confusion over certain "probations" and "bans"

[Azaraxzealot]

i cant name any real specific ones tat confuse me, but right now i saw a guy who got put on probation for saying "firefox + adblocker plus = what advertisement?"

i dont get it... and another time i saw someone who was put on probation for putting a picture of a panda riding some children's toy saying "haters gonna hate" on a thread about someone asking why there was hate towards Halo: Reach

so... i just wanna ask why these people got in trouble, the latter person even commented on the subject properly i genuinely want to know so i can avoid getting in trouble...

 

[Griphphin]

If that was all they posted, they were probably low-content posts. In general, it's a good idea to accompany any picture or video with some kind of explanation, even if you don't feel it absolutely needs one.

 

[Woodsey]

The former is because the Escapist has a fair bit of revenue provided from the ads. No ads, no Escapist.

Advertising ad-blockers undermines the work of the Escapist staff.

 

[Snake Plissken]

Not much you can do. Mods here are relatively strict. The adblocker thing is actually discussed in their terms or something. It's basically a "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" sort of thing with "Don't Promote" thrown in. If you use one, keep it to yourself, and just try to avoid any discussion of it in general.

Who knows, I may even get probated or banned just for relaying that information to you...

Aside from that, it seems pretty random. I've pushed some boundaries and always seem to get away with it while others get the hammer for relatively insignificant infractions (if you would even call them that). Just roll the dice and hope for the best.

 

[Not-here-anymore]

The adblocker one makes sense - the escapist generates primarily generates revenue via adverts, and adblockers prevent those adverts. So using one is generally frowned upon.

Most random probations seem to be a result of a series of low content posts. I live in fear of this, hence my ridiculously verbose posting habits.

 

[fix-the-spade]

"firefox + adblocker plus = what advertisement?"

In that case it's because The Escapist (and most websites) pay the majority of their bills though on site advertising.
If you're going around recommending ad blockers on a site, you are screwing them out of money. That makes Kuliani (the community manager) very angry, you won't like him when he's angry. It is also in the site's terms of use not to promote adblockers.

Regarding pictures, you're supposed to put them in spoiler tags when posting, mostly because it saves a lot of bandwidth and speeds up viewing for other people. But also because it means everyone else doesn't have to sift through all the picture posts to get to something readable.

To avoid Mod wrath here is pretty easy, just look at what you're posting and think 'is this relevant, does it make me sound like a dick?'
If the answers are yes/no, you'll be fine.

 

[MurderousToaster]

With the adblocker, somebody's promoting something that's not entirely legal. Or it could just be a low-content.

With the picture, it was an incredibly low-content post and they really didn't contribute to the thread at all. If they let low-content posts like that slide, then there's be chaos on these otherwise well-mannered and discursive forums.

 

[Redlin5_v1legacy]

Ads are a source of money for these forums. Don't want to let the Escapist go bankrupt now do we?[footnote]No, we really don't. No Escapist, no forums.[/footnote] I see the reason behind this one.

For the second case, always offer a bare minimum of one to two sentences in your post. Even if an image says all you want to say, it is still considered low content. Low content is really discouraged here and will probably get slapped with a probation.

Regarding pictures, you're supposed to put them in spoiler tags when posting, mostly because it saves a lot of bandwidth and speeds up viewing for other people. But also because it means everyone else doesn't have to sift through all the picture posts to get to something readable.

Hmm, I've only spoilered pictures if they are moving GIFs or if I have a number of them. I hope my habit of leaving them out in the post doesn't get me mod wrathed, even if I have good content in my post.

 

[Daffy F]

it's all explained in the rules... I also think mods don't like these kind of threads.

 

[maddawg IAJI]

Adblocks are against forum rules and policy because essentially, you're stealing money away from the Escapist. Keep in mind that Advertisers are what keep this site running.

The picture was low-content. We don't support one word replies like "This" or "QFT" and stuff like that. You need to put SOME detail and work into each of your posts.

