| Scripture,Tradition,Reason-Anglican & Old Catholic The forum for Anglican, Anglo-Catholic and Episcopal churches. |
 | | 
15th October 2007, 09:53 PM
|  | Formerly Jtbdad Christian on every board!
      
 | | Join Date: 14th April 2004 Location: Ohio
Posts: 11,040
Blessings: 87,332
Reps: 3,058,096,514,874,249 (power: 3,058,096,514,895) | | | How determined?
Recently a number of reported post threads have had what seem to be bizarre outcomes.
I will not point out specific outcomes, or why I feel them to be bizarre as that is not necessary to my question. None of them were reports of myself so I don't have a personal stake in their outcomes.
My question is this?
How does each mod interpret whether or not something is a violation of the no flaming rule?
Here is why I ask:
Recently there have been such comments as "It can be refuted in the thread" "It has been refuted in the thread" "He is only stating an opinion" While I have always supported not taking action unless a report had been made I have never supported letting a flame stand only because it may or may not be refuted in thread. That would seem to indicate that there are two different sets of rules. One set for those who are flamed and have the ability to make a logical argument in response, (those who refute the flame and thus no action is taken) and another set for those without this ability in which case presumably the flame would be edited.
Additionally is it really true that because someone states an opinion their comment is not a flame? For example if I made the comment that "in my opinion all males who are in their early 40's are despicable pedophiles" is this not a flame because it is my opinion? It seems by some of the comments in the report threads that as long as someone states that something is their opinion then it is not a flame?
I was directed by a senior member of the staff to actually post this so I really would appreciate a response from the mods.
__________________ Just a Christian
Lord, make me an instrument of your peace,
Where there is hatred, let me sow love;
where there is injury, pardon;
where there is doubt, faith;
where there is despair, hope;
where there is darkness, light;
where there is sadness, joy; O Divine Master, grant that I may not so much seek to be consoled as to console;
to be understood as to understand;
to be loved as to love.
Last edited by jtbdad; 15th October 2007 at 11:01 PM.
|
15th October 2007, 10:27 PM
|  | mea culpa
60 
| | Join Date: 10th January 2004 Location: omaha
Posts: 4,274
Blessings: 21,027
Reps: 41,974,667,785,658 (power: 41,974,667,799) | | | Friend jtbdad
Moderation would be a very easy thing to do if there was a clear cut, indisputable line beyond which a post becomes a flame. Unfortunately for those of us trying very hard to moderate this forum fairly, this line does not really exist. Requesting that posts that approach this line to be edited sometimes closes down legitimate discussion of the issues. Closing down discussion would not be a good thing for anyone.
I try very hard to approach this with as much objectivity as I can muster. Sometimes I fail. I apologize for my imperfections, but I continue on to do the best I can. My PM box is always open if you have questions about my rulings, but I do not intend to argue every decision I make in the report forum.
__________________
signature block pending |
15th October 2007, 10:49 PM
| | Formerly Jtbdad Christian on every board!
| | Join Date: 14th April 2004 Location: Ohio
Posts: 11,040
Blessings: 87,332
Reps: 3,058,096,514,874,249 (power: 3,058,096,514,895) | | Originally Posted by longhair75  Friend jtbdad
Moderation would be a very easy thing to do if there was a clear cut, indisputable line beyond which a post becomes a flame. Unfortunately for those of us trying very hard to moderate this forum fairly, this line does not really exist. Requesting that posts that approach this line to be edited sometimes closes down legitimate discussion of the issues. Closing down discussion would not be a good thing for anyone.
I try very hard to approach this with as much objectivity as I can muster. Sometimes I fail. I apologize for my imperfections, but I continue on to do the best I can. My PM box is always open if you have questions about my rulings, but I do not intend to argue every decision I make in the report forum.
Peter;
Thank you for answering me and you know I have nothing but respect and love for you. I do not intend to imply that you do not do you best or that your intentions are nefarious. Would you be kind enough however to answer the questions I asked? Perhaps asking them more succinctly would help.
