Friend or foe

[lhalifax]

There may be cultural differences related to what is expected or appropriate. In a discussion forum with a worldwide audience there will be conflicts and hurt feelings based on those differences. There will be other problems related to differences in how the English language is used even regionally within the same country. There is also just the way our own fears and emotions affect the way we hear things.
(...)
If we meet those we rub the wrong way online, we often find there is a fine person there that we can like if we get to know them.
We never know what is happening in a person's life that is affecting their patience and tolerance.
It is easy to take offense but takes a diplomatic set of skills to de-escalate a conflict.
We can try for empathy in ourselves but usually demanding it of others is ineffective.

I heartfully thank you for your words. I do agree.

For example, a Chairman could ask for clarifications before removing a post and stating "You have a lot of emotions going on here and it's clouding your judgement. I removed your angry response to John as it has no place here." and "Your mind is made up.". Maybe I'm wrong, but I find this wording insulting.

For example, a Staff member could have written your words, instead of personally attacking me in terms of personal niceness, friendliness and nastyness. Maybe I'm wrong, but I find this wording insulting.

I now see that this other post of insults to me has been deleted. I appreciate it.

Still, I cannot understand the Chairman when it keeps defending his friend, Staff member, when I say that talking about footing the bills (which *is* a sensitive topic, obviously leading to some sort of personal feeling) is not appropriate, by the rules:

Discussions should only be about the causes, theories and remedies for these accidents.

This post is in the "Support->Feedback" section.

I still didn't get an answer: how talking about money (and how reporting false statements about money) can adhere to the sentence above?

Thanks for your time and patience.

.LH.

 

[The Chairman]

a) it's not related to "causes, theories and remedies for these accidents",

In this case part of the "remedy" is the recovery of the deceased. There's really nothing else that could be done for them or their families.

So, deleting the post which clarified my thoughts leaves to the reader

It should be noted that I also deleted your post that was misunderstood and that you're free to repost your contention that the families have paid for it all without the previous rancor.

I get it. No one likes to be moderated. Most everyone feels justified in voicing their anger and giving anyone who disagrees with them a smack down. You're too close to the issue to be truly objective about the tone of your message. Look at all these accusations you're throwing around like there's a big conspiracy. Your post was inflammatory and was really starting to pull the thread off topic. I simply excised that from the thread and I've been nice about it.

 

[Caveeagle]

I think a larger point might be a silver lining for this “misunderstanding”..

An ongoing fund should be maintained in reserve to support these efforts. NOT for special t shirts, or boondoggle type costs, but to defray very specific costs for travel, gas and materials needed that recovery divers should not really have to cover on their own. And so families would not feel pressure to pay in a trying time.
I’m not a fan of go fund me, but would contribute.

 

[lhalifax]

This is the unfriendly part. Who are you to tell anyone that they should not post?

Nice wording on your part. "Who are you ..". I bet that should I reply talking about your personal niceness I'd be banned in no time.

Do you really think this attitude is not insulting? If so, everything is clear.

ScubaBoard staff has no way to vet facts of events happening so far away. However, we can and will moderate for tone. Be nice or your post may be edited or even deleted. People are wrong all the time. Correcting them nicely and respectfully is fine. Lashing out at them or asking them to stop posting is simply not friendly and is not going to be tolerated. Most people who come here are quite open to changing their mind if you nicely present us with the facts. Simply stating "False" does not give us any additional facts, nor does it add anything but rancor to an otherwise friendly and interesting thread. You seem to feel that John impugned the honor of the families by stating the recovery crew had "no funding". I haven't discussed this with John, but it's my guess that he was pointing out just how selfless the recovery team has been with their time and finances rather than trying to embarrass or demean the families.

Ok. So let me understand:

1) "staff has no way to vet facts of events happening so far away", but you wrote me "I don't see the violations you suggest. There were no insinuations about the families and John wrote the truth. " How can you tell it was the truth? By faith? Were you part or witness of the agreements? I was. I repeatedly told you I was.

