Which is silly. I don't want to get away with things that I shouldn't and EVERY SINGLE TIME I knowingly do something wrong I contact a moderator and tell them so they are aware and can deal with it appropriately. A two-point infraction is far from appropriate and such heavy-handed moderating only causes resentment and leaves me afraid to post, and would do much worse to less vocal members.Originally Posted by Russt
I'd like to go ahead and make two points:
1. I have never been banned.
2. The reason I have never been banned is that I am more conservative with my posting when my points are high.
I feel that the system is not excessive in any manner.
And anyone who ventures the funhouse knows I push and push for my pleasure.
Its a game of give and take.
I fail to see why people put so much emphasis on criticizing the infraction and ban system. After all, you shouldn't get infractions or bans at all. I really don't know how can you even get infracted so much, and this is not directed towards anyone.
Actually what Chompy says is what should really happen.
Truth be told, it is harder to:
Accumulate infractions and get banned
vs
Post a picture of pornographic-nature
...and get banned. Think about that, for a moment. Actually, even for a joker like myself, I find it really hard to get infractions. I've gotten mostly warnings, and some infractions during posting here. Only time I got banned was for that one picture.
BombsAway - why can't you argue more often like you did just now? You called no one an idiot, broke no rules, and still got your point across. I don't think doing this is too much to ask of any member. Following these rules is very simple. Be mindful of what you say to other members and you should be just fine.
I'd agree with you regarding the two points if the rules stated that points are doled out based upon the moderators feelings on what it should be rated, but even that I think is unfair. Everyone on this site receives two points for a flaming infraction or nothing for a warning. It's been like this since day one (or at least, since it was changed to 2 points last year, and that was done with a public notice). How is this heavy-handed at all? It's the same infraction for all people. Read the rules and then you won't be in the same situation you were in ten days ago where you had "to walk on eggshells". If you don't want to be banned, don't push the issue.
Being "a little mean" is not against the rules, and neither is "being aggressive". You can do both and still stay within the confines of the rules. Calling other members idiots or dumbasses (not saying you are, just a hypothetical member), even if all evidence points to it, has no point or relevance in any conversation. Ev-er.
I do take everyone's point of view when deciding things for the forum constantly. I took the forum's opinion on Flugzeug before I did it. I asked users what they thought about moderation in a Democracy poll and amped it up accordingly. I took user's input when creating the Marketplace, and I have even asked users about the possible creation of new boards (boss board, call to action). I asked people what should be done about the Angry Dome. I ask users for their opinions pretty consistently, so I find it surprising that you think everyone's opinions get overlooked.
One last thing, if you run to the police every time you did something wrong, how do you think that would affect your life? If you report yourself for a violation and get marked for it, where's the sense in complaining about that?
Imma go ahead and agree.
Pornography should be 2 points under banning.
Repeated usage and obvious abuse of pornography should be a BAN ON SIGHT.
By abuse I mean mults and etc.
Never mind, Fiel got my point across quite nicely.
That being said, I've always been a fan of the GFAQs system where moderations aside from warnings, and bans really don't do much to you.
This is a MapleStory forum Chompy. Porn shouldn't even be present here.
We ride a fine edge on the funhouse.
Also explicit wording would fall under that category.
In my world this is in infinitely grey issue.
Note if one posts an image from www.bigcockspineappleingthings.com.com then yes.
But lets take Takashi Murakami's My lonesome cowboy.
I posted an image but due to the rules immediately changed it to a link.
But its an art piece on par with ancient Greek works so...
Where is the line.
Link to image.
EDITED:
Southperotica is the line.
Your point is? I've been a mod in a general-gaming related forum in which the entire purpose of the forum is for gaming, and gaming only. I've witness pictures of pornographic nature being posted. Though I completely understand your point, it doesn't mean there will be a complete absence of porn. Same goes for trolling. It'll always be there if the user chooses to create it. The correct way to handle this is to find the proper and respective punishment for those violations. First offense, they get this. On 2nd offense, perma-ban, ex.
