Johann_Kaspar

Did someone get banned only because s/he chose the "wrong" nickname

Mech Bliss

That seems to be one of the significant problems. The appeals section does seem to be there for show, even though it's not publically viewable. Of course there are exceptions, and it ultimately depends on who you're dealing with, but it's like talking to a wall in there.

One of my appeals to a warning was closed in less than 15 minutes. I doubt any serious consideration could have been given in that time, and that was reflected by the fact that my appeal was not directly addressed and the justification for the warning was not clarified, which was what I wanted.

I appealed that action to appeal the warning again and it went ignored (and I mean that literally) for at least five weeks. Finally it was taken up, but what I wrote was never actually addressed. The original decision was upheld with the comments in my appeal totally ignored and still no justification provided.

It's a function of bias and an unwillingness to admit to any moderation mistakes. Some of them take their jobs way too seriously as moderators, until it comes to appeal time.

copernicus

I am in complete agreement with you, Mech Bliss. It brings to mind the old Latin saying "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" (Who will guard the guards themselves?) The big problem with CF is that the moderators have no restraint, and they don't feel obligated to justify their decisions. That's why I left. I felt that I had been noticed and would be harrassed in the future. I would have stuck around if I thought that they were interested in fairness.

Unfortunately, modern christianity does not seem to predispose people to tolerant behavior. It ought to, but fairness seems to be a hallmark of the old christian liberalism. And Christian liberalism seems to be waning. The judgmental God of the OT is on the rise, and those who worship him seem to want to emulate him. "Like god, like worshipper" to paraphrase the old saying about parents and offspring.

Lanakila

Yes she did. It was a: I am just here to win y'all to christ and I do my best-I love you even though you are wicked heathens bound for hell--ect type thread.

seebs

I've had good luck with appeals, but part of that, I think, is that at least three of the warnings I've gotten were so obviously ill-considered spite warnings that merely reading them was experienced as physical pain by many of the staff members I've discussed them with.

In general, I don't think some of the staff understand the point of the appeals system, and frankly, I think many of them don't understand the warning system either.

copernicus

It's not just luck, seebs. You are a believer, and that counts for something in their book. I wonder if any atheist has had success in winning an appeal in the apologetics forum. The moderators may see themselves as fair, but they don't wear blindfolds.

seebs

Honestly, I don't think my believer status helps me with many of the staff. I would guess that, if it weren't for Rule 1, a staff vote on the question "is seebs a real Christian" would be split, or possibly go slightly against me.

Rosa Mystica

Ya know, some of the people on CF who I think should be banned will never be banned. Some of them, might I add, are senior admin. who keep harrassing me w/ their unsolicited advice (hint: Mr. Cheese. I had to tell him to leave me alone once and for all yesterday). This kind of harrassment of those who don't wanna be advised/proselytized to is perfectly acceptable on CF. But, if I write a swear word (w/ punctuation marks as a substitute for a letter), then I get bitched out by mods b/c some twit felt the "need" to report it? :angry: Gimme a break, please.

Heh, I just had a thought: maybe I should become a mod. one day. Whadda ya'll think? Would you like me to apply as a mod? Which forum would you like me to moderate? :rolling:

seebs

I still think what CF mostly needs is mods who don't think of the site rules as a bully pulpit.

Rosa Mystica

Please elaborate further.