Poll: Injustice of the Permaban

[SL33TBL1ND]

Every warning, probation, and suspension I've gotten over the years have been completely deserved.

And totally worth it.

 

[V da Mighty Taco]

I do think that the mods get a little too ban-happy from time to time (especially the past 2 months or so) and that people should be allowed to discuss piracy so long as they're civil about it, especially given how much it affects the gaming industry as a whole. I also heavily agree with those that say that the "don't be rude" rule is much too vague as well as those who think that Vault's banning post was tame and shouldn't have been grounds for said banning.

With that said, this site is easily one of the most civil message boards out there, and the mods are undoubtedly a big reason for that. Some mods - such as Spidermod - are also both likable and hilarious, with them being as much a member of the community as the likes of Daystar or the aforementioned Vault. They definitely have a lot of issues, but they're still far better than just about any other forum's mods that I've come across. After all, I've never heard of someone here being banned for nothing more than letting it be known that they're a part of a fandom. *coughnotsosubtlejabat4chancough*

Now if only the woman / man / anthromorphic penguin known as Spidermod would explain who their avatar is... >

 

[DudeistBelieve]

It's ridiculously easy to avoid mod wrath, just don't be a dick. Don't call people names. Be ambiguous if you're a recreational drug user. I've been on forums with terrible moderation, any of you ever post on Gamefaqs? The moderators there are right cunts. These people here are good folk.

Although I do have a funny mod story of asking about posting video reviews in the user review section. One of the non-marter mods was all like "Fuck no! You can't even use your youtube account there." and I had to be all "Uh... but the rules for the section said that we can." and a giant misunderstanding because apparently no one knew what was going on in that section of the site except for Marter... and I was pretty much told the rules were under review and not to post anymore videos in there.

Couple months later....... I mean, I haven't checked but I'm fairly certain we still can post youtube reviews there still. *shrug*

I think the moderation is mostly fine. The only glaring problem I have with it is the "perma-banned" avatar. It just reeks of a juvenile "ha, you're in trouble" remark. It seems a little hypocritical to me that users cannot insult one another (for good reason), yet mods can insult the banned users with that avatar.

Really? I kinda like it. A final "fuck you" to whoever's been a an asshole enough to get banned.

 

[zefiris]

How can you manage to get this many strikes? Not even I manage this, and I'm quite abrasive.

It's certainly not unjust.

 

[incal11]

How can you manage to get this many strikes? Not even I manage this, and I'm quite abrasive.

It's certainly not unjust.

At one point I got strikes for low content very regularly, and I see mods doing the exact same kind of short posts all the time with no consequences whatsoever. Curiously, this tends to happen when I'm having an unpopular opinion, but never in more "neutral" threads.

I think the moderation is mostly fine. The only glaring problem I have with it is the "perma-banned" avatar. It just reeks of a juvenile "ha, you're in trouble" remark. It seems a little hypocritical to me that users cannot insult one another (for good reason), yet mods can insult the banned users with that avatar.

Really? I kinda like it. A final "fuck you" to whoever's been a an asshole enough to get banned.

I think he has a point. That perma-banned avatar may feel justified, but it is still nothing more than a juvenile power trip.
Although it may be some kind of default feature that appear when someone gets perma-banned. And normal mods may have no control over it.

The concept of perma-ban itself is flawed too. A long term ban of perhaps one year would be enough. It's enough time for people to grow up and change, or just loose interest in the forum completely anyway. That way less people would be tempted to ban-jump too.

Ideally all mods should see "dickish" behavior as the lack of experience and maturity it really is, and not feel the need for some payback. Or even for perma-banning.

 

[Signa]

I am impressed with the efficiency of the moderation, but I am absolutely dissatisfied with the unyielding coldness of some of the more controversial moderation decisions. And I'm speaking as someone with a clean record.

 

[gorfias]

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.

I've been coming here for some time and it has been a problem for most of that time. I've lost a lot of people I enjoyed arguing with. A sanction can be against someone for stating something another person would find offensive. In Politics and religion, most of what people write might offend another.

Most of the time, when some one ticked me off, I'd reply in kind. That was enough to get a sanction to me for responding.

I'll have to review: is 8 sanctions, regardless of time frame, enough to get one permaband?

You should have seen this place last November around the time of elections. People with thousands of posts were getting banned. Things have calmed down some since then.

EDIT: "Amnesty
After every 6 months without any warnings, you will drop down one level on the Forum Health Meter. After 2 years without any warnings, your meter will be returned to 0, regardless of where it was before."

 

[deadpoolhulk]

i'm going to say that i think the Modds are doing a good job. now clearly i amn not the most frequent poster, nor do i lurk much either. (I'd say this is just a site i go to when i randomly feel like it. or Zero Punctuation) but yeah, i'm yet to see anyone banned or warned, look at the post and think "wow the modds over reacted huh?" it has all seemed reasonable to me.

the fact that you get 8 seems pretty good. if you fail to learn from your mistakes seven times? i'm kind of doubting having more chances is going to help any.

 

[Lovely Mixture]

Looking over the CoC [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/codeofconduct] now.

