Temporary ban: Davita

This topic is closed.
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • john madden
    From the Posting Guidelines: Every user has the right to protest any assigned infraction points. To dispute your infraction, you need to PM a member of the moderation team (Atlantis, wm and Paman) with a note about the infraction. Include why you believe you were unfairly issued the infraction, including URL links to any relevant posts. One of the moderators will acknowledge receipt of your PM/email, the moderator team will discuss the infraction and will come to a decision. The decision may be a reaffirmation of the previous infraction, a downgrade of the infraction or even possibly an increase in severity of the infraction

    This applies to infractions imposed on posters. We have, on many occasions, advised on the board that to dispute/question particular mod decisions in public does not accord with the guidelines and may result in additional infraction/s.

    We have engaged in general discussions about how forum guidelines are applied from time to time. Have a look through the Forum Life channel.

    Leave a comment:

  • atlantis
    I think that it has been clearly explained that:
    - The joke he made had a racial undertone and therefore an infraction has been given. Anyone telling me that the joke is not to be considered racist should seriously peruse a dictionary at the letter R as in "racism".
    - the infraction has been appealed and the infraction has been confirmed. It was an unanimous decision and it did not take long to take it.
    - we have been baited countless time and we've been warning Davita more than onec, politely but firmly.
    - A last warning has been given and we clearly stated that we were not interested in beating dead horses.
    - the last warning has been unfortunately ignored.

    End of the story.

    And, no, moderators are NOT to be challenged publicly "for the sake of transparency". We communicate publicly any decision of importance for the sake of transparency and any of our decisions can be challenged and appealed to the owner or to any mod of one's choice by PM. We will review any argument submitted and answer any appeal sent to us but be aware that we are not interested in exhausting ourselves in a pointless and harassing communication. Once a decision is binding... well it's binding and it's time to move on.

    Personally I also doesn't mind to answer any PM concerning moderation, as long as they are courteous. I think that all mods are pretty much on the same line than me on it.

    Any submission of a post by a user implies that he/she agrees to respect this policy. If anyone find that this policy does not suit him/her we will definitively understand that he/she doesn't wish to be part of this community. We try to be fair and transparent in our actions but we won't take it personal if people disagree with the policy of this forum. Anyway, if we would not be fair, I think that we would quickly be on the downfall. for the record, in the past 5 years, this forum has seen a constant growth, in the number of registered users but more importantly in the traffic it generates and the quality contributors it has attracted. I think it speaks by itself.

    Really, we are more than tired with this sad episode. It is a pity that Davita did not realise that it was time to move forward. I close your thread, Omdafyd. The infraction is binding and the chapter is closed. All the informations are in the thread here: http://www.livinginindonesiaforum.or...ary-ban-Davita.

    For those who are interested by challenging publicly or debating the owner's policy, I suggest them to create their own blog. They will have a lot of fun and we will save some precious time...
    Last edited by atlantis; 17-02-13, 19:07.

    Leave a comment:

  • ohmdafyd
    started a topic Temporary ban: Davita

    Temporary ban: Davita

    [COLOR=#333333]"Davita has received a temporary ban, because he continues to question moderator decisions publicly.[/COLOR]"

    Atlantis, I trust, hopefully, that it is the apparent baiting manner in which his challenges to Moderator authority led to his infraction and subsequent ban and that decisions made by Moderators are still able to be challenged publicly for the sake of transparency, providing of course that such debate remains civilised and constructive.