By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
kirby007 on 08 December 2018

You mean like the discord that already exists?



 "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.

Around the Network
kirby007 on 08 December 2018

Like the staff chat in mentioned discord?



 "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.

Moren on 08 December 2018

The idea sounds like your very own, private Discord where you can invite users of your choice to discuss VGC.
There's plenty of those, and I don't think you require mod approval to create yet another one.



AngryLittleAlchemist on 08 December 2018
padib said:
Bristow9091 said:

As a staff member I can say the answer to both of these things is; No.

The reason: Reading over everything you're saying, absolutely NONE of this is needed as a separate thing, everything you've been saying can be done as is by anyone, it doesn't need a special group with their own badges, or its own discord or anything of the likes. Like I said before, if you want to make a thread on improving behaviour on the forums or something, go ahead and do so, you don't need to be an Ambassador to do that, the only reason I can see anybody wanting such a thing is so they have more power over regular members, the ability to create threads that others can't participate in, and the fact that you could use those threads to talk about other members in private, while having your own exclusive set of rules, seems extremely fishy and could be used for all the wrong reasons.

I admire your attempts at trying to convince us over and over, but we've already said no... maybe it's time to drop the idea?

No problem, thanks for hearing me out.

Were you a previous staff member? The name rings a bell.



Eagle367 on 08 December 2018
Ganoncrotch said:
Eagle367 said:
I think people should be allowed to openly discuss their bans with the community. As long as they aren't breaking any rules in the process, there shouldn't be any reason why threads discussing bans are blocked.

But most posts in that line of thinking would probably lead to more moderation if someone doesn't understand the rules as in a ban of

"why was I banned for calling X console shit, it is shit"

What's gonna come of discussing why that sort of ban got them a ban, it just opens up area's such as a user suggesting they were joking or trying to suggest that their original post of "game/system is shit" actually represented the view of "the game/system has this list of actual reasons why it's an unpopular choice among gamers" which would not have led to the original ban... but then that's literally there in black and white in the rules as well.

8. Substance - Content is king for all posts and threads (for more rules on thread creation, see Rule 3). Some tips to keep you and your posts out of trouble:

  • Do not say that item A sucks, or that item B is better than item C. Give reasons why, and provide evidence (articles, screenshots, technical information, even opinion etc).
(just one example)

Also someone contesting their bans leads to the opportunity to lure others into mocking a user or gloating over the ban they received and again... further moderation's come from one fuck up.

But you're just taking one example for this. It's not just people calling consoles or stuff shitty that are banned. It's people who might've been banned for over generalizing for example and them they just mention the gropg again and due to past history and "lack of clarity" they are banned. And instead of being allowratp discuss the matter with the community, they tell you to talk to the mods who ignore what you're saying I'm private messages and give non answers as replies and threaten you with another ban of you discuss the issue. I mean we should be allowed to dissect bans as a community so we can decide whether the bans were reasonable in the first place. If they actually broke the rules, you can easily show which rule they broke and it's hard to argue against that. But I'd it's some abstract thing which only the ,of thought was ban worthy, the others might disagree and cause the mod to be more mindful. Now the mod has all the power and you can't discuss the bans because they are things that cannot be mentioned. It creates a restrictive environment where people get afraid of commenting or they become indifferent and go all out until they are permabanned. You can;t discuss the bam in any manner no matter what aspect you want to discuss. You can't even make a thread about bans being unfair. Or anything



Just a guy who doesn't want to be bored. Also

Around the Network
Azuren on 08 December 2018

Awful lot of attempts to grant per to oneself going on in here.



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

Check out my Twitch Channel!:

www.twitch.tv/AzurenGames

DroidKnight on 08 December 2018
RolStoppable said:
A shame that padib's idea was shot down. I was looking forward to getting a tag on my profile picture.

Can we get this guy a Faux Mod label or what?  



...to avoid getting banned for inactivity, I may have to resort to comments that are of a lower overall quality and or beneath my moral standards.

