To the moderators of the Escapist:

Brockyman

New member
Aug 30, 2008
525
0
0
PurpleRain said:
Bofus Teefus said:
PurpleRain said:
Glefistus said:
To the moderators of The Escapist: WAAAAAAAAH!
I'm willing to back this only because it is pretty obvious most times why someone is banned. I've never needed explaining to.
Yeah, but I think this was done respectfully enough by the OP to where the flamage is a bit misdirected, don't you think? I was one of Glefistus' whiners on the petition. I had a few questions, and thought they were articulated nicely by the OP. They were answered by the mods, who, as mentioned earlier, didn't seem to see anything wrong with the inquiry. End of story. No crying from me.

I'm not going to disagree with you that it's usually pretty obvious, but I do get curious when some of the larger players, like yourself, meet the mighty banhammer. It's because they're part of what draws me to the site.
Oh, especially to the Escapist 1.0 crowed. Having known these people for longer like Mobius and Necro, it is more of a bigger impact to see them leave how they did. Mobius seems a nice enough guy but was homophobic and a bit egotistical which led to his banning.

The point I was agreeing with Glefistus was, most posts that you see get banned are indeed quite clear on why. Someone is casting a hate speech or making a racist/sexist/etc remark, you can't still wonder why they are banned. Other bannings are not as apparent, but a read through the rules shows clearly why. Lists and verses threads are common probabtions as well are Flamebate threads such as 'Xbox is betterer' or 'Religion sucks' etc.
The only issue I have is, who decides if something is "hate speech" or racist/sexist/ect? Yahtzee's jokes during the review of "50 Cent Blood on the Sand" could have been taken, by some very thick people, as a racist statement. If a Mod is a Democrat, they could ban someone for putting "Obama sucks" because they could see it as hate speech, and the same for Admin that is Republican could do the same thing...

I just think "Freedom of Speech" type rules should apply. If I threaten (in a non joking way) to kill someone, ban me. If I make an off color joke that offense people, tough for them. There is not a right to "not be offended"
 

AkJay

New member
Feb 22, 2009
3,555
0
0
Susan Arendt said:
sky14kemea said:
Susan Arendt said:
Let me step in at this point and simply say one thing -- when deciding what disciplinary action to take, we look at a user's complete ban history, as well as their general demeanor. So, if an individual infraction doesn't look like it justified a permaban, you're usually pretty safe in assuming it's a "straw that broke the camel's back" kind of situation. If you've been banned seven times for virtually the same offense -- say, making personal insults towards other community members -- it seems pretty obvious that you're not going to change your ways. Why would we want to keep that person as a member of our community?
so this is why Mobius was banned?

Ok, that's fair, I can't really argue with that reasoning, but admittedly Mobius' posts were just a joke gone way too far.
About the users not changing? Is there anyway someone could make an appeal and maybe get him a trial 'un-banning'? Because I know a lot of people liked him, especially in the RP forums.
I'm not referring to anyone in particular. This complaint -- that people get permabanned "for nothing" -- is one that pops up frequently, so I was hoping to better explain that that simply isn't the case.

As for appealing, while I understand where you're coming from, and am personally all for second chances, don't you think the previous 7 bans should be enough of a heads up for the person? One would think that a reasonable person would figure out long before then that such behavior isn't appreciated. How many chances do we give a person before we finally tell them no? Ten? Twenty?

I've had to permaban people that I genuinely like. It's not something I get a giggle out of. But I'm also very much in favor of people taking responsibility for their behavior.
I have noticed that sometimes people get banned, and the mods/admins/whatever don't really give them a reason, just a "You are banned, have a nice day", so how can they change the error of their ways if they do not know what they did?
 

Brockyman

New member
Aug 30, 2008
525
0
0
Did you make a joke? I think that's a 3-Day suspension.

Edit: I meant to quote this to another post after someone got probation for a silly joke. I was using it as commentary to how extreme things can get.
 

