Moderation transparency

[mr_hunt]

1 hour ago, Alpha_TATEr said:

question, have i earned a point yet ? 

 

asking for a friend. 

if they gave out points for being super-handsome, you'd be the lebron of the emb, my friend.  

[mikemack8]

3 minutes ago, mr_hunt said:

if they gave out points for being super-handsome, you'd be the lebron of the emb, my friend.  

Balding, and never reads a book past page 1?

[Moderator6]

4 hours ago, Texas Eagle said:

Yeah not sure why I was tagged here either. I’ve been staying out of the mud and just talking football.

Am I supposed to show myself out or something?

If I recall you've made comments about the moderation in the past.  I tried to think of anyone who wanted to discuss moderation. Not everyone who was tagged is a problem poster or anything, but people I thought wanted to discuss moderation and keep it out of the blog and somewhere else.  If you're not interested and have no issues, carry on my friend.

[Moderator6]

58 minutes ago, mr_hunt said:

5 stahs     

This post made it all worth it.    

[Moderator6]

Some of the reaction was expected.

We want transparency!  We want a discussion. We demand explanations!

I give complete transparency, lengthy discussion in an open forum and give detailed explanations...

Wait, no not like that!  That's a filibuster.  We don't like the way you gave us exactly what we asked for.

And 2 of you calling it a filibuster (when someone in Congress won't give up the floor so they can delay a vote) is odd.  

Spoiler

 

[Westbrook#36]

Who asked?

[Swoop]

4 minutes ago, Moderator6 said:

Some of the reaction was expected.

We want transparency!  We want a discussion. We demand explanations!

I give complete transparency, lengthy discussion in an open forum and give detailed explanations...

Wait, no not like that!  That's a filibuster.  We don't like the way you gave us exactly what we asked for.

And 2 of you calling it a filibuster (when someone in Congress won't give up the floor so they can delay a vote) is odd.  

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

 

 

I think the point you're largely missing is that people wanted a reason beyond "enough is enough" for months when a poster was banned. It could've saved all parties involved a lot of time and perhaps disregarded the need for this thread to begin with.

Further, since I have been included once again, I'm just curious on a few things. I don't have an intention to continue to drag this out though as I'm sure we all have enough going on in our lives. I'll try to refrain from directly calling people out.

First being that I know for a fact that a certain poster that was banned had a poster come after him making fun of his dead mother. Seemingly this was never addressed and my question is why is that?

Second being why is it that a specific poster (that I've personally ignored) has been allowed to troll about Carson Wentz in at least half of his posts (though I suspect much more) for literal years? 

Third being: Do you take issue with a major culprit of issues with the board immediately coming over to stir the pot? This is someone who's been warned/banned before. If so, where do we go from here. If not, this is problem, no?

Fourth, do you not find it strange that yourself and others feel the need to keep tabs on people that are no longer here and to share publicly what's going on with them? Doesn't that come across as a tad power hungry?

Just a really bizarre string of events, if I'm being honest. Like I said though, I don't really want to go back and forth for an extended period of time here.

[Moderator12]

10 hours ago, Moderator6 said:

Mods anonymous

Many sites have anonymous mods and the mods here don’t want their personal account bothered by moderation stuff.  The fact that some of you keep hounding mods, the attacks on VA and the YouTube comments have proven that.  How could we possibly post in peace about literally any topic when people go from forum to forum (or personal email, YouTube, etc. and stalk us) to track us down about silly nonsense? 

I’ll give you an example.  DUM would send me multiple pm’s demanding something.  He would monitor when I was online and message me saying he can see I’m online, why am I not responding to something.  He was upset that when a clone of bacarty showed up, that we didn’t allow it. First of all, 12 handles registrations not me.  But DUM wanted this clone to be allowed so he could make fun of him.  Even though it’s against the rules for a suspended or banned poster to create a clone to get around that.  DUM hounded me about it and was stalking to find out when I was online and not.  He stalked a lot of you and reported you, pm’d us about you, pushed for people to get banned.  Imagine the mods not being anonymous and having DUM, 4for4, Toronto and others follow you around and harass you no matter what topic or forum you’re in.  
 

Funny how the confused crew, who were complaining about the anonymous mod accounts completely undercut their complaint by stalking and harassing the ONE person that didn't have an anonymous account.

 

Morons.  And considering they are doing this to a disabled vet who is trying to earn money to take care of his sick mother, vile POS's.

