By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Jranation on 21 January 2018
Carl2291 said:
VGPolyglot said:

So, I decided to remove my avatar for now, until I got the mod team to approve it. Am I allowed to use this?:

Absolutely not.

 

CGI-Quality said:
VGPolyglot said:

So, I decided to remove my avatar for now, until I got the mod team to approve it. Am I allowed to use this?:

-pic

'fraid not.

Is it the kissing or what she was wearing? Or both? 



Pocky Lover Boy! 

Around the Network
vivster on 22 January 2018
Azuren said:
Aeolus451 said:

On principal, yeah but I didn't look thru the thread yet. I'll give a definite answer after I read through it. It's possible that both deserve moderation. In general, insulting others is far worse than stating unsubstantiated opinions.

The issue is whether or not his unsubstantiated arguments were legitimately his mistake, or if he did so with the intention of getting a rise out of someone.

Ignorance, willful or not, is not a defense. People need to experience consequences out of their ignorance to actually realize that ignorance is a problem and can be easily avoided. Unsubstantiated claims are extremely harmful and should have consequences.



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

Aeolus451 on 22 January 2018
vivster said:
Azuren said:

The issue is whether or not his unsubstantiated arguments were legitimately his mistake, or if he did so with the intention of getting a rise out of someone.

Ignorance, willful or not, is not a defense. People need to experience consequences out of their ignorance to actually realize that ignorance is a problem and can be easily avoided. Unsubstantiated claims are extremely harmful and should have consequences.

So everyone in a religious thread should suffer the consequences? 🙀



vivster on 22 January 2018
Aeolus451 said:
vivster said:

Ignorance, willful or not, is not a defense. People need to experience consequences out of their ignorance to actually realize that ignorance is a problem and can be easily avoided. Unsubstantiated claims are extremely harmful and should have consequences.

So everyone in a religious thread should suffer the consequences? 🙀

Sure, why not?

That'll stop people making religious threads and stop me from posting in them.



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

Aeolus451 on 22 January 2018
vivster said:
Aeolus451 said:

So everyone in a religious thread should suffer the consequences? 🙀

Sure, why not?

That'll stop people making religious threads and stop me from posting in them.

At least, you're principled enough that you'll apply it across the board versus it just being a double standard. 



Around the Network
vivster on 22 January 2018
Aeolus451 said:
vivster said:

Sure, why not?

That'll stop people making religious threads and stop me from posting in them.

At least, you're principled enough that you'll apply it across the board versus it just being a double standard. 

I'm not even against religious threads, just the unsubstantiated claims. A thread like "wouldn't it be interesting if there really was a god" or "I believe that there is a god because I'm mentally incapable of thinking otherwise" would be some interesting read. But usually it's like "there definitely is a god and you cannot disprove it, so I'm right", which is akin to "Iwata eats babies and you cannot disprove it, so I'm right". Guess which one of those threads would be instantly closed and which not.



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

Kerotan on 22 January 2018
Miguel_Zorro said:
RolStoppable said:
I noticed that zorg1000 got banned and his ban note read like a Rol-ban, so I investigated. I came across another user (Mar1217) who got moderated for the same reason. Both had responded to Pagan who repeatedly posted unsubstantiated arguments. What happened here is that a user who argued with nothing but baseless claims received protection from the mod team while two users who rightly called him out for his paranoia got punished.

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8698504
The starting point. There has never been a point where Nintendo fully focused on gimmicks.

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8698993
Here Pagan reiterates that Nintendo would completely focus on Labo in case it succeeds. There's no evidence that Nintendo has ever focused on a single IP in their history. There's no reason to consider such an argument defensible, let alone reasonable.

Those two posts contain unjustified negativity which is a form of trolling. It's clear that the responses Pagan received didn't come out of nowhere.

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8699020
This post removes all doubts that anyone could have. Another baseless attack on Nintendo, this time coupled with a clear attack (condescending straw man argument) on everyone who disagreed with his previous posts.

But the only person to get banned was the one who supported his argument with facts.
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8699068

In summary, we are looking at a case where an instigator did not support any of his claims and proceeded to lash out at others while going unpunished, while those who called him out received a penalty for using terms ("dense" and "childish", respectively) that appropriately described the behavior of the instigator.

The words "dense" and "childish" come of course with negative connotations, but so does the word "racist". All of those words are descriptive terms and not plain insults. You can interpret them as insults when there's no basis for their use, but when a basis exists - such as calling someone a racist when he describes black people as subhumans - then they are not an insult and instead used in their primary function as descriptive terms.

We'll keep on eye on pagan for trolling.

The last part of the post that you linked to from Zorg was fine, but the earlier quoted post that he was moderated for was not.  Zorg could have called him out in a more constructive way that this. http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8699044.  Calling people childish leads to an escalated, heated argument.  If we allow people to escalate fights like this every time somebody posts an unreasonable opinion, we'll be left with a bunch of fires.

The Mar1217 warning was borderline in itself.  If I had been online I might have suggested a PM.  But he needs to avoid these tit-for-tat type console war arguments, including drive by comments in threads related to other systems. http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8698830

I'll be reaching out to him with some coaching.

Regarding your very last line. Great to see this. Leading the mod team by example.

 

BTW who are the other 2 head mods currently? 



Aeolus451 on 22 January 2018
vivster said:
Aeolus451 said:

At least, you're principled enough that you'll apply it across the board versus it just being a double standard. 

I'm not even against religious threads, just the unsubstantiated claims. A thread like "wouldn't it be interesting if there really was a god" or "I believe that there is a god because I'm mentally incapable of thinking otherwise" would be some interesting read. But usually it's like "there definitely is a god and you cannot disprove it, so I'm right", which is akin to "Iwata eats babies and you cannot disprove it, so I'm right". Guess which one of those threads would be instantly closed and which not.

I'm fine with people having unsubstantiated opinions because that's what the majority of people's opinions are. Its not like they're not kicking puppies or anything.



Azuren on 22 January 2018

RolStoppable said:

 

Thanks for finally responding after two days.

So much sass.



Watch me stream games and hunt trophies on my Twitch channel!

Check out my Twitch Channel!:

www.twitch.tv/AzurenGames

vivster on 23 January 2018
Ka-pi96 said:

Kirby was banned for saying naggers annoy him? WTF?

nagger - someone (especially a woman) who annoys people

Sounds like a fair comment to me...

Which is why he was banned for sexism.

Aeolus451 said:
vivster said:

I'm not even against religious threads, just the unsubstantiated claims. A thread like "wouldn't it be interesting if there really was a god" or "I believe that there is a god because I'm mentally incapable of thinking otherwise" would be some interesting read. But usually it's like "there definitely is a god and you cannot disprove it, so I'm right", which is akin to "Iwata eats babies and you cannot disprove it, so I'm right". Guess which one of those threads would be instantly closed and which not.

I'm fine with people having unsubstantiated opinions because that's what the majority of people's opinions are. Its not like they're not kicking puppies or anything.

Thinking like that will only lead to ruin. The worst massacres(all of them?) and generally most terrible things happened because people let unproven claims roam free without challenging them. You see, people have a habit on believing things and everything gets out of control once people start to act on those beliefs.

So for the benefit of everyone it's only prudent to instantly attack any untruths to stop people from believing them. Beliefs lead to actions based on those beliefs and if those beliefs are false, then everyone dies just because we let that one guy have "an opinion".



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