PurpleRain

New member
Dec 2, 2007
5,001
0
0
Brockyman said:
The only issue I have is, who decides if something is "hate speech" or racist/sexist/ect? Yahtzee's jokes during the review of "50 Cent Blood on the Sand" could have been taken, by some very thick people, as a racist statement. If a Mod is a Democrat, they could ban someone for putting "Obama sucks" because they could see it as hate speech, and the same for Admin that is Republican could do the same thing...

I just think "Freedom of Speech" type rules should apply. If I threaten (in a non joking way) to kill someone, ban me. If I make an off color joke that offense people, tough for them. There is not a right to "not be offended"
Hate speech is more generally aimed at achieving nothing. If mods were democrats Darkside wouldn't be here. if they were Republicans neither would I. They are fair and unbiased and smart enought to see through sarcasm and whatnot to see any real sort of racism. We've had a lot of it here, and all were banned promtly.
 

Brockyman

New member
Aug 30, 2008
525
0
0
PurpleRain said:
Brockyman said:
The only issue I have is, who decides if something is "hate speech" or racist/sexist/ect? Yahtzee's jokes during the review of "50 Cent Blood on the Sand" could have been taken, by some very thick people, as a racist statement. If a Mod is a Democrat, they could ban someone for putting "Obama sucks" because they could see it as hate speech, and the same for Admin that is Republican could do the same thing...

I just think "Freedom of Speech" type rules should apply. If I threaten (in a non joking way) to kill someone, ban me. If I make an off color joke that offense people, tough for them. There is not a right to "not be offended"
Hate speech is more generally aimed at achieving nothing. If mods were democrats Darkside wouldn't be here. if they were Republicans neither would I. They are fair and unbiased and smart enought to see through sarcasm and whatnot to see any real sort of racism. We've had a lot of it here, and all were banned promtly.
I think that's true for the most part... I don't really feel any of the mods/admins are bad at all. It just gets frustrating at times for not knowing the reasons or punishing someone for an off topic joke (without any bad overtones). It feels too much like a high school class room then a community of adults... somedays
 

Tech Team FTW!

New member
Apr 1, 2009
1,049
0
0
The Swanson's banning was completely justified and explained.
Mobius' banning was completely justified and self explanatory.

Both these users made the decision to make the posts that got them banned and they live with the consequences.

The moderators of this site are generally reasonable when it comes to punishments, hence the appeal form that you recieve when the banhammer strikes a blow. I have successfully argued my case when a suspension I recieved was not entirely justified. On that basis I hold the belief that these forums are moderated fairly.
 

JC175

New member
Feb 27, 2009
1,280
0
0
Brockyman said:
Did you make a joke? I think that's a 3-Day suspension.

Edit: I meant to quote this to another post after someone got probation for a silly joke. I was using it as commentary to how extreme things can get.
Yeah, I made the connection. I won't report you, it's okay. :p
 

scotth266

Wait when did I get a sub
Jan 10, 2009
5,202
0
0
The OP has been updated to include links to moderator responses.

Brockyman said:
Did you make a joke? I think that's a 3-Day suspension.
Oi. You're treading a fine line there. Don't do it again.

AkJay said:
I have noticed that sometimes people get banned, and the mods/admins/whatever don't really give them a reason, just a "You are banned, have a nice day", so how can they change the error of their ways if they do not know what they did?
I was given the understanding that the mods PM the person modded with the details.

Fire Daemon said:
See, this is why I've been slightly confused about this entire thing. Darth Mobius was put on a 3 day suspension originally and then given a perma-ban for the same post, which seemed really strange to me.

...

This is why a reason given by the moderators would be a good thing. A simple line or two explaining what warranted Mobius' departure would have removed any confusion and this discussion wouldn't have been needed.

Still, I suppose this discussion is a good thing. The moderation team and the community need to be able to communicate every now and again for things to run smoothly. If the mods are up in the sky, people might not feel the need (or even realise) that they can be communicated and reports can be put in, reducing the moderators power and making the forums a worse place to be.
A resonse was given on that issue: there is now a link in the OP. I agree that there need to be more detailed reasons for moderation given though. It helps to both answer questions the community may have and warn the new users that the moderators mean what they say in the Guidelines.
 

