Yes, and I’m not on 24/7, so perhaps she said something truly awful and it was deleted before I saw it. I don’t see everything the mods see, or see the track record.
1 Like
@CurrentlyHorseless, the way I read the post(s) here by Mod1 is that they do not simply say ‘oh this person is a nuisance because they are either always flagging people or get flagged a ton’, not the other way around.
Edit to add: The irony is not lost on me that another dead thread was bumped up by the same person who insists they don’t like threads about them.
8 Likes
Endless is talking about at least a couple of years, if not more, worth of consistent behavior.
5 Likes
Question:
Why would someone find it necessary to edit a post on a CLOSED thread?
Why would someone find it necessary to REPEATEDLY have to edit posts on a closed thread?
4 Likes
User banning is very seldom the result of a singular post or even a single thread.
If you feel we should review a post, send an alert. We may not agree that it’s something we need to intervene on, but if you’re concerned about a post, let us know. If there are a bunch of posts in a thread you think we should review, you can just send one alert where the issue begins and make a note about taking a look at subsequent posts…we can read on from there to check on the thread.
8 Likes
General observation.
Traffic on COTH is primarily North America and slows or stops by about 11 pm PST.
The exception is when a cray cray thread erupts. They very often do this after midnight PST, so very late in other time zones. Sometimes I am awake and get to watch it unfold. Then the next morning the thread is locked or people are banned.
Other times I get a good night’s sleep and complete miss the action. It’s not unheard of for someone who has been merely prickly or contrarian to explode quite suddenly in the wee hours. The next morning, the mods report that they have removed or edited several posts and banned a member. And the other posters are murmuring about mental health issues and if the banned poster needs help.
In the case here I never saw the posts that got the person banned but like I said it’s a known pattern for a poster to finally lose it over night and get edited and banned before I have my morning coffee in the PT zone.
There are indeed examples of this late night phenomenon on this very thread. I think the term they use in senior care is “sundowning.” A useful term for online life as well.
5 Likes
Having spent years moderating a large now gone horse forum I can say that it’s extremely rare to ban based on a single post or even a contentious thread. It’s also rare to ban a dissenting poster who often swims against the forum’s main opinion. People don’t see the entirety of a member’s input…what’s been moderated or deleted or a pattern of issues. Moderating is a thankless job. It’s like trying to herd cats. And rarely is everyone happy.
7 Likes
Thank you.
1 Like
I cannot tell you how many times that term has crossed my mind on many of these threads in the past. However, I did not mention that term, since I did not want to insult anyone with the comparison. Particularly seniors.
Many thanks to the mods here for all their efforts and explanations.
3 Likes
When I have read someone get a bit hot under the collar and lose it, if it is evening or weekends, I first think they may be under the influence of mind altering substances. 
5 Likes
Ditto.
That is a really brave statement to make, Bluey….
1 Like
Long ago we used to post when that was happening the old "friends, don’t let friends … post when … ".
Not sure it helped, no one does it any more since flag use has become standard.
3 Likes
Also known as happy hour lol 
3 Likes
I don’t agree with your statement that the blow ups occur mostly after midnight Pacific (after 3 am Eastern). My perception is that the forum is dominated by users in the Eastern time zone, and the blow ups occur during late evening, Eastern time. I’m in the Central time zone, so only slightly off phase from the bulk of posters.
Re: bolded. You’re obviously referring to the posts by LLPR. According to the time stamp, those were posted between 11:00 pm and 12:30 Eastern, not after 3am Eastern.
I’ve assumed alcohol was implicated in some posters’ “uninhibited” posts, especially with the whole cardbordeax meme. Isn’t that a more logical interpretation than “sundowning”? I completely disagree that referring to a fellow poster as displaying “sundowning” is in any way “useful” in an online discussion.
2 Likes
When you tap the flag icon, one option that comes up is to communicate privately with the poster, rather than with the moderator. If a poster is getting “hot under the collar”, or may have had more than one glass of cardbordeax, I would think that it is kinder to communicate with the poster privately (“Are you sure that’s what you want to say?”), rather than reporting them to the moderator or publicly calling them out in a response post.
1 Like
Well, lots of our posters are seniors. 
Also I have FB friends who are totally lovely IRL who if they are going to go on a tear and start messaging me and forwarding crap absolutely do it after midnight. Anxiety and urgency can absolutely rise in the witching hours. Even without substance use. I just think it’s a thing I’ve noticed across platforms, you’ll get someone’s late night anxieties pouring into a void and sometimes when there’s no one online to respond back they keep shouting louder and louder.
3 Likes
easy way to deal with these runaway threads is change the status to Muted
2 Likes
What’s your point?
I think that references to “sundowning” or other behavior related to dementia is absolutely not useful in an online discussion, regardless of whether the age of the poster being alluded to is 40 or 97.
1 Like
It is not a “nasty accusation.” It is a fact. CurrentlyHorseless is correct. You will notice at the bottom of my screenshots posted here there are accidentally not “cropped,” pictures at the bottom of the photo. I have 4 phones and two computers full of ONLY screenshots (just like those at the bottom of my screenshots on my phone) from this BB. We are putting them together in a unique filing system to post here & better point out some of my confusions with this BB.
I’m positive @Moderator_1 will do his/her best to answer my inquiries and allow me to more fully make Coth aware of real (or perceived) serious concerns. That said, I also can’t imagine Coth would condone users pming each other to get users banned. However, it seems that whether by “accident,” or (perhaps) intentionally, though I hope this is not this not the case, this has IN FACT occurred. And, I know for certain the editor of this BB is well aware of the large amount of absolutely inappropriate posts by you, Eggbutt, Ambitious Kate and some others I haven’t named.
Perhaps, posting my screenshots of many inappropriate posts here, which have been flagged but ignored (not so much as acknowledged) for up to two years now will provide a better format to display the clear favoritism by certain moderators on this BB.
If Coth chooses to “summarize,” a thread by only providing the “most liked,” posts, rather “most relevant,” or “most factual,” that is their right. It is, unfortunately, not a great a way to represent. It diminishes its integrity and makes Coth more like a DH page rather than a non-biased, zero favoritism BB.
Allowing addresses to be posted and doing absolutely nothing to that poster as admonishment is at issue, also. As is allowing blatant or underhanded death threats and all insinuations that getting shot is (or should be) a natural result of anything- aside from being in imminent danger without a way to retreat. (As NJ law regarding attempting murders will show) I have presented just a few examples of this already. I’ll be providing many, many more. Then, we can get to the question: “why have these users not been banned or suspended while others clearly have for much, much less.
This is a technical help forum and I plan to ask my questions using evidence of such things and hoping to be provided with answers by moderators. Although, I do understand it is the right of this BB to say, “well, this is coTh and we make the rules as we go, select posters we ‘like better’ and decide to only take strict action against other posters for much less, simply bc we say so.” That is COTH’s right. I’m just here to point out very clear instances & showcase this to make CoTh aware that is exactly what it is doing - incase it has been somehow missed.
