BR Forum Feedback

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Post Reply
ldev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2616
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by ldev »

I would suggest that if a moderator is participating with full gusto in a lively back and forth on a particular topic and if a poster then posts something that goes against forum rules, that particular moderator who is participating should not be in a position to ban that poster i.e. you should not be judge, jury and executioner. Otherwise the impression is created that the poster was banned for posting something that is not in agreement with that moderator's personal viewpoint. And it should be clear as to which moderator has banned that poster. i.e. justice should be done and seen to be done as well.

Anyway BRF is a private forum and can make up it's rules as it sees fit.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20772
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by Karan M »

maitya wrote:Rakeshji, I see plethora of posters making multitude of allegations that they are unable to prove, albeit those are made against desi-kalluram-infested orgs, striving to deliver desi products, only to be rebuffed by the merry-go-round of "tests", to ensure gora-TFTA products get a chance to be inducted.

I can understand everybody has their biases (political and idealogical ones as well), and those yielding admin powers are no exceptions - plus of course, BRF is a private entity, with membership rules defined and executed by that private entity etc etc - but a modicum of balance is called for, isn't it?

Anyway, without naming anybody, let me point out, another poster was recently asked to go for being vocal in support of indigenous products - so, is a decison being taken, that since the idea of true-atmanirbharata has taken roots amongst quite a few here despite the striped-label-worshipping types here, time to weed-out of these as many as possible, and maintain this newly-defined "BR values" - is it?
Maitya, not Rakesh here, but allow me the liberty of responding.

Its not generally a moderation policy to explain individual moderator actions. However, we've gone ahead trying to explain things on a case to case basis so let me make the effort in this one too just so that your concerns are assuaged.

The poster in question was not let go for supporting indigenous programs. It was precisely because of his support for indigenous programs, his personal history and passion (however over the top his responses), that he was given so much of leeway despite oft making inflammatory posts attacking other members points of views (often without evidence). You would not believe the number of complaints that those responses generated and no, it was not some cabal out to target a pro indigenization advocate. Just general guys like all of us who would be irritated at the forces, GOI being called corrupt without evidence. The last part is the clincher. For instance, if there was true evidence of a scam, you will not see any of us censor it. However in a casual debate throwing out allegations of incompetence, corruption etc whilst being light on actual facts is not acceptable.

In fact multiple BRF members of the mod team who have reduced their contribution cited that individuals intemperate and frequent outbursts against the AF, GOI for their decision and stated this was an example of how the moderators were not up to the task, were biased etc. Yet, we continued to try and give him and many other members a "soft landing" hoping they'd moderate their posting style and be more collegial.

Let's be clear here - we support atmanirbharta, to the extent that unless forum rules are routinely violated we encourage people to understand and support why indigenization is the only long term, and viable path forward. Personally speaking, I am completely and idealogically supportive of this. I am sure literally all of the moderation team is likewise including our mbers of the veteran community. You will not find a single person in the mod team saying "let's drop local, we want imports".

However we all know that due to a bunch of reasons there will be an occasional import. This cannot be automatically ascribed to corruption. For instance say the Rafale comes with capability the IAF doesnt have elsewhere.

By all means, contest that by pointing out how the money could have been better used for upgrades, accelerating indigenous programs etc. I've also pointed that out inasmuch we have to abide by the decision of the IAF, GOI.

What is not acceptable however is saying look the "corrupt so and so's did this, they should have just bought 1999 Kirans at the price and swarmed the PAF". If these are the kind of arguments made, do you seriously think this adds to the quality of the forum? It doesn't. It actually makes the rest of us who want indigenization at all costs (albeit without combat capability dipping), also end up being messaged as being equally confused, and the forum being a chai ka adda.

In this members case, multiple moderators - must be a true record, intervened to ask that poster to tone down. In discussion after discussion, he very angrily rebuffed their suggestions, ensuring even the moderators who were seeking to assist him by steering him out of trouble finally said "dude, enough". I suggest you look at Ramanaji's last interaction with him to see a classic case of that in action. You can see me, Rakesh literally multiple other mods giving up as well.

Finally a cooling off period, not a permanent ban, was imposed. If the gent in question chooses to make his return acrimonious again, he would be forcing the moderator teams hands. That's the precise problem we are confronted with, when a short duration ban is imposed and the individual comes back even angrier seeking to score points.

It is anything but being against atmanirbharta, this forum remains strongly committed to India making and inducting indigenous weapons, have no doubts on that score.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20772
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by Karan M »

ldev wrote:I would suggest that if a moderator is participating with full gusto in a lively back and forth on a particular topic and if a poster then posts something that goes against forum rules, that particular moderator who is participating should not be in a position to ban that poster i.e. you should not be judge, jury and executioner. Otherwise the impression is created that the poster was banned for posting something that is not in agreement with that moderator's personal viewpoint. And it should be clear as to which moderator has banned that poster. i.e. justice should be done and seen to be done as well.

