Poll: Forum Rules Need a Change

[Grey Day for Elcia]

I also think the rules of ad-blocking need to be changed.. they have them under things like piracy.. Last I checked, using an ad-blocker wasn't committing a crime escapist, you just don't like it.

captcha: Downward slope, quite captcha.. quite..

We don't claim that adblock is a crime, only that it effectively cripples our ability to continue providing you with a free of charge service.

 

[Grey Day for Elcia]

The rules don't need changing, just the consistency of the moderation.

If the only thing you can do in a thread is agree with someone, without posting your own thoughts, then maybe you shouldn't be posting in the first place.

This.

[sub]Both the examples supplied in the OP would receive a warning given perfect execution of the forum rules. The mods can't be everywhere, and it is your job to help them find posts which might break the rules. The report button is your friend.[/sub]

[sub]I think the low-content rule is fine. Sure, it's annoying to have to fill out your post with meaningful content some times, but I think it's a price we need to pay to avoid devolving into a meaningless rabble of "this"s and dittos.[/sub]

I agree.

I think OP is saying "Some low content posts receive warnings, others don't, therefore we should remove the low content restriction", while, as explained before, it's a flexible rule. I would hate to scroll through dozens of comments saying "This" and "I agree", the threads are big enough as it is, padding them doesn't serve a purpose. Sparing a word or two to say "Yeah, that guy said it for me" or even saying that, doesn't actually help. Great, we know there is more than one person with the same thoughts...so what?

This white text thing you're doing... really cute.

I strongly suggest you don't do it anymore.

 

[Grey Day for Elcia]

It just really bums me out that something in no way harmful is seeing people warned/suspended/banned. Best case scenario: the person you agreed with replies, a discussion develops and you make a friend. Worst case scenario: you take up a tiny, tiny ounce of bandwidth temporarily and no one cares what you said.

This is easily the best forum I've been a part of, but at a certain point it just seems spiteful. Encourage discourse and intelligent debate, yes. But don't punish people for just agreeing with someone. It's almost petty and condescending in some light.

The worst case scenario is actually a thread entirely filled with "+1", "LOL", "This", and "I agree".

As there are a finite amount of posts that can be displayed on each page, you are essentially hindering the flow of otherwise productive and developing conversation.

As many others have stated, it's not about word count, it's about contribution to the discussion.

 

[TimeLord]

Actually, when mods join discussions, it's mostly to contribute in a rare derail or to make some humorous comments when someone's made a "Hi, I'm new here"-thread.
Mods don't really post as normal users often, so it's nice to see their human side once in a while. It creates a better atmosphere in the forums.

People assume that moderators are a strict progression of cause to effect when actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint we are more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly, timey wimey... stuff

 

[sky14kemea]

Actually, when mods join discussions, it's mostly to contribute in a rare derail or to make some humorous comments when someone's made a "Hi, I'm new here"-thread.
Mods don't really post as normal users often, so it's nice to see their human side once in a while. It creates a better atmosphere in the forums.

Heeey, I post in Off Topic threads sometimes! :<

It depends how busy I am, actually. I'm also in an RP and an RP/Forum Game.

 

[Jonluw]

Actually, when mods join discussions, it's mostly to contribute in a rare derail or to make some humorous comments when someone's made a "Hi, I'm new here"-thread.
Mods don't really post as normal users often, so it's nice to see their human side once in a while. It creates a better atmosphere in the forums.

Heeey, I post in Off Topic threads sometimes! :<

Mm, yes I seem to recall you telling me to train some green user in the ways of the bb-code.

What's with the sudden string of staff posts?
The thread was effectively dead 24 hours ago, and suddenly "Nasrin, Nasrin, Nasrin, Nasrin, Timelord, Sky."

I must say you guys sort of killed my arguments in this discussion with that warning though.

 

[sky14kemea]

Actually, when mods join discussions, it's mostly to contribute in a rare derail or to make some humorous comments when someone's made a "Hi, I'm new here"-thread.
Mods don't really post as normal users often, so it's nice to see their human side once in a while. It creates a better atmosphere in the forums.

Heeey, I post in Off Topic threads sometimes! :<

Mm, yes I seem to recall you telling me to train some green user in the ways of the bb-code.

What's with the sudden string of staff posts?
The thread was effectively dead 24 hours ago, and suddenly "Nasrin, Nasrin, Nasrin, Nasrin, Timelord, Sky."

I must say you guys sort of killed my arguments in this discussion with that warning though.

We all power on come online around the same time? I guess. xD

 

[DigitalSushi]

Example: "I agree." Warning. "Yeah, I also agree with you." No warning.

