Page 1 of 2
Ombudsman's Feedback
Posted: Sat Jul 02, 2011 4:58 pm
by Iƒrit
Any feedback you would like to leave for either me or Odin, would be much appreciated, positive or negative anything is welcome
Re: Ombudsman's Feedback
Posted: Mon Jul 18, 2011 12:50 pm
by Dubby_CompGamerGeek2
So far I have been reasonably impressed with both of you,
not only with your official duties,
but also with your diffusing of issues before they get to your inbox,
and your behavior as forum users as well.
Re: Ombudsman's Feedback
Posted: Mon Jul 18, 2011 12:52 pm
by harchester
ifrit best ombudsman so far
Odin -
nogood job though both of ya
Re: Ombudsman's Feedback
Posted: Tue Jul 19, 2011 10:25 am
by Iƒrit
Thanks for the feedback guys.
Lets keep stuff clean, please post feedback, not discussion of said feedback.
Re: Ombudsman's Feedback
Posted: Mon Sep 05, 2011 3:48 am
by Clarkey
My observation of the recent case being handled in the Ombudsman office leads me to a poor performance by the Ombudsman.
Iƒrit wrote:I do believe that jacks opinion, and Tetrismonkeys opinions are pretty spot on.
SIngling out others opinions and just saying they are spot on is not giving your own neutral opinion. You should be stating your own opinion based on the facts of the issue.
Iƒrit wrote:Giving C2 a warning due to a track history is not only profiling but also hypocritical considering you allowed clarkey, jack and other x-mods/x-admins to come back to modding after their track records.
Singling out Mods as examples does not show neutrality at all. Also, the user notes are not only there to record verbal warnings and official warnings, but they also serve for deciding whether an official warning is to be given. If a user has in the past verbal warnings, and continue to repeat the offence they will get an official warning based on the fact that their usernotes show a history of verbal warnings. You may call it profilling but I call it using the usernotes as their intended purpose.
Re: Ombudsman's Feedback
Posted: Mon Sep 05, 2011 4:03 am
by RepliMagni
And I think the ombudsman was spot on in rescinding what was at best a pedantic warning
Keep up the good work
Re: Ombudsman's Feedback
Posted: Mon Sep 05, 2011 8:46 am
by Empy
Clarkey wrote:Iƒrit wrote:Giving C2 a warning due to a track history is not only profiling but also hypocritical considering you allowed clarkey, jack and other x-mods/x-admins to come back to modding after their track records.
Singling out Mods as examples does not show neutrality at all. Also, the user notes are not only there to record verbal warnings and official warnings, but they also serve for deciding whether an official warning is to be given. If a user has in the past verbal warnings, and continue to repeat the offence they will get an official warning based on the fact that their usernotes show a history of verbal warnings. You may call it profilling but I call it using the usernotes as their intended purpose.
Agreed.
Re: Ombudsman's Feedback
Posted: Mon Sep 05, 2011 12:26 pm
by lone dragon
I have seen nothing to give feedback on so either everyone is fine, ombs are doing everything behind the scenes or there are not issues to worry about and the forum is running smoothly which is the best result.
Re: Ombudsman's Feedback
Posted: Mon Sep 05, 2011 1:50 pm
by Iƒrit
Iƒrit wrote:Thanks for the feedback guys.
Lets keep stuff clean, please post feedback, not discussion of said feedback.
And cleaned again, please do NOT discuss feedback in this thread if you do wish to I have, moved posts from here to another thread and allowed for users to take their discussions their. Please use that thread in the future.
Re: Ombudsman's Feedback
Posted: Mon Sep 05, 2011 1:51 pm
by Guild
seems to still lack the cahonie to stand up to some of the mods decisions
Re: Ombudsman's Feedback
Posted: Mon Sep 05, 2011 2:10 pm
by Mordack
I also think it's fairly inappropriate for the ombudsman to make sanctimonious references to decisions and events which are miles out of their purview. In your official capacity, you are here to judge each case on its individual merits, not to parrot off your half-baked opinions on anything and everything.
"Profiling" was an especially stupid word to use in that context. Also, the allegation of hypocrisy is both unsupported and unfounded. If I didn't know any better, I'd say you threw that word into the mix for the sheer hell of it. The people to whom you refer, and perhaps I am one, were allowed to come back because of (a) a genuine change in their attitude and (b) a genuine willingness to contribute. Their past history was taken into account, but so indeed were their current actions.
The same, to an extent, is true of warnings. If someone's track record is one of constantly pushing the rules to their limit and getting into all manner of trouble, then it suggests that subsequent infringements are neither accidental nor borne of ignorance. If you've already been told off for doing something once, then there's no excuse for doing it again. If you're not someone who frequently breaks the rules, and made an infringement out of a genuine lack of knowledge, then there's a stronger case for a verbal warning. Please note that I refer not to that individual case, with which I am unfamiliar, but more broadly to the whole concept of 'profiling' to which you referred and the warped schism through which articulated it. Wrong on so many counts.
Re: Ombudsman's Feedback
Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2011 2:42 pm
by Mordack
Also why does the ombudsman choose to close threads whilst he is allegedly 'thinking' about them?
Heaven forbid other people would have a chance to add something to the debate whilst he sojourns himself Buddhist Monk style to consider the serious issue before him. Does all discussion really have to pause whilst he scratches his head and scrolls through a two page thread?
Re: Ombudsman's Feedback
Posted: Sat Oct 08, 2011 8:24 pm
by ~Odin~
Mordack wrote:Also why does the ombudsman choose to close threads whilst he is allegedly 'thinking' about them?
Heaven forbid other people would have a chance to add something to the debate whilst he sojourns himself Buddhist Monk style to consider the serious issue before him. Does all discussion really have to pause whilst he scratches his head and scrolls through a two page thread?
1) I closed it because im sick of spam in the thread and refuse to remind people to stop spamming.
2) I ONLY need to hear from the people involved.
3) I am the only current ombudsman...Ifrit is no longer on the team...and I have a real life...so if i wish to take a few moments and lock a thread and chat to the people involved then i will.
I havent been able to get a hold of the people involved with my current case as of yet hence why it is still open. If you wish to ask me anymore direct questions you are more then welcome to PM me on the forums.
Re: Ombudsman's Feedback
Posted: Sat Oct 08, 2011 8:37 pm
by ~Odin~
Fox McCloud wrote:No insults ment here Odin, but if preforming the tasks of the Ombudsman require to much attention from you or you lack the time to handle these cases in a timely matter, wouldn't it be prudent to resign and allow someone else to do the job?
This is true...i never said i dont have the time to deal with it, i just said i have a real life and it will take a moment is all. As of yet i am to reach the parties involved and that would be due to work and time zones. I rather be 100% in my decision then close a case a little early.
Re: Ombudsman's Feedback
Posted: Sat Oct 08, 2011 8:41 pm
by Ĕɱƿŷ
Mordack wrote:Also why does the ombudsman choose to close threads whilst he is allegedly 'thinking' about them?
Heaven forbid other people would have a chance to add something to the debate whilst he sojourns himself Buddhist Monk style to consider the serious issue before him. Does all discussion really have to pause whilst he scratches his head and scrolls through a two page thread?
I don't quite understand why everyone needs to put their big nose into something which doesn't concern them. This isn't a global peer mediation. It's an ombudsman issue involving 3-4 people.