Anyway BRF is a private forum and can make up it's rules as it sees fit.
Hi Ldev,

The reason this is not possible is because the moderation team can only have a limited number of mods active, in terms of those with specific interests aligned to a specific topic, and this is after the Mod team has already been expanded significantly. It's hence not possible in the practical sense to have one set of mods participating, another set of mods to then act as mods for that thread etc.

Yes, you have a valid point regarding the fact a mod is accused of bias and so forth, it unfortunately comes with the role. Yet, we engage with the members to explain the issue.

Also which mod has banned whom is not really germane and is deliberately not done out to ensure MOD-member acrimony doesn't take root. Nobody is out to "get" one member. As SSridhar has pointed out Moderator decisions are discussed amongst the wider team and multiple viewpoints heard.

Plus its very dynamic, mods have intervened in threads to cool them down, left that thread, the thread still catches on fire. Based on the previous mods feedback the second mod or third mod who comes thereafter takes action. You'd then walk around thinking the third mod dislikes you. It's anything but. So to avoid such personalization of admin decisions, it makes little sense to say "So and so has banned xyz".

You guys literally may have no idea that same guy who gave the ban may have been asking for a short term ban for the specific posters in question, by taking the effort to analyse their posting record, thinking only a short duration ban was sufficient and instead he will get attacked by the very posters he was seeking to protect from their one off or whatever hot headed actions.
k prasad
BRFite
Posts: 962
Joined: 21 Oct 2007 17:38
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow
Contact:

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by k prasad »

Karan M wrote: Hi KP hope your PhD is going well and welcome back to the forum. Missed your detailed AI reports!
Thanks Karan-ji... It's going well. A large part of my going into radar-research was the amount of interest and knowledge I gained as a poster in BRF, so big thanks to BRF for that. Sadly, this has meant that I've not been able to visit AI or IRSI in a long time.
I understand your point about being clear with which rule was broken. AFAIK - though I don't remember what was the issue that led to your temp ban, and will not second guess it, moderators do specify why they did impose a ban.
My temp ban was fair... I got a 1-week ban for asking what rule was broken by another poster that warranted their ban (because I was truly confused), but I can see how that came off as questioning the mods. I think Rakesh or SSridhar gave a good explanation in reply, so no hard feelings.

One of the big reasons why ban periods appear longer now is IMHO purely because of the fact moderators wait and wait and only take action when they are pushed to do so. Its often that the individual in question has accumulated such a "history" that moderators finally think enough, please.

Yet that action merely because its not frequent tends to gather a lot of attention. For instance members who've been given a lot of leeway and have abused it may receive a long duration one.
You are right... Often we as posters don't see the earlier warnings or leeway given to a poster before the ban. So when the ban happens, it feels like a football match where a player is warned and given a yellow card for dangerous tackles but sent off for something faaar less egregious. It's simultaneously fair, but appears knee-jerk to those not in the know. I suspect this is part of the reason for the comments here. Whether that requires a change in approach and if so, how, I leave it to the mods wisdom. I'm just happy to lurk and post occasionally, and hope to read more posts by knowledgeable people about topics that I'm interested in :-)
Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17167
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by Rahul M »

What posters dont get to see but mods do is the full history of unacceptable posts by a member, and belive me some of it is glorious, as n^3 would say. :D
so, sometimes you might feel someone has been banned for some minor issue but it's likely the last straw that broke the proverbial camel's back. and believe me, major mod decisions are almost always debated by the team in torabora cave complex before implementation. It's not one mod going gung-ho with his ban hammer.
ldev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2616
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by ldev »

Karan M wrote: Hi Ldev,

The reason this is not possible is because the moderation team can only have a limited number of mods active, in terms of those with specific interests aligned to a specific topic, and this is after the Mod team has already been expanded significantly. It's hence not possible in the practical sense to have one set of mods participating, another set of mods to then act as mods for that thread etc.

Yes, you have a valid point regarding the fact a mod is accused of bias and so forth, it unfortunately comes with the role. Yet, we engage with the members to explain the issue.

Also which mod has banned whom is not really germane and is deliberately not done out to ensure MOD-member acrimony doesn't take root. Nobody is out to "get" one member. As SSridhar has pointed out Moderator decisions are discussed amongst the wider team and multiple viewpoints heard.

Plus its very dynamic, mods have intervened in threads to cool them down, left that thread, the thread still catches on fire. Based on the previous mods feedback the second mod or third mod who comes thereafter takes action. You'd then walk around thinking the third mod dislikes you. It's anything but. So to avoid such personalization of admin decisions, it makes little sense to say "So and so has banned xyz".