 

2 hours ago, Alpha_TATEr said:

question, have i earned a point yet ? 

 

asking for a friend. 

+1.  Now you have street cred.

[mikemack8]

26 minutes ago, Swoop said:

Fourth, do you not find it strange that yourself and others feel the need to keep tabs on people that are no longer here and to share publicly what's going on with them? Doesn't that come across as a tad power hungry?

I would certainly agree with this part except it seems that a member, or members, of that crew have taken to harassing VA outside of this site via his YouTube channel.  

[HazletonEagle]

1 hour ago, Moderator6 said:

This is exactly why I made a public topic to address all the public moderation complaints people have made.  The entire thread doesn't apply to you, it's a public forum to address all the issues not just you.  You were just one of the people who wanted discussion and transparency. You ripped me and the mods publicly plenty of times, you had no problem with that being public but now want to have a PM discussion.  I was getting pm's from a bunch of people about the same stuff, so I'm not going to go back and forth on the same points with different people.  And your last lengthy pm to me was not only about your own behavior it was about others as well. 

You don't have to participate, this isn't just for you.  Happy posting mate.  

Yeah. I have no problem with a public post.  But when you mention my name numerous times and go right in to what other people said or did its very misleading to people reading. Defamatory even, which is against the TOS. 

This is best handled on an individual basis where you and the other mods can hear concerns and maybe even consider them. 

My PM to you told you you suck. And why I feel that way. And gave a detailed description why.  It included those guys because I wasn't really involved with the trolling.  And my intent had never been to die in a hill for them.  I pmd them,  and even posted right in the open to them that they were out of line And pleaded with them to stop before they got themselves banned.   They know this. 

My issue was

1) that the moderation was very lopsided against them. 

  - with little mod help,  and the weight of your iron fist they felt even more emboldened to defend themselves against the trolling against them,  because you weren't. At least not enough. 

- not a single one of RTKs group is gone.  They said some vile things- dead radiative, accusations if racism over and over again.  They're all still here.  On the other end,  DUM, 4FOR4 TorontoEagle and UndyTaker are all gone.  4 people racked enough points to get banned.  At most,  they caked RTK and his side morons over and over.  On the other side,  not one of them racked up enough for a ban and they said far worse things. 

 

2) any moderation that is resulting in people being kicked out of our already small community is not what we need. It is counter productive. That was ok on the old EMB at its height of popularity. But definitely not the type of action we needed here. 

But my solution was never transparency. Ironically, that was Toronto who is banned now.  So you never gave him this opportunity.  Too bad...

 

My solutions were more mods or no mods. I explained why I believed either idea would work better.  

[HazletonEagle]

1 hour ago, RememberTheKoy said:

 

Funny to read that his conspiracies extended to the mods.  I remember he kept trying to claim I was the ringleader of some group of posters like his crew of friends that actually coordinated together on things.  Completely false and totally paranoid.

 

 

Since this is Rant and Rave I'm going to hope my post poking fun at HE is allowed but if not then just delete (please no warning point).

Everyone knows the extent of your involvement.  You were their main target,  and then you had a small grip of people start defending you. This guy's started trolling the 4for4/DUM group.  One of your buddies stick up for you because he believes you're mentally retarded.

[HazletonEagle]

43 minutes ago, Westbrook#36 said:

Who asked?

The guy who is banned already ironically.  But mod2 wants to portend he did everyone a favor by having this discussion.

I repeatedly asked for a PM discussion. 

There's literally no one left on the board that asked for this. 

[Moderator6]

5 minutes ago, Swoop said:

I think the point you're largely missing is that people wanted a reason beyond "enough is enough" for months when a poster was banned. It could've saved all parties involved a lot of time and perhaps disregarded the need for this thread to begin with.

I appreciate the response and this is what I did this for to discuss concerns.  I will break them out into quotes so I can reply to each.  With the above, we did give reasoning more than "enough is enough."  We said he attacked other posters and ignored warnings and suspensions.  Some people were looking for 1 specific post or phrase or "the straw that broke the camel's back."  Blog posters themselves would comment to explain that they witnessed him just endlessly going after people and ignoring mod warnings.  We got multiple reports and pm's about his repeated behavior.  So that's the backdrop and context of "enough is enough."

