For the most part, I love the mods, but sometimes I really don't get you guys and how you decide when something constitutes trolling or flaming. Lately, I've been really pissed with the uneven treatment of comments that express negative opinions about games. Like recently with Bayonetta 2, I could scarcely go a day without seeing some negative comment about how it's going to fail, or cheering its failure, or just generally finding joy in the misery of anyone that wanted to see it succeed. I've reported some of these posts, and often they're in a thread that several mods take part of themselves, like the COMG thread. Other times they're "will it sell a million" threads or "it should/could be ported" threads, but there's usually a comment or two like this at the very least in all these threads. And Bayo2 is just one example. I saw it with the Star Fox franchise when people were discussing the new Star Fox game, I've seen it all over the place with long running franchises like Mario, Zelda, Crash, or Halo. I've never actually seen someone banned for this.

Yet recently, in a thread about a rumored Banjo-Kazooie game, WhiteEaglePL was banned for saying that he hopes the game fails. The grounds for the ban? "Trolling Microsoft". Yet the post CLEARLY has NO MENTION of Microsoft WHATSOEVER. Here's the post. It doesn't say Microsoft, it just says he hopes "it" (the rumored game) fails. It mentions The Wonderful 101 failing as well, does that mean he's trolling Nintendo? He's not trolling any system or company, and in fact he's not even trolling Banjo-Kazooie fans. He just doesn't like the series. What's wrong with having that opinion? If someone comes into a thread about a rumored Flappy Bird sequel and says they hope it fails, are you going to ban them? Because you shouldn't, that's stupid. If you are going to ban them, are you going to say they were banned for "trolling mobile platforms"? Because that's even more stupid. If you're going to ban WhiteEagle, it's ridiculous, illogical, and unjust to ban him for "trolling Microsoft" when his post was about a game, not a company, expressed no ill will towards the people themselves who were fans of the game, and then in turn to not ban everyone who trashes Bayonetta, or Star Fox, or Mario, or Crash, or Halo, or any other game or franchise that people are constantly trash talking, wishing to fail, or relishing in the failure of.

At its root, this is a complaint about consistency, but also about justice. Bans for trolling particular games are extremely rare, and this one was particularly unjust and illogical. I can live with the fact that my reports are routinely ignored because having a negative opinion about a particular franchise and wanting to see it fail doesn't mean the person hates me, my taste, or my preferred console. But when someone is finally banned for it and the mod responsible just assumes that a simple statement of ill wishes for a game is made for the sole purpose of pissing fans of a company off and not just a reflection of the poster's distaste for the franchise, I gotta say, I'm pretty damn pissed. You ignore all sorts of shit and THIS is what you finally ban someone for? No one was insulted, no one was told their taste in games was bad, no one was in any way personally affected by this one user's opinion on Banjo-Kazooie. Yet apparently having a dissenting opinion about a game DOES in fact constitute reason for banning, and all those reports you mods ignored from me, all those other countless posts with similar negative opinions about game franchises that were overlooked by the mods even when they started arguments, that VASTLY outnumber the very few that ever see mod attention, those were all apparently flukes.

Are reports anonymous?

I was just given the power (powah!) to view all previous (dismissed or otherwise) reports.

My heart...

Yes. He does have a free pass to create baiting threads.

Why?

That gif is pure win. 

Totally nails it! xD

Ka-Pi is correct.

Also as for the above issues, on my phone so can't say much but Toastboy has indeed been moderated countless times, infact he was yesterday also. To a degree. Sometimes Toastboy makes threads which are obviously attempts to stir up the fanbase, other times they look like his honest opinion. The key is either way it's currently against the rules to complain and attack in the thread, just report the thread and move on. That way you won't get banned.

There's still no defense for Fusion, he even expected the ban. Hence the warning was posted in thread after his ban because others were getting close to the line. As it was, Kowen didn't cross it again or get too close thereafter, and there were other reports. The first post, yes I agree it's one which could be moderated but I guess someone decided that due to the thread warning iy wasn't required. 

Anyway yeah, hope that helps 

Fusion was the only one who made it personal. His only contribution to the thread was to attack kowenicki. 

Regarding toastboy. He does not have a free pass. Nobody has a free pass. About the specific post... Do you think it is really worth a moderation? Do you think one guy saying he thinks that Sony fans are the only people complaining about a problem is worthy of a permaban (Because that is very likely what would happen with one more bait moderation)? Or do you think its better to send him a pm giving him a slap on the wrist and giving him an extended warning?

