Poll: Injustice of the Permaban

[kyuzo3567]

I joined this site when they already had the 8 strike rule and the convenient health bar on our profiles for posts and warnings so I have no experience with what the earlier systems were, but I don't think the mods here are too strict at all.
I do have a question though, how do you get strikes for low-content warnings? Does it happen because someone flags your comment, or is there a different system checking the length of posts to find them? I'm genuinely curious and figure I'll get an answer faster if I post in here.

Depends on what you want to discuss. Something like "should drugs be legalized" is totally fair game. But admitting to committing a crime - which taking or selling drugs is in the US - is a bit of a gray area for us. It could, in theory, get us into legal trouble. If we have evidence you're committing a crime and do nothing about it, we could theoretically be held liable. Yes, we really could.

So if you want to talk about drugs in the abstract, fine, but refrain from telling us about the amazing you time you had snorting lines off your Vita's screen, ok?

Sorry, I just wanted to say that I really love reading your posts in the forums whenever I come across them, and that last line of yours is basically a perfect example of why.

 

[Daystar Clarion]

I'm still totally not bitter.

Not bitter at all.

[sub]TimeLord, I will pay you money.[/sub]

Leaving aside that you are attempting to bribe completely the wrong person, you are only 3 1/2 months away from losing a notch from your bar.

[sub]Shut up, I will pay you moar money![/sub]


That's a notch though, I was close to having it all wiped out.

I wanted the Tetris of health bar renewals.

 

[Yuuki]

It's extremely easy to avoid warnings/bans - steer clear of gender-controversy topics. This includes stuff like rape, sexism in games, sexism anywhere else, racism, sexism, homosexual rights, any form of discrimination, sexism, you get the idea.

Those topics are basically breeding grounds for warnings/bans to be handed out, judging from what I have seen in my rather short time here. If you really must post in those topics (since they're currently "in"), you need to triple-check your posts because it's quite easy to slip out something that someone or the other will find offensive and have them scrambling to hit the report button.

To avoid low-content warnings simply drag your sentence(s) out with extra words, just flesh it out. E.g. instead of saying "good video!" you can say "I say dear chap, I found this video to be a jolly good show and I do implore you to keep up the spiffing work."

Every site/forum has different moderators and it's in your best interest to figure out how to avoid setting them off - usually the rules are enough, but they don't always paint the full picture of moderation.

 

[lacktheknack]

The moderation here is fine as it is, it's only when the big names at the time get banned the moderation suddenly becomes a damn problem.

Seriously. No one was complaining about this til a week or so ago.

And even though I'm firmly on Team Bring-Back-Vault101, I do grasp that she made a slip that finally took her out. It's good that the mods are at least consistent.

Anyways, no, the system looks like it works. If you watch yourself, you'll have no issues with it. I have an "occasional slip" trend, but my forum meter drains faster than it rises.

Plus, I find the mods actually dislike handing the wrath out. I managed to lock a thread without getting any more punishment than an angry glare. Maybe I should have gotten a warning for that, but I didn't.

 

[Charli]

Um... no. I've never received a single warning on this website. I've received two on another, a ban on one other.

The Escapist is pretty lax compared to some web forums harboring knee-jerk nazi moderators I've been apart of.


Most warnings and bans I've seen dished out have been firm but fair.

Also some advice: If you read a topic you feel will push your buttons in a negative manner, try hard to abstain from posting. You're not you when you're angry and tons of furious responses are rushing through your brain without filter. Or at least give the topic a while to find it's footing and let someone else take the heat so you can think clearer.

 

[TimeLord]

I joined this site when they already had the 8 strike rule and the convenient health bar on our profiles for posts and warnings so I have no experience with what the earlier systems were, but I don't think the mods here are too strict at all.
I do have a question though, how do you get strikes for low-content warnings? Does it happen because someone flags your comment, or is there a different system checking the length of posts to find them? I'm genuinely curious and figure I'll get an answer faster if I post in here.

