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

Forums - Website Topics - The Mod Team: Questions, Comments, Concerns? Ask Here!

Conegamer on 03 April 2015

Slade and Kapi are both very much correct. We have the benefit of seeing post and moderation history for more informed decisions. Far too many people think it's OK to stealth troll and get away with it, which merely creates a more toxic environment.

Such posters need to be clamped down on if it's a constant thing, and it's something that I hope is more of a focus to produce a more positive community in future.

 

As for this case...yeah I don't think there's much more to add that Kapi and Slade haven't already. Excellent work!



 

Here lies the dearly departed Nintendomination Thread.

Around the Network
Mr.Playstation on 03 April 2015
Ka-pi96 said:
Aeolus451 said:
Ka-pi96 said:

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/forum-rules.php#content

  • Flamebait and Trolling. Posts or signatures slamming a particular platform without basis - be it a specific console, macs, windows, or anything similar - will not be tolerated. This applies to specific games as well as consoles.

  • Consider that:

    • You cannot create threads, posts, signatures, etc. just to bait people of a specific fan group. Bait threads will be locked and you will be moderated for them. If you spend a lot of time making hit-and-run negative threads or posts about a specific platform, you will also be moderated at the discretion of the moderators

Bolded the important parts.

No the post wasn't an 'attack' on anybody. However, by saying that Microsoft won't bother talking about the Xbox at all at E3, it was clearly an attempt to bait Xbox fans. Some even took the bait further showing it as a flamebait post.

Post history absolutely should matter for moderations. He could have just posted that he hopes to see plenty of PC stuff there as well and not said what he expects specifically leaving out Xbox. His history is why that is a problem, it isn't the first time he's said (or in this case implied) negative things about Xbox so there is a clear pattern there. Someone who has a pattern of anti-Xbox posts is likely intending to troll or bait people. If however he had been someone that has shown he likes Xbox previously and occasionally makes a joke or two about it then that post shouldn't be moderated as the intent is just to have a bit of a laugh.


#Ka-Pi4mod

#Downwithsmeags

(Jk) Excellent post Ka-pi



Send a Friend Request On PSN :P

Aeolus451 on 03 April 2015
Ka-pi96 said:
Aeolus451 said:
Ka-pi96 said:
Aeolus451 said:
I disagree with Burek's recent ban. I just wanted to get that out in the open just so others know.

Why do you disagree?

Because the post by itself was not an attack on MS, any fanbase or person. By itself, it wasn't baiting. People should be punished because of a post that breaks the rules by itself then their posting history should only play a part in the severity of their punishment.

Posting history shouldn't make it easier for someone to get punished regardless if their posts actually break any rules or not. It simply makes it to where if someone shows any bias, they'll just be walking on thinner ice over time. They get banned more easily and for longer lengths of time. 

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/forum-rules.php#content

  • Flamebait and Trolling. Posts or signatures slamming a particular platform without basis - be it a specific console, macs, windows, or anything similar - will not be tolerated. This applies to specific games as well as consoles.

  • Consider that:

    • You cannot create threads, posts, signatures, etc. just to bait people of a specific fan group. Bait threads will be locked and you will be moderated for them. If you spend a lot of time making hit-and-run negative threads or posts about a specific platform, you will also be moderated at the discretion of the moderators

Bolded the important parts.

No the post wasn't an 'attack' on anybody. However, by saying that Microsoft won't bother talking about the Xbox at all at E3, it was clearly an attempt to bait Xbox fans. Some even took the bait further showing it as a flamebait post.

Post history absolutely should matter for moderations. He could have just posted that he hopes to see plenty of PC stuff there as well and not said what he expects specifically leaving out Xbox. His history is why that is a problem, it isn't the first time he's said (or in this case implied) negative things about Xbox so there is a clear pattern there. Someone who has a pattern of anti-Xbox posts is likely intending to troll or bait people. If however he had been someone that has shown he likes Xbox previously and occasionally makes a joke or two about it then that post shouldn't be moderated as the intent is just to have a bit of a laugh.


It's why I mentioned post history before and why I disagree with using it in that way. A post that by itself doesn't breaks the rules suddenly breaks the rules because that user has a history of criitizing a particular brand or showing bias. Do you know how easily it would be to say someone is trolling, flaming or baiting others with using post history like that? There's plenty of flaws in this.

There's a lot of alt usage in the forum on this site, that's far more toxic to the community and discussion in general than someone who skirts the rules.  I see a lot of profiles that have under 50 posts and been here for 5 years. Is that a way to get around building up a negative post history or just to attack a user or brand? 

In my opinion, post history should be used to determine the scale of a punishment. It also stunts discussion amoung people with differing opinions in fear of building a post history or bias.

