Berzerker vs. Lemon Merchant

[leif erikson]

Berzerker is appealing two moderator actions. The first is a 2-point infraction for trolling in this post while the second is a 3-day thread ban from the same thread.

The original infraction message:
Berzerker,

Your message (Baking Cakes and Discrimination: Or, "What Would Jesus Do?") constitutes trolling under our rules:

You know, I don't think he would, I'm pretty sure he would be insisting that your question was great and ranting about the Oppression of Real Americans by cosmopolitan liberal elites such as myself.

You're right... but great? I'm flattered, I'd be happy with good or relevant. He wouldn't twitter that to someone he likes, he'd type that to someone he's mad at. So I'm wondering why you and Tim are sharing his moral high ground.

well the real issue is that hillary clinton forced blacks to migrate to Colorado in 1993, making democrats hypocrites and racist drug war

Waging a racist drug war while accusing others of racism is hypocrisy

Which month would they migrate in?
Would they pass through Kansas, or New Mexico?
Why would the economy suffer?
Why do you single out blacks migrating, are you a Democrat?
Isn't it hypocritical to not say anything about Native Americans migrating?
Obama migrated to Colorado once and Democrats didn't complain.

/Berz-mode

At least you didn't put them in quotes to make it look like they're mine. You seem to really hate questions, did the teeth on your saw dull?

Not disputing this, but could you be specific about when you recognized it?

Oh, a question... DONT ANSWER! Call him stupid instead.

You were warned not to troll in the thread but you did it anyway. You've received a two point infraction lasting two months.

Please do not troll other users. Your message may have been removed or altered.

Your account's access may be limited based on these actions in the future. Please keep this in mind when posting or using our site.

"Yes to the last question" is referring to my question whether he would consent to having the Conversations made public in the Appeals thread in Site Feedback.

Thanks... yes to the last question. I have a couple complaints that apply to other mod practices so they should see them too. But I'm challenging 2 infractions in the same thread. I dont even know how many points she hit me with, I cant remember where thats recorded.

I was infracted for trolling in the baker's discrimination thread, here's the set up:

Lexicus has advocated shooting racists. In #282 he praised Abraham Lincoln apparently for shooting a bunch of racists. So I asked, "wasn't Lincoln a racist?" to show the contradiction in condemning racists while praising a racist. That earned me a trolling infraction in #283

Moderator Action: Am I not getting through to you? I said no more trolling. Enjoy the holiday. --LM

Now its bad enough I got accused of trolling for my question, but while promoting civility LM felt the need to call me stupid, dense, or thick (fill in the blank) for not figuring out she'd see my question and arbitrarily call it trolling.

I've noticed some mods like to add their commentaries to mod actions, please leave the condescending insults out of it. The victims of these snide comments are not allowed to publicly defend themselves because that would be considered PDMA when it isn't discussing the action but the attached insults.

In my extensive debates with Tim, Lex and Sommersword they will 'derail' threads by accusing me of derailing the thread so we end up arguing about who started the derailment, etc. Then Arakhor shows up to criticize me for derailing the thread. I get tired of mods mimicking my opponent's accusations with their commentaries. You might as well just appoint Tim, Lex and Sommers as mods. But that aside...

The 2nd infraction I'm challenging is in #278

Moderator Action: As ori said, stop the trolling. Do not ignore mod warnings. Warned for trolling. --LM

As you can see my post was a bit long and took me time to write as I'm sometimes pre-occupied with other things. I posted it 17 minutes after Ori's warning and I was unaware he had posted in the interim. LM ignored that explanation, apparently she thinks I lied and her 'facts' were relevant, not mine.

From Tim's post in #259

"Remember that old saw about how there are no stupid questions?"

LM told me that was mild and he wasn't calling me stupid, he was calling my question stupid. That isn't what Tim said, the old saw is there are no stupid questions, just stupid people.

“Remember there are no stupid questions, just stupid people.” #MrGarrison #LifeLessons. - South Park

LM said she didn't accuse me of trolling for calling Tim stupid - I didn't call him stupid - instead she said it was my comment about the old saw having dull teeth and Tim and Lex sharing Trump's moral high ground with their penchant for insulting people. With all the obnoxious crap posted by Tim and Lex and I get a trolling infraction for dull teeth and moral high ground?

As for Tim flooding my inbox with his vulgar rants about how evil I am, it isn't my intent to get him or anyone else in trouble. Just be aware Tim hates my guts (his words) and he follows me around like a stalker insulting me at every chance. I dont like reporting people, this place would suffer if the report function was used for personal vendettas and I suspect Tim has been doing that to me and other posters he hates.

I dont know how to invite others into my discussion with LM

This is the discussion of the infraction and thread ban between Berzerker and Lemon Merchant (referred to as me in the discussion below):

From Berzerker:

I was responding to Tim, he called me stupid a few posts before that

From me:

Well, do not answer trolling or flaming with trolling. Especially when there has been a mod warning in the thread and we're on alert.

Berzerker:

wait a minute, I object to this - those mod warnings were recent while I was still in the process of typing and posting.

and if he's trolling why did I get the pts? I didn't call him stupid, he called me stupid for asking a question so I was pointing out his hypocrisy

Me:

If you feel that the infraction was unjustified, please take it up with a Supermoderator or an Admin.

Berzerker:

I've been told in the past to take it up with the mod issuing the infraction. Why didn't Tim get infracted for trolling? He called me stupid for asking a question so when he asked a question I pointed out his hypocrisy and you infracted me instead.

