Poll: Injustice of the Permaban
- Thread starter Drathnoxis
- Start date
Recommended Videos
My 2 biggest complaints about the system are 1) After the stupid system was implemented I was automatically bumped up to 5 in infractions even though at the time I'd only had 2. So now I'm only 2 infractions away from permaban. 
(Yes I'm still bitter about that after 3 years) 2) I think that stupid permaban avatar is incredibly immature.
(Yes I'm still bitter about that after 3 years) 2) I think that stupid permaban avatar is incredibly immature.
That, I have to agree with. I mean, when it came to being banned, the gray lettering and the red BANNED under the avatar works just fine to show that the person was banned. The avatar just seems to be a way to mock people for not following the rules.canadamus_prime said:
Meh. I'm still bitter about my only two infractions, that I got last year in the span of two days, where my posts, one was apparently offensive (though the person I was talking to admitted to acting as I called him), one was something I can't remember, and both posts were two weeks old at the point the infractions were given.
And then I see people going into threads with posts consisting of nothing more than "Dis gon be gud" GIFs and text that says the same, and they get away.
Moderation isn't harsh. I just feel it's inconsistent. Why can't there be a mod tribunal or something to decide the fate of a post instead of only one being allowed the decision? It'd also add a lot of mysticism and power to the image of the mods, which I feel they'd enjoy.
And then I see people going into threads with posts consisting of nothing more than "Dis gon be gud" GIFs and text that says the same, and they get away.
Moderation isn't harsh. I just feel it's inconsistent. Why can't there be a mod tribunal or something to decide the fate of a post instead of only one being allowed the decision? It'd also add a lot of mysticism and power to the image of the mods, which I feel they'd enjoy.
I do as well. And some posters that people like don't get that avatar when they're banned, because they're special I guess. Again, inconsistent.canadamus_prime said:
8 infractions should be more than enough to realise what you can, and cannot post. Hundreds of people manage to do it every day without any problems. If you still don't get it after that many, then removal of posting privileges is better for everybody. I don't see why being here longer, or being popular should exempt a person from the rules.
Rather than a "Anything you write that offends somebody is going to get you in trouble."
After all, there are some users who recently posted in the The-Banhammer-and-You-A-Users-Guide-to-the-Forums, about how the word "slut" shouldn't be allowed to be used. The mods pointed out that it's the context that matters the most, not specific words themselves.
Or else as you say, people could get banned for pretty much anything, seeing as being offended is entirely subjective. The reason it's mentioned is advice on how to avoid unnecessary issues.
I must admit, I am not much of a fan either. While I do not think it was the intention, it makes bans seem more personal and mocking than they are supposed to be.canadamus_prime said:
That's meant as a way of making people evaluate what they wrote. As in "Read this, do you think it's going to upset anybody? If so, why not re-write it so that it doesn't?"Dags90 said:
Rather than a "Anything you write that offends somebody is going to get you in trouble."
After all, there are some users who recently posted in the The-Banhammer-and-You-A-Users-Guide-to-the-Forums, about how the word "slut" shouldn't be allowed to be used. The mods pointed out that it's the context that matters the most, not specific words themselves.
Or else as you say, people could get banned for pretty much anything, seeing as being offended is entirely subjective. The reason it's mentioned is advice on how to avoid unnecessary issues.
To be honest I'm not sure if marks EVER go away, I have 3 strikes on me as the result of a single event (a ban that was reversed) and I'm pretty sure it was over 2 years ago at this point, and definatly well over six months where one of the marks should have disappeared. It doesn't matter because despite some contreversial posts I tend not to get in trouble, and remain polite even when argueing with people, I'm just saying this by way of correction in that I don't think marks ever go away (could be old information) since I've actually been at this a long time and have been paying attention to my own profile at least.
That said, I don't pay much attention to who gets banned or moderated, but I can say that I've been involved in a number of heated debates and said some very contreversial things that have gotten some pretty negative attention here from the user base (I'm generally right wing, not a huge supporter of most gay rights issues, very pro-America, and a militant to boot) and I have gotten in absolutly no trouble.
In general it seems to me that it's more an issue of HOW you say things, instead of what your saying. Remain polite, avoid flame wars (even when flamed), and take the time to explain yourself especially when your giving a contreversial or minority opinion. My posts tend to be long for a reason.... do that and you probably won't get in any trouble.
The few cases where I've noticed people getting banned for things that weren't sort posts, involved people trolling, being insulting, or getting into flame wars. In general the moderators want to keep things civil, I'd imagine from their perspective "who started it" or said what first doesn't really matter so much as what your saying now and the trouble it's causing. Someone flames you, you flame them back, your both at fault. If you wind up getting into flame wars frequently instead of knowing when to let things drop (like I tend to) the pattern gets noticed.
I've been here a long time, and that's my input.
That said, I don't pay much attention to who gets banned or moderated, but I can say that I've been involved in a number of heated debates and said some very contreversial things that have gotten some pretty negative attention here from the user base (I'm generally right wing, not a huge supporter of most gay rights issues, very pro-America, and a militant to boot) and I have gotten in absolutly no trouble.
