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

Forums - Website Topics - The Moderator Thread

vivster on 07 February 2017
RolStoppable said:
vivster said:
I remember that time when they banned that poor bloke for 5 days because he made a lighthearted joke that could've been interpreted in any way. The mod's rational was that the person obviously hated the Nintendo Switch. That bloke went on to be one of the first people on this forum to preorder a Switch.

So yeah, sometimes mods moderate too much. Though I also blame the report system which is obviously flawed.

While one can feel for this specific poor bloke and his intentions for posting, using (future) console ownership as justification for trolling is incredibly flawed. Right now I am getting flashbacks of people who seriously said that they own a Wii, so they can bash it all they want. Of course this goes for any console, so just because someone owns a PS4 and XB1, for example, but repeatedly slams the PS4 in his posts, doesn't mean that such behavior should be tolerated and exempt from moderation.

In this particular case though there was no evidence that the poor bloke made this harmless joke out of contemption. It was merely conjecture. I bet that it didn't even occur to the mod that it could've just been a harmless quip in a thread that was already overflowing with contentless hype posts anyway.

While ownership might not be a reason or justification for flaming it definitely validates criticism. Firstly because that person actually owns the thing he is criticizing and as such has first hand information and secondly that it's an actual purchased product that demands criticism by the person who actually put money for it on the table, be it positive or negative.

Ownership might also be an indication that the hate for a certain product can't be too strong, especially in case of a preorder.



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

Around the Network
vivster on 07 February 2017
RolStoppable said:
vivster said:

In this particular case though there was no evidence that the poor bloke made this harmless joke out of contemption. It was merely conjecture. I bet that it didn't even occur to the mod that it could've just been a harmless quip in a thread that was already overflowing in contentless hype posts anyway.

While ownership might not be a reason or justification for flaming it definitely validates criticism. Firstly because that person actually owns the thing he is criticizing and as such has first hand information and secondly that it's an actual purchased product that demands criticism by the person who actually put money for it on the table, be it positive or negative.

Ownership might also be an indication that the hate for a certain product can't be too strong, especially in case of a preorder.

I wasn't saying that you deserved a moderation. The argument you added after the first sentence was bad, that's all. Even some of the biggest haters can prove ownership, so ownership in and of itself really means absolutely nothing.

Just because a thing means nothing in some cases doesn't mean it should be automatically assumed to mean nothing for everyone. We should assume the best case first until it becomes obvious.



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

vivster on 07 February 2017
RolStoppable said:
vivster said:

Just because a thing means nothing in some cases doesn't mean it should be automatically assumed to mean nothing for everyone.

The thing is that it means nothing in all cases. User personality, posting history and possible interpretations of the post in question are the things that need to be considered. Console ownership is irrelevant.

So you're saying there is no difference in a user complaining about a console he doesn't even own and a user who actually suffers a drawback and as such is criticizing the thing he owns?



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

Hynad on 07 February 2017
Leadified said:
Hynad said:

Do mods censor wall posts now (as in: erase what they don't like)?

Unless it's spam from a bot, I haven't heard of this happening. What's the context?

 

axumblade said:
Hynad said:

Do mods censor wall posts now (as in: erase what they don't like)?

What are you referring to? The mods shouldnt be deleting anything that is moderable unless its nsfw or spam.

Since whoever did this wouldn't come forth and give an explanation, I went to Miguel in private, who assured me he would look into it. So I will leave it at that and won't mention any names, and hope for the best.



SkepticallyMinded on 07 February 2017
Super_Boom said:
SkepticallyMinded said:

I've also been moderated for making a completely valid statement about the anti-science agenda from evangelical Christians.(Super_Boom culprit)

You were banned for this post. Nowhere in there are you specifying evangelical Christians, or fundamentalist, or any type of extreme. You're making a jab at an entire belief system, and that absolutely isn't okay. Heck, it's the first example listed in Rule 13.

Like it or not...this forum is welcome to users of all political and religious beliefs...and that won't change.

Still see nothing wrong with the post. It's not an extreme or minority position of Christians to deny basic scientific facts.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/10/30/5-facts-about-evolution-and-religion/

How can I be banned for suspecting that Christians would be happy about an anti-scientific perspective? Seems entirely factual.

spurgeonryan said:
SkepticallyMinded said:
Let's see here, I've been moderated for not being able to read someone's mind in order to discontinue posting on their wall. (StarOcean was the mod)

I've also been moderated for making a completely valid statement about the anti-science agenda from evangelical Christians.(Super_Boom culprit)

I find it absolutely perplexing that my first ban was 7 days as well. That mod (Star Ocean) is clearly emotionally unstable to have placed such a harsh ban on me for his own blunder.

