Wow, mods are one sided

[yamahasho]

Lol, not one mod in this discussion actually denies favoring Red Bull.

I guess you all are human too and have some favorite team.

My favourite teams were Team Lotus and Williams Grand Prix Engineering, currently no favourite (team or driver) - when it boils down to it, I am an engineer, I enjoy the engineering. Engineering doesn’t really have a side.

You can create a conspiracy with no evidence and absence of evidence is proof of nothing at all.

I’m more of the engineering side as well but getting back on topic, the opening allegation was the mods favor one team or another, any lack of denial usually means the allegation was never denied. If this was a court matter, a defendants failure to deny an allegation may lead the court to determine that the defendant has admitted to the allegation.

No proof is needed, just the lack of not opposing the allegation is enough. Courts do this all the time.

[yamahasho]

Lol, not one mod in this discussion actually denies favoring Red Bull.

I guess you all are human too and have some favorite team.

Literally denied in the first page!

I must of missed it then, I saw a lot of discussion pointing to the rules of the forum but no outright denial.

[Stu]

Lol, not one mod in this discussion actually denies favoring Red Bull.

I guess you all are human too and have some favorite team.

My favourite teams were Team Lotus and Williams Grand Prix Engineering, currently no favourite (team or driver) - when it boils down to it, I am an engineer, I enjoy the engineering. Engineering doesn’t really have a side.

You can create a conspiracy with no evidence and absence of evidence is proof of nothing at all.

I’m more of the engineering side as well but getting back on topic, the opening allegation was the mods favor one team or another, any lack of denial usually means the allegation was never denied. If this was a court matter, a defendants failure to deny an allegation may lead the court to determine that the defendant has admitted to the allegation.

No proof is needed, just the lack of not opposing the allegation is enough. Courts do this all the time.

That really isn’t true, a court requires evidence or proof of wrongdoing.
Conspiracy theories are created through a lack of proof, mod bias is a conspiracy theory, supported in this forum by fans of different drivers & teams (often at the same time).

[yamahasho]

My favourite teams were Team Lotus and Williams Grand Prix Engineering, currently no favourite (team or driver) - when it boils down to it, I am an engineer, I enjoy the engineering. Engineering doesn’t really have a side.

You can create a conspiracy with no evidence and absence of evidence is proof of nothing at all.

I’m more of the engineering side as well but getting back on topic, the opening allegation was the mods favor one team or another, any lack of denial usually means the allegation was never denied. If this was a court matter, a defendants failure to deny an allegation may lead the court to determine that the defendant has admitted to the allegation.

No proof is needed, just the lack of not opposing the allegation is enough. Courts do this all the time.

That really isn’t true, a court requires evidence or proof of wrongdoing.
Conspiracy theories are created through a lack of proof, mod bias is a conspiracy theory, supported in this forum by fans of different drivers & teams (often at the same time).

I guess it's the court of public opinion, and the perception that users are seeing, is that the mods are Red Bull bias, this is a public forum and like any other public position, perception is everything. Not facts or having proof. I think you all do a good job, i've taken myself to the limits before and have been warned and many of my posts were deleted, I'm okay with it, but as for this discussion, I can see where the opening poster is coming from.

[dans79]

That really isn’t true, a court requires evidence or proof of wrongdoing.

Depends if you are talking about criminal or civil court, O.J. learned that the hard way!

[Big Tea]

That really isn’t true, a court requires evidence or proof of wrongdoing.

Depends if you are talking about criminal or civil court, O.J. learned that the hard way!

The US has the Fifth amendment and UK has the right to silence, but both have the assumption of innocence. In many countries this is not so and the onus is on you to prove it. If the UK/US or Napoleonic system, there is still the feeling that if enough mud is thrown some will stick. So...

[dans79]

That really isn’t true, a court requires evidence or proof of wrongdoing.

Depends if you are talking about criminal or civil court, O.J. learned that the hard way!

The US has the Fifth amendment and UK has the right to silence, but both have the assumption of innocence. In many countries this is not so and the onus is on you to prove it. If the UK/US or Napoleonic system, there is still the feeling that if enough mud is thrown some will stick. So...

The 5th amendment doesn't really matter in civil court. that's why I mentioned O.J. he basically won his criminal case, but lost his civil one!

