Inside Broadcast V

[GibsonGirl]

Well then we'll see how long they last.

'They've' been here for several years. Longer than you and I, in fact. And 'they've' been making personal attacks ever since I've been a member of this site. Probably before then.

 

[redhotswami]

Sorry, only my first paragraph was responding to you specifically. The rest was just in general. I should have specified that.

s'all good

 

[Lancemc]

Look, as far as I'm concerned, it comes down to this:

U2Man was a good friend of mine here, and was to many others. Sure he got under a lot of people's skin, but he was rarely outright offensive, and even when he was, you know what? Everybody here has those moments. Whether you loved him or hated him, some of the actions taken recently and comments made by mods and members and such have been pretty damn absurd.

A threat to punish us for putting up U2Man avatars??? Was that fucking serious even for a second??? Give me a break. Who fucking cares? This place has gone so far up its own ass anymore it feels like I'm constantly up to my eyeballs in shit. Maybe I'm just irritable because my life has been a nightmare for the past 4 months, but I know I can't be imagining all of this.

And I'm damn glad that threat earlier didn't pan out, because if it had, that would really have just been completely out of line and I would have had to call this place quits for good.

[/rant]

 

[GibsonGirl]

Look, as far as I'm concerned, it comes down to this:

U2Man was a good friend of mine here, and was to many others. Sure he got under a lot of people's skin, but he was rarely outright offensive, and even when he was, you know what? Everybody here has those moments. Whether you loved him or hated him, some of the actions taken recently and comments made by mods and members and such have been pretty damn absurd.

A threat to punish us for putting up U2Man avatars??? Was that fucking serious even for a second??? Give me a break. Who fucking cares? This place has gone so far up its own ass anymore it feels like I'm constantly up to my eyeballs in shit. Maybe I'm just irritable because my life has been a nightmare for the past 4 months, but I know I can't be imagining all of this.

And I'm damn glad that threat earlier didn't pan out, because if it had, that would really have just been completely out of line and I would have had to call this place quits for good.

[/rant]

 

[KhanadaRhodes]

okie dokie. it's been stated before to not talk about this anymore, and yet here we are.

what i love is people saying we shouldn't have banned someone who broke the rules, and was given more than their fair share of chances, because this other person is still allowed to roam free! we've stated this several times before: if you see a rule-breaking post, report it. we're not perfect, the mod and admin team are only human. we don't catch everything. now if you report, say, 30 truly rule-breaking posts by the same poster and they still go unsuspended? then yes, this argument would be warranted.

this is just a forum. someone has been suspended. it's not permanent, sicy has never implied it would be. the fact that several of you think the rules don't apply to you just because your friend got suspended appalls me. sicy, bonochick, and myself have been saying all day to stop talking about banned members.

anyway, none of you will probably read all of this anyway and just take bits and pieces and distort it to however you want it to sound.

if sicy wants to reopen this thread or start another one i'm leaving it up to her, but i'm closing this at least for now since no one can seem to listen to what we're saying.

 

[Sicy]

While I certainly understand why Khan closed this thread, I'm going to go ahead and leave it open for now. Hopefully I am making the right decision.


All I want to say is I stand by the decision we made for the suspension. This was not a split decision. This has been discussed amongst the mods for a long long time now. Over the last few months there has not been anyone on this forum that we've had to issue constant, almost daily warnings to on a regular basis. This isnt just about a few 'jokes'. Personally, I cannot understand for the life of me how anyone could contest it, but hey I guess that's what happens when people have a lot of friends. It's much more difficult to see 'wrong' when someone is your friend, and I guess I can understand that.

I also understand that everyone has their opinion, and wants to discuss it and I would like to allow that to happen, but the topic of this thread is supposed to be 'I confess I love to see when Inside Broadcast is updated and who was banned in the process.' We have always tried to remind everyone about this. We try to be consistant.

I would also like to echo, as we have stated sooo many times, we cant be everywhere all the time. We dont always see what goes on in every thread. Personally I dont frequent B&C that often. What really bothers me is the 'well how come so and so gets away with blah blah blah'. We ALWAYS try to be fair in issuing warnings and suspensions, etc. The best way to get posts with rude or personal attacks to our attention is by reporting the persons post.

Ideally I would like us to be able to move on. There really is no reason to go on and on about this. What's done is done. Again, we have planned on this being temporary. Those of you that are really friends with him I'm sure know how to contact him outside from this board. Most of you have PM abilities so you can easily discuss it with each other in private. The mods will also address any concerns in private as well. The discussion in this thread should be kept at a minimum. And there should be no personal attacks, against other members OR the moderators.

