BR Forum Feedback

[Dmurphy]

Guys, the quick reply facility looks great. Can we have a link to "quick reply" at the end of each post with an option to quote the post we're replying to?

[niran]

ooh! now there is keewik reply facilities, magnificent!!

[Gaur]

Am I the only one who finds the new smileys weird? Is it possible to revert back to the old smileys?

[Sagrawal]

There used to be a hyper link for Bharat-Rakshak.com on the top left corner in the previous version of BR Forum. In my opinion it was very convenient to just click the link to go to BR site rather than typing it again. Can we please have a link to Bharat-rakshak.com somewhere in the forums?

Thanks

Sumit

[Rahul M]

^^^
those fine tuning will probably take a few more days.
Jagan, can anything be done about the retarded looking smileys ?

now for the reason why I started this post : all hail the webbies for the quick reply option !

[nachiket]

^^^
those fine tuning will probably take a few more days.
Jagan, can anything be done about the retarded looking smileys ?

!

Smiley's seem to remain like the old ones in Google Chrome for some reason. They get pakified in Firefox. New TFTA edit button also renders like old SDRE one in Chrome.

[putnanja]

How about adding some new smilies? Does the new version of phpBB offer any more smilies by default?

[Pankaj C]

I have been lurking around for a good eleven years now. The quality of discussions have gone down past couple of months. The content remains as good as always however; there is a tendency of some newer members to start resorting to personal attacks. This is distasteful and makes me nostalgic of the oldies and their way of putting forward their perspective. Do I say gone are the old days? I don’t know yet but, sincerely do hope eventually I am proven wrong.

[Rahul M]

best way to stop such behaviour is to report those posts. without your(as in aam-BRFite) help it's not possible to keep track of every misdemeanor. click the button with the little red '!' mark to report a post.

[archan]

Personal attacks are dealt with seriously. Even a mundane ones such as calling someone stupid or dense calls for a warning in my book. Please report whenever you see such behavior.

[Muppalla]

Print Preview of all pages as a single page format - Is this going to be avaialble or it is being shelved because of technical reasons?

[ShauryaT]

: all hail the webbies for the quick reply option !

Which will encourage more short posts, which do not always help the quality of discussions. Great quick tool, but may not serve the direction the forum is intended for, to encourage quality discussions? Just a thought.

[AnimeshP]

There is a very interesting discussion going on in the Perspectives thread in the Technology forum regarding BP and the Oil spill... I'm just wondering if the correct thread for that discussion is the Oil and Natural Gas thread?

[archan]

^^ The spill is not related to India directly while the Oil thread is focused on Indian perspective.

[shiv]

Admins - I just did a test post and found that the words p0rn and f*ck are blocked by the forum software. I can understand f*ck but why p0rn? Does the word need banning?

Note that c*nt appears without censoring. Maybe a few changes are required

[Anujan]

^^^ George carlin's views on this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_Nrp7cj_tM

[Abhijeet]

I think this may be the right place to post this.

The PRC economy thread repeatedly sees poor moderation from some admins who enjoy flexing their muscles there. I don't think bans and warnings are appropriate for posters who reply to others with published facts, and without using profanity or personal attacks. Yet Chinese posters who are quite well-behaved are routinely warned or banned after labeling them Commie drones, while other Indian posters who reply from the heart rather than the head (that is, with emotional, unsubstantiated claims) are not.

Here is a recent exchange:

Some Chinese posters post some economic facts about China. Some Indian posters reply with statements to the effect of "Indians have never cared about being rich or building tall buildings, only about spirituality." Some back and forth ensues.

The result is that a couple of Chinese posters are banned and warned under different pretexts.

Rahul M posts:

>> thread cleaned up, OT posts moved to trash.
>> sukhothai banned by gerard for using free email.
>> starek warned for flamebait.

No Indian posters are mentioned in this post.

I post:

What about all the other posters talking about how India isn't bothered about trivial things like economic development because everyone in India is so spiritual? They should be warned as well for bringing irrelevant nonsense into the PRC economy thread.