2) "Correcting them nicely and respectfully is fine", but when a Staff Member writes "What a nice, friendly person you are! (...) I decided months ago that I would stop posting on SB because of the creeping nastiness taking over", then it's fine?

And yes, as stated above and as you finally understand, "You seem to feel that John impugned the honor of the families by stating the recovery crew had "no funding". " It is so, because it's FALSE. Were it true, I would never say a word, and would be the first one to help to cover the costs.

Do you feel, as a few others seem to, that the recovery team is not deserving of our honor and praise? Of course not. So, why not just nicely tell us that the families are contributing and doing all they can to defray the costs? Perhaps they are even paying these two gentlemen for their time? That would be great and we would love to read about that kind of support! In any event, keep it nice.

Dear sir, please don't mock me. As you do know, I'm under an NDA. What I can publicly share is not up to you. I privately told you that families were covering the costs since the very first moment (Note: in the mean time, I've been authorized to discuss this matter publicly, since they too felt bad reading you friend's insinuations). I didn't bash at first. I used the "report" function to privately settle the thing, without any public bashing. All this started because neither your staff nor you could so far answer a very simple question:

How can talking about footing the bill be viewed as related to "causes, theories and remedies for these accidents"?You recently told me that it's relevant because "the remedy in this case IS the body recovery.". Exactly. THE BODY RECOVERY, the tecniques used, difficulties they met and how did they succeed. This is about the remedy. Fotting the bills is not.

So yes, I removed your unreasonable demand that was causing the thread to devolve into rancor. I also removed the responses that your post engendered. The subject of that thread is the accident and the subsequent dangerous recovery of the deceased. Please remain on topic and keep it nice.

It's all clear now. The user ("Who are you to tell anyone that they should not post?") must stay quiet and adhere to the rules. Your friend, Staff member, can post false facts, insult, post personal attacks and it's fine.

Good to know.

 

[The Chairman]

Do you really think this attitude is not insulting? If so, everything is clear.

So you're offended by me asking a question? Do you really want to understand or just complain?

How can you tell it was the truth? By faith? Were you part or witness of the agreements? I was. I repeatedly told you I was.

I think you both are telling the truth... as you each see it. He said. You said. Oh wait. You didn't say it in that first post. You only said "false" and we had no idea what you were talking about. Then you rudely told John to stop posting.

2) "Correcting them nicely and respectfully is fine", but when a Staff Member writes "What a nice, friendly person you are! (...) I decided months ago that I would stop posting on SB because of the creeping nastiness taking over", then it's fine?

That post was also deleted. Rancor is rancor. It all gets deleted. I don't care who you are.

As you do know, I'm under an NDA.

No, I didn't know. I have no idea what you know. I have no idea if you are who you claim to be. All I know is that your post was inflammatory, it started bickering in that thread and you've been trying to justify your role in all of that. Be nice. Stop assigning motives. There is no need to start a fight here on SB. Your post got deleted. John's post got deleted. We don't need that kind of drama here.

 

[The Chairman]

It's all clear now. The user ("Who are you to tell anyone that they should not post?") must stay quiet and adhere to the rules. Your friend, Staff member, can post false facts, insult, post personal attacks and it's fine.

It should be noted, that you have not been asked to "stay quiet". You've been asked to "be nice". In fact, you've been encouraged to correct any statements you see as wrong, but nicely. Be nice. Show respect. No one is trying to muzzle you but we aren't going to allow you to start a verbal brawl either. Be nice.

