Flaming?!?

[Bacchus]

What does flamming mean on Habsworld? According to fanpuck it is insinuating that mods are not the best people on the world. I submit this thread as an example:

http://forums.habsworld.net/index.php?show...c=10526&hl=

Whereas on-line dictionaries state that flamming means either:

1 . Computer Slang. an act or instance of angry criticism or disparagement, esp. on a computer network.

(http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/flaming)

or 2. An online argument that becomes nasty or derisive, where insulting a party to the discussion takes precedence over the objective merits of one side or another.

(http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=flaming)

I think that it ought to be the second ... when things get nasty or derisive. If it is anything less than that, or if it is what "Tradesamsonov" or whatever his name is, then I think that some moderators should have been banned at this point, because it is quite common here to read peoples "angry criticism" (read any recent game thread as evidence).

I think things ought to be taken down a notch. If you don't like what a person writes, don't read it. Too many people respond to too many stupid posts. Just ignore it.

I personally thing handles like Tradesamsonov, or killbush, are stupid. I would never do it. And I tend not to interact with people who do, because they are usually reactionary. But to ban them, or to argue with them, is just to encourage them. If you ignore a child throwing a tantrum then they are less likely to do it again ... they are seeking attention ... you shouldn't give it to them.

Sorry for the moral lesson ... but there has been some heavy handed modding recently. Don't envy your job ... but at the same time, don't get self-righteous in it either. It will cause you more harm than good in the long run.

Habsworld ought to be more clear on their policy.

[Pierre the Great]

yeah any anti player or anti person name turns me off because you know where they stand.

Anybody can get along with anybody just as Fanpuck and I. It was pretty rough between him and I for a couple months/weeks now I don't have a problem with him at all. Funny how things go.

[JLP]

Bacchus, writing "...According to fanpuck [flaming] is insinuating that mods are not the best people on the world." is a false premise and a straw man argument. That was never said, if you want to have a sensible discussion, start with facts.

Now I don't always agree with Fanpuck (or the other mods or posters or even the admin for that matter), and I might have handled it differently. But the thread in question, really, begins with an overreaction by dumpSamsonov to a process called "merging" that happens all the time when there is similar content in different threads. Mods merge to help the order of the site. Mods don't get paid by the way, we are here to try and make this a good experience for the Habs fans who visit.

I see your points, we all may have to remind ourselves to ignore the posts we don't like or are not interested in, especially as the site continues to grow. There is also the issue of quality though, some less-moderated forums are just full of junk.

Finally, I'm suggesting that "dumpSamsonov" be cancelled as an ID, we'll see what the site admin thinks, of course the user could continue with a new name. An ID like that is just negative -- if we allow it maybe we should allow "ScrewRivet" or "SakuSux!" as well, that's not the sort of Habs forum I'd be proud of.

[Bacchus]

Bacchus, writing "...According to fanpuck [flaming] is insinuating that mods are not the best people on the world." is a false premise and a straw man argument. That was never said, if you want to have a sensible discussion, start with facts.

It wasn't a direct quote, but what Dumpsamsonov hardly said anything that warrants banning, especially since when users who are not mods say are receive similar comments they aren't banned.

Here is what DS was banned for:

"QUOTE(dumpSamsonov @ Feb 9 2007, 12:49 AM) *

LOL 2 moderators contradicting each other, one tells me I won't gets banned for disagreeing with the mods and the other tells me he's going to ban. Laughable. You guys are on a real power trip."

To which Fanpuck responded, "You had your chance, and you blew it within an hour by flaming again."

... I don't see that this is flamming. And, as I just said, the only reason he was banned was because he wrote it to a mod, and not to a regular forum user.

I see no strawmen arguments here.

NEway, what does flamming mean here? It should be clarified. There should be transparency. I'm not trying to give you mods a hard time. I don't envy your task. I did it before on my own forum and had enough of it. But, I was always very transparent, and I explained my actions.

Of course, post merging doesn't have to be explained, but bannings and deletions ought to be. Also, mods have to be very careful of what they say since they must set the example.

[JLP]

I appreciate your concerns and thanks for your reasoned tone. I think he got the 24 hour suspension not for that one comment but for repeatedly sounding off (and not in a constructive way but rather with a decidedly mean and bitchy tone) about a thread being merged. Why not be a bit cooler about it?

Anyway yeah there are some words that are not allowed and other restrictions are spelled out in the forum rules, but sometimes it is subjective when a mod warns or suspends a poster, it's a judgment call for sure, and nobody's perfect.

But among the hundreds of active members only a very few seem to end up in the situation repeatedly.

[Fanpuck33]

What does flamming mean on Habsworld? According to fanpuck it is insinuating that mods are not the best people on the world.

Absolutely not. Flaming deals directly with HW Rule #2: No racism/racial-slurs/prejudice/personal provocation/foul language, etc.

Here is what DS was banned for:

dumpSamsonov: "LOL 2 moderators contradicting each other, one tells me I won't gets banned for disagreeing with the mods and the other tells me he's going to ban. Laughable. You guys are on a real power trip."

Fanpuck33: "You had your chance, and you blew it within an hour by flaming again."