Brockyman

New member
Aug 30, 2008
525
0
0
Pi_Fighter said:
The Swanson's banning was completely justified and explained.
Mobius' banning was completely justified and self explanatory.

Both these users made the decision to make the posts that got them banned and they live with the consequences.

The moderators of this site are generally reasonable when it comes to punishments, hence the appeal form that you recieve when the banhammer strikes a blow. I have successfully argued my case when a suspension I recieved was not entirely justified. On that basis I hold the belief that these forums are moderated fairly.
The main reason I'm posting on this thread (other then I can't sleep) is that IF a punishment is justified, especially for long time memebers, it needs to be noted on the post. Most of us don't have time to go look at someones whole body of work, and if the mods would just post something saying " Mobius was banned for _________ after ___ number of warning", then I think most of us would agree, and there would be no issue. Most people don't like "we did it because we said so" as a reason, especially if they really like the poster.

I think you are right for the most part, but transparency would be a nice addition
 

scotth266

Wait when did I get a sub
Jan 10, 2009
5,202
0
0
xmetatr0nx said:
The only thing im wondering here is are these concerns and questions coming about because people honestly want to have a talk with the mods about possibly changing some things or adding more leniency? Or is this a popularity contest, only concerning the who of banned people.
This isn't just about the big bans: those were just a catalyst for writing the post. This has changed to generally be a thread about asking questions about moderation policy (to ease the tension in the community), and the mods have been kind enough to answer most of them.
 

Jamash

Top Todger
Jun 25, 2008
3,641
0
0
Brockyman said:
The only issue I have is, who decides if something is "hate speech" or racist/sexist/ect? Yahtzee's jokes during the review of "50 Cent Blood on the Sand" could have been taken, by some very thick people, as a racist statement. If a Mod is a Democrat, they could ban someone for putting "Obama sucks" because they could see it as hate speech, and the same for Admin that is Republican could do the same thing...

I just think "Freedom of Speech" type rules should apply. If I threaten (in a non joking way) to kill someone, ban me. If I make an off color joke that offense people, tough for them. There is not a right to "not be offended"
If you read the Privacy Policy of Themis Media, you'll notice that they log which URL you have come from before visiting the Escapist, and which URL you visit next after leaving the Escapist.

If someone makes an off-colour remark or racist seeming comment, they may or may not get put on probation or suspended, depending on the severity or the remark and how many people were offended enough to report that comment.

However, hypothetically, if the staff discover that before or after the user made the comment, they had visited a site like Stormfront or another racist or 'bad' website, they may guess that the user is actually quite racist and not someone who they want in their community, so they ban them.

It's worth noting that the staff could have a slight insight into the character of users by their internet history at around the time they visit the Escapist, and may decide to take action based on that.

Similarly and again hypothetically, at the times of 4chan attacks, they can tell who has come straight from that site or who visits it immediately afterwards, and may take note of that.

Freedom of Speech is a noble concept in a democracy, but this isn't one. It's a website owned by a private company and we give up our Freedom of Speech and similar rights when we agree to their rules and policies.

Note that this is only a wild guess of mine, based on what I've read. I not saying that this is what the staff do, for I have no way of knowing that (nor do I want or expect anyone to confirm or deny my speculation), but I'm just pointing out terms and conditions in the privacy policy that we've all agreed to, and a hypothetical situation in which the staff could use certain information to route out 'bad apples' (but I'm not suggesting that this is what's happened to any of the members who have been banned and mentioned in this thread, like Necro or Mobius).
 

Aura Guardian

New member
Apr 23, 2008
5,114
0
0
CantFaketheFunk said:
Shibito091192 said:
Please could I be added to the list.

I was recently also wrongly put on 'Probation' for commenting on a video before watching it.
I had watched it and my comment was posted over 40 mins after the video was uploaded.
I think the moderators need to get better at their job.
This post [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/6.120562#2371219]? "First!" posts are strongly frowned upon by the staff.
I get annoyed at those "first" posts.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.85791#1256940
 

scotth266

Wait when did I get a sub
Jan 10, 2009
5,202
0
0
Darkrai said:
I get annoyed at those "first" posts.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.85791#1256940
As do we all, but since that discussion was finished a few pages back, let's move on.
 

D_987

New member
Jun 15, 2008
4,839
0
0
theklng said:
D_987 said:
Clemenstation said:
Forum ecology? The biggest fish have to get caught eventually so others can step up to take their place.

I don't know any of these banned people. I also look forward to not knowing whoever fires off those ~50 posts/day to become the new Fat Fish of the Escapistpond.
Those people were never "famous" due to their post counts, they were "famous" due to their posts.
i disagree. they were famous due to the network they created on the escapist. very few people here post good posts; don't soil those that do with calling the escapist famous people's posts good.
You just proved my point; they were famous for what they posted, I never said they made good posts...
 

101194

New member
Nov 11, 2008
5,015
0
0
iain62a said:
I actually thought the mods did the right thing in banning TheNecroSwanson.

His post was needlessly aggressive for no real reason, and in my opinion that deserves a ban.

I'm pretty sure he's been in trouble with the mods before this too.
This.
 

mshcherbatskaya

New member
Feb 1, 2008
1,698
0
0
PurpleRain said:
Brockyman said:
The only issue I have is, who decides if something is "hate speech" or racist/sexist/ect? Yahtzee's jokes during the review of "50 Cent Blood on the Sand" could have been taken, by some very thick people, as a racist statement. If a Mod is a Democrat, they could ban someone for putting "Obama sucks" because they could see it as hate speech, and the same for Admin that is Republican could do the same thing...

I just think "Freedom of Speech" type rules should apply. If I threaten (in a non joking way) to kill someone, ban me. If I make an off color joke that offense people, tough for them. There is not a right to "not be offended"
Hate speech is more generally aimed at achieving nothing. If mods were democrats Darkside wouldn't be here. if they were Republicans neither would I. They are fair and unbiased and smart enought to see through sarcasm and whatnot to see any real sort of racism. We've had a lot of it here, and all were banned promtly.
It bears restating. There is no Freedom of Speech here. This is not a public place. The Escapist is a private, for profit operation. It's true that I have no right "not to be offended." It is also true that you have no right to be offensive. Neither of us have any rights of this sort at all.

In fact let's state that again for perfect clarity.

NO FORUM MEMBER HAS ANY RIGHTS WITH REGARD TO POSTING ON THIS FORUM.

We are here by the good graces and the good business sense of The Escapist staff and Themis Media. That's it. You have no right to free speech. You have no right to an explanation. You have no right to ongoing participation in this forum. This forum would work a lot better if people got over themselves and their sense of entitlement where their keyboard output is concerned. You have no rights here. You do, however, have responsibilities. Contribute to the community, use your brain, don't be a dick, expect good behavior from others, and practice it yourself. It's really not that hard.
 

Alex_P

All I really do is threadcrap
Mar 27, 2008
2,712
0
0
mshcherbatskaya said:
NO FORUM MEMBER HAS ANY RIGHTS WITH REGARD TO THIS SITE.
Not entirely true. You still have legal rights. There are limits to what a company can do with your personal data, for example, that can't just be waived via a click-through agreement.

-- Alex
 

mshcherbatskaya

New member
Feb 1, 2008
1,698
0
0
Alex_P said:
mshcherbatskaya said:
NO FORUM MEMBER HAS ANY RIGHTS WITH REGARD TO THIS SITE.
Not entirely true. You still have legal rights. There are limits to what a company can do with your personal data, for example, that can't just be waived via a click-through agreement.

-- Alex
OK, yeah, but that's not what I was talking about. I suppose I should have been more specific. I will edit my original statement.