Groundspeak Forum Appeals Process

[The Hornet]

You may be aware that a little while ago my "The Hornet" and "Lactodorum" accounts were banned for 3 days and indefinitely respectively for apparent breaches of the forum guidelines. Neither ban was the responsibility of a UK moderator. I have been asked about the outcome of these bans and the appeals process in general.

My appeals mentioned certain specific points which I wanted to be clarified but I can report that I have had NO feedback on the merits or otherwise of either appeal.

I have been in correspondence with Groundspeak about a number of matters, including the appeals process. I have agreed that the content of those e-mails will remain confidential but I think I can say, without fear of breaching that agreement, that Groundspeak say they recognise shortcomings in the appeals system and are trying to improve it.

So based on my experience, it seems that appealing against a decision of a forum moderator is currently a futile exercise.

[keehotee]

It has to be said - it would appear in recent (?) months, that the lunatics really have taken over the asylum......

(No offence to the B's....)

[Simply Paul]

Thanks for this feedback Peter. It is as I feared. As it's a bit late to 'unban' me for the three days I was excluded from t'other place, I had been wondering what the point of me following up my appeal was too and wanted to see how you got on before committing myself to the process further. The emails I received from Michael hadn't filled me with a lot of hope- he said he'd not seen the first I sent to appeals@gc.com (I checked, the address was on it and correctly spelt), which rather suggests either he or the system isn't so well organised... I think I'll save my time and effort and move on (while harbouring a suspicion that GroundSpeak pick their lackeys from a hat; some are good, some are bad, and they don't really care which is which).

I don't think I'll appeal against Mandarin warning me for saying dam.n either. I do believe she felt she was, as she said in her email to me, being consistent. As I'm not aware of anyone else getting a warning for saying dam.n I'm not sure how consistent she was being, and now she's personally got no issue with the word, consistency is no longer a factor. But it's early days for her and I'm the forgiving type (yes, really) so I'm prepared to give her the benefit of the doubt. ;)

With the rather less justifiable trouble The Hornet got into, at the very least GS owe Peter an apology for the gross overreaction in banning him for an innocent request in the coin forum. I hope he doesn't have to wait until it's a nippy day in hell to get it, but my head is saying it's never going to happen :(

[The Hornet]

With the rather less justifiable trouble The Hornet got into, at the very least GS owe Peter an apology for the gross overreaction in banning him for an innocent request in the coin forum. I hope he doesn't have to wait until it's a nippy day in hell to get it, but my head is saying it's never going to happen :(
I consider that incident closed and I'm not looking for, nor expecting, anything more.

[dodgydaved]

With the rather less justifiable trouble The Hornet got into, at the very least GS owe Peter an apology for the gross overreaction in banning him for an innocent request in the coin forum. I hope he doesn't have to wait until it's a nippy day in hell to get it, but my head is saying it's never going to happen :(

I also, privately, e-mailed a senior lackey at GSP voicing my concerns that a forum moderator had not followed the correct procedure when banning (suspending) Peter's posting rights as outlined in my post in a previous thread:

https://forums.groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?s=&showtopic=200874&view=findpost&p=3593016


He replied that he:

" asked to be aware of how it is being handled but I'm not taking direct action at this time. I definitely have taken more interest in it since your email, however."

My breath is held - unbated:(

[Alan White]

So based on my experience, it seems that appealing against a decision of a forum moderator is currently a futile exercise.
Based on my experience, it has always been a futile exercise appealing to Groundspeak about anything which its volunteers do.

[Simply Paul]

I consider that incident closed and I'm not looking for, nor expecting, anything more.Yeah, but a sorry would be nice, wouldn't it? I think you're doing the right thing; what happened to you has highlighted some moderation shortcomings anyway, so it is possible something positive will come out of it. Fingers crossed :)

[Wadders]

I also email Jeremy, during the bannings and voiced my concerns at how the forums were being moderated, Jeremy's reply was just as i expected it went like this;

" "




Nope! he didn't even have the common decency to acknowledge one of his customers.:(
The email was civil and polite at all times, but it is nothing less than i expected.:wacko:

[Simply Paul]

I think I read a mod or reviewer saying that there was no point in contacting Jezza through his profile as he doesn't read those emails. I'm sure someone could find the post on the other forum; it was on one of those threads about GroundSpeak doing something which seemed daft ;)

I wonder how he keeps in touch with his customers? If he's relying on feedback from lackeys these days he probably thinks GroundSpeak is smelling of roses in the UK... Or perhaps he comes onto the forums as a sock puppet (against GS policy) and enjoys the show?

