This is the most clear cut not to mention disgusting HC I've ever seen on the site and you just no vio'd it. This is unrelated to the harassment violation I didn't even request be given, which was given for an entirely different thread. The fact that I initially banned thecolonel for this (which is still what should happen, but I digress) is completely irrelevant. It's disgusting that you think the only appropriate violation for this entire affair is a single warning and that he shouldn't even be marked down for hateful comments.
Edit: I appreciate people backing me up on this but I've made my point clearly and the mod team as a whole apparently disagrees. It's regrettable this kind of hate speech isn't dealt with more severely. However, there's no point in bickering further if the mods feel rule technicalities trumps all.
Im very surprised that no one other than me actually thinks its a very bad idea to allow 2 violations for the same action to occur.
deletedalmost 9 years
people are worried about the objectivity if such a standard was implemented, and that in itself is a site problem
what i mean by this is that i think most mods believe that people will say their ban is unjust because it doesnt follow a set of conduct, because we all know how hard mods bend to the communities will
Like idk what thread is being argued or anything I'm just taking y'alls word for it that there was in fact a thread, with hateful comments aimed towards the transgendered community And multiple threads aimed towards mist
i wouldn't say that, he's just making too much out of his position and taking it too seriously. the moderation team's job is to make the community the best it can be, and i don't understand how allowing thecolonel to stay benefits the community whatsoever.
May I ask why it would be so terrible to set a new precedent that if you attack someone with hateful comments that you will get both a HC vio and harassment vio?
You can only get 1 community violation per instance. For example if I call you a slur multiple times and u ask me to stop but I kep on going I would get an harassment violation, not a HC violation even though it falls under both rules.
Just like thecolonel got an harassment violation instead of a HC one for his second post. His punishment for the first post was a warning(not sure if she actually asked him to stop but I think I read it atleast) + forum suspension from mist.
If Mist acted directly then link me his HC vio. You are all aware of the HC in multiple threads and refuse to act.
deletedalmost 9 years
I'm pretty sure this isn't the first time he's had a thread locked or moved, nor is it the first time he's been dished out a forum suspension for being vile. I'd go back and look through the moderator actions, but there's still no search feature for that and frankly, I'm far too lazy for it.
That doesn't change the fact that you should rely more on your discretion here (which I actually agree with 99% of the time) rather than going by the rules as they stand, as I just explained.
this isnt a government. you dont need to be extremely by the book in your operations. its a internet mafia site. you can bend the rules to punish people who show no intention of following them.
We are discussing HC vio, not harassment. A large group of the team saw the HC, and didn't act. He made a second thread where Mist then reported and he got harassment. The team did nothing to act on the the two threads worth of HC.
The idea that we have to wait around for a bad guy to do more bad things in order to punish them is so flawed. Essentially what is happening is that we are waiting around for said user to get even more vile and hateful and then we will apply vio 2, and then just sit around and wait for it to happen a third time. Easier option: Realize he's a bad guy and deal with it such.
Was the team slow or was the user being harassed slow in reporting ?
deletedalmost 9 years
Few circumstances exist where you, as the active admin, simply cannot do things By The Book and instead have to use your best discretion. The Book is for the mods. This is one of those circumstances, homie.
Try Again
