A Letter to the Moderation, and a Defense of Wynn.
- Thread starter Armadox
- Start date
I never said there are rules to the removal of pub club membership. Please, don't put words in my mouth. Also, really? You think there's some sort of conspiracy about a large amount of the members getting pubclub membership? *shakes head* It's really nothing you need to worry about, nor is it my business to discuss it.Fox12 said:
YEAH! I mean, it's not like this is the only site with that sort of clause in their legal forms or anything! Oh... wait...
You should read the fine print more often when signing up on websites, you'd be surprised what you're agreeing to if that little bit comes as a surprise to you. My impression of this community isn't what's worth discussing. I'm here, aren't I? That should say something about how I feel regarding the community. I just choose not to sugarcoat what I say for the special snowflakes who think that calling someone "poison" is tantamount to hate speech.
Please.. I'm saying this with all due respect... get some common sense, please. The rules say in a large amount of text; Don't be a dick to others!Fat Hippo said:
That's it. That's all they really say. Yet again, here we have someone nitpicking the rules with an obsession that borderlines obsessive-compulsive because they don't agree with it. I've got news for you, no one cares if you agree with them or not. They are the rules here. They are what the staff and moderators agree to enforce and what you and everyone else agree to abide by when posting here. It's as simple as that. Any interpretation beyond that level of simplicity is just your sense of paranoia creating an atmosphere where a conspiracy theory exists.
While this post may sound like "Hey, he's being a dick! He's breaking the rules!". Honestly, that's up to the moderators and staff to decide in the end, and if they feel as though I'm acting that way, I will, unlike many here, respect their decision towards my post or account. Why? Because this is their show now and they're calling the shots. I respect that, as you and everyone else should.
Is this really the hill everyone wants to die on? Like, really?
I mean, okay, you're all entitled to do so, but there are better causes to take up.
EDIT: Or, hell, Susan. People have said all sorts of heinous shit about her on this website over the years since she left. See also the way that conversations about Anita Sarkeesian always went; she wasn't a member of the forums, so the rules didn't really have any consideration for how people talked about her.
I mean, okay, you're all entitled to do so, but there are better causes to take up.
Silvanus said:
They never have, really. Same things go for content creators and former staff themselves, even. I'm sure I don't need to remind everyone of the way people started talking about MovieBob after he got canned from the website.The Decapitated Centaur said:
EDIT: Or, hell, Susan. People have said all sorts of heinous shit about her on this website over the years since she left. See also the way that conversations about Anita Sarkeesian always went; she wasn't a member of the forums, so the rules didn't really have any consideration for how people talked about her.
Need a hug, man?n0e said:
Maybe some chamomile tea?
I mean, I'm making it for myself, so I'd share.
Kinda seems like everybody around here needs to take a step or two back from the e-drama and just breathe a bit.
Not that anybody cares what I think.
Aww is this just Wild West drama shit bleeding over to the real site?! Man, why can't those CowEsapers keep to their stables?!CaitSeith said:
Shhhh, that's not part of the narrative. Or it could be as we could always invent details about your choice. I bet you were another martyr who thought the team was too harsh! What fun we have with watching the mod list!Katherine Kerensky said:
[sub][sub]Moo! [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f9iIgQN5uZE][/sub][/sub]
People keep saying things like this and I don't know why. Wynn tried to start arguments with mods consistently for a very long period of time and ignored dozens of different people's different approaches to get him to settle down a little. This isn't someone who said one thing wrong and suddenly got ganged up on by mods, this is someone who spent however many years seeing how far they could push it. Is there anyone who has even been half as directly antagonistic to the mods and would therefore be at risk of the same treatment? I don't visit here super often these days but I can't think of anyone.Armadox said:
Seems pretty straightforward to me - don't spend ages acting like an ass (particularly to the people holding the site together for no pay) and there's no reason you'll lose free PubClub. Asking for something more specific than that just smacks of people wanting to figure out what loopholes they can find, exploit, and avoid punishment for (as if this site needs to go back to people doing that).
A conspiracy? I wouldn't call it that. We know what happened, and I wasn't accusing anyone of anything. The tech team was fired, and they gave away pub club memberships. What is freely given can be freely taken. But after some thought, I think there dhould be some cause, or guidelines, determining this.n0e said:
As for banning people, yes, that's always been allowed. I think everyone is aware that that's technically the case. But I think it's also true the outright banning people generally gets, and certainly deserves, an explanation. And it's not something that is generally seen as healthy for a community. The idea that users can, but also should, be banned for any reason at any time is not a healthy mindset to have when leading a community.