In general it seems to me that it's more an issue of HOW you say things, instead of what your saying. Remain polite, avoid flame wars (even when flamed), and take the time to explain yourself especially when your giving a contreversial or minority opinion. My posts tend to be long for a reason.... do that and you probably won't get in any trouble.
The few cases where I've noticed people getting banned for things that weren't sort posts, involved people trolling, being insulting, or getting into flame wars. In general the moderators want to keep things civil, I'd imagine from their perspective "who started it" or said what first doesn't really matter so much as what your saying now and the trouble it's causing. Someone flames you, you flame them back, your both at fault. If you wind up getting into flame wars frequently instead of knowing when to let things drop (like I tend to) the pattern gets noticed.
I've been here a long time, and that's my input.
If you can't follow the code of conduct after 8 strikes that disappear on their own after a certain period, then the problem isn't with the moderation.
I think the moderation is just fine. This may well be due to the fact that I've never actually had anything to do with the mod team; why would I think there's a problem if I've never had a problem? But I'm one of those people that will always click on the link if someone has been warned/suspended/banned for a post, and I can't think of a single instance when I've disagreed with the mods' decision.
If anything, as other people have said, the system is rather generous. Having eight chances is more than enough of an opportunity to avoid getting banned. For all the people complaining about the fact that eight low-content posts can earn someone a ban (which is debatable in itself), I would argue that that person deserves a ban. They would have had seven opportunities to learn from their mistakes and stop making posts that don't contribute to the discussion. I'm of the view that if someone hasn't learnt by then, then the forums are better off without them.
Further to that, there is also the appeal system. So even if someone has actually been unfairly judged by a mod, there exists a system where they can ask several other mods to weigh in on the issue, which to me seems a pretty fair way of dealing with that.
This post actually went on longer than I intended, all I really meant to say was that I think the moderation system is good!
If anything, as other people have said, the system is rather generous. Having eight chances is more than enough of an opportunity to avoid getting banned. For all the people complaining about the fact that eight low-content posts can earn someone a ban (which is debatable in itself), I would argue that that person deserves a ban. They would have had seven opportunities to learn from their mistakes and stop making posts that don't contribute to the discussion. I'm of the view that if someone hasn't learnt by then, then the forums are better off without them.
Further to that, there is also the appeal system. So even if someone has actually been unfairly judged by a mod, there exists a system where they can ask several other mods to weigh in on the issue, which to me seems a pretty fair way of dealing with that.
This post actually went on longer than I intended, all I really meant to say was that I think the moderation system is good!
1 year, 3 months since you were at level 5. Two sets of 6 month reductions to get to 3. You're 3 months into the next reduction, and 9 months away from the 2 year slate cleaning. That system is simple and automated; the computers are not out to get anyone (yet).Therumancer said:
I actually think the system itself is fine. The warnings are meant to, you know, WARN people that they maaaay just want to be a little more careful with what they say. And you get eight of the damn things before you're kicked, and that's assuming you don't behave yourself for any stretch of time and regain some 'health'.
Now I have had moments in the past where I've seen a user get a warning (and in some cases a full-on ban) for a post that really didn't seem all that bad. I personally didn't find Vault's last post to be mean at all. Sure, she called the guy a crybaby. It wasn't exactly nice but it also didn't seem to be all that mean-spirited.
Hell, I've seen other posters say the exact same thing without getting a warning, just in a more subtle, passive-aggressive manner. I actually find that to be worse because then you have condescension mixed in as well.
Still, 8 warnings should be enough to make you seriously reconsider writing an insulting post, no matter how tame it may seem.
Now I have had moments in the past where I've seen a user get a warning (and in some cases a full-on ban) for a post that really didn't seem all that bad. I personally didn't find Vault's last post to be mean at all. Sure, she called the guy a crybaby. It wasn't exactly nice but it also didn't seem to be all that mean-spirited.
Hell, I've seen other posters say the exact same thing without getting a warning, just in a more subtle, passive-aggressive manner. I actually find that to be worse because then you have condescension mixed in as well.
Still, 8 warnings should be enough to make you seriously reconsider writing an insulting post, no matter how tame it may seem.
I have no problems with the current system as they give enough chances to make mistakes yet not enough to allow the person to be a major problem before removing them. The only issues come up when people refuse to step back and the conversation degrades from discussion, to screaming match, to name calling. Insults are the biggest ban issue I have seen. My advice is yell the insults at the screen not typing them and bam no problems.
Now as to why I came in here. I want to quote all the modes out of context.
Also maddawg this is a warning that last comment sounded mean but I won't use my secret mod powers on you as I must hide those from the mods lest they catch me.
Dear god I either need more coffee or sleep. Choices choices.
Now as to why I came in here. I want to quote all the modes out of context.
Poor Gryffindor I think I just put them in the negatives.
Also maddawg this is a warning that last comment sounded mean but I won't use my secret mod powers on you as I must hide those from the mods lest they catch me.
