*** ALL MEMBERS *** Ending Rudeness, Hate, Bigotry: Getting Back to Basics

originally posted by: grandmakdw

Makes me wonder if I'm a target of the new T&C for fighting so hard to dispel the ugly Christian bashing.

It's not a 'new T&C', it's that staff want to take certain parts of it more seriously instead of letting things slide.

And no, you're not a target.

originally posted by: neformore
a reply to: theabsolutetruth

Debating semantics of this to the "nth" degree for the sake of it is pointless.

It's happening. I'm sure if you fall foul of it the reason why will be explained to you at the time.

That should be standard procedure.

Please, please make it a rule for all mods to explain in a message exactly what the problem with a post was. The automated "this is not acceptable" tells me absolutely nothing and I am left in the dark as to what the problem was.

Please make it a rule that mods can't delete a post without explaining why and not using a point and click choice that tells the offender not a thing about what the mod found objectionable.

a reply to: grandmakdw

In every case of a removed post (or thread), a PM is sent out automatically from the staffer that did the deed. You can respond to that PM and ask why if you wish to do so.

a reply to: grandmakdw

when you have a post removed there is an automatic PM sent to you. In it is the name of the mod who did the removal. All you need to do is send a message asking for the whys and wherefores.

It may take a day or two, sometimes we're not always on line on a day to day basis. Or, you can send that message via the complaints function.

It's very easy to get a hold of us, generally.

a reply to: theabsolutetruth

Another thing all ATS members are invited to openly display is a hatred of obfuscation. Please do your part in ensuring it doesn't enter this thread.

a reply to: masqua

I just want to know why I'm on the list!

(kidding)

These threads, while informative, often create so much drama.

originally posted by: masqua
a reply to: grandmakdw

In every case of a removed post (or thread), a PM is sent out automatically from the staffer that did the deed. You can respond to that PM and ask why if you wish to do so.

I have done that in the past and extremely rarely have I received a response. I haven't had it happen in a long time, granted, but when I have asked why because I was truly baffled as to what the problem was, normally I don't get a response. That is why I think it should be policy for all Mods to explain why a post was removed rather than use a point and click choice of reprimand that tells the offender nothing.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

At allowing exceptions one could argue there is obfuscation in the op

We will no longer allow blanket statements about whole groups of people

masqua way of patience is way better than threats

So glad to read this as I often get called a troll for actually asking questions that go outside of the average readers consciousness fishbowl.

a reply to: grandmakdw

Well... all I can say is that I answer most of the PM's I get from the membership. The really rude ones don't get a response because I'm a pagan and could do a nasty spell if truly angered. I don't want to go there.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

There is certainly a mixed message there.

''Stop the hate unless it is directed at..... and obfuscation''.

I am guessing you would actually prefer that members are not openly hating on posts demonstrating ''obfuscation'' on ATS.

Politeness and civility are a given but I am wondering whether there is some sort of agenda here for example have the pro-transgenders and pro-palestinians winged so much we are now deleting contrary opinions?

originally posted by: masqua
a reply to: grandmakdw

Well... all I can say is that I answer most of the PM's I get from the membership. The really rude ones don't get a response because I'm a pagan and could do a nasty spell if truly angered. I don't want to go there.

I don't think I have ever been really rude when asking why a post was removed. I can be a little testy, but rarely rude.

Honestly, there was one that was removed that truly baffled me, for the life of me I couldn't figure out what the problem was. I asked at least 3 different times what the problem was and never got an answer. Leaving me to think that since the Mod held the opposite opinion from mine, that the Mod was offended by my opposition in general and took it personally.

But since I never got a response after several inquiries that was all I could conclude, this was a couple of years ago.

Ever since then I thought that all Mods should be required to write a personalized sentence to offenders, rather than the point and click choices they get. That would certainly have helped me and did help me one time when a Mod did answer what she thought the problem was, a lack of citations, when I gave a huge list of citations in a previous thread on the same thing. I didn't repeat the citations because I was once fussed at for giving the same really excellent citations over and over in different threads, those were the best ones out there and I was flummoxed as to why I could no longer use them when they made the point so succinctly. To follow that up; when I didn't give a citation after having done so in many threads, I was again chastised. Confusing!

Again, please, please, please, triple please
make a new rule the Mods must give a one sentence personalized reason for removing posts.

a reply to: tothetenthpower

And this right here is where a lot of the questions are coming in.

There are people that have opinions that differ from yours. They can express those opinions while not breaking the T&C. One can say they believe in what ISIS is doing. One can also claim to be a Neo-Nazi and state their tenants in a post without breaking T&C. But how you have responded regarding these instances, it would be reasonable to think that you would delete the post or ban the member. All without breaking T&C. 99.9% of the people who use ATS will disagree, but that .1% that does, as long as they are presenting their opinions within T&C, and considering what the OP, should be able to have their posts stand and the rest of the community lambaste them for it.

And another concern is that is addressed here regarding memebers thinking certain mods "have it out for" certain people or threads. A Mod couldn't even make it through this topic without expressing opinions that have nothing to do with the topic at hand. You, sir or madam, have made an off topic post.

a reply to: grandmakdw

Once they got "buttons" it proved irrisistable to those disabled by the short attention span rate of a millenium upbringing.

The old guard will U2U I'm reasonably sure as I knew them once upon a time.

No offense but buttons took away the personal touch. Sure it's quick and easy but that's the problem.

I got "1 Sacked" for difference of opinion.

I do have to say no tolerance was given 10 years back to one line or off topic posts period and it was very common to intervene personally on a thread and get posters back on track - I see little of this nowadays.

The extreme seeming response might be lack of the old "beat" mod and a more automated system letting small stuff go till the force needs to be brought in on MRAP's to regain order.

Also, being a lurker for a long time and a member for a while, I'll believe this rule will be enforced long term when I see it. I've seen handfuls of threads like this, none seem to do anything long term.

originally posted by: masqua

There's no 'hate' in giving an honest opinion.

You and Tenth are not on the same page here.

a reply to: Seamrog

Please explain. I'm of the opinion we're very much on the same page.

a reply to: masqua

Start reading on page 6.

If you don't agree with the particular opinion held by that 'moderator,' it is hate.

It is arbitrary, and personal and subjective.

Honest opinions are not welcome unless they fit a personal ideology.

Theabsolutetruth has been nailing it, and has been largely ignored.

For some moderators, this is agenda and ideology driven.

I am not suggesting that of you, but you asked the question.

a reply to: Seamrog

It's been said many times before, but here goes again.

Nothing that is actioned by a moderator, barring a blatant T&C violation, is done without discussion. Sometimes a lot of discussion. Everything done by any mod is seen by every other mod. The rest of the board doesn't see it, but there is accountability at every step.

If you disagree with a mod then you disagree with them. As long as you are civil about it, it's not an issue.