1. We have added the ability to collapse/expand forum categories and widgets on forum home.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. All Civ avatars are brought back and available for selection in the Avatar Gallery! There are 945 avatars total.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. To make the site more secure, we have installed SSL certificates and enabled HTTPS for both the main site and forums.
    Dismiss Notice
  4. Civ6 is released! Order now! (Amazon US | Amazon UK | Amazon CA | Amazon DE | Amazon FR)
    Dismiss Notice
  5. Dismiss Notice
  6. Forum account upgrades are available for ad-free browsing.
    Dismiss Notice

civman110 vs illram

Discussion in 'Infraction Review' started by Rob (R8XFT), Mar 18, 2016.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Rob (R8XFT)

    Rob (R8XFT) Ancient Briton Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2002
    Messages:
    10,532
    Location:
    Leeds (UK)
    Moderator Action: This appeal thread is in its original form, save for the removal of PM correspondence due to the lack of the poster's consent, and the removal of any content deemed inappropriate.

    civman110 is appealing an infraction given to him by illram.

    <snip>

    <snip>

    My response to Civman110 was this:

    I have lodged the appeal with my colleagues; please allow about a week before I come back to you with the findings, as we need to give everyone a chance to properly look into the situation.

    One other point - I will relay the decision to you and act according to the process, but I won't be entering into a chain of pms discussing the merits of the findings or my opinion on the matter. I'm sure you'll understand this.

    Best,
    Rob.
     
  2. leif erikson

    leif erikson Game of the Month Fanatic Administrator Supporter GOTM Staff

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2003
    Messages:
    23,658
    Location:
    Plymouth, MA
    Would vote to uphold.

    It is not as clear as he claims in his reply to Ilram who he means are "historically ignorant individuals ... that are victims of botched lobotomies". Further, not clear which people are "walking mental disorders who aren't capable of critical thinking". It sounds to me as though he also means those that do not agree with him?

    In addition to this lack of clarity, the language is completely uncivil. There is no need to use this kind of language.
     
  3. Lefty Scaevola

    Lefty Scaevola Moderatus Illuminatus Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2000
    Messages:
    9,793
    Location:
    San Antonio TX USA
    I have looked at this twice and am still undecided.
     
  4. Camikaze

    Camikaze Administrator Administrator

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2008
    Messages:
    26,834
    Location:
    Sydney
    I think the infraction is fine. The post falls into a pattern of uncivil posting such that it's difficult to draw the conclusion that he wasn't directing the attack at other users. Even with the slight phrasing change, he's still at best implying that Timsup2nothin is a 'historically ignorant individual'.
     
  5. Browd

    Browd Dilettante Administrator

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2012
    Messages:
    10,726
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    I would agree. A fair reading of his post is that Timsup2nothin is included in his blanket flame. I would uphold.
     
  6. illram

    illram Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2005
    Messages:
    9,218
    Location:
    San Francisco
    For what it's worth, normally I would reverse this after discussion with the poster but given civman's general caustic style I didn't give him the benefit of the doubt. So, my infraction was as noted based on understanding the post as still flaming Tim even though he tried to edit it after the fact and make it more "general."
     
  7. ori

    ori Repair Guy Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2005
    Messages:
    16,280
    Location:
    Baden-W├╝rttemberg, Germany
  8. Lefty Scaevola

    Lefty Scaevola Moderatus Illuminatus Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2000
    Messages:
    9,793
    Location:
    San Antonio TX USA
    There is 4 uphold, 1 abstain, Illram recused, and Rob (R8XFT) has not voted.
     
  9. Rob (R8XFT)

    Rob (R8XFT) Ancient Briton Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2002
    Messages:
    10,532
    Location:
    Leeds (UK)
    I'm an abstain. I can see how someone could think it referred to posters, but the explanation civman110 gave afterwards should have been enough to sort this out.
     
  10. Plotinus

    Plotinus Philosopher Administrator

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2003
    Messages:
    16,741
    Location:
    Cornwall
    I thought that civman's explanation sounded reasonable until I read through as much of the thread as I could stomach, and it's fairly clear to me that while Tim did attribute the view in question to others, he was at least implicitly endorsing it. And so while civman's response was ostensibly about third parties, it was at least implicitly about Tim. Looking at their past history confirms that. If civman wanted to distance his comments from Tim he should have been much clearer about it. So I would vote to uphold.
     
  11. Lefty Scaevola

    Lefty Scaevola Moderatus Illuminatus Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2000
    Messages:
    9,793
    Location:
    San Antonio TX USA
    On my third time though, I vote to overturn, but it is a close issue.
    I can also easily see how the OT guys have a much better read on civman110 than I do.
     
  12. Rob (R8XFT)

    Rob (R8XFT) Ancient Briton Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2002
    Messages:
    10,532
    Location:
    Leeds (UK)
    I have sent civman110 this pm:

    civman110,

    Your appeal of your infraction for flaming other members has been rejected; the general opinion being that the language used was quite uncivil and that it was difficult to draw the conclusion that you weren't directing the attack at other users.

    As stated in my previous pm, my role here is merely to report the information to you and I will not be entering into a discussion about the validity of the decision.

    The appeal thread will be posted in the 'Infraction Review' subforum. At the moment, the first post is your pm to me outlining the case as you see it. Before the thread is posted you have the choice of that post (containing your pm) staying as it is or for it to be redacted, in which case I will replace your pm with a brief summary of the request. Please let me know what you would prefer.

    Rob.
     
  13. Plotinus

    Plotinus Philosopher Administrator

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2003
    Messages:
    16,741
    Location:
    Cornwall
  14. Rob (R8XFT)

    Rob (R8XFT) Ancient Briton Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2002
    Messages:
    10,532
    Location:
    Leeds (UK)
    I've still not heard back from civman110, but will give it until the weekend.
     
  15. Rob (R8XFT)

    Rob (R8XFT) Ancient Briton Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2002
    Messages:
    10,532
    Location:
    Leeds (UK)
    As I've not heard from civman110, I will publish this thread with his pms deleted.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page