- Starring fig367 As dunravin2002 The Sock Puppet
The Original Sequence Of Events
The original sequence of events went something like this.
- I submitted a post to the bdsmireland-personals yahoo group, which I’d taken extra special care to compose in respectful, warm, friendly tones.
- That post was moderated by fig367, the moderator who has been primarily responsible for moderating many of my posts over the years.
- Both fig367‘s original and subsequent reasons given for the moderation were more incomprehensible than usual.
- I first published my blog post about it, and received an aggressively worded, hugely long comment from an individual identifying himself as dunravin2002.
- I published an update to my post, including my awareness that dunravin2002 was fig367‘s sock puppet.
- After publishing the update, I received an even more aggressive, lengthy email from fig367/dunravin2002, but to date have received no response from fig367 to my second query about my moderated post.
My original objectives were (and still are)
- to share my experiences of the double standard applied to post moderation in bdsmireland and bdsmireland-personals
- to make the unwritten rules of those yahoo groups more visible
- to make the moderators’ behaviour more visible to others
- to possibly (but I wasn’t optimistic about this) get a re-evaluation of the decision to moderate my original post (and/or possibly future ones)
With that in mind, I looked over the comment and email again, and I saw that fig367/dunravin2002 was essentially using only three basic arguing strategies, all of which shared many common features.
- all were either personal attacks, straw men, or red herrings
- all were distracting me from both my objectives and fig367/dunravin2002‘s behaviour
- all were absolutely irrelevant to fig367/dunravin2002‘s original moderation of my post
- The straw man is a logical fallacy in which an argument is based entirely on misrepresentation of an opponent’s position. It may contain valid logical statements, but since only the misrepresentation is being argued, the opponent’s position remains unchallenged.
- The ad hominem is a logical fallacy in which an argument is based solely on the personal demerits of the opponent and the opponent’s cited sources. However valid the asserted personal demerits may be, they do not challenge the logical merits of the opponent’s position.
- A red herring is a responding argument which may itself be valid, but which deliberately sidesteps and disregards the original issue in an attempt to change the subject or divert the argument.
- One variant of the red herring is the argumentum ad populum (Latin: “appeal to the people”), which is an argument based entirely on the fallacious premise that a proposition is true solely because many people believe it to be true.
I’ll be referring back to these from time to time as they arise. Any links within each quoted portion will link back here to show which logical fallacy is being used.
If for whatever reason anybody would like to read fig367/dunravin2002‘s comment and email in their original format, there is a link down the bottom of this post so you can view them in full.
And now, fig367/dunravin2002‘s comment and his subsequent email.
1. Bait And A New Rule Just For Me
- Author : D
E-mail : dunravin2002@…
Submitted on 13 February 2009 at 21:53
[…] it may have been helpful if you quoted the original personal ad to which you attempted to respond or at least linked to it so people can see fully what he requested. [message text omitted] This fellow is looking for guys. […] You are a woman. […] Therefore you can only offer, at best, a partial insight into his problem. An insignificant insight perhaps. Maybe even an irrelevant one.
Yes, he was looking for guys, yes, I am a woman, and yes, my insights may well be of questionable value. Fine. And I’m sure that posting that text would indeed have been helpful, fig367/dunravin2002.
However, I couldn’t find any group rules governing the standards of insights, and I wouldn’t want to be held responsible for putting you in the rather unfortunate position of being oh-so-reluctantly forced to ban me from the group, just for following your advice and publishing another member’s message without their permission.
Since many threads have already been published containing many insights of variable merit, would you please review your decision to moderate my post in the bdsmireland-personals yahoo group now?
- […] you persist in replying to people’s bona fide personal ads (where it takes a certain amount of courage to put one’s deepest and darkest desires out there in full view) often in a condescending and patronising manner. You may think that you’re doing them a service by pointing out how badly the ad is structured or what it lacks. […] It is not. It can severely damage the confidence of the original poster and discourage others who […] hesitate for fear that their open and honest attempt to connect with others will met be with ridicule and patronisation. They then feel excluded and isolated.
Fine, your personal slights notwithstanding, what does any of that have to do with my post which you moderated? My recent post wasn’t condescending or patronising.
I get that you haven’t liked my previous posts. You dealt with them at the time. You moderated them. It’s done, move on. Are you trying to say that you moderated this post simply because in the past I’d written others you didn’t like? Is every future post of mine going to be moderated because I’d already done some you didn’t like in the past?
You know, fig367/dunravin2002, in future I will do my best to appreciate how much courage it takes for a fragile, sensitive creature to bare his deepest, darkest desires by posting something along the lines of:
- im a nice guy, i want 2 b tied up+ spanked otk. fuck me hard in my man pussy with ur big hard cock+make me drink my own cum. no pro dommes.
where are all the true Dominate ladies? cum on, u know u want 2, why won’t u mail me?? ur all fakes + wannabes.