Me:

I didn't see Tim's comment. Let me take a look.

Ok. I had to go way back in the thread to see it, and it was mild at best. It didn't even really deserve an answer. In any case, the "Stupid" comment to Tim was not what got you infracted. It was the moral high ground comment and the saw teeth one. The "Stupid" comment was just adding to it. Adding to that, there was just a mod warning in the thread telling you guys not to troll anymore and you ignored it. I don't care if you were typing at the time. You could have gone back and edited your post.

And really, the reason you guys get these infractions is that you retaliate. You know you could just report the abuse instead?

Berzerker:

I didn't ignore it, I never saw it until after I got your infraction. Reporting the abuse doesn't seem to work, you just called it mild. So I can call people stupid? Thats not trolling or flaming?

Me:

This is what Tim wrote:
Timsup2nothin said: ↑

Remember that old saw about how there are no stupid questions?

And that other one about how there's always an exception to prove the rule?

He's calling your question stupid. He's not calling you stupid. That's why there was no action taken. He's not directly flaming you.

You can play rules lawyer all you want, but the facts are these:

1. Tim was not flaming you. He was criticizing your question.
2. Ori made it quite clear that there was to be no more trolling in the thread.
3. You either totally ignored the warning, or crossposted your troll post with him.
4. In any case, after you found out about the warning, you did not edit your post to remove the trolling language, which is why you were infracted for ignoring the warning.
5. You continued to troll in the thread even after I gave you the infraction for it, and warned you again, resulting in a three day thread ban for that thread.

Those are the facts as I see them. If you don't agree then appeal the infraction. I see that you have already been in contact with ori, and I have invited him to this conversation as well, so that he has all of the relevant facts, such as they are.

Berzerker:

Remember that old saw about how there are no stupid questions?

“Remember there are no stupid questions, just stupid people.” #MrGarrison #LifeLessons.

The answer is 'just stupid people'. Google it...

I was infracted before I saw the mod warning, thats the relevant fact. It was your infraction that led me to look back into the thread for a mod warning and thats when I saw it.

wasn't Lincoln a racist?

you think thats trolling too?

Moderator Action: Am I not getting through to you? I said no more trolling. Enjoy the holiday. --LM

If you want to get through to me, explain why its trolling. Right now I dont know what I can post without you getting upset. Did someone report that post? My God if thats trolling then what isn't trolling. Singing along with Mr Rogers about the neighborhood? Let people debate for God's sakes.

Lex advocated shooting racists and then he compared himself to Lincoln who was a racist. So I asked him, wasn't Lincoln a racist? And you think thats trolling? You need to explain your rationale for mod actions, all you're doing now is broadcasting your bias and leaving people to wonder what can be posted without you inventing excuses to punish them.

------------------------------------------

I have not had the opportunity to answer his last three responses. I added ori to the conversation in hopes that he might see it and offer some insight on how I should respond.

I gave Berzerker the three day thread ban for indirectly calling Lexicus a racist. I felt he was further trolling in the thread after he had been warned. Perhaps I erred. I don't know enough of American history to know if Lincoln was really a racist or not, but it seemed to me that Berzerker was making the comment to say that Lincoln was a racist, Lexicus compared himself to Lincoln, therefore Lexicus is also a racist.

As for the first infraction, as you can see from one of my responses, I detailed what I thought was the transgression. He was combative, and clearly looking for an argument. I don't buy his assertion that he didn't see ori's posts. At the very least, he says he saw them after his own. He could have edited his own post and made it less accusatory and less confrontational. Berzerker has made it a habit of trolling in threads lately. Arakhor has noticed it too. As for myself, perhaps I was too hard on him, I don't know. I tend to second guess myself after the fact.

Sorry for the length of this one.

 

[Bootstoots]

Sorry for not seeing this for five weeks.

Is there any way to see who posted what when, if a post is more than a week old? I want to see how far apart the modtext message is from Berzerker's post, to see if his claim that he cross-posted with ori's modtext is plausible. But all I see is the day of the posts, not the time. Is the time stored anywhere?

 

[leif erikson]

If you mouse over the date, it will show the time.

 

[ori]

so lets rule on this - his post came 17 minutes after mine so the claim that he did not see the mod text is at least plausible and the problematic bits are without the mod text warning probably not much above what would trigger an action by us. So I would suggest reversing the warning.

 

[Rob (R8XFT)]

I concur with Ori.

 

[Browd]

Agree to reverse.

 

[Bootstoots]

I concur - we should reverse.

 

[Camikaze]

I agree with reversing both moderator actions, but for a different reason. I don't think ori's warning is particularly relevant; it's not like the warning suddenly made trolling against the rules or changed the standard by which a post should be judged. Whether or not Berzerker saw the warning, the question is simply whether what he posted qualifies as trolling in a non-RD thread. I do not see how it does. I'm struggling to see how it would qualify as trolling, even if in an RD thread. I don't think the PM exchange sufficiently identifies which parts of the posts are supposedly problematic. In relation to the first post, perhaps it is, "You seem to really hate questions, did the teeth on your saw dull?" In the second post, it has to be "wasn't Lincoln a racist?" The first is not a particularly profound contribution to the discussion, and the second is a purposeless non-sequitur. But I don't think either of things are trolling.

 

[Bootstoots]

I think we can finally close this appeal now. @leif erikson, will you do the honors?

 

[leif erikson]

Will do.

edit - Have notified both Berzerker and Lemon Merchant via PM.