Standard abuse, same old

Only at The Standard – yesterday I engaged in a bit of discussion (with a Standard moderator) there about the Roy Morgan poll, and OAB jumped in with a typical and deliberately disruptive attack, a game they play often.

One Anonymous Bloke 

🙄

Not fucking your pet goat would be a start.

I quoted site rules “What we’re not prepared to accept are pointless personal attacks, or tone or language that has the effect of excluding others. We are intolerant of people starting or continuing flamewars where there is little discussion or debate.”

That intolerance is very selective.

One Anonymous Bloke

Step away from the goat and pull your pants up.

It’s a metaphor for your relentless weasel negativity and rank nauseating hypocrisy.

Typical irony, given OAB’s record of weasel negativity and hypocrisy.

Then Weka stepped in as moderator and gave OAB some advice on being attacking better.

[I know you see yourself as the frontline rapid attack dog against the RW trolls, but when you start scaring away the cats who are here for the debate (or to play with the mouse), or when you are leaving your dogshit lying around, then there is a problem. You are quite capable of ripping apart RW arguments, so how about you put some effort in.]

And I was told off for responding…

[did you see the moderator warning to you yesterday? By all means engage in escalating a fight with OAB (or anyone) and see how I feel about wasting moderator time – weka]

..and got blamed for ‘escalating a fight’. So I replied:

Weka – I saw your ‘moderator warning’ and responded. So you are blaming me for “escalating a fight” because I pointed out the site rules you asked me to check out yesterday?

Are you suggesting that if attacked here people should do nothing about it?

“in escalating a fight with OAB”, warned about wasting moderator time “don’t escalate esp in ways that require moderators to spend their time sorting it out” and banned for a day. OAB was also banned for a day but had achieved their objective with weka’s support they have both openly discussed baiting and banning people they don’t like.

Te Reo Putake also tacitly endorsed OAB’s attacks and put the blame on me:

[Give it a rest, Pete. You’ve been around long enough to know you’re heading rapidly toward self martyrdom. No more, please. TRP]

And weka went further, banning me.

[no Pete, I’m saying don’t escalate esp in ways that require moderators to spend their time sorting it out. If you don’t know what that means then err on the side of caution. You can now take the rest of the day off – weka]

I thought The Standard may have improved a bit but this shows their selective moderation is as bad as ever – some of their moderators are a part of the game. They’re enforcing a ‘don’t complain about being harassed or we’ll ban you’ rule.

TRP is a Labour supporter, weka is a Green supporter. They seem to have a Memorandum of Understanding with OAB that personal attacks are moderator supported behaviour at The Standard, and if you react you will be blamed and may be banned.

This had followed me commenting the previous day on Labour’s conference and their use of social media. Again I had engaged in a discussion with a Standard moderator when weka stepped in.

[There seems to be an implication there that The Standard is connected to the Labour Party organisation. As you well know it’s not, and I don’t care what you now assert about your comment, the implication is still there. Given your substantial history of asserting that there is a connection, and your history of walking the edge of the commenting rules here, I’m going to err on the side of caution and make this a warning. Have a think about the site rules, including the bit about wasting moderator time. – weka]

I responded:

Weka – you are reading something into my comments that wasn’t there. There are usually posts here about Labour conferences so I thought there might be something here about it – as there later was.

There are often posts here about specific Labour Party matters, like conferences. Some of the authors and some of the regular commenters have obvious and open links to Labour. That doesn’t make this a Labour Party website, it’s not, but it’s well known as one with some Labour content. And Green content, and Mana content, and other content.

If a moderator chooses to waste their time they can pretty much pick on anything they like to warn or ban. That’s your call of course. To clarify, are you warning me to not mention Labour here in case someone interprets it as something more than it is?