Like I said above, I've spent many, many long posts in the blog explaining things and that didn't make a difference.  It did not save all parties time.  It actually generated more people discussing, more people then posting how they disagree, debating how the board should be moderated.  Bloggers also debated many different occasions what the blog should even be about.  Some said take the RnR trash talk and personal feuds to RnR or private message.  Some said the blog should be more gentlemanly like scholars conducting themselves with respect, some thought it was a place for serious football discussion apart from the usual TATE topics, some thought it was an anything goes.  The bloggers couldn't even agree on what the blog should be and then various people would ask us to moderate how it should go.  So this thread was a longtime coming, I wish I would have had time to do it previously.  I thought things had died down until this week when banned posters were going after VA's personal YouTube and all that it was just getting out of hand.

 

Quote

First being that I know for a fact that a certain poster that was banned had a poster come after him making fun of his dead mother. Seemingly this was never addressed and my question is why is that?

The person who made that comment was given warning points for it.  Someone tagged me in the blog and I replied to say that the poster was given warning points and it was out of line.  If someone didn't see that comment because the blog moves fast and didn't notice that, they might not know action was taken.  Also, we don't publish every warning or decision.  This is one of the points I was making, you don't know who does and doesn't get warning points and then people are commenting in the blog saying someone got away with something or it was allowed.  No, it wasn't.  It was reported and I gave warning points.

Quote

Second being why is it that a specific poster (that I've personally ignored) has been allowed to troll about Carson Wentz in at least half of his posts (though I suspect much more) for literal years? 

I've seen some other people troll about Wentz the other way as well and bring him up.  There were people who trolled about Carson Strong and then bragged about it and we never gave them any warnings or messages to stop or anything.  Some of these people started to post in RnR and then publicly posted that they were going to go and hijack the Hurts topic.  I never gave them warning points for that either.  Despite them claiming we were out to get them or something, we allowed all that and didn't give warnings.  At one point, they complained about "the other side" and I said well let's be clear if you want moderation (the guys who kept saying they don't want moderation unless it's someone else) then I'm going to have to moderate the things you're doing as well.  What is the line?  It's why I called them guidelines instead of rules in the pinned topics.  Is it really worthy of official warning points because someone keeps bringing up a player they didn't like?  If we give warnings for that, then what about other things people post about constantly repeating the same football talking point?  Now that "could" lead to warning points if it's just a lot of spam for no reason.  But in discussing football and making a post with a bunch of points and naming Carson Wentz, Carson Strong, Foles, Minshew, whoever...is that necessarily "trolling" by making a football argument over and over again?  Again, I've seen people who liked Wentz also continue to bring him up so do you want them warned for it too?  I tend to think actual football (or other on-topic posts depending on the forum) are just discussion unless it ventures into a category in the guidelines.  Like I said, that could be a warning point.  But again, we don't see that happening.  You say it's half his posts, well then next time it happens repeatedly report the posts so we can review.  We're not living in the blog or TATE all day reading everything.  What gets put on our radar are reported posts and complaints brought to us.

Quote

Third being: Do you take issue with a major culprit of issues with the board immediately coming over to stir the pot? This is someone who's been warned/banned before. If so, where do we go from here. If not, this is problem, no?

If I read that correctly you mean someone who was banned on the old boards but then was allowed here.  There were others like that including DUM and 4for4 but did you have a problem with them being reinstated on this board?  4for4 was also banned on this board and then reinstated, did you have a problem with that?  There are others who were banned on the old boards but allowed back here.  So I don't know who specifically you are talking about but we know who they all are and when needed have given them warnings.  There are 2 in particular that I had my eye on and you know what? They took heed to the warnings and were on good behavior.  One of them I had to give a warning once and then he stopped.  Frankly, I've been impressed that some of the formerly banned members have behaved well here.  Others haven't.

Again, if you see something you have a problem with we are not seeing every post and "allowing" something, so report it, pm the linked quotes to me, something so we can review and take action if needed.

Quote

Fourth, do you not find it strange that yourself and others feel the need to keep tabs on people that are no longer here and to share publicly what's going on with them? Doesn't that come across as a tad power hungry?