Yes indeed, shame on me for thinking that posts like this are
a self-absorbed demand to get their rocks off anything other than a fragile, sensitive creature’s bona fide open and honest attempt to connect with others.
- I’ve talked to people who have specifically mentioned you, Lubyanka, as a barrier to them posting on any site of which you’re a member solely because of your caustic responses to them and others. Therefore, I think you (or anyone else) has no business replying to any personal ad unless […] you might be interested in what they have to offer. If you can’t offer that much then I’d feel any reply you would make could be considered not relevant [..]
Attacking me here and now for my alleged offenses committed elsewhere in the past is pointless and irrelevant. If you want to address any actual specific offenses I committed in bdsmireland or bdsmireland-personals, then please name them and address them at the time they occur in the appropriate manner. What am I supposed to do about them now? And this is related to your moderation of my post how, exactly?
You know, having carefully reviewed the rules of bdsmireland-personals, I could not find any stipulations such as you mentioned which strictly limit posts to personal ads and directly dating-related responses to those ads. Obviously I cannot follow rules which I don’t know about.
I did find
- a post recently published in bdsmireland-personals by a bdsmireland moderator which fell outside your stipulations
- many threads in bdsmireland-personals which fall outside your stipulations
So I can only conclude that you, fig367/dunravin2002, have invented that rule for me alone.
Since my post is within the bounds of the specified rules which are applied to everybody else, please allow it.
I was first alerted to fig367/dunravin2002‘s use of the straw man fallacy by his extensive use of it in this next section.
In this section, fig367/dunravin2002 misrepresents me as if I had been against moderation in general. Since my issue was never moderation in general, this is not only a straw man, but also a red herring.
And so fig367/dunravin2002 disregards my query about moderating my post using unwritten rules nobody else is expected to follow, whilst at the same time he attacks me for a position I never adopted.
(I’ll deal with his trolling, sock puppeting, and personal attacking practices later)
- You seem to have a problem with moderated groups. […] Moderation filters out the crazy lunatics, the incessant ranters, ‘the chip on both shoulders’ brigade, time wasters, children, trolls and many many more who just want to cause trouble and bring bad energy. It protects privacy and reputation […] It brings some degree of order to the proceedings; otherwise ‘free for alls’ and flame wars ensue.
[…] I notice that you moderate comments on this blog to your own whim without answer to anyone. It’s your blog and you’ll allow what you please on it. Fair enough. Well it’s their group with their rules […] Why should you be upset about that? Is this not a double standard at work? There are nearly twelve moderators in the BDSM-Ireland group […] most or many are reasonable people and would not moderate, or allow to be moderated, a post or person without good reason.
[…] It is usually because they are a trouble-maker. Of course it goes on invisibly. […] On your blog you are a jury of one. […] Other malcontents […] have been popping up on sites over the years spewing disinformation, vitriol and bad feeling ever since. It’s pretty clear to me that the decision to censor these types has been vindicated. Do you want to fall into this category of crank? Do you really want every nutso out there to have a voice or full access to everything??? If so, that’s a recipe for anarchy and nothing good will come of it.
Blah, blah, blah.
Please allow my post which you moderated, and all of my future posts which are within the actual, stated rules already, fig367/dunravin2002. And please leave the done and dusted ones alone. You haven’t mentioned a single specific offense which I can address. So what the fuck am I supposed to do about it? You made a mistake moderating my recent post. I called you on it. Big deal.
Speaking of spewing disinformation, for the record, 6 of the 12 listed moderators of bdsmireland have been inactive for some years, leaving a total of just 6 active moderators at the moment. Furthermore, with regard to my post in bdsmireland-personals, the only active moderators of bdsmireland-personals are you and kahli. So your position (such as it is) is unsupported by numbers, fig367/dunravin2002.
I’m pointing this out for the record.
My blog is not a yahoo group, fig367/dunravin2002. Just in case you truly aren’t aware of the difference between a blog and a yahoo group community, I will spell it out for you.
