BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Underground > Policy & Help >

Building a Case Against a Possible Bad Admin/Mod

  
  

Page: (1)2

 
 
—| x |—
12:06 / 15.09.03
There is some question as to whether or not Haus is a decent and upstanding moderator and administrator. In fact, in another thread, he himself says that perhaps he isn’t suited for the job anymore. Regardless of whether he will decide to relive himself of his duties or not, there still leaves the question of whether or not Haus has currently or in the past, abused his status.

Now, I know that some threads have been locked or deleted on his suggestion. This one was not because I specifically requested it to be left the way it is. Now, although this thread shows merely Haus being an ass and me not feeling too happy about it (and yes, getting a little more bent out of shape than the particular requires; however, as is clear, I do not have a single incident with Haus to gripe about, but this conflict between he and I goes all the way back to two incarnations of the board ago!)& does not supply evidence of unnecessary alteration or deletion, it is v. clear that Haus was v. eager and willing to “resolve” his abuses by altering the contents of the thread—i.e., he appears not to want the “adult” solution of shaking hands and syaing sorry, but rather, he desires to destroy evidence of his “crimes.” Put differently, we can see here an example of a trend of behaviour: resolution through abuse of moderation.

I also know that there have been incidents where portions of threads have been removed, edited, or otherwise altered on his suggestion.

Certainly, the mod process is intended to cope with such abuse, but if you’ve a buddy or two in yer back pocket it ain’t too hard to get around. Leaving this and ideas about possible accomplices aside, who here in this wonderful Litherland has felt that they have been on the receiving end of Haus’ abuse in his role as a moderator & administrator?

Please. Let us be serious about this. Only respond if you feel you’ve a legitimate complaint—personally, I don’t care how long ago it was. Tell your side of the story in as friendly manner as you can, and if the thread is still there, or the thread is there & you have the contents of what it was altered from, please provide all links, saved copies, and such for the an attempt to build a good and fair case agaionst our Mr. Haus.
 
 
Lurid Archive
14:22 / 15.09.03
I really don't want to get involved in this but I think I should comment.

One of my concerns is that a poster who feels they have a grievance should be allowed space in which to air their complaints. Feeling bullied or victimised is something we don't want anyone to feel if we can prevent it. However, feeling bullied in and of itself is insufficient to demonstrate that one is being mistreated.

But let me try to answer some specifics here. First, modog, despite your protestations to the contrary, you don't have a complaint against Haus as a moderator. Editing one's own posts is a general rather than a moderator privilege. Hence there is nothing to answer on that count.

Your accusation boils down to Haus' ability to manipulate other moderators (which he could do equally well as a ordinary member, presumably), thus facilitating his own edits. Here one must be careful, since if we take agreement with Haus as evidence of conspiracy, we are essentially assuming the conclusion.

I'd like to state, as strongly as I can, that I think the idea of Haus having "buddy or two in [his] back pocket" is utterly ridiculous. Also, I think that the threads started by you, modog, sincere in their desperation as they may be, are attempts to goad and insult rather than resolve.

Someone less charitable than myself might conclude that your goal here is to make life so uncomfortable for Haus, that he ceases to be a moderator or perhaps even leaves the board. I hope that is not the case and that you have something more constructive in mind.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
14:26 / 15.09.03
I'd also just like to clarify that some threads have been locked or deleted on his suggestion cannot refer to any of the threads started by yourself in the Conversation in the past 24 hours, since Haus is not a Moderator of that forum.
 
 
Lurid Archive
14:43 / 15.09.03
Actually, Haus is an admin so would be able to propose that threads be locked or deleted on any forum. However, I don't believe he has been online today.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
14:50 / 15.09.03
My error. Well, in the interests of transparency, almost all of those locking/deletion requests in the Conversation were mine. I did state why quite clearly in a couple of the threads themselves.
 
 
Tryphena Absent
15:07 / 15.09.03
Can we leave the current Time to Strike thread up please? I think it raises some issues that we should all probably go over from a lot of posters that stand apart from modog/6opow. Also I think people should be able to see that topic summary.
 
 
6opow
18:26 / 15.09.03
Do you people understand "thread rot." Do you understand "abstracts"? Keep up or keep out suckers.

Lurid, again, I can't thank-you enough for trying to sort through this. Good on you.

