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

Ryika v. leif erickson

Discussion in 'Infraction Review' started by Browd, May 13, 2016.

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

    Browd Dilettante Administrator

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2012
    Messages:
    10,433
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    Ryika has decided to appeal his 2 point infraction for Trolling, handed out by leif erickson on May 11 for this post.

    This is the infraction PM:

    And here is the initial PM that I have received from Ryika asking for an appeal:

    And a follow-up PM:

    I haven't asked Ryika if he consents to publication of his PMs, but will do so before we publish this thread.

    At this point, I haven't studied the PM exchange closely enough to express a view as to whether to uphold or overturn.
     
  2. Camikaze

    Camikaze Administrator Administrator

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2008
    Messages:
    26,769
    Location:
    Sydney
    The infraction seems to me to be a composite one - it isn't straight trolling, or straight spam, it's a kind of mild spam that is infused with mild trolling such that the two combine to be greater than the sum of their parts. I would say the problem with the post in question is predominantly spam, but it's the trollish nature of it that pushes it over the line in a way in which other similarly spammy posts are not pushed over the line. Anything Trump related in the Civ forums is reasonably likely to provoke some sort of negative reaction, or off-topic reaction.

    Of course it's not like this is the worst post in the world. I think it's pretty borderline, and Ryika seems to acknowledge this when he states that he would agree it's worth a warning. The question then seems to be whether it's worth 2 points.

    A poster with a recent infraction history is less likely to be cut any slack in this regard. The fact that he was already sitting on 6 points suggests that he's already well-acquainted with the trolling rules, and shouldn't need a warning to know what's acceptable. The function of warnings is really to give people notice of posting behaviour which they may not have realised was against the forum rules. Someone with a string of recent trolling infractions can't really claim to not know that they should be careful in posting comments with even a small degree of trollish content.

    If I had come across this post first, I might have given it 1 point as (Minor) Trolling instead, but I think it was perfectly open to leif to make it a 2-pointer. So I'd vote to uphold the infraction.
     
  3. Rob (R8XFT)

    Rob (R8XFT) Ancient Briton Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2002
    Messages:
    10,359
    Location:
    Leeds (UK)
    What Camikaze said, basically. I think that the post does deserve at least one point and can understand why Leif has gone with two. Vote to uphold.
     
  4. Lefty Scaevola

    Lefty Scaevola Moderatus Illuminatus Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2000
    Messages:
    9,793
    Location:
    San Antonio TX USA
    I concur that it is more spam than trolling, but is some of both. Given his recent activity, I can vote either no change or a reduction to 1 point.
     
  5. Lefty Scaevola

    Lefty Scaevola Moderatus Illuminatus Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2000
    Messages:
    9,793
    Location:
    San Antonio TX USA
    Count me as a vote to uphold.
     
  6. Plotinus

    Plotinus Philosopher Administrator

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2003
    Messages:
    16,656
    Location:
    Cornwall
    I don't think it's worth two points. I would give it one point for spam rather than for trolling. It's spam because it's introducing a new and potentially divisive topic into the thread for no good reason, which is what differentiates it from the other examples that Ryika gives.
     
  7. Browd

    Browd Dilettante Administrator

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2012
    Messages:
    10,433
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    Having now waded through this PM exchange, I would vote to uphold. It is arguably more problematic as spam than trolling, but it has flavor of both, making it somewhat worse. Certainly could debate 2 points vs. 1 point, but I'm comfortable with 2 points (particularly where the poster has enough experience with trolling and flaming infractions to know better). The fact that other spammy posts may have been overlooked, or that we occasionally utilize mod text to persuade posters to behave better, is irrelevant.

    By my count, there are now 4 votes to uphold and 1 vote to reduce to 1 point. Anyone else want to weigh in?
     
  8. Lefty Scaevola

    Lefty Scaevola Moderatus Illuminatus Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2000
    Messages:
    9,793
    Location:
    San Antonio TX USA
    Yeah, many appeals have missed this part in black and white in the rules posted in Site Feedback

    I get the sense that ainwood, who did most of the work reducing the "the rules" to writing, had an unfortunate experience with a lawyer once upon a time.
     
  9. Camikaze

    Camikaze Administrator Administrator

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2008
    Messages:
    26,769
    Location:
    Sydney
    I think this could be wrapped up now.
     
  10. Browd

    Browd Dilettante Administrator

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2012
    Messages:
    10,433
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    The poster has been informed of the decision to uphold and has consented to publication of his PMs, so I will publish this thread shortly.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page