Don't be a dick to others. In so many words. But what does that mean? How do you define when someone is being a "dick." What if you and me disagree on that point? There's a reason rules aren't written that way. "Common sense" is not so common, and there's often times no sense. Better to have clear rules to go by.
Good lord, here we go again... Stop defending Wynn, he didn't fucking deserve it.
The site isn't some government run system with everything that comes with it, despite what he and some others like to compare it to. It's a private site run by volunteer users trying to keep the peace. As n0e said, the CoC says to not be a dick. Guess what, WYNN WAS BEING A DICK FOR WELL OVER A YEAR. The mods chose to not ban Wynn, and as n0e stated, gave him a chance to calm down, as clearly the dozens of other attempts in the WW and elsewhere by mods and users alike didn't work. Wynn knew what was expected of him in the normal forum, and in his last post, he made it VERY clear he learned nothing, and had no intention of ever stopping. The mods decided not tolerate his crap anymore, and that's the end of it. Don't be a massive twat waffle, and guess what, you won't be kicked out for being a massive twat waffle. Fancy that shit.
I keep seeing people explain that he didn't break any rules, and thus shouldn't be banned for it. I shouldn't have to even remind anyone how hated it is that people skirt the passive-aggressive rule in order to bait the person they're arguing with. We expected those people to be punished. Wynn? He was skirting the rules as best as he could in order to be a massive throbbing cock shaped thorn in everyone's sides. He couldn't have been asking for punishment more if he tried.
There's no dumb conspiracy, there's no need for paranoid speculation that the big bad scary mods are coming for us next. He was a problem user, he needed to be removed, he was removed, and that's all there is to it. Nothing else. NOTHING. ELSE. Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh...~
Now, with that out of the way, I agree for the most part. The Basement Cat and Topaz thing is questionable, yes. More communication, more explanation, and things being more clear and transparent for everyone else is extremely valuable. And having potentially huge changes being put forth for public opinion is a thing I absolutely hope the mods make use of. In another thread, we have several mods telling us that a statement will be made regarding this among many other things, but we were told to be patient. Your questions may very well all be answered soon.
The site isn't some government run system with everything that comes with it, despite what he and some others like to compare it to. It's a private site run by volunteer users trying to keep the peace. As n0e said, the CoC says to not be a dick. Guess what, WYNN WAS BEING A DICK FOR WELL OVER A YEAR. The mods chose to not ban Wynn, and as n0e stated, gave him a chance to calm down, as clearly the dozens of other attempts in the WW and elsewhere by mods and users alike didn't work. Wynn knew what was expected of him in the normal forum, and in his last post, he made it VERY clear he learned nothing, and had no intention of ever stopping. The mods decided not tolerate his crap anymore, and that's the end of it. Don't be a massive twat waffle, and guess what, you won't be kicked out for being a massive twat waffle. Fancy that shit.
I keep seeing people explain that he didn't break any rules, and thus shouldn't be banned for it. I shouldn't have to even remind anyone how hated it is that people skirt the passive-aggressive rule in order to bait the person they're arguing with. We expected those people to be punished. Wynn? He was skirting the rules as best as he could in order to be a massive throbbing cock shaped thorn in everyone's sides. He couldn't have been asking for punishment more if he tried.
There's no dumb conspiracy, there's no need for paranoid speculation that the big bad scary mods are coming for us next. He was a problem user, he needed to be removed, he was removed, and that's all there is to it. Nothing else. NOTHING. ELSE. Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh...~
Now, with that out of the way, I agree for the most part. The Basement Cat and Topaz thing is questionable, yes. More communication, more explanation, and things being more clear and transparent for everyone else is extremely valuable. And having potentially huge changes being put forth for public opinion is a thing I absolutely hope the mods make use of. In another thread, we have several mods telling us that a statement will be made regarding this among many other things, but we were told to be patient. Your questions may very well all be answered soon.
I am not the most active person on these forums, but I've been on and off them for seven years now. In that time I've had disagreements with other posters and had feelings about the quality of the moderation, but overall the site was interesting enough to keep visiting. In all that time I have not once received a warning for my posts. Because when I make a post, I'm not a dick. It's not a hard concept.
The rules are simple enough and for the life of me I can't understand how so many people get banned from what is overall a pretty lenient forum. I click every time I see a post hidden because the user received a warning or was banned, sometimes it's clear why, other times I disagree with the warning and feel the content was not that bad, but I can almost always see how the post violated the simple rule of "don't be a dick". It doesn't take that long to re-read your comments before clicking "Post" to make sure you are not attacking another person, insulting them, belittling them, etc. That's all it takes.