Maybe if another moderator would have dealt with it, but I dont moderate in a robotic style. I am more than willing to give people a little leeway if the issue is borderline. I am not going to enforce the ruleset as if they were cast iron, "You do this and we ban you" rules. I view them as a guideline and I said this before I even applied for the job. I have said this since I joined the team. I think talking with people before straight up moderating them can potentially have huge benefits not only to the specific user, but to the community as a whole. If toastboy continues to act like an ass, despite being spoken with? Then sure. I would support a permaban. Now though, as things stand, I see him as a harmless little puppy that once in a while shits on the carpet.

Regarding kowenicki, he never actually brought up that the PS4 also has the "problem". He was replying to Vivsters apparent (I dont know myself) mistake in saying the PS4 had it better than Xbox One. Actually, if you look closely at the thread itself, it is full of known Sony supporters acting concerned or saying how good the PS4 is. Should I moderate these people too? Should I moderate the Xbox supporters who only posted to deflect a bit of bad news towards PS4?

Do you really think that these offenses are worthy of a lengthy ban?

Or should I send a pm warning to one or two people and moderate the one person who took it one step too far?

If you think I am wrong with my style, by all means send Kantor and Smeags a PM asking for me to be removed from the team.

Was this the outcome Carl? 2 warnings and a moderation? Because thats basically the way i see it going from a moderation point of view.

The three users I see breaking the rules and actually causing the thread to go a certain way are Toastboy, Kowenicki and fusioncode.

Toastboy's initial comment was what sent the thread down the wrong path and imo is a bannable offense. He derailed the thread and flamed an entire fanbase: "The only ones complaining about it are Sony fans IMO" This was the 2nd post of the thread and an entire fanbase was already singled out.

He then took it a step further and implied that anyone who complains about (Xbox One) long loading times are psychologically wrong or Sony/Nintendo/Ouya fans. This is further insulting other users and clear flaming. But as you said if Toastboy is one away from Perma then best warn him and leave it at that.

Kowenicki makes a similar post that seems to be a veiled attack on a specific fanbase with "It staggers me how little ps4 owners know about the xbox one and yet spout it anyway." My issue with this post is that it was a reply to Vivster, basically implying that Vivster is making a bias post, which i dont think was Vivsters intention. Not only that but, again, the generalisation of the "PS4 owners" is what causes flame wars and baits other users. I think I've had this discussion with Torillian in the past that generalisations like this about fanbases causes lots of damage, more so than targeting a specific user, because more often than not its the specific user that are the problems and not the fanbase as a whole.

Fisioncode's post was unfortunate and a clear violation of the rules, no discussion needed there.

Other than those three posts/posters, i didnt quite get the same feeling from the thread as you did "Actually, if you look closely at the thread itself, it is full of known Sony supporters acting concerned or saying how good the PS4 is." So to answer those questions of yours, nobody else needed to get banned moderated. I think we should remember that its okay for people to be bias, they just need to be on topic, civil and within the rules. And to add further to this, if your second post in the thread is already calling out a fanbase, then said fanbase would likely come to defend their stance.

Anyways I just felt like giving my opinion on this.

I definitely think there should be a bigger discussion around posters who make sweeping generalisations of entire fanbases, as i feel this really gets the flame wars going. I have in fact seen moderators making similar comments about entire fanbases which is very unfortunate. But as it is now this isnt against the rules, but it should definitely be imo and at the very least mods shouldnt engage in that kinda talk as that sends out a message to say its okay.

Also i dont think classicgaming disagrees with your style and i certainly dont think he wants to go to the head mods and ask for you to be removed.That really wont help anybody. Not only will they not remove you, but it will also kill any further disucssions and i think there is still room for discussion here.

Almost got it right. It was 1 warning and 1 moderation. kowenicki didnt have any action taken against him, as I didnt think he did anything really wrong. Toastboy as you say was part of the problem and he was dealt with in a way where he wouldnt be permabanned. He accepts it, he says he will keep his nose clean (If he does I do not know, but he should considering whats coming if he doesnt).

Im all for a more open discussion regarding the generalising of fanbases. As it stands now, its a very borderline thing that has no clear ruling. Some people will say something that will push it over the line, others will say things that will keep them on-side. If we do have to create specific rules based on generalisations then I personally would like some input from the forums on what would and wouldnt be acceptable. I also agree that it doesnt help at all when moderators also take part...

Other than that, thanks for the input! Its great to see detailed posts and opinions in this thread.