"But let me try to answer some specifics here. First, modog, despite your protestations to the contrary, you don't have a complaint against Haus as a moderator. Editing one's own posts is a general rather than a moderator privilege. Hence there is nothing to answer on that count."

This is not quite on the level of what is going on. Like I sadi elsewhere there was the original gripe which did not (and still currently does not) have much to do with Haus' status as admin/mod. Tis is the first complaint: Haus slanders or otherwise abuses me on a regular basis, and did so recently. This is unacceptable behaviour, but no one seems to care--apparently 'cause "that's simply how our dear old Haus is," or some such lame formulation that wouldn't work if you substituted anyone else's name for his. Can you imagine: "It's OK, that's simply the way Andrew is, you'll get use to his insults and what-not shortly enough, or you could always try ignoring him."

That is so ridiculous it makes my elbows hurt!

The second complaint arose from Haus' own suggestion that he might not be mod/admin material anymore. This is about Haus' status as a mod/admin. Now, I myself don't currently have a complaint in this direction, other than I know for a fact that there are those who do have complaints about him, and now, I am trying to round them all up so they can present a solid case against him. The case can then be weighed by the community at large.

The first complaint is immediate. The second complaint is also immediate, but can not be dealt with in the immediate way that the first can. It's simple really, and I don't see why people are having such a difficult time figuring it out.

My goal here is to do whatever it takes to get Haus and his lovely angels to see that Haus is at least equally at fault in many of the conflicts he becomes embroiled in & that sometimes he creates conflict where there wasn't any. This especially occurs in the Headshop where one post from Haus derails a whole thread and turns it into a mud-slinging free for all. That is not to be tolerated from anyone or by anyone, and yet, many tolerate this behaviour from Haus or don't even see him as engaging in it. I don't get it, and I am sick to death of it.

This is a wake up call to some sleepy headed people and their favorite chumpion.
 
 
Tom Coates
20:08 / 15.09.03
Right. I'm going around each of these threads in turn. I'm not going to claim that Haus has never done anything annoying on the board. Nor am I going to suggest that people never suggest a moderation act that perhaps they shouldn't. But let's get something straight - technically the board is heavily stacked in the direction of no change - any and all no votes are immediately considered to be vetos and the action is dropped. The board was built that way precisely so that a equally split decision - or one where there's likely to be any kind of dissent in fact - is unlikely to get pushed through. In practice it's slightly more complex than that, of course - I don't doubt that many moderation acts are passed without being read properly - but then that's not something that can be ascribed to Haus.
 
 
Tom Coates
20:26 / 15.09.03
Oops. I left out my conclusion. Essentially, whatever you believe to be the case about this situation - however much you don't like Haus - essentially however justified you feel in your actions, your current actions are not justified. You are - to put it bluntly - over-reacting. A lot. In public. If you were looking for a way to narrow my options as to how to resolve this situation, then you've basically found it. God knows I'd rather everyone just got along - or were intelligent and sensible enough to be able to resolve disputes between themselves without dragging the whole board into it.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
22:42 / 17.09.03
I would like to address some of these questions, once the mood has cooled down slightly and the trollsuits have been thinned out, but I hope that nobody will think of me as evasive in waiting around a little.
 
 
Seth
06:01 / 18.09.03
It's a wise move to wait it out. And there would probably be people holding misconceptions regardless of what you attempt to do.
 
 
000
16:28 / 18.09.03
Set said something funny! And true.

There will be misconceptions regardless of what anyone does. This board is full of people with misconceptions.

A psychic star child told me this.

I came here to fart in Haus' general direction.

ah, that's better.
 
 
Seth
19:32 / 18.09.03
This board is full of people with misconceptions.

It certainly is. We're all only human, after all.

Apart from him.

Him is here!
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
20:10 / 18.09.03
What, Him? We must battle him.

Battle Him.



Battle Him!
 
 
Seth
20:48 / 18.09.03
I was thinking more....

  
 
Bill Posters
11:32 / 19.09.03
* rerails thread *

Hmmm... Mod3, the use of the word "slander" is all very well, but legally-speaking it would be very, very difficult to prove, at least in its English sense... in Scottish law you'd have a better chance, and as for Canadian law, I know not. But then, this is cyberland, and I have no idea which country's laws would be being broken, and all in all I feel that this might set some awfully unpleasant precidents. Yes, I know this isn't the first time Haus has been threatened with legal action, but even I think that's going a bit far. (However, I will return to the matter of defamation below.)

