Hell, that's so dull.

I don't think there's anything wrong with heavily enforcing rules and even banning those who don't listen, otherwise there would be no point in having rules.

On the other side, what seems to be really wrong is the the complete ignorance of the needs of the community. You have to set up rules together everybody can live with and then enforce them.

You just don't make rules because you can. Otherwise people will think one is on a power trip.

The argument "I have documentation that everything was fine by the rules" is nice for Rapini, but doesn't help the forum at all.

There seems to be a huge gap between the rules and what the forum wants. A way bigger gap than in other forums. That either means that everyone posting in B&M is either completely insane, or some aspects of the rules like lc/nc just suck, compared to other subforums.

I'm not in agreement that this is outside the scope. I mean, if the guy was banned for "trolling" infractions, it makes a big difference what qualifies as a trolling comment for you as a mod. And I was attesting from personal experience that you've hit me with trolling infractions for questioning politely very questionable judgements. Yes, as you and I discussed, this is technically against the letter of the "trolling" rules. But if someone's getting banned for this kind of behavior (and I knowingly admit that I have no knowledge of severity or content of this guy's infractions) that seems pretty unfortunate.

Maybe, just maybe, because it was the most important news article directly related to brick and mortar poker on the west coast that was posted to the forum for several months in either direction? And time-sensitive to boot for anyone who was planning that day on playing at the card room that had just been raided and closed?

There very well could be valid issues; I don't go in that forum often enough to know either way. I was simply pointing out that posts calling Rapini a troll who arbitrarily deletes posts, or accusing him of snap banning someone who was actually banned for their 7th warning/infraction in the forum (and still insisting it was a snap ban even after this was pointed out) aren't likely to make things happen.

Quite a few forums here will insta-delete a post like that. Is it really so much to ask to provide something more than a link? A summary, an opinion, a discussion point...is that really so onerous?

I hope you don't take offense to this comment, but you really should read a thread before posting in it. NOSUP4U loved to post non-famous players' and cardroom staff's names in the CAZ thread. He even went as far as posting pictures of a player in the B&M Forum. That's why he's banned.

Also, I edited the forum guidelines a few months ago to reflect the fact that people are welcome to question B&M mods' decisions/actions/etc. via PM or the low-content thread. I have absolutely no problem with people complaining about my moderation as long as they don't derail substantive threads to do it. So if that wasn't clear in the past, I apologize. But going forward from that point it should be perfectly clear.

Your subjective feelings about the importance of that information have no bearing on whether the OPs of those threads provided content worthy of discussion. Either they did or they didn't. And I still don't believe that a bare link to a news story is worthy of its own thread in B&M. I'm open to the idea that I'm wrong about that and maybe the community wants a bunch of threads that consist of a link alone as the OP, but no one other than you has advocated that position.

I think that killa just nailed it.

Summary execution, perhaps. But when the driver's license is revoked and he's no longer allowed to drive? Seems reasonable to me.

Every time that someone makes an accusation against Rapini for heavy handed modding, and then the actual facts are revealed - Rapini is found to be on the, if anything, lenient side of things.

There seems to be a certain number of folk here who think that they should be allowed to post whatever they want, whereever they want, and the rules be damned. Personally, I'm glad that 2+2 doesn't allow that.

Yes, in my opinion. Often a first name (or nickname) is all that is needed to identify a regular. Obviously, Rapini realizes this as well.

Maybe. But I've found him to be fairly consistent on this issue. So I really don't see that he is an outlier in this regard.

Examples, please, or are you just complaining for the sake of complaining? And if you're going to quote examples that you think should have been deleted for violating the rules, but weren't, did you report them?

A. I agree, it would be nice to have the ability to edit titles.

B. Snap ban? After a period of 1 1/2 years of violations? What dictionary are you using?

C. The deleted posts don't meet the stated guidelines, which are there for all of us to read. And which we are all supposed to follow.

