Issues with Jack
Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 2:17 pm
Here you go Bill, something to keep you amused.
Last 16 page thread was locked and the people who posted within were directed to the Ombudsman. A few have continued to post elsewhere so I'll hold the torch and direct them here.
Case in point, Jack edited someone's post. Post was a racial slur so it required modding. In all seriousness it deserved a banning but the three strikes rule seems to be in effect.
Issue is Jack put words into AGA's mouth which he had no right to do. People arc up when people quote them and change the content so for a Mod to edit the original post with anything more then an edit and an explanation is stepping beyond his limits.
To stop this getting locked can we keep it civil as best we can. Put forward your argument and if you have a rebuttal, stick to topic. Makes it easier for Bill to sift through and take the key points.
Feel free to edit this as you go Bill. Best of luck.
Against Jack
- Edited a users Post and put words in their mouth to directly insult them. Regardless of the user, the moderator has a responsibility to act in a professional manner. Jack does not live up to this professional code of conduct.
- Frequently triggers swear filters despite knowing exactly what words are banned. What right has Jack to moderate a community when he himself cannot control himself to act in an appropriate manner? Why should the community listen to his mod warnings or accept his decisions when he himself is free to abuse without setting a proper example to follow?
- Lacks an in-depth knowledge of the rules. As a result of gaining his position out of who he knows and not what he knows, Jack is found wanting in regards to rules, either through ignorance or that he just doesn't abide by them. Hell, he didn't even recognise the rules on abuse or language by user standards, nor the standards expected by mods.
- Abusive towards users. This is not a once off case, I invite everyone to spend a few mins actually going through Jack's posts in this thread, in the other threads and from a general profile view and just realise the extent of his abusive nature. He lacks Tact and does that maintain an attitude that becomes a mod. Case in point, all replies to criticism to date.
- Lacks moderating experience, makes obvious mistakes time and time again. Splits threads when they do not require splitting and again was made a mod and then supermod without any substantial experience, without any trial period, without being restricted to a smaller section to build up experience. Other mods with experience were denied promotion due to there not being a requirement for any more Supermods and yet well you see how things turned out.
- Was made Ombudsman without a revote despite having only a handful of votes as a result of his friendship with Smoosh and not out of any true ability. This assignment ties in with being made a mod and subsequently a super mod without any discussion involving the rest of the team or without any input from any other source. Just an impulsive decision made by the admin and the admin alone.
- As Ombudsman, each issue was dealt with poorly, leading to direct conflict with those who brought issues up. Never acted in a professional manner and was blinded by tunnel vision, his own pride and opinion to properly listen to and act upon user concerns. Again, this behaviour can still be seen as a supermod and so an ongoing characteristic flaw that makes him utterly unsuitable for leadership positions.
- As Ombudsman did not make the community aware of the fact he was a supermod/had supermod powers. In a thread he was personally involved in, after it was locked he managed to post in it for the last laugh through the (ab)use of his supermod powers and when this was brought up refused to concede his point leading to more conflict with several users including myself and Clarkey (which in recent debates, Jack made an unwarranted attack by implying we are in a homosexual relationship with each other and entirely inappropriate supermod or no supermod).
- As Ombudsman, he held a neutral position and yet was a best mate with the administration leading to a complete and utter conflict of interests. During the April fool’s Joke, he was aware of it as was Smoosh in advance and both played along showing a gross betrayal of their positions and duties to the community.
-As Ombudsman he worked with another mod to create cover stories for themselves and when I pointed out the fact he knew while posted something utterly ambiguous that implied he didn't, his post was magically changed to ensure I couldn't call him out on it. Also note the fact that a guilty party (Jack) volunteered to find out what happened speaks volumes about his duplicitous nature and just how compromised the position was.
- Was made a mod due to his friendship with smoosh. As a mod, he made spam threads in the general area breaking spam rules and also spammed user threads in general on purpose, drowning out their meaning and leading them to be moved to the spam temple again derailing threads which lead to breaking more rules.
- Despite there being no need for more supermods, he was made Supermod above and beyond current candidates who were denied the promotion due to the lack of need for one. No discussion was made, no one was consulted, and it was an in-house promotion over all the other workers due to the simple fact of who he is.
- Has caused several rifts within the moderation community and destabilised it a lot more than any help he has given it. One has to weigh the potential good he does with the amount of damage he does and come to your own conclusions if he should stand down or not.
- As a Super Mod he's been in constant conflict with users and posters, unable to control his opinions or his emotions in a position that requires tact and a working relationship with the community. Other moderators were fired outright for this behaviour while he gets a pat on the back.
For Jack
-AGA's post was a racial slur and by comparison editing a post is the lesser of two evils.
