unfair warning

[harchester]

The following is a warning which has been issued to you by an administrator or moderator of this site.
Quote:
This is a warning regarding the following post made by you: viewtopic.php?f=101&p=2016259#p2016259

"bebita is an Elite player

why ?

Simple...he posted this ELITE thread

+1 E- Rep for you bebita"

Section 4: Spam
b. Replies
Replies will be considered spam if they do not contribute to the discussion of the topic. This may include off topic posting or an excessive number of posts that contain nothing more than emoticons or small words such as ‘lol’. While it is appropriate to indicate something is amusing, drowning out a whole thread with such posts makes it hard to follow for all users.

Consequence:
A polite note from a moderator will be issued requesting the user cut down the amount of irrelevant posts. Repeat offenders will be given one warning point.
-----------

my post was relavent to the topic

bebitas starting post was who is elite and why

i replied with who i thought was elite and the reason why i thought this was elite

my post was not ment for spam
--------------------




also, congrats harch on following the post.

i'm not an elite player

*leaves*
---------

this is a reply from a MOD in the same topic how is this not considerd spam and mine was ?

[Empy]

Clearly said the first post, if you think you are elite or not. Do not nominate other players. You then proceeded to say nothing of yourself and throw out a smart ass comment about Bebita. I can see how it's debatable that your post was on topic, but in my opinion it was not. You have previously received warnings for spam, therefore a Verbal Warning was not necessary hence the Board Warning.

Topic

Post

[harchester]

yes exactly however this is NOT spam its debateable its on topic...my reply was on TOPIC

a MODs reply directly after mine was worse than my reply

how is that not spam ?

and in your opinion it was spam ? WTH is that

so if you dont like somthing Screw the rules of it NOT being spam
IMO it is

viewtopic.php?f=101&t=161121

this is the link to the thread

i would like my warning revoked

[Jim]

Empy, as far as i can see Mods do not Mod threads normally to only contain 100% focused on topic posts except under special circumstances: official voting threads for instance.

Harch's post could simply have been to say "Nice idea for the thread" because it is elite. In most cases the user would be allowed to say that.

[Empy]

Well either you'd get no warning or a Board Warning, a Verbal Warning is not an option. As clearly stated in the "Consequence" part of rule 4.B...

Section 4: Spam
b. Replies
Replies will be considered spam if they do not contribute to the discussion of the topic. This may include off topic posting or an excessive number of posts that contain nothing more than emoticons or small words such as ‘lol’. While it is appropriate to indicate something is amusing, drowning out a whole thread with such posts makes it hard to follow for all users.

Consequence:
A polite note from a moderator will be issued requesting the user cut down the amount of irrelevant posts. Repeat offenders will be given one warning point.

Although your point of the post after you by Maddog is irrelevant since the issue at hand is YOUR post not other posts (if you feel it's spam the report it please, that is why the function is there). I'll tell you why in my opinion that post IS on topic.

do u think you are a elite player in sgw?
if yes share us why
please do not nominalizate friends
just u
and why u are part of elite

This is the first post, which establishes what the Topic will be about. It says "do u think you are a elite player in sgw?" your post was your thoughts on BEBITA and not HARCHESTER (yourself). Maddogs post

:lol:


also, congrats harch on following the post.

i'm not an elite player

*leaves*

was about MADDOG not being an Elite Player "i'm not an elite player "

Also referencing the first post again (see above) it says:
"please do not nominalizate friends
just u
and why u are part of elite"
Your post did none of the above. The only arguable fact is your mentioned the term "elite player" but you clearly did not go in the direction the topic was intended to go in based on the first post. Therefore your post is spam. As I said in the first part of my post, since you've previously had a Board Warning (and I would assume at least 1 verbal warning prior to that) for Spam (I checked your User Notes, as the Ombudsmen can) you get a Board Warning without a Verbal Warning this time.

[Jim]

Empy, all your points seem valid enough. What do you think of mine?

[harchester]

Empy, as far as i can see Mods do not Mod threads normally to only contain 100% focused on topic posts except under special circumstances: official voting threads for instance.

Harch's post could simply have been to say "Nice idea for the thread" because it is elite. In most cases the user would be allowed to say that.

i did post it was an elite thread like it could have potential to become better with the more replys it got

if some1 is going to warn some1 based on the way i word things then i would be pretty anoyed as im Scottish and we have different ways to type lthat mean the same thing as what Jim said 'Nice idea' and my reply wich was 'elite thread'

like English people word things different from Scotland
Canadians word things different from americans or UK people

and towards Empys post

MY POST was ONTOPIC

[Byrnes]

Empy, as far as i can see Mods do not Mod threads normally to only contain 100% focused on topic posts except under special circumstances: official voting threads for instance.

Harch's post could simply have been to say "Nice idea for the thread" because it is elite. In most cases the user would be allowed to say that.

i did post it was an elite thread like it could have potential to become better with the more replys it got

if some1 is going to warn some1 based on the way i word things then i would be pretty anoyed as im Scottish and we have different ways to type lthat mean the same thing as what Jim said 'Nice idea' and my reply wich was 'elite thread'

like English people word things different from Scotland
Canadians word things different from americans or UK people

and towards Empys post

MY POST was ONTOPIC

Hes 100% right people say things different.

