Concerns Members Have About Enforcement of Forum Rules

[Brian En]

The trolls I'm referring to the ones that come here for the sole reason to cause trouble. As for everything else, that's up to the people involved. If they can't come to a resolution then maybe a mod should step in. We're adults who agreed to the forum rules. We may not agree to the rules, but by clicking that submit button we have agreed to follow the rules.


I'll know more if and when I get into a dispute here.

[Anchor]

Originally Posted by Brian En

I'll know more if and when I get into a dispute here.

Uh-oh.... but you are from Canada - so at least you'll be nice about it

[Brian En]

Originally Posted by Anchor

Uh-oh.... but you are from Canada - so at least you'll be nice about it

Yah. I'm always nice during disputes. It's the Canadian curse.

[Seashore]

TtC published a private message from BROOK on a thread, did he not? What happened there?

[Anchor]

Seashore - I remember that. Brook actually made some comment about it at the time.

The issue was not pressed.

The forum's treatment of Ttc - another dark episode of our history. Within two or three posts he was accused outright of trying to start a cult.

A..

[Seashore]

Originally Posted by Anchor

Seashore - I remember that. Brook actually made some comment about it at the time.

The issue was not pressed.

The forum's treatment of Ttc - another dark episode of our history. Within two or three posts he was accused outright of trying to start a cult.

A..

My point in raising the issue is to open a discussion of banning francie for posting an email but not banning TtC for posting a private message. Not that I want TtC banned. That's not the point either!

What about the fact that TtC posted a private message on a thread - which is grounds for banning - not banning him - but banning francie? What's the rationale?

[Anchor]

Seashore,

the moderators are not consistent. You can work hard at prooving that but you dont need to, I will admit it right up front.

What we do, is try our best.

What's the rationale? Probably context and what was disclosed and what else was happening at the time.

A..

[Seashore]

Originally Posted by Anchor

What's the rationale? Probably context and what was disclosed and what else was happening at the time.

My response to your answer is to say that the context of the banning of francie was not just, and she should be re-instated.

[Luana]

What was disclosed was the Truth. It's really time to let this rest and allow Francie back.
Please

[Bilko]

Originally Posted by Anchor

The problem with characterizing anyone as a TROLL is that it is immediately prejudicial.

We banned a lot of people recently. When we were subscription there were very few actions against members. The forum is a free for all and we cannot rely on more than several thousand members to simply "ignore". That would be naive (ideal I agree). A lot of members always think they can do better than the moderators we get endless posts telling us how to do our work. Some of it is useful, some of it make me cringe.

Some people come here to learn - others come to make fun at our expense.

The moderators are damned if they do and damned if they dont. We tried to increase the numbers of moderators, mainly to increase coverage, but also to avoid charges of "tyranny" - we try to avoid bans without internal debate. Sometimes it isnt possible.

There is no way we can do our jobs without the ability to eject people intent of working against the mission of the forum.

Note people are not ejected because they are disruptive -we need disruptive people. The new ideas and input I have seen here since the subscription requirement was lifted is fantastic. The staus quo was getting old. The new stuff is fantastic.

It comes at a price. Enforcement is sometimes needed.

Most people are banned/ejected ultimately because it is obvious that they are intent on causing harm to what avalon and camelot are supposed to be: respectful discussion forums.

It is not about censorship - but I would say that, and I remember warning all the moderators that when we ban or remove posts that is what we get accused of. Goes with the turf. Cant do anything about it.

If the moderators cease to act to keep the forum on track - then I am pretty sure the forum will slowly become useless and all the remaining people that were tenacious enough to stick with it would eventually leave.

A..

Having been a moderator over on spiritual forums i completely agree with what you have said. If you could see the constant barrage of negativity and disruption directed to forums such as this without the shield of hard working moderators you might agree too. If anything i believe that when it comes to the decorum and moral of the forum i believe the moderators have been lenient.

In order for a forum to progress in a particular direction ie positive or forward, there must be a mechanism in place to stop it slipping in the wrong direction.

[Seashore]

Originally Posted by Bilko

Having been a moderator over on spiritual forums i completely agree with what you have said. If you could see the constant barrage of negativity and disruption directed to forums such as this without the shield of hard working moderators you might agree too. If anything i believe that when it comes to the decorum and moral of the forum i believe the moderators have been lenient.

In order for a forum to progress in a particular direction ie positive or forward, there must be a mechanism in place to stop it slipping in the wrong direction.

What is your position on the banning of francie?

[Stargazer1965]

Mods....I am coming from a users position here even though I am a systems admin in the real world.

I don't like second guessing anyone and I understand in the admin world we do things that we are told to do and asked not to question.

I read back over the last posts of Francie....Was she banned for what is here or something that was removed???

Thanks for any response.

[Bilko]

Originally Posted by Seashore

What is your position on the banning of francie?

Sorry for the late reply seashore.
My response was in reply to your first post in this thread about members running the forum themselves. I am a new member here so can't comment on any past actions by members or mods without searching for and reading up on the case history.
My leniency quote was directed at thread i read yesterday concerning a member who suggested all homosexual people are pedophiles. The thread ended with a 7 day ban.

Sorry for any confusion.

[Seashore]

Originally Posted by Bilko

I am a new member here so can't comment on any past actions by members or mods without searching for and reading up on the case history.

Okay thanks.

[Anchor]

Originally Posted by Luana

What was disclosed was the Truth.