How My Blog Is Different To A Yahoo Group
And Why That Is Important
|bdsmireland Yahoo Groups||My Blog|
|The yahoo groups known as bdsmireland and bdsmireland-personals are groups for the purpose of providing a community space.||I am one individual. My blog is my personal space.|
|Those groups have a community membership of thousands, and moderators are required to manage the participation of that membership.||I have no community membership to manage, and therefore no need of moderators to manage it.|
|People are attracted to the groups because they advertise and promote the facility to connect BDSM people to each other.||People are attracted to my blog solely because they wish to read what I have to say. I advertise and promote nothing else – no community participation, no community facilities of any kind.|
|People join those groups specifically so they can participate in those communities and connect with other BDSM people.||People read what I write because they choose to do so. Their decision to comment is unrelated to community participation. Nearly every comment is addressed to me personally.|
|Those groups remain alive and carry on solely thanks to member contributions.||I started my blog by myself, and continue it by myself. I am the sole contributor to my blog, and I am the only one who keeps it going.|
|If every moderator of those groups vanished tomorrow, the groups could easily carry on because of the active participation of the remaining membership.||If I vanished tomorrow at noon, my blog would cease updating tomorrow at noon.|
|Moderators can and often do impose limits on how group members may participate and interact with others within those groups. Moderator decisions directly affect thousands of group members.||My decisions which I implement on my blog affect only myself and my blog. My decisions have no impact on any individual’s interactions with others.|
There, all clear now?
I really hope you can process this information, fig367/dunravin2002. I really don’t want to hear any more about how me moderating you on my blog is the same as you silencing members for your personal reasons in your yahoo group.
- Is it possible that some of the exclusion and isolation you suffer could be down to the behaviours and actions taken by yourself? Is everyone else always wrong? Generally they are not. […] Were you seriously going to post stories (and lets be clear that they would be just that – stories) from anonymous strangers claiming all sorts of grievances and slights […] impugning the reputations of people or groups of people? […] If so, […] God help us all.
Ok, you know, this is still irrelevant to my post which you moderated, fig367/dunravin2002.
(please don’t ask me to tell you about the bit I edited out from here with the hermaphrodite newsreading tuna sandwich in it)
- Now seems a good time to state that I’m perfectly aware that you can moderate or censor this comment as you wish. You have that facility and you have that right. No problem. However, I would ask that if you do post this, you would do so in its entirety and not take selected bits and pieces out of context as you have done before with others I notice. This is an ‘all or nothing’ comment. I do not consent to anything less.
[…] You obviously felt you could freely publish private correspondence from the moderators of BDSM-Ireland here. Did you obtain their consent to do so prior to posting your ‘Recent Crap’ rant? […] Is this not another example of a double standard at work? […]
Um, I’m still waiting for you to address that post of mine which you erroneously moderated, fig367/dunravin2002.
I dealt with this in my previous post already.
I then published my second update, in which I mentioned the above
trollage comment, included a few brief responses to it, and mentioned my awareness that fig367/dunravin2002 were the same person.
I then received the email below.
1. The Gospel According To Sock Puppet
- From : dunravin2002@…
Subject : So wrong :)
Date : 17 February 2009 19:10:38 GMT
To : Lubyanka
My comment must have rattled your cage hard and then some. You’re jumping the gun massively there Sherlock. I am not Fig and he is not me. […] Nor am I a moderator or linked to any of the current moderators of either group. […] Who I am is really unimportant. Who I’m not is. I am not Fig367. The fact that you think it’s ok to make wild unsubstantiated allegations against any person with no proof whatsoever (apart from an ability to add 2+2+2 and come up with 222) speaks volumes about you and your judgment.
Right, more attacking, blaming, fine, I suck, my judgement sucks, whatever. Now, fig367/dunravin2002, can we ever get to that that post of mine you moderated, please? Everything else is just irrelevant red herrings, straw men, personal attacks, and hyperbole.
If you, fig367/dunravin2002, are happy to accept anything a sock puppet says when he refuses to identify himself, then good luck with that. Who you are may well be unimportant to you. Unfortunately, before I will trust anything
a sock puppet an individual says, I need just the teensiest bit more than that.
- If ever you wish to be taken seriously again, you should at least do the decent thing and withdraw that falsehood before you look completely ridiculous. I’m not sure how easy or hard it would be for Fig to disprove that he is me but I’m thinking it would be fairly easy for me to verify that I am not him. I may even enjoy doing so :)
Fine, I’m wrong, I suck, whatever. Before I start laughing my head off, I’m just going to remind you again, fig367/dunravin2002, that my issue is with my post which you moderated, which you have yet to address. So the accusations and threats of not taking me seriously and me looking ridiculous are completely irrelevant.
- Either prove you’re a unique separate, non-sock-puppet individual and identify yourself, or shut the fuck up.
Is this really the best you can do? No facts, no evidence, no proof of any kind, just “you’re wrong”?
Now for the laughing part.
Two words – R-u-b-b-e-r C-h-i-c-k-e-n.
It seems obvious to me that it’s waaayyyy too late for me to start worrying about being taken seriously and looking ridiculous now. :)
Actually, if you like ridiculous, I’m laughing right now at a grown man playing with sock puppets.
Tag, you’re it.
