Are the forums too strict?

[Nouw]

No, however it is subjective.

Refer to the one about being a jerk.

 

[DJDarque]

There was a user who got to over 800 posts recently, and every post was nothing but ban-worthy bullcrap.

I don't know if you're thinking of who I'm thinking of, but if you are, he did end up getting banned in the end.

OT: I like the level of strictness we have on this forum. It keeps the asshole that lives deep inside me in check.

 

[justnotcricket]

I think they do an OK job, actually. I think that some posts (especially the more borderline cases)go unnoticed is because no-one (or an insufficient number of people) actually reported them so the mods never see them.

I've also gotten the impression that the mods here are pretty open to discussing the situation with the offender, and I've seen punishments reversed in short order if they weren't justified. I've actually seen less of it lately, but when I first joined the forums the rules were a little different and there was a group of particularly...controversial...posters, so there was a lot more of that stuff flying around.

 

[Erana]

This isn't about "Fair" its about what the staff envision the forums to be.

And go read the rules; its mostly "Don't be a jerk, don't break the law and put some effort into it, and you're fine."

SHENANIGANS! SHENANIGANS!

The rules of this site have been made quite vague in order to allow mods to interpret them as they see fit. It's a recipe for disaster and still no effort has been made to put specifications in place in order to reign in bad moderating. And with some of the people I've seen come in with this latest wave of mods, I'm quite sure everything I do will be under unfair scrutiny because I know several mods use personal bias to guide their actions.

Well, yes, they have been made relative. The whole idea of the rules is that they're a philosophy the staff wants to impress upon us, and the mods are people chosen because they have a grasp of the staff's ideals and will try to uphold them.

We're meant to be a community. A community expected to be mature and respectful. We really shouldn't need rules at all. Any arguments here should be made where the other is our interlocutor, not our enemy. Any observations on a topic, good or bad, should be expressed with an explanation and not in generalizations and vague adjectives. Most importantly, this should be an environment where the most desired outcome in a conflict is the participants apologizing and coming to an agreement, not that one person should "win."

At least, that's what I've come to believe the ideals of the forums to be. I know my mind's 3/5ths fluff and cotton candy, but try to follow what I think the staff wants, and feel that the rules suggest that forum participation should be in that direction.

I think they do an OK job, actually. I think that some posts (especially the more borderline cases)go unnoticed is because no-one (or an insufficient number of people) actually reported them so the mods never see them.

And yes, definitely this. From what I've heard from the mods, this is largely why a mod-worthy post goes unhammered.

 

[FalloutJack]

To some, perhaps. I think there might be some things that should've been let go or were interpretted wrong by the staff. In those cases, you ARE allowed to appeal the thing. Many just don't take that time to do so.

 

[lady man lady]

i agree, there seems to be a lot of needless probations, i wish they would add an off topic section of forums that could truly be off topic, even there you have to adhere to strict guidelines. i like how the threads here are more constructive than most, but sometimes i would like to participate in a less serious thread, and i don't think that would hurt anything.

 

[Betancore]

It does seem pretty strict here, and the moderation can be inconsistent at times, but most of the time it seems fair. Keeps the posts interesting as well, otherwise everyone could just post 'lol' or something in response to a thread. I know a fair few people who haven't joined the Escapist, but know of it, and have commented on how 'draconian' the moderators are. Fair enough, I guess, but at least it means that the illiterate assholes are banned, and all the witty, eloquent assholes get to share their opinions.

 

[Fanboy]

I have never had a problem with the strictness of this interwebsite. Sure sometimes the level of moderation can seem a little inconsistent, but I keep in mind that Mods are just people, and that most of the time I'm only seeing one part of the story. Besides, I like spontaneous moderation; It keeps me on my toes!

At least it would if I wasn't such a nice guy. : )

 

[TriGGeR_HaPPy]

Criticize the post, not the poster. A simple rule many fail to follow, so they get slapped for it.

This, basically. I've disagreed with people several times throughout my time here on The Escapist, but because I've only called out certain points I disagreed with, and didn't resort to name-calling, I've never even gotten a probation. Like Hader said, it's a simple enough rule to follow...

Now, to those people who are saying that the mods only look at the post without looking at the wider picture, you're wrong.
Ok, some posts are so downright terribad that they deserve a pimp-slap right there and then, but they're not the posts we're talking about here. If the mods are unsure about what to do with a post, they won't simply put that person on probation (or worse) and walk away, they will look at the prior conversation to get a feel for what's been said, why it's being talked about, etc. This, and the fact that they may have to work through a whole list of reports before getting to the one that you think needs to be looked at, is also why it may take a little longer for some people to get the probation that they deserve.

