I've never seen this before on AVF. One of the members is reporting a mod for bad behaviour!
The member is Mike Hughes, the mod is Outoftheknow. Here is the post in question.
outoftheknow said:
Mod comment -
All of this is arguing/discussing a moderator's comment - starting by saying you won't doesn't change that as you likely well know.
For the benefit of all - in case it wasn't clear (which it really should have been):
So it is probably best to post all that as a helpful post rather than going on about how crap you think AI is. That's the point of my comments - this thread isn't about AI and how good or bad it is in anyone's opinion.
As above - members post information and advice to offer the valid version.
You are being disingenuous. Read my whole comment as it explains how AI can be posted here complete with it's inherent inaccuracies.
Similarly in the vein of being helpful with posts, it would be helpful to post at least a link to the post where you answered it.
End of Mod comment
Click to expand...
Mike Hughes said :
I have reported your post on the basis that it doesn’t appear to be moderation as much as a public attack on a poster based on your personal perspectives. It could have been done by DM but was not.
On that basis, a brief public reply.
outoftheknow said:
Read my whole comment as it explains how AI can be posted here complete with it's inherent inaccuracies.
Mike Hughes said :
This is
not moderation. It is accusatory and insulting. It implies that I am so stupid that I have not read your comment in full. It is aiming to publicly humiliate rather than moderate and guide.
Out in the real world, as I’ve already discussed privately with another mod and a senior mod, both of whom thought DM the more appropriate route, I am registered sight-impaired. The nature of my sight loss means that my eyes skip words, sentences and sometimes entire paragraphs. Therefore, in order to read a post I will, without fail, have to read it multiple times. The number varies with tiredness, stress, font size and many other factors. I might capture all the text on first read. It might take ten times. There is no consistency because words I’ve read first time through might go awol second time through.
It is always insulting when
any poster says to another “No, you’ve not read my post” or “No, you’ve taken my post out of context” or “You’ve clearly not read all of my post” and so on. It’s condescending in any circumstances. In my circumstances I can guarantee you that I worked harder to read your post than any other poster, read it more times than any other poster and by the end of that most definitely hadn’t missed a word. For a moderator to go down that line…
For clarity, at no point have I said this thread was about AI so please stop making this suggestion as it’s a straw man.
You appear to have shied away from the word “perception”. Something is either factual or it is not. In the instances cited, the user did indeed have the inaccuracy both pointed out to them and a number of links provided to confirm. So why it’s being suggested that should have done something I actually
did do is beyond me. I will leave it to you to explain whether you nodded that, didn’t read that far back or… whatever.
The suggestion that I should point a poster, who had asked a question which has been asked and answered multiple times, to the exact place where it was last answered? Personally I think it’s enough to make the observation. Poster can then choose to read back or not. I’m not a moderator. It’s not my job.
You will as a mod note multiple edits on this post. That’s not because it’s being crafted in so,e way. It’s because as per reading the posts of others my eyes will deceive me into thinking I’ve written stuff correctly spelt and worse when I’ve not.
