1. We have added the ability to collapse/expand forum categories and widgets on forum home.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Photobucket has changed its policy concerning hotlinking images and now requires an account with a $399.00 annual fee to allow hotlink. More information is available at: this link.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. All Civ avatars are brought back and available for selection in the Avatar Gallery! There are 945 avatars total.
    Dismiss Notice
  4. To make the site more secure, we have installed SSL certificates and enabled HTTPS for both the main site and forums.
    Dismiss Notice
  5. Civ6 is released! Order now! (Amazon US | Amazon UK | Amazon CA | Amazon DE | Amazon FR)
    Dismiss Notice
  6. Dismiss Notice
  7. Forum account upgrades are available for ad-free browsing.
    Dismiss Notice

Kyriakos vs. Vincour

Discussion in 'Infraction Review' started by ori, Apr 3, 2017.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. ori

    ori Repair Guy Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2005
    Messages:
    16,136
    Location:
    Baden-Württemberg, Germany
    Kyriakos requests a review of the 1-point warning he received for this post.
    The conversation between him and Vincour is quoted below as forwarded by Kyriakos.

    edit:

     
  2. ori

    ori Repair Guy Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2005
    Messages:
    16,136
    Location:
    Baden-Württemberg, Germany
    As I was part of the discussion that resulted in this warning I am recusing myself from this appeal.
     
  3. leif erikson

    leif erikson Game of the Month Fanatic Administrator Supporter GOTM Staff

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2003
    Messages:
    22,720
    Location:
    Plymouth, MA
    The problem here is what standard are we using to decide whether this is appropriate or not. I am still unsure how to decide what is considered spam, trolling or flaming in a non-RD thread in OT.
     
  4. Bootstoots

    Bootstoots Chieftain Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2003
    Messages:
    8,633
    Location:
    Mid-Illinois
    That's because the lines are vague and hard to define. I'm never quite sure myself and just have to make decisions on a case-by-case basis, as is pretty obvious in my opinion here.

    Although I favored this infraction initially, in retrospect it does seem mild enough to be allowable in a non-RD thread. It appears to be a response to the preceding two posts:

    Both of these posts are within the limits of a non-RD thread too, but I don't think Kyriakos' response is substantially more aggressive or trollish than either of these. Calling someone's opinions simplistic is allowable in a non-RD thread, and saying that some issue should be argued somewhere else is allowable too. I've fairly often seen people make posts during side-arguments saying that the side issue belongs in another thread, and that's generally okay. That doesn't mean that they get to dictate the course of the thread, of course, but they're allowed to opine that some argument belongs somewhere else.

    All this said, I'm very much in favor of Vincour jumping in head-first and he's doing an excellent job in general. But in this particular case, I'd favor overturning the infraction.
     
  5. leif erikson

    leif erikson Game of the Month Fanatic Administrator Supporter GOTM Staff

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2003
    Messages:
    22,720
    Location:
    Plymouth, MA
  6. Camikaze

    Camikaze Administrator Administrator

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2008
    Messages:
    26,769
    Location:
    Sydney
    I would generally agree with that evaluation of the post. It does not appear to me to be rule-breaking within the context of a non-RD thread.

    However, there's a question of whether that actually arises for determination. The forum rules state the following in relation to an appeal:
    I can't see evidence of any of these in his request for a review of the infraction. Theoretically, the idea is that a poster should essentially specify some grounds of appeal, which we can then evaluate. Posters shouldn't just hand us up an infraction they don't like, without any attempt at outlining why they think it is wrong.

    If we search for those grounds of appeal within the PM exchange with Vincour, the primary argument Kyriakos is putting forth is that Vincour is a junior moderator, who apparently should therefore not dare to infract him without a preliminary inquiry conducted by more experienced site staff. That this is his primary complaint seems to be confirmed by his PM to ori initiating the appeal, in which he doesn't mention why he thinks the infraction is wrong, but does mention that Vincour is a junior mod (which he bundles with a rather arrogant personal assessment of Vincour's disposition, which frankly says much more about Kyriakos than Vincour). Of course, Vincour answered these arguments perfectly, pointing out that his decision is just as binding as any other moderator's decision, and that Kyriakos was not due any extra special process simply because the infraction had been issued by Vincour. I would add for the record that Vincour had heard the opinion of another moderator before acting, although in the end that's irrelevant to the infraction, because contrary to what Kyriakos seems to be suggesting, it's in no way required.

    We should make absolutely clear to Kyriakos the appeals process does not exist so that he can simply demand to 'speak to the manager', because he doesn't think he should have to deal with a lowly junior moderator. The appeals process exists so that he can appeal an infraction on its merits. He has failed to do so. In a usual case I would be very much inclined to extend a poster some latitude in the form of their appeal. But in this case, Kyriakos has set about the appeal with such disdain for Vincour's capacity to make a decision and the appeals process in general, that I don't think it would be appropriate to treat his appeal as anything other than incompetent or ill-founded.