You guys literally may have no idea that same guy who gave the ban may have been asking for a short term ban for the specific posters in question, by taking the effort to analyse their posting record, thinking only a short duration ban was sufficient and instead he will get attacked by the very posters he was seeking to protect from their one off or whatever hot headed actions.
I really do not want to hash this topic anymore but am compelled to point out that in this specific instance the post that got Mort Walker banned was responded to by you at 00.40 on December 28 and you correctly pointed out that there was no basis for the allegations of corruption etc in his post and you left it at that - correctly in my view. 17 minutes later Rakesh quoted that same post by Mort Walker and banned him for 1 month. Clearly you and Rakesh had different thresholds in what constituted unacceptable posting and triggered a ban. However in the last couple of days prior to that Mort Walker had been extolling the virtues of US radars and even Indian radars vs the S-400 in particular and European radars in general. I was a participant in that fairly acrimonious discussion. Irrespective of the merits of each of those radars, the appearance is that Mort was penalized for holding a view contrary to that held by Rakesh on the radar discussion and while he may have survived that encounter, the axe fell on him at the first available opportunity thereafter. Now this may or may not be what actually happened but this is at least my perception of it.

I appreciate that what you guys do as moderators is a very difficult job but unless different viewpoints are allowed to be expressed this will become an echo chamber.

Anyway, my last on this. Thanks.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20772
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by Karan M »

ldev wrote: I really do not want to hash this topic anymore but am compelled to point out that in this specific instance the post that got Mort Walker banned was responded to by you at 00.40 on December 28 and you correctly pointed out that there was no basis for the allegations of corruption etc in his post and you left it at that - correctly in my view. 17 minutes later Rakesh quoted that same post by Mort Walker and banned him for 1 month. Clearly you and Rakesh had different thresholds in what constituted unacceptable posting and triggered a ban. However in the last couple of days prior to that Mort Walker had been extolling the virtues of US radars and even Indian radars vs the S-400 in particular and European radars in general. I was a participant in that fairly acrimonious discussion. Irrespective of the merits of each of those radars, the appearance is that Mort was penalized for holding a view contrary to that held by Rakesh on the radar discussion and while he may have survived that encounter, the axe fell on him at the first available opportunity thereafter. Now this may or may not be what actually happened but this is at least my perception of it.

I appreciate that what you guys do as moderators is a very difficult job but unless different viewpoints are allowed to be expressed this will become an echo chamber.

Anyway, my last on this. Thanks.
Ldev, I often surf BRF from a mobile device. As such if I know another mod is on the thread with full access to all the board functions, I might well let the other mod handle the administrative action, lest I screw things up. Simple explanation for "how come two mods are there on one thread" whereas one did something and the other didn't. My immediate reaction was look I made a post, the other guy quoted it and seems to have misunderstood what I said, let me clarify lest I don't get misconstrued, I'll return later to the topic when I can. Rakesh was online though and stepped in. This is the trust factor, mods expect other mods to manage stuff they'd overlook.

This is a perfect example of what I was mentioning earlier as to why its important you guys don't associate mod action with one mod and not the other or a group vs another group. It just makes you guys overthink the issue.

Suffice to say as other mods have repeatedly mentioned, Rakesh discussed the issue with other available mods at the time and was hence well within his bounds to take action. There is a quorum where he can raise these issues and he did. I wasn't online but other mods were and they'd have voiced their feedback if they thought so. The systems been set up for ages.

For the record, I, Hnair and so have several other mods posted repeatedly on this forum that please don't accuse the services or GOI of corruption without tangible proof. That's literally a mod request. Rakesh has in that sense only implemented what is an open and stated public policy which we've all been requesting members to steer by. This is also an example of how the leeway we give ends up affecting us. We don't hand out bans liberally but rely on notices and warnings. However when action is taken, it ends up being perceived as being arbitrary.

Anyhow, the ban is temporary and Mort is welcome back to the discussion. We only ask that members rejoin the forum with a cool head and don't take things too personally. Long time members with a long history of mostly productive posts (bar the occasional snafu) are treated with consideration as Mort was.

Any member is free to extol different viewpoints but as we've repeatedly stressed. Please bring accurate and factual data to buttress your statements and also evidence.

A forum called bharat rakshak can't hope to live up that name it keeps accusing bharat rakshaks of malafide intentions without evidence. That's a key thing we are concerned about.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20772
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by Karan M »

k prasad wrote:
Karan M wrote: Hi KP hope your PhD is going well and welcome back to the forum. Missed your detailed AI reports!
Thanks Karan-ji... It's going well. A large part of my going into radar-research was the amount of interest and knowledge I gained as a poster in BRF, so big thanks to BRF for that. Sadly, this has meant that I've not been able to visit AI or IRSI in a long time.
This is wonderful news and a great example of how you've used the forum to enrich your skills. Kudos. Wish you the best and if you are abroad I hope you can return to join the desi effort (though of course the decision is yours and you are the best judge of that). Once again, excellent stuff.
I understand your point about being clear with which rule was broken. AFAIK - though I don't remember what was the issue that led to your temp ban, and will not second guess it, moderators do specify why they did impose a ban.
My temp ban was fair... I got a 1-week ban for asking what rule was broken by another poster that warranted their ban (because I was truly confused), but I can see how that came off as questioning the mods. I think Rakesh or SSridhar gave a good explanation in reply, so no hard feelings.
Thanks for being open minded about the whole issue and seeing the other side. I am but a recent mod but I know bans of any sort are not at all welcome, so it's not easy to wear an objective hat so to speak. I can also assure you though that none of the mods would have made the decision out of any predecided notion against you.
One of the big reasons why ban periods appear longer now is IMHO purely because of the fact moderators wait and wait and only take action when they are pushed to do so. Its often that the individual in question has accumulated such a "history" that moderators finally think enough, please.