Don't Be a Jerk

This section is mostly fine, but I feel it needs concrete examples of what is considered offensive AND punishable.
Is saying "Jews are scum of the earth" different from saying "I believe Jews are scum of the earth" ?

Also, Poe's Law. How do you know if someone is trolling? (I mean, unless they say so obviously) And in the case that someone is banned for trolling, are the people who previously accused him of trolling going to be warned or not?

Have Respect for Others

Nothing wrong with this section. The fact that this thread is allowed shows it's enforced to the right extent.

Have Respect for the Site and its Content

I understand the importance of this, but it seems in need of examples.

Can you be warned for saying: "CONTRIBUTER1 is an idiot" or "I think CONTRIBUTER1 is an idiot" ? Obviously only posting that, it would be lacking merit for discussion and would only be an insult.

Is it better to have: "I think CONTRIBUTER1 is ignorant because etc?"

Put Some Effort Into Your Communication

Fine in theory, but I may have seen some people warned for only having a sentence and a half which seems excessive (I'll have to see if my examples are as I remember them).

Use Our Forums Appropriately

Fine.

Posting Pics or Videos

Also fine, but I've seen quite a few posts where people have posted images larger than my head without spoiler-tags, should I flag them?

 

[Colour Scientist]

Well when you put it like that I feel bad -_- although I kinda assumed you had me on ignore anyway. Nothing personal though, I just disagree with some post you have made, and I feel at least one would have gotten a warning for anyone else.

I don't have anyone on ignore.

And it's cool. I can be condescending and a bit smug/prickly (though I do try not to be). You're not necessarily wrong. I try to be fun most of the time. That likely doesn't come across on the forums all that often anymore. You should've been in here in 2010. =D

I used to think you were a really happy-go-lucky poster, back when you were using Pincer as your avatar and that ridiculously cute pika uh one.

 

[Drops a Sweet Katana]

I'd say moderation here is pretty reasonable on the whole. Looking over the CoC, the penalty system gives A TON of room for mistakes. 4 warnings BEFORE probation is pretty good going and after that, you two have more chances before getting the dreaded permaban. Add to that the presence of the appeal system and forum health regeneration, I'd say it's all pretty fair.

I have my gripes with it though, primarily the leniency and inconsistency of the mods with regard to the 'Don't Be a Jerk' rule. While being a jerk is a bit of grey area, that should not make it a no-go zone. Mods need to be a little more strict about these things. If someone has a problem with getting a warning for a comment they've made, they can use the appeal system and make a case for themselves. Simple.

 

[Legion]

The concept of perma-ban itself is flawed too. A long term ban of perhaps one year would be enough. It's enough time for people to grow up and change, or just loose interest in the forum completely anyway. That way less people would be tempted to ban-jump too.

A user who was banned last year recently had their permanent ban revoked after a year away.

They went straight back into posting aggressively:

Yeah? Your position is not just offensive it's also spineless. You stand for nothing? Are you-serious? This isn't about what your favourite fucking ice cream flavour. It's about BASIC, HUMAN, RIGHTS. and you should feel absolutely ashamed that 'your neutral on it'.

Obviously that doesn't mean that people cannot ever be redeemed. UltraJoe was once banned years back and was a moderator for a while. But that doesn't mean that a permanent ban is always a bad thing. I think it's better to have it as it is, and with the option of appeal that is available.

Posting Pics or Videos

Also fine, but I've seen quite a few posts where people have posted images larger than my head without spoiler-tags, should I flag them?

Yes, if they are ridiculously large. Although the chances are, if the image is appropriate, they may not get in trouble (I honestly don't know), but just have the image put in tags instead.

Personally I don't see flagging as necessarily "This post should be moderated!" as much as "Do you mods/staff think this should be moderated?" I do it to bring attention to a potential problem more than anything.

I am not sure if that's the "right" way to go about it, but considering it's down to a moderators discretion to do anything about it or not, I think that it is.

 

[loa]

Um yeah, you have to be super inoffensive around here.
DON'T even try to argue with other people much or you WILL rack up permanent warnings and good luck arguing with the moderation about the reasoning behind those.

 

[incal11]

The concept of perma-ban itself is flawed too. A long term ban of perhaps one year would be enough. It's enough time for people to grow up and change, or just loose interest in the forum completely anyway. That way less people would be tempted to ban-jump too.

A user who was banned last year recently had their permanent ban revoked after a year away.

They went straight back into posting aggressively:

The point remains that he had a chance to change. There are lots of people who could use such a chance. Letting people come back after they have matured is worth having to renew the year-bans of a few sub-normal dicks.

(captcha: "love you" heh!)

 

[Chromatic Aberration]

Read through the whole thread now and I think I'll add in my two cents on this issue.