 

[Addicted2H2O]

As a completely unbiased third party, I fail to see how posting something about the recovery divers making an effort to help without monetary backing violates any rules here. Could it have been left out of the post? Maybe. But I also don't see how it conveys anything to the effect of disgracing the families because "they didn't pay for it." No one made any suggestions that they should've, or for that matter that anyone should've. Maybe the two recovery divers did what they did out of the goodness of their hearts. Yes I'm sure it cost them money and certainly wouldn't expect them to be saddled 100% with the costs of this endeavor, but again the staff member never in his original post suggested that anyone reimburse them. He did mention that a gofundme account has been set up, which can be taken as fact, but never suggested that ANYONE put donations into it. The way I read his post, he simply stated that Edd and Mike took it upon themselves to help with the recovery and stated that they did so with no financial assistance for the sole purpose of showing their character and willingness to help without any expectation of compensation. I don't at all see how that puts a negative spotlight on the families. I don't know Edd or Mike or anyone else involved in this tragic story, but I'd almost be willing to bet that neither Edd or Mike expect the families to reimburse them for their efforts. These families juts lost loved ones and I have yet to meet a diver that wouldn't do absolutely everything they could to help in a situation like this is they have the means and the skillset to do so. I know if it were me....I'd have done the same thing. Without expectation of compensation. Again I'm completely unbiased here and am certainly not taking sides but I see no warrant for you getting upset my friend. The staff member simply stated facts as he learned them. Nothing more.

 

[lhalifax]

So you're offended by me asking a question? Do you really want to understand or just complain?

As previuosly well written by RayfromTX, there are undoubtedly differences in how people feel about what appears in writing in a forum. Sadly, written communication doesn't convey a lot of non-verbal signals that are of paramount importance. So, I can tell you that yes, when someone asks in a provocating manner "Who are you to tell anyone that they should not post?" I find it challenging. I find it diminshing and challenging. I do woant to understand and cooperate (see below), but I find your attitude harsh. I'm cooperative here: I'm not insulting, I'm trying to make you understand that you did hurt my feelings, that to me you sounded (and still sound) harsh, and that I believe you could do better. This is cooperation on my part, I'm not (just) whining, I'm trying to let you know how people can feel reading you.

Hope you understand.

I think you both are telling the truth... as you each see it. He said. You said. Oh wait. You didn't say it in that first post. You only said "false" and we had no idea what you were talking about. Then you rudely told John to stop posting.

This is because you acted, IMO, in a hurry. You dind't even take the time to ask for an explanation. I would have given it to you.

That post was also deleted. Rancor is rancor. It all gets deleted. I don't care who you are.

No, I didn't know. I have no idea what you know. I have no idea if you are who you claim to be. All I know is that your post was inflammatory, it started bickering in that thread and you've been trying to justify your role in all of that. Be nice. Stop assigning motives. There is no need to start a fight here on SB. Your post got deleted. John's post got deleted. We don't need that kind of drama here.

Yes you did know. Or at least you should have know, by reading a previous post of mine on the same topic. Again, in an effort to cooperate, I'm just trying to make you understand that you (IMO) acted in a hurry, with a bias based on personal acquaintance with one of the persons involved, without even bothering to ask for clarifications.

As I told, I'm not just whining. I wish to analyze this issue to help you, and make this place a better one. I wish to make you understand that sometimes a bit of communication is needed before acting like God. Of course, you are the owner, this is your site. You are God. And I think this makes you feel better. But what kind of God? A nice, cooperative, indulging one, or a harsh, provocative and stiff one? Your choiche.

When you write "All I know is that your post was inflammatory, it started bickering in that thread and you've been trying to justify your role in all of that." you simply demonstrate that you ignore (or want us to believe you ignore) all the previous steps.

At first, I just used the "report" function. No public whining. The "report" function, as I intend it, is not to blame or shame. It's just a technical way to start a private conversation with the Moderators about an issue, to analize and resolve it in a friendly and private manner. In a way to protect everyone: the poster, the reporter, and the forum.

When reporting the post, I clearly stated what the issue was IMO. That the part implying the families didn't foor the bills was incorrect and IMO not pertaining to "the causes, theories and remedies for these accidents".

