JRPGFan is clearly a user he's unhappy with, after his reports did nothing he had to express his distaste. Clearly JRPGFan shouldn't be allowed in Xbox Metacritic Threads

JRPGFan is clearly a user he's unhappy with, after his reports did nothing he had to express his distaste. Clearly JRPGFan shouldn't be allowed in Xbox Metacritic Threads.

I looked through that thread a bit and there's several users being critical of a game that didn't do well with critics. *shrugs If that's the big deal then people gotta stop getting upset over petty stuff.

You could see it that way but its mainly the agenda behind that stuff. The post per se could be a meh moment. But multiple mehs are a pattern. 

I have to say a few things about my recent ban.

"Flaming (I got your reference. Still, you can't accuse the mod team of letting hate speech fly. That's not happening.)"

The reason for my ban was made up. I did not accuse the mod team of letting hate speech fly. The actual implication of my post was that Angelus has a good grasp of what is offensive and what is not, and that is good because it is something that this mod team needs. It wasn't too long ago that the mod team decided that calling a racist a racist, or a rapist a rapist, is worthy of a moderation. While Angelus issued the ban, he quickly agreed that my post wasn't hate speech when I PMed him on the following day. Logically, if my comment wasn't hate speech, there cannot be an implication that the mod team will let hate speech fly, so the reason I got banned for has no basis anymore. Mistakes happen when decisions are made quickly and I've been the victim of wrongful moderations before, so I can easily look past another wrongful moderation.

But when this was forwarded to head moderator CGI-Quality, my ban was not overturned. Instead the reasoning for the moderation of my post was changed to:

"It openly states that we'll let you say something of that nature. That is not something you can deny. It suggests that we'll let you saying something offensive (whether it is Hate Speech or not). So, the implication is the issue, not if a combination of words ultimately results in Hate Speech."

Following that, the PM took an awkward turn when I was pondering what to do next. I wrote a comment about blackmail that I immediately followed up with a "Probably not.", but ultimately this got interpreted as my most likely course of action despite being a thought that I dismissed myself in the same line I wrote it.

What I considered much more appropriate after getting wrongfully accused of accusing the mod team of letting hate speech fly is to accuse the mod team of letting hate speech/highly offensive material fly for real. CGI-Quality interpreted that as me asking him to allow me to step over the line again to make a point. It's a common pattern among many members of the mod team that they:

1. Misinterpret what I say.
2. Always assume the worst.
3. Dismiss what I say.
4. Ignore me altogether.

Now the challenge I have in front of me is to mix all of the above things together and meet the following criteria:

1. Don't step over the line while making my points.
2. Back up the accusation that the mod team lets hate speech/highly offensive material fly. This is the crucial difference between a baseless accusation and constructive criticism.
3. Show that a significant portion of the mod team treats me with prejudice which is why I've been victim of instances of injustice and wrongful moderations, including the most recent one.

Wow, that was a long intro. Let's get started already!

We have to take a deep look at a thread from October 2017. The topic concerns the controversy surrounding the video game Wolfenstein II, a game in which players are tasked to kill nazis.

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=232048

The relevant portion starts at post #155 when contestgamer enters the discussion. Here are some selected quotes followed by own comments:

Explicit mentions that blacks, jews and atheists are equal to nazis. Implicit mentions of further groups (etc.).

Apparently the jews had their genocides coming. Additionally, any group of people should be considered equal to nazis.

Gays join the fray of explicitly mentioned groups.

The following quote is an answer to the question why contestgamer is defending nazis:

Show tolerance towards nazis and their opinions.

The following quote is a response to a statement that nazis aren't like jews or atheists because neither jews or atheists hold a collective belief that millions of people need to be killed:

Almost makes one feel sorry for the poor persecuted nazis...

In summary: This guy has a bigger problem with fictional nazis being killed in a video game than real nazis working towards their Endlösung. It's a huge contradiction on his part that he says that criminal actions should be persecuted, but somehow spent his time throughout the thread to defend nazis, a group of people who killed millions of people.