Would you really like to offer up this defense in court?

"Your honor, it was a straight road, no rain, no traffic, so my going 75mph in a 55 mph zone shouldn't be wrong. After all, I never even read the speed limit sign that was posted there!"

Who knows, the judge might end up laughing too hard to suspend your driver's license!

A 7 digit infraction, without using the same digit twice! Impressive!

Lee

I've never understood this one either. Or why the Las Vegas Lifestyles thread isn't in B&M, for that matter. But then again, I'm not an admin or a mod so am not privy to all the discussions on these topics. If there were/are any. I dunno.

Does seem silly though, to me at least, not to have the Atlantic City thread at least not be in B&M.

Lee

cool story son

Don't worry, after your complaints are mocked, you'll stop posting there regularly, and then he'll let the other moderators know how happy he is to have driven you away.

Fair enough. Note I never said I had enough information to determine whether this guy was banned for good reason or not, just posted my personal experience with what I felt was over-enthusiastic modding. I wouldn't want my picture showing up uninvited on 2+2 either.

As to an article on the raiding of a brick and mortar card room in the B&M forum being only subjectively important, I guess my only reasonable response is LOL. If I remember correctly I was the third WTF comment on why the first two versions were deleted (and that being only those I saw in the moments before they were deleted and I assume slapped with troll infractions of their own) and the final link that stood had the highly relevant "was anyone there?" to distinguish itself from the other two threads with only a link.

None of which is the issue at hand, I have only recounted that experience here since there's a pertinent discussion relating to appropriate balance and judgment in moderating duties.

That was indeed an inconsistency and my fault completely for having IRL commitments to attend to while that third thread went up. I would have deleted it as well, but by the time I got back to it there had been too much substantive discussion to reasonably take it down.

But hopefully you understand my position that a link alone is not good enough for a thread starter even if you disagree with that position.

I remember at my first dealing gig, I was very hardcore about no talking about the hands. Don't make a grunt when the board gets really wet, don't make any indication that you think the fourth flush card may have changed things, nothing.

Players complained. I got into arguments. Floor backed me up publicly. After all, it was the letter of the law, and I was right to enforce it.

Away from the tables, out of the sight of the public, I was involved in some conversations regarding how to go about enforcing the rules and when to show some leniency. Basically I was told, "You're not wrong, Walter..."

Maybe something like that is going on here? You can't really point to a specific "wrong" moderation he's done, because they all fall within the guidelines. And I'm sure no other mods are jumping at the chance to do MORE free work, since it's a thankless job already.

When complains come in about one specific moderator over and over and over again... well, it's not really helpful to cop an attitude of "aha they were only 5 complaints not 7 like you said so therefore your point is worthless." Right or wrong on the facts, something may be broken in the way they're handled, and the way they're presented to the public.

It's not the message, it's the delivery.

For example, maybe is IS a good idea to have a pre-emptive post when perma-banning a long-time respected member, that way you don't get a score of posts of "Rapini sucks and he ran over my dog!" but rather have just laid it out transparently from the start so people can read and go, "Hmm, yeah, that makes sense, and I'm glad the mods respect us enough to let us know how they're helping the forums better serve us."

And as I've said before, I think maybe the tone of the automatic PMs for the infractions/warnings could be a bit more constructive rather than punitive. As they are, I think they feel more as a challenge to the infracted rather than a helping hand to guide the person to better contributing to the forum. (Maybe it's changed; I've not been infracted in a while.) Can an open hand be more effective than a rap on the knuckles? Are the mods intended to be seen as Catholic School nuns?

But at the end of the day, none of it matters at all. This is a web forum, and if you don't like the way a tiny corner of that is handled, then just don't go there. Easy enough. There's rarely useful new information being posted there anyway.

I'm happy with Rapini as-is, mainly because I no longer care. Not my forum, after all. I'm merely offering the above as a perspective.

