Criticism of Moderation

[RobbyPants]

And yet, complaining about non specific posters and non specific problems on another board is not allowed. Else the GitP thread would not have been locked.

Meg's stance for several years has been that she doesn't like threads bitching about/poking fun of other sites.

And, to be fair, we kinda let that get out of hand when it was allowed.

In my experience at BG and The Den, that's what always seems to happen.

[Libertad]

That probably happens because the purpose of the thread is to discuss things you don't like about said site.  I don't think that people who defend said sites would post in the topic for fear of starting an argument.

Also, continually talking smack about other community message boards (even if complaints are justified) just creates an "us versus them" mentality which just spreads around bad feelings.  It's not something conductive or positive.

[Basket Burner]

That probably happens because the purpose of the thread is to discuss things you don't like about said site.  I don't think that people who defend said sites would post in the topic for fear of starting an argument.

Also, continually talking smack about other community message boards (even if complaints are justified) just creates an "us versus them" mentality which just spreads around bad feelings.  It's not something conductive or positive.

The purpose of that thread was to vent a little. At the time, few people could even see topics in this subforum. I'm not complaining about that being locked. I am complaining about the inconsistency here, which several people have been so kind as to prove me right about.

Not wanting an us vs them mentality is a noble goal to have. However when the entire board is built around the premise of most of the posters vs a few posters, complaining about any instance of us vs them just looks foolish and falls flat on its face. All of the raging about Sunic for example, starting with multiple posters being accused of being him. Why? Because those being accused acted in vaguely the same manner. That's it. That is the only reason. I bolded the keyword there in order to preempt the obvious and predictable response.

I could elaborate on this obvious hypocrisy for quite some time, but at the end of the day what it comes down to is that if I was wrong about the users there would not be so many people joining the circle jerk, and if I was wrong about the mods they would have locked this thread, same as anything else that should not be here. Unfortunately I am not wrong, and the fact of the matter is that some forms of us vs them are permitted while others are not accepted.

To be fair, not every user joined in, but a substantial number did.

[Kajhera]

That probably happens because the purpose of the thread is to discuss things you don't like about said site.  I don't think that people who defend said sites would post in the topic for fear of starting an argument.

Also, continually talking smack about other community message boards (even if complaints are justified) just creates an "us versus them" mentality which just spreads around bad feelings.  It's not something conductive or positive.

The purpose of that thread was to vent a little. At the time, few people could even see topics in this subforum. I'm not complaining about that being locked. I am complaining about the inconsistency here, which several people have been so kind as to prove me right about.

Not wanting an us vs them mentality is a noble goal to have. However when the entire board is built around the premise of most of the posters vs a few posters, complaining about any instance of us vs them just looks foolish and falls flat on its face. All of the raging about Sunic for example, starting with multiple posters being accused of being him. Why? Because those being accused acted in vaguely the same manner. That's it. That is the only reason. I bolded the keyword there in order to preempt the obvious and predictable response.

I could elaborate on this obvious hypocrisy for quite some time, but at the end of the day what it comes down to is that if I was wrong about the users there would not be so many people joining the circle jerk, and if I was wrong about the mods they would have locked this thread, same as anything else that should not be here. Unfortunately I am not wrong, and the fact of the matter is that some forms of us vs them are permitted while others are not accepted.

To be fair, not every user joined in, but a substantial number did.

I think this comes down to the private vs public approach to moderating people have been discussing. Some interventions are seen and some are not - and I'm pretty sure what you're complaining about has been intervened against, but since it's a new issue being new boards there are a few growing pains to get used to. So this thread's been adopted into working out appropriate response, which is important to figure out. And may justify the thread not being locked.

If some of the initial posts in this thread are too inappropriate perhaps the topic should be split.

[Basket Burner]

That works a lot better when:

Posts that are sent privately can be responded to. Currently they can't, and it isn't even apparent who sent them.
People start to act differently. If any sort of intervention was done, and it worked, then the same posters that have been harassing since the beginning would not still be doing that. So either it was not done, or it didn't work.

Whatever the case, their behavior is permitted, because they are on the right side of the us vs them line.

[RobbyPants]

That works a lot better when:

Posts that are sent privately can be responded to. Currently they can't, and it isn't even apparent who sent them.

What do you mean? PMs can be replied to.

