By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
The_Yoda on 14 March 2018
kirby007 said:
VGPolyglot said:
How does the mod e-mail work? Does it get sent to the entire team, or to one person?

Zorro recieves the mail and prints it out. He then will ride tornado to axum, there they discuss it and copy it and then send it per pidgeon to the other mods. Then a fake message will be send towards Rol using a system of handeggs and fonduepots. After this they meet in rivendel and debate how to respond and which action will be take once they leave for mordor. Then an eagle wil deliver the message to a slave who will type the response back to you.

That's more streamlined than I would have guessed ... Well thought out though considering the fake message.

 

Sorry all I thought it was funny and deserved some acknowledgement.  Shutting up now.

Bandorr said:

I 

The_Yoda said:

I'll give you my poll result, I would read it as SOME or possibly MOST but would hardly ever infer such statements meant ALL unless I was looking for a bogeyman or it was a statement that makes little sense otherwise and I struggle with an example but one would be "people that live normal lives are born with hearts" because you have to have a functioning heart to live a normal life.

If you are inferring ALL then here you are looking for racism in my opinion and not giving the benefit of the doubt to the poster that they have the logical facilities to understand:

1) people are people regardless of the color of their skin

2) at best you might find generalities for a group but are going to find very few universals besides death where ALL would be what you the reader should infer.

Not granting people in general the benefit of the doubt and automatically inferring ALL would seem to put you in a mindset that other people are inferior and don't understand  what your superior intellect does ... if that's the case: Are you any better than a racist? same concept different manifestation of superiority

The mods have requested the "racism" talk (or at least this specific talk) be removed from the thread. So I'll put a message on your wall instead.

Responded there



Around the Network
fatslob-:O on 15 March 2018
The_Yoda said:

LOL I haven't read to the end (still a page to go) but you lost me with the bolded statement ... I thought only non mods could backseat moderate ...  please elaborate (if you have elaborated already I apologize for my impatience) 

VGP isn't a mod so he can indeed backseat moderate me so then I argue to Rol regardless of his snide remarks towards me that he harboured sinister motivations to eliminate me from this community but then he disagreed only to have his assertion backfired against him when VGP openly reveals my suspicion to be correct of him using a similar tactic to toastboy's by baiting me into moderation ... 

The entire event is over and FWIW and I doubt his faith is worth much anyways too since a double standard is in place ... 



VGPolyglot on 15 March 2018
fatslob-:O said:
The_Yoda said:

LOL I haven't read to the end (still a page to go) but you lost me with the bolded statement ... I thought only non mods could backseat moderate ...  please elaborate (if you have elaborated already I apologize for my impatience) 

VGP isn't a mod so he can indeed backseat moderate me so then I argue to Rol regardless of his snide remarks towards me that he harboured sinister motivations to eliminate me from this community but then he disagreed only to have his assertion backfired against him when VGP openly reveals my suspicion to be correct of him using a similar tactic to toastboy's by baiting me into moderation ... 

The entire event is over and FWIW and I doubt his faith is worth much anyways too since a double standard is in place ... 

Yes, I'm not a mod, and while I used to want to be one I don't think that will happen now so I have to advocate in here instead.



kirby007 on 15 March 2018

Jesus fuck Carl that isnt racism, hes insulting other users and having a toxic attitude...
Fml i had hopes for you ( or did you mislabel the ban note? )

Oh and i always assumed Rol becoming mod was the worst thing that could happen



 "I think people should define the word crap" - Kirby007

Join the Prediction League http://www.vgchartz.com/predictions

Instead of seeking to convince others, we can be open to changing our own minds, and seek out information that contradicts our own steadfast point of view. Maybe it’ll turn out that those who disagree with you actually have a solid grasp of the facts. There’s a slight possibility that, after all, you’re the one who’s wrong.

vivster on 15 March 2018
kirby007 said:
Jesus fuck Carl that isnt racism, hes insulting other users and having a toxic attitude...
Fml i had hopes for you ( or did you mislabel the ban note? )

Oh and i always assumed Rol becoming mod was the worst thing that could happen

If I have learned anything from this forum then everything is racism. And if it's not racism it's most likely sexism.

Have you changed your mind about Rol now?