After yesterday’s exchange weka came back to this:

[no, I’m suggesting you grow some social intelligence and understand that your long history here affects how people interpret your comments, including your history of implying and/or telling lies about the connections between the authors, the site and political parties. IME, you are an expert in riding the edge of the rules to avoid bans but still manage to substantially disrupt the community. But thanks for pointing me back to this from the other thread, more than happy to moderate on the basis of self-martydom so I don’t have to deal with this shit for another week (and a day on top of the other ban) – weka].

Social intelligence – funny.

She accuses me of telling lies but makes things up. I don’t intend to ‘disrupt the community’. There is a history of ‘the community’ – of which weka has been a prominent player – creating disruptions as an excuse to give moderators an excuse to ‘waste their time’ so they can justify a ban. She’s a bit vague but that looks like an extended ban.

Petty and pathetic but that’s how some of them keep playing  it. And the credibility of The Standard as a serious political forum suffers, as does the credibility of the parties associated with those nasty and exclusionary practices.

Standard practice at The Standard.

I think that the bans are, in part at least, preventing any defence of their attacks. Weka is  making things up, and doesn’t have to courage to allow any challenges.

Leave a comment

24 Comments

  1. Pickled Possum

     /  6th November 2016

    Well pete all I can say is … Thank You for supplying a blog site where All can come and have their say … Left Right In Between’s and the Don’t knows an the What ever’s. and then there’s Al and Corky and Kitty stalwarts of this site
    The Standard is a ‘orrible place to go visit shame as there are some really good writings there butt to scroll thru all the rubbish to find the odd gem it’s just not worth it
    One abusive Bloke who I think has mental health issues I mean really pete you, a pet goat, smacks of What he did last summa. 😉

    Reply
    • Corky

       /  6th November 2016

      Geez, why don’t they just come out and say; ”if you have an opinion we deem unacceptable; if you try to defend that opinion or defend yourself against other bloggers attacks we will fuck you over good and bad. Simple stuff really…..but no, they go through this pantomime of being reasonable and balanced.

      Utu will be served at election time next year, Pete. Provided the Cat Killer doesn’t become our Trump. That would mean a lot of conflicted people at Standard. They may have to instigate a ‘safe space’ where confused members can rest up.

      ps- Morgan already has 1000 members… I wonder from right or left of the political spectrum?

      Reply
      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  6th November 2016

        Key is in no doubt they will come from the Greens and Labour. From what I have seen of his social media followers I think that is certainly true of those likely to join his party. But he might claw back a few ex Labour centrist voters who have been turned off by the hard Leftists there. That is the risk area for Key. And the old Social Credit types who think there is an economic magic wand to wave could be fodder for his tax nirvana.

        Reply
  2. Conspiratoor

     /  6th November 2016

    Blogging’s a game pg. A weird little sub-culture with zero impact on the real world. A game played under a set of rules that are interpreted by biased refs, who as we know, are always right even when they are wrong. Just saw a classic example on the field where an ab gets binned for giving paddy a friendly cuddle. Cheers,c

    Reply
    • Blogs may not have a lot of impact on the real world but I think they can give useful insights into thinking and behaviour within parties and activist groups.

      Reply
      • Conspiratoor

         /  6th November 2016

        The problem I have with what you are saying pg is that political blogs are inhabited by folks with entrenched views who run the same lines over and over and become totally predictable. There is no listening and it is very rare to hear a point conceded. You could spend half a day here and know all you will ever know about ynz commenters ‘thinking and behaviour’. Go Paddy!!!!!

        Reply
      • Maggy Wassilieff

         /  6th November 2016

        Blogs are useful for educating once naive old ladies like me as to how the wicked world of smear politics engages with our media.

        Reply
  3. Conspiratoor

     /  6th November 2016

    It’s a metaphor for your relentless weasel negativity…

    This is a bit uncharitable pg, but I have heard similar sentiments expressed on a number of other blogs. When it comes to politics you do appear to be a glass half empty kind of guy. Care to comment?

    Reply
  4. Alan Wilkinson

     /  6th November 2016

    Why on earth patronise a site so brain-dead useless, PG? Do you expect these people to change? Of course they won’t. They are comfortable in their stupidity and would be scared witless outside it, just like WO’s lot.

