Free Speech

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

I wholeheartedly agree that you should not be put on probation for making a bad joke.  You should be on probation when you repost the joke (or a similar joke) 5 times after the joke was infracted though.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

And I will note that this policy is not new.  It has been my policy to infract re-posted infracted posts with 10 points for a while now.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Who determines what a "bad joke" is? Are we talking tasteless/offensive?

I'm legitimately asking. I don't have a horse in this race.

In the My Little Pony thread, several posters began posting images of dead horses, decaying horses, and other pictures to rile up the MLP fans.  Al posted Tesco's logo, a supermarket who was found to have horse meat in their burgers.  This was infracted at the same level as everyone else who posted what I considered trolling pictures in that thread (with the exception of one person who was infracted less because he had deleted the posts.  Normally I would not infract posts that were self-deleted, but due to the large quantity from this poster and the particularly gruesomeness of some of the pictures, I thought that some points were necessary).

Al ended up re-posting the picture today, and it was infracted at 10 points, the same as I've done when other people re-post something that was infracted.  He then proceeded to continue reposting the picture and starting threads about Tesco until he was infracted above mod review.  Upon reaching mod review, he uninfracted his posts.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Knowingly re-posting a deleted post warrants pretty heavy infraction points.

I also don't appreciate the lie by omission that this thread is, if Inks's summary is accurate.

The evidence is all on the reported posts board.

I have used this policy on several posters, and this is the first time that anyone on the mod team has questioned that decision.  And it's one thing to discuss this policy.  If the mod team decide that my actions in giving 10 point infractions for this are inappropriate, I would gladly stop doing so.  But it is inappropriate to continue posting something when you know you are going to get infracted, especially when the person is a moderator.  And then to uninfract yourself raises this to a whole new level.

Typically I don't discuss infractions publicly, but since this has blown up, I feel that the full details are warranted.  If anyone has any questions, I would be happy to answer them, although I won't be discussing my infractions of other people, at least not without their consent.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

The posts that landed me on probation were not actually posted on that thread.

Whatever.

No, and I acknowledged that.  But it was quite clear that when you created the threads, you were not actually curious about people's thoughts about Tesco or where British posters go to get their groceries.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Whatever the case, we do need a real discussion about how to deal with jokes and this ridiculous policy that questioning of a moderator's motives gets an immediate deletion and infraction points. That's beyond ridiculous.

You don't get infracted for questioning motives.  But when you make an objectively false statement, yes, it's going to get infracted on this board.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

I wholeheartedly agree that you should not be put on probation for making a bad joke.  You should be on probation when you repost the joke (or a similar joke) 5 times after the joke was infracted though.

What's the logic behind this position? I don't see any. It isn't even really a case of dogmatically following the rules, because they're your rules (right down to the interpretation of a bad joke as a crime).

Bizarre.

So, if you don't get infracted for reposting it, and the person doesn't contact the mod appealing the issue, what does the mod do?  Continually infract the post?  Well that doesn't make much sense.  Let the post stand?  Then you end up having the mods cave in to people who are persistent.

You did nothing to appeal your infraction.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

we're infracting objectively false statements?

When the accusations are along the lines of "the mods delete things simply because they dislike them" or "jmfcst was banned for no reason other than the mods flexing their power", then yes.  Because those don't further discussion of moderator actions.  They're lies that inflame the community, and they're baseless.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

we're infracting objectively false statements?

Only when it's a "false" claim about Inksy. He's digging himself a lovely hole.

That's not true.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

we're infracting objectively false statements?

But this isn't to say that any false claim is going to get infracted.  But when someone maliciously misleads the forum, yeah, it's going to get deleted, and probably infracted.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

As a pony-ite, I must say that I actually found Al's joke funny and believe he should not have been infracted.

OK - that's a legitimate position to have.  But the way to go about achieving that end is not to repost the post but discuss it with the mod.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

There is no rule on this forum (at least not yet) that you have to like My Little Pony. Making fun of a TV show is not in my view an infarctable offense quite possibly anywhere on the internet.

So if I posted a picture of spaghetti in the Italian Elections thread, you don't think Al would infract that?

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

There is no rule on this forum (at least not yet) that you have to like My Little Pony. Making fun of a TV show is not in my view an infarctable offense quite possibly anywhere on the internet.

So if I posted a picture of spaghetti in the Italian Elections thread, you don't think Al would infract that?

It's not a TV show but a serious discussion.

And a discussion about a show isn't serious?

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Again, why would I leave because of an issue over one moderator? How about we solve the issue with the one moderator?

That's a bit of an oversimplification.  You seem to be implying that you have 0% fault in your unpleasant experiences on the forum.