It's rather simple to stay out of trouble. Just don't be an idiot or a douche and you'll be fine. Don't mock other users, don't troll, don't advertise and if you believe what you're writing may get you mod wrath, don't post it.

 

[Irridium]

i cant name any real specific ones tat confuse me, but right now i saw a guy who got put on probation for saying "firefox + adblocker plus = what advertisement?"

i dont get it... and another time i saw someone who was put on probation for putting a picture of a panda riding some children's toy saying "haters gonna hate" on a thread about someone asking why there was hate towards Halo: Reach

so... i just wanna ask why these people got in trouble, the latter person even commented on the subject properly i genuinely want to know so i can avoid getting in trouble...

For your first question, this site gains money from advertisements. Admitting you use adblock means your admitting to depriving this site of a profit. Its like if someone ate in your restaurant, and admitted to not having to pay for food. You'd kick his ass out.

For your second question. Posting just a picture for a response qualifies as a "low content post", which is against the rules. Unless that post is insanely witty/clever/cunning. But most of the time its not.

 

[Semudara]

Here's something I don't get. I saw a post that was fairly uncivil. It got the person put on probation for 3 weeks or something. I had seen a post a little earlier that was a hate-mongerer's sexist spew, filled with cussing and arrogant ignorance and general hatred toward everything. It got them put on probation for 3 days.

I'm sorry I can't quote the examples word for word, but those descriptions are pretty accurate.
Can anyone explain that to me? Does The Escapist just favor sexist assholes?

 

[Wicky_42]

With the adblocker, somebody's promoting something that's not entirely legal. Or it could just be a low-content.

Dude, there is NOTHING wrong with blocking ads - advertisers don't have ANY legal rights to force their shit on you, and you are completely within your rights to block them if you want.

Great, so websites make money showing ads to visitors. Fine.

However, there was no signing of a terms of service or anything that said 'I will view all ads on this site or I will leave and not view any articles' or any such bullshit. If adblock was in any way having a significant impact on revenue, then the ad-fuelled web business model wouldn't work. It does. Maybe they'd have a few more hundred bucks a year or something - so what? They're obviously making enough cash to expand, what with releasing a daily video series, so temp-banning people over talking about a common, legal, freely available browser plugin just smacks of bullshit.

 

[MurderousToaster]

With the adblocker, somebody's promoting something that's not entirely legal. Or it could just be a low-content.

Dude, there is NOTHING wrong with blocking ads - advertisers don't have ANY legal rights to force their shit on you, and you are completely within your rights to block them if you want.

Great, so websites make money showing ads to visitors. Fine.

However, there was no signing of a terms of service or anything that said 'I will view all ads on this site or I will leave and not view any articles' or any such bullshit. If adblock was in any way having a significant impact on revenue, then the ad-fuelled web business model wouldn't work. It does. Maybe they'd have a few more hundred bucks a year or something - so what? They're obviously making enough cash to expand, what with releasing a daily video series, so temp-banning people over talking about a common, legal, freely available browser plugin just smacks of bullshit.

The moderators who dole out the bans dislike it. It's their forums. If they don't like somebody promoting something that they would rather not be promoted, they ban them.

 

[MurderousToaster]

Here's something I don't get. I saw a post that was fairly uncivil. It got the person put on probation for 3 weeks or something. I had seen a post a little earlier that was a hate-mongerer's sexist spew, filled with cussing and arrogant ignorance and general hatred toward everything. It got them put on probation for 3 days.

I'm sorry I can't quote the examples word for word, but those descriptions are pretty accurate.
Can anyone explain that to me? Does The Escapist just favor sexist assholes?

Probably different moderators banned the people. Some are probably more lenient with their bans than others.

 

[Ironic Pirate]

The 'scapist makes money off ads, so talking about ad blockers is like telling your friend how to shop lift in front of a Best-Buy worker.

As per the second one, image only and less than three word posts are frowned upon, probably to prevent the site from becoming like an image board.

I think they can be a bit picky about it, because sometimes a joke needs two words and any more ruin it.