Welcome back Stevex6

This is what it says in the Rules -
https://www.cointalk.com/threads/coin-talk-rules.34131/

NOTE - Coin Talk has an infraction system. Break the rules and you may, or may not, based on the moderator's discretion, be given an infraction for rule violations. Infractions carry points, and those points stay with you for a given period of time - again discretionary. Anyone who acquires 10 points is automatically banned from Coin Talk. That ban may stay in effect for a limited period of time, again discretionary, or it may be permanent - meaning you will be banned forever.

That said, 99.9% of the members will never have to worry about this. It's pretty simple, follow our rules and you will never be given an infraction. Typically infractions are only ever given to those who blatantly and/or repeatedly break the rules.

If I understand your comments above you'd like the discretionary aspect to be done away with. But would you really ? You see, if you remove moderator discretion the only thing left is a set punishment for a set period of time for each and every preestablished violation. And quite simply, that's not something that's even possible. For how do you determine what each and every possible violation is ? And then how do you determine what a fitting punishment is for each and every one of those violations ? What you're suggesting is mandatory punishment for given violations. And if you can't even figure out what all the possible violations are then you can't figure out what all the punishments are either.

And, you would also be faced with establishing preset punishment for repeat violations. OK, let's say we do that, how many repeat violations are enough to warrant a permanent ban ? 3, 5, 10, 15 ? Where do you put that number ? How many times do you get to break the rules before somebody say enough, you're done ?

Are you beginning to see the problems involved with what you are suggesting ? And that's not all of them by any means, that is only scratching the surface of what your suggestion presents.

The rules were written the way they are written to allow humanity, fair and impartial judgement, to enter into the equation. To be able to judge each and every occurrence on its own, considering the unique characteristics of each and every circumstance. To be able to say what this guy did is not the same thing as what that guy did because the circumstances are different.

What we do here as moderators and administrators, and yeah I'm one of two administrators, requires, demands, judgement and discretion. For that is the only way there is to be fair and impartial. We do not live in a black and white world, we live in a colored world and there are many, many, shades of color. Each situation is unique and so it must be treated in a unique manner - that requires discretion.

No you don't. But I do. And therefore it is up to me to make decisions - that's my job. And it is not a job that I get paid for, it is a job that I have volunteered to do since the beginning of this forum - going on 15 years now. And over the course of that 15 years I have done the job in the exact same way, treating each and every member fairly and impartially. Also, please understand, that to do that job it's not just a matter of deciding of how to hand out this or that punishment for this or that violation. That's only part of it. The other part is deciding how to best protect the rest of you, all 40,000 plus of you, from those violations committed by the few. And that also requires discretion, and good judgement.

No it isn't and that's the way it has to be. Discretion is mandatory in order to maintain fairness and impartiality.

Over the years I have explained many times in various posts in various sections of the forum and in the Support and Feedback section specifically, how the rules work, how that discretion works. I have explained how in some cases a violation of the rules is treated by simply editing a post, with no written warning, no formal warning, no infractions, no points, no any other kind of punishment administered. In other cases a written warning may be posted, within the thread, saying he don't do that anymore - or something along those lines. In yet other cases a formal warning may be given, that comes in the form of what we call an Infraction. With an infraction a member gets a private message, it is a pre-written canned message, appropriate for the situation at hand, but no points are assigned. However, each warning is recorded and becomes a part of that member's permanent record. Then there is the formal warning that carries points. The number of those points will vary depending on the judgement of the moderator and the situation at hand, each one being unique. There may be 1 point assigned, or 2, and on rare occasions even 3, but almost never more than that. And those points will expire at a given time, the time also being up to the discretion of the moderator. It may be 2 days, it may be a week, 2 weeks, a month, even 3 months. Again it is up to the discretion of the mod and each individual situation. And yes, of course the consequences of repeat offenses of the same violation can be more severe - as they should be. And then there's the very rare occasions where somebody does something that is offensive enough to warrant permanent banning right off the bat. Again, as it should be. But in each and every case discretion is used.

So who judges that discretion exercised by the moderators ? I do. And if I think a moderator made a mistake, in either direction, too severe or not severe enough, then I overrule the moderator and make the correction. But again that is one of those things that happens very, very rarely. Why rarely ? Because I pick the moderators, I teach them, I train them how to do and what to do and when to do - and when not to. And that is something that goes on constantly from the day they are picked. It never ends.

Now I wish to make one other thing perfectly clear. Administration of the forum rules is not something that is based on the popularity and or acceptance of those rules by the membership - meaning all of you. When you sign up, when you register to become a member of this forum you agree to abide the rules and the administration of those rules - just as they are. Put bluntly - you don't have any say in the matter. Whether you like them, or don't like them, doesn't matter at all. They will not be changed because of your opinions.

Think of it like this. When somebody comes to your house, do they get to make up their own rules as to how they will behave themselves while in your house and around your kids and your wife ? Or, do they follow your rules no questions asked ? I'm willing to bet you that in each and every case, with every single one of you, it's going to be they follow your rules - or else. And it will not matter who they are or how much they are liked or disliked by anybody. Period end of story.

Well that's exactly how it is here too.

edit - and for the record, Steve was informed - by me.

 

No I didn't, but I didn't because they have no relevance, cannot have any relevance. Why ? Because if you start making exceptions because - this guy is well liked, because that guy is a Supporter, or because this guy over here has made positive contributions in the past, or any other reason you can possibly think of - then you have removed fairness and impartiality.

I demand of all the moderators, that each and every member of this forum be treated equally. 100% fairness and impartiality. That no leniency be granted - because of how long one has been a member here, because of how old a member is, how young a member is, or who the member is. Everybody is treated exactly the same. And yes that applies to me too. As an example, there are members of this forum are personal friends of mine, people that I have known for 20 years or longer. And when it comes to the rules they get treated just exactly like the guy who joined yesterday. And if you doubt that, post the question and ask it - I'm pretty sure they'll answer you and confirm what I just said.

But this isn't a public resource, this is a privately owned forum, and the owner has the right to establish the rules as he sees fit. This IS his house. And there are only 2 admins - him (Peter T Davis) and me. He and I, and only he and I, decided what the rules would be. And it wasn't done in a single day, it actually took a long time, many discussions to arrive at what we have.

Sorry but that's not gonna happen, for obvious reasons. For one all cases are discretionary, not just some of them, judgement is always applied based on each cases unique situation. And do you think for one second that would happen if the membership played a part in the decision making process ? I can guarantee you it wouldn't. Instead things like popularity and personal likes and dislikes, as well as opinions on what is right or wrong, would be what decisions would be based upon. And that's a double edged sword, it cuts both ways. Not only would popular members be given leniency but unpopular members would be given none and driven out - just because other members didn't like them.

So no, this is not a democracy and members don't get to vote.

I evaluated Steve's case, I am the one who made the decision. Like I said, I review moderator actions. And it was based on sound judgement. And if you, or anyone else, knew all the particulars and specifics, and could base your decision on a completely unbiased and impartial view, I have no doubt your decision would be exactly the same mine was.

 

Sorry but you are not. It's personal and private, and I will no more discuss his business with you than I would discuss yours with anybody else. That is a line I will not cross. Discussions regarding disciplinary actions of specific members are not permitted. Privacy must be maintained.

 

I will add this -





You see that blindfold, it's not there to make a fashion statement or because she thinks it looks good on her.