 

[Chizip]

thank you for opening this thread back up. i don't see why it's seen as such a horrible thing to talk about why someone was banned. it can help people understand whats going on and maybe prevent someone from making the same mistake in the future. as long as the discussion is civil and not insulting to anyone, as much as this discussion has been, i don't see what harm can be done. when you forbid people to talk about things, they will assume things and maybe spread false rumors behind the scenes.

i also think it is nice for there to be an open dialogue between members and the moderators. members should be able to question a moderators decision, yet still respect all the hard work they do here. it shouldnt be seen as an insult to the mods, but an invititation to discuss why certain decisions are made, so everybody can understand and feel better about things. when mods take a dictator type of approach and say thats just the way it is and close things it just makes things worse, imo.

anyway, ill get off my soapbox for now and hope this whole thing can lead to a better interference! and yes i do think the mods do a great job here even though i disagree with things at times.

 

[Bonochick]

What really bothers me is the 'well how come so and so gets away with blah blah blah'. We ALWAYS try to be fair in issuing warnings and suspensions, etc. The best way to get posts with rude or personal attacks to our attention is by reporting the persons post.

This is something I can't stress enough. I've often requested for people to do this, and I still do. With thousands of members and numerous forums, we cannot read every post. Well, we could...but then we wouldn't have lives outside of here.

There is nobody here who is above the rules. If you see a violation that hasn't been addressed by a mod, it's simply because we haven't seen it...not because we are playing favorites. Please, please, PLEASE bring it to our attention by reporting it as soon as you see it.

 

[Utoo]

thank you for opening this thread back up. i don't see why it's seen as such a horrible thing to talk about why someone was banned. it can help people understand whats going on and maybe prevent someone from making the same mistake in the future. as long as the discussion is civil and not insulting to anyone, as much as this discussion has been, i don't see what harm can be done. when you forbid people to talk about things, they will assume things and maybe spread false rumors behind the scenes.

i also think it is nice for there to be an open dialogue between members and the moderators. members should be able to question a moderators decision, yet still respect all the hard work they do here. it shouldnt be seen as an insult to the mods, but an invititation to discuss why certain decisions are made, so everybody can understand and feel better about things. when mods take a dictator type of approach and say thats just the way it is and close things it just makes things worse, imo.

anyway, ill get off my soapbox for now and hope this whole thing can lead to a better interference! and yes i do think the mods do a great job here even though i disagree with things at times.

Agreed 100%.

I think the "no discussion of banned members" rule is something that deserves to be discussed.

http://forum.interference.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=177000

 

[Bonochick]

On the topic of the avatars and signatures thing, I just think that people showing support for a member who violated so many rules and led the mods to having no other choice but suspending him is basically a slap in the face to us. Despite what many may think, this isn't about egos or power trips. I've always just wanted this place to be nice. Call me a dork, but I just want this to be a nice community where people feel welcome and free to express to share their thoughts and opinions without fear of other members reacting in mean ways.

We work hard to make this place nice, so when we make a change to help our cause, and people are against us, it's very frustrating and disheartening.

We don't want to upset people and possibly drive them away. We just want everybody to be nice and show a little respect...not just to the moderators, but to everybody here.

One last thing...everybody having similar avatars is just plain confusing. My opinion on that is just in general, not simply regarding the topic at hand. People often become associated with their avatars (obviously), and their posts are recognized by them. I realize you can argue, "But U2 avatars are all similar too," but I think we've just gotten used to the fact that this is a U2 board, and we'll probably always have lots of U2 avatars.

So...those are my "professional" and personal opinions on that matter.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

I've always just wanted this place to be nice. Call me a dork, but I just want this to be a nice community where people feel welcome and free to express to share their thoughts and opinions without fear of other members reacting in mean ways.

I won't call you a "dork" for that, I applaud you and think it's admirable.

People can have all the 'fun" they want, but the problem is that any one person's/group's definition of fun isn't someone else's-and there are plenty of people posting here outside the sphere of your friends. And maybe some of those people don't want to read posts about your suspended friend all over the forum-and that doesn't help your cause either. You can take it up privately like Sicy said. You can say just ignore it-but you can say that about anything anyone complains about on here. And a widespread thing becomes impossible to ignore.

The mods are just trying to balance all of that for everyone who posts here- not just any one group of someone's friends. They are also just enforcing the rules-and the rules are the rules and that doesn't equate to anyone trying to ruin anyone's fun.

 

[ylimeU2]

The mods are just trying to balance all of that for everyone who posts here- not just any one group of someone's friends. They are also just enforcing the rules-and the rules are the rules and that doesn't equate to anyone trying to ruin anyone's fun.

