the moderators don't read the whole thread before taking action; or that they're not generally reading the posts day to day, without necessarily posting in every thread they read; or that reports aren't seen by, discussed among, multiple moderators...

Freemedia2018 was not banned for "what was a one off outburst related to a moderator's decision and an infraction, simply for derailing a thread" (although an "outburst related to a moderator's decision and an infraction" would, in itself, be an excellent justification for a ban). He was banned because he did literally nothing but that since he arrived here. After openly admitting to having been forced by his own behavior to leave another forum.

I (IIRC) didn't even bother reporting him. I just put him on ignore almost immediately after he started posting.

I'm surprised that you're posting this as if it were new information. Yes, that's the way it both is, and is intended to be. Remember that this a technical support forum. The common moderator admonition to "get this thread back on topic", which is sometimes addressed to "all", isn't a euphemism. It's literal.

Also remember that when forums like this started, they specifically attracted users who didn't want to be on Usenet anymore. That history alone should tell you how LQ (which is about 20 years old, coinciding with when everyone stopped using Usenet for discussions) is meant to be used, what the role of the moderators is, and what the expectations of the users are.

I was not going to comment on this part of the thread (which you've derailed again, more below), but this statement is patently false. I personally have reversed or deleted multiple infractions after reviewing them. I've also provided detailed feedback and specific guidance on your participation.

You are forming a habit of derailing threads with this topic. I am now asking you to refrain from this moving forward.

--jeremy

What makes you think they are?
You seem to be in on the specifics of his ban - more so than the average member. I did not observe the same behaviour, I saw that one thread derailment and that one post, not multiple outbursts as you seem to suggest? Or are you suggesting multiple thread derailments? I had not seen those either.
Which doesn't seem at all relevant to this site. Under pseudonyms, any of us can be any manner of web user elsewhere.
That's certainly one solution. (by the way, I wasn't suggesting you reported anyone for anything)
Not as new information no. I somewhat disagree that this is a "technical support forum". None of the volunteers here are paid and if this were purely technical support as you suggest, it would take a very different format (and most likely not have an off-topic section).

I'm just failing to see where rules are being broken nor the real need for the hard line approach... we all have different views, but mine just seem fundamentally incompatible with how the site is run.

1 members found this post helpful.

We are definitely failing to communicate effectively here with one another. I'll take the blame. It seems I'm not understanding what it is you're trying to get across to me.

Let's just leave it. And yes, "best to you"... I'm not angry or upset with you in any way, so take the closing as it was meant... sincerely, not sarcastically.

Well, off I go...

I didn't think of it that way. What I did see was many, many Zero Reply posts that NEVER get replied to.


But, I'll take your information as it was meant and refrain from making those type replies to the Zero Reply postings.

What makes me think the moderators are reading the whole thread before taking action? Really, cynwulf?

The answer is: my history of discussions with moderators. Reports are seen by multiple moderators, and there is sometimes internal discussion before any action is taken. You can also clearly see the moderators participating in the threads as users, and sometimes you see them give you reputation, so they're obviously not waiting for reports before reading new posts. I know how this works.

Also remember: if a moderator does take action based on incomplete information (which, let's be honest here, can happen), you have an appeals process.

I know you're not adverse to telling it like it is, so I will. When people say this, you know what the next sentence usually is, right?

I don't know who you are - do you speak for the staff or are you, despite the lack of any designation, part of the staff? On who's authority do you make these statements about how the site is administered?
Which seems anecdotal?

You appear to know that "internal discussion" takes place and what is discussed, the overwhelming majority of members here do not - as they have no access to any hidden staff section of the site - nor do they for the most part make assumptions about what is / is not discussed.

I don't see where freemedia has this history of this on this site and though I've looked through old posts, nothing is jumping out at me... I'm open to correction if someone can provide examples?
Where is that? I do not see it here:

https://www.linuxquestions.org/linux/rules.html
That is not "telling it like it is".

2 members found this post helpful.

^ yeah dugan, I would also like to hear you tell it like you think it is.

Well, all this brings back fond memories (see my signature).
Back then it was also rtmistler I had the biggest issue with, so I hope jeremy sees this!
Seeing as this sort of overreaction seems to be a continuous problem, I'd vote for their moderator status to be removed or at least reduced.

Oh, and the "Off Topic" card, the ace anyone can always pull out of their sleeves when they don't like where the discussion is going: "After all, this is a technical forum!" Patently ignoring that half of their own utterances would have to be removed too, if that rule was applied always and strictly.
Pencil pushers, unable to see themselves.

I used to get upset about this stuff. I still do, but much less now, and I am actively working at not giving a single damn.

I really did think I was being clear earlier, but sure, I'll be more explicit, since you both asked. Here's some reality for you.

If you actually feel that the way the forum is run is incompatible with the way you want it to be be run, and if you think that that will not change, then you should leave.

That's how it is.

The appeals process is to contact me directly. I take a look at every single instance sent to me, and do my absolute best to be objective and respond with whatever action I think is in the best long-term interest of LQ. If you have an issue with a specific action I or any mod has taken, please do feel free to contact me with as much information and context as possible.

--jeremy

4 members found this post helpful.

I did not say these things, why are you directing it at me now?
And no, you're wrong - that person is not unhappy with the forums, but with some aspects of how it is being governed.
That is not the same thing.

Ah, diminishing dissenting voices until you can make it personal.
Bad move.

No, I wasn't a 100% sure and if I would have voiced it for you, who knows, you might have blamed me for putting words in your mouth?

I just did.

No, I counted the people in this thread it could apply to, and I padded the number as much as I could.