People start to act differently. If any sort of intervention was done, and it worked, then the same posters that have been harassing since the beginning would not still be doing that. So either it was not done, or it didn't work.

Whatever the case, their behavior is permitted, because they are on the right side of the us vs them line.

This cuts both ways.

[veekie]

In either case, a lot of moderation was handed out, regardless of which side of the debate they were on. Everyone going off topic, and especially into personal attacks were warned or PMed where they crossed the line.

Which in fact was the likely reason for the earlier complaints, as they were seen as being chastised without a corresponding one being delivered to the other party.

[Basket Burner]

That works a lot better when:

Posts that are sent privately can be responded to. Currently they can't, and it isn't even apparent who sent them.

What do you mean? PMs can be replied to.

Not warnings. It says they are sent by "Min/Max boards" and you can't even click them to reply. As opposed to say, a PM from a specific moderator that you could reply to.

People start to act differently. If any sort of intervention was done, and it worked, then the same posters that have been harassing since the beginning would not still be doing that. So either it was not done, or it didn't work.

Whatever the case, their behavior is permitted, because they are on the right side of the us vs them line.

This cuts both ways.

That might be true, except that as I explained before I made zero posts for a while to see if things would change. They didn't. That rules that possibility out. If the problem were me, then this thread would have stopped on its own a while ago even if it was not locked. Better yet, it would have never existed in the first place, as I made the decision to leave literally 5 minutes beforehand, and if it were not for this baiting thread keeping me around I would have likely stayed gone. So everyone that doesn't like the 1%, go thank ImperatorK for making sure I stay around.

I'm on the wrong side of the us vs them line. If I wasn't, there wouldn't be a problem here. So the problem does not cut both ways in that regard.

I have also taken steps to resolve these measures by taking the high ground. Those did not work, so I became meaner to them. I'm doing my part here.

[SneeR]

It's fine to contribute nicely. BB, you have so many great ideas! We want to hear what you have to say, as long as you say it nicely.
Taking your patented caustic tone and using mocking sarcasm in your corrections of others makes things personal.

You are actually the person who made me realize one of the base disparities in class design. Your contributions are invaluable, but your insistence upon being rude ensures that no one wants to take you seriously. People end up responding to your posts with either flame-baiting or simply ignoring, and that is terrible.

But can they be blamed when every good idea you say comes with a dismissive insult? We all like the same thing here: tabletop gaming. Can't you give your opinion in a nonaggressive manner? I guarantee you that, if you post your thoughts and nothing else--no insults, no derogatory remarks against others' styles of play or optimization--only your thoughts on the subject at hand, that people will eventually stop flame-baiting you and take you seriously!

We want to respect you, but respect is a two-way street!

[Basket Burner]

It's fine to contribute nicely. BB, you have so many great ideas! We want to hear what you have to say, as long as you say it nicely.

Problem with that theory: I started out nice. A growing number of people responded to this with rage. I stopped being nice. People then complained I wasn't being nice.

Even the socially challenged should be able to realize that if you are hostile towards someone, they will be hostile right back at you.

I've tried your way already. It didn't work.

Taking your patented caustic tone and using mocking sarcasm in your corrections of others makes things personal.

I see what you did there, and I am not taking the bait.

You are actually the person who made me realize one of the base disparities in class design. Your contributions are invaluable, but your insistence upon being rude ensures that no one wants to take you seriously. People end up responding to your posts with either flame-baiting or simply ignoring, and that is terrible.

You have came to the entirely wrong conclusion regarding that matter.

But can they be blamed when every good idea you say comes with a dismissive insult? We all like the same thing here: tabletop gaming. Can't you give your opinion in a nonaggressive manner? I guarantee you that, if you post your thoughts and nothing else--no insults, no derogatory remarks against others' styles of play or optimization--only your thoughts on the subject at hand, that people will eventually stop flame-baiting you and take you seriously!

We want to respect you, but respect is a two-way street!

Oh, you mean like what is happening now? (crickets)

Here is a wonderful example:

Sunic, stop bullshiting us. You received so much warnings that the Mods were forced to moderate your posts. Not one of them would go through without their permission. So you just waited it out.
And this threads purpose changed after you (allegedly) left, so don't lie that you came back because of it.

