Mike Adams

Just saw the X3 debacle, and personal attacks aside, I think the OP was just trying to confirm that a DVD that's 4.08GB is not a legitimate release, and came here to ask the knowledgeable among us. I'm the first person to tell bootleggers to get lost, but this guy came in saying he got a DVD from a supposedly-legitimate distributor and it looked to him like a bootleg, because it was an A-list title, yet it was only a single-layer DVD.

I think it was a little quick for someone to immediately jump on him as being a bootlegger because it was quite clear to me that he was trying to confirm whether a disc he got was in fact a bootleg -- he wasn't asking because he wanted to MAKE one. For that reason, I think I'd be throwing around the "a-word" if I came into a forum asking a perfectly innocent question (that ironically was actually an attempt to PREVENT bootleggers from getting away with passing their discs off as genuine) and the only response I got was someone calling ME a bootlegger.

Guess they'll ban me for this now, but if people in this forum are gonna shoot first and ask questions later, what would I be losing? Just don't be so quick to judge people, especially based on an unclear post because English isn't their native language. I'd wager that wherever this guy is from, he does much better at posting in English than we would trying to post in his language.

acubfaninmd

i dont know anything about bootlegging but why would it matter if someone knew how many gbs a movie had? just wondering why you thought he was trying to make illegal copies of the movie

Tarantino

This should probably go into the feedback forum, Mike.

= J

Mike Adams

I don't necessarily care that it got moved, but I posted in the main forum because that's where it happened and I wanted to address what happened. There's a guy out there who'll probably never be allowed to join this forum simply because DarthMarino misunderstood the guy's question and assumed he was a bootlegger. Sure, his response wasn't ideal, but I don't think banning him right off the bat was justified. My opinion of this forum just keeps dropping....

Mike Adams

I didn't -- that was DarthMarino's assumption. The original threads are still there... people should read them.

Tarantino

If your opinion of this forum has dropped <i>that far</i>, there are other DVD forums out there.

= J

WallyOPD

Personally I appreciate it when the mods/admins swiftly give the boot to someone who violates forum rules within their first few posts. If you aren't on your best behavior at that point you're probably never going to improve. When I take a look at other large forums around the net I'm amazed at the level of civility and maturity that exists in most of the discussions here.

Ranger

Where are the links to these threads?

I think there might be some people who rush to label someone a bootlegger or such, but I think it is pretty rare that the admins mistakenly ban someone over that.

It is true that some members try to gang up on one poster (ex. 'InBeforeTheLock' posts or chat about the spam links) - they often forget that is not the appropriate action since there is that "report this post" link on the left side if thought that there is a problem.

Mike Adams

The guy was simply reacting to being slammed right out of the gate. I don't think he would have been a troublemaker, but after asking an innocent question and being immediately called a bootlegger just made him snap, and I don't think his comment was entirely undeserved by the recipient.

Mike Adams

It pretty much has, so you can bet I'll be looking. Got any suggestions?

Mike Adams

Here's the welcome the guy got...

http://forum.dvdtalk.com/showthread.php?t=494285

...and here's where he re-registered to try and get an answer and explain himself:

http://forum.dvdtalk.com/showthread.php?t=494291

My only question is why immediately ban someone? Suspension works just as well. It's simply a permanent solution to a temporary problem.

Ranger

Well, the poster who said "so you're the asshole who needs to get out." should have gotten reprimanded as well.

A personal attack, even directed towards spammers and bootleggers and such, is still a personal attack and shouldn't be tolerated at all since it sets a poor example for others.

Aside from that, seems like things were done right.

Mike Adams

Of course, and the OP should have been <b>reprimanded</b> as well, not immediately and permanently banned.

Absolutely, but this guy was <b>NOT</b> a spammer or a bootlegger, and he was given no warning, no suspension, nothing. Just immediate permanent banishment. To me, it's a pretty clear case of new members being treated more harshly than current members. Why the zero-tolerance policy for newbies and the leniency on people who should know better? Seems ass-backward to me.

Aside from? I think the whole thing is that the guy was banned for his first offense, which was actually defensive, not an attack. I don't think either party should be allowed to name-call, but to me, nothing seems "done right" about it.

das Monkey

The guy broke the two cardinal rules of the forum within a span of two hours on his first day. Whether he's a spammer or bootlegger is immaterial. Moderating is an art, not a science, and it seems clear that the judgment call made in this situation was the correct one.

das

Mike Adams

I'm wide open to the idea that I'm seeing this wrong... so what's the other rule he broke? I'll assume the first is profanity directed towards another member (and I guess the fact that it was a defensive response rather than an unprovoked attack is also, as you say, "immaterial"), but I can't for the life of me figure out what the second one was, unless it was not speaking good English.