Yet that action merely because its not frequent tends to gather a lot of attention. For instance members who've been given a lot of leeway and have abused it may receive a long duration one.
You are right... Often we as posters don't see the earlier warnings or leeway given to a poster before the ban. So when the ban happens, it feels like a football match where a player is warned and given a yellow card for dangerous tackles but sent off for something faaar less egregious. It's simultaneously fair, but appears knee-jerk to those not in the know. I suspect this is part of the reason for the comments here. Whether that requires a change in approach and if so, how, I leave it to the mods wisdom. I'm just happy to lurk and post occasionally, and hope to read more posts by knowledgeable people about topics that I'm interested in :-)
Yes that's the thing. Rahul M has addressed this point so I won't belabour it.
k prasad
BRFite
Posts: 962
Joined: 21 Oct 2007 17:38
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow
Contact:

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by k prasad »

Karan M wrote: This is wonderful news and a great example of how you've used the forum to enrich your skills. Kudos. Wish you the best and if you are abroad I hope you can return to join the desi effort (though of course the decision is yours and you are the best judge of that). Once again, excellent stuff.
Hopefully... without saying much more, I'll just say that I've been close to the ground on a lot of the developments in desi defence, and I'm still a little wary about how things stand in terms of support for private defense initiatives. Tonbo Imaging's experience comes to mind. Hopefully, in a few years, things will be different.
Vayutuvan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12060
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 04:36

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by Vayutuvan »

Karan M wrote:This is why we request the forum members to report offensive posts as versus relying on themselves to police offensive viewpoints.
Question: Can forum members report offensive posts by a moderator? Thanks.
Bala Vignesh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2131
Joined: 30 Apr 2009 02:02
Location: Standing at the edge of the cliff
Contact:

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by Bala Vignesh »

Vayutuvan wrote:
Karan M wrote:This is why we request the forum members to report offensive posts as versus relying on themselves to police offensive viewpoints.
Question: Can forum members report offensive posts by a moderator? Thanks.
Yes we can!! The button with the exclamation mark icon is the report post button..
Vayutuvan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12060
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 04:36

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by Vayutuvan »

Bala Vignesh wrote: Yes we can!! The button with the exclamation mark icon is the report post button..
Thanks. But what would be the aftereffects? Retribution? Outing the fact that the reporting poster reported a mod? Do mods are pulled up by other mods or sent on vana vaasa? None of these are transparent. It does leave people with a certain amount of trepidation to post on BRF.
Bala Vignesh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2131
Joined: 30 Apr 2009 02:02
Location: Standing at the edge of the cliff
Contact:

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by Bala Vignesh »

Its sent only to the mods as a message and not visible to anyone else. As far as retribution go, I have never faced flak from anyone for reporting the posts, as long as it's appropriate.
Vayutuvan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12060
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 04:36

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by Vayutuvan »

Actions on non-admins are there for all to see unlike the opaqueness of admins being pulled up by senior admins.

That unsymmetry can be corrected by simply banning a poster for whatever time or even permanently by telling the offending poster in a private message.

Karan ji already said mods are not infallible nor are they bias free. just like no commoner poster is indispensable, mods also are not indispensable.

(Edited by me. For the record with apologies to Karan Ji)

Ultimately it boils down to a question of trust and the belief that mods are wise.

if that trust is broken, posters will look for explanations and speculate. That speculation happens either among friends through private messages outside BRF or even publicly in bogs and other forums.

I, for one, am a supporter of self-restraint both on the part of admins and everybody else.

Since none of the admins are chiming in, I would not like to drag this on.
Last edited by Vayutuvan on 04 Jan 2022 03:38, edited 1 time in total.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20772
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by Karan M »

Vayutuvan wrote:Actions on non-admins are there for all to see unlike the opaqueness of admins being pulled up by senior admins.
When and where has this occurred? What exactly are you referring to? Which admin got pulled up where? Not even sure what is being brought into the discussion here and in what context. The moderators operate in unison. There are no cliques or groups competing etc. No such drama.
Karan ji already said mods are not infallible nor are they bias free. just like no commoner poster is indispensable, mods also are not indispensable.
When have I said the former. I read this, and was like what?? I have not said this, and nor is anything that I have said, remotely intended to imply the above interpretation either.

