Permission for public moderation

old mac

Suspended
Original poster
May 16, 2011
140
191
Mods, you do have permission to post my moderation history. I'm guilty of only one of the three strikes.
 

old mac

Suspended
Original poster
May 16, 2011
140
191
OK, it's been a week.
If they ever do reply, it will just be a wall of words, filled with irrelevance. It will be hard to justify banning me because I said someone sounded like someone else.
 
Last edited:

HexMonkey

Administrator
Staff member
Feb 5, 2004
2,166
434
New Zealand
First, apologies for the delay. As Weaselboy stated, the administrators are all volunteers with lives outside MacRumors. This would normally have been addressed sooner, but you simply got unlucky in terms of our availability in the last couple of weeks.

I'll address just the three posts that resulted in your access to the PRSI forum being removed, since the rest of your moderation history isn't relevant.

The first was on Jul 22, when, referring to another member, you wrote "He was so unstable".

The second was on Jul 25, when you told another member "Quit being obtuse. If your going to quote me, at least write something intelligent."

The third was on Aug 20, when you replied to another member and told them that they "sound just like [a] crazy conspiracy theorist".

These three statements are all classed as personal attacks under our forum rules. Two of these violations have already been further explained to you in response to contact messages.

As you had three violations of the Rules for Appropriate Debate for posts in the PRSI forum within a six month period (and in fact, within one month), your access to the PRSI forum was appropriately removed under our policies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scepticalscribe

old mac

Suspended
Original poster
May 16, 2011
140
191
HAHAHAHA1.png
First, apologies for the delay. As Weaselboy stated, the administrators are all volunteers with lives outside MacRumors. This would normally have been addressed sooner, but you simply got unlucky in terms of our availability in the last couple of weeks.

I'll address just the three posts that resulted in your access to the PRSI forum being removed, since the rest of your moderation history isn't relevant.

The first was on Jul 22, when, referring to another member, you wrote "He was so unstable".

The second was on Jul 25, when you told another member "Quit being obtuse. If your going to quote me, at least write something intelligent."

The third was on Aug 20, when you replied to another member and told them that they "sound just like [a] crazy conspiracy theorist".

These three statements are all classed as personal attacks under our forum rules. Two of these violations have already been further explained to you in response to contact messages.

As you had three violations of the Rules for Appropriate Debate for posts in the PRSI forum within a six month period (and in fact, within one month), your access to the PRSI forum was appropriately removed under our policies.
My give a damn is broken. MacRumors and the mods are a joke. Just ban me permanently like last time. I'm surprised no one figured it out.
 

Scepticalscribe

macrumors Sandy Bridge
Jul 29, 2008
51,748
35,328
The Far Horizon
What’s instructive is seeing how someone can act so irrationally under the guise of anonymity of the internet. That is not a joke.
I agree completely.

Notwithstanding that, I was quite struck by the tone of entitled - and enraged - arrogance of the OP's posts, and, once the moderation history in question had been published, it was manifestly clear that the poster had no grounds whatsoever for complaint.

However, the - his - final post left me without words.
 
Last edited:

Bin Cook

Suspended
Jun 16, 2018
383
780
He has a point, moderation shouldn't be public because it is in effect, double punishment and unappealable (see the document that states "moderation is always correct").
 

Scepticalscribe

macrumors Sandy Bridge
Jul 29, 2008
51,748
35,328
The Far Horizon
He has a point, moderation shouldn't be public because it is in effect, double punishment and unappealable (see the document that states "moderation is always correct").
In the case of this thread, from what I could gather reading it, he - the OP - specifically requested - and gave permission to - the mods to make it public.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JayMysterio

HexMonkey

Administrator
Staff member
Feb 5, 2004
2,166
434
New Zealand
see the document that states "moderation is always correct"
There is no document that says this. Perhaps you are thinking of the What if I disagree with moderation of my posts? FAQ, which includes "Moderation is almost always correct, appropriate, and done fairly". "almost always" is very different from "always", and we have a robust appeal process in place for the exceptions to that (described in that same link).
 
  • Like
Reactions: I7guy

Scepticalscribe

macrumors Sandy Bridge
Jul 29, 2008
51,748
35,328
The Far Horizon
Who has a point?
I suspect that he may have meant the OP of this thread, for whom - as he had clearly given permission for his moderation history (that he complained about - and had no grounds fro complaint, from what I could see, once the moderation history was published) to be made public - this point is moot.
 
Last edited:

I7guy

macrumors Core
Nov 30, 2013
22,636
10,512
Gotta be in it to win it
Maybe he’s saying the policy for allowing moderation be made public shouldn’t be allowed. However as noted moderation is appealable and op is incorrect in that regard even if the percentage of reversals is low.

The explanations by the staff show how easy it is to post an insult without (obstensively) thinking about what is being written.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.