From the account that is currently suspended. Did someone get hit by their own ban hammer?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Macrumors and Racism
- Thread starter Hoosier317
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
You and I have had our differences but I enjoyed the chats we had and the difference of opinion that you brought to the table. It horrified me when it resulted in the way it did. I find PRSI pretty hostile and the post that @Peace mentioned also is pretty offensive to me.
I think even if Macrumors was to 2-3x its staff it would have a hard time moderating all the threads. And they're not going to get it 100% satisfactory for either side of the fence.
I left PRSI because of how hostile it was. People just love to argue there non-stop and then it isn't too much before name calling and other isms ists are called, then the suspensions are handed out in plenty.
Personally, I find public suspensions extremely off putting. Ban them from the thread quietly (a short time out) .... why is a site wide public suspension needed? If two people are disagreeing and then resolve, that's life - two people walk away better. I don't run this place, but it is something I really don't like.
That said... in relation to this thread, the OP called clear threads they disagreed with racist and I didn't see racism, I just saw a difference of opinion.
The point that you and Peace are making - I'm glad that Macrumors is at least trying to moderate because some other places (Reddit) are just cesspools when it comes to politics.
I think a lot of people get off on upsetting others these days.
Last edited:
I can't speak for what another user meant with a post. You can of course discuss this with the user in the thread if you wish, but as you know, you have to do it without breaking any rules yourself. A discussion might be fruitful for both of you, because discussion is how we adjust our thinking and how we better understand what someone is trying say and how s/he thinks.
If you think we should moderate a post, you are well aware of what to do. Submit a report. Further, if you should disagree with the moderators' decision, you can ask the admins to review the moderation and have ample opportunity to state your arguments. If you feel a rule is lacking or should be adjusted, send us a suggestion. And to give good quality feedback, it's a good idea to familiarize yourself with the rules as they are today, so you can see if you feel something needs to be changed. Be specific about what you want changed and how, and why you feel it will be an improvement.
I'll give you an example. You mention banning instead of temporary suspensions. Ok, at what point should that happen?How should moderation escalation be changed? To what degree and in which cases? Is it dependent on a certain number of problem posts, the wording in one single post? Should the users' previous posts or moderation history be taken into account? If so, to what degree? How do we decide which posts are worthy of instabans? If we ban instantly when users express certain opinions, we take the possibility away for other users to discuss with them and try to change their position, thereby contributing to bringing about change. Is that ok, and at exactly which point is it ok? Most importantly, should we instaban users based on what you feel is inappropriate? If not, how can the wording of the rule be changed so that it keeps the kinds of posts you feel are unacceptable out, but at the same time gives us enough leeway to allow posts you feel are legitimate or that might be the catalyst for a useful discussion?
These are just a few of the things we consider before changing the a rule. We don't want to move the goalposts so often that users can't keep track of what's allowed, but neither do we want to keep rules that aren't working or lack rules that would make it easier for users to know where the boundary is.
Send us a specific suggestion in a contact message and we will gladly discuss it with you. Many changes have come about because of issues that users bring up in just that way.
You know all this, Peace. I'm not trying to lecture you, just to be clear. I'm just genuinely surprised that you are ignoring the system that's in place.
I think we try to work with the member to alter their behavior, rather than blindly banning at the first hint of problems.
That was much better said than my long post! 😝
And to boot, I forgot to mention that aspect, which is really important.
I responded to you. But just know I won’t be posting any further in political forums. Consider me banned from them. What I posted was in no way racist. I said “all groups”. You simply didn’t like what I had to say.
Regardless this is my last post concerning a non Mac topic. And don’t wish to discuss this any further. It was my mistake to go there.
IMO it just circumvents the way in which something is said which is really easy to do on this site based on "rule such and such states you can't say that in such a way", to which there are several such rules seemingly arbitrarily applied based on the mods interpretation. You can't make a racist a non-racist this way, you can only change how they say it. However, if that's the goal, then I would agree.
As far as Peace's posts, I notice he's now suspended and I'm hoping it's not for speaking out in this thread. While I may not always agree with staff here I do appreciate the fact that we can air our differences in a civil way in this forum.
Last edited:
I certainly hope not, I know, there's a rule about discussing moderation, but I think it would be a nice gesture by someone on the staff just to say, "No it wasn't" (I suspect he went off in the example thread he posted ...)
Well, the OP is also suspended. Again, I'm hoping it's not for speaking out in this thread as well, I get it could've happened from another post but both of these people in the same thread seems suspect. Should I watch what I'm saying here, too?
I wish I could respond specifically, but the privacy policy prevents me from doing so. I can however state a general fact about moderation: users are never banned for speaking out.
