StarGateWars Forums

Dear Mods,

Upon a recent appeal to an Appeal which I have filed, a comment was made by Caprilla in response to the said appeal, excerpt below which has been edited to highlight my points. The full thread here: Subject: Warning Issued on 17th June

Caprilla wrote:The discussion (detailed in the next paragraph), brought up several other incidents which you could/should have been warned for, but weren't, largely due to you making a fuss. Is it something the forum staff can be proud of? Not particularly, but it does cast a different light on your ' perfect and spotless ' record.

I discussed the situation with relevant section head. I was informed that given your previous behavior/history on the forums, to cease replying to your messages, and wait for you to follow Protocol and speak to the SH themselves.

Firstly, the accusation that I should have received more warnings than I actually have received. I would really like to know what these are. I genuinely, cannot recall any verbal warnings or PMs which have resulted in anything but full obedience and co-operation from myself.

Secondly, I would like to express my disappointment in the administration and support staff for failing firstly myself and secondly the community. If I have failed the rules in the past, for what reason have I been given slack where others have been branded with the full punishment? Like Caprilla rightly suggests, it is not something that you should be proud of.

Thus I guess my question is, why do you hold a prejudice on those people who are maybe less literate and perhaps less familiar with protocol and policy? Just because I received a high level of education and I am able to speak English as my first language do I receive more leniency than other end users? I hate to user the word so flippantly given my "history" but do you think some mods do actually omit some bias and others lacking the cojones to implement adequate punishments?

Forum rules can be referenced here:- viewtopic.php?f=101&t=197143
You will note that the consequence for some rule breaks are down to discretion, for example section 5c allows for throwaway insults to be ignored. The alternative would be for every insult, perceived insult, hidden meaning etc etc result in a warning (verbal or otherwise) being issued, which would result in the more 'direct' members of the forum being banned in short order.

Speaking personally, if a users post gets reported for a rule breach (or I stumble upon it), and it's in a section I am responsible for moderating, and that sections specific rules do not counter the general forum rules (as an example insults in the GC being un-moderated), then whatever consequence listed against the rule break is what I will issue the poster. The exception to that being if I am bound by the 'perceived bias' rule, being in a war with the poster, at which point I will bring it to the attention of either another moderator of that section, or a global moderator. Caprila, being the most active of the global moderators gets the lions share of those issues.

At the end of the day though, if the forum rules are not broken, you will never get a warning from a moderator.

Like minds Clockwork, thanks for saying so eloquently what I was thinking I'm a little worried tbh, that you have begun stalking my thoughts...


Perhaps it was a mistake for me to reveal even that a discussion had taken place. Its not exactly a 'secret', given that I freely discuss 99% of all warnings with other staff members. It's not a prerequisite to issuing a warning, but hey ho, I find it useful to have a sounding board.

However, what was said in that discussion is private to the staff involved.

the fact that jack locked a thread that WAS an appeal shows he is acting illegally as a mod

Bump. Still awaiting an answer from somebody other than Caprilla.