They seem to be somewhat stricter than I might find ideal, but this place has somehow been kept above the putrid mess that personifies most internet forums. And for that, I salute our mods.
Can we have a serious discussion about qualms with moderation?
- Thread starter Dangit2019
- Start date
The modding in this forum is appalling, stifling any real discussion and free change of ideas; while at the same time culling high-content personalities for minor infractions due to their strikes system.
It's actually the only reason I never became an Escapist publisher's club member. This is my home news site, my default page, but I'd still rather have my nails pulled than try to tread so gingerly as to avoid the arbitrary depredations of modwrath here.
My post here summed up my feelings:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/jump/18.822742.19904240
Two reasons for *that* post earning suspension were given later in the thread. They don't happen to be true.
Accused of insulting the mods, I was in fact insulting their work. I'm sure they're great people, they're just awful, unjust forum mods who crush personality and cull the life out of the threads here.
And told only 'constructive' criticism was acceptable, well...I told them what they were doing wrong, and how to improve. They were harsh words, but this place is very far off the beam - and it's *only* due to the mods.
No need to tell me to go elsewhere - obviously, I already do.
It's actually the only reason I never became an Escapist publisher's club member. This is my home news site, my default page, but I'd still rather have my nails pulled than try to tread so gingerly as to avoid the arbitrary depredations of modwrath here.
My post here summed up my feelings:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/jump/18.822742.19904240
Two reasons for *that* post earning suspension were given later in the thread. They don't happen to be true.
Accused of insulting the mods, I was in fact insulting their work. I'm sure they're great people, they're just awful, unjust forum mods who crush personality and cull the life out of the threads here.
And told only 'constructive' criticism was acceptable, well...I told them what they were doing wrong, and how to improve. They were harsh words, but this place is very far off the beam - and it's *only* due to the mods.
No need to tell me to go elsewhere - obviously, I already do.
The one thing I think is stupid is the low content post warnings. I don't think they matter, and sometimes, one or two sentences really can sum up your thoughts or opinions. I'm not going to write a fucking thousand word essay on my thoughts. What's wrong with being short and straight to the point? Nothing, nothing I tell you.
This.Kenbo Slice said:
...
And if I stopped there, I'd get in trouble, but if I add something like "I agree with the above, because I believe it to be correct", it'd be fine.
OTOH, quite possibly there is some good reason for the low post count rule that's just not obvious.
I would think it should be quite obvious, myself.thaluikhain said:
Would the forums be better in any way around here if we had countless threads filled to the brim with people doing this:
"Low content" could go a long way toward being better defined, explained, and actually policed, but one or two sentences that are actually relevant to the thread at hand and/or constructive to a discussion between users will rarely be wrathed, because contrary to popular belief, "low content" isn't defined by the number of characters present within a person's post.thaluikhain said:
Er...it does seem to be. Posts that are little more than "This." don't seem to get warnings if there's a bit more blather added to them.shrekfan246 said:
That's when it comes down to the users to report them, and it's highly circumstantial depending on what the "blather" actually is. You'll notice that saying something to the effect of "This is extra text to avoid mod wrath" won't generally save people from getting smacked for low content, but it's up to the other users to actually report those posts anyway, because the mods are only human and will not be in every thread, watching every post and catching the ones that break the rules. This is a pretty active forum, and comparatively there aren't a large number of mods active at any one time due to time zones and personal lives.thaluikhain said:
Yes, there are posts that will slip through. It's going to happen, and I'm sure you can point out a plethora of posts which say "This" but never got smacked. That doesn't mean those posts weren't also breaking the rules, it just means they weren't caught back when they were still relevant enough to moderate.
"This, because [reason]" would generally be enough to clear somebody though, unless it's literally just fluff like "because they're right." It might still be cleared just on the virtue of other people not reporting it or a mod glossing over it in the report queue, but again, that doesn't make it necessarily okay to do. Which I imagine is where all of the complaints about moderator inconsistency stem from. Different mods are going to clear or wrath things for different reasons. They're not always going to know the context of friendly ribbing between users, they're going to be caught on off days or they're going to find something personally offensive that may just be borderline breaking the rules, and people might find themselves getting smacked around for it. That's what the appeals system exists for. If you get moderated for typing a single line and can make a compelling argument for why that line wasn't low content within the context of the thread you were posting in, the chances are rather likely that your punishment will be removed.
But if you see a post that you'd consider to be "low content" which didn't receive punishment, it's really a 50/50 split between whether it got cleared or whether it never was reported in the first place.
I understand your perspective. But while many posts are empty blather (and where on the internet is that not true) the Low Content rule prevents threads from devolving into 50 posts in a row of "This!" which occurs on other sites.thaluikhain said:
That's why the Low Content rule exists.
P.S. I've received 2 warnings since joining up. Both were for Low Content. The 2nd one was in my 2nd week as a Moderator.
Reported.Daemonate said:
BTW: I expect that you got that Warning in the post you linked earlier for being rude. Calling the Mods "Quacks" is insulting. It also qualifies as "Giving Mods sass".
I understand people getting in trouble for saying "This" or "Lol." But not when they actually type one or two sentences where they voice their opinion. I got two warnings for that, I was like, I'm pretty sure I typed enough to get my point across. But whatever.thaluikhain said:
The only time i got a warning was for posting in a review thread without knowing the one month rule. I did find it a bit harsh, considering this seems to be the only part of the forum with such a rule (i see threads from years ago getting necroed without any punishment in other forums).
However seeing as it got cleaned up after time i don't see that much of a big deal in it anyways.
However seeing as it got cleaned up after time i don't see that much of a big deal in it anyways.