Let me be clear, so this time around I am not misunderstood or your post is taken as gospel. The only thing I *have* said, is that mods generally support localization of defence equipment. But it's contextual. It's hardly unthinking "bias" - it's a considered thoughtful position based on India's warfighting and strategic, industrial needs. And nor is there any retribution against members who don't share this view. At best, we attempt to educate.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20772
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by Karan M »

Vayutuvan wrote:
Bala Vignesh wrote: Yes we can!! The button with the exclamation mark icon is the report post button..
Thanks. But what would be the aftereffects? Retribution? Outing the fact that the reporting poster reported a mod? Do mods are pulled up by other mods or sent on vana vaasa? None of these are transparent. It does leave people with a certain amount of trepidation to post on BRF.
There is no retribution - the mods don't care about any one poster nor are they waiting to get even etc.

If you disagree with a mod decision or wish to report a post, do so using the report message button. Make your case politely and dispassionately. Please dont personalize the issue unless you must. It could be the moderator whom you thought had an axe to grind against you didn't undertake the action. Plus, it detracts from the point of your message.

Also, please be aware that you are bringing up the issue to a wider number of people who will see the message. If anyone has personal issues with one mod, a prior spat etc., please don't use the post report button as a way of getting even, it is pointless and will be seen through by the wider team.

Also, if anyone has a long track record of insubordination vs multiple mods, that will also be taken into account.

Once again - I encourage people to look out for the "soft signs" - if your posts are being deleted or "poofed", don't get upset at the tired mod saving you from admin action by cleaning up on your behalf. I've again and again seen people picking up fights over this, and literally ensuring they precipitate the very thing the mod was literally protecting them from. For instance, some members get carried away (general comment, not referring to VT here) and usually, when in a heated argument with a mod or other members, start using offensive terms, sarcasm, below the belt comments. The other member may respond as is (an unwise move), or report the comments (correct thing to do). The mod, depending on the context, might choose to be extra kind (again contextual) and delete the message and post a general caution to the poster. The sane thing to do here is accept the misbehavior and stop picking a fight. The mod has given the poster a way out. Take it and return later with a cool head. Also, don't make this a habit. If the mod sees one has a habit of making hit and run posts, counting on a mass delete action, then other mods will know about it over time.

So by any means, don't count on the above either as being always the case. BRF's stated policy was to have regular, effective moderation, warnings/bans etc. If the policy is now generally followed, again, something the mod team may well choose to implement, you will see far more warnings and bans. Rather than the above, "soft caution" via deletes etc. Please be aware/prepared for this. Again. Not a comment on you/any specific member, making a general point.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20772
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by Karan M »

k prasad wrote:
Karan M wrote: This is wonderful news and a great example of how you've used the forum to enrich your skills. Kudos. Wish you the best and if you are abroad I hope you can return to join the desi effort (though of course the decision is yours and you are the best judge of that). Once again, excellent stuff.
Hopefully... without saying much more, I'll just say that I've been close to the ground on a lot of the developments in desi defence, and I'm still a little wary about how things stand in terms of support for private defense initiatives. Tonbo Imaging's experience comes to mind. Hopefully, in a few years, things will be different.
Things are changing for the better and in a huge way. This GOI has now earmarked 60% and above for local procurement this year alone. As a result, many players including start ups looking for a breakthrough got one. My concerns are that even so, we should increase the overall budget levels (accelerate modernisation, bring up declining force levels) and fund breakthrough programs (jet engine, IISc fab etc which can't be put in the same framework as regular procurement) but policy wise a lot of positives have been done. IMHO Tonbo's issues are not the only story out there. Many other players are doing pretty well.

https://theprint.in/defence/make-in-ind ... rs/609818/
Vayutuvan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12060
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 04:36

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by Vayutuvan »

Karan M wrote:
Vayutuvan wrote:Actions on non-admins are there for all to see unlike the opaqueness of admins being pulled up by senior admins.
When and where has this occurred? What exactly are you referring to? Which admin got pulled up where?
I didn't construct the sentence well. So let me reword that into a question after a statement of fact.

Fact: Everybody is able to see that a poster got warned and then banned. If it is a temporary ban, the poster comes back and viewed by everyone as a "troublemaker", not just by admins only. That poster does not have a status quo antebellum.

Fact: Let us say an admin was reported. But no one (other than the admins) see whether any action was taken or not. If action was take, the admin has status quo ante after their return.

How can this asymmetry be corrected?

There are two ways to do that.

1. Banning is done by a handle, say "GentlemanCadet" or "Admin".
2. Better still, a generic handle "Admin" sends a private message to the poster explaining why the warning/ban.

Is the intent to publicly shame a poster? In that case, is it not fair to publicly shame an Admin as well?

One more question:

Is there a policy in place to prevent admins "outing" the fact that a particular poster has reported an admin's post?

Probably a little bit of circumspection is called for.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20772
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by Karan M »

I am not sure whether a poster is always outed as having been warned or banned. This is usually the case when a poster has been particularly disruptive and hence the forum is generally informed that the poster has been sent out. So AFAIK, not all warnings are public but permabans usually are, because the mod team usually makes it a point to state this.

