what?
-
-
-

__________________
Steph
If you get a warning, put on yer manpants and stop whining about it.

Even though I disagree with about 99% of what the banned person said, if there is no solid proof that he was in violation of TOS then he should be allowed on the forum. Lest we let VMD become like Guantanamo Bay, where we punish people with no proof.

yes the stakes are that high.

__________________
Steph
If you get a warning, put on yer manpants and stop whining about it.

wow, try to stick up for the mods and got sarcasm. awesome

maybe...but stil, ya'll took the unprecedented action to permanently ban a school offical AND remove all CMU advertisements from vmd. It was pointed out by SOE i believe in another thread that the location on rl's profile pointed to the reason why he was banned - multiple accounts- i would have, and i imagine most of the regular posters here as well, thought this was because vmd HAD proof that rl had multiple accounts (and note to rl, in my previous post i did say IF you were banned for multiple posts not that I was saying you were).

I know other times when there were investigations on someone they were temporarily banned, basically pending the outcome of the investigation, so if there were any questions they could be addressed, then a decesion made.

If rl didn't have multiple accounts, then of course the TOS doesn't need to be changed, but if he did and this rule is bent for him, because he IS a school offical, - then it really shouldn't be there- it would be unfair to have one set of rules for some posters and another for others, just based on their status here.

__________________
GI Elective [x]....Wards []
Wards [x] ............Night Float []
MICU [] .............Wards []
Wards [] ............CCU []
Elective!![]......... PGY 1 1/2 []
VACATION!!!! [] .Move Complete[]

The decision to unban a person, in this case Rl, is made in the face of presented "Evidence" or doubt raised against our own data. In an effort to be fair and equitable, a position as Steph has pointed out has benefited many users here, if there is credible evidence to suggest otherwise and based off of other factors, leniency may be given. Though on a shorter leash and much more watchful eye.

__________________

If the glove doesn't fit.....

These were two separate actions which were decided independently of each other and should not be linked as Moderation and Advertising issues are handled by separate entities and NEVER mixed as that would be a conflict of interest. The fact that they occurred within the same week or so is merely a coincidence.

With regards to the CMU Banners, the campaign has been suspended pending CMU's listing with IMED, the minimum requirement. The VMD Advertising Team made this decision when the IMED recognition was not made available within the alloted time given to CMU to provide such documentation. Once they are proven to be recognized by IMED, the suspension will be lifted and the banners will be able to appear again as before.

All users, whether Officials, Mods, registered users, etc, are treated the same. In the case of multiple accounts, our system plays a big part in this as it often catches them on its own based on certain criteria. Once a certain threshold of criteria are met, the system will automatically ban the multiple accounts and indicate this in the "location" of the user's profile.

Although considered very accurate, there is still room for error. In those cases, we manually verify the findings. If we don't find indisputable proof to verify the findings (very rarely will we not find enough evidence), we will give the user the benefit of the doubt and reverse the ban under a more watchful eye (which happened in this particular case).

Since the accounts were banned automatically in this case (and with most multiple account cases), the Moderator investigation was done AFTER the ban instead of before. That is the reason why the account was listed as such during the investigation, and I suspect that most would not have even noticed had it not been a School Official or other popular poster.

But the fact is that we decided that the School Officials would be treated as any other users, hence the ban for suspected multiple accounts AND the reversal when there wasn't enough evidence to support the suspicion after our investigation.

I hope this helps clear things up a bit.

__________________
Doc
Site Administrator

What I do not understand can you be more specific.

__________________
Moderator: USMLE Step 1 Forums, USMLE Step 2 Forums,USMLE Step 3 Forums.

Some day I will be the next Goljan/Daugherty/fysher for IMG's all over the world.

It was a bad joke. I likened the OJ simpson trial (reasonable doubt) to the ban on RL.