No form is moderation is 'automated' (as in mod wrath handed out by a computer program). Low content posts have to be reported by the community (or found by us along with anything else that needs moderator attention when we randomly browse the forums) the same as every other post that is reported and they all get seen the same way we see every other post.

A common misconception which you bring up yourself is that Low content posts are about length. They aren't, they are about low content. Posting to simply say "lol" is definitely low content but not because it's a low letter count. Something along the lines of saying "I have no opinion one way or the other and am posting in this thread for no reason" is also low content as it does not contribute to the thread discussion in any way.

Also, writing;

"This

Extra words to avoid mod wrath"

Doesn't work. In fact if anything, it'll attract more users to report you because you are drawing attention to the fact that you think you are trying to avoid moderation.

 

[Knight Captain Kerr]

There is far worse out there but the moderation isn't the best either. It is more good than bad but they could still do with some improvement. The strike policy, I can see the logic behind it but I don't think it is the best way to handle things. It can easily lead to death by 1000 cuts, a user doing lots of little things that will get banned. It is hard to make a banning rule that applies to everyone in all situations. Context really is key, things do have to be taken on a case by case basis when it comes to banning. A suspension isn't that bad, but a ban? Banning is a really extreme measure. It should be a last resort for when there really is no other way. Such an action shouldn't be taken lightly. I think this forum has banned some users that it didn't have to ban.

 

[TimeLord]

[sub]Shut up, I will pay you moar money![/sub]


That's a notch though, I was close to having it all wiped out.

I wanted the Tetris of health bar renewals.

Shouldn't have slipped up then should you? I can't help you there to erase your own mistakes.
You'll just have to wait like everyone else

Plus, I find the mods actually dislike handing the wrath out. I managed to lock a thread without getting any more punishment than an angry glare. Maybe I should have gotten a warning for that, but I didn't.

We don't want to warn/suspend/ban anyone. But if we didn't then we'd end up with a forum overrun with Emperor only knows how many insults, trolls, adverts, porn and everything else in between! At the end of the day what we do works, and while it continues to work without the forums falling down around our ears, we will continue to do it.

 

[Xan Krieger]

The problem is when the moderation permabans someone and the quality of the forum drops. Take for example when they banned Danyal and the quality of R&P went down. I think the mods need to decide which is more important, the rules or the quality of the site?

This is absolutely ridiculous. It would mean that the same rules don't apply to everyone anymore, and posters that are popular can't be touched. Think about it, it's crazy. Everyone, regardless of their popularity, should abide by the rules as everyone else, no exceptions. Quality doesn't drop because of some jerks getting banned. And if you think it did, you are more than welcome to try and crank it up.

Anyway, like I said in another topic: Just follow the rules, it can't be that hard. Think before you submit.

Yeah it does sound bad but it's not like other people are treated differently. Jim Sterling is allowed to be as offensive as he wants and he's never even gotten a warning.

 

[Bara_no_Hime]

**snip**

Um, no.

I have over 6000 posts, I'm a regular member, often posting in controversial topics like feminism and gender threads.

Check it out - no strikes.

As long as one is polite - and knows when to walk away - one can post often and avoid issues that would cause one to get Warnings.

Personally, I think the moderation has been too lenient lately. But my thoughts on that have been covered in another thread.

 

[Calcium]

Well, "injustice of the permaban" and "is forum moderation too harsh" are two different things I'd say. I've gone 500+ posts without ever receiving a warning. Whenever I've seen a moderated post I never really think "that's unfair!" A couple of times I've seen people permabanned without a reference, but they were low posters, so I assume they were people trying to get around existing bans by making new accounts.

 

[Cain_Zeros]

The only mod-wrath I can recall getting is a completely deserved warning for low content right when I was starting out. I made it through when the moderation was bad unscathed. Trust me, since coming back and actually reading things in the forums (which only happened about a week ago after being gone for a year if not more), I can tell you that the moderation is really not as bad as you think it is, and the people I've seen getting mod-wrathed have deserved it.