There is no intent to publicly shame anyone as a matter of policy. Let me make a comment here - we count on a member's maturity and their ability to conduct themselves here with the same dignity and gravitas they would do IRL and if not, at least within the forum rules and bounds of reason. We get nothing out of mocking or shaming anyone. It is not what we do or what we wish to do.

Even if you received a general ban from an anon admin handle - it would still mean one admin undertook the action. If its publicly reported, it would still make the member unhappy. Not sure how it helps.

The only reason an individual is publicly mentioned as having received a warning is if the moderator sees that his prior comments to avoid the same are ignored or the poster has said something particularly obnoxious or inflammatory (per the mod's opinion/forum rules/discussion context).

The board software clearly shows who has reported what and which post. The moderators routinely see posts being reported and act on it, but don't make a hue and cry about it either. We use soft cautions where possible, warnings and bans only when necessary.

Trust me, moderators have lives of their own (as you do) and in these testing times, we don't want to add to your (or our) troubles by going after or keeping track of some online bête noire. We just want to be as even-handed as possible and keep the forum, an interesting, lively and learning place wherein we discuss matters of mutual interest. The fact that you sought it out and are posting here automatically means "one of us" (mod or no mod). We are a self-selected group of like-minded individuals (with an interest in a strong India) for the most part and so that does count.
Vayutuvan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12060
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 04:36

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by Vayutuvan »

Karan M wrote: ... The only reason an individual is publicly mentioned as having received a warning is if the moderator sees that his prior comments to avoid the same are ignored or the poster has said something particularly obnoxious or inflammatory.
Fair enough. Would you wish to address the other question which I had in my post? Let me repeat it below.

Is there a policy in place to prevent admins "outing" the fact that a particular poster has reported an admin's post?

If it is not, I request the admin team to consider putting such a policy in place.
Last edited by Vayutuvan on 04 Jan 2022 04:13, edited 1 time in total.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20772
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by Karan M »

Vayutuvan wrote:
Karan M wrote: ... The only reason an individual is publicly mentioned as having received a warning is if the moderator sees that his prior comments to avoid the same are ignored or the poster has said something particularly obnoxious or inflammatory.
Fair enough. Would wish you address the other question which I had in my post? Let me repeat it below.

Is there a policy in place to prevent admins "outing" the fact that a particular poster has reported an admin's post?

If it is not, I request the admin team to consider putting such a policy in place.
I addressed this already.
The board software clearly shows who has reported what and which post. The moderators routinely see posts being reported and act on it, but don't make a hue and cry about it either. We use soft cautions where possible, warnings and bans only when necessary.
If you are worried that an admin will come on the forum and point out a poster has reported an admin's post - why will they? To what end. At least, so far, I haven't seen any admin do this. It seems very hypothetical with unclear motives/benefits for anyone to do this (for all concerned, nobody truly benefits, so why would anyone do this).
hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4633
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by hnair »

Vayutuvan wrote: Fact: Let us say an admin was reported. But no one (other than the admins) see whether any action was taken or not. If action was take, the admin has status quo ante after their return.

How can this asymmetry be corrected?
If an admin gets reported, there might be a discussion among admins if the situation warrants and a consensus reached about future course of action in such a situation by all admins. Again, only if needed. 99% of the time, those reporting on an admin are repeat offenders who don’t like to be shown up as offenders by an admin or is taking their infallibility too seriously.

Since there is no asymmetry in all this, there will be no corrections.

As Karan M mentioned, what an individual posters say won’t matter, but if you have a history of notes against your profile and you catch an admin’s eye, it will lead to closer scrutiny of the notes, recent posts and any disruptive patterns that emerge.

K prasad, I looked at your history and it was me who gave a temp ban for posting something from an ISPR source during the height of Galwan tensions. Usually it won’t be cause for action, but forum also was in a state of alert since we get lots of eyeballs during crisis times (we had 600 plus “guests” on some interesting days). Just clarifying that it is not for the reason you mentioned above
Vayutuvan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12060
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 04:36

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by Vayutuvan »

Karan M wrote: At least, so far, I haven't seen any admin do this. It seems very hypothetical with unclear motives/benefits for anyone to do this (for all concerned, nobody truly benefits, so why would anyone do this).
Poster Amber G reported an admin and another admin outed that fact. To what end?
Vayutuvan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12060
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 04:36

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by Vayutuvan »

hnair wrote:Since there is no asymmetry in all this, there will be no corrections.
I disagree. So let us agree to disagree. I am moving on.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20772
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by Karan M »

Vayutuvan wrote:
Karan M wrote: At least, so far, I haven't seen any admin do this. It seems very hypothetical with unclear motives/benefits for anyone to do this (for all concerned, nobody truly benefits, so why would anyone do this).
Poster Amber G reported an admin and another admin outed that fact. To what end?
If this has occurred, then the issue was a repeat one, wherein admins are often accused, and a complaint is personalized. And time and again, the admins have seen there is no merit to those allegations. And the admin "outing" or rather publicly reporting this more or less states that the admins are aware of this behavior on the individuals part. In short, its "please change, enough".