That was nice of him to link to threads that were relevant to the questions.

I'm pretty sure Rapini did it long ago. I ended up exchanging a few PMs about it at the time since it was at the same time that he moved a bunch of posts about the best way to get to the Borgata from the Borgata thread to the AC thread in the travel forum.

And yes, I hear people travel for miles around to get to the Celebration of the Suds...

jj is right; I was the one who moved the AC About Town thread to Travel. It had nothing to do with B&M poker, so I put it in a more appropriate forum. The thread has done really well there.

Definitely agree re people traveling for miles for the Celebration of the Suds. I met people from Florida, California, New Hampshire, and Texas there two years ago when I attended (the group I was with was almost entirely MD-, PA-, and NJ-based though with one from NY and another from OH.)

For sure I can see where you were coming from, it's in absolute agreement with the letter of the forum rules.

I hope though that you can see where I'm coming from as well. If in following the letter of the rules you find yourself having to delete the same thing multiple times, remove numerous comments and hand out infractions, all in pursuit of culling a thread you yourself just noted developed into substantive discussion when left alone for a short time (something that I'd argue wouldn't take much foresight to determine would happen) maybe then the problem isn't with the posters... this is pretty standard spirit vs. letter stuff IMHO.

I have no idea whether that thread was an outlier or if there are tons of infraction points stockpiled up from BM users from similar situations, so this is either inconsequential or the heart of the issue people are discussing in this thread.

You don't have to be a world-class poker player to go through Rapini's posts ITT and make a confident read on him.

He's banned because you don't like him. I've done the same things on the same thread (and worse) and never received an infraction.

The whole idea that you should get infractions for mentioning a name in a context that's not identifiable and not remotely slanderous, libelous or creating any sort of potential liability is absurd. I think you agree with this or you would have issued many more infractions.

Again, it seems very clear that Mark's public disgust with your heavy handed tactics is what triggered the string of warnings/infractions, all from YOU, all within the last year. I would have no problem if you just banned Mark from B&M, but he's been tremendously helpful to other posters in other forums who now lose his help.

Those forums that are moderated by people who never had a problem with Mark, or don't hold grudges, and didn't go over every one of his posts with a fine toothed comb looking for citable offenses.

Your opinion of what the content contributors and readers of B&M want to post and read is irrelevant. You are a mod, not an editor. Lighten up Francis, let unpopular threads disappear on their own, not because you want to impose your narrow views and choices on the rest of us.

Except this case.

Please take your straw horses out to pasture. We are arguing over fairly innocus stuff.



Context matters. I called Mark and two other regs gay on the CAZ thread. Rapini didn't dock me for it. Was it because he realized Mark and I are friends and it was a funny comment? Or had I not gotten on Rapini's sh*t list yet where he would snap-infract every post I wrote?

No, after a much shorter period of Rapini writing him up for every ticky tack violation he could find, when no other mod wrote him up for anything.

And so we all deserve the death sentence. But we don't get it, because Rapini let's our little miscues slide. But if he doesn't like you...

I was going 64 in a 55. I've never been pulled over by any other cop than this one your honor. He's given me 6 tickets in 6 months, yet I've seen him sitting by the road as hundreds of cars pass at 70 MPH on the same road. He only tickets those who cross him.


Lee, your love of authority and order is duly noted. If it could be combined with a sense of proportion and fairness, I might even agree.

Making a bunch of rules and regulations to follow and then following them does not make one a good moderator. And dealing with the blowback from atrocious moderation and serious personality deficiency does not make one a saint, it is fully expected when one exercises heavyhandedness consistent with his cop complex.

Rapini moderates like an old guy who has never seen the internet before. He simply doesn't understand humor, the evolution of threads, and the way conversation works. If you must analogize to speeding tickets, understand that Rapini is throwing them out for guys going two over the limit and then searching their cars.

Rules, regulations, fairness aside, the fact is that Rapini makes his forum less fun and interesting to participate in.