 

[AstylahAthrys]

The strictness of the Escapist is why I like it so much. It's so neat and clean here, which makes it vastly superior than most places on the internet. I know, I don't post much, but I'm lurking all the time, and my experience here is usually pretty pleasant, save a few offensive posts. As for the Permaban being unjust? I don't think so. If you get that many strikes against you, I think it's fair to want said person to go.

 

[Abomination]

While I have been given one warning that I strongly believe was unwarranted it has been the only warning I have received on this site.

Despite my often contrary opinions that clash with the more emotional and fanatical members of the board I have learned simply what not to say in order to maintain a relatively full health bar.

I've been banned from many a forum before, banned 4 times from the World of Warcraft forums for example, and if I've only got one warning here I think the mods are a bit TOO lenient.

Does this thread have something to do with Vault 101 AGAIN?

 

[madwarper]

Yes. There is no court of appeals or means of redress,

Yea, that's wrong. You could do yourself some good by reading up on the Code of Conduct [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/codeofconduct].

Appeal System
Moderators and staff are human and sometimes make mistakes. For this reason, we have an appeal system that members can utilize to plead their case in hopes of a reversal of a penalty. Once you have received a penalty, a message will be sent to you via private message. At this time, there is also a link to the appeal process. Please note, the appeal process works with your email account, not the private message system on The Escapist. If you choose to use the appeal system, please make sure to check your spam folder for an email.

All appeals are normally seen within 48 hours of your appeal, except on weekends.

 

[DrunkOnEstus]

It's simple. Just love and obey the CoC. I've respected and loved the CoC ever since I saw it, and there's a few people on here who are willing to get behind you if they realize that you love and respect it. Also, Bill and Ted can even understand the most important rule: "Be excellent to each other". If someone gets me riled up, I just bite my tongue (in a manner of speaking) and ignore it. It's better to not respond if the alternative is to be all passive-aggressive and what not. I'm also in the camp that doesn't much care for the passive-aggression that allows for condescending insults that sidesteps the rule. But there are grey areas, and we're all human here, so it's totally understandable.

Of course the mods are sexy and awesome, and I definitely couldn't say how I'd handle being in one of their shoes.

 

[hazabaza1]

Eh. It's a bit inconsistent at times.
I've seen many a post doing stuff like "someone I know would call you this" or (pretty much quoting here) "My fiance would have many things to say about you if you suggested that. Mostly calling you a 'slut' or '*****'" that goes unmoderated.
Yet if you make a joke that might be deemed offensive you have to make sure to have a "this is totally a joke super special don't ban me" assurance or you may (in my experiences) get banned and have to appeal.

I can only name 2 users that have been brought back from a ban. But, they are currently banned.

Hi.

 

[RedDeadFred]

We wouldn't be having this discussion if Vault was still around, these things only crop up when someone people actually liked, get banned

Well, there was a pretty popular thread going around about what people thought of the moderation here on the day she was banned. It seemed like that thread led to her ban more than her actual post did. Don't get me wrong, her post deserved the ban because even though the OP said he wasn't offended by it, others might have been. I just don't think a lot of attention was drawn to it before the other thread specifically referenced her post.

But you're right, we've certainly had a boom of these kinds of threads since she's been gone.

 

[Altorin]

it's like Batman, you die a hero or live long enough to see yourself become the villain.

 

[Zen Toombs]

I've been lurking these forums for quite some time now, and while I think it's generally a pretty cool place I can't help feel that the super strict moderation is a detriment to the site.

In my opinion, it's a mixed bag. You're spot on about the whole "homogenization of opinion" thing, and I don't really like that.

However, there's also a problem of letting people who are basically just being inflammatory jerks just go about their business. I mean, it took Zeel months to get banned!