'Kay, now my main response to this thread is partially x-posted from another thread, but for the sake of completeness, I'm putting it here also. (Oh and I don't think any of the following involved Mod3 at all, though I could be wrong). I will first detail two incidents which lead me to question the use of moderator powers by the man behind the Haus 'suit.

1. Shortly after Xmas, a post of mine was, amongst others, put up for deletion, apparently by Haus, and duely erased, even though it was a serious and (I thought) valid and valuable one. It was in a thread which was being rotted, so to give you (i.e. the feller behind the Haus suit) the benefit of the doubt, you may have just chopped the end of the thread off without reading it all carefully (you may have had a heavy moderation-load, after all). Nevertheless, it concerned me; it felt a bit odd, to say the least. (The topic in question was drinks, of all things, and the post related to how ginger beer is extremely popular amongst people of Carribean background here in London. I'm sorry to say I remember not which forum or thread it was in. Possibly one on the Quibla Cola / Mecca Cola wars in the Switchboard.) Anyway, I thought it had the potential to go somewhere interesting and couldn't see why on earth it was erased like that.

2. Now, this is where things get both more serious, and more complex, and my knowledge of the situation (given that I know not what moderators say to one another in their private, moderating conversations) is far from total. However, around the same time, during a whopping great magickal scrap, certain allegations were made about me and various other male posters. For an individual in my position, the allegations constituted defamation in the English law sense of that term. Nietszch, your personal/magickal integrity was also called into question; I would be amazed if you do not remember. I believe you complained posts were vanishing. Haus mocked you, saying there's little point in claiming that black helicopters were taking posts. I thought that was utterly unfair considering that a moderator had obviously deleted the posts in which we defended ourselves, and for all I know, you Haus may have approved that request (can I safely assume it was not you who actually moved for it in the first place?). It was at that point that the 'Lith became, to me, well, somehow sour, not the same. And, to my shame, I did not bother to complain; if my posts were being deleted anyway, 'what's the point?', I thought to myself, and now I couldn't prove a damn thing. The point is, defamatory allegations were made, and rather than allowing me (and others) a defence, they were swept under the carpet where they continue to fester. (And if anyone thinks I am being precious, there is a legal action in progress by a well-known London mage who was defamed verbally, in a similar fashion, in front of a just few people in a bar, not so long ago, never mind in front of the whole flippin' interwebnet.) Bottom line: a moderator, and one who is no expert in magick and has little or no experience of the 'magickal scene' and it's wretched politics at that, mocking a non-moderator for making supposedly silly claims about black helicopters, IMHO isn't on, even if that particular moderator had no say in, perhaps no knowledge of, the deletion. (And sorry, Nietzsch, to drag you into this. It may not have been you, if not I'm sure you'll say so and I'll stand corrected.)

3. A final question: should moderators be permitted - intentionally or otherwise - to wind posters up until they flip, turn troll and then sit back and watch them get stripped of their moderator status and indeed any other status they had?

I do not think I am being unfair in the above. I also think that you do have ample chance to clear your name, oh man behind Haus, and your personal integrity may still be preserved in aspic for all eternity.
 
 
Dr Doom
12:28 / 19.09.03
Your final point is dead on Bill. Haus and Mod, after the whole PM dust-up recently, were both told to, I quote Haus here, "shut the f*** up and get over it", by Tom no less.

Then last weekend, Haus started a thread basically stating "bwahah! I have discovered that Mod is using more than one suit! Let's get 'im!" Did it seem provocative to anyone else? And then, when Mod declared this was NOT the case; that Haus was wrong, and got rightly irritated, and started his thread or two, it resulted in a massive clique of posters, who seemed to me to not know the full story, descending on him in a self-defeating righteous wrath, and missing the whole point that Mod was trying to make in the first place.

It bothers me. Yes, in this instance, as nearly always, Haus IS being confrontational, and patronizing, as per the norm, but given his history with Mod, and both being told to shut it, you have to question what he was thinking, whether saying sorry to the board afterwards was fair compensation given his previous history of altercations with, amongst others, a troll that almost destroyed the board, (i.e. sexless backpacker), which is an uncanny coincidence to say the least, and whether he is fit to be an administrator full stop. These things, plus Bills questions above, and others accusations and obvious unease with the Haus suit, paint a very poor picture.