    Reply
    • Kevin

       /  6th November 2016

      I go there to cause chaos and mayhem and take the piss. Not easy though often it parodies itself.

      Reply
  5. duperez

     /  6th November 2016

    For a moment there I thought I read an observation “the credibility of The Standard as a serious political forum…” following comments about some of the practices of the people controlling it.

    I accept it’s just a game (as Conspiratoor said) and that a game can be a serious political forum. When the game though is as infantile as some of the carry-on outlined here, it is as serious as any political forum being held in sand-pit at play centre with the three and a half year olds.

    Reply
  6. Kevin

     /  6th November 2016

    I pointed out the “no attacks” rule and got told by none other than the word’s greatest Sysop that attacks were allowed so long as they were not “pointless” making me in effect fair game (attacks on anyone not far Left is considered not pointless over there).

    As for not being a mouth piece of the Labour party that’s just about as credible as Prentice’s claim that they’re not left wing.

    Reply
  7. I didn’t approve OAB’s comments, tacitly or otherwise and his comments were appropriately moderated by another moderator anyway.

    I looked at your behaviour and suggested you stop being a wanker before you got banned. Face it, Pete, you’re a bit of a pompous git and your smugness winds some folk up. I was just trying to help you see the error of your ways, but none so blind …

    Anyway, enjoy your martyrdom, which was what you were hoping for all along, right?

    Reply
    • No, you are wrong on just about every count there TRP. You and weka and others keep presuming incorrectly.

      You did tacitly approve of OAB’s comments, you dumped on me and ignored what they posted, and you have done the same here.

      You and weka and OAB have been playing the same game for years – making things up and manufacturing excuses for banning people.

      I wasn’t ‘hoping for martyrdom’, before weka jumped and dumped, with your support, I was having a civil discussion with Greg. The martyrdom label is an excuse for you to justify your intolerance of me. I’m just amazed you fear what I have to say.

      Ironic you accuse me of “being a wanker”. And still no criticism of what OAB repeatedly does, deliberately tries to create disruption and then ‘moderators’ blame the targets.

      Reply
    • “appropriately moderated”

      OAB pointlessly abused with the aim of disruption (against your own rules) and precipitating a ban, and Weka joined in the game giving OAB exactly what they wanted. And you support that as ‘appropriate’.

      In the absence of any other explanation from you that’s how things stand.

      Reply
      • Making things up doesn’t change the facts, Pete. OAB was sorted by another moderator so I didn’t need to comment there. However I suggested , nicely, that you might want to dial it back a bit. Pointing out your own failings is not tacit approval of anyone else’s failings, That’s a false equivalence and a splendid example of your previously mentioned pomposity. Just take the hint in future and you might get to hang around longer.

        Reply
  8. Blazer

     /  7th November 2016

    own the Blog, make the rules and change them when you feel like, is the way things work.Prentice leads by example ,hates getting hammered in a discussion and waits for a spurious excuse to ban people.

    Reply
  9. Corky

     /  7th November 2016

    ‘Face it, Pete, you’re a bit of a pompous git and your smugness winds some folk up. I was just trying to help you see the error of your ways, but none so blind …’

    Well, at worst I would say we all have our faults. But, fugg me, what a bunch of thin skinned prats…..roll on the election. I can’t wait to see how they spIn that. That will be a pop-corn and chips even.

    Reply
  10. duperez

     /  7th November 2016

    Sometimes the Standard reminds me of how things used to happen on Whale Oil. (no idea about now – I don’t go there.)
    There’s a feeling of someone arriving at work in a shitty mood and saying, “Right, the first thing that slightly upsets me I going to put the boot in.” Someone posts something ostensibly innocuous and Wham! threats and warnings. (On Whale Oil it was often feral sycophants who couldn’t handle mild comments that had different perspectives.)

    Reply

Leave a Reply to Alan Wilkinson Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s