There are so many problems with this that I am not sure where to begin, so I will leave it with three things:

1: I was not put on moderated status. I was threatened with it, which caused me to lose what little respect I had left for them as a result of their obvious biases, but I left because there was nothing here but idiots flamebaiting me and people not nearly as skilled as they think they are, and are yet unwilling to learn.
2: The bitching continued even after the fact, post histories do not lie even if you do.
3: Not a single one of you have correctly assessed the situation regarding the person you hate so much. Everyone deserving of enough respect to have it explained to them has either already left these boards or does not care though, so you can think whatever you like as these boards have demonstrated it's pointless to correct people that refuse to be corrected.

Do you see now why I have lost all respect for these boards? The most offensive part of it isn't the us vs them mentality, raging against specific posters or any of that. It's the people that think they know their stuff but really don't, and refuse to be set straight. From people that are honestly bewildered as to how a low level character can be immune to nearly everything a Balor can throw at them when it is such a painfully simple trick I am surprised it did not come up by post 5 at the latest to the various scenarios involving badly designed characters it's obvious that despite only learning the advanced tricks relatively recently I am still more skilled and knowledgeable than just about anyone here. That's not a positive reflection on me. It wouldn't be a negative reflection on these boards either, if it weren't for that refusing to learn thing.

It'd be as if I went to another board now, and everyone there was seriously saying things such as Luvdisc for Ubers, or that Baton Pass is good outside of Smash Passing and so forth.

[RobbyPants]

Not warnings. It says they are sent by "Min/Max boards" and you can't even click them to reply. As opposed to say, a PM from a specific moderator that you could reply to.

Oh, the warnings. I suppose it'd make sense for the mod issuing it to send a PM too, so it could be replied to.

That might be true, except that as I explained before I made zero posts for a while to see if things would change. They didn't. That rules that possibility out. If the problem were me, then this thread would have stopped on its own a while ago even if it was not locked. Better yet, it would have never existed in the first place, as I made the decision to leave literally 5 minutes beforehand, and if it were not for this baiting thread keeping me around I would have likely stayed gone. So everyone that doesn't like the 1%, go thank ImperatorK for making sure I stay around.

I'm on the wrong side of the us vs them line. If I wasn't, there wouldn't be a problem here. So the problem does not cut both ways in that regard.

I have also taken steps to resolve these measures by taking the high ground. Those did not work, so I became meaner to them. I'm doing my part here.

Have you read this thread? You've been gone for about a week and here's the time line:

1) ImperatorK creates the thread. So far, he's the only one to complain about you.

2) You chime in that you're leaving.

3) Several other people complain about your posting style

4) 23 hours after your post, Sinfire steps in and re-purposes the thread.

5) For over a week, the thread's topic stays off of you and on modding in general.


I seriously don't see what you're talking about. I don't see what you mean about us vs. them. You're not the only one who has been talked to.

[Basket Burner]

That might be true, except that as I explained before I made zero posts for a while to see if things would change. They didn't. That rules that possibility out. If the problem were me, then this thread would have stopped on its own a while ago even if it was not locked. Better yet, it would have never existed in the first place, as I made the decision to leave literally 5 minutes beforehand, and if it were not for this baiting thread keeping me around I would have likely stayed gone. So everyone that doesn't like the 1%, go thank ImperatorK for making sure I stay around.

I'm on the wrong side of the us vs them line. If I wasn't, there wouldn't be a problem here. So the problem does not cut both ways in that regard.

I have also taken steps to resolve these measures by taking the high ground. Those did not work, so I became meaner to them. I'm doing my part here.

Have you read this thread? You've been gone for about a week and here's the time line:

1) ImperatorK creates the thread. So far, he's the only one to complain about you.

2) You chime in that you're leaving.

3) Several other people complain about your posting style

4) 23 hours after your post, Sinfire steps in and re-purposes the thread.

5) For over a week, the thread's topic stays off of you and on modding in general.


I seriously don't see what you're talking about. I don't see what you mean about us vs. them. You're not the only one who has been talked to.

Even after the repurposing, many of the comments were still references to me. Some subtle, some not so subtle, but context makes it clear that the bitching about specific posters continued for quite a while after that.

So yes, I've read it. I am also capable of understanding things in a not 100% literal manner.