I expected that a Moderator would come up asking for clarification, which didn't happen. He just replied "Hi. SB mods don't fact check or mod posts for accuracy, thus putting us in an impossible position of choosing who to believe. Instead, we rely on members to refute info they believe to be wrong. I see that you did that, albeit briefly. Thank you for the heads up. I will keep an eye on the thread to ensure that it continues to respect the TOS and the forum's rules."

I then replied very politely and provided further information. The same information that you now say you ignored: "As I clearly stated in a previous post, my infomration is firsthand. I've been on the site for 18 days. Every day. I'm also personal close friend to one of the victims, and his family. I do know what I'm talking of.". Again, referring to a post I wrote some days before, clearly stating that I had first-hand information.

As I got no reply whatsoever, I wrote to the Chairman. More on this a bit later.

So far:

1) abiding to the rules, I did report the post
2) the answer from a moderator didn't warn me about my public reply ("I see that you did that, albeit briefly.")
3) further, polite, communication was ignored.

In a cooperating effort, let me explain how all this could have been avoided:

1) the moderator asking for further details
2) the moderator keeping discussing the problem, thus helping a user to better understand

Now, to the conversation I started with you. Since I got no answer to my reply, I politely wrote you: "
Dear sir,

I reported a post in the "Accidents and Incidents", but I got unsatisfactory reply from a senior moderator. Please see https://www.scubaboard.com/community/conversations/reported-post.2092954/

As I clearly stated, a Staff Member (!!) incurred in at least four violations of the current policies, but the Senior moderator refused to act, on the misleading assumption that "SB mods don't fact check or mod posts for accuracy, thus putting us in an impossible position of choosing who to believe".

From my point of view, there is nothing to "believe", just to read the post and compare it to the rules.

Please take a moment to review the link above to the reported post, and take corrective actions.

Thank you for bringing ScubaBoard to us, and to keep it a pleasant place.
"

Where did I bash here?

1) I got an unsatisfactory reply. This is a FACT.
2) I politely asked you to "Please take a moment to review the link above to the reported post, and take corrective actions"
3) I politely greeted you, thanking for this forum.

The fact that you now write that you weren't aware of any of this, means that you acted witouth even bothering to read what I originally wrote. Wow. Without even reading, you replied "
I don't see the violations you suggest. There were no insinuations about the families and John wrote the truth.

However, it's not your place to call anyone out publicly: staff or not. You have a lot of emotions going on here and it's clouding your judgement. I removed your angry response to John as it has no place here."

So:

1) I privately reported a post
2) moderator shut of the communication, without replying to my explanations
3) you didnt' bother to read
4) In the mean while you friend attecked me personally in a public post
5) You supported him by defining my judgement clouded and (in the same style as "who are you to...") by diminishing me because "it's not my place to call anyone".

Can you see the climax? Can you see that you are the main cause of all this "misunderstanding", because of your lack of communication, lack of comprehension, harsh attitude?

How could all this have been handled in a better way?

1) I reported the post
2) Moderator instead of closing communication could read and reply to my statements
3) invite the poster to the conversation
4) privately discuss the matter

Maybe we could end up agreeing on a rephrasing like "altough the families are covering the costs, a gofoundme has been set up to help recovery the costs, thus helping both the resuers and families".

All this would have never happened, the poster would have done a great service, the gofoundme would have gained donors, everyon would have been happier.

As you can see, with a minimal effort in communication, everyone would win.

With your attitude which I keep feeling harsh, uncommunicative, insulting, dimishing, you - in my very humble opinion - screwed things up. You just made me feeling angrier, you didnt' cooperato the spread the truth, you dind't cooperate to help the families, you just made clear a point: You are God and your decisions are unappealeable. Hope you feel greater now, you showed once more how powerful you are on your forum.

I bend to my knees and beg for your mercy, My Powerful Lord.

 

[JohnnyC]

Dude, get over it. Now you're just complaining.

 

[tursiops]

Dude, get over it. Now you're just complaining.

Not just complaining, but going on and on and on......he needs an editor.