Holding Mods Accountable and Double Standards...

[TheBonzaiEffect]

I think this is a real problem on RealGM. I understand being a Mod is an arduous, often thankless, job. And I salute everyone who takes up that mantle. But just like cops or any other position of power, there is always a bad apple or two...or even simply those who allow their human biases to take a hold.

I bring this up as recently the moderator Ken displayed rampant double standards and hypocrisy in how I was treated vs. the other dozens attacking/baiting me. He then attacked me personally for daring to call out his hypocrisy. During the Raptors/Mavs game (I think we all objectively can agree how Raptors fans can get, in general, more than any other fan base here...), I said something insulting about their fanbase. I received a strike. Fair enough. I did not realize I had two previous strikes from over a year ago (separate issue...maybe strikes should reset after a certain amount of time has lapsed?), so I received a temporary ban. However, the problem lies in that a number of other posters were baiting me, insulting me, harassing me, even when I couldn't respond. And they had carte blanche to do so. I reported these posts like I'm supposed to. Ken's response to these egregious personal attacks? And I quote...

"They are not, not even remotely personal attacks.

Bringing up the Canadian education system, is.

For one last time - what others are saying to you, and how we handle them, is none of your concern."

Here is one of the personal attacks I reported:

viewtopic.php?p=80506221#p80506221

"So very salty with your posts. Will you cry yourself to sleep tonight? Hold up that L, kid."

I'm sorry...but in what world is calling me salty, calling me a kid (I'm a 35 year-old man, not a "kid". I'm also a POC so I hate that racist term), and telling me to cry myself to sleep at night and hold an L, not baiting and a personal attack? In what world? Let alone "not even remotely a personal attack."

After questioning this, I could no longer post (before the PM exchange, I still could).

I've been in contact with several other Mods, two of which have been very helpful and understanding. But I feel in situations like these, there needs to be checks and balances in place. If Ken thinks what was said to me is ok, then that's a problem. A big one. Can we not:

A. Review the action of other Mods, just like Police, refs, and others are internally reviewed?

B. Perhaps vote on strikes/reported content, rather than having one Mod who might have a personal bias, make the decision unilaterally?

I love RealGM, but I'm very disappointed in how this situation was handled. A mob of childish bullying was condoned, while I was punished.

Happy Holidays.

Best,

Bonzai

[azcatz11]

I think this is a real problem on RealGM. I understand being a Mod is an arduous, often thankless, job. And I salute everyone who takes up that mantle. But just like cops or any other position of power, there is always a bad apple or two...or even simply those who allow their human biases to take a hold.

I bring this up as recently the moderator Ken displayed rampant double standards and hypocrisy in how I was treated vs. the other dozens attacking/baiting me. He then attacked me personally for daring to call out his hypocrisy. During the Raptors/Mavs game (I think we all objectively can agree how Raptors fans can get, in general, more than any other fan base here...), I said something insulting about their fanbase. I received a strike. Fair enough. I did not realize I had two previous strikes from over a year ago (separate issue...maybe strikes should reset after a certain amount of time has lapsed?), so I received a temporary ban. However, the problem lies in that a number of other posters were baiting me, insulting me, harassing me, even when I couldn't respond. And they had carte blanche to do so. I reported these posts like I'm supposed to. Ken's response to these egregious personal attacks? And I quote...

"They are not, not even remotely personal attacks.

Bringing up the Canadian education system, is.

For one last time - what others are saying to you, and how we handle them, is none of your concern."

Here is one of the personal attacks I reported:

viewtopic.php?p=80506221#p80506221

"So very salty with your posts. Will you cry yourself to sleep tonight? Hold up that L, kid."

I'm sorry...but in what world is calling me salty, calling me a kid (I'm a 35 year-old man, not a "kid". I'm also a POC so I hate that racist term), and telling me to cry myself to sleep at night and hold an L, not baiting and a personal attack? In what world? Let alone "not even remotely a personal attack."