 

[beegee]

One last thing...everybody having similar avatars is just plain confusing.

It reminds me of the time we were supporting Sicy and we all had Sicy's avatar

 

[Bonochick]

I thought of that too.

 

[LMP]

First off I want to say I have a great respect for anyone who mods an Internet forum. I've been to others and they seem very loose and out of control, which can be a damper on going to a place, posting, and having fun.

I have a few minor gripes about this whole issue. The "report to moderators" button is great for disciplinary action, that's just a fact. Most people, I would think, wouldn't use it because it sounds like a kid tattling about another kid to the teacher. I know it's a great tool to have, but it'll only hurt keeping a look out on everything. Some people could be reported on more than others while another person gets off scot-free, which is a point I believe GG brought up. I don't know if there's a way better to find when there's a problem other than that, but to me it looks like a faulty system.

Also, it's already been discussed, but I do believe we should be able to respectfully discuss why someone was suspended or banned for the same reasons discussed above.

I really enjoy posting here, I'm on almost every day, and over that time I've gained friends amongst other posters. I haven't come to this forum to discuss U2 is a very long time, I come for my friends. When I see one of my friends, who I take lightly (but I can see how people can get riled up by him) gets in trouble, I want to stick by him. One of the few ways I can show that is by changing my avatar.

Sorry if that was long-winded. Like I said above, I don't have any ill-will or have any disrespect for moderators at all, they're doing a job and they're doing it well. I also think that aside from rules, it's a matter of opinion if someone is "offensive" or "unfunny," and if the majority believes that a suspended/banned person isn't either of those things, that should be taken into consideration.

 

[BVS]

I also think that aside from rules, it's a matter of opinion if someone is "offensive" or "unfunny," and if the majority believes that a suspended/banned person isn't either of those things, that should be taken into consideration.

I never saw "offensive" or "unfunny" in the description of why this person was suspended.

 

[Bonochick]

I have a few minor gripes about this whole issue. The "report to moderators" button is great for disciplinary action, that's just a fact. Most people, I would think, wouldn't use it because it sounds like a kid tattling about another kid to the teacher. I know it's a great tool to have, but it'll only hurt keeping a look out on everything. Some people could be reported on more than others while another person gets off scot-free, which is a point I believe GG brought up. I don't know if there's a way better to find when there's a problem other than that, but to me it looks like a faulty system.

I don't want people to feel like they are tattling, I want them to feel like they are doing us a favor...because they are. We really appreciate people who give us a heads up and let us know when something needs attention. We also don't inform people who reported posts, so although we see the reporter's name, that information stays with us. Members don't have to worry that it's going to get around that they are a tattletale or anything.

The system may be faulty, but it's better than nothing. However, the system becomes less faulty the more it is utilized. When you report a post, it gives us a direct link to that post so that we can easily address it. When posts are brought directly to our attention like that, it's a lot easier to track problems.

The function to report posts isn't to be used by mods, it is to be used by members. We expect...or at least hope...that people will use it and not worry about having a tattletale stigma attached to them, because that is not the case at all. If we didn't want people to report posts, that function wouldn't be available. I'm grateful for the people who take the time to hit that button and send some info our way. It helps us catch more posts, which helps us to be as fair as possible. We need to be keeping a look out on everything if we truly desire to be fair...and we do.

 

[Screwtape2]

The function to report posts isn't to be used by mods, it is to be used by members. We expect...or at least hope...that people will use it and not worry about having a tattletale stigma attached to them, because that is not the case at all. If we didn't want people to report posts, that function wouldn't be available. I'm grateful for the people who take the time to hit that button and send some info our way. It helps us catch more posts, which helps us to be as fair as possible. We need to be keeping a look out on everything if we truly desire to be fair...and we do.

I'm not sure that it is possible but could you change the report post function to something where members could flag a post for being possibly abusive? That way it would be easier for people to help out the mods. I think that would solve a lot of problems.

 

[LemonMelon]

Also, it's already been discussed, but I do believe we should be able to respectfully discuss why someone was suspended or banned for the same reasons discussed above.

Yes, I agree. However, this U2Man thing has been blown way out of proportion. Do you know how many threads it has sidetracked in the past 24 hours? And guess what; that IS against the rules. If we would have kept it all to this one thread, there wouldn't have been anything for the mods to bring up. As it is, we've been breaking the rules for an entire day and the mods really haven't done anything, even though they have the power to do so. Good on them. I just think we're asking for it.

 

[Bonochick]

I'm not sure that it is possible but could you change the report post function to something where members could flag a post for being possibly abusive? That way it would be easier for people to help out the mods. I think that would solve a lot of problems.