I suggest you report them, we will deal with them accordingly.

The rules don't need changing, just the consistency of the moderation.

What consistency are you arguing for?, the fact that not all posts are moderated on the same ruleset? or that the mods are not online at a specific time?

When it comes to mods online, we have lives outside of The Escapist, we love this site, we love it so much some of us are making a pilgrimage to The Escapist Expo and we are paying to get into the place.

As for consistency with regards to some users not getting warnings for low content posts, from my point of view its because a) the post didn't get reported and b) I went out of my way to message that user and tell them I'm not going to warn them for it but in future if they could have a proper discussion and wish them to enjoy the site?

Consistent?, no, am I and my colleagues trying to help you guys? yes.

 

[Daystar Clarion]

Example: "I agree." Warning. "Yeah, I also agree with you." No warning.

I suggest you report them, we will deal with them accordingly.

The rules don't need changing, just the consistency of the moderation.

What consistency are you arguing for?, the fact that not all posts are moderated on the same ruleset? or that the mods are not online at a specific time?

When it comes to mods online, we have lives outside of The Escapist, we love this site, we love it so much some of us are making a pilgrimage to The Escapist Expo and we are paying to get into the place.

As for consistency with regards to some users not getting warnings for low content posts, from my point of view its because a) the post didn't get reported and b) I went out of my way to message that user and tell them I'm not going to warn them for it but in future if they could have a proper discussion and wish them to enjoy the site?

Consistent?, no, am I and my colleagues trying to help you guys? yes.

Oh no, please don't take offense, I didn't mean it that way

What I meant was that you can only moderate what's been reported, so there's going to be some low content posts that pass under the radar, while others seem to get noticed straight away.

I should have probably made that a bit clearer, huh?

 

[DigitalSushi]

Example: "I agree." Warning. "Yeah, I also agree with you." No warning.

I suggest you report them, we will deal with them accordingly.

The rules don't need changing, just the consistency of the moderation.

What consistency are you arguing for?, the fact that not all posts are moderated on the same ruleset? or that the mods are not online at a specific time?

When it comes to mods online, we have lives outside of The Escapist, we love this site, we love it so much some of us are making a pilgrimage to The Escapist Expo and we are paying to get into the place.

As for consistency with regards to some users not getting warnings for low content posts, from my point of view its because a) the post didn't get reported and b) I went out of my way to message that user and tell them I'm not going to warn them for it but in future if they could have a proper discussion and wish them to enjoy the site?

Consistent?, no, am I and my colleagues trying to help you guys? yes.

Oh no, please don't take offense, I didn't mean it that way

What I meant was that you can only moderate what's been reported, so there's going to be some low content posts that pass under the radar, while others seem to get noticed straight away.

I should have probably made that a bit clearer, huh?

I'd like to apologise to you Daystar, I saw your con mod comment and flipped dude.

I just saw your comment coupled with the thread subject and as treating us like robots, I thought "dude we are humans", we are fallible, moderation will never be perfect, since we are not perfect ourself.

We could create the greatest system on Earth, the minute you throw a human into the mix?

 

[Daystar Clarion]

Example: "I agree." Warning. "Yeah, I also agree with you." No warning.

I suggest you report them, we will deal with them accordingly.

The rules don't need changing, just the consistency of the moderation.

What consistency are you arguing for?, the fact that not all posts are moderated on the same ruleset? or that the mods are not online at a specific time?

When it comes to mods online, we have lives outside of The Escapist, we love this site, we love it so much some of us are making a pilgrimage to The Escapist Expo and we are paying to get into the place.

As for consistency with regards to some users not getting warnings for low content posts, from my point of view its because a) the post didn't get reported and b) I went out of my way to message that user and tell them I'm not going to warn them for it but in future if they could have a proper discussion and wish them to enjoy the site?

Consistent?, no, am I and my colleagues trying to help you guys? yes.

Oh no, please don't take offense, I didn't mean it that way

What I meant was that you can only moderate what's been reported, so there's going to be some low content posts that pass under the radar, while others seem to get noticed straight away.

I should have probably made that a bit clearer, huh?

I'd like to apologise to you Daystar, I saw your con mod comment and flipped dude.

I just saw your comment coupled with the thread subject and as treating us like robots, I thought "dude we are humans", we are fallible, moderation will never be perfect, since we are not perfect ourself.

We could create the greatest system on Earth, the minute you throw a human into the mix?

Hey, cheer up, it's not that bad.

Afterall, with mod responsibility comes

Spoiler

Er...