After questioning this, I could no longer post (before the PM exchange, I still could).

I've been in contact with several other Mods, two of which have been very helpful and understanding. But I feel in situations like these, there needs to be checks and balances in place. If Ken thinks what was said to me is ok, then that's a problem. A big one. Can we not:

A. Review the action of other Mods, just like Police, refs, and others are internally reviewed?

B. Perhaps vote on strikes/reported content, rather than having one Mod who might have a personal bias, make the decision unilaterally?

I love RealGM, but I'm very disappointed in how this situation was handled. A mob of childish bullying was condoned, while I was punished.

Happy Holidays.

Best,

Bonzai

I agree with you 100%

[Gremz]

I am best mod. Just ask Howard Moss.

[spikeslovechild]

I have had a similar situation with a mod on the current affairs forum. I got accused of "baiting" despite using no incendiary language and just posing a video with a small blurb of facts no different then another mod often does with articles. I would contend opinion articles are a heck of a lot more baiting then cspan video. Apparently for some facts are incendiary it's a ludicrous standard.

If I was to add a suggestion mods shouldn't be able to just post a single line like "baiting" they should have to record a thoughtful well reasoned rationale for each warning instead of being able to hide behind loose nebulous standards.

[dorkestra]

I have had a similar situation with a mod on the current affairs forum. I got accused of "baiting" despite using no incendiary language and just posing a video with a small blurb of facts no different then another mod often does with articles. I would contend opinion articles are a heck of a lot more baiting then cspan video. Apparently for some facts are incendiary it's a ludicrous standard.

If I was to add a suggestion mods shouldn't be able to just post a single line like "baiting" they should have to record a thoughtful well reasoned rationale for each warning instead of being able to hide behind loose nebulous standards.

You are not alone my friend! I have requested explanations three times now to Outsider without a single explanation. We can do better.

[dorkestra]

Also fleet has admitted to turning a blind eye to w-hamiltons antogism while warning his adversaries because of he is quote "part of the woodwork" (i.e. has the same political bias as this moderator).

This kind of policy has to go. Unfortunately Howard Mass has the same political bias according to his twitter and this likely drips down from the top.

[azcatz11]

Also fleet has admitted to turning a blind eye to w-hamiltons antogism while warning his adversaries because of he is quote "part of the woodwork" (i.e. has the same political bias as this moderator).

This kind of policy has to go. Unfortunately Howard Mass has the same political bias according to his twitter and this likely drips down from the top.

He's a nut job. I'm really glad I had to defend myself as a racist. I really hope he loses his mod privileges

[spikeslovechild]

I have had a similar situation with a mod on the current affairs forum. I got accused of "baiting" despite using no incendiary language and just posing a video with a small blurb of facts no different then another mod often does with articles. I would contend opinion articles are a heck of a lot more baiting then cspan video. Apparently for some facts are incendiary it's a ludicrous standard.

If I was to add a suggestion mods shouldn't be able to just post a single line like "baiting" they should have to record a thoughtful well reasoned rationale for each warning instead of being able to hide behind loose nebulous standards.

You are not alone my friend! I have requested explanations three times now to Outsider without a single explanation. We can do better.

Well it's nice to know i am not alone. To be fair I never requested a good explanation because I assumed if the mod had one it would have been given in the original warning.

I don't even know what was problematic in the orginal post that triggered the warning in the first place. I assume the rules are put in place not to punish posters but to instead warn them of behavior the site owners do not condone or tolerate on their site so when you just give a one word warning what are posters supposed to draw from that? Most of us don't actively try to violate the rules and none of us are mind readers.

[Howard Mass]

The Current Affairs has a very strict policy especially during this tough times.

viewtopic.php?f=69&t=1887618

The Moderators on The Forum do a great job including Fleet and Outside and I support them.

I do my best to have fair-minded Moderators and while I am active politically, I do not bring that on to RealGM.

Please re-read the rules linked above and have accountability for your own actions.