Rahul M:

perhaps you would like to go back and check who was warned and why. and possibly re-read my comments to understand what it means ?

I reply:

If you warned others as well, why did you mention only the (presumably) Chinese posters in your bolded comment above?

I think the moderators' mandate is to maintain a forum where views can be freely exchanged without intimidation or abuse. It is not their job to suppress facts about China by arbitrarily labeling them flamebait, or be harder on Chinese posters than on Indian ones. It does not serve the forum well.

[Rahul M]

I would like you to point out by username which chinese users have been banned/warned and why. and then compare with the allegations in the post above(which I've locked to prevent editing).

I would like to mention beforehand that in case of a mismatch between what you allege regarding action taken by admins and what actually happened, an apology would be expected, failing which a board warning would be issued.

[atreya]

A humble, little suggestion. The thread for LCH discussion includes some pics and discussion on LUH also. I think the name of the thread should be changed to include LUH, as creating a separate thread for it wouldn't be useful and will only confuse people more. OTOH, since its a new development and as eagerly awaited as the LCH, we should keep it separate from the Indian Military Aviation thread.

I would go further to suggest that we include all kinds of helicopter deals in the thread. There are atleast 4 different helicopter deals in various stages now (gunship, light utility for IA and IAF, light utility for IN, heavy lift, Mi-17 deal which was recently concluded, etc.) and the LCH and LUH being developed. So, why not include all of them in this thread and name it something like New Helicopters in Indian Defence, or something like that?

[Rahul M]

atreya, I was thinking along those lines, will change the title.

[Abhijeet]

I would like you to point out by username which chinese users have been banned/warned and why. and then compare with the allegations in the post above(which I've locked to prevent editing).

I would like to mention beforehand that in case of a mismatch between what you allege regarding action taken by admins and what actually happened, an apology would be expected, failing which a board warning would be issued.

Rahul M, they're not just "allegations". I've copied the relevant parts of your post above, where you listed the two Chinese posters who had been warned or banned. You did not list any Indian posters, which I called out. Where is the list of Indian posters who you said had also been warned?

[munna]

Rahul M, they're not just "allegations". I've copied the relevant parts of your post above, where you listed the two Chinese posters who had been warned or banned. You did not list any Indian posters, which I called out. Where is the list of Indian posters who you said had also been warned?

Actually they are worse than allegations! Any poster who insinuates and opens his trap to spout garbage is dealt by standard procedures whether Chinese or Indian. Rahul merely said that any emotional response to such flame baiters (Mr SK Thai) may also also lead to warnings for posters posting the responses. Just because Drones come and regularly get themselves in a soup does not mean we have to resort to equal equal and persecute aggrieved posters.

[Sanku]

Sirjee, Rahul M has been warning me merrily for with examples like

1) ONE use of sms lingo in a fun reply
2) ONE use of a colloquial phrase meaning "full of himself"

If I did things like these some of these Chinese posters do, I would be banned for eternity and some!!

[Rahul M]

abhijeet ji, I made a very specific request, namely "I would like you to point out by username which chinese users have been banned/warned and why." I see that you have avoided it and merely repeated your earlier post with a different wording. that is NOT what I asked.

sanku ji, efforts at whitewashing only go so far.
a) it was anything but 'fun', obscene would be the correct term.
b) was again a *very* uncivil comment, whatever you think it actually means.

[Abhijeet]

abhijeet ji, I made a very specific request, namely "I would like you to point out by username which chinese users have been banned/warned and why." I see that you have avoided it and merely repeated your earlier post with a different wording. that is NOT what I asked.

For goodness sake, please don't use the schoolmaster hectoring a small schoolboy tone. I'm not avoiding anything but did expect you to be able to read your own post. Here it is again:

>> thread cleaned up, OT posts moved to trash.
>> sukhothai banned by gerard for using free email.
>> starek warned for flamebait.

You can pick out the names of the Chinese posters yourself from this post.

I'll repeat my question, which I've posted twice now:

Where is the list of Indian posters who you said had also been warned?