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

Around the Network
VGPolyglot on 16 March 2018

So, I saw that the Something Awful forums have people's ban history as public, and I think that should be the case here too. There are a few benefits I'd see to this:

1. More transparency - It allows for the community to feel more open and upfront
2. More context - More recent bans will be easier to understand if the prior moderation history is able to be seen, and will make it easier for users to understand the conduct that is expected to avoid further bans
3. More clarity - Some permabanned users were unbanned then re-banned, however since the moderation history cannot be seen the reason for the permaban in the first place is unknown unless the mod who writes the note decides to include it.



Hynad on 16 March 2018
VGPolyglot said:
So, I saw that the Something Awful forums have people's ban history as public, and I think that should be the case here too. There are a few benefits I'd see to this:

1. More transparency - It allows for the community to feel more open and upfront
2. More context - More recent bans will be easier to understand if the prior moderation history is able to be seen, and will make it easier for users to understand the conduct that is expected to avoid further bans
3. More clarity - Some permabanned users were unbanned then re-banned, however since the moderation history cannot be seen the reason for the permaban in the first place is unknown unless the mod who writes the note decides to include it.

We had that in the past and while it did add transparency, it also brought its share of toxicity for hardly any worthwhile benefit to the community.



vivster on 16 March 2018
RolStoppable said:
Hynad said:

We had that in the past and while it did add transparency, it also brought its share of toxicity for hardly any worthwhile benefit to the community.

We never had public moderation histories on VGC. The monthly ban reports in the past only showed the type of ban, but not the underlying reasoning. Nobody could gather from them what the expected conduct is (which VGP is going for in his benefit #2).

In any case though, the drawbacks are greater than the benefits. Most of the expected conduct is common sense, so there wouldn't be anything to learn for the vast majority of people. On the other hand, mischief makers could study what triggers people and raise their chances for successful baits.

Meanwhile, the few people who find it exciting to read up on ban notes already check the list of banned users on a regular basis.

I missed a lot of funny ones in the past so that isn't a great solution. Maybe we can have a compromise of only showing the last moderation and have a list of, let's say, the last 100 banned people.



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

Hynad on 16 March 2018
vivster said:
RolStoppable said:

We never had public moderation histories on VGC. The monthly ban reports in the past only showed the type of ban, but not the underlying reasoning. Nobody could gather from them what the expected conduct is (which VGP is going for in his benefit #2).

In any case though, the drawbacks are greater than the benefits. Most of the expected conduct is common sense, so there wouldn't be anything to learn for the vast majority of people. On the other hand, mischief makers could study what triggers people and raise their chances for successful baits.

Meanwhile, the few people who find it exciting to read up on ban notes already check the list of banned users on a regular basis.

I missed a lot of funny ones in the past so that isn't a great solution. Maybe we can have a compromise of only showing the last moderation and have a list of, let's say, the last 100 banned people.

There are no real good reason to make moderation history public. The trouble makers find their way out eventually. And those who revel in knowing certain users are banned already take advantage of the current members list feature.

The reason someone gets banned concerns the user himself and nobody else. Having this made public would only serve to make for a more toxic environment in which other members would use that kind of things as bullets against those getting banned. We don't need that. There's nothing beneficial for the common good of the community in this. If you need to know why certain users have gotten banned this bad, if it's that important for you to know, my guess is that you should rethink your priorities and concentrate and work on yourself and what you bring to the community. 

Last edited by Hynad - on 16 March 2018

vivster on 16 March 2018
Hynad said:
vivster said:

I missed a lot of funny ones in the past so that isn't a great solution. Maybe we can have a compromise of only showing the last moderation and have a list of, let's say, the last 100 banned people.

There are no real good reason to make moderation history public. The trouble makers find their way out eventually. And those who revel in knowing certain users are banned already take advantage of the current members list feature.

The reason someone gets banned concerns the user himself and nobody else. Having this made public would only serve to make for a more toxic environment in which other members would use that kind of things as bullets against those getting banned. We don't need that. There's nothing beneficial for the common good of the community in this. If you need to know why certain users have gotten banned this bad, if it's that important for you to know, my guess is that you should rethink your priorities and concentrate and work on yourself and what you bring to the community. 

If that was the case, this thread has no purpose.

Anonymity breeds toxicity, not transparency.



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