I'd thought this issue would be hypothetical given most people should know better than to troll admins on the board over an extended periods of time. But if they continue to persist in aggravating behavior, the moderator will call them out.

Remember, moderators are well aware of a posters long term track record. We balance it against the value they bring with their posts but you should not expect the moderators to condone aggravating behavior.
hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4633
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by hnair »

Vayutuvan wrote: Poster Amber G reported an admin and another admin outed that fact. To what end?
That would be me and here is my original post on why that was done as an exception (usually it is as Karan M says - we don’t bother):

Link

And usage of words like “outing” does not spine up your alleged grievances. I had put a warning that is visible in the original post, which is as per admin guidelines. That is what all admins do
Suraj
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15043
Joined: 20 Jan 2002 12:31

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by Suraj »

Vayutuvan wrote:
Karan M wrote: At least, so far, I haven't seen any admin do this. It seems very hypothetical with unclear motives/benefits for anyone to do this (for all concerned, nobody truly benefits, so why would anyone do this).
Poster Amber G reported an admin and another admin outed that fact. To what end?
Hnair has already answered this. I deleted around dozen posts that were off topic - a lot of it idle chatter around personal familiarity with an Indian American CEO recently in the news. No one was warned, no one was banned.

In response, the poster in question reported me for deleting posts. I've never read that post report - it was handled by another mod, hnair, who discussed it with other mods, who did not like the attempt to pit one mod against another, and the poster was warned for it. During all that time, I'd been away from forum anyway.

The premise of moderation is misunderstood at times. The goal is to keep the forum content in shape first, and focus on the posters second. Not the other way around. When a thread is off topic or turning hot and a mod does a flag march, it is in posters' best interests to take heed. If you don't like that posts were deleted, sure report it, or post here.

Almost all post reports against mods are about posters not liking a particular mod action, not the mod posting as a poster. As far as I am concerned, I close almost all these reports with no action, including against the reporter. Mods are not interested in second guessing each others actions - they're mods because they've demonstrated the ability to manage moderation work. However, one essentially guaranteed way to face mod action is to amateurishly attempt to pit mods against other mods.

If you disagree with a mod action, focus on the action and not the mod. The mod is fungible here - it could be any of us and the action is likely to be the same because most of the time, it gets posted behind the scenes and a quick quorum obtained.

I've never seen anyone warned simply for complaining about some action without making anything personal. By all means report such instances, but let's skip the elaborate shadowboxing - quote specific posts and we can comment specifically.
k prasad
BRFite
Posts: 962
Joined: 21 Oct 2007 17:38
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow
Contact:

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by k prasad »

@mods, do you think it might be useful for us to start a milhist thead about Indian defence related Wikipedia pages and editing improvements? Back when i was an active wiki editor, it was often frustrating to not have enough time or knowledge to update pages or remove misinformation. I think BRF is a great source of both the things we need - knowledgeable folks and good writers, and this could be a good way to harness our collective knowledge to improve how the world is informed about Indian defence systems.
Suraj
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15043
Joined: 20 Jan 2002 12:31

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by Suraj »

Requests to start threads are common. There's nothing fundamentally wrong with most of the ideas. The real problem is constructing the base of the thread and maintaining it. If the view is 'if I just start the thread, people will come', that is likely a naive approach. Please look at all the many threads beyond page 2 or 3 of any of the forums.

The most long term viable threads are the ones that are driven by someone who's a domain expert or at least someone with the motivation to drive it for 6-12 months or more. Mods are happy to ensure that thread stays on track through active moderating input, but do consider that having a good idea isn't enough basis for the long term viability of a thread. It takes more.
k prasad
BRFite
Posts: 962
Joined: 21 Oct 2007 17:38
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow
Contact:

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by k prasad »

Suraj wrote:Requests to start threads are common. There's nothing fundamentally wrong with most of the ideas. The real problem is constructing the base of the thread and maintaining it. If the view is 'if I just start the thread, people will come', that is likely a naive approach. Please look at all the many threads beyond page 2 or 3 of any of the forums.

The most long term viable threads are the ones that are driven by someone who's a domain expert or at least someone with the motivation to drive it for 6-12 months or more. Mods are happy to ensure that thread stays on track through active moderating input, but do consider that having a good idea isn't enough basis for the long term viability of a thread. It takes more.
I completely agree, Suraj... Which is why I asked here, and trust the mods judgment on whether such a thread might be useful and popular. You all have a better handle on the pulse of the community than i would.
Suraj
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15043
Joined: 20 Jan 2002 12:31

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by Suraj »

No we don't. We expect anyone wanting to start a thread to do the work of establishing whether enough people are interested in the topic, they themselves have the motivation and proceed accordingly.

