By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Website Topics - Moderator announcement - The "Shoot, Kill and Dismember the messenger" attitude

MDMAlliance on 20 October 2013

I don't think I've ever really resorted to calling out the OP for being biased for posting negative news, although I have to admit that I've definitely had that kind of vibe and did do this to a user post in a thread (pokoko specifically, which I admit I shouldn't have done and wouldn't do it again if I had a chance). Yeah, doing that kind of thing really only makes things worse and it seems like this could help calm down the forums a bit.



Around the Network
Turkish on 20 October 2013

Happened a lot to me, great that its finally being addressed.



Panama on 20 October 2013

You sort of get used to the passive aggressiveness after a while.



Jaywood2010 on 20 October 2013
bananaking21 said:
JayWood2010 said:


It isnt what it is stating at all.  It just means dont go off topic and call users out for their posting habits or call them biased just because the thread/comment is negative.  Comments should always stay on topic and by calling people out it leads to arguments when it could have easily been avoided.  Private message that person or talk to a mod about it. Plus they have a report button as well.


i agree. but he said that if i, for example, a sony fan, post negative news about lets say xbox one constantly i should be told to cut it out.  what i am saying is that if i keep posting false news or obviously wrong news, then yes. but if i post true news and actual news that is negative then no, i certainly shouldnt have to "cut it out". i can post what ever i want, negative or not. negativity isnt breaking the rules, what he is suggesting that it should be. 


Negative news isnt annoying, or at least in my opinion.  No reason for somebody to cut anything out that is factual.  It is annoying when somebody posts random blogs or opinion pieces that are negative "constantly".  The people who do this know who they are.  None the less they shouldnt be banned either unless they break a rule or if it is flame bait.  The rule people are mentioning that i agree with is making titles not so misleading etc. 

There is no reason anybody should be banned for having an opinion, positive or negative.  But people need to relax with "oh you are obviously biased because you dont like halo, uncharted, mario etc".

It is as if people think theyre opinion is the only one that matters so im glad this rule is being put in place.  It should cut out a lot of that nonsense out. I was talking to Maris earlier about it and it is the first time in months that i feel i can actually post stuff without the few people coming in every thread just to say something about me.  And there is many other users who has been put in this situation.




       

bubblegamer on 20 October 2013
psrock said:
Mr Khan said:
Part of me feels like this is a good idea, but another part does not. Unless this means that we have broader latitude to shut down threads (and moderate such thread-makers) that have a negative tone in them, to stop this sort of thing before it happens?

I would rather that we had come down on the side trying to stop the FUD spreaders, rather than hurt the people who are just reacting to that.

You are right. Why only go after the reaction and not the cause. Threads starters should be held to a better standards in this place, too many crappy ones, straight up neogaf copy, negative and Fud spreaders. It's simply not fun anymore. 

I second this. Too much spinning and spam going on in here to sometimes even notice the good news that gets posted by some of the more legitimate users. Just how many Pokémon sales threads are we getting daily? It's really dragging the quality of the website down.



Around the Network
TM25 on 20 October 2013

Good to know sales discussion about pokemon, is dragging a site dedicated to sales discussion down.

Perhaps rules should be implemented that force topic makers to actually engage in their own threads. There is at least one user who post his information (always negative) and then makes a hasty retreat never to be seen again in the thread. Meanwhile people are racking up moderations in those threads.



bubblegamer on 20 October 2013
TM25 said:
Good to know sales discussion about pokemon, is dragging a site dedicated to sales discussion down.

Perhaps rules should be implemented that force topic makers to actually engage in their own threads. There is at least one user who post his information (always negative) and then makes a hasty retreat never to be seen again in the thread. Meanwhile people are racking up moderations in those threads.


I see you've actually read my comment and understood it :S

No one is against discussing the sales. But do we need 20 different threads in doing so? One for sales of the first week, one for second, one for comparing to past iterations, one for first week US, one for first week UK, one for first week US+EU, one for the adjusted numbers of first week (every region all over again)??



TM25 on 20 October 2013
bubblegamer said:
TM25 said:
Good to know sales discussion about pokemon, is dragging a site dedicated to sales discussion down.

Perhaps rules should be implemented that force topic makers to actually engage in their own threads. There is at least one user who post his information (always negative) and then makes a hasty retreat never to be seen again in the thread. Meanwhile people are racking up moderations in those threads.


I see you've actually read my comment and understood it :S (hypocrisy and hyperbole are easy to understand)

No one is against discussing the sales. (Though you appear to be)

 But do we need 20 different threads in doing so? (Hyperbole the active threads are for the pokemon community now)

One for sales of the first week.  (You must have been irate when the site was doing this for every other large game right? (answer no))

one for second, one for comparing to past iterations (reactionary threads are annoying, but people criticising pre-order numbers and them being proved false with years of trend based data is not allowed now?)

one for first week US, one for first week UK, one for first week US+EU, one for the adjusted numbers of first week (every region all over again)??  (more unecessary and misplaced hyperbole)

Also it's frightful that you would criticise numbers being adjusted on a sales site.





bubblegamer on 20 October 2013
TM25 said:
bubblegamer said:
TM25 said:
Good to know sales discussion about pokemon, is dragging a site dedicated to sales discussion down.

Perhaps rules should be implemented that force topic makers to actually engage in their own threads. There is at least one user who post his information (always negative) and then makes a hasty retreat never to be seen again in the thread. Meanwhile people are racking up moderations in those threads.


I see you've actually read my comment and understood it :S (hypocrisy and hyperbole are easy to understand)

No one is against discussing the sales. (Though you appear to be)

 But do we need 20 different threads in doing so? (Hyperbole the active threads are for the pokemon community now)

One for sales of the first week.  (You must have been irate when the site was doing this for every other large game right? (answer no))

one for second, one for comparing to past iterations (reactionary threads are annoying, but people criticising pre-order numbers and them being proved false with years of trend based data is not allowed now?)

one for first week US, one for first week UK, one for first week US+EU, one for the adjusted numbers of first week (every region all over again)??  (more unecessary and misplaced hyperbole)

Also it's frightful that you would criticise numbers being adjusted on a sales site.



What a bitter way to respond. Never mind enjoy your argument and whatever it is you are going to fill in for me.

Hopefully we have some users here who are not as biased and understand what i mean. Pokémon was an example, it's not about the game itself.



Carl on 20 October 2013
pezus said:

You were moderated for the thread, not because of the reactions of other posters. The thread on its own was lock-worthy.


This is a straight up lie.

Mr Khan said:
Part of me feels like this is a good idea, but another part does not. Unless this means that we have broader latitude to shut down threads (and moderate such thread-makers) that have a negative tone in them, to stop this sort of thing before it happens? 

I would rather that we had come down on the side trying to stop the FUD spreaders, rather than hurt the people who are just reacting to that.

Well, why not moderate both? Moderate the obvious trouble causer and moderate the people who're acting like gimps in said thread.

That said, you will have to be veeeeery careful on who you moderate for making certain threads. You cant just moderate based on console/company allegiancies.

Has anyone been moderated for this yet?