Let me address the specific excuse you mods and mod-apologists are using for Rapini, that Mark was warned, he persisted in breaking the rules, so he got what was coming to him.

You are ignoring the fact that Rapini defines LC and Trolling very subjectively so he can give guys like Mark who aren't shy about disagreeing with him, warnings and infractions at his whim.

As I said, I've never gotten a demerit for using the names of regs in my posts, including one where I called three identifiable regs homosexuals in a very witty post on the same CAZ thread where Mark racked up all of his violations. If Rapini was truly even handed, he would be handing out far more infractions because the behavior he uses to justify Mark's banning is almost commonplace on B&M among long time posters.

Mark mentioned the name of a well know prop at CAZ and was given an infraction, two posts after someone else mentioned two other props. The prior poster didn't get an infraction or their posted edited (and props at CAZ are known as "Poker Hosts", part of their job is interacting with us players, and wear badges with their names).

He got an infraction for responding to a troll.

The picture he posted was of a known scumbag who welshed on a bet. It may not have been right, and may have deserved that particular demerit, but it's not as if he was randomly uploading pics.

Mark got infractions for making jokes that Rapini didn't find funny and so marked as LC.

I understand modding is a thankless job, and a bit of work. I understand sometimes it's hard to be leniant when you are in a bad mood. But if a mod doesn't make their forums better, they instead make it worse, what's the point of having a mod?

I suggest Rapini would do well with a vacation from mod-ing, and maybe some sensitivity training. Or maybe some better tools so he's not so frazzled by all the work of deleting and infracting other peoples posts that he doesn't find funny.

If that's true, then I've screwed up in not giving you warnings/infractions. Can you link me to specific instances?

It's not my rule, but I do think it's a good one and I try to enforce it consistently. Again, if you see instances where you think the guideline has been violated, please use the Report Post function to let the mods know about it.

Phrases like "it seems very clear" are often used by people who can't back their claims with facts. I'm not saying that's necessarily the case here, but can you show me any situation in which I have expressed any kind of personal bias against NOSUP4U? As I've said numerous times, I'm fine with people criticizing my moderation as long as they don't derail substantive threads to do so. NOSUP4U also sent me plenty of personal attacks via PM and I think the only result of those was one 24-hr tempban. I'm simply not a vindictive guy.

None of that stuff mattered to me; there's plenty of users who feel that it's OK to derail substantive threads with moderation complaints or to send personal attacks via PM. I deal with them all the same way: warnings, infractions, tempbans, and bans. There's no "heart" in moderation for me, as playynade said earlier in this thread.

I've also said before in this thread that I find your claim of bias quite offensive because I take pride in being as consistent as I can be with violations that I see. But if you can point to specific instances of inconsistency, I'd be happy to address/provide redress for them. I've made mistakes in the past and I'll make them again in the future. I'm certainly not above admitting to them.

How often did he purposefully violate those forums' guidelines? I don't have anywhere close to enough time to track individual problem users and "go over every one of [their] posts with a fine toothed comb looking for citable offenses," and yet it was easy for me to see plain violations NOSUP4U had that were more than enough to amount to a permaban.

I agree with the mod/editor distinction you make except to the extent that you might consider deciding what topics are appropriate for the B&M Forum an "editorial" function. That's why I almost never edit users' threads or posts, but instead delete them entirely or lock them if I believe they violate the forum guidelines. I find that that approach is less offensive to the users' creative license.

START RAPINI

READ POSTS(BM)

BEGIN(INFRACTIONS)

END

*user must manually oil tin man after each use

Even in poker we recognize that the best interests of the game require deviation from the written rules. This is necessary because growing and sustaining the poker community in a room is for the greater good.

Why threaten me when you can just infract me any time you want?

why don't you post the specific posts you infracted and let us decide.

and why didn't you just exile him? was that not sufficient punishment to satisfy your ego?