No, it's not power hungry.  Power hungry would be banning everyone who complains about us which we didn't do while they ripped us publicly for months.  Power hungry would have been banning them a long time ago and not giving them multiple chances.  Power hungry would have been to not reinstate 4for4 from being banned.  Maybe the phrase power hungry isn't appropriate in what you're describing so here's my take on why we would comment on what they're doing on another board:

I had no interest in what they did when they were banned from here.  I didn't even know there was another board.  They started going to VA's EMB YouTube channel which is used to generate interest and traffic to the site to grow the community, collect more ad dollars to help financially support the site.  They started this by being childish trolls who went to spam the EMB YouTube channel.  VA deleted the comments and turned comments off.  We laughed it off, disgruntled former posters.

Then, they took it further by giving out his personal email address which someone had who was a supposed friend, and that person also shared VA's personal YouTube channel and they started doing it there.  VA is a retired military veteran with his own health issues and he is a caretaker for his mother who he's posted about her long ongoing health issues.  His personal YT channel is a way to make income to support the medical bills and way of living.  

Think about that.  These guys are so petty about stupid football message board drama that they go to his personal YT to affect his personal income.  The man who volunteered to build this entire site, spent hours going through old EMB threads to archive and bring them here, built the ad revenue streams with Amazon and such so that the board can support itself through those sponsored links so we don't have to deal with annoying ads here.

They went after him.  Because of their bad behavior that got warnings on bans on a football message board.

So yeah, they went that far so we browsed their new home, saw that they were doing the same stuff there.  I wanted to make the point for those that complain about the mods that it's not us, it's these people and it's proven because they're doing the same thing there and their mods have already had to call them out.

 

 

[Moderator6]

6 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

The guy who is banned already ironically.  But mod2 wants to portend he did everyone a favor by having this discussion.

I repeatedly asked for a PM discussion. 

There's literally no one left on the board that asked for this. 

Then go back to TATE and quit complaining.

[HazletonEagle]

Just now, Moderator6 said:

Then go back to TATE and quit complaining.

I think pretty much everyone already had but then you did this.  

[Swoop]

@Moderator6 I'm talking about RTK, who has been permanently banned before, came here, has been banned/warned and immediately came into this thread to take shots at HE.

Given the circumstances that should be addressed, should it not? If not, that's part of the problem.

[HazletonEagle]

Just now, Swoop said:

@Moderator6 I'm talking about RTK, who has been permanently banned before, came here, has been banned/warned and immediately came into this thread to take shots at HE.

Given the circumstances that should be addressed, should it not? If not, that's part of the problem.

The amazing thing is that RTK is repeatedly claiming no involvement. 

[Moderator6]

14 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

Yeah. I have no problem with a public post.  But when you mention my name numerous times and go right in to what other people said or did its very misleading to prove reading. Defamatory even, which is against the TOS. 

This is best handled on an individual basis where you and the other mods can hear concerns and maybe even consider them. 

My PM to you told you you suck. And why I feel that way. And gave a detailed description why.  It included those guys because I wasn't really involved with the trolling.  And my intent had never been to die in a hill for them.  I pmd them,  and even posted right in the open to them that they were out of line And pleaded with them to stop before they got themselves banned.   They know this. 

My issue was

1) that the moderation was very lopsided against them. 

  - with little mod help,  and the weight of your iron fist they felt even more emboldened to defend themselves against the trolling against them,  because you weren't. 

2) any moderation that is resulting in people being kicked out of our already small community is not what we need. It is counter productive. That was ok on the old EMB at its height of popularity. But definitely not the type of action we needed here. 

But my solution was never transparency. Ironically, that was Toronto who is banned now.  So you never gave him this opportunity.  Too bad...

 

My solutions were more mods or no mods. I explained why I believed either idea would work better.  

As I said, I have done pm's back and forth with people.  And that will continue for things on a case by case basis.  Toronto wasn't the only one asking for transparency.  And I did explain things to him in the blog a LOT of times and he still continued to lie about reasoning.  I gave these type of posts on occassion, some very lengthy posts in the blog to explain things.  That didn't matter, they kept complaining and running with narratives regardless.  

Your points you stated above I already addressed in this thread:

1. It was not lopsided, others were given warnings and even suspensions too. They just were the bigger problem and repeated offenders and kept getting warning points. I gave multiple examples in this thread of where I did defend trolling against them.  I specifically gave posters warning points for attacking DUM and 4for4, for example.  For a long time, Toronto had no warning points despite his CONSTANT ripping the mods.  He just kept going and finally got warnings for all sorts of things, the last straw was going after VA.  And he's one that is attacking his YouTube channel.  These guys were toxic and trash and proving it more and more.  Yet, I did give points to others including people who attacked them as well.  So this lopsided thing is BS.