As another poster recently pointed out to me, Haus has two suits, both can be seen on the thread below, and, it effectively gives him the ability to edit his posts without anyone else seeing...

http://www.barbelith.com/underground/topic.php?id=12944#post238078

And now people wonder why mod3 is 'trolling' and getting royally pissed off. It's because of the hypocrisy and the insult of having one moderator championed and another unceremoniously removed of his duties and openly condemned by Tom, when he has, imho, a definite case against Haus, and further, a definite right to reply, after Haus started provoking him after the first argument a while ago. I mean, it seems to me that most people don't see that Haus started the recent argument.

But it is early here, and I'm miserable as all hell...
 
 
The Strobe
12:52 / 19.09.03
Yawn.

Haus has had two suits since the days when it was OK, simply because one was (iirc) on his work machine and one on his home machine. He has stopped all use of the other suit, afaik, apart from when he forgets.

However.

Only his primary Haus (reborn and full of hit points) has admin/mod status. The other one is just a user. So he can only edit the posts of Haus about we give each other a lovely huggle. Anything posted under the Haus1 suit needs ANOTHER mod to change, because the other Haus is NOT A MOD. The secondary suit was and is always a "spare", and now that multiple suits are not allowed, Haus does not take it out of the cupboard. He owns it, he does not use it.

As has been pointed out many time, moderators cannot do anything but alter on their own. People's status in a community is altered by the reaction to their behaviour. Mod has behaved in a particular way, and the community reacted. And that's why his status has changed. Haus didn't call him names and we all agree; we all took a good look at what was going on and made our minds up. And, whatever you may think, note that Haus didn't clog the Conversation up with multiple irritating threads and use his board-illegal secondary suit to make his point.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
13:01 / 19.09.03
Then last weekend, Haus started a thread basically stating "bwahah! I have discovered that Mod is using more than one suit! Let's get 'im!" Did it seem provocative to anyone else? And then, when Mod declared this was NOT the case; that Haus was wrong, and got rightly irritated, and started his thread or two, it resulted in a massive clique of posters, who seemed to me to not know the full story, descending on him in a self-defeating righteous wrath, and missing the whole point that Mod was trying to make in the first place.

This is a categorically untrue and wildly distorted version of events, easily dispelled by reading a few threads

A general thread started by Haus on the issue of multiple suits: nowhere does he mention anyone by name in his first post.

A thread started in response, by modog, specifically directed at Haus.

It was after the second of these was locked that modog started a thread in the Conversation designed to continue his feud with Haus. Rothkoid moderated for it to deleted, I agreed (the idea that Rothkoid and I, or Rothkoid and Haus, are in some kind of secret elite is fairly laughable to anyone who's seen some of our past disputes). I was well aware of the previous threads when I agreed to that deletion request, and when I subsequently proposed to delete modog's later 'Fascist' thread etc.
 
 
Tryphena Absent
13:15 / 19.09.03
I think it's fair to point out that Haus would criticise anyone with multiple fictionsuits and so would a significant number of other moderator's. That's what mod's do- follow the generally supported rules of the board. These rules aren't made by some weird dictatorship on planet Lambada, I think that's become clear over the last few days, they tend to grow through practical decision. Moderator's are here for their practical purpose.

Btw Haus' two suits are no secret. The majority of policy readers know about them- you can also look through the member list and they're right there and he's publicly stated that he owns both of them quite a few times over the last two years.
 
 
Dr Doom
13:31 / 19.09.03
Ooh look! Anna and Flyboy are defending Haus! How unusual!

Oh, sorry, I meant how sad.
 
 
We're The Great Old Ones Now
13:39 / 19.09.03
Planet Lambada?

But that is the forbidden planet!
(would you like to know more?)

Several people probably have multiple suits registered from a time when that was still the done thing. I know I do, because Tom teased me about it - but they're 'beyond use'. Haus has two suits for legitimate reasons, as I did when I was travelling and couldn't log into the Nick suit for idiot reasons of my own. Someone, possibly Mod3 (?), had a second suit specifically and purely for magickal purposes. If they used that second suit for anything else, that's a serious breach of trust because the issue was specifically raised at the time.

May I suggest the proverbial big step back? Rather than starting from the assumption that there's a conspiracy or a crime, maybe we should look at the events without making assumptions about what happened, and trace the problem.

