poor moderation/attention to reports

[Chris]

@Martin;

Where have I said it’s you? Again, you’re a moderator, you should know this isn’t the place for personal complaints so I’m shocked you’re encouraging it with a post to me which would obviously receive a response.

It is bumping and it is breaking the rules. If you don’t believe me, have a look in the thread Olli posted in the spam section



Nowhere have I said or even implied that “that there are a bunch of people with no common sense walking round” which doesn’t make sense btw, you’re inferring that from your skewed interpretations

Apparently you wouldn’t take specific action considering that thread consisted mainly of off topic posts and it was only mine and Recusions you picked up on.
You are also clearly not impartial which is shown by your refusal to apologise for giving me a false warning (which I made a thread about and a conclusion was reached by the General Manager that I didn’t break any rules) It seems extremely rude that you didn’t correct your mistake, or do you still feel that I did break the rules (in by doing so you are directly undermining Matt’s decision.

Anyway, as I said, I’m not here for an argument, hence my refusal to name you originally, you chose to cause an argument out of it I was merely giving my opinion on poor moderation which is the topic of this thread.

You're lucky you even got an apology after the way you have spoken to the staff members which give up their time to do this job.

Anywho in reply to the bumping thing, none of the posts you reported contained anything along the lines of "aifdhgsdfhgsdo" (As far as I know anyway) and neither did they spam new posts or cause any bother to other forum members. Had it have been 15 posts or something like that then yes I would have agreed with you, but 6 posts is nothing.

[The Don]

I'd just like to point out RE: the bold bit that this member of GM did not agree with you being targeted, they were in fact referring to the posts not being dealt with, which I have looked at and that's because the posts haven't been reported. Most moderators will just deal with the posts which are reported when in a rush, and it just so happens that your posts were reported, so it would seem to you that you're being targeted! I understand that it might seem like it but in reality, you're not being targeted by the moderator.

Those posts not being dealt with and my posts being dealt with absolutely show targeting, how could you argue anything else?

---------- Post added 16-05-2012 at 11:26 PM ----------

You're lucky you even got an apology after the way you have spoken to the staff members which give up their time to do this job.

Any who in reply to the bumping thing, none of the posts you reported contained anything along the lines of "aifdhgsdfhgsdo" (As far as I know anyway) and neither did they spam newposts or cause any bother to other forum members. Had it have been 15 posts or something like that then yes I would have agreed with you, but 6 posts is nothing.

I'll address the rest of your comments when you have the decency to actually read my posts. If you did read my post correctly, you would have noticed the part where I said I hadn't received an apology.

[Chris]

Those posts not being dealt with and my posts being dealt with absolutely show targeting, how could you argue anything else?

---------- Post added 16-05-2012 at 11:26 PM ----------



I'll address the rest of your comments when you have the decency to actually read my posts. If you did read my post correctly, you would have noticed the part where I said I hadn't received an apology.

He may not have apologised for that previous situation, but nonetheless he has said sorry here and is quite apologetic about the situation, give him a break.

As moderators one of the most important things is remaining impartial at all times. I would most certainly never target someone and I am sorry if it has come accross that way.

[myke]

Those posts not being dealt with and my posts being dealt with absolutely show targeting, how could you argue anything else?

I just explained to you that the posts were reported and therefore dealt with, perhaps if you had reported the other pointless posts in the thread then they would be dealt with just as equally

[The Don]

I just explained to you that the posts were reported and therefore dealt with, perhaps if you had reported the other pointless posts in the thread then they would be dealt with just as equally

If a moderator has been alerted of a thread with rule breaking, is it not common sense to look at the thread to see if rule breaking has been persistent? If so, he would of noticed the other pointless posts (and I am going to presume he did read the rest of the thread) so yes, it still in my eyes is targeting.

---------- Post added 16-05-2012 at 11:32 PM ----------

He may not have apologised for that previous situation, but nonetheless he has said sorry here and is quite apologetic about the situation, give him a break.

No, he didn’t apologise, that previous situation wasn't even mentioned until I posted about it (which was after his ‘apology’.

[Samantha]

Surely if someone picked up a pointless post by akeam then the moderator should look at the whole thread to are if any other posts could be deemed pointless. Just because they aren't reported doesn't mean they aren't there.

Akeam beat me.

[The Don]

Surely if someone picked up a pointless post by akeam then the moderator should look at the whole thread to are if any other posts could be deemed pointless. Just because they aren't reported doesn't mean they aren't there.

He clearly did look at the rest of the thread but either couldn't understand that they were pointless posts (which I find unlikely) or he decided to not pick them up on it.

[myke]

If a moderator has been alerted of a thread with rule breaking, is it not common sense to look at the thread to see if rule breaking has been persistent? If so, he would of noticed the other pointless posts (and I am going to presume he did read the rest of the thread) so yes, it still in my eyes is targeting.

I would love to put you in the position of a 1-man-team super moderator for a week and see just how well you'd stick to what you've said. There's a process that has to be done when sending out warnings and reading the rest of the thread may be overlooked because of this process. As I have said, if the other posts had been reported then they would've been dealt with in exactly the same way.

[Chris]

No, he didn’t apologise, that previous situation wasn't even mentioned until I posted about it (which was after his ‘apology’.

If he hasn't been personally contacted by the forum manager (Or in this case Matt) then he has nothing to be apologising for.

Surely if someone picked up a pointless post by akeam then the moderator should look at the whole thread to are if any other posts could be deemed pointless. Just because they aren't reported doesn't mean they aren't there.

Akeam beat me.

I do agree but things are easily missed due to the reasons that Myke has mentioned above, so I don't think complaining about it is necessary. All it takes is the click of a few buttons to simply report a post which could have been missed so I don't think it's too much to ask.

[Samantha]

Why should it have to matter if they're reported though?

Nvm saw post above.