You haven't posted an answer to this. It's a simple enough question.

[Sanku]

sanku ji, efforts at whitewashing only go so far.

Umm I wasn't whitewashing "my" comments.

a) it was anything but 'fun', obscene would be the correct term.

Obscene?

I thought I was warned for use of sms language? . Seriously, perhaps there was something in there which means different things, but as far I was concerned it was a just my take at sms lingo discussion.

You may or may not believe it, and it matters not to me at all, but that IS true.

b) was again a *very* uncivil comment, whatever you think it actually means.

Rahul M, not to get into a torn shirt or open fly debate, but far more uncivil comments have passed above and below that post (by others) -- I do not see why it was different from the datum -- that is my position (I can actually point them out, but I have no wish to get others into hot water, unless its a repeated personal attack I dont bother)

In any case, your prerogative as a Mod. No complaints -- I was actually providing a counterpoint to Abhijeet who thought that you are lenient

[niran]

Mr. Abhijeet, below here is the complete post

>> thread cleaned up, OT posts moved to trash.
>> sukhothai banned by gerard for using free email.
>> starek warned for flamebait.

@ all, please do not increase our workload by responding to flamebaits and OT posts, chances are high you could be warned too. no need to get overtly emotional and play into the hands of disruptors.
Rahul.

nowhere do i see Indian or presumably Indian poster warned. it advises every one including Chinese posters
to avoid "Flame Baiting" or else........
it says Mr.sukhothai has been banned for using "free email" which is an offense here.(in case you do not know this). everyone have to have ISP issued or Employer issued email to register. none is exempt.
WRT Mr. startrek, he was flame baiting plain and simple.
now please, accept 4 healty goats to let me increase me post count.

[Rahul M]

abhijeet ji, I made a very specific request, namely "I would like you to point out by username which chinese users have been banned/warned and why." I see that you have avoided it and merely repeated your earlier post with a different wording. that is NOT what I asked.

For goodness sake, please don't use the schoolmaster hectoring a small schoolboy tone. I'm not avoiding anything but did expect you to be able to read your own post. Here it is again:

well for goodness sake, why don't you answer my question and we will let go of this tu tu main main exchange ?

I don't need you to repeat my post(s), I know quite well what I've written. I'm asking what YOU THINK it means. because anyone who understands what it means won't be posting the long list of ludicrous accusations above.

[krisna]

As per my knowledge of lurking for some years and later a brfite, the maximum of posters warned and banned have been Indians.
Maybe the mods have to be lenient to Indians.

Mods have the DIE mentality of lecturing/hectoring SDREs and GUBOing non Indians.

Hiding inside a dark corner in a black kave komplex with lights off and painting myself black

[Mahendra]

LOL what next? Rahmullah being asked to provide caste based census data to prove that Brahmins have been warned in proportion to their presence on this board.
And before anyone jumps on me, Rahmullah has issued a warning to me for calling a Chinese Ship a rust-bucket (and Kasab is not Pakistani )

[Abhijeet]

well for goodness sake, why don't you answer my question and we will let go of this tu tu main main exchange ?

I don't need you to repeat my post(s), I know quite well what I've written. I'm asking what YOU THINK it means. because anyone who understands what it means won't be posting the long list of ludicrous accusations above.

I pointed out exactly the list of posters that you asked for. I can't express it any more simply. If you mean something else, please explain.

You, however, have very carefully not responded to my question. What's your reason for avoiding it?

[Carl_T]

Abhjeetji, I think Mr sukhotai was banned for using free email. Now granted, he got there faster due to flame-baiting...

[Rahul M]

well for goodness sake, why don't you answer my question and we will let go of this tu tu main main exchange ?

I don't need you to repeat my post(s), I know quite well what I've written. I'm asking what YOU THINK it means. because anyone who understands what it means won't be posting the long list of ludicrous accusations above.

I pointed out exactly the list of posters that you asked for. I can't express it any more simply. If you mean something else, please explain.

abhijeet ji, clearly comprehension is not one of your stronger points. this is the fourth and last time I'm repeating the request, my patience is not infinite.

