I'm very sorry

[Kyle Stark]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Here's another thing about last night's deletion. I deleted the thread before I looked at the person posting. I didn't realize until after that it was a "celebrity"

When I did, that's when I made the post linked to above.

[/ QUOTE ]

I call bs on this one. That's utterly impossible.


[/ QUOTE ]

No its not, at all. This site is so huge and topics are always re-worded and beat to death by a million different people it's VERY easy to see just the post and think "oh god not this crap again...DELETE"

[ QUOTE ]

And I don't see why we can't express our dislike for certain poker players here. They want tv time? Then they should get the stuff that comes with having it, the good and the bad.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed 100%. It burns my azz when someone like Toby Maquire is a douche to the espn camera's....but you KNOW he'll be whoring himself out when Seabiscuit 2 comes out.

[davehwm]

[ QUOTE ]
I just reread the post by Paul Phillips (which was reproduced on his own website) that led to his permanent banning on 2+2.

I must say that I am absolutely astonished that he would be permanently sitebanned for that post (or more accurately, for refusing to publicly and privately apologize for making that post). Of course, I do acknowledge (as 2+2 is a private, corporate forum) your absolute right to be as unfair, capricious, or draconian as you choose.

I would also like some clarification or guidance, if you would kindly deign to do so, as to whether such comments or observations by myself and/or others are tolerable or at least permitted.

Thank you very much in advance for your considering my humble question.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you read the thread, you'll see that it was Mat Sklansky that deleted the entire thread. He claims it was an accident and only should have deleted the first post.

May I offer a few suggestions (as a moderator, myself):

1) If there are multiple moderators per forum, there should be a clear understanding as well as open communcation between these moderators as to what is allowed and what is not allowed.

2) Create a moderator's forum where things like this can be discussed.

3) When deleting a post, don't leave (pompous) comments such as "I got at least half a dozen suspensions out of this thread" or "Three more suspensions. Eventually, some of you will get the point". Instead, clearly state who was suspended, and why.

4) Clarify the T&C, perhaps even using examples, so that everyone knows what they will and will not be suspended for. This is especially important since the T&C are now being more "strictly" enforced.

I respect the moderators and owners of this board greatly for their poker skill, but they sure aren't doing a very great job of running a messageboard.

[ThaHero]

I'm pretty shocked by these recent events.

I'm absolutely terrified to post here now, in forums that aren't strategic and I'm giving an opinion on a matter other than raising preflop. I thought I had an understanding of the rules and Terms etc., but it seems they are open to interpretation by the moderator(s) as well. I'm really worried I'm going to be banned for this post as a matter of fact.

I would hope the moderators would start to look at a person's posts on a whole and not just single out one or two and ban that person. Deletion is sometimes warranted, and if bad behavior persists, maybe ban that person. But we have lost quite a few quality posters just because they made some posts that, for the most part, were on the fence as to whether they should be allowed or not.

Hopefully the forum members and moderators can reconcile whatever prompted such a widespread censorship and make things more cut and dry. Hopefully the overall quality of the forums improve as well.

[toots]

Huh.

After a couple years of reading this forum, I have witnessed outright misogynism (comparing notable female players to street walkers and other women of loose virtue), homophobia, continual attacks on the personalities of both name-brand players as well as other posters here, and a continual stream of trolling from a small but vocal subset.

But what Paul said got Paul banned?

Nice.

[zipo]

>>but they sure aren't doing a very great job of running a messageboard.<<

What struck me as odd was the demand to Phillips that he 'apologize privately...and publicly' for his 'transgression', or be permanently banned.

Essentially, this was a demand that he grovel for the privilege of being allowed to post here, where it was extremely difficult to see where his post even remotely violated the posted TOC.

That's what led to my earlier speculation that perhaps there is more going on here behind the scenes than we are all privy to, because on the face of it the 'offense' and the demand for private and public apology seems frankly bizarre.

[mondo]

[ QUOTE ]
Absolutely. In fact they are welcomed. However, if someone presents them in a nasty fashion and then threatens to never post again if any one of their posts is ever deleted, I'm less likely to view the criticism as constructive.

[/ QUOTE ]

Which is in direct response to:
[ QUOTE ]
I haven't followed 2+2 as regularly as I might. When
did every thread in this forum become a
deletion/banning **** swinging contest? This site has
the most brain damaged interface I've ever seen;
instead of actually removing a deleted post they leave
up a placeholder that says "post deleted" with the
obvious result that every thread is hijacked by
pointless metadiscussion. And this fellow dynasty
pours fuel on the fire by boasting about all the
people he's banned.