As for moderating being an "art", it must be the art of deciding who to punish severely and who to let slide for not only doing exactly the same thing, but also instigating the whole thing to begin with, not to mention being someone who's been around long enough to know better as opposed to being a newbie. Besides, I've been here long enough to know that the first time people "break a cardinal rule", they're not immediately banned. Doesn't take any "science" to figure that out.

crazyronin

Re-registering after a ban would be my guess.

Mike Adams

That's possible, but that's kind of like the police picking a guy at random to drag downtown, and when they try to arrest him for something he didn't do, they add "resisting arrest" to the list of charges if he balks.

Like I said, my problem is with the initial ban. If he had been suspended after the first "a-word", and then re-registered so he could heap more verbal abuse on poor DarthMarino, then sure, ban his ass. Just doesn't hold water with me, though. I know it doesn't have to, and the forum will go on, but hey, this is the "Feedback Forum", so I'm feeding back (makes annoying squealing sound).

By the way, not to hand the powers that be an excuse here, but like I said, I didn't see all this until it was over, so if he was initially suspended and then banned after the re-reg, then I understand that. Still, the typical response to an attack is an explanation of the unacceptable behavior, as was given, and an admonishment that if the behavior continues, a suspension will result. That's the "science" of moderation. The "art" is a moderator saying to himself "This guy can't half speak English, he's probably a bootlegger, and I've got a sweet trade (or some other mutually-beneficial activity ) pending with DarthMarino, so this bozo's outta here!"

Ranger

I think this is very true, but considering what happened in such a short time...

For all we know, that member could have signed up three or four times in the past and it just wasn't noticed til after the thread was closed.

Mike Adams

For all we know, the guy could have killed Geoff's dog. Speculation doesn't matter, I'd like to know what <b>really</b> happened. I see TWO registrations, period. I'm happy to be proven wrong if the powers that be want to actually address the issue beyond "it was a judgment call".

Josh H

The long time members have shown they can contribute to the forum, and that whatever infraction was likely just an out of character out burst.

For the newbies, if the jump right into breaking rules, personal attacks and so forth it's a good sign that they're a troll and are just going to post problems. I've never seen any member during my almost 8 years posting here that started off posting rude, abrasive shit or otherwise breaking forum rules turn into a good, productive member of the forum community.

People that launch right into that kind of stuff are trolls who've probably banned from many sites before.

Minor Threat

You're obviously not aware of Groucho.....

Josh H

Ok, change that to started off posting "genuinely" rude abrasive shit.

Tarantino

Just wondering why you care so much about this, Adams?

I've been to a lot of forums on the internet over my years, and this one is the most consistantly moderated. I actually appreciate it, although I've had one or two run ins with 'the law' as well. If you go somewhere else, as you doggedly claim you will, you'll see how it can be at other forums...and you'll probably come crawling back, tail between the legs.

= J

Mike Adams

I don't appreciate the metaphor, but I do understand it can be worse elsewhere (I know... I spent a lot of time in alt.video.tape-trading). The thing is, I'd much rather be in a place where trolls thrive and you can just ignore them, than have shit happen like what happened here, which is entirely due to over-moderating. In other words, I'd much rather see the O.J.s and Robert Blakes of the world go free than to have innocent people imprisoned "just in case they're guilty of something".

Mike Adams

That's just the point -- this guy didn't "launch right into that kind of stuff", he got labeled as a bootlegger right off the bat by DarthMarino, and was actually just trying to make sure someone wasn't passing off a bootleg on him, which apparently they were. Like I said, I think I'd be calling someone an asshole too if that happened to me. I've also made it clear that I have no tolerance for bootleggers, but there was a colossal rush to judgment by more than one person in this situation, and instead of it being a situation where it's one post that DarthMarino could apologize for and move on, it's a permanent banishment of someone who has just as much right to be here as you or I do.

You'll never find out if someone can contribute to the forum if they never get the chance. It's not like this guy started out by saying "Hey all you assholes, how big is the X3 DVD supposed to be?" If figuring out who's a troll and who can contribute is an art, there's at least one moderator here who hasn't mastered it, and a system of higher-ups who are saddled with the choice of either supporting this guy or showing an embarrasing hole in the armor.