Wynn dug his grave years ago and I was amazed when I realized he was still active on these forums. The guy was a joke that went on for far too long. And looking at his twitter feed posted in another thread, all he wants is to get banned on forums so he can claim to be a martyr. So he finally got what he really wanted and we should all be happy for him. Good riddance.
The rules are simple enough and for the life of me I can't understand how so many people get banned from what is overall a pretty lenient forum. I click every time I see a post hidden because the user received a warning or was banned, sometimes it's clear why, other times I disagree with the warning and feel the content was not that bad, but I can almost always see how the post violated the simple rule of "don't be a dick". It doesn't take that long to re-read your comments before clicking "Post" to make sure you are not attacking another person, insulting them, belittling them, etc. That's all it takes.
Wynn dug his grave years ago and I was amazed when I realized he was still active on these forums. The guy was a joke that went on for far too long. And looking at his twitter feed posted in another thread, all he wants is to get banned on forums so he can claim to be a martyr. So he finally got what he really wanted and we should all be happy for him. Good riddance.
If you really cared about the site, you'd spend less time making these threads, and more time streamlining your thoughts so moderators could read through them quickly. Instead, every thousand words you make the administration read is another second they could be working on new content (irony at work, right?), answering messages from people who may actually have similar concerns but pick more direct venues for these thoughts, and spending less time paying attention to the usual malcontents who thrive in threads like these.
I can't imagine the answer is anything I want to hear, but I'm endlessly curious as to what your idealized end-goal is here. Do you want the forum community to collectively rise up and overthrow the corrupt higher-ups? If so, I can happily recommend ResetEra [https://www.resetera.com/], a forum made by former NeoGAF mods who departed following the recent social outcry of the creator's behavior. If you really desperately believe that is your promised land, I encourage to go out and live your dreams.
If you want a more open community, one of the first things you'll have to accept is that it won't always happen. You continue to repeat "It doesn't have to be the way it is" like we don't already know that, but stuff has operated the way it has for over a decade now for a reason. It's not the only reason we'll listen to, but it's wisdom we aren't just throwing out as a matter of course. User privacy is non-negotiable, so the apparent incessant demand to justify everything we do, moderation-wise, will never happen. If you don't like it, I'm sorry; leave. Total transparency will likewise never happen, and for practical reasons. Ideas go from 0 to 90% completed constantly, and can go from being considered to being shuttered at any time. Sometimes things change in the space of a few minutes, and chronicling all of these changes means nothing to 95% of the population. And the 5% will only care long enough to make more threads like these, which take more time from the administration, and create more posts like these which will inspire more threads like these, which take more time from the administration, and create more...
You get the picture.
If you really want change, I'm happy for you, but public spectacles aren't the way to do it. They only ever waste time. The change you want to enact may never come, but any change at all from this system you're clearly unhappy with will never be improved or accelerated by threads like these.
So please stop wasting our time.
If you want this to be a discussion among the community about how to improve the rules, that's fine. Discuss. But if you want to put up long-winded wanted posters about the moderation and administration under the veil of wanting "communication," then the only thing that you'll create for us is staff hours spent on nothing--time we'll never get back and a community that will feel empowered to keep demanding. If you want a moderation team that listens to you, think about the rammifications of your tone, structure, and argument. Make it as easy for us as possible so we can actually do stuff with it without long internal conversations and deviations to deal with people in this thread--both for and against moderation--who are all sharpening their torches and lighting their pitchforks. If you want a site that is vastly different from the one that's here at present, then find a different site. None of us have the educational background of lawyers (at least not since DEFY fired them), nor are any of us paid even fractions of the money they do to care about the exhausting minutae you seem convinced is the only way the Escapist will ever be good.
Whatever you want, there are countless better ways to do it. All this unpaid work does is slow down the rest of the work that any of us should be doing, or better yet, would have already done without all of this.
I can't imagine the answer is anything I want to hear, but I'm endlessly curious as to what your idealized end-goal is here. Do you want the forum community to collectively rise up and overthrow the corrupt higher-ups? If so, I can happily recommend ResetEra [https://www.resetera.com/], a forum made by former NeoGAF mods who departed following the recent social outcry of the creator's behavior. If you really desperately believe that is your promised land, I encourage to go out and live your dreams.