I would like you to point out by username which chinese users have been banned/warned and why.

I DID NOT ask you to repeat what I said ( ), I requested you to post what you thought were the members who were warned/banned and for what reason(s).
all three times you have failed to comprehend what was being asked (which is a little hard to believe) and responded with irrelevant quotes and counter questions. either that or you realised you had shot off your mouth and are therefore pretending not to understand.

You, however, have very carefully not responded to my question. What's your reason for avoiding it?

this 'question' is unfortunately yet another example of this lack of comprehension,
______________________
how

Where is the list of Indian posters who you said had also been warned?

logically derives from

I would like you to point out by username which chinese users have been banned/warned and why............

is beyond me. perhaps you would like to explain how you arrived at this conclusion from that sentence of mine.

as it is, that 'question' has already been answered by member niran. I am a little surprised at how everyone but you understands what I wrote.

[habal]

frankly it would be good to have postors mugs (or a rough approximation thereof) below the i.ds, and this includes the moderapers so that one has a fair idea as to what sort of personality is making those comments. Folks will often talks besides each other in absence of any biometric variable.

[Abhijeet]

abhijeet ji, clearly comprehension is not one of your stronger points. this is the fourth and last time I'm repeating the request, my patience is not infinite.

I would like you to point out by username which chinese users have been banned/warned and why.

I DID NOT ask you to repeat what I said ( ), I requested you to post what you thought were the members who were warned/banned and for what reason(s).

I'll ignore the ad hominem attack in that post -- which is a violation of forum guidelines -- and simply respond to your question. Here are the members listed by you who had been warned or banned, as per the reason given by you.

>> sukhothai banned by gerard for using free email.
>> starek warned for flamebait.

This post answers your question fully, and is "straight from the horse's mouth" so to speak, untouched by any misquoting or paraphrashing. Unfortunately, I don't have the inclination to put it into a different format just because you demand it.

how

Where is the list of Indian posters who you said had also been warned?

logically derives from

I would like you to point out by username which chinese users have been banned/warned and why............

is beyond me. perhaps you would like to explain how you arrived at this conclusion from that sentence of mine.

as it is, that 'question' has already been answered by member niran. I am a little surprised at how everyone but you understands what I wrote.

They don't "logically derive" from each other. That's a strange way of putting it. Since you mentioned that Indian posters had also been warned, in addition to the Chinese posters I listed above, I simply asked for the names of the Indian posters.

Admin impartiality would require that if an admin lists that users A and B had been warned or banned, they would also list users C, D and E who had been similarly disciplined as part of the same action. Instead, you chose to list some of the users who had been warned or banned, but not all. I simply asked you for the rest of the list. So far, you have avoided that question.

niran is not an admin as far as I know, so I wouldn't consider his post as authoritative. In any case, if you say it is, perhaps you could point me to it?

[niran]

Admin impartiality would require that if an admin lists that users A and B had been warned or banned, they would also list users C, D and E who had been similarly disciplined as part of the same action. Instead, you chose to list some of the users who had been warned or banned, but not all. I simply asked you for the rest of the list. So far, you have avoided that question.

niran is not an admin as far as I know, so I wouldn't consider his post as authoritative. In any case, if you say it is, perhaps you could point me to it?

but saar, nowhere does the post say Indian origin Posters have been warned. then how could one
name a list which was not a list in the first place, BTW you do not need be an AdM to read and digest
and act any post. AoA eek aur post me ijafa

[Rahul M]

abhijeet ji, clearly comprehension is not one of your stronger points. this is the fourth and last time I'm repeating the request, my patience is not infinite.
[quoteI would like you to point out by username which chinese users have been banned/warned and why.

