I’ve taken issue with the recent handling of a thread and I have some concerns. Before I elaborate, I’m going to be VERY CLEAR that this isn’t an admonishment of all moderators (or even those involved) so there is no need for posts referencing the work mods do or how thankless the job is; this isn’t a trial and I’m not looking for evidence to condemn or exonerate. I was directed here via pm by one of the mods involved. Lastly, I’m not going to specifically name other posters, mods, or the thread as the concerns have to do with policy application and therefore calling out someone else by name is irrelevant.
I received an initial warning point in a thread because the discourse was deemed too personal. The pm sent by the mod explained why the point was issued. While I dispute some of the details involving the overall tone of the conversation and the timeliness of the action taken I can accept the point and that the thread was dominated by a small group of us and move on.
What I initially took issue with was the self-described rant posted by the mod in addition to the pm sent.
“You know, locking up a thread shouldn't be the solution to disagreement. It's actually kind of sad if that is the solution. Why not just shrug, agree to disagree, and just end your part in the discussion without saying anything further and walk away. This need to prove another wrong or prove yourself right or keep arguing until others agree with you or so you can have the last word is sad and boring. Yeah, I get it, you passionately believe you are right. So what? The other believes that, too.
But making your arguments personal toward another is not going to fly. And if anyone is wondering ... a few posts and/or comments were removed that would make my rant make sense.”
I subsequently responded to the post and pointed out the hypocrisy. The post was full of the same condescension and attacking dialogue that we were penalized for. If I, or another poster, were to call the opinions of others in a forum sad and boring it would most certainly be taken as a personal attack. For pointing out that fact I was awarded another 2 warning points by another mod, my post was deleted, and I was banned from posting content for 24 hours. The second mod was the one that pointed me here. We exchanged a series of messages. I expressed that I felt bounds had been overstepped by the initial moderator post and that issuing 2 extra warning points for pointing that out seemed excessive. I was told that I was awarded more points because I don’t have the right to vent publicly about other posters or moderators. I was also told that if I had pm’ed the mod directly about the inappropriate post there would have been no need assigned the extra points.
My response was to again point to exactly how the initial mod post violated the policy that was just stated to me. I also made the point that using the same logic; had we (the handful of posters involved) been pm’ed by the original mod there would have been no need for the rant either. Eventually the original mod post was amended, and allowed to stand as it was no longer deemed offensive. I propositioned that if the post was edited then my claim obviously carried merit. I also made the case that it had to have bearing on the excess points I was awarded, but apparently not. I feel that the application of posting policy in this matter was both heavy handed and extremely uneven. It feels very much like a standard has been created where mods aren’t held to the same scrutiny that regular posters are.
Our posts are deleted, we’re issued warning points for getting personal, then we’re flamed by mod rant that was every bit what we were critiqued over. I post and point out the hypocrisy; my post is deleted, I’m awarded more points, and I’m banned from content creation. Meanwhile, only after a back and forth via messages with the second mod, is the original post slightly amended. It was then allowed to stand. It was a very vexing handling to say the least. Posting policy was often cited to me, which leads me to believe it is very important to those who moderate on this site. Assuming that is case, I can’t understand how it is deemed acceptable for those policies to only apply in one direction. When my content is removed, I’m awarded warning points, and I’m banned from creation while the other party is allowed to simply alter their original post and this is considered justifiable I’m not sure how to view it as anything other than inconsistent.