Last 16 page thread was locked and the people who posted within were directed to the Ombudsman. A few have continued to post elsewhere so I'll hold the torch and direct them here.
Case in point, Jack edited someone's post. Post was a racial slur so it required modding. In all seriousness it deserved a banning but the three strikes rule seems to be in effect.
Issue is Jack put words into AGA's mouth which he had no right to do. People arc up when people quote them and change the content so for a Mod to edit the original post with anything more then an edit and an explanation is stepping beyond his limits.
To stop this getting locked can we keep it civil as best we can. Put forward your argument and if you have a rebuttal, stick to topic. Makes it easier for Bill to sift through and take the key points.
Feel free to edit this as you go Bill. Best of luck.
Against Jack
- Edited a users Post and put words in their mouth to directly insult them. Regardless of the user, the moderator has a responsibility to act in a professional manner. Jack does not live up to this professional code of conduct.
- Frequently triggers swear filters despite knowing exactly what words are banned. What right has Jack to moderate a community when he himself cannot control himself to act in an appropriate manner? Why should the community listen to his mod warnings or accept his decisions when he himself is free to abuse without setting a proper example to follow?
- Lacks an in-depth knowledge of the rules. As a result of gaining his position out of who he knows and not what he knows, Jack is found wanting in regards to rules, either through ignorance or that he just doesn't abide by them. Hell, he didn't even recognise the rules on abuse or language by user standards, nor the standards expected by mods.
- Abusive towards users. This is not a once off case, I invite everyone to spend a few mins actually going through Jack's posts in this thread, in the other threads and from a general profile view and just realise the extent of his abusive nature. He lacks Tact and does that maintain an attitude that becomes a mod. Case in point, all replies to criticism to date.
- Lacks moderating experience, makes obvious mistakes time and time again. Splits threads when they do not require splitting and again was made a mod and then supermod without any substantial experience, without any trial period, without being restricted to a smaller section to build up experience. Other mods with experience were denied promotion due to there not being a requirement for any more Supermods and yet well you see how things turned out.
- Was made Ombudsman without a revote despite having only a handful of votes as a result of his friendship with Smoosh and not out of any true ability. This assignment ties in with being made a mod and subsequently a super mod without any discussion involving the rest of the team or without any input from any other source. Just an impulsive decision made by the admin and the admin alone.
- As Ombudsman, each issue was dealt with poorly, leading to direct conflict with those who brought issues up. Never acted in a professional manner and was blinded by tunnel vision, his own pride and opinion to properly listen to and act upon user concerns. Again, this behaviour can still be seen as a supermod and so an ongoing characteristic flaw that makes him utterly unsuitable for leadership positions.
- As Ombudsman did not make the community aware of the fact he was a supermod/had supermod powers. In a thread he was personally involved in, after it was locked he managed to post in it for the last laugh through the (ab)use of his supermod powers and when this was brought up refused to concede his point leading to more conflict with several users including myself and Clarkey (which in recent debates, Jack made an unwarranted attack by implying we are in a homosexual relationship with each other and entirely inappropriate supermod or no supermod).
- As Ombudsman, he held a neutral position and yet was a best mate with the administration leading to a complete and utter conflict of interests. During the April fool’s Joke, he was aware of it as was Smoosh in advance and both played along showing a gross betrayal of their positions and duties to the community.
-As Ombudsman he worked with another mod to create cover stories for themselves and when I pointed out the fact he knew while posted something utterly ambiguous that implied he didn't, his post was magically changed to ensure I couldn't call him out on it. Also note the fact that a guilty party (Jack) volunteered to find out what happened speaks volumes about his duplicitous nature and just how compromised the position was.
- Was made a mod due to his friendship with smoosh. As a mod, he made spam threads in the general area breaking spam rules and also spammed user threads in general on purpose, drowning out their meaning and leading them to be moved to the spam temple again derailing threads which lead to breaking more rules.
- Despite there being no need for more supermods, he was made Supermod above and beyond current candidates who were denied the promotion due to the lack of need for one. No discussion was made, no one was consulted, and it was an in-house promotion over all the other workers due to the simple fact of who he is.
- Has caused several rifts within the moderation community and destabilised it a lot more than any help he has given it. One has to weigh the potential good he does with the amount of damage he does and come to your own conclusions if he should stand down or not.
- As a Super Mod he's been in constant conflict with users and posters, unable to control his opinions or his emotions in a position that requires tact and a working relationship with the community. Other moderators were fired outright for this behaviour while he gets a pat on the back.
For Jack
-AGA's post was a racial slur and by comparison editing a post is the lesser of two evils.
What's with that anyway..
.