Why does the possibility or the occurrence of an in thread refutation seem to affect whether a comment is ruled a flame? It seems to me that if it is a flame whether it is refuted or not does not change the fact that it is a flame. And, according to not only our Wiki, but also the general guidelines of the board flaming is not permitted.
and
Is it true that stating that a comment is an opinion, by default determines whether or not the comment is a flame? If not then why is it often used to validate a No Violation vote?
Again thank you for your kind response.
__________________ Just a Christian
Lord, make me an instrument of your peace,
Where there is hatred, let me sow love;
where there is injury, pardon;
where there is doubt, faith;
where there is despair, hope;
where there is darkness, light;
where there is sadness, joy; O Divine Master, grant that I may not so much seek to be consoled as to console;
to be understood as to understand;
to be loved as to love.
|
16th October 2007, 12:09 AM
|  | not a nutter
  
| | Join Date: 15th September 2005
Posts: 24,936
Blessings: 23,082 My Mood 
Reps: 246,782,134,644,269,024 (power: 246,782,134,644,301) | | | Can anyone hear violins playing in the background? |
16th October 2007, 01:51 AM
| | not a nutter
51
| | Join Date: 10th September 2004
Posts: 8,161
Blessings: 1,192,203
Reps: 5,783,139,325,808,914 (power: 5,783,139,325,825) | | | To call fellow posters hypocrites, in the context of how it was done, in my opinion, was a flame.
To say that "I call that impatience and stupidity at the cost of Unity" about the actions of a group when posting in a debate, in my opinion, is strong debate. Same with if someone said "I call that hypocrisy". Probably. Depending on the context.
We try our best to make fair calls. THree mods agreed on this particular call.
__________________
"Love the sinner, hate the sin? How about: Love the sinner, hate your own sin! I don't have time to hate your sin. There are too many of you! Hating my sin is a full-time job. How about you hate your sin, I'll hate my sin and let's just love each other!"
- Mark Lowrey |
16th October 2007, 01:54 AM
| | not a nutter
51
| | Join Date: 10th September 2004
Posts: 8,161
Blessings: 1,192,203
Reps: 5,783,139,325,808,914 (power: 5,783,139,325,825) | | | Oh also there is a difference between call people names and naming words or actions. Depending on the context.
We all need to 1. be nicer and 2. toughen up.
And I do think some of the behavior in the report threads has been beyond the pale, and that will be addressed.
__________________
"Love the sinner, hate the sin? How about: Love the sinner, hate your own sin! I don't have time to hate your sin. There are too many of you! Hating my sin is a full-time job. How about you hate your sin, I'll hate my sin and let's just love each other!"
- Mark Lowrey |
16th October 2007, 02:59 AM
|  | More of You and less of me, Lord!
 
| | Join Date: 18th August 2004 Location: North west of England
Posts: 14,171
Blessings: 127,187
Reps: 791,312,101,613,372 (power: 791,312,101,636) | |  I think it is good that you've brought up these questions, jtbdad. Here are my responses: Originally Posted by jtbdad Why does the possibility or the occurrence of an in thread refutation seem to affect whether a comment is ruled a flame? It seems to me that if it is a flame whether it is refuted or not does not change the fact that it is a flame. And, according to not only our Wiki, but also the general guidelines of the board flaming is not permitted.
We have an agreed approach to reports in that we try to be light-handed whenever possible, as I'm certain you are aware of, having been a mod previously. The best thing for us all to do (not just the mods) when we see posts with comments that might be considered inflammatory is to seek clarification in the thread itself. If it is a glaringly obvious flame, that would be different. But many posts can be misunderstood on the net (again, I'm sure you know that), and many times people simply do not express very well what they are trying to say. I do think that if our misunderstandings can be rectified in the thread itself, that is a healthier way for us to proceed than for people to instantly hit the report button all the time. Is it true that stating that a comment is an opinion, by default determines whether or not the comment is a flame? If not then why is it often used to validate a No Violation vote?