[Empy]

I see what you're saying, and I see your post in a different light now. It's still off topic though. Read the first post in the thread. State if you think you are an Elite Player or not and why. You called Bebita and Elite Player and said why. That's not on the topic in my opinion, and in the opinion of the person who started the topic as he reported your post. I'm not saying Authors have free reign over their threads, but if in his opinion and mine your post wasn't going with the topic then it probably wasn't going with the topic...

@Jim:
What Mods normally do or not isn't really relevant. The rules state what needs to be done for posts that are spam, and like I showed in my previous post and this one it was spam. If he had said "nice thread" or "good idea" that would be no problem, but he didn't... he did something that the author specifically said in the first post not do.

[harchester]

i interepted bebitas posts wrongly

but like you and jim and others said its debateable

bebitas post arent exactly all the time understandable and like i told bebita he needs to make things more clear when posting a thread

like i said in my previous posts

PEOPLE word differently in bebitas eyes all of his post will make perfect sense

in my eyes i posted to what i thought was correct

so IMO my post was ontopic

and when asking around to other MODs

they said it wasnt fully offtopic but they do NOT think it is worthy of a warning

and they have seen other posts far worse than that

[zeekomkommer]

wow everyone is scoring points around here. time for me to score some aswell:

point1:
debatable warnings arn't nessesairely fair or unfair, it depends if there is enough leading up to it and if the case can be made strong enough

point 2:
what other ppl posted afterwards is irrelivant to the current topic ad hand, te ombudsman is here to judge warning fairness not mod concistency

point 3 (omg did he just make a hattrick ? ):
different ppl will express themself in different ways depending on their english skills and the common vocabulary of the region aswell as the age and gendre of the user

point 4:
different ppl will interprit different posts differently becausse of their curret state of mind, their english skill and the common vocabulary of the region aswell as their gender

point 5:
mods will indeed look ad the usernotes before giving a warning and thus repeated offenders will be punished harder

point 6: your point that bebita was not clear enough has been stripped away due to: bebita's post being very clear. just read it and you find out:

- only nominate yourself
- don't nominate others
- ad a reason why you are an elite

point 7:
if the goal of a topic is saying why you are an elite player then saying what you think about the topic and who you think is an elite player is not on topic

point 8:
you'd probebly gotten away with it if you hadn't added:
"+1 E- Rep for you bebita"


okey, i think i'm winning on points now, anyone wants to ad something in their defence ?

[harchester]

wow everyone is scoring points around here. time for me to score some aswell:

point1:
debatable warnings arn't nessesairely fair or unfair, it depends if there is enough leading up to it and if the case can be made strong enough

point 2:
what other ppl posted afterwards is irrelivant to the current topic ad hand, te ombudsman is here to judge warning fairness not mod concistency

point 3 (omg did he just make a hattrick ? ):
different ppl will express themself in different ways depending on their english skills and the common vocabulary of the region aswell as the age and gendre of the user

point 4:
different ppl will interprit different posts differently becausse of their curret state of mind, their english skill and the common vocabulary of the region aswell as their gender

point 5:
mods will indeed look ad the usernotes before giving a warning and thus repeated offenders will be punished harder

point 6: your point that bebita was not clear enough has been stripped away due to: bebita's post being very clear. just read it and you find out:

- only nominate yourself
- don't nominate others
- ad a reason why you are an elite

point 7:
if the goal of a topic is saying why you are an elite player then saying what you think about the topic and who you think is an elite player is not on topic

point 8:
you'd probebly gotten away with it if you hadn't added:
"+1 E- Rep for you bebita"


okey, i think i'm winning on points now, anyone wants to ad something in their defence ?

Zeek about the E-Rep comment

that was a private joke between me and Bebita + bebita fully understands the reason i posted this

so Zeek what i ask is

is my warning to stand or to not stand and be revoked ?

[zeekomkommer]

the ombudsman cannot overturn your warning, if you have anything else to ad to your case then do so now, i'll be taking all pending cases to the admins tomorow

[Jim]

After thinking about this case i believe the warning was too severe. The amount of off topic posts in threads similar to Bebita's and the lack of warning for said posts makes me think it was too much to warn harch for his post. Yes i know "the report function is there" but i do not believe any of those posts deserved a straight up warning either.
I will ask bebita to post what he thinks as people have already said "it was his thread" arguments and harch has used a "bebita understood" argument.

[Empy]

The amount of off topic posts in threads similar to Bebita's and the lack of warning for said posts makes me think it was too much to warn harch for his post

There was one other post in the thread, and I'll repeat. It was NOT offtopic as Harch's was because he talked about himself as you were supposed to, whereas Harch talked about himself which Bebita CLEARLY (if you have any understanding of any English variant) stated not to do.