If you want a more open community, one of the first things you'll have to accept is that it won't always happen. You continue to repeat "It doesn't have to be the way it is" like we don't already know that, but stuff has operated the way it has for over a decade now for a reason. It's not the only reason we'll listen to, but it's wisdom we aren't just throwing out as a matter of course. User privacy is non-negotiable, so the apparent incessant demand to justify everything we do, moderation-wise, will never happen. If you don't like it, I'm sorry; leave. Total transparency will likewise never happen, and for practical reasons. Ideas go from 0 to 90% completed constantly, and can go from being considered to being shuttered at any time. Sometimes things change in the space of a few minutes, and chronicling all of these changes means nothing to 95% of the population. And the 5% will only care long enough to make more threads like these, which take more time from the administration, and create more posts like these which will inspire more threads like these, which take more time from the administration, and create more...
You get the picture.
If you really want change, I'm happy for you, but public spectacles aren't the way to do it. They only ever waste time. The change you want to enact may never come, but any change at all from this system you're clearly unhappy with will never be improved or accelerated by threads like these.
So please stop wasting our time.
If you want this to be a discussion among the community about how to improve the rules, that's fine. Discuss. But if you want to put up long-winded wanted posters about the moderation and administration under the veil of wanting "communication," then the only thing that you'll create for us is staff hours spent on nothing--time we'll never get back and a community that will feel empowered to keep demanding. If you want a moderation team that listens to you, think about the rammifications of your tone, structure, and argument. Make it as easy for us as possible so we can actually do stuff with it without long internal conversations and deviations to deal with people in this thread--both for and against moderation--who are all sharpening their torches and lighting their pitchforks. If you want a site that is vastly different from the one that's here at present, then find a different site. None of us have the educational background of lawyers (at least not since DEFY fired them), nor are any of us paid even fractions of the money they do to care about the exhausting minutae you seem convinced is the only way the Escapist will ever be good.
Whatever you want, there are countless better ways to do it. All this unpaid work does is slow down the rest of the work that any of us should be doing, or better yet, would have already done without all of this.
This is actually kind of a hilarious area where this community has never been able to actually hold a consistent position when you look at events of moderation.Elvis Starburst said:
People have been complaining that troublemakers skirt by the rules through passive-aggressiveness since before I joined these forums, and while that does have some merit, this is far from the first time that a user who was a persistent issue has been removed from the forum despite their actual posts not explicitly breaking the Code of Conduct. And every time said users are banned, there's a sudden backlash about how actually they weren't really deserving of a ban, at least not for whatever post inevitably got marked as their banned-for one.
It's a pants on head retarded double standard I'm absolutely perplexed by in Wynn's case (And possibly American Tanker, but I don't fully have that situation memorized). Wynn wasn't being passive-aggressive, he was being full aggressive. But just because he didn't tip over the line of the rules, somehow he got away with it and everyone suddenly came to his defense after got banned when the mods had enough. Why?! He got the punishment everyone would beg for when someone was being passive aggressive, and now suddenly it's a problem that his line skirting was dealt with like it should?shrekfan246 said:
All this fucking stupid conspiracy crap, and nobody being happy with anything anyone does to try and make them happy makes this place look more like Tumblr by the day. Thank god NewClassic is taking a much more firm stance, it makes me extremely excited for the announcement the team has planned. Maybe now the mod team will fully take charge and we can get this shit show back on track. It's been a HELL of a year
Except in every case I know of it broke the catch-all "Don't be a jerk" rule.shrekfan246 said:
As another poster has already pointed out, if a user doesn't proof read the tone of their posts it's their own damn fault when the hammer comes down on them. The point of having forum rules in the first place is to promote a relatively civil space for discussions. If a user is clearly disrupting the peace, depending on the gravity of their crimes, they aught to be dealt with. In Wynn's case it should be clear to just about everyone that he was well beyond any form of reform or redemption. He was given far more rope to hang himself with than he deserved IMO.
If it were solely up to me I would have permabanned him eons ago.
Oh, certainly, but that's a level of nuance that the backlash here doesn't ever take into consideration. Many people here seem to think that "don't be a jerk" only applies to extremely explicit, openly hostile comments. I've seen plenty of threads over the years where someone got banned and the thread would immediately derail into a bunch of people saying, "oh come on, that was ban-worthy?"Fappy said:
I'm mostly just noting how the moderators here have never been able to win, because even when people have complained that the moderation was too lenient, they were still complaining that it was too harsh and oppressive.
One of the Retsutalks was about Slowbeef's demodding (voluntary), and he made the comment "I've had to probate PizzaTime several times for just being a bad poster."shrekfan246 said:
Imagine how the usual suspects would respond to moderation like that. xD