I actually do believe that if we stated our opinions very clearly as being our opinion, this would reduce the numbers of reports. But this isn't a 'by default' decision as a rule in moderation. The whole thing is determined mainly by context, and also by our experience with the poster in question. Yes, that is subjective to a degree. We would be robots if we didn't take personalities into account, though. I think context is the main criteria, and specific word choice, and intention. It is sometimes a judgement call, and that's why we now wait for consensus between at least two or three of us. People may think we are biased, but I do think we all try very hard to be objective in spite of the difficult tasks we face.
Anyway, that's my view. 
__________________ WAHOO! |
16th October 2007, 08:38 AM
| | Formerly Jtbdad Christian on every board!
| | Join Date: 14th April 2004 Location: Ohio
Posts: 11,040
Blessings: 87,332
Reps: 3,058,096,514,874,249 (power: 3,058,096,514,895) | | Originally Posted by higgs2 To call fellow posters hypocrites, in the context of how it was done, in my opinion, was a flame.
To say that "I call that impatience and stupidity at the cost of Unity" about the actions of a group when posting in a debate, in my opinion, is strong debate. Same with if someone said "I call that hypocrisy". Probably. Depending on the context.
We try our best to make fair calls. THree mods agreed on this particular call.
Higgs I specifically kept individual report threads and specifics out of my question because I didn't feel it germain to my question. But now that you have brought specific posts up let me ask you, in one report thread it was ruled that the use of the word hypocrites was a flame "in this post" The question was asked then if it was a flame in that post how could it not be a flame in others to which no response was offered. So I will ask you how is the use of the word "hypocrites" (a favorite of a couple of posters on this board) not acceptable in the post reported but acceptable otherwise? (other than a quote of Scripture obviously)
__________________ Just a Christian
Lord, make me an instrument of your peace,
Where there is hatred, let me sow love;
where there is injury, pardon;
where there is doubt, faith;
where there is despair, hope;
where there is darkness, light;
where there is sadness, joy; O Divine Master, grant that I may not so much seek to be consoled as to console;
to be understood as to understand;
to be loved as to love.
|
16th October 2007, 08:40 AM
| | Formerly Jtbdad Christian on every board!
| | Join Date: 14th April 2004 Location: Ohio
Posts: 11,040
Blessings: 87,332
Reps: 3,058,096,514,874,249 (power: 3,058,096,514,895) | | Originally Posted by Naomi4Christ Can anyone hear violins playing in the background?
Naomi can you explain your post please?
__________________ Just a Christian
Lord, make me an instrument of your peace,
Where there is hatred, let me sow love;
where there is injury, pardon;
where there is doubt, faith;
where there is despair, hope;
where there is darkness, light;
where there is sadness, joy; O Divine Master, grant that I may not so much seek to be consoled as to console;
to be understood as to understand;
to be loved as to love.
|
16th October 2007, 08:44 AM
| | Formerly Jtbdad Christian on every board!
| | Join Date: 14th April 2004 Location: Ohio
Posts: 11,040
Blessings: 87,332
Reps: 3,058,096,514,874,249 (power: 3,058,096,514,895) | | Originally Posted by higgs2 Oh also there is a difference between call people names and naming words or actions. Depending on the context.
We all need to 1. be nicer and 2. toughen up.
And I do think some of the behavior in the report threads has been beyond the pale, and that will be addressed.
Can you explain further please? Do you believe that using a term that calls into question the intelligence of a large group of Anglicans acceptable? It never has been, what about the rules changed so drastically that it is now?
__________________ Just a Christian
Lord, make me an instrument of your peace,
Where there is hatred, let me sow love;
where there is injury, pardon;
where there is doubt, faith;
where there is despair, hope;
where there is darkness, light;
where there is sadness, joy; O Divine Master, grant that I may not so much seek to be consoled as to console;
to be understood as to understand;
to be loved as to love.
| | |
| Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes |  Linear Mode |
| | |
