Have you contacted the Mod who issued your moderation?
And if you bring your issues into a public forum, you bring the public into it. For better or for worse, that's how this works.
Have you contacted the Mod who issued your moderation?
And if you bring your issues into a public forum, you bring the public into it. For better or for worse, that's how this works.
Smeags said: Have you contacted the Mod who issued your moderation? And if you bring your issues into a public forum, you bring the public into it. For better or for worse, that's how this works. |
whats the point, look at the post and be objective yourslef.
and here i though that means its discussion with the mods.
The moding on this site need to be openly discussed and challanded due to its clear bies interpretation of the rules by those that use to much feelings and not enough logic. The lack of any true standart of enforcment and fair treatment for all is rampant and its not like many wouldnt agree.
BeElite said: whats the point, look at the post and be objective yourslef. The Mod Team: Questions, Comments, Concerns? Ask Here!and here i though that means its discussion with the mods. The moding on this site need to be openly discussed and challanded due to its clear bies interpretation of the rules by those that use to much feelings and not enough logic. The lack of any true standart of enforcment and fair treatment for all is rampant and its not like many wouldnt agree. |
Because you just came off a ban, I'll be nice.
But read the OP please, especially this part:
I asked whether you asked the mod who moderated you because... he has the reason for why he originally moderated you. I cannot speak for him.
I will say that you have a (very) long history of taking shots at Microsoft/Xbox, so that our patience for any little jab at them is wearing thin. So it's not a fact to say that the whole world is very anti-Xbox/Pro-PS.
But that's what I would say.
Smeags said:
Because you just came off a ban, I'll be nice. But read the OP please, especially this part:
I asked whether you asked the mod who moderated you because... he has the reason for why he originally moderated you. I cannot speak for him. I will say that you have a (very) long history of taking shots at Microsoft/Xbox, so that our patience for any little jab at them is wearing thin. So it's not a fact to say that the whole world is very anti-Xbox/Pro-PS. But that's what I would say. |
But it is a fact, sales wise it is. Its a comment thats factually backed by sales in a sales thread, 100% of the markets agree. How is it not a fact to say the word is anti xbox and pro PS is PS4 is outselling the xbox in evey marlet everyhere.
If you lose a game 1-2 1-9 or 1-50 its still a loss, this is the same thing. Not a single market can be used to dispute my statemnt, and its was a sales thread. Not some general what ever that could be interpreted in any way. It was about sales.
My comment was on point on topic and backed by numbers.
RolStoppable said: First off, something not related to this post. You've made it clear that sending a PM to the moderator in question is the quickest way to get an answer. However, all of you guys use the mod chat, so if an issue with a moderation gets posted in this thread, I expect that moderators who visited this thread make the moderator in question aware of a raised issue. There's still no answer to Fusioncode's ban. Now for the above mentioned consistency. You banned Dr. Henry Killinger for calling someone who wasn't present in a thread a "tryhard". The user (Jega) who was called that word is just that, so this is a very similar situation to the Fusioncode incident. But it doesn't stop here, because I skimmed through the thread: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=191434&page=1 It's filled with people who mention Jega, toastboy and thedrill, with only the latter being present in the thread. The tone of all posts is quite similar, but in the end only two users got moderated. So where's the consistency? It's either not there because you suck at your job or it's not there because you realize that something is off in this specific case. By moderating people who call out the aformentioned Xbox fan trio in one form or another, you are condoning the actions of said trio and basically giving them protection on top of that. The better course of action would be for mods to say that if someone doesn't like to be called a tryhard/biased/whatever, then they shouldn't be like that; you say that you can't moderate someone for calling someone else what they are. Moderating people for such things only leads to inventive descriptions, so that people can say what they want to get out. But ultimately sly digs are worse for the forum environment than the unmasked truth being spoken out. It also makes your work harder when you encourage people to dance around questionable rules. For example, the whole thing that it's not allowed to call a troll a troll. It's not flaming when it's an accurate description. |
1. Moderators are not on ModChat at all times, and some are rarely on. I've already asked the involved parties (through PM) about the ban and am trying to get all possible information before bringing a researched answer.
2. I saw Killinger's post because he was part of the post that got Kerotan in trouble. I was not actively looking for posts to moderate in that thread (since it was already locked), and thus I moderated Killinger for calling out a user that was not part of the thread.
3. You seem to go by the "call a spade a spade" code, but this site doesn't. We have dealt with ToastBoy, Jega, and TheDrill, and will continue to do so if they continue to break the rules.
RolStoppable said:
No, it's not. Anti means to be against. Let's say there are several political parties in a country and the top two get 45% and 35% of the votes, respectively. Nobody in their right mind would describe the country as having an anti-stance towards the party with 35%. Your simplified logic means that if one console has sold even only one unit more than another, then the console that sold less falls into the anti-category. |
it was a sales thread not a political one.
Either you win or lose, either a marlet is for you and you sale most or its not.
RolStoppable said: 1. Okay. 2. and 3. That's why this site's rules are annoying. Next thing you know is that you start to ban people for racism when they call a black person black. |
1. I promise I'm trying to get an answer on this.
2. Just gotta roll with the punches on this one. Though I do guarantee we wont get to that point. *knocks on wood*
BeElite said:
Either you win or lose, either a marlet is for you and you sale most or its not. |
Okay, let's talk sales. The Apple iPhone is the most popular brand of smartphone out there, the Samsung Galaxy is 2nd. Is the world anti-Samsung? Of course not.
Signature goes here!
TruckOSaurus said:
Okay, let's talk sales. The Apple iPhone is the most popular brand of smartphone out there, the Samsung Galaxy is 2nd. Is the world anti-Samsung? Of course not. |
sammy phones out sale iphones dont they, either way the world woud be more pro Ip then sammy.
Plus if the ban is casue my statement is not true enough. Yoy should ban a handlfull of pro xbox peopel evry time they makle a thread.
RolStoppable said: I know how I can challenge you. Do you think Jega is a try-hard? No answer is also an answer. |
Again, you think we should be able to call users what we think they are.
This site, when it comes to disparaging remarks, does not operate this way. Especially when they are not part of the original thread discourse.
They could be a troll. They could be a fanboy. They could be tryhard (which is classified as a derogatory slang term). But it's not your place to call them that on this site. If you're dealing with a user you think is being as much, then either ignore, report, or deal with them in a way that goes according to rules.