I don't think I understand what you're requesting. To me, it seems like flagging and reporting is the same thing. When you report a post, an email gets sent to all of the moderators of a forum. It includes a link to the post, the name of the member reporting the post, and a comment from the member regarding why he or she reported the post. Could you try to explain how what you are suggesting differs from that so I can try to understand it better?

 

[LMP]

I'm not sure that it is possible but could you change the report post function to something where members could flag a post for being possibly abusive? That way it would be easier for people to help out the mods. I think that would solve a lot of problems.

Like a little red flag pops up by the post and says "Hey, you're being an asshole?"

or something like that?

 

[Screwtape2]

I don't think I understand what you're requesting. To me, it seems like flagging and reporting is the same thing. When you report a post, an email gets sent to all of the moderators of a forum. It includes a link to the post, the name of the member reporting the post, and a comment from the member regarding why he or she reported the post. Could you try to explain how what you are suggesting differs from that so I can try to understand it better?

I guess what I mean is that the e-mail would be sent but the person reporting the post wouldn't have to do anymore than press the report button. If something is little or in a grey area, most people aren't going to take the time to try to explain why their reporting. The mods would then make the judgememt instead of the people reporting having to basically make that determination. I hope that makes sense. This would help both the mods and regular forum members.

 

[ylimeU2]

I also think that aside from rules, it's a matter of opinion if someone is "offensive" or "unfunny," and if the majority believes that a suspended/banned person isn't either of those things, that should be taken into consideration.

I agree with you that something being offensive or unfunny is subjective. I want to again say what MrsSpringsteen said, the mods have to try and create a balance where everyone can have fun. I feel like a lot of it has to do with context.

In other words, what ever a person's particular sense of humor is, there is a place for it. There are times when joking around is just disruptive to whatever discussion may be going on and some people just don't see that because they find it funny.

And it may seem like the majority of people are sticking up for the member, that may not be the case. We, as members, aren't privy to what posts are reported. I have rarely used the report function, but if I did, I am certainly not going to state that in the thread. We don't have any real idea how many people found certain things offensive or funny. You just can't judge that based on what you see right now. All we can do is trust that the mods are just trying to create that balance for all. I think they do a pretty good job over all and if they do something, it is because they deemed it necessary for the good of the whole, not just for a select few.

 

[redhotswami]

On the topic of the avatars and signatures thing, I just think that people showing support for a member who violated so many rules and led the mods to having no other choice but suspending him is basically a slap in the face to us. Despite what many may think, this isn't about egos or power trips. I've always just wanted this place to be nice. Call me a dork, but I just want this to be a nice community where people feel welcome and free to express to share their thoughts and opinions without fear of other members reacting in mean ways.

We work hard to make this place nice, so when we make a change to help our cause, and people are against us, it's very frustrating and disheartening.

We don't want to upset people and possibly drive them away. We just want everybody to be nice and show a little respect...not just to the moderators, but to everybody here.

One last thing...everybody having similar avatars is just plain confusing. My opinion on that is just in general, not simply regarding the topic at hand. People often become associated with their avatars (obviously), and their posts are recognized by them. I realize you can argue, "But U2 avatars are all similar too," but I think we've just gotten used to the fact that this is a U2 board, and we'll probably always have lots of U2 avatars.

So...those are my "professional" and personal opinions on that matter.

I don't think that everyone is changing their avatar to "slap you in the face" so to speak. I think telling people to remove their burnese avatars would inherently harm that community of a free exchange of ideas that you are trying to maintain here on the forum. If somebody were to outright use an avatar defaming you or other mods, then yes, that is a big no-no. But I think the general idea here is sort of a "memorial" if you will.

And if people want to protest, is that really such a bad thing? Ultimately, your actions stand because they are your actions. You still maintain your status as mod and the other rules will still stand. A silent protest falls into that free exchange of ideas that you want this community to engage in.

I think that in not allowing people to talk about the suspended/banned member, and not allowing people to even have images in refrerence to that member, you are sort of enforcing a 1984-style of forum. People here are in a way forced to "forget" about their friends because there is no room for any sort of acknowledgement or memorial. I could be naive, but I do honestly think that people are doing this more to remember their friend (or jump on a bandwagon) than they are to slap you in the face or outright disrespect you. There certainly are other ways in which they can carry THAT out.

 

[Bonochick]

I understand you now, Screwtape. Not sure if it's possible, but I see what you are saying.

I agree with you that something being offensive or unfunny is subjective. I want to again say what MrsSpringsteen said, the mods have to try and create a balance where everyone can have fun. I feel like a lot of it has to do with context.