First, generally the rules seem to be good. I've never seen someone get perma-banned who didn't deserve it for one thing or the other. In fact, users such as Katatori (blatant mod sass, hostility) and Danyal (flamebaiting, spamming) should have gotten the boot much sooner than they did. Personally, I've gotten along just fine up until now with about half of my posts in R&P without incurring a single infraction up to this point - so it's not impossible to discuss even controversial topics without getting into trouble. If I had to guess the whole "the moderation is blatantly unfair!"-argumentation seems to suffer a lot from the psychological drive to think as oneself of being right, or how Guppy put it so succinctly,

GOOD MODERATION: The guy I reported gets a warning. Tee-hee!

BAD MODERATION: The guy I reported doesn't get a warning. Outrageous!

APPALLING MODERATION: I get a warning. Clearly there is a conspiracy against me.

Plus, factor in that memories that are attached to emotional distress will be more prevalent, meaning that everyone remembers the troll and not the mass of people who just quietly voice their non-controversial opinions on things and you will get the perception that the moderation is utterly dysfunctional.

You're allowed to insult groups of people all you want

You might want to back that up with some, you know, evidence.

Because the mods give out warnings to people who insult religious people, soldiers, and even bronies.
All groups of people.

I've provided my evidence, where's your's?

If you want I can link you some. The sad fact of the matter is that it is socially acceptable to shun some minorities on the basis of broader political movements and viewpoints that are prevalent in Western countries. That might be acceptable in case of some (Nazis, Fascists) but gets a lot more fishy when it comes to other groups that are "criticized" sometimes to the point of almost advocating genocide (criminals, muslims and immigrants as the most striking examples) and that see no mod attention simply due to the fact that those viewpoints represent parts of broader cultural movements (the surge in anti-immigrant parties across Europe, the death-penalty advocates in the US or elsewhere). For instance, we have just about now a poster over at R&P who has spouted the typical fundamentalist homophobia and who also hasn't received any kind of mod attention as of yet.

However, while I find those "viewpoints" to be completely disgusting I can see why they are not moderated though: a society must deal with those kinds of viewpoints as long as they see see the popularity they seem to have in the broader context; banning this kind of "expressions" might have consequences for the staff and the site that they might not want to take into account, so I can understand their reluctance in that regard.

I think I'll now write a second separate post about an issue that I think I need to voice my opinion on : moderation in R&P.

 

[Hazy]

I try to make posts that are insightful and witty (read: showing others that my opinion is right and theirs are wrong) so that I may better educate the populace.

No, but seriously, I think it's okay.

I got banned once for something that wasn't even in the rules, so that was pretty asinine, but that was quite a few years ago.

 

[Ashannon Blackthorn]

Katatori-kun got banned? I had him blocked for giving me a stomach ulcer so didn't know.

I think the mods are fairly fair in a fair way. They are human. granted the one warning I got was over something I stand by to this day and even got the mod to admit that I was right in a private message but rules were rules. Moral victory 1 Rule Enforcement 1... damn a tie...

 

[Chromatic Aberration]

Now about an issue I want to voice my opinion on: While I hate to beat on a dead horse, I'm kind of disappointed with the apparent lack of will to moderate the R&P section properly and take the concerns of it's regulars into account. After some lengthy discussions in the mod-group-chat about half a year ago I expected some changes to happen in that regard. What we got was a promise to install an R&P specific mod and a very nice sticky from NewClassic on how things need to be taken into account. People jumped on that sticky and voiced their concerns and shared some interesting ideas on how to improve things.

However, the attention of the mods quickly faded and not until prompted reacted to any inquiries voiced in the thread. Even the most basic ideas (like simply adding a reason to every moderated post over yonder to make mdoeration more transparent) were, if at all, only applied spotily and a few weeks later, the stance of the staff about an R&P specific mod seemed to have changed. A few weeks ago then, the sticky was locked (presumably out of accident) and was subsequently automatically deleted. As far as I see it, all those developments do not reflect well onto the will of the staff to account for the controversial nature of the R&P section.

As I see it, those things should still happen; It still is a good idea to just have the mods simply add a reason to moderated posts over there (even if its only one word or obvious) and it might be advantageous to look for a specific mod among the regulars over there (I can name you at least 3 people who I think would suitable for such a role) who know the section and have a vested interest in it.

 

[Something Amyss]

Katatori-kun got banned? I had him blocked for giving me a stomach ulcer so didn't know.

I had him blocked, too. I just went and looked at the post that got him banned, though, and it sorta seemed dodgy to me.

 

[Imperioratorex Caprae]

In light of this situation, I have an opinion... Bans aren't handed out at whim, you really have to be a continuing screw-up to garner one. This site is a membership, not a right and you must abide by the rules. Breaking rules consistently means you eventually get banned.
I don't feel sorry for permabanned folk because they had their warnings, they apparently can read (if they can post they can read) the CoC and they refuse to honor it. We come here under the Escapist's umbrella and its their (the mods) right to choose who sits under the umbrella and who is too much a problem and subsequently put out in the rain.
I'm not sorry some of you had friends who were banned but maybe if they took the time to alter their language so as not to violate said CoC they would still be here.
Again, its TE's right to say who stays and who doesn't, as they own and operate the site and as such have delegated the responsibility to keep order to the MODS. Therefore you have no rights to be here indefinitely, you only have the privilege to remain here as long as you follow the rules.