You're acting as though the R&R didn't exist. We DO have proper punishements for it, namely Autoban for porn and 2 infraction points for trolling. Just because something happens to be in a place doesn't mean it belongs nor does it make it appropriate for posting.
That suggestive images or text is okay, porn, like we all acknowledge it, is not. There's no grey zone there.
There is no grey zone on what is pornographic?
I, and thousands of others, would strongly strongly disagree.
If you think you might be crossing the line with what is pornography, you have already crossed it. It's better to not post and be safe.
I have done that I and still adhere to that.
The link that was chinchilled was originally an image I spoiler posted then edited to a link.
Because I like SP.
We shouldn't be stretching our freedoms guys.
A forum's structure isn't a democracy :) Admins just want it to seem that way.
And on the topic of porn being allowed... There must something wrong with people to think that it is even slightly acceptable. If you want to look at porn, go to a porn website.
And also. It's ILLEGAL to show porn to anyone under 21/18 (forgot) without a warning.
I don't think we need a "Enter If you are above 21" button on our homepage as a warning.
__________________________________________________ _________________________________________
I honestly think the Warning System is flawed. I think it should be stricter on the topic of people being allowed to make another account.
It's not very hard to avoid warnings and infractions. I myself have NEVER gotten one due to simple self-constraint.
I think it's 18, unless it's different in different parts of the world
And yeah, wow. I don't get how people could accidentally post porn. Just make it a ban
I disagree with this, Sarah. Punishments are set in stone for your protection. They ensure that everyone is treated equally for doing the same things. Your punishment for a crime should never be based on the subjectivity of the person addressing the crime. You attacked someone I don't like, you only get 1 point. You attacked someone I like, here's 5 points. That is an abusive way to run the community. They're specifically hard coded based on the severity of their social impact (ie: how many strikes you get for each offense, flaming you get 3, 4th is gone). This removes the moderators from having to weigh the severity of your crime and makes them responsible only for determining if one has occurred, reducing variation.
For punishments to be truly fair they need to handed out consistently and enforced equally.
I do argue like this often, especially on the forums. I'm far more abrasive on IRC but that's because it's active conversation and I'm not thinking about what to say next. I can only think of a few instances on the forums where I've attacked anyone and that's always after long term agitation. I explained my position to Bomber without attacking him in four or five posts in another topic a day earlier and then he brought it into a completely separate topic and started up again. Clearly this doesn't justify my actions but I'm just making the point that it's not like I laid into him after a single post.
I was convinced that I had recieved a single point infraction at one time for flaming but upon looking again, that's not true. However, flaming is really broad and should probably be even further broken up. As far as I'm concerned "flaming" should be a single instance single point infraction if the offense is minor (calling someone dumb, stupid, ugly, etc. Just being mean for little reason.) Someone says something they shouldn't and get a point for it. Harassment, on the other hand, is continued flaming or attacking someone on a personal level (like calling someone .) These are clearly very different offenses but under the current system are valued equally which allows some people to get away with too much and some people to get away with too little. Granted, there are rarely full-out harassment cases here, but as the community grows there will be and I don't see any reason not to separate them currently besides maybe it being too much work, though really it's not.I'd agree with you regarding the two points if the rules stated that points are doled out based upon the moderators feelings on what it should be rated, but even that I think is unfair. Everyone on this site receives two points for a flaming infraction or nothing for a warning. It's been like this since day one (or at least, since it was changed to 2 points last year, and that was done with a public notice). How is this heavy-handed at all? It's the same infraction for all people. Read the rules and then you won't be in the same situation you were in ten days ago where you had "to walk on eggshells". If you don't want to be banned, don't push the issue.
But it's a real shame that you think it's okay for your members to feel like they can't speak their mind. That's the message I'm getting from the end of that paragraph. Don't push the issue to me sounds like don't be yourself. I don't push any single issue on the forums, all of my warnings have been single instances. So I don't see any other way that I should take that.