I mean.

Er...

*runs away*

 

[GeorgW]

Ok, so there's a lot of mods posting here and a lot of similar complaints, so I'm just gonna highlight these two very similar and common complaints and give a simple answer.

It doesn't necessarily line up well with the rules though. You're much much less likely to get banned for something like: Do the forum rules need a change?

Is it just me or is it purple out?
OT: No.

Than you are for just saying "No", even though you haven't actually contributed anything extra to the discussion.

I've personally said this more times than I can remember before and I know my colleagues have as well, I've even gone as far as to make a moderation FAQ for just these kind of things, but it's very important so I'll continue to say it every time the topic comes up. Low content has never, ever been about word count. Never. The two examples you gave would both count as low content. However, if you've noticed a difference in moderation, it's due to one simple thing. People don't realise that it's not about word count (apparent by the amounts we have to tell people about it) and therefore the post example you gave won't get reported. We do all we can, but we can't be everywhere at once, and we rely on the community to use the report function to help direct us to posts that break the rules. If they aren't reported, they usually won't get moderated, it really is that simple. So if you want to blame anyone, blame the people not reporting, not the rules, and not the mods.

Mods are like Teachers in that they both seem to believe that a short post/essay/whatever is worse than the same post/essay/whatever with added bullshit padding.

It's interesting you say that, cuz I was talking with one of my teacher last week. It's national test month, so there's a lot of tests right now, some in essay form, so I was asking how people were doing. She specifically said that there were a lot of people that would write a bunch of useless padding thinking like you do, and that they therefore got a lower grade. Meanwhile, she gave the example of one of the few papers that got an A+ was only half a page long. So either your school system is really weird or your teachers are stupid. Either way, I don't appreciate the analogy.

And finally, once again something I always make sure to mention. We are humans, and humans make mistakes. That's why there's an appeal system, and if you have a problem with a moderation you are free to use it.

 

[Elate]

We don't claim that adblock is a crime, only that it effectively cripples our ability to continue providing you with a free of charge service.

Similarly, posts including, advocating, or linking to illegal or adult material are a very quick way to end your time as part of The Escapist community. An example of these are:

-Piracy (crime)
-Ad Blockers
-Illegal Drugs in the United States (crime)
-Illegal Acts in the United States (crime)
-Pedophilia (crime)
-Pornography (I believe supplying to underage is a crime)
-Sexist, Racist or Perverted Remarks (discrimination, crime)

Listing it under "illegal or adult material" seems to be insinuating if not directly saying that it is a crime, or that you considering it an illegal act. And it isn't exactly free of charge, if I really want all the content I have to subscribe to the publisher's club, so blatantly the ads don't support everything, but that isn't what I have issue with, I just have issue with it being implied that ad blockers are a crime, and people that even talk about them are treated like criminals on the forum for something that for everyone else, is just a tool to use to avoid all the porn ads (Which from what I hear, there were on the escapist, relating to that PS3 porn app or something.)

It's not even like they're that related to gaming anymore, I remember when the ads used to be for things like EVE.. Now I just had a look, Cancer support, and clothing ads (for American stores) which are the wrong size for the frame and stretch the screen out.

 

[Grey Day for Elcia]

We don't claim that adblock is a crime, only that it effectively cripples our ability to continue providing you with a free of charge service.

Similarly, posts including, advocating, or linking to illegal or adult material are a very quick way to end your time as part of The Escapist community. An example of these are:

-Piracy (crime)
-Ad Blockers
-Illegal Drugs in the United States (crime)
-Illegal Acts in the United States (crime)
-Pedophilia (crime)
-Pornography (I believe supplying to underage is a crime)
-Sexist, Racist or Perverted Remarks (discrimination, crime)

Listing it under "illegal or adult material" seems to be insinuating if not directly saying that it is a crime, or that you considering it an illegal act. And it isn't exactly free of charge, if I really want all the content I have to subscribe to the publisher's club, so blatantly the ads don't support everything, but that isn't what I have issue with, I just have issue with it being implied that ad blockers are a crime, and people that even talk about them are treated like criminals on the forum for something that for everyone else, is just a tool to use to avoid all the porn ads (Which from what I hear, there were on the escapist, relating to that PS3 porn app or something.)

It's not even like they're that related to gaming anymore, I remember when the ads used to be for things like EVE.. Now I just had a look, Cancer support, and clothing ads (for American stores) which are the wrong size for the frame and stretch the screen out.

We'll take your concerns about the implied language and the relevancy of our ads into consideration. Thank you for taking the time to explain.