- I still can’t grasp the double standard of you whining about being moderated when you do precisely the same thing on your blog. Seriously, to any objective observer, it doesn’t add up. Nor does your explanation about posting private (not personal) emails from people who are not friends and colleagues. Erm, was that Randy poly dude a friend or colleague so? Why on earth did you have to go through the charade of establishing non-consensuality????? Again, more apparent hypocrisy.
Attacking and name calling me are still irrelevant and unrelated to my post which you erroneously moderated.
For your information, I refer your attention to the table explaining how a blog is a completely different entity to a yahoo group, and the stuff about privacy which I published before you sent me this
- It’s true I don’t like the way you treat people online but at least admit your erroneous charge against Fig and then maybe there might be a way forward through somewhat civilised discourse. Otherwise, whatever credibility you have left as a crusader for ‘justice’ is gone.
And now, brought to you by the fig367/dunravin2002 sock puppet…
Let’s play… “What’s… That… Lie!!”
Lady Lubyanka, you risk losing all your credibility! But you can keep your credibility (under false pretenses) and a whole lot more, for as long as you are willing to perpetrate a great, big, fat, whopping lie to everybody on the planet!
All you have to do is lie, and your false credibility as well as our fabulous mystery prize can be yours!
And tonight’s great, big, fat, whopping lie is …
- … that dunravin2002 isn’t fig367‘s sock puppet!
Lady Lubyanka, for your false credibility as well as tonight’s fabulous mystery prize behind Door Number 2, are you willing to take the lie challenge?
- *clock ticking*
Whilst you decide, our lovely Joelene-Patricia will show you our grand prize behind Door Number 2.
- *light music*
Thank you Bob. Tonight, Lady Lubyanka will be lying for our star prize behind Door Number 2! And tonight’s fabulous mystery star prize is…
*drumroll* [spokesmodel gestures]
- … “somewhat civillised discourse” …
with the fig367/dunravin2002 sock puppet!!
*applause* *music fades* *clock ticking concludes with a ping*
Well Lady Lubyanka, have you decided? What’s it going to be?
You know Bob, as tempting as it is to lie for that prize … As difficult as it was trying to imagine moving on with my life without lying … And as much as I love the idea of keeping my credibility under false pretenses …
But on the other hand considering that both the lie and the prize are totally irrelevant to the sock puppet’s moderation of my post …
… I think I’m just going to stick with honesty, Bob.
Thank you so much for playing “What’s… That… Lie!!” Lady Lubyanka.
[turns to audience] Well, unfortunately Lady Lubyanka couldn’t lie for us this week. Tune in next time for yet more lies, and even more fabulous prizes! Thanks to all of you here in the studio, and all our viewers at home for watching, til next time, byebye!
- *applause … fades out*
- The problem with having high standards Lubyanka is that occasionally we are obliged to live up to them. Do the right thing here for your own sake and sanity please.
I’m so disappointed that you never got round to mentioning my post which you erroneously moderated, fig367/dunravin2002! That was all I originally wanted, and all I’m still looking for from you.
Even a reason which fits the circumstances and the rules would be nice.
I know that fig367/dunravin2002 is in all likelihood going to try to counter this post by attacking me and blaming me for doing this or that or the other thing.
I also know that however hard fig367/dunravin2002 works to make my life difficult, I will continue to speak out. Any further hassle I get from fig367/dunravin2002 will be posted here.
The reason I am bothering to publish all of this is so that everybody can see
- the identity of fig367‘s sock puppet, dunravin2002
what happens when a person publicly queries a moderator decision on their post in the bdsmireland and bdsmireland-personals yahoo groups
I mean, I queried my fucking moderated post for fuck’s sake. Honestly, if you think about it, was the response I got actually proportional to that? Was it proportional for a group moderator to hide behind his sock puppet, troll my blog and spew vitriol at me for querying his royal moderatoriness’ decision?
- Was it?!
Remember that I waited before publishing my first post on this blog. There was ample opportunity to sort this out before these posts were published. If I’d had the least bit of rational response, and if this hadn’t happened so very many times before, then these posts could never have been written.
And then I speak out about this and all the shit in the world hits the fan. The whole world marginalises us enough as it is. It just seems stupid, pointless, and harmful to marginalise ourselves further. So I won’t be backing down anytime soon.
Entirely thanks to you, my lovely, lovely readers, I have a voice now, a voice I can use to express myself, a voice which can make a difference. And I can say it all here, in a place those people can’t touch. And entirely thanks to you, I’m going to make the best use of it I can.
You’ve given me my voice. I will do my best to honour your gift.
From the bottom of my heart, I thank you all. :)
- First attempt at a html table, done.
- First bloggy game show, done.
- Signed my name to my words, done.
- Posted, done.
- Do the right thing, done.