The progressive system is absolutely atrocious. It's akin to committing three counts of petty theft and receiving a life sentence. Punishment fits the crime, it doesn't scale arbitrarily.

Explain your logic please. This should be hilarious to read.

Do you have to read peoples minds to know if you are bothering them or not?

Could you post the actual reason for the moderation that can be found in your mod report on your profile so we can see what the real reason is and not just take your word for it.

A reasonable person makes it clear that they wish to discontinue the conversation. They do not simply respond to my comments and then covertly grab a moderator. That's about as juvenile as it gets.

The reason presented is a complete fabrication I'm afraid but here it is: 

Trolling (Trolling and spamming someones wall when told not to. Flaming at a mod.)

You can visit this person's wall to see my posts to them:

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/profile/22961/zkuq/

CGI-Quality said:
SkepticallyMinded said:
The progressive system is absolutely atrocious. It's akin to committing three counts of petty theft and receiving a life sentence. Punishment fits the crime, it doesn't scale arbitrarily.

Explain your logic please. This should be hilarious to read.

Can you link the posts in question? I'd like to review them. If it was unfair, though I'm not the mod in question, I apologize. If it was justified, however, then I'd advise a reconsideration of posting certain things.

But we'll take a look.

Most are contained in this post but I would like the progressive system addressed more than anything.

PS: I apologize for the verbosity of this post, but I thought if I truncated it additionally things would become unclear.



Around the Network
FunFan on 07 February 2017

Free speech is a double edged sword. We want it to cut unimpeded, but don't like it when it's coming our way. That said, I think preserving free speech should always be the most important goal, so I'm not too keen on overprotective approaches. But we don't want blood to start flying everywhere, either. Balance is the key.



“Simple minds have always confused great honesty with great rudeness.” - Sherlock Holmes, Elementary (2013).

"Did you guys expected some actual rational fact-based reasoning? ...you should already know I'm all about BS and fraudulence." - FunFan, VGchartz (2016)

FunFan on 07 February 2017
Ka-pi96 said:
FunFan said:
Free speech is a double edged sword. We want it to cut unimpeded, but don't like it when it's coming our way. That said, I think preserving free speech should always be the most important goal, so I'm not too keen on overprotective approaches. But we don't want blood to start flying everywhere, either. Balance is the key.

Don't think this forum actually says it offers free speech anywhere though so...

I didn't said or assumed it did. I simply wrote "that" to point out the reason why I think theres a bit of disent by some members, including myself, regardless of the merits of said dissent.



“Simple minds have always confused great honesty with great rudeness.” - Sherlock Holmes, Elementary (2013).

"Did you guys expected some actual rational fact-based reasoning? ...you should already know I'm all about BS and fraudulence." - FunFan, VGchartz (2016)

Lawlight on 08 February 2017

The problem is that bans don't let you know why you were modded nor is there a way to appeal like on GameFaqs where you can still look at the content and contact the mods,, just not post on the boards. So if you're banned, you have to wait for your ban to be over to know what's up and it can happen that you're unjustly banned but too late.



vivster on 08 February 2017
FunFan said:
Free speech is a double edged sword. We want it to cut unimpeded, but don't like it when it's coming our way. That said, I think preserving free speech should always be the most important goal, so I'm not too keen on overprotective approaches. But we don't want blood to start flying everywhere, either. Balance is the key.

The problem here is that thin skinned people bleed too easily. So is it more convenient to move all harmful things away from them or to remove them from the harm.

I say we ban everyone pressing the report button to save them from being offended in the future.



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

FunFan on 08 February 2017
vivster said:
FunFan said:
Free speech is a double edged sword. We want it to cut unimpeded, but don't like it when it's coming our way. That said, I think preserving free speech should always be the most important goal, so I'm not too keen on overprotective approaches. But we don't want blood to start flying everywhere, either. Balance is the key.

The problem here is that thin skinned people bleed too easily. So is it more convenient to move all harmful things away from them or to remove them from the harm.

I say we ban everyone pressing the report button to save them from being offended in the future.

^.^

We can also let them deal with it themseves. Bleeding is a part of life, after all.

(But abusing the report button should still be discouraged.)



“Simple minds have always confused great honesty with great rudeness.” - Sherlock Holmes, Elementary (2013).

"Did you guys expected some actual rational fact-based reasoning? ...you should already know I'm all about BS and fraudulence." - FunFan, VGchartz (2016)