Eagle367 on 09 December 2018
CGI-Quality said:
Eagle367 said:

But you're just taking one example for this. It's not just people calling consoles or stuff shitty that are banned. It's people who might've been banned for over generalizing for example and them they just mention the gropg again and due to past history and "lack of clarity" they are banned. And instead of being allowratp discuss the matter with the community, they tell you to talk to the mods who ignore what you're saying I'm private messages and give non answers as replies and threaten you with another ban of you discuss the issue. I mean we should be allowed to dissect bans as a community so we can decide whether the bans were reasonable in the first place. If they actually broke the rules, you can easily show which rule they broke and it's hard to argue against that. But I'd it's some abstract thing which only the ,of thought was ban worthy, the others might disagree and cause the mod to be more mindful. Now the mod has all the power and you can't discuss the bans because they are things that cannot be mentioned. It creates a restrictive environment where people get afraid of commenting or they become indifferent and go all out until they are permabanned. You can;t discuss the bam in any manner no matter what aspect you want to discuss. You can't even make a thread about bans being unfair. Or anything

The job of the moderator is to decide if the ban was warranted or not. That's why they exist in the first place. Just because someone may not understand why they were banned (or disagrees with it), does not mean the action wasn't warranted. Here's another thing to consider — we have numerous posters who have never been moderated. That is Warning, Banned, nothing. It's possible to be someone that does not cause issues. I do apologize if you happen to have a moderation you didn't understand or felt was unjust. I'm happy to look over it, and if it was a mistake on our part, I'll see what steps can be taken to fix it.

Also, since you've hinted that one of our moderators either ignored you or threatened to ban you over discussing a moderation, if you wouldn't mind, kindly tell me who. If you'd prefer to PM me about it, that works too.

It was a long time ago but I made a thread discussing my ban and they took it down. Then I made a thread discussing why we are not allowed to discuss our bans. It was removed and the mod gave me non answers and vague things like you have a history of over generalizing these things so you mention the, and something negative so you are banned. I was talking about something very specific at that time and I said it's obvious from my comment that I did and he/she said you should be more obvious about it. That's my problem with it, I think it;s wrong to decide on your own whether I am obvious about something or not. Anyways I made a thread just about people discussing their bans in general and they took it down and threatened to ban me for not listening to the mods. I asked them about the specific rules where I am not allowed to do these things or be banned for making these threads and they weren't very specific about it. The other mods also didn't help saying discuss it with the mod that did it in private

My point being I don;t trust one mod to make the decision fairly enough nor the mod team to do anything about it unless the community is allowed to discuss it openly. Just like how EA wouldn't have stopped the lootboxes in star wars battlefront 2 and how Bethesda wouldn't have given the canvas bags if it wasn't for the fan backlash. I don't know the process of selecting mods here, nor do I blindly trust them with  managing. I might just be permabanned one day without any explanation.But I feel that if the mods had accountability with the community they'll be less inclined to stuff like this.   

 

                                              



Just a guy who doesn't want to be bored. Also

Eagle367 on 09 December 2018
CGI-Quality said:
Eagle367 said:

And instead of being allowratp discuss the matter with the community, they tell you to talk to the mods who ignore what you're saying I'm private messages and give non answers as replies and threaten you with another ban of you discuss the issue. 

Returning to this, I spoke with Ryuu (the moderator in question). He says that he did reply, but a moderation happened soon after (once you are banned, people are unable to speak with you in a PM). He says that you guys discussed it in the email instead. If that's the case, I'll consider this a resolved matter. If there is any other issue with this, just shoot me a PM.

It was resolved for him. I just tolerated it and moved on because what could I have done. I'm not allowed to discuss the thing nor are my appeals taken seriously. Even now I guess they aren't. I knew I would be banned if I kept discussing it and I had better things to do with my time. Seeing the mod thread reminded me of it ans I thought I could get some real progress for future matters but it doesn't look like I will;. The next time I'm banned, i'll probably not be allowed to discuss it. If it's a clear cut violation, I'll accept but it will happen if not for my slipping up while discussing heated topics, than for some other vague reasons. I will get mildly angry in the latter case but I'll maybe bother with it or just give up and move on. And that's my problem, you are banned for stuff you don't understand why you're banned for and you just stop caring afterwards. That is a recipe for the ,oss to go wild eventually and this turning into one of those sites where you are banned if the mods don't agree with your views on politics, religion or life in general. I was just suggesting what I feel is essential to keep the mods honest but in the end the mods control the site and can do it or not do it. It's an easy change, just not close threads where people discuss their bans just for the sake of closing threads where people discuss their bans. I hope that happens but at the same time shouldn't get my hopes up



Just a guy who doesn't want to be bored. Also

COKTOE on 09 December 2018

Is it reasonable to suggest that mods don't put personal shots, or anything that could be construed as such into their ban notes? Be they 1 day bans, or permas. I have sometimes had issue with the tact within ban notes, even before I recently had one such note to process myself. I have examples, very recent and from the fairly distant past, but am not going to site them unless asked to....I think it would be better to outline the reason for the bans as clinically as possible, and forgo the theatrics. ALL OF THE TIME. It's not something that happens in every case. Far from it. But I feel diplomacy should be the watchword in all cases. There's no need to foster confrontation. Especially for members that will be returning.

Also, where's my money mo***f***ers? :)