So what?

I am sure there are lots of private messages that contain "truth".

I get told the truth a lot in private messages. I just had quite a lot of that today - unpleasant truths. I won't be making any of this truth public just because its the truth.

The system we operate in deserves us to respect that PRIVATE MESSAGES are private unless permission is given to make it public.

A..

[Seashore]

Originally Posted by Luana

What was disclosed was the Truth.

Project Camelot and Project Avalon are initiatives that exist for the purpose of establishing the truth about public issues.

The subject matter contained in the email posted by the banned member in question was alluded to by Bill Ryan as justification for his position taken in a debate on a thread. Debates have two sides and do not get resolved if only one side is fully presented.

Shutting out the other side is not going to end this debate.

[truth and integrity]

Originally posted by seashore
Debates have two sides and do not get resolved if only one side is fully presented.
Shutting out the other side is not going to end this debate.

Exactly. It is so sad that franciejones can not speak up for herself and present her point of view. Secondly, it maybe justified that mods removed an e-mail that Bill’s sent to her. However, why they removed her post where she requested her name to be removed from The Round Table. This action can not be justified at all.

Best regards,

[suricatt]

Interesting debate... I haven't read anything posted by Francie, so I can't comment on those issues. However, being an unfortunate (or maybe not) participant in the Tokyo Rose paedophilia thread, I would like to commend the quick action taken by Karen and Anchor.

This being said, I'm quite dubious the 7 day ban is sufficient. My point being someone like Tokyo Rose who so openly condemns/judges others living by different rules will most probably strike back in one form or another once he/she returns.

The debate on so called trolls is important for the future of this forum. Do we want to allow hatred of others and preconceived ideas to pollute our conversations here? I.e. do we really want to talk about separation? Wasn't the creation of this area initially motivated by the concept of togetherness?

Everyone is entitled to their own ideas, however no one wants/deserves to be slapped and kicked in the face because of who they are, how they live, or what they believe. The moderators are a primordial part of this forum.

It's not acceptable to me to ignore blatant hatred and disrespect. I like to stand up for myself, for who I am. Don’t you like doing the same for yourself? Should we not stand up for what this forum is all about?

Well, that's my 2 cents worth. ;-)

Originally Posted by Anchor

What we do, is try our best.

To make what you do more easier:

- forum membership becomes invite only
- it is still free to join
- it is still read-only to non members
- if the invitee fails to comply with forum guide-lines 2 people get banned = the invitee and the inviter

Implementing this might help...but it will reduce the "diversity"

[tacodog]

Originally Posted by Seashore

My response to your answer is to say that the context of the banning of francie was not just, and she should be re-instated.

I know the Mods are overworked and under appreciated, but I have to agree with Seashore on this one. Truth and disclosure comes in a variety of ways...if it didn't, there wouldn't be any.

[Seashore]

Originally Posted by Seashore

On the issue of trolls, we could all agree to ignore them.

When I use the word "troll," I mean to refer to paid parallel government agents only - not people who have issues and come across as provocative in their posts.

It seems that people on the forum are using the word "troll" to refer to anyone who is difficult. And again, I think all of us members (including me of course) need to work on how we respond to posts and not look to moderators to ban unpleasant people from the forum.

[Seashore]

In my opinion, Project Camelot and Project Avalon are a part of alternative journalism. Therefore, I feel that those who are in decision-making functions at Project Camelot and Project Avalon have a responsibility to protect free speech.

In my opinion, the banning of franciejones is a free speech issue because the sequence of events leading up to the action taken against her involved a very public issue of importance: is Dr Bill Deagle a paid disinfo agent?

This post on my part is to register my protest for what I feel is improper stifling of healthy debate about an important public affairs issue.

[UncleJohn]

Originally Posted by Seashore

When I use the word "troll," I mean to refer to paid parallel government agents only - not people who have issues and come across as provocative in their posts.

It seems that people on the forum are using the word "troll" to refer to anyone who is difficult. And again, I think all of us members (including me of course) need to work on how we respond to posts and not look to moderators to ban unpleasant people from the forum.

The word "troll" on groups and forums has a very definite meaning. A troll is a post by someone with the intent to extract a emotional reaction. In other words, they are fishing for a bite.

Sometimes this technique is used to disrupt, but mostly it is by someone playing head games with others, or attempting to attract attention to themselves or to validate their positions by bullying.

"Paid parallel government agents" are much in the minority of trollers on net.

The PC mods are not trying to suppress anyone's free speech other that attempting to keep the discussions here civil and somewhat on focus.

[Seashore]

Originally Posted by Seashore

In my opinion, Project Camelot and Project Avalon are a part of alternative journalism. Therefore, I feel that those who are in decision-making functions at Project Camelot and Project Avalon have a responsibility to protect free speech.

In my opinion, the banning of franciejones is a free speech issue because the sequence of events leading up to the action taken against her involved a very public issue of importance: is Dr Bill Deagle a paid disinfo agent?

This post on my part is to register my protest for what I feel is improper stifling of healthy debate about an important public affairs issue.

I do not believe franciejones fits into the category of "troll" as you lay out here and I repeat my protest - for what it's worth.

[Seashore]

Originally Posted by Seashore

TtC published a private message from BROOK on a thread, did he not? What happened there?

Trolls are one thing. The banning of franciejones is something else.

This issue has not gone away – despite the deafening silence.