Quantcast
The Moderator Thread

Forums - Website Topics - The Moderator Thread

Hey, can we have a new rule for Official Metacritic/Opencritic threads?

Everytime one of these threads gets posted there's always people that delve into how reviewers are corrupt, bribed, etc. I understand their concerns, but it's not fun having the same discussion every time one of these threads pops up. Can there be a containment thread for the merits of review outlets or something? Talking about how review outlets are all corrupt, or reviews don't matter in a review thread is just off topic IMO.

P.S. If I ever talk about or respond to this sort of nonsense in Metacritic/Opencritic threads again, just give me a 5 day ban. Thanks.



Around the Network
Cerebralbore101 said:
Hey, can we have a new rule for Official Metacritic/Opencritic threads?

Everytime one of these threads gets posted there's always people that delve into how reviewers are corrupt, bribed, etc. I understand their concerns, but it's not fun having the same discussion every time one of these threads pops up. Can there be a containment thread for the merits of review outlets or something? Talking about how review outlets are all corrupt, or reviews don't matter in a review thread is just off topic IMO.

P.S. If I ever talk about or respond to this sort of nonsense in Metacritic/Opencritic threads again, just give me a 5 day ban. Thanks.

Not a bad idea. I'll have a chat with the mods and see what they think.



                                                                                                                                            

@CGI-Quality 

Your team needs to get their act together. Either you guys are oblivious or actively protecting trolls, but neither option meets the standards that a competent mod team should strive for.

Link to thread: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=240672

Yet another instance of o_O.Q creating a troll thread to lure people into his twisted arguments. The first problem is that the mod team doesn't seem to have a grasp of what trolling is, hence why his behavior doesn't lead to moderations. Instead you seem to follow some weird rulebook and are only willing to ban him for lack of substance in thread creation, backseat moderating or flaming, but his main offense trolling goes unchecked time and time again.

The thread was instantly called out for what it is and was going to be:
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9039145

Perplexing reply by CGI-Quality:
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9039185

What should have been done at that point is lock the thread and ban the OP hard. It doesn't take a clairvoyant to know where it would be going and what the OP would be up to. I give you credit for not moderating morenoingrato at that point though.

However, the moderation came later:
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9039217

The classic "don't call a spade a spade" rule triggered in all of its ugliness. The levelheaded person takes the punishment, the offender gets a free pass.

Of course the original poster himself becomes part of the topic because of his motivations. think-man's comment on that chatter:
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9039437

A rather vague message where only one thing is certain: The mod team protects the OP.

...

Quoting myself from a good month ago:
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9024845

In this thread it has been discussed that moderation plays a role in keeping this place alive. This topic isn't only a question of how to get new users to sign up, it's also about user retention rates. When I look around and see how the mod team treats users like Nintendo Fan Girl and Helloplite while o_O.Q returns from moderations, continues to do his thing and is not taken care of despite actual moderators engaging with him directly in threads, then I have to tell the mod team one thing:

You are doing it wrong.

It just doesn't make any sense that you treat members who are liked in this community worse than members who are not only disliked, but universally loathed.

...

There has been a pattern that the mod team does not respond in uncomfortable situations and instead opts to ignore and hope that issues go away on their own. What you accomplish with that behavior is that users go look for other forums, whether they are affected directly or indirectly by questionable moderation practices.

...

Then there is this:
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9006540

CGI-Quality said:

Crazy as it sounds, sometimes, it is more strategic to let a toxic user remain, as they can bring in site traffic. I'm not saying let it be a free-for-all, but controversy can be healthy. I particularly feel you in one area - mods shouldn't always be arresting officers. Sometimes, a simple intervention is enough. Loud and clear, I hear that!

This is probably why toxic users can get away with so much. The desire for traffic gets put over healthy discussion, and while that approach provides short term boosts with very active threads for a couple of days, I am convinced that it has done a lot of long term damage to the forums because people have the option to look for forums where things are better. As in, lively discussion without the necessity of toxicity.

The thing is that a traffic-first approach doesn't have to be bad, but the way moderation is handled makes it bad. You'll get a lot of activity if you allow people to freely talk about all aspects of a topic, so when o_O.Q makes one of his troll threads, let users talk about him and his motivations without limit. Since you aren't putting a limit to o_O.Q, you shouldn't limit morenoingrato or anyone else either. Should things go out of hand, you end it all by punishing the root cause, and only the root cause. That way you don't harm good users.

But when you do it like you actually do it, you run the risk that the site will become even more dependent on a traffic-first approach because the good users leave and only the toxic users can spark lengthy discussions. This means that things keep getting worse over time.

...

Conclusion

The appropriate course of action now is to undo morenoingrato's ban. Overturn the moderation and don't hold it against him in the future. Nobody else in the thread gets moderated; if it happened while I was writing this, treat it the same way as morenoingrato's case. The only person you have to moderate is o_O.Q with 14 ban days or more.



Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV (360+PS3) would outsell SSBB. I was wrong.

A Biased Review Reloaded / Open Your Eyes / Switch Gamers Club

Thank goodness I can filter Politics threads now.