2. I don't know how many times me, 12 and VA have said we don't want anyone suspended or banned.  So not sure why you're saying that.  You should take issue with the people who managed to keep getting warnings and suspensions on a board that is extremely lenient compared to the last one.  Others get warnings and stop, these guys kept going and pushing it further and further (I would often wonder if they were actually trying to get banned).  I explained all the decision process and patience and leniency above it's there to read.

I gave Toronto opportunity in the blog by responding to lots of posts and explaining reasoning.  It didn't fit what he wanted to hear so he kept spreading lies.  

[Moderator6]

8 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

I think pretty much everyone already had but then you did this.  

False.

[HazletonEagle]

Ok.  You believe you did a good job.  And that's all that matters to you. So I guess we aren't getting anywhere. Thanks for the "discussion".

[mikemack8]

I think there's only one way to finally settle this.

I'll draw up the combat waiver.

[mr_hunt]

so....how does one go about getting an invite to that new message board for bad boys?    

[Godfather]

This doesn't explain why my homie Shocker was banned. For what? It's not his fault he didn't have the best education. Everyone was hatin on his slang and parties he would have on OBJ's boat 

[Mike030270]

11 hours ago, Moderator6 said:

Mods "allow” certain things

I’ve said this repeatedly but you guys don’t listen.  We DO NOT read every forum, every post. We do not "allow” something just because it’s posted.  Especially the blog that moves very fast.  Someone will post "the mods are allowing that” and suggest we’re hypocrites.  Even like minutes after it’s posted, assuming we are watching every post and living in the blog like you do. We don’t see it!  That’s why there is a report function.  

And some of you who say you don’t use the report function because you think it’s snitching, we see the reports from you!  Or they would send us pm’s being pushy and demanding we give warnings/suspensions or bans for the posters that they don’t like.  These guys are lying in the forums and total hypocrites.  

You can use the report function, pm us or tag us if you need to call attention to a post I don’t care which way but we likely won’t see it unless you tell us in some way.

I will also say that some items are easy to make a quick judgement and others it’s not immediate.  There are times that I need to go through the context and see other posts to figure out what happened.  Other times the mods are discussing it together to get a consensus on how we should handle.  For myself, sometimes I’m getting tagged on things or getting pm’s and my work day is full of meetings so I’ll get to it later.  Then people complain that we’re allowing or ignoring things.  If we moderate, you complain. If we don’t moderate, you complain.  If we moderate but it’s not fast enough, you complain. If we moderate and it’s too fast…you get the idea.  No one is ever happy.
 

HE was calling me a snitch when I would @ you to their complaints. I kept telling them they wont see it unless they actually @ the mods. Gee I was right

[Mike030270]

52 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

Yeah. I have no problem with a public post.  But when you mention my name numerous times and go right in to what other people said or did its very misleading to people reading. Defamatory even, which is against the TOS. 

This is best handled on an individual basis where you and the other mods can hear concerns and maybe even consider them. 

My PM to you told you you suck. And why I feel that way. And gave a detailed description why.  It included those guys because I wasn't really involved with the trolling.  And my intent had never been to die in a hill for them.  I pmd them,  and even posted right in the open to them that they were out of line And pleaded with them to stop before they got themselves banned.   They know this. 

My issue was

1) that the moderation was very lopsided against them. 

  - with little mod help,  and the weight of your iron fist they felt even more emboldened to defend themselves against the trolling against them,  because you weren't. At least not enough. 

- not a single one of RTKs group is gone.  They said some vile things- dead radiative, accusations if racism over and over again.  They're all still here.  On the other end,  DUM, 4FOR4 TorontoEagle and UndyTaker are all gone.  4 people racked enough points to get banned.  At most,  they caked RTK and his side morons over and over.  On the other side,  not one of them racked up enough for a ban and they said far worse things. 

 

2) any moderation that is resulting in people being kicked out of our already small community is not what we need. It is counter productive. That was ok on the old EMB at its height of popularity. But definitely not the type of action we needed here. 

But my solution was never transparency. Ironically, that was Toronto who is banned now.  So you never gave him this opportunity.  Too bad...

 

My solutions were more mods or no mods. I explained why I believed either idea would work better.  

Who are RTKs group??