I want to start with a disclaimer here. At no point am I attempting to attack individual moderators, adminisrators, or the decisions they have made. I fully support the vast majority of them, and I am content to disagree with the rest behind the scenes. I will use one or two here for illustrative purposes, but will remove the names of the poster, and admininistrator/moderator responsible for banning in an attempt to divert any and all attention away from the specific instance. If you know the situation I describe I would ask that you keep any conversation on it fairly vague so as to not name names.

The forum rules are entirely out of touch with how the forum is being moderated. I have no objection to the rules as stated, nor to the way the moderators have acted. At the same time there is no way to say the two are remotely close to on the same page. It is extremely common practice for a mod or admin to ban someone for an implicit rather than explicit rule. In all fairness to the posters on this board I would like to request that the implicit rules either be formalized, or done away with.

This is not in regards to everything that might broadly apply. For example, at some point fanboy was determined to be an insult and people warned/banned for using it. This is acceptable to me. It falls under the no insukts rule which is clearly stated in the rules (see rule 9). Similarly the "exclusive" rule makes a lot of sense to me. It is clearly stated and there for all to see. While not part of the forum rules as yet, there is somewhere you can direct people to in order to better inform them of the rule they broke.

This is a problem because one of the intended uses of the ban system gets under-mined. If it is intended to reform potential bad posters then there must be a clear list of things found unacceptable. When you get banned there is a message asking you to review the rules to find out which one you broke specifically (a fact learned from a RL friend having fun with me). This message is entirely meaningless in a large number of bannings. To show this I will have to get into more specifics.

The incident that set this off was a forum poster linking pornagraphic images on the website. The poster was permanently banned, and then unbanned some time later. I was shocked. How could someone violate the rules so blatantly and still be a welcome member of our community. I started to put together an argument to appeal to the admins to at least understand why this poster was allowed back. I looked first to the forum rules in order to cite exactly what he did wrong. I was shocked a second time. There wasn't a rule against it at all.

There are other instances as well. A very prominent poster was banned for consistently starting threads that were critical of a specific company. Most of them were true, but generally overly negative in the interpretation of events. I justified the ban, mentally, as an extention of the trolling rule. It would fit since the poster most likely was trying to just rile up a certain population of our forum. There is a nasty catch here. One that affects probably 80% or more of the bans that happen. There is no rule against trolling. Don't believe me? Go check. This thread will still be here when you get back.

The stated rule are often not enforced either. Specifically I am talking about the content rule (see rule 5). I can cite numerous times where posters will repeatedly violate that with no consequence. Posting specifically that only item A sucks is almost never actioned, and happens in a great number of threads. This is a problem for various reasons. If the rule is to stay enforced, then it will only ever be used as a scape goat to ban a member the particular mod/admin does not like. If it is never enforced then it gums up the moderation queue with invalid reports.

The only solution in my mind is to completely re-write the rules to have them reflect the actual guidelines to posting on this forum. Normally I would say this is the kind of request that should be made more privately. However, I feel community input is critical to this. Changing the rules is not a small under-taking. Things included or excluded can cause more head-aches than one could possibly imagine. So if the community at large is ok with the current state in light of the facts above, then who am I to say it should change? If the community is for change then it will be a signal that the current admins need to start getting plans in motion to have the rules better reflect the current moderation guidelines.

I would also like to apologize to any admins that feel I might be stepping on their toes here. I do not feel this is a decision that should be made by one or two people behind closed doors though. Ultimately the will of the community is the second most important aspect to forum rules. The only one higher being the site owners wishes, as he as the right to refuse to support certain communities.

If I am vague, or you would like more concrete examples of what I am talking about then please feel free to request it. I will be back as often as I can to clarify my position. Thank you all for bother to read this massive post.

Ok that is extremely helpful. Can I ask that a link to it be put in a more obvious spot and/or ban message redirect there as well?

I understand that you cannot possible create an exhaustive list of rules for every possible scenario, and that ultimately a lot will be up to mod discretion. However, I disagree that the most common, or severe offenses need not be included. This is not a court of law, but this, essentially, a society of rules. Like I said in the very begining, I do not have any specific disagreement with any individual mod action. There is absolutely no rule that even hints at a no trolling policy. Given the behavior found on the vast majority of gaming forums it is not hard to believe that this rule does not exist in many of them.