Well, the OP is also suspended. Again, I'm hoping it's not for speaking out in this thread as well, I get it could've happened from another post but both of these people in the same thread seems suspect. Should I watch what I'm saying here, too?
We'll see I guess. I'm very much against suspensions. Nothing like reading an old thread and finding a handful of long time members suspended permanently. Just sad. That's one thing I'm against for sure. But hey, I'm not a moderator so while I appreciate the work that they do I'm glad that Macrumors lets us interact with the staff in this thread.
Edit: As I was writing this, looks like no? (They were not suspended for speaking out in this thread).
Last edited:
My bad --- looks like the members in this forum were not suspended for speaking out in this thread ( a great thing ) - thanks for telling us.
(What DT and ericgtr12 were asking).Re: " I can however state a general fact about moderation: users are never banned for speaking out. "
Our privacy policy does not allow me to reveal why a member is suspended, but I can say nobody has been suspended as a result of comments in this thread. I just double checked the records.
A permanent suspension is the same as a (permanent) ban, a temporary suspension is what was called a time-out on the previous forum platform vBulletin. So no, a suspension is not necessary permanent, but it can be.
This is what I saw happening... quite a few members were engaged in conversation, heated at times but still a conversation. Then entered a couple of new posters that didn't like what they were reading and instead of presenting a well thought out counter argument decided to do nothing but virtue signal from their soapboxes and in repeated nuisance posts called for the banning of "racists" and "maga trolls". These members were given ample opportunities for civil discourse but continued to just call for all dissenting ideas to be deleted and the posters banned. One even going as far as to say "you racists don't deserve civil conversation". In my book the second you declare someone unworthy of conversation you have lost.
Just as you shouldn't bring a knife to a gun fight don't bring your emotions or ideologies to a discussion, bring facts and ideas. The best way to combat what you feel are bad ideas is with better ideas!
In the end you must be able to accept that you might not agree on anything but hopefully you have gained something from the experience and grown. Virtue signaling will get you nothing but praise from those guarding your safe space who are equally afraid of other viewpoints that don't fit your narrative.
Just as you shouldn't bring a knife to a gun fight don't bring your emotions or ideologies to a discussion, bring facts and ideas. The best way to combat what you feel are bad ideas is with better ideas!
In the end you must be able to accept that you might not agree on anything but hopefully you have gained something from the experience and grown. Virtue signaling will get you nothing but praise from those guarding your safe space who are equally afraid of other viewpoints that don't fit your narrative.
Last edited:
No, people are free to speak their mind, even if its critical of MacRumors or how the site is run. As the other staff members responded, we really can't go further into any details, but I want to make it clear that its not because of posting an opinion
That's a status I don't think I've seen before under a member id... Cancelled.
How have I missed this juicy thread about PRSI????
all joking aside, thanks to all the mods.
all joking aside, thanks to all the mods.
That's a status I don't think I've seen before under a member id... Cancelled.
It’s voluntary. They have to contact administrators to have their account disabled, but I do believe they have the option of ‘re-enabling‘ their account in the future if they choose to.
Here’s the thing, a lot of members never take the time to actually read the forum guidelines, and that’s Ok. But when you Have members that consistently make the same mistake over and over again that results in a repeated suspension, at what point do they say ‘Maybe this website is not for me’, it’s time to move on If a member can’t follow simple rules after ample warnings.
This is actually posted direct from their ‘forum guidelines‘, and I think it holds true for those who seemingly can’t learn from their mistake(s):
“MacRumors is stricter than some forum sites but more lenient than others. The rules have been fine-tuned for years, to best suit our forum members. When you post at MacRumors you need to follow the MacRumors rules.”
Last edited:
That's a status I don't think I've seen before under a member id... Cancelled.
vBulletin had the "guest" status. Unfortunately, XenForo doesn't have an automatic distinction between suspended for a violation and suspended simply because a user asks to have an account cancelled. This never sat well with me, so we now add the "Cancelled" title manually.
An excellent (and agreed, a necessary,) distinction and thanks for clarifying this.
If they did otherwise they would have to read into the perceived intention of snippets written by a user. I think it would be a really dangerous proposition if you consider how difficult it is to convey feelings in written form. I think it would overly penalize ESL's and those not really that used to express themselves in the written form (I'd argue it would also penalize younger people that are usually more 'idealistic' but less experienced in written-form debates).
That whole section (PRSI) is a cesspit of aggressive debate and it does more damage to the reputation of Mac Rumours than enhances it. I have come to realise being banned from there is more of a favour than a punishment and although I browse MR less than i used to, I enjoy it more now. I have now blocked PRSI threads from showing up and advise anybody to do the same.
- Status