I DID NOT ask you to repeat what I said ( ), I requested you to post what you thought were the members who were warned/banned and for what reason(s)./quote]

I'll ignore the ad hominem attack in that post -- which is a violation of forum guidelines -- and simply respond to your question. Here are the members listed by you who had been warned or banned, as per the reason given by you.
{it's a statement of fact, not an ad hominem or any type of attack. I've given enough proof to bolster this point, even this post of yours provides another one.}

[quote="Rahul M">> sukhothai banned by gerard for using free email.
>> starek warned for flamebait./quote]

This post answers your question fully, and is "straight from the horse's mouth" so to speak, untouched by any misquoting or paraphrashing. Unfortunately, I don't have the inclination to put it into a different format just because you demand it.
{yet you have the inclination to make ridiculous charges but not the decency to explain them. your charges FYI bear *no* conceivable connection to either my post or my actions in that thread, which is why an explanation was necessary.}

how logically derives from
is beyond me. perhaps you would like to explain how you arrived at this conclusion from that sentence of mine.

as it is, that 'question' has already been answered by member niran. I am a little surprised at how everyone but you understands what I wrote.

They don't "logically derive" from each other. That's a strange way of putting it. Since you mentioned that Indian posters had also been warned, in addition to the Chinese posters I listed above, I simply asked for the names of the Indian posters.
{this is yet another example of your problems with comprehension, nowhere have I said any other member, Indian or otherwise has been formally warned. when you imagine things you should at least mention that.}

Admin impartiality would require that if an admin lists that users A and B had been warned or banned, they would also list users C, D and E who had been similarly disciplined as part of the same action. Instead, you chose to list some of the users who had been warned or banned, but not all. I simply asked you for the rest of the list. So far, you have avoided that question. {admin impartiality has been maintained throughout, it's not my problem that you do not understand what happened from statements in plain english. unfortunately I'm not aware of any simpler variety of english than this. p.s what list ? }

niran is not an admin as far as I know, so I wouldn't consider his post as authoritative. In any case, if you say it is, perhaps you could point me to it? {it's a matter of comprehension skills, not authority, BR and my actions as admins are transparent enough that any member can understand.}

In any case, I believe I have given you many more chances than were due to explain your charges, in stead you were more interested in pointless arguments and making up false statements. board warning issued.

[Abhijeet]

You are of course free to do as you wish. Hopefully, there are other admins who will follow the exchange, and understand which of us was correct and who was ranting.

As an aside, you may want to consider learning how to quote someone else's post.

[munna]

You are of course free to do as you wish. Hopefully, there are other admins who will follow the exchange, and understand which of us was correct and who was ranting.

As an aside, you may want to consider learning how to quote someone else's post.

Abhijeet I guess you must be well aware that ANY admin will ban you or me or anyone for using free email account. So where is the question of partiality in this? On top of this the drone poster specifically mentioned by you-Mr S Thai was hell bent on putting religious flame baits on a Tech/Eco forum thread.
The admin in question did not say that he/she had warned Indian posters rather he/she cautioned everyone against responding to flame baits via emotionally charged responses. I repeat nowhere in his/her post did he/she say that Indian (by the way he has no means of checking anybody's passport, we might as well be Bangladeshis ) posters have been warned too.

[Gerard]

I haven't been following the latest exchange in this thread but as the mod who banned Suhkothai, I would like to point out that this was not done under any pretext.

I don't even consider it a ban. He/she is free to rejoin, complying with BRF rules.

Another user had complained about his post and as a new user, I checked his background country and registration email id (to see if he was a previous user). I did not act on the complaint (flame baiting) itself.

The user in question registered using an email valid for 15 minutes. BRF has never allowed free emails, far less a temporary one that lasts for a few minutes.

I banned all email addresses from that domain, not just Sukhothai. I didn't ban his IP or ISP.

He/she simply could not continue with such an email ID. Unlike a non-compliant username (which I can change to one from my Borat cast/crew list), such a user must re-register.

The fact is that free emails are not allowed on the forum and any user with a free or invalid email risks getting banned permanently by a mod. Behavior that causes others to complain and draw unwanted moderator attention is probably not the best course of action in that situation.

I don't see how simple forum housekeeping is muscle-flexing or acting on pretext.