CGI-Quality said:
Nah, we can discuss this in here since it has already began. Just for the future, use the email. |
Ok.
For starters, I actually knew that Amy was talking about all my replies in that thread so I'm ok on that end. That's why I linked the reply that didn't receive the moderation warning, because it was obvious she was referencing that one more so than the other one.
I simply don't see what is backseat moderating about it. My point was not whether or not the thread was "legal" on VGChartz, but rather why it was needed. I don't think that's a criminal offense. I don't think I should have reported the thread either, in fact I think that would be much worse than actually discussing the thread with the topic creator. Discussion is what this site is for and it's much better to dissect an OP than just report it, especially because he didn't do anything wrong by creating the thread.
Most arguments come from a similar mindset anyways and have the same end result. When you argue with someone you're doing it because you believe your position more than theirs. The end goal of arguing is to have the other party come to the conclusion that they can agree with your position. That's most discussion on this site. And the final result of that agreement is that they don't repeatedly say/post similar comments in the future. So in the end the result is the exact same, they don't post comments that they now view as unnecessary or wrong. What I wrote wasn't that different from any other discussion, it just started with the necessity of the thread as a starting point.
My posts wouldn't have changed that drastically either had I just not questioned how much the thread was needed. It's not like I just kept repeating that and left it at that. I provided a counter-point for the OP which was the backbone of my argument. Had i just kept repeating it nonstop - yes, maybe it would have been a bit douchey. But I basically just repeated it as much as GoOnKid replied, because that was the point we were discussing. I only repeated it because we were discussing the comment, the moment that he stopped replying I didn't interfere with the thread further.
In hindsight it simply would have been better to just cut to the chase and explain why the argument wasn't well thought out, but I just don't think it's harmful enough for a moderation (Not that I'd care about a warning but, the progressive ban system and all).