It is a touch like saying "don't put your hand near a blade when it is on," but there is also some benefit in it. Users can report precisly which rule they feel is being violated, and a moderator can handle frivilous complaints over bans in a similar manner. In my mind it would help take some of the stress off the moderators. In my mind many things work though, and not all of that translates into the real world.

But the "item X sucks" is a different issue. That is stated, but not enforced as a rule. I will not comment if that is for better or for worse, but that is the state of things. Having an unenforced rule seems a little odd to me when enforced rules are not explained.

In the end though I will respect that this is your site. If you are entirely happy with the way it is set-up, then I am not going to complain publicly. You provide a tremendous service considering the cost, and the last thing I want to seem is ingrateful. I know of a couple of other users who share my complaints, and thus this thread was created to see if we were a tiny minority or not. I do appreciate you taking the time to deal with this though.

I personally have reported, in one way or another, many of these offenses. Many times it goes unpunished. What really grates me, and why I used it as a specific example, is when a mod will post after such posts and no moderator action has been taken. Of course there could be a moderator rule in place where they are meant to only act on reports which I am unaware of, and have seen on other websites.

Gnizmo your request is reasonable and it is time I updated the forum rules. I'll start working on them now and hopefully have something up tonight.

i got in trouble for just saying "yawn" on a boring thread... but i sayed sorry :)

Thanks, Gniz. The moderations taking place on this site have no rhyme or rhythm. You'll get banned for something one day, and watch 15 people do the same thing the next with no consequence. I've been banned for arguing back and forth with a member, BACK AND FORTH, and I was the only one banned. The rules and terms of service are one thing, the Moderators are here act like bias is just a natural thing we have to deal with. If I say something criticizing the XBOX 360, if a diehard 360 fanboy moderator happens to see it, I'm banned. But if a more level headed 360-favored mod sees it, or a neutral mod, or PS3-biased mod, or Wii-biased mod, they'll just add to the conversation. *edit* The problem with that scenario is, a die-hard console-x fanboy will ALWAYS see the negative comment about their console and almost always ban for it.  At least, such is my luck anyway. 

I dont mind people saying Console X sucks. As long as they have a valid argument and they clearly state thats it is an opinion and not fact. As long as they dont say Console X sucks all the time aswell then no harm done.


Also one thing that has got me about this site though it is my most visited and loved site is the following.

Why is it if a mod likes certain games or a console you can get banned for saying something negative about. Not trollish mind. Just something Negative. heres and example



a thread about Forza 3 graphics. Everyone was saying how good the game looked and tbh it did look ok. Then a next thread by the same poster poped up saying new real gameplay footage OMG bla bla whatever.

Anyway i check out the footage then say the games doesnt look as good as the images that have been posted and that it doesnt look that much better then Forza 2. The i got banned.

I didnt argue against the decision i just thought ok cool.



@OP

thought the rules dont need changing because many of the things you have stated should be common sense really. The mods need to be a bit more consistent with the reasons why they ban people and treat everyone the same in a ban situation. In threads i have been banned for what i have said the is like 20 other posts saying the same or worse who dont get banned.l

Phrancheyez your mod history reads like a guide of the things you should not do on these forums, including numerous instances of insults and trolling. You have never been banned for "an argument" you have been banned for: calling someone a baby, calling someone a fanboy, calling someone a troll, trolling yourself (multiple times), calling someone a moron, calling someone an idiot.

You should not be complaining about the forum rules, as if anything me updating them will only lead more quickly to a permaban for you if you continue to act the way you do.

People you cannot see another member's moderation history.

This means that just because you reported someone and they weren't banned does not mean that they were not moderated. We have warnings as well, and since moderation is progressive (repeats of the same offense result in harsher penalties) you have no idea what they "deserved" and it's not for you to say. The lack of the same ban for the same penalty is not a sign of inconsistency because the punishment is different for every user based on their individual behavior.

Well this is not a thread about the mods, this is more about updating our forums rules which needs it.

I agree with you Gnizmo. I've had issues with some things in the system for a while now, particularly the pornographic incident. The issue of perma-banned members coming back over and over again seems to be one that is troublesome particularly for this website. Overall I think the moderation is decent and a few changes in the rules could make the forums a far more enjoyable experience.