Dear god I either need more coffee or sleep. Choices choices.
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.Xan Krieger said:
Anyway, like I said in another topic: Just follow the rules, it can't be that hard. Think before you submit.
While I can sympathise with the people who don't like the site's moderation, I can also see that reading up on the Code of Conduct will eliminate the future warnings and bans. So I've been wrathed 7 times, 3 of them were repealed, I should have read the CoC telling me not to endorse adblocking software or do low content posts, potentially offensive posts and I would have gotten no warnings.
Simple: follow the rules, do I like all the rules? No. Do I have to follow them if I want to stay here? Yes. Are (some of) the rules too harsh? Yes, but I chose to go here where the rules apply, I need to follow them.
Simple: follow the rules, do I like all the rules? No. Do I have to follow them if I want to stay here? Yes. Are (some of) the rules too harsh? Yes, but I chose to go here where the rules apply, I need to follow them.
What moderation? I went from being a regular user to only coming on for a few series and maybe clicking on a few interesting looking news articles because of the lack of moderation. The moderation of this forum is of the worst moderation I've ever seen. You're allowed to insult groups of people all you want, just don't insult individuals or you get in trouble. Do you want to call all Americans stupid? Go right ahead, the mods are cool with that! Do you want to call all PC gamers pirates who don't deserve good games because they don't pay for them? That's fine too! Are you an intelligent American who buys all of their PC games who is now offended by the rampant insults being hurled your way? Well you'd better shut up and take it, and don't you dare get mad and call these people out on their bullshit because if you do, that's bad and the moderators will get you!Drathnoxis said:
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that the moderations I have wracked up for becoming justifiably offended at those types of posts are unfair. They're fair, I lost my cool and insulted the guy back, that's a rule violation and I deserved to be moderated. What I am saying is that the other person who started throwing insults first in each situation should have also been moderated. But they don't get moderated, they get away with it by insulting everybody instead of insulting an individual. I know this because on multiple occasions I have reported these posts and come back days, usually at least a week later (as I said, I only come around here for a few of the weekly shows now), and find that the post is still plainly visible for all to see, read, and be insulted by. This tells me that the moderators on this site are clearly okay with this kind of behavior. But why? On every single forum page, there's a link to the forum rules which contains this:
This tells me that somebody higher up on this site who wrote the rules actually does not want it to be okay for members to insult entire groups of people, so why isn't this rule being enforced? Somebody higher up needs to sit all these moderators down and say "Listen guys, these are the rules we have laid out and you're not enforcing all of them. It's time to start doing a better job, and if you can't do that, we'll replace you with people who can." Because right now, people are making your forums a less pleasant place to be and absolutely nothing is being done about that.
That, and a while back there was a whole crapload of pony spamming going on. You couldn't go into a single thread without people derailing it to post pictures of ponies or talk about the show. And the mods did nothing about that either, which I found very strange because they moderate any post that's deemed to be "low content" because, according to the rules, "These forums are used for discussion and low content posts halt discussion." Yes, low content posts halt discussion, but derailing every thread possible to talk about ponies didn't halt discussion at all... Except for the part where, you know, it halted every discussion that wasn't about ponies.
My final issue is with the report button itself. I hate any report button that just pops up and says "Are you sure you want to report this? YES/NO" without any kind of input. It makes me feel like those in charge don't care why I feel the post is inappropriate. And how do you know what I'm reporting it for anyway if you don't ask? What if I'm reporting something because I feel it's a "Topicless Thread Creation", but the moderator who reviews it looks at it and says "I don't see any flaming or mention of that certain browser add-on that nobody had better ever dare mention" and thus doesn't do anything about it? What if it's like all those damn pony posts the forum used to be plagued with that I mentioned earlier and again, the mod doesn't consider that and just says "No insults, this post can stay"? At the very least, there should be a little window with a list of all the various rules and a radio button next to each one so we can pick what rule we think the post violates.
Quoted for truth.AnarchistFish said:
Doesn't matter, they don't enforce that rule.Dags90 said:
Once again, quoted for truth. I'm very glad I'm not the only one who's seen this going on.SanAndreasSmoke said:
Now all you have to do is get some moderators in place that will actually enforce those rules and maybe people will be able to enjoy themselves while they're here. Until then, I won't be back until next Monday when there's a new Jimquisition to watch, because I'm sure not coming back tomorrow for the community that's allowed free reign to insult me for being American and playing PC games among other things.Susan Arendt said:
Forgive the dead horse I'm about to brutally chainsaw but as stated by several mods and Susan in this thread, if you don't learn your lesson after 8 (!) opportunities then it's not our fault you can't follow the rules which are always available to read under the 'Forums' drop down menu above.
Every 6 months without receiving any kind of mod wrath will make your health bar drop by one level. After 2 straight years of nothing then you are reduced to a clean slate, regardless of where you started from!chozo_hybrid said:
I'm still totally not bitter.TimeLord said:
Not bitter at all.
[sub]TimeLord, I will pay you money.[/sub]