Cgipson banned? Huh?

[manicmike]

I don't get why Charlie was banned when there are at least a couple other members who post nothing but condescending and negative comments and yet they are still allowed to roam free.

 

[sm4him]

I'll just say this: For those of you who benefitted from Charlie's help, or valued his input on this forum, I'm sure he'd love to hear that from you, whether he comes back or not.
There *are* some circumstances under which I think he might, eventually, return--but I wouldn't hold my breath waiting on it.

 

[terri34 6]

Oh no I wonder what happened. Hope he comes back.

Charlie calls it as he sees it which is why his "I just went to Best buy, now I'm a pro" rants are classic and epic. I hope he comes back although I'm sure some mods wish he wouldn't. Too many people read Charlie's posts subjectively rather than objectively.

...in before the lock.

This is incorrect, and it’s unfortunate that this perception exists. Charlie did a lot worse than offend “one particular member”; honestly, it takes a lot for a regular member to get banned around here. All we ask is that everyone abides by the TPF guidelines, especially the ones regarding behavior. As Mish mentioned, he had plenty of opportunities. We spent a lot of time chatting with him, and I don’t think there is a mod on the team who was happy about this penalty.

You may consider his rants against newbies and amateurs “classic and epic,” but from a moderator viewpoint, they are simply disruptive, disrespectful, and not in keeping with the guidelines.

The moderating team is here to enforce the guidelines. We are not the gestapo. Please avoid the insults; we’ve done nothing to earn that title.

Soooo easy to be on the outside looking in, and be a Monday morning quarterback!

 

[pixmedic]

actually, after literally a FULL DAY of Mod discussion, the initial conclusion was a permanent ban.
it was reduced to a lengthy temp ban because we all felt that Charlie DID have a lot to offer the forum community, and it was our hope that he would return to the forum and keep to the guidelines.

being a newer Mod here, i was honestly surprised at how hesitant the team was to even seriously entertain the idea of a permanent ban.
It was definitely not a decision made lightly, or by any one mod, and there was no malice involved.

 

[Tailgunner]

Ole Charlie, what will the TPF without him? I must admit, he was annoying when I first started out but I grew to like and respect a lot of the things he had to say. A lot of the things he said made sense, he just doesn't sugar coat anything lol

 

[Braineack]

I'll just say this: For those of you who benefitted from Charlie's help, or valued his input on this forum, I'm sure he'd love to hear that from you, whether he comes back or not.
There *are* some circumstances under which I think he might, eventually, return--but I wouldn't hold my breath waiting on it.

I actually tried to find out what forum he may have migrated over to in order to follow him over...

 

[ratssass]

I don't get why Charlie was banned when there are at least a couple other members who post nothing but condescending and negative comments and yet they are still allowed to roam free.

...consistently inconsistent.I DO appreciate the guidance Charlie and others have provided,and that includes newbs and the some what strange questions that are asked.

 

[tirediron]

I don't get why Charlie was banned when there are at least a couple other members who post nothing but condescending and negative comments and yet they are still allowed to roam free.

...consistently inconsistant

Please bear a few facts in mind:

1. You probably did not see or were not privy to all of the aspects of a certain issue;

2. Moderators are volunteers; we do this to try and make TPF a nice place to be. We are [allegedly] human, we don't see everything and we do make mistakes;

3. As alluded to earlier in this thread, almost no decision regarding a ban, even a short ban is made without a lengthy discussion by as many moderators as are available; and

4. We do our best to ensure the even enforcement of standards across the board.

 

[terri34 6]

If you believe you see inconsistency, then perhaps posts you see that you think need action aren't being reported. Please use the "report post" feature! We do not and cannot see everything, and we rely on our members to point out suspect posts.

Thank you for your understanding.

 

[ratssass]

I don't get why Charlie was banned when there are at least a couple other members who post nothing but condescending and negative comments and yet they are still allowed to roam free.

...consistently inconsistant

Please bear a few facts in mind:

1. You probably did not see or were not privy to all of the aspects of a certain issue;

2. Moderators are volunteers; we do this to try and make TPF a nice place to be. We are [allegedly] human, we don't see everything and we do make mistakes;

3. As alluded to earlier in this thread, almost no decision regarding a ban, even a short ban is made without a lengthy discussion by as many moderators as are available; and

4. We do our best to ensure the even enforcement of standards across the board.

...perhaps i should've voiced this differently. Of your first 3 points,you're absolutely correct (the human thing,I'll just accept on blind faith).But from the outside looking in,enforcement does seem to be all over the place.I've said it before,and I'll say it again:Moderators have an unenviable job.I think you all try your best.

 

[kundalini]

Cgipson had been on my ignore list for quite some time.

 

[runnah]

I think the obvious solution is to grant me the power to mod the moderators. Think Judge Judy but with a beard and penis.

 

[The_Traveler]

But from the outside looking in,enforcement does seem to be all over the place.I've said it before,and I'll say it again:Moderators have an unenviable job.I think you all try your best.

I think the difference is that Charlie was straight ahead, take no prisoners and so it was easy to see when he went off the rails. Others here are more stealth-@$$h0le-ish and get by because each individual unpleasantness is difficult to point to as an egregious offense.

You can take some satisfaction is that, in the end, they have to live forever in their own company.

 

[limr30 3]

I think the obvious solution is to grant me the power to mod the moderators. Think Judge Judy but with a beard and penis.

Will the brass stones be the same as hers?

 

[limr30 3]

It's already been mentioned that we non-mods are not privy to all the incidents that would cause someone to be banned. Posts may have been removed and we would never know just how incendiary they might have been. This may add to the illusion that rules are being inconsistently enforced.

Charlie definitely made no bones about his strong opinions and I personally had no problem ignoring him when he was just being douchy. But then again, I have a long history - both in real life and on the Internet - of learning when to ignore the blowhard and when to pay attention. Some of the newcomers to the forum, however, might be put off by him (or others as forceful in their manner and opinions) and that is counter to the purpose of this virtual community we've all chosen to be part of. We all might have gotten used to him, but we don't know how many others have felt insulted and put off. On the one hand, we could say those people just need to grow a thicker skin. This may be true. But does that mean the purpose of our participation needs to include "Force newbies to have tougher skin"? Are we then saying that we are going to provide the tough love of the Internet? Do we want to become that kind of a place? I don't, simply because I think it would be much more fruitful for everyone (not just newbies) to provide a balance between honest criticism, spirited discussion, and ​civility.