The bottom line is that nazis are among the worst groups of people who have ever lived on Earth, yet here we have a guy who treats nazis as equals to jews, atheists, gays or really ANY group of people.

Now on to review the mod team's actions in the thread:

1. contestgamer did not get moderated, nor even addressed by the mod team. This shows that the mod team does let fly highly offensive material.

2. monocle_layton got moderated for the following reason:

Flaming (No matter the context, do not call someone a "fucking simpleton". I know it was probably in the heat of the moment, but you have to keep your cool and not attack others in the process. ) ~ think-man [8583464]

This proves that moderator think-man was aware of the discussion in the thread. He did not only condone contestgamer's posts, but it could be argued that he protected contestgamer. However, my opinion on this matter isn't that think-man is a nazi sympathizer, but rather that he doesn't care about politics and merely showed the ugly face of the "don't call a spade a spade" rule that repeatedly punishes those who call out people for who and what they are.

3. Moderator Aura7541 was an active participant in the thread at the time contestgamer posted. He conversed with other people and did not participate in the discussion that contestgamer spawned. However, as a moderator he should be obligated to step in during such a situation.

4. While the-pi-guy and Pemalite carry Moderator tags, they were not moderators at the time of this particular incident, so they are without fault.

Does this prove that the mod team lets highly offensive material fly? Yes, this is irrefutable evidence, because nazis are in no way, shape or form equally respectable to groups such as jews, atheists or gays.

But wait, this isn't over yet!

After all, I have yet to show how dismissive the mod team is of me. If you kept scrolling through the thread of October 2017, you might have already found the third to last post in the thread. That post contains a link to The Moderator Thread and a public report of the whole incident (at 50 posts per page, you have to open page 38 to read reactions), meaning that it can be verified that the whole mod team knew about the incident, so it wasn't only think-man and Aura7541 who have to take the blame.

It was me who made that public report. Does the mod team rather let a nazi sympathizer run free than giving me the gratification of having correctly identified something that is very wrong? Well, that's for the mod team to explain, provided they want to.

This is the story why I consider it very unfair that I got moderated for an implication that was supposedly there while someone who made explicit statement after explicit statement went unpunished despite the whole mod team having awareness of that incident.

The conclusion?

While I don't expect that this will change anything about my moderation, it provides a satisfying closure for me, because the above unresolved case from October became relevant again due to a recent event. I got moderated because the mod team misinterpreted my post and because they don't like it if they are accused of letting big violations fly. But it is actually true that the mod team occasionally lets big things fly as the above case proves. The appropriate reaction to that is not to ban people who point that out (or ban people who are only believed to have implied that), but rather to acknowledge oversights and mistakes and vow to do better in the future, so that history doesn't repeat itself.

I am believed to work towards the destruction of the mod team, but if that were my objective, I would pull out a lot more things and much more frequently. Additionally, if I thought a particular moderator should be removed from the team, I would simply say so, just like I did in the past. I hope you remember the various anonymous surveys concerning the mod team where I rejected anonymity. The PM with CGI-Quality took an awkward turn, so next time I'll make sure to take a different approach when I want to make the mod team aware that something big is coming.

After writing all this, I don't have much of a desire to argue about my moderation or the case from October 2017. What I do expect, however, is that it gets officially acknowledged that all of it happened instead of receiving the ignore treatment.

In summary of your own quotes of contestgamer, he was saying that it's not okay to kill people regardless of how hated they were, including nazis.  It especially makes sense with people calling everything a nazi these days. A child can see that.

If you think someone is being overly offensive or using ad hominem, report it, troll them or let it go... If you attack someone in a obvious manner over it, you're just asking to be punished and made out to be a villian. If you keep repeating the same thing, expecting different results, well....

I think there's usually difference though between someone who has some genuine concerns about something, and someone who is trying to start some trouble.  

It's one thing to say that a company doesn't make games you like or that some game wasn't all that good.  It's another to post negative remarks in dozens of separate threads.