 



Aeolus451 on 03 April 2015
Ka-pi96 said:
Aeolus451 said:


It's why I mentioned post history before and why I disagree with using it in that way. A post that by itself doesn't breaks the rules suddenly breaks the rules because that user has a history of criitizing a particular brand or showing bias. Do you know how easily it would be to say someone is trolling, flaming or baiting others with using post history like that? There's plenty of flaws in this.

There's a lot of alt usage in the forum on this site, that's far more toxic to the community and discussion in general than someone who skirts the rules.  I see a lot of profiles that have under 50 posts and been here for 5 years. Is that a way to get around building up a negative post history or just to attack a user or brand? 

In my opinion, post history should be used to determine the scale of a punishment. It also stunts discussion amoung people with differing opinions in fear of building a post history or bias.

The mods often say when they are looking at reports they try to find the context behind the post and post history can often provide that. Maybe that means some things wouldn't be bannable for some users while it would be for others, but what people post isn't as important as why they post it. If someone has a post like Burek's then you have to ask is it just an attempt at a joke or is it intended to annoy Xbox fans? Looking at posting history it seems much more likely to be one than the other.

If you don't want your post history to count against you in the future then just don't post any antagonising comments.


Personally, It's not an issue for me but I would like to see bans for actual posts that break the rules versus ones where it was based off of post history. 



vivster on 03 April 2015

I think the mods went overboard with this one. If light trolling like this was enforced in every part of the forum we wouldn't have any users left to ban.
 Seriously, if these small digs would've been directed at anything else than one of the big 3 companies it would get a pass.

 What's even more problematic is that in this case it was extremely ambiguous. The mods and Xbox camp simply decided that VR/AR is a bad thing and as such all posts that mentioned it got a bad rep. If I had written "It will probably 95% games and one VR trailer at the end" I wouldn't be anywhere near a warning. Because apparently mods and Xbox camp decided that VR is bad and games are good and anyone who pretends otherwise is trolling.
What if I had written "I hope it's 95% VR/AR" because I had a genuine interest in this matter? Or in the same way "I hope it's only about Halo". What would you have done then?

While X1 trolling is rampant on this forum(as much as Nintendo and Sony trolling) I think the big ban hammer on everyone was a mistake. It seems reactionary because the Xbox camp got banned first and there was a desire to simply even things out.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

Around the Network
vivster on 03 April 2015
Ka-pi96 said:
vivster said:

You missed a few other categories in the dupe thread motivation.
People who just don't give a shit and people who only put minimal effort into checking. That's why I said "obvious dupe threads". I have absolutely nothing against dupe threads that fall into the categories you mentioned. Though I only except rush hour dupes when they are within 10 seconds. If it is too much effort for the thread creator to make one last check before they click submit then they don't think their thread is worth it and it might as well be. Such behavior shouldn't be encouraged by just doing nothing against it. Making a thread isn't twitter or a youtube comment. It's the start of a hopefully lively discussion or to spread important news. But the way some people treat threads in these forums is unbelievably disrespectful to anyone actually putting at least minimal effort into their threads. Not taking the time to check which topic you are posting in is just another example of this and another factor actively contributing to dupe threads.

Don't those things kind of go against each other? The forum rules as they are mean if there are duplicate threads then the better thread not the earlier one is the one that remains open. So that is already encouraging people to put effort in to the thread and take their time. If you rush it and put in minimal information while someone else took the time to make a decent OP then your thread will probably be locked. If you are only going to accept duplicates made within 10 seconds then it's just a case of rushing to make the quickest possible thread and people won't care for actually putting a decent amount of information and sources in to the thread.

That's missing the point. I don't mean that people have to hurry. With 10 seconds I mean that if a thread is posted more than that after a previous thread that means the thread maker didn't check before submitting his own thread.

If he sees that there is already such a thread and deems it unworthy he can still post his own one and mention it in the OP. But nobody does that because simply nobody checks for dupes just before clicking on the submit button. Which really shouldn't be a big deal, browsers have tabs now.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

Aeolus451 on 05 April 2015

Any mod online at the moment? I have a question about a GIF that I'm thinking of using.



Aeolus451 on 05 April 2015
spurgeonryan said:
Aeolus451 said:
Any mod online at the moment? I have a question about a GIF that I'm thinking of using.


Did you read the rules?


Yes but the GIF in question is technically fine but it skirts the line. :D 



Conegamer on 05 April 2015
Aeolus451 said:
spurgeonryan said:


Did you read the rules?


Yes but the GIF in question is technically fine but it skirts the line. :D 

Then what is it?



 

Here lies the dearly departed Nintendomination Thread.

Carl on 05 April 2015
Aeolus451 said:
Any mod online at the moment? I have a question about a GIF that I'm thinking of using.


Hey. This link tells you who is and isnt on. Found through the Members tab.

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/members.php?name=&gender=&keyword=&country=&type=Moderator&order=Last+logged+in 

My inbox is open to any and all NSFW content, if you dont feel good posting it here.