What are the rules?

[Sheriff Uling 3]

However, there has to be some freedom to dialog/debate and then if a situation escalates... deal with it (banning).

The retaliator normally gets the brunk of the law/rules/policies/ and in our case... the terms of service.

and that is fair?

No... it sucks!!!

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

MENA just gets a pass though doesn't it?

As long as they keep their theatrics limited to the confines of their dirty little ghetto, no one on the outside cares.

[Jenn! 918]

MENA just gets a pass though doesn't it?

As long as they keep their theatrics limited to the confines of their dirty little ghetto, no one on the outside cares.

What is that supposed to mean?

[Jasman0717 9]

[Kez/JWolf 6]

I could not belive that Dev was banned for what happened in the thread on friday... I was amaze at a mod making statements like that... I think the person who should have got banned was the mod for making comments about a race of people... I thought it was against TOS to make remarks about race, color or sex...

To then ban a member when they have not broken any TOS and give no explanation for the ban is just not good policy... from re-reading the whole thread it would appear that she was banned because she spoke out against the mod and his appalling comments about PI woman...

Kez

[TracyTN 237]

I agree with what Kez said. I've been out of town (mini honeymoon!) but was sent a link to dev's 'ban worthy' thread. I honestly thought the offending portion must have been edited out before I got to it, because I couldn't figure out what part had gotten her banned.

I *think* I know now what quote it was, but I have to say that I've seen MUCH worse written here by other members who didn't even get a stern talking to by a mod. But this one was banning material? A dictionary definition? Personally, I found the moderators comments in said thread MUCH more shocking and offensive than dev's commentary.

Color me confused.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

I read the thread too.

I don't think what dev said warranted a ban. Not even close.

Nor do I think what Yod said warrants outrage. What's true is true.

[no name 1]

I read the thread too.

I don't think what dev said warranted a ban. Not even close.

Nor do I think what Yod said warrants outrage. What's true is true.

It might be true but we as adults should have tact & class. Some things do not need to be said aloud. Why don't you poll in the PI forum & see what they say?

And don't forget the instigator as well...he should be punished too.

Edited August 13, 2007 by devilette

[smoke20 0]

I read the thread too.

I don't think what dev said warranted a ban. Not even close.

Nor do I think what Yod said warrants outrage. What's true is true.

i dunno i was pretty po'd & i felt it was warranted. true or not a mod should never make comments like that.

Edited August 13, 2007 by smoke20

[Dr_LHA 3]

Nor do I think what Yod said warrants outrage. What's true is true.

Maybe, but it was really one for the "bite your tongue" thread IMHO.

[Nagishkaw 510]

I agree with what Kez said. I've been out of town (mini honeymoon!) but was sent a link to dev's 'ban worthy' thread. I honestly thought the offending portion must have been edited out before I got to it, because I couldn't figure out what part had gotten her banned.

I *think* I know now what quote it was, but I have to say that I've seen MUCH worse written here by other members who didn't even get a stern talking to by a mod. But this one was banning material? A dictionary definition? Personally, I found the moderators comments in said thread MUCH more shocking and offensive than dev's commentary.

Color me confused.

Colour me outraged. I guess it all depends on who you are.....peculiar, isn't it?

[TracyTN 237]

I read the thread too.

I don't think what dev said warranted a ban. Not even close.

Nor do I think what Yod said warrants outrage. What's true is true.

I said shocked (as in 'Did HE just say THAT?') and offensive, not outraged. Apples and oranges to me.

[Captain Ewok 1,900]

I've tried to ask this in PM, but I am coming up empty.

Is it not normal to warn a poster before closing a thread/banning someone? Is it not common courtesy to PM someone to chill out or they will get the thread closed/ or a ban?

Banning someone then PMing makes no sense as your account is disabled & therefore no access to PMs.

I'm still trying to figure out why I got a ban for a so-called personal attack which was not an attack, but a posting of a dictionary DEFINITION. I'm also wondering why it's been over 74 hours & despite repeated PMs asking WHY & assurances it is being looked into, I have not received any answers as to why this happened when it obviously was NOT a violation of the TOS.

I can not speak for the mods but personally I was on a business trip for a week. I told you this in an email and my access to the internet was limited. I know it may be assumed that I spend every instant online but I too have another life offline that sometimes takes me away from here and while I want to work everyones problems as fast as I can, sometimes my personal life can not allow the prompt reply. Int he contact us section of the site it is stated:

Please note that your message will be sent to the Administrator. We

will respond as soon as possible, but please allow up to 14 days. If you need

immediate assistance with the Forums please contact a moderator.

While this is on the long side it does allow for the occasion like the past week when I can not get regular internet.

[Captain Ewok 1,900]

I will say this and hopefully it helps make the policy of suspensions a little better. I will personally remind all the mods to check the "email" and not "PM" button when suspending someone so that the message will get to the member. Further in general I am the person to review any moderator action however this last week I went days without internet and was clearly very slow getting on top of things. Until today in fact I have still had minutes of internet a day versus the normal amount. I will not announce this publicly when I am away for obvious reasons but the mods generally can pick up any day to day activities. As for comments made in the thread in question and the suspension I would apologize to any member that was offended by any language by a member or moderator. I was not online to read this at the time but I want to make it clear that this site is about acceptance of all people from everywhere and respect for the multicultural nature of the site. Sometimes people say things in the heat of the moment that is off tone and we should all remember to think twice before posting as written text is often read without the context of the situation and can not be taken back easily. If you ever need anything just email or PM me and I will do my best to address it. I prefer PM's or emails on admin related topics as open forum posts cause a mod effect typically and also do not allow us to personally tailor responses back due to privacy reasons.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Nor do I think what Yod said warrants outrage. What's true is true.

Maybe, but it was really one for the "bite your tongue" thread IMHO.

It doesn't hurt if people applying from consular posts are aware of the specific conditions that consular officers working in that post face on a day to day basis. For example, I've made posts in the past telling Indian K1 applicants that many Hindu couples commit K1 fraud by taking advantage of a loophole in Hindu marriage law. Saying that has pissed some people off, but true is true. The onus is on the beneficiary to present his/her case in a manner that overcomes those suspicions. Knowing the nature of the suspicions that our human consular officers have can only help.

JMHO