Creating and maintaining the content of a thread is an exercise similar to writing a book. Mods aren't even editors or proofreaders in this analogy - our role is to prevent a good thread prospect from being derailed by others.
Vayutuvan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12060
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 04:36

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by Vayutuvan »

for the record let me state the following.

1. I do not believe that mods are not acting in good faith.

2. My posts here coming after Mort getting banned are coincidental.

I simply took the opportunity to express my concern that whether mod team is being dominated by a few individuals.

as to the question of "What do they get out of it?", may be kicks, may be political capital, may be resume padding. Who can know?

Just like mods are worried about personality cult developing among the posters, I am also concerned that the same doesn't happen among mods.

The real danger is group think whether it happens among the fungible mods or (presumably) non-fungible posters
k prasad
BRFite
Posts: 962
Joined: 21 Oct 2007 17:38
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow
Contact:

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by k prasad »

Suraj wrote:No we don't. We expect anyone wanting to start a thread to do the work of establishing whether enough people are interested in the topic, they themselves have the motivation and proceed accordingly.

Creating and maintaining the content of a thread is an exercise similar to writing a book. Mods aren't even editors or proofreaders in this analogy - our role is to prevent a good thread prospect from being derailed by others.
Got it! Thanks for the detailed explanation. If i return to being active on wiki, I'll keep an eye out to see if more BRF posters are interested.
Suraj
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15043
Joined: 20 Jan 2002 12:31

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by Suraj »

Vayutuvan, there's nothing actionable in your feedback so there's nothing for the mods to do here. Thanks for your thoughts, however.

We can only comment on specific posts or actions. To that extent, we already have done so here and here. If you do not like it, please state specifically what the concern is.

However, please avoid making random non-allegations about mods couched in layers of deniability. It is a pointless waste of everyone's time to figure out.
Vayutuvan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12060
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 04:36

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by Vayutuvan »

Suraj, that moment is past. Next time I will give something actionable.

I want to point out an inconsistency in one of your posts above.

"... who did not like the attempt to pit one mod against another ..." , "amateurishly attempt to pit mods against other mods"
with
"The mod is fungible here"

If "the mod" is fungible, then how can a poster one mod against the other and succeed?

It boils down to whether the mod was posting as an ordinary poster or as a mod.

I responded sarcastically to a mod who, I thought, was posting as a poster. Then I was banned for 7 days "for baiting a mod". There was no attempt at baiting. It was a sarcastic response to a sarcastic post by the "poster" or a fungible mod.

If it is the latter, did the mod call for a quorum before posting that sarcastic "below the belt" post against the sitting POTUS?

Please understand that I would stand up to anybody attacking my POTUS.

Leaving that aside, taking "fungibility of mods" as an axiom, it is but natural for the readers of the forum to conclude that it is the BRF mod policy to hit the POTUS below the belt.
Suraj
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15043
Joined: 20 Jan 2002 12:31

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by Suraj »

Vayutuvan wrote:Please understand that I would stand up to anybody attacking my POTUS.
Thanks for confirming that the mod action against you was deserved.

I'm afraid none of your other handwaving is parseable. Please stop. This thread has a useful purpose and you're derailing it.
Vayutuvan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12060
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 04:36

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by Vayutuvan »

POOF

Admin Note: That is enough - this thread is not about you but about forum feedback and Admins don’t run a Dr Phil pop-psychoanalysis show. Do keep your earlier promise and move on
Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17167
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by Rahul M »

>> Please understand that I would stand up to anybody attacking my POTUS.

Please understand that if you degrade forum quality in an effort to shore up the echandee of your mumbling farting prez a permaban will be issued.
perhaps some ARF (america rakshak forum) and not BRF is the right place for you ?
bharathp
BRFite
Posts: 453
Joined: 24 Jul 2017 03:44

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by bharathp »

i have been a LONG time lurker and an occasional poster.. is there any outside BRF meeting/watsapp type group I could join? I feel like I already know most posters and their style of posting at this point - feels like a group I already know
hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4633
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by hnair »

Rahul M wrote:>> Please understand that I would stand up to anybody attacking my POTUS.

Please understand that if you degrade forum quality in an effort to shore up the echandee of your mumbling farting prez a permaban will be issued.
perhaps some ARF (america rakshak forum) and not BRF is the right place for you ?
:lol: poster Vayutuvan certainly got his quorum of BRadmins in this thread and so the pertinent question that we all have, “Does he know he is your POTUS?” can be asked and giggled.

Let there be no doubt on AR-16s minds that India will continue to love and respect the current POTUS for all the good stuff he has done and said in the past:

Senators Put a Price on New Russian Aid : Arms control: Foreign Relations panel votes to block assistance if Moscow goes through with rocket sale to India.
“I am confident that the Russian leaders will recognize the wisdom of stopping this sale once they see the risk of losing their economic aid,” said Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.), who offered the amendment. “This is no minor sale; this is dangerous.”
Post Reply