Whoever's idea this was, you might want to reconsider
your implementation. Or is this post going to
disappear too? I have no idea, but my first deleted
post will be my last.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have edited the 4 letter vernacular above, in fact, this, and this alone, would seem adequate as a moderator "edit". The rest of the PP opinion is rather tame, and certainly below the threshold of deletion, if normalized 2+2 content across all forums is the standard. Additionally, I agree w/ PPs criticism.

[ QUOTE ]
Here's another thing about last night's deletion. I deleted the thread before I looked at the person posting. I didn't realize until after that it was a "celebrity"

When I did, that's when I made the post linked to above.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you deleted the post because of **** ??? Again, a simple edit would have sufficed.

Did PP go out on a limb, with "first post deleted will be my last" ? ...... probably...... Was it likely someone at 2+2 saw this as an opportunity to provoke PP in a knee-jerk reaction to having the forum, and by extension, its moderators criticized ? ...... seems almost certain ......

As you may have noticed, I am not a frequent poster. I am a cross-forum daily reader, and an avid fan of 2+2. I have also had occasion to play w/ PP (seated to his right at '04 WPF for an hour or so), and have found him personable, engaging, and intelligent. I have read many of his posts, and, generally speaking, find them insightful and provocative.

It is an unfortunate decision which has been rendered. 2+2 is a source of information, theoretically. When a quality poster is banned as a direct result of a personal affront, real or imagined, it is time to re-examine the protocol upon which such a decision was based. In short, 2+2 blew the call on this one.

Finally, holding one set of posters to a higher standard than another is feeble. Celebrities, professionals, and other recognizable entities should have an intrinsic desire to portray themselves in a favorable light. Good will is derived through public observation, and judgment. However, should a celebrity "lack" this internal gyroscope, 2+2 should not be an arbiter of discriminatory stature; one set of rules for all participants is sufficient.

Are you really going to push PP underground ? Over a perceived slight ? If so, in my opinion you have done a disservice to the 2+2 community, as a whole.

Respectfully,

mondo

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

Sorry, Mason, but you got this one wrong. There are a number of better ways to deal with the situation. Challenge Paul to make specific suggestions on improving the interface. Actually listen to his complaints and addresses some of the excesses of the moderators.

As it is, you just look petty.

[betgo]

[ QUOTE ]
The quality of this forum improved when moderation of the trolls was stepped up a while back, and I appreciate the effort Dynasty and Mat have put into it.

That said, Paul Phillips was not a troll, and nothing in his deleted post was moderation-worthy (IMO).

Banning him is an even worse decision than (effectively) banning Abdul was.

2+2 will still be the best poker discussion forum on the 'net even with Paul Phillips gone, at least in the short run and probably for the forseeable future.

Just don't ban Barry Greenstein, Gigabet, Fossilman, and MajorKong next. They are all in the same category as Paul Phillips and Abdul Jalib were -- consistently insightful posters whose thoughts are (were) always worth reading. Axe too many of those guys (and similar posters), and everyone else will start to leave as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this. I think Dynasty and Mat are doing an excellent job of improving the quality of this forum and others on this site.

Some people abuse the Internet to post all sorts of insults, obsenity, etc. This forum in particular attracts people who are not good poker players who like to insult and harass "celebrities" they see on TV, and post various other garbage.

It seems, however, that the disagreements with Paul Phillips could be resolved in a less public and confrontational manner. The impression is given that criticism is not acceptable.

Moderators need to keep the real garbage posts out of the forum. However, as the other poster said, the moderation should be as invisible as possible. This has not been the case on this and some other forums.

[MelK]

[ QUOTE ]
Sorry, Mason, but you got this one wrong. There are a number of better ways to deal with the situation. Challenge Paul to make specific suggestions on improving the interface. Actually listen to his complaints and addresses some of the excesses of the moderators.

As it is, you just look petty.

[/ QUOTE ]

There are special laws about attacking the king or queen. It is treason and cause for immediate execution.

Mason and David are our royals here, although I haven't figured out which is the king and which is the queen. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[ohkanada]

I agree.

We need to improve things on 2+2, not ban people for silly reasons.

Ken