[jacobite]

I watched a programme the other night, where the accused was executed first, then tried after their execution..............remind you of anything?

Comforting to know that GSP has the same approach with it's customers :cheers:

[fraggle69]

I watched a programme the other night, where the accused was executed first, then tried after their execution..............remind you of anything?

Comforting to know that GSP has the same approach with it's customers :cheers:


It's an American thing to shoot first then to ask questions later. They also like to lock people up for no good reason, but that's getting a little bit off topic.

GSP are just a product of America, and as such what comes naturally is a lot of stupidity and even worse English than me!

[Crid]

Groundspeak say they recognise shortcomings in the appeals system and are trying to improve it.

They don't seem to be trying very hard to improve it so far.

C-, could do better.

[PopUpPirate]

I've said it before, it's exactly how NOT to run a forum (Groundspeak of course!!!) - no-one has to visit, so you have to encourage debate rather than stifle it :) Banning and censoring should be considered a last resort, not a first.

It's not a US, or a Groundspeak issue, it's just bad forum moderation.

[Crid]

It's not a US, or a Groundspeak issue, it's just bad forum moderation.

Actually I'd say it IS a Groundspeak issue. The forum has their name and logo on it, therefore its moderators represent them and Groundspeak need to sort it out if it's giving them a bad name. In exactly the same way that I left my old bank because their credit card division kept mucking me about. The bank tried telling me that the credit cards were dealt with by a different company, but as far as I was concerned the cards had their name and logo on it, therefore it WAS their problem and they should have sorted it out for me.

Sorry, bit of a tangent there, but hopefully it illustrates my point.

[PopUpPirate]

Sorry, was trying to imply it wasn't down to a particular culture :)

[Fatblokecaver]

Im a bit late getting into this thread - my opinion (for what it is worth) is does gc.com have an appeals process this side of the pond? Does the string streach this far?!!!!!!

FBC

[Simply Paul]

Culture? America? America? Culture? But seriously, I have a friend ranting on YouTube at the moment because one of her videos was removed for TOS violations- which didn't violate any logical interpretation of the TOS. Thus it's a universal problem. Some people simply aren't suited to being in positions of power. The temptation to use it is just too strong, even when there's no real need to wield that big stick... It does make you appreciate it all the more when things work as they should though, which is something, right? :(

[jacobite]

It's an American thing to shoot first then to ask questions later. They also like to lock people up for no good reason, but that's getting a little bit off topic.

GSP are just a product of America, and as such what comes naturally is a lot of stupidity and even worse English than me!

I can confirm that my wife (arock&ahardplace), who is American, and who is EX US Forces does take the shoot first, ask questions later approach. Whilst out on a training exercise she had to make a quick judgement call and mistakenly shot her CO in the back with an M16. Now, some might criticize her for this action, personally I just say....................good shot! :applause:

[The Hornet]

I just came across this posting (https://forums.groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?s=&showtopic=201616&view=findpost&p=3611072) by one of the "Super-Mods"

I didn't know whether to laugh or cry at his point Number 2 :mad:

[dodgydaved]

I just came across this posting (https://forums.groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?s=&showtopic=201616&view=findpost&p=3611072) by one of the "Super-Mods"

I didn't know whether to laugh or cry at his point Number 2 :mad:


.........you mean:

"A single volunteer, for example, would not be able to ban someone permanently on a whim."

I thought he recently did:eek::ph34r::ph34r:

[Simply Paul]

It's the "Those who violate the Forum Guidelines are first warned, then temporarily suspended..." bit which isn't ringing true for me. :(

[The Hornet]

It's the "Those who violate the Forum Guidelines are first warned, then temporarily suspended..." bit which isn't ringing true for me. :(
Bingo! - and the existence of an Appeals Process :eek:

[Happy Humphrey]

I was tempted to make a sarcastic post on the Groundspeak thread but then thought better of it...;)

I guess that the miscreants here are trying to impress the Mods and Lackeys over there with their immaculate behaviour so as to avoid getting another 'warning' ;). Which may then risk another ban (I mean 'suspension' ;)) and lead to the instigation of another 'appeal' ;) (also known as temporary ignoring of e-mails).

[keehotee]

When I got banned earlier in the year I received three warnings beforehand - however I didn't know I'd received any warnings because they were sent to the forum inbox, and weren't emailed - and I didn't get any notification that there were new messages waiting - so I merrily carried on doing what I was doing until they finally emailed to say I'd been banned for 7 days.

Oh - and I didn't get the usual email notification to say there were unread messages in my inbox until after I'd been banned.
Is there some admin way to bypass the notification, or fake the sent date of a PM?