When it comes to things of little importance or general interest you're open but look, 50% of the suggestions forum is locked. Some of those ideas are awful but there are some good discussions that just get ignored or dismissed. Swerve made a thread on this very subject just a few days ago and you (or eos? one of you) said it didn't need to be revised but here we are, with your new banning standards and expectations. I was watching and didn't see this brought up to the public at all before you posted this. In general I've found you to be very dismissive about things you don't agree with. That's hypocritical for me to say because... ahha, but I'm not a leader here.I do take everyone's point of view when deciding things for the forum constantly. I took the forum's opinion on Flugzeug before I did it. I asked users what they thought about moderation in a Democracy poll and amped it up accordingly. I took user's input when creating the Marketplace, and I have even asked users about the possible creation of new boards (boss board, call to action). I asked people what should be done about the Angry Dome. I ask users for their opinions pretty consistently, so I find it surprising that you think everyone's opinions get overlooked.
You're not the police, though, and nothing I did or have ever done is comparable to something anyone would report to the police. But, for the sake of argument, if I were to kill someone and went to the police myself; I'd still be punished but you can bet your bottom dollar the punishment would be far less than if I ignored it or ran away from it. If I am going to be mean in real life I will make it a point to warn people before hand, and I would excuse myself afterward, knowing what I've done isn't the right thing to do. This has happened before. I take responsibility for my actions when I know I'm at fault, and while I shouldn't get a reduced punishment for it, I shouldn't get punished MORE for being accountable. It was said that I wouldn't have recieved the infraction had I not said anything. How is that fair? It's not like the post had a good chance of being missed, it was in the current most popular thread in one of the most active forums. I should've been punished regardless, it's a problem if the moderation here only finds it necessary to infract those who admit to their faults.One last thing, if you run to the police every time you did something wrong, how do you think that would affect your life? If you report yourself for a violation and get marked for it, where's the sense in complaining about that?
You're right that it shouldn't be about your feelings for the member but that's not what I meant at all. It should be entirely based on circumstance, not feelings. If I punch someone for no reason I'm going to be charged. If I punch someone who's attacking me I'm going to get a break. Not all punchs should be treated the same. In this case I verbally attacked someone who had (imo) provoked me for several days beforehand, and in any justice system that would be taken into account when dealing out the punishment. That may make more work for the moderation team but that's your job. Everything isn't black and white. As a moderator you should be willing to do some investigation. The job is a responsibility.
Here's another case of an infraction I recieved but do not agree with (not bringing these up to contend them, just to make points.) A few weeks ago that death123 person was in the social section asking people personal questions, and it was clear that he was just screwing around but other people didn't seem to get that, and so they kept trying to help him by telling their own stories which were mostly terribly embarrassing. My fears of him being a troll were confirmed by the end of his stay and I called him out on it so others would recognise it and stop. I didn't want anyone else to be embarrassed and I spoke out in order to prevent that and draw attention to the situtation. Obviously the appropriate thing to do would have been to call a mod but what I did wasn't harmful in anyway, and yet I recieved a 1 point infraction for a trolling accusation. I am completely against falsely calling people trolls and have spoken out on that subject quite often and the rule against trolling accusations was put in place. This rule should be used to stop people from throwing it around and discrediting other posters but there are certain cases, this one specifically, where it's necessary to call someone out to prevent harm to others. Trolling accusations specifically should be based on the users history and not on their single post. If you feel you don't know the user well enough to determine whether their use was appropriate or if this sort of behaviour (repeatedly calling someone like Greg a troll is borderline harassment anyway) has been continuous, you should take it up with the other moderators before issuing an infraction. I'm sure there's a mod forum for exactly this purpose.
Running out of steam.
Last edited by Sarah; 2010-01-02 at 06:49 PM.
Posting Permissions
|
|
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks