sky14kemea said:
Most people seem to think "Don't be a jerk" is specific enough. If you know right from wrong, then it should be easy enough to tell when you're being rude to someone or not.
As for warning people that their posts are insulting, you can do that just fine without calling them a troll. Just a nudge via PM saying "Hey, your post is kinda insulting, might wanna edit that fast!" would do.
Most people isn't all people, I'd say it's just less than a majority who don't discover what crosses the line into insulting till it's too late.
Like is it insulting to say that someone's expressed (and even evangelised) views fit the very dictionary definition of sexist and/or racist prejudice? Is it insulting to say how their actions are negative and how you disapprove of them?
I was reprimanded for telling someone how disgusted I was that they'd gloat about shoving an old lady off a bus. He was not reprimanded for such a blatantly inflammatory and offensive post.
I got 3 PMs from people (not friends, people I'd never conversed with before) saying they were amazed that I got reprimanded for that post.
There were no "fu** you" in the post, it was the "I don't want to live on this planet any more" video and putting in unequivocal terms that doing such a thing is inexcusably wrong.
Is that "being a jerk" telling someone how they were wrong to assault a defenceless person?
That's not the part of the system I was talking about. I'll be more specific. In the current system, the ban level is already set based on the users current health bar, so we don't have to decide what level of a ban to give them. This seems harsh to the users, but it cuts out favoritism, which is also complained about sometimes on the forum.
Well the maxim "justice is blind" doesn't mean blind in that sense.
This is what's known as a zero-tolerance policy, removing all discretion creates more injustices than it solves. It's like California's three felonies (no matter how minor) getting an automatic sentence of 25-to-life. And this of course doesn't eliminate favouritism as moderators still decide who gets a warning and who doesn't, but I don't think favouritism is even a problem or ever has been.
Lack of communication and explanation perhaps.
And I'm not saying get rid of the health bar system, I'm saying tweak it so it isn't so harsh on your regulars.
And If it was me... I'd have the health bar go the opposite way. You are closer to a ban as your health bar DEPLETES and then slowly refills. But that's just a design aesthetic thing: a health bar shouldn't be "better" if it is more filled.
Emulating the conditioning we see in computer games like Halo it takes a long time to START refilling, (6 months) then every subsequent month another health block recovers unless you screw up. Different screws up should have different consequences, threatening and directly swearing at another user should lose more blocks than a low content post.
I didn't decide on a 6 month reset period. Again, the Staff decide the system and we follow it. If you want to ask about the Moderation system, please PM a member of Staff. I don't have many answers for that subject.
Oh, I thought moderators were considered members of staff. I have no idea what relevant member of staff's mail is or even which one would respond.
So what's your aim as a moderator if not an employee? When you have a dilemma what is the Prime Directive? In other words
what are you trying to make these forums more or less like?
I'd genuinely like to know as the rules limiting speech at the moment limit me here more than anywhere else. I can accept working within an established framework of permissible conduct (house rules) but what is it all working towards?
I mean how is it bad to merely say how another person is being bad? To avoid ever challenging what any other user says or does; that is to condone by silence. But... what's the mod's objective? Will they censor such extremely inflammatory posts like gloating about assaulting frail women? Or can people reply, saying how awful it is to do such a thing.
Because stuff like that going unchallenged and people unable to challenge it... that's not an escapist environment, that's an environment people want to escape from.
Though that may be the exception, exceptions matter.