He is asking a question, not reporting an issue.  He is not reporting content at any standard but asking a simple question that could have easily been answered.  Is he making some report?  Because im definitely not seeing it.  That is not against the rules.

Lets look at the post and you go ahead and tell me that he was making some kind of report or complaint.  Sounds to me like he was asking a question that could have been answered and everybody could move on

Pezus's Comment

I don't understand, what is this directed at?

I didn't "give the game away" because I didn't know he was an alt. I commented on his wall because of his ban explanation, which said he was an alt. I was surprised he was an alt, honestly, because, as I said, he was very different.

User was moderated for this post - Conegamer

Don't want to derail the well earned roasting the mods are getting for the ridiculous Pezus ban (and trust me, I like the site better without him here so I am not pushing an agenda with that comment), but can someone please put an end to the idiotic practice of banning people for quote threes please?

I understand that when something becomes very massive, a friendly reminder could be in order, but banning people for quote threes is a fundamental misunderstanding of what moderation should be about. (It is setting an arbitrary and stupid rule, then ban people over it to exercise influence. In other words, abuse of power).

they usually don't ban people for quote trees unless they have already been warned like 5 or 6 times.  If you haven't learned not to have excessive quote trees after that many official warnings, then they need something more severe to remind them not to have quote trees.  

Since they have started enforcing, these forums are much easier to read and navigate.  Personally, I don't see any problems with the strategy they are using with quote trees.  

Read the full post that he quoted, before deleting half of it - http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=6261622

He asked the question... After he was told to drop it and take it to the designated thread.

Taken from rule 16 - "If you have a problem with a moderator, send that moderator a private message, and if you are still dissatisfied, send a private message to axumblade, the Lead Moderator."

He knew the rules, he ignored them, he got himself banned. Its as simple as that. Like I just told you, you both posted in the thread that explained the whole thing. Conegamer gave them all fair warning.

I dont know how I can explain it clearer. I dont know why we are still talking about moderations made in April.

I'll field this one as it's my ban. The key really is in the ban reason and therefore the context:

Other ("At any rate you know the drill by now. Don't discuss it here, or you'll be banned. PM Smeags or Axum with complaints or voice them in the official thread. " I gave you that fairly straightforward warning (which you quoted), yet you continue to discuss it in the thread rather than in a PM. You've not really left me with much choice here.)

The part in quotations is what pezus removed from the quote in the above comment. Don't discuss it here or you'll be banned. PM Smeags or Axum with complaints or post them here. It was something which he saw and went out of his way to delete so he could continue the discussion. Yeah, it's a simple question. I'm not going to deny that. But mod criticism in that thread was running wild so firm lines had to be draw frequently and pezus was a victim of this. 

I still stand to this day (and I will for a long time to come) that he could have just sent that in a PM. What is exactly "PlayStation" about that comment? What would have been lost if it was in a PM? Why exactly, did the other users need to see that comment? And why did pezus remove the part about posting and you'll be banned from his quote? Put all that together, and you arrive at the inevitable conclusion - there wasn't much wiggle room due to the previous warning and thus he had to be banned. But even so this is now three months old and has been discussed-at length-in this thread before. 

As for quote trees, I hate moderating them but they're a nuisance and as much a rule as any other. When I moderate them I give them ample warnings; an informal warning, a PM, a formal warning, then a ban if it's a recognizable pattern (one 4-quote tree will not get you a ban; a handful of trees 5 or more will). Even so, only three users to my knowledge have been given bans, compared to hundreds of informal warnings, messages and pointers. If you can't do it or provide a valid reason after being called out on it three times, then it's also a case of "disrespecting the site rules" as much as it is a ban for quote trees. 

I mean come on, if you've been warned three times you'll keep an eye out on them, right?

I do feel like this was a poorly implemented moderation.  Conegamers comment before didn't make much of any sense.  Unless he was refering to some private conversation being had, otherwise it is was a poorly communicated response.  Pezus was just trying to figure out what he was talking about.  It almost seems like a mod trap from an outside perspective.  

Also, Carl, you have said previously in this thread that you don't really care if people comment on perma banned members walls, in fact, you feel members are entitled to it.  That is essentially the same thing, just in different locations on the site.  Both would fall under the last rule on the forum rules, no?

Lastly, jay, I feel like most people have moved on from this moderation.  Sometimes you just have to move on.  Chalk this one up to a moderation you don't agree with and put it behind you.  You obviously aren't the only one that disagrees with the ban, but its done.  Pezus is gone.  Lets move on.  If something similar happens again, then we can revisit it.  However, I believe the mods have learned from this experience, no matter what they are saying here.  I don't anticipate moderations similar to this happening again anytime soon.  

Ive read it carl.  Pezus was asking what it was directed at.  That isnt complaining about moderation, making some report, its not even questioning the moderation at this point etc.  He asked what that "It will not" was directed at and got banned for it.  Not against the rules.  All coneg had to do was say what it was directed at.  A litle clarification for him really wasnt that big of a deal.

I would have walked away after post #1 if carl wasnt constantly posting for me to show examples. examples, examples, over and over again.  Then he basically says screw the community, what i say goes and no matter how many people disagrees ill do it anyways.  Bravo to him, really, speaks a lot for the community.  Act like that and there is the exact reason people stop coming here.  Treat the community like shit, they dont have to come here and they wont.

Here's what can be done: Shorten the damned quote three if it's so annoying. Quote threes are a minimal annoyance, something that shouldn't really be more than a best practice hint at the most. To issue mod warnings for it is stupid, to ban users for it is full on retarded. Banning people for repeated ignored quote three warnings is the same kind of Holier than Thou attitude that got people so upset at the Pezus ban. It's a ban that is put down not because the behaviour is detrimental (the quote three itself) but because someone dare ignored the almighty warning of a mod who suddenly got a bug up his ass. That is ridicouls moderation behaviour, but not surprising when you see how the mods view themselves and tehir team in this thread for example.

well, to be fair to carl, it was because you were still complaining that they weren't listening to you.  Obviously they don't agree with your assessment, thats why I am saying put it behind you.  

Honestly, I find that I enjoy things a lot more if I have a positive attitude about them.  I tell my students the same thing.  If you have a negative attitude, you are going to hate math, however if you are positive about it, you may still not like it very much, but it won't be nearly as bad.  Right now, I think you are looking at everything the mods are doing through this negative lense, and it is just making you madder and madder and less happy with everything they do.  My advice, take a step back, look at what is going on from different perspectives.  Try and be more positive about how things can change and I think you will find a lot more success, both in what kind of change you can enact, as well as in your feelings of the site and the moderation team.  The end result being just a much more enjoyable experience.  

Thats my two cents anyway...