The us vs them comes about because clearly this entire thing is about raging about Sunic, and any posters that are believed to be Sunic. Before anyone gives the obvious response, I'd like to remind you again these accusations were leveled at multiple posters. Clearly several people cannot be the same person. Of course, most of them are leveled at me because the other people they were thrown at are not very active here. Perhaps because they've lost patience with the place as well. Regardless, it still amounts to us vs them bitching about specific posters, as I believe that were this about anyone else, things would go differently.

[RobbyPants]

1: I was not put on moderated status. I was threatened with it, which caused me to lose what little respect I had left for them as a result of their obvious biases, but I left because there was nothing here but idiots flamebaiting me and people not nearly as skilled as they think they are, and are yet unwilling to learn.

You weren't the only one to receive a warning.

As we mentioned in this thread after the fact, any time this stuff is dealt with privately, it leaves each side feeling like they were singled out. There is more than one poster who has claimed that they were singled out and the others got away with nothing.

Even after the repurposing, many of the comments were still references to me. Some subtle, some not so subtle, but context makes it clear that the bitching about specific posters continued for quite a while after that.

So yes, I've read it. I am also capable of understanding things in a not 100% literal manner.

In this thread, or elsewhere?

Edit:
I can see two potential posts you might be referring to in this thread, but context-wise, to me, it looks like they're discussing modding in general in these situations.

[X-Codes]

I really don't care whether or not he's Sunic, anymore.  Just ban him and be done with it, he's obviously going to be a prick regardless of what you moderators do.

[SneeR]

Just stick with it, BB! Ignore the flambaiters and jerks, and stay nice. It will sting for a while, but eventually you will just be another poster, and people will stop reacting violently to your posts.

I know you don't deserve some of the hate around here, but you can just ignore the people who hold a grudge! Every member of this community is valued as long as they don't alienate themselves and remain helpful rather than hurtful.

Try just a bit longer!

[Zonugal]

Man, for someone who apparently holds no respect for anybody/anything here he sure does make it a point to keep visiting.

[Prime32]

I'll get to BB later. But first, this thing isn't as one-sided as ImperatorK claims.

Sunic, stop bullshiting us. You received so much warnings that the Mods were forced to moderate your posts. Not one of them would go through without their permission. So you just waited it out.

This never happened. Both you and Basket Burner have been warned, but neither has gone to that stage.

@ SneeR
With all due respect, I admire your forgiveness, but talk for yourself. I don't want to respect him and I don't care how many good ideas he has. A douche is a douche, I won't respect him no matter how nice he will start to be. Mainly because I know that deep down he thinks of us as fuckwits and idiots.

Stop it.
Both you and Basket Burner have been overly aggressive, but for different reasons. While Basket Burner has been trying to change how people think, you've just been trying to provoke him to the point where he gets banned. The first rule here is "don't be a douche"; what made you think that declaring you will always be a douche and want others to act like douches would be acceptable?

While his tone is unpleasant, Basket Burner has brought up some interesting ideas; a productive member will be given more leeway than someone who breaks the rules for its own sake. If you stop insulting him, we can forget all this and wipe your record clean. If you continue, you'll be placed on post moderation.

The same goes for BB. Calm down and everyone else will.

if you are hostile towards someone, they will be hostile right back at you.

That goes both ways. But game theory says that the winning strategy is to be the first to forgive.

[ImperatorK]

This never happened. Both you and Basket Burner have been warned, but neither has gone to that stage.

We're gonna try and see if putting him at 35% will work for a while. More work for us, but at least then we can try and drill some common sense into his head.

No comments on the rest...

[Agita]

This never happened. Both you and Basket Burner have been warned, but neither has gone to that stage.

We're gonna try and see if putting him at 35% will work for a while. More work for us, but at least then we can try and drill some common sense into his head.

No comments on the rest...

Okay. First of all, quoting PMs without consent of the sender is dickish; there's a reason they were private in the first place. Don't do that.

I can't comment on the authenticity of the quote, but BB was never put on the 35% level. That is all, and is all that shall be said on the topic of warnings. End of discussion.

[Sinfire Titan]

This never happened. Both you and Basket Burner have been warned, but neither has gone to that stage.

We're gonna try and see if putting him at 35% will work for a while. More work for us, but at least then we can try and drill some common sense into his head.

No comments on the rest...

I meant that we would do so instead of banning him outright. We have yet to actually put him above the threshhold.