Bill, if you keep saying there's been foul play, you're going to be asked to provide really serious evidence and even with the records that will be hard - and your audience will be skeptical. On the other hand, starting from the point of view of seeing what happened and asking how, everyone keeps an open mind, and the mistake can be corrected. At the same time, it opens the possibility of this whole mess providing positive results, rather than a big, ghastly nightmare.
 
 
The Strobe
14:03 / 19.09.03
J, if you're going to pick on people, be a little less abstract. I'm a moderator. I defended Haus too. So maybe you should be a little less specific in your attacks if you want to appear like you have a case rather than a vendetta against a certain group of individuals.
 
 
Dr Doom
14:06 / 19.09.03
OK. My bad. I'll be a good little poster now and be quiet. Nick, go ahead. delete away...
 
 
Dr Doom
14:21 / 19.09.03
Looks like I touched a nerve...

But why move to delete your own post Anna? Why post it in the first place?
 
 
Tryphena Absent
14:38 / 19.09.03
Yeah you touched a nerve. You just accused me of a complete lack of free thought in the most partonising way possible... if that kind of unfounded toss doesn't upset you than there's something wrong with your head. I deleted it because I shouldn't have posted something so irate in the first place.
 
 
grant
15:57 / 19.09.03
Might be a good idea if we actually did a housecleaning of second suits.

So to speak.

On this:
Someone, possibly Mod3 (?), had a second suit specifically and purely for magickal purposes.

I don't think that was Mod3, but ummm velvetvandal? Could be wrong on that. I remember the thread here in Policy specifically discussing whether the suit was kosher.
 
 
Jack Fear
16:12 / 19.09.03
J:

I'll be blunt: your recent contributions exemplify the sort of accusing-without-outright-accusing bullshit that I (for one) find so goddam infuriating in this recent brouhaha.

It's obnoxious, it's poisonous, and it is not at all helpful.

No one is suggestinbg that you just "shut up and be a good little poster." What is being suggested is that if you have the courage of your convictions and you think you've got a legitimate gripe, then lay it out in a clear, unambiguous, and non-inflammatory manner.

Sniping from the sidelines is not helpful: and for the record, it pisses me off when Haus does it, too.
 
 
We're The Great Old Ones Now
17:06 / 19.09.03
For the record, I asked J to agree to deletion of this post in a (now deleted) oneliner - one of those "let's just rewind the tape" jobs. Hence this. Sadly, J hasn't put the post up for deletion as agreed - presmably either because ze believes I'm a moderator, and hence able to propose the action myself, or because others - including, alas, Anna - have now seen the original post. Which is a shame.

May I suggest as an alternative to the deletion of this side-row - which would now be a considerable undertaking, and vanish great chunks of the thread - that we acknowledge the goodwill implied by the agreement to my initial suggestion, and assume that J will offer Anna a private apology of some sort. Otherwise this thread will degenerate sharply - which would be a shame, because there's some important, if not enjoyable, discussion taking place.
 
 
Dr Doom
17:12 / 19.09.03
I don't see that the thread has to degenerate. I was trying to offer my own unfettered thoughts on this issue.

And I doubt I'll be offering Anna an apology anytime in my immediate lifespan...
 
 
We're The Great Old Ones Now
17:24 / 19.09.03
Oh, great.

Well, since we're obviously going to have to do this, please explain to me why you did not, as agreed, delete your own post?
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
00:21 / 20.09.03
A note - "Dr. Doom", "J" or any other name for suit 992 is the sexless backpacker, having been given a suit most likely by one of our Canadian members. See here for more details. I imagine that the suit has probably been confiscated by now.
 
 
Spatula Clarke
01:10 / 20.09.03
I'd have to suggest that accusing anyone of providing Andrew with a suit is one of the less helpful things to say at the moment.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
08:44 / 20.09.03
Dude, talk to Tom. It is possible, though, that the suit was taken without consent and driven away, and we should probably hope that this is the case.
 
 
Tom Coates
09:22 / 20.09.03
Whether it's Andrew or not is irrelevant. All that it is safe to say is that the person who posted in February 2002 is unlikely to be the same person who is posting now. Which means the current poster got the suit from somewhere and has no demonstrable history on the board whatsoever, and has just appeared magically calling people names and pointing fingers. For these reasons I'm not going to pay any attention to it, and I advise no one else to either.
 
  

Page: (1)2

 
  
Add Your Reply