Normally, that wouldn't have been a problem. What he said wasn't that bad. But after just calling calling us KGB, dictators, and lying about how we do things, he got his first warning of the night for personal provocation. After that, he was told he could continue the discussion if he did so with some civility. Instead, he attacked the mods again, more personal provocation. It was his 3rd warning for flaming, so he was suspended for 24 hours, not banned. (3 strikes and you're out type of deal)

Now, of course we can't catch everyone that goes wrong. There are only a few of us and tons of you. We can only see what we read. And when someone starts a thread with that kind of title, of course it will draw the mods attention. And when you attack someone, we'll call you out on it when we see it. And let's face it, a person is more likely to notice something directed at them. If I'm skimming a thread and see someone say, "Hey Bacchus..." I probably won't notice anything since I'm only skimming. But if I see "Hey Fanpuck," then I'm going to stop skimming and read it. So in that sense only, I suppose bashing a mod might be worse than bashing a regular user.

I think things ought to be taken down a notch. If you don't like what a person writes, don't read it. Too many people respond to too many stupid posts. Just ignore it.

But to ban them, or to argue with them, is just to encourage them. If you ignore a child throwing a tantrum then they are less likely to do it again ... they are seeking attention ... you shouldn't give it to them.

As I've already said many time, we don't do anything to anyone because of their opinions. I disagree with almost everything that comes out of PTG's mouth for example. But I've only warned him once, when he made a racial comment. If I was going around warning and banning people because of opinions, than someone like PTG wouldn't be around anymore. Anyone who disagreed with a mod wouldn't be around anymore. That accusation is baseless.

Back in the early days of this site, dumpSamsonov wouldn't have lasted even this long. We didn't have as many users and some of the old mods really did ban someone if they dissed the mods. Times have changed. Bashing a mod still isn't a great idea, but it's no different than bashing anyone else anymore, aside from the fact that personal attacks are usually more obvious when you are the target. The 24 hour suspension was the result of his "tantrum." But we're not dictators here. He'll get another shot.

We try to give people a fair shake. If someone isn't happy with the mods, that's ok. Come talk to us. PM us. Don't go around creating threads to bash the administrators of the site and flame on them instead of talking things through. Bacchus, this is something you do, and I appreciate it very much.

[huzer]

I think things ought to be taken down a notch. If you don't like what a person writes, don't read it. Too many people respond to too many stupid posts. Just ignore it.

Sorry for the moral lesson ... but there has been some heavy handed modding recently. Don't envy your job ... but at the same time, don't get self-righteous in it either. It will cause you more harm than good in the long run.

Habsworld ought to be more clear on their policy.

I echo those sentiments. While I'm not in agreement with a great deal of the moderation that takes place, Habsworld is still one of the better hockey sites on the web. If it wasn't for the content, I wouldn't be here almost explicitly because of the heavy handed moderating.

[Fanpuck33]

I echo those sentiments. While I'm not in agreement with a great deal of the moderation that takes place, Habsworld is still one of the better hockey sites on the web. If it wasn't for the content, I wouldn't be here almost explicitly because of the heavy handed moderating.

This coming from someone who was warned for calling people Nazis...

[PMAC]

I echo those sentiments. While I'm not in agreement with a great deal of the moderation that takes place, Habsworld is still one of the better hockey sites on the web. If it wasn't for the content, I wouldn't be here almost explicitly because of the heavy handed moderating.

I don't think the Mods are heavyhanded at all. They are doing a difficult job as well as they can and I for one am sick of the kinds ranting BS posted by people like DumpSamsonov. That kind of attitude coupled with multiple threads on the same topic might drive me away!

Thank you Mods :hlogo:

[simonus]

wow! I really never thought of HW moderating as particularly heavy-handed...

I don't usually read other habs msg boards because they tend to be full of unreasoned flaming, bashing, and other distracting and nonconstructive content. I would offer that this site has the content quality level that it does because the mods are not complete absentee landlords.

As to the current matter, dumpSamsonov is in itself a troll nick. From his first post he has acted as an extreme agitator on the site. In spite of this, he has not been banned and has been welcome to post essentially whenever, wherever, and on whatever he has wanted. His current suspension should be over in a few hours and as long he is able to not rage over issues such as simple mod housekeeping (another way that this site maintains a quality control), he should have no problem posting on this site.

I see many different and opposing opinions expresses on a variety of issues. I have seen many users (including mods) attacked for what I felt were erroneous or specious reasons and those posters have not been disciplined so long as those attacks were not wholly mean-spirited or offensive.

As this board grows the mod core must constantly re-evaluate its stand on issues of standards and policing and I promise that between sakiqc, Fanpuck, JLP, KoZed and myself, a variety of views are represented. The idea that we all would agree on any one issue is kinda funny. If you espouse anything close to a reasonable opinion you can be sure that at least one of us is sympathetic to your view.. and might hold it as well.

I guess there are active users who distrust and dislike the mod core, or members thereof... and that is fine. We do not ask for universal appreciation or even respect. Obviously you all have a democratic voice insofar as you can voice complaints or choose to use a different board and we try to be sensitive to the zeitgeist of the HW community in assuring that our operating policies create an acceptable environment for the greatest number of our members.

Edited February 9, 2007 by simonus