[MadMax]

That really isn’t true, a court requires evidence or proof of wrongdoing.

Depends if you are talking about criminal or civil court, O.J. learned that the hard way!

The US has the Fifth amendment and UK has the right to silence, but both have the assumption of innocence. In many countries this is not so and the onus is on you to prove it. If the UK/US or Napoleonic system, there is still the feeling that if enough mud is thrown some will stick. So...

Using the right to silence can be used against you by a clever prosecution, however.

[Big Tea]

Depends if you are talking about criminal or civil court, O.J. learned that the hard way!

The US has the Fifth amendment and UK has the right to silence, but both have the assumption of innocence. In many countries this is not so and the onus is on you to prove it. If the UK/US or Napoleonic system, there is still the feeling that if enough mud is thrown some will stick. So...

Using the right to silence can be used against you by a clever prosecution, however.

( and Dans)

As I said, if muck is thrown, it sticks enough to sway a decision that is not 'provable'

[hollus]

Lol, not one mod in this discussion actually denies favoring Red Bull.

I guess you all are human too and have some favorite team.

Literally denied in the first page!

I must of missed it then, I saw a lot of discussion pointing to the rules of the forum but no outright denial.

Third post:
"If your post was about things, it probably stands, no matter the color.
If your posts was an attack on other posters, or tainting and teasing, or repetitively inflammatory, it is probably gone, and if not it should be. Red or blue or green or papaya."
The colors are of course a metaphor for the current big 4.

[AeroDynamic]

Well, lets examine an example of the one sidedness here.

this post is directed at me in the Red Bull thread:

dude's a RB hater and a merc zealot since the start, just ignore him.

moderators refuse to moderate it and let it pass. It sat there for well over a week, and I only saw it today as I was looking for an old post.

When I respond today with the same sentiments, its reported immediately, I get the warning and my post is deleted. The moderators reasoning about my post applies to the instigating party who broke the same principles the mod is preaching to me in the private message accompanying my warning.

Lets quote the remarks from the mod that clearly apply:

Why the need to be personal and what would be wrong with confessing a soft spot for RB?

I am taking the post as a personal negative, sort of insult, really? And in any case as really confrontational.
Please drop the personal stuff. Live and let live. You are bringing the hostility along.

so its ok to call someone an RB hater but not an RB lover.



shout out to three letter mod, hes the best new addition we have had.

[AeroDynamic]

We can be imperfect. Especially while browsing thousands on posts. Guilty as charged.
Go personal once, and you might get lucky. Or not.
Go personal again and again, and it will get noticed.
Getting most things mostly right most of the time is as much as I consider it sustainable to aim for as a mod.

This reads like a bunch of excuses. funny these excuses fall so consistently on one side.

Even your interpretation of punches are warped depending on who's posting. Its been pointed out to you, the punch above, and you took no further action, but moments later, laid out reasons to delete another post, that perfectly fit reasoning to delete the original offending one.

Who are the mods kidding with that 'thousands of posts a day' rhetoric? we're talking within 2 digits at most in a single thread.

[chrisc90]

I dont think there is any 'sided-ness' with the mods. Im a RB fan and ive had posts that have crossed the line removed. Absolutely fair game.

If there is something you dont like, why not hit the report button and give a explanation in the little box and youve done your best.

[yamahasho]

Literally denied in the first page!

I must of missed it then, I saw a lot of discussion pointing to the rules of the forum but no outright denial.

Third post:
"If your post was about things, it probably stands, no matter the color.
If your posts was an attack on other posters, or tainting and teasing, or repetitively inflammatory, it is probably gone, and if not it should be. Red or blue or green or papaya."
The colors are of course a metaphor for the current big 4.

Thank you, doesn't really do it for me though. And like they say, silence is complicit.

Sure the mods can say there isn't any proof to say they're siding with Red Bull and are indirectly protecting Red Bull's reputation. Very easy to say that since they deleted most if not all the red bull bashing posts.

I think the Johnny Depp case is a good example, in the UK, I believe he just didn't have enough proof or the burden of proof was too high. However, in the USA, he was able to convince a jury. I understand one system may work better than the other but clearly the mods are not seeing both sides.

The mods should share one username.

[hollus]

“The mods” is about half a dozen people. Assuming a monolitic view is just that, assuming.