LTD Sales Predictions: PS4 - 130m, Switch - 110m, XBO - 52m
2019 Sales : PS4 - 15m, Switch - 18.8m, XBO - 4.8m
2020 Sales: Switch - 22m (Peak Year)

I should become more toxic if i read that correctly

/in before thread ban



 "I think people should define the word crap" - Kirby007

Join the Prediction League http://www.vgchartz.com/predictions

Around the Network

@CGI-Quality Not sure if you accidentally referenced the wrong post in your ban note for Klaudkill, he edited it after the initial infraction, or I've missed something in my morning stupor.

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9039301



Chinese food for breakfast

 

COKTOE said:

@CGI-Quality Not sure if you accidentally referenced the wrong post in your ban note for Klaudkill, he edited it after the initial infraction, or I've missed something in my morning stupor.

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9039301

This is the post he got banned for: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9039331

Somehow he got unbanned after 2 hours, so the reinstated ban references the wrong post.



LTD Sales Predictions: PS4 - 130m, Switch - 110m, XBO - 52m
2019 Sales : PS4 - 15m, Switch - 18.8m, XBO - 4.8m
2020 Sales: Switch - 22m (Peak Year)

JWeinCom said:
KLAMarine said:

I don't think it's wrong to post an OP that is neutral and then let it be known where one stands on an issue later on in the thread.

No, it's not that the post is neutral.  It's that the OP is specifically claiming that THEY are neutral in the comments.  That they"don't know what they think about" the topic.  But you can see from OP's subsequent posts that they clearly have an opinion.

It's because a lot of people would simply avoid responding if they knew that they were in for an argument.  Pretending to be neutral gets people to respond that otherwise would not have, and then before they know it, they're in an argument, and because of the way we're wired, they feel compelled to defend it and keep posting.

OP wants to argue about it.  And if he wants to spend his time doing that, more power to him.  But he's trying to bait people into arguing who may not normally be inclined, which is why you saw such a strong reaction

The above quote about sums it up. Vgchartz needs a rule against pretending to be neutral in the OP, and then going full blown argument mode in the rest of the thread. Had the OP just said "This is B.S.! Transgender person has been discriminated against!" in the OP, then the thread would be fine. Granted, his opinion is wrong and a ridiculous one. Scratch that. It's not an opinion. It's a factually false belief. You can't discriminate against a person who is biologically still a man in this context, and in this specific situation. 

BTW I'm against people being called Trolls or the whole idea of trolling in general. It often leads to people getting banned for ridiculous reasons. Before I came here I made a thread in some other forums arguing that 3DS was infinitely better than Vita. I was open and honest in the OP that I thought Vita was terrible, and on the verge of death, while 3DS was amazing. Vita fans came into the thread, and tried arguing everything on the planet that Vita was superior to 3DS. I never insulted anybody, but was insulted multiple times, and called a troll in the thread. I kept getting accused of not wanted a genuine discussion, simply because I wouldn't bend to the ridiculous arguments being presented in favor of Vita being better. Eventually they issued me a 5 day ban, and I left the forums for good to come here. In hindsight I was beyond absolutely correct. Vita died completely in 2013, while 3DS flourished. Anybody saying Vita is better than 3DS in this day and age should be laughed at. 

TL/DR: People should never be moderated for their opinions/false beliefs, and accusing someone of being a troll basically amounts to a psychological attack. 

P.S. The correct way to handle that thread is to show how OP's idea is blatantly false, and contradictory. Then, everytime he posts a new thread, post linking to all his old threads where he's been proven wrong time and time again. This should be enough to keep people from being baited into arguing with him, that don't want to argue with him. 

Edit: You know what? Nope. OP's thread should be locked on account of being sexist, because it flat out is. It should be locked just as quickly as any thread stating that "Negroes are inferior to White Men, and deserve to be enslaved!". OP should be banned for a month for his ridiculous and factually wrong beliefs. 

Last edited by Cerebralbore101 - on 30 July 2019

In response to Rol's above post.

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9015351

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9015410

The mod team is well acquainted with the behavior of o_O.Q, including very recently, so this is indeed a case that the team should be looking at.

Last edited by Carl - on 30 July 2019

The thread was originally in general discussion.
Someone that just came off a (I think 2 week ban?) who has made many political threads suddenly make a general discuss one?
But instead of stating an opinion baited people into a "I'm not sure what do you think" type of argument.
It was a political thread. They have a political opinion.

The "salon closed" thread is just an extension of "Men Can Get Pregnant Too" and very much mirrors the discussions found in "On the Social Construction of Sex"

Do I think 'morenoingrato' crossed the line? Yeah probably. That was too aggressive. Do I think they would have said that comment if the thread were put in the right place? No I don't. It is the same as many threads and comments. It crossed the line, but it was a result of being baited and wasn't a natural comment.



  • Deadliest mass shooting by an individual in US history (10/01/2017)
  • Deadliest high school shooting in US history (02/14/2018)
  • Deadliest massacre of Jews in US history (10/27/2018)
  • Political assassination attempt of TWO former presidents(and 10+ other people)  (10/23/2018 - and beyond)