    I would therefore not vote to overturn the infraction as a result of this appeal. I would, however, suggest that the OT supermods discuss the infraction further with Vincour, who is then free to make his own decision as to whether to keep it in place or not, bearing in mind that the OT moderating team, of which Vincour is an equal part, is best positioned to determine the relative standards for RD and non-RD threads.
     
  7. Bootstoots

    Bootstoots Chieftain Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2003
    Messages:
    8,633
    Location:
    Mid-Illinois
    Of course I completely agree that the condescending way that Kyriakos treats Vincour here is unacceptable - his decisions are every bit as official as anyone else's barring Thunderfall. He should be set straight about that, in no uncertain terms. In his PMs, what he should have done is to simply argue that his post is within non-RD limits without making any reference to how new Vincour is, rather than immediately telling Vincour to post a thread in staff to have other mods evaluate his decision.

    That said, though, Kyriakos does give a real reason for reviewing this infraction: that the behavior is in fact within non-RD standards. All four bullet points are technically met. He tells us what infraction he is referring to, gives the full PM chain, includes a brief explanation of why he thinks the infraction is wrong ("i was certain my post was very well within moderating limits for a non-rd thread, and contains no heavy language ("simplistic views" isn't taboo)."), and asks for us to evaluate it to see whether this is indeed not acceptable.

    It might be better, though, to handle this within staff by reopening that infraction thread and let him know that I've thought about it and changed my mind about whether the post really is within non-RD standards, and that there's currently no consensus within the appeal thread. I'll lay out my case, others can chime in, and he can decide whether to reverse or let the appeal continue. This would also allow ori to rejoin the discussion if he still thinks that the post is infractible.

    He's been doing an excellent job so far, and I don't want to discourage him with a public overturning of his first infraction, especially given Kyriakos' behavior here. So, should we do it that way?
     
  8. Camikaze

    Camikaze Administrator Administrator

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2008
    Messages:
    26,769
    Location:
    Sydney
    I'd missed that first brief PM actually; thought he'd just sent what's in the second quote block to ori. Given that, I suppose he has scraped through with the bare minimum requirements. As such, I think there probably is enough consensus about whether the post is rule-breaking to come a decision without remitting it for further consideration outside the appeals process. I don't think there's a good enough reason to depart from the proper process, given the appeal request is competent.
     
  9. Browd

    Browd Dilettante Administrator

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2012
    Messages:
    10,430
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    One condition of an appeal is that the appellant has "made a genuine attempt to resolve their concerns with the relevant moderator via private messages." Based on my review of Kyriakos' conversation with Vincour, I'm not convinced that he made any effort to engage with Vincour -- he leapt immediately to an appeal -- and what engagement he did engage in was dismissive and condescending. I would agree that his post seems borderline infractable (although that is where moderator judgment comes in), but I would dismiss the appeal on the grounds that he hasn't made the requisite effort to resolve the issue with Vincour before pursuing an appeal.
     
  10. Bootstoots

    Bootstoots Chieftain Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2003
    Messages:
    8,633
    Location:
    Mid-Illinois
    He did eventually offer this, in PM 7. There are other little snippets, but this is Kyriakos's main argument:

    It seems to me that their PM exchange did contain a bit of a discussion about the main substantive issue related to the infraction, on which they did reach an impasse - specifically, on whether Kyriakos's post was appropriate for a non-RD thread.

    Of course it's buried in there among the jibes that implied Vincour's decision was somehow illegitimate and needed to be backed up by senior mods, and even calling him by his old username in the quoted post. Still, it did seem that the conversation had reached an end with Kyriakos not convincing Vincour that his post was within non-RD standards, and Vincour did then indicate that he was holding is ground, that Kyriakos was welcome to appeal, and showing him the right procedure.

    I would love to dismiss this case on a technicality, given that I strongly urged Vincour to plunge right in rather than just wading in slowly, that I initially supported the infraction, that he has been doing a great job, and that Kyriakos is being a complete jerk in his trademark passive-aggressive way. But I think the minimum requirements for an appeal have been met, and I don't think I can justify dismissing this appeal on procedural grounds.
     
    Blue Monkey likes this.
  11. ori

    ori Repair Guy Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2005
    Messages:
    16,136
    Location:
    Baden-Württemberg, Germany
    I will let Vincour know that the infraction should be reversed then and prepare this thread for publication.
     
  12. ori

    ori Repair Guy Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2005
    Messages:
    16,136
    Location:
    Baden-Württemberg, Germany
    This thread was edited prior to publication by adding a link to the infracted post and removing a link to the infraction itself (the latter is not accessible to general users). Other than that no edits of the appeal were made.

    The conversation in the first post remains as a later message to me by Kyriakos stated that he had no objections to the publication.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page