I'd like to post here to check the grounds on why I've been banned.
I was once banned before and complained to the moderator via PM, but I never got an answer, not even to say "shut up". So I'm afraid I'm going to send him a PM and not get any reply. I was banned by Bristow9091 on the grounds that I "attacked the Nintendo fanbase". He also said that I should, in the future, avoid posting on Nintendo threads. He also mentioned that my posts, and of course the post in question, is "not constructive".
This is my post:
I say that Nintendo fans don't care about third party AAA games but they get excited about them as soon as they get third party AAA games and celebrate how Nintendo does have third party AAA games.
How is that an attack?
Besides, other members posted things that don't look really constructive about EA and they didn't get any moderation, such as:
-- One said that "EA is ALL about exploitation"
Can I say that "Nintendo is ALL about exploitation" without being moderated?
I once said that on Nintendo, games that are old and cheap on other consoles get re-released on Nintendo platforms anyway, being far expensive and nobody complains. and I got moderated for attacking Nintendo (That happened last year if I'm not mistaken).
We can say that a company is all about exploitation, but I'm sure I'd be moderated if I said that Nintendo is all about exploitation.
-- The other says that "EA is all about gambling" and it EA would trash Nintendo's image
Could I post that Nintendo is all about gambling in that negative sense without being moderated on VGC?
-- The other posts "EA is lazy and want the path of least resistance to money"
Is this a constructive post? Could I change EA for Nintendo, post the same single sentence and not get moderated round here?
-- Other posts: All the Nintendo fans I know hate EA and refuse to buy their games
Except that it's said "fans I know", it's basically a general opinion about Nintendo fans. It's said that Nintendo fans hate EA.
Why would they hate EA? Can I say Nintendo fans hate AAA third party games without being moderated? Probably not. Can I say they hate EA? I guess yes.
Unless you help me being less confused about Bristow9091 reasoning, I'd say that he's been biased and used a disproportionate moderation against me.
I also feel that Nintendo is a protected brand on VGChartz, because I see, even though I haven't a list of those posts as evidence, many attacks, negative comments and jokes against many groups and companies without any moderation, while against Nintendo it's almost never tolerated.
I bet I can post "PS doesn't have many quality games and the fans buy it anyway", and it's just an opinion, but if I say things like "Nintendo games are too expensive and Nintendo fans buy it anyway" (which is an opinion that I have) I'll be moderated for sure. I can even try doing it now and check my 1 week ban later on.
Having looked at the situation, I can understand some of the gripe, but I also see why it lead to a moderation. I'm not going to detail your history, but some of it does contain specific infractions related to Nintendo (and/or its fans).
Take these words from your previous moderation as an example: "I'm not claiming anything about lacking variety and nothing to play. I was talking about myself. It offers nothing to play FOR ME. Damm, You're the Nintendo warrior all the time, relax. You're quite annoying to be honest. And, no you're absolutely wrong. All in all, Nintendo has so many draughts, it's not even a joke anymore. Since Wii days. Every year, Nintendo has huge slow periods of 4 to 5 months. That's me claming now.
Nintendo is the queen, king and lord of draughts".
In regards to that specific topic, what you posted was antagonistic, inflammatory, and off-topic. The bold part(s) are especially bad. I personally don't get the need for stuff like that. Regardless, it added a mark to your history, and because it was recent, it carries that much more weight as a result.
Your latest post is another generalization of Nintendo fans. Throwing in the "ps stuff can kiss my ***" (as a continued means to highlight Nintendo fans in a generalized light) just capped it off. It was unnecessary. The posts you quoted, while borderline in some cases, don't carry the weight nor history of yours. I agree that no company should see any form of unwarranted attack, but context is key here.
Now, I have seen others say that we are protective of certain brands (Nintendo often leads this), and it may need a closer look from us, but all that is a side step to your specific situation. I get that you are frustrated, but the moderation stands on the basis of the sum of all parts involved.
Last edited by CGI-Quality - 2 hours ago