In other words, what ever a person's particular sense of humor is, there is a place for it. There are times when joking around is just disruptive to whatever discussion may be going on and some people just don't see that because they find it funny.

That's what's difficult. I think I come off as a prude sometimes for the stuff I call people out on. I also realize that many people are annoyed with everybody trying so hard to always be politically correct and not step on anybody's toes. Trust me, I personally am not as uptight as I come across sometimes. There are things I've posted at a Ryan Adams board I go to that I would never say here...but they are two completely different environments. I think I have a pretty good sense of humor, but I also have to be sensitive to the fact that certain things won't go over as well with some as they do with others. We all should have that bit of sensitivity about what we say. Think before you post.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

i actually don't care about the suspension and just thought the doggies were funny mine has bono shades 'cause bono is cool

and it looks like the kitty has joined the doggie in the dog house

 

[Bonochick]

I don't think that everyone is changing their avatar to "slap you in the face" so to speak. I think telling people to remove their burnese avatars would inherently harm that community of a free exchange of ideas that you are trying to maintain here on the forum. If somebody were to outright use an avatar defaming you or other mods, then yes, that is a big no-no. But I think the general idea here is sort of a "memorial" if you will.

And if people want to protest, is that really such a bad thing? Ultimately, your actions stand because they are your actions. You still maintain your status as mod and the other rules will still stand. A silent protest falls into that free exchange of ideas that you want this community to engage in.

I think that in not allowing people to talk about the suspended/banned member, and not allowing people to even have images in refrerence to that member, you are sort of enforcing a 1984-style of forum. People here are in a way forced to "forget" about their friends because there is no room for any sort of acknowledgement or memorial. I could be naive, but I do honestly think that people are doing this more to remember their friend (or jump on a bandwagon) than they are to slap you in the face or outright disrespect you. There certainly are other ways in which they can carry THAT out.

I understand your points, unico. I guess this is kind of how I see it though.

Imagine you're a boss at an office. There is an employee you've had to write up repeated times because of his behavior that was breaking rules and disrupting the office. You've made it clear to the employee that he risks being suspended or fired if he continues this behavior. The employee continues to act in an inappropriate manner, so you finally suspend the employee. When you arrive at work the next day, several employees are wearing t-shirt's with the suspended employee's picture on them.

Silent protest, yes, but can't you see how that could be a little frustrating for you to have to see? All you wanted to do was get your employee to follow rules so that you could have a pleasant environment, but he refused to comply. For the sake of the office, you did something about it, and people are against you. You just can't win.

 

[LemonMelon]

Wow, those were some major suspensions/bannings you just did. I must say that I'll miss the baby.

 

[Lila64]

 

[redhotswami]

I understand your points, unico. I guess this is kind of how I see it though.

Imagine you're a boss at an office. There is an employee you've had to write up repeated times because of his behavior that was breaking rules and disrupting the office. You've made it clear to the employee that he risks being suspended or fired if he continues this behavior. The employee continues to act in an inappropriate manner, so you finally suspend the employee. When you arrive at work the next day, several employees are wearing t-shirt's with the suspended employee's picture on them.

Silent protest, yes, but can't you see how that could be a little frustrating for you to have to see? All you wanted to do was get your employee to follow rules so that you could have a pleasant environment, but he refused to comply. For the sake of the office, you did something about it, and people are against you. You just can't win.

I do see your point too, and I appreciate you seeing mine as well. As people who hold supervisory roles in different aspects, we know that we really just cannot keep everybody happy at the same time. But in this example case of the employee, I see what you are saying, however I do see how the employer has a right to enact certain policies because the employer is paying these employees and ultimately they are bound by certain provisions which are clearly listed in a contract.

That being said, we members do agree to certain rules when we sign on, like a "terms of service" not like a contract. However it is a different relationship. Depending on the type of job, most employees aren't exactly there to engage in a free exchange of ideas. There is a specific mission and specific assigned tasks to be done.

However in an internet forum, where the mission is to provide that free exchange of ideas, there will be as many disagreements as there are agreements, both amongst members and between members and moderators. Telling people not to post images as an act of disagreement is, IMO, actually sort of scary. Because if you think about it, in a way it is saying that the mods don't want these particular images because it is offensive to them, which then puts them in the same bag as an avatar or sig that was specifically defaming you, which, again, I don't believe it is the original intention. It isn't about you or one other mod, it is simply a disagreement. I think outright banning such pictures is going to (and already has) cause more of a stir and disruption in the environment than allowing them to run their course. People will move on.