How do I know this? People have brought up this issue before, and some of the mods told us how they get things done when that little red button is pushed. Granted, maybe not all mods work this way, but as far as I understand it, most of them work this way. And I wouldn't want them to change. The system works, just stay within the rules and you're fine.

(The rules/code of conduct, by the way, can be found here:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/codeofconduct
They're fair, and easy to understand. It'll take you only a minute or 2 to read them, so if you haven't already, I'd highly suggest doing so.)

 

[Lazarus Long]

I wouldn't necessarily say the escapist is the mod's "house". If anything the escapist is like the ocean and the mods are the lifeguards. Because if this was their house, what's stopping the mods from shutting down the site and telling everyone to "get out".

Because they're getting paid by... um.. house advertisers based on how popular this little house party is. They can kick everybody out, but it would be a bad idea. Nobody can really blame them for wanting to keep the party classy, though. But now that I think about it, I guess it's Themis' house, and the mods are the butlers and such. By which, of course, I mean no offence.

Spoiler: Butlers are awesome.

[/spoiler]

Also, is it just me, or is the Captcha getting drunk?

 

[AWC Viper]

you don't follow the rules you get punished, simple. If you can't follow them then ask the mods for a long holiday.

 

[Erana]

This isn't about "Fair" its about what the staff envision the forums to be.

And go read the rules; its mostly "Don't be a jerk, don't break the law and put some effort into it, and you're fine."

SHENANIGANS! SHENANIGANS!

The rules of this site have been made quite vague in order to allow mods to interpret them as they see fit. It's a recipe for disaster and still no effort has been made to put specifications in place in order to reign in bad moderating. And with some of the people I've seen come in with this latest wave of mods, I'm quite sure everything I do will be under unfair scrutiny because I know several mods use personal bias to guide their actions.

Well, yes, they have been made relative. The whole idea of the rules is that they're a philosophy the staff wants to impress upon us, and the mods are people chosen because they have a grasp of the staff's ideals and will try to uphold them.

We're meant to be a community. A community expected to be mature and respectful. We really shouldn't need rules at all. Any arguments here should be made where the other is our interlocutor, not our enemy. Any observations on a topic, good or bad, should be expressed with an explanation and not in generalizations and vague adjectives. Most importantly, this should be an environment where the most desired outcome in a conflict is the participants apologizing and coming to an agreement, not that one person should "win."

At least, that's what I've come to believe the ideals of the forums to be. I know my mind's 3/5ths fluff and cotton candy, but try to follow what I think the staff wants, and feel that the rules suggest that forum participation should be in that direction.

First of all, I do not care to have the staff's philosophy imposed upon me. I have my own philosophy and the forums should be my equal time to respond. But god forbid they give anyone equal time.

Secondly, this community is anything but mature and respectful. However there are going to be times when such arguments breakdown which is a direct effect of "John Gabriel's Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory". Which in all honesty should be upgraded to a law at this point. Many mods often abuse the vague rules in attempt to oppose order as they see it. And I think you should go back and look up the words "conflict and argument" because they aren't things that are best handled by having them end in stalemates.

In conclusion, I don't particularly care what the staff wants or how they feel this forum should conduct itself. I am a person of my own ideas, and I have no intention of apologizing for them or changing them at the whim of someone who's deluded themselves into believing they're in some kind of position of power.

I am who I am. And I will change for no man.

If your thoughts and those of the staff don't mix, then why are you here fighting the current?

 

[similar.squirrel]

No. The amount of bad spelling and grammar has increased considerably in the last year or so, and that needs to be dealt with. That said, the only comparisons I have are PWOT and SomethingAwful, who castigate you for the kind of idiocy that may be congenital. But on those forums, yours usually publically insulted before being banned, which brings joy to the community.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

Criticize the post, not the poster. A simple rule many fail to follow, so they get slapped for it.

This, basically. I've disagreed with people several times throughout my time here on The Escapist, but because I've only called out certain points I disagreed with, and didn't resort to name-calling, I've never even gotten a probation. Like Hader said, it's a simple enough rule to follow...

Now, to those people who are saying that the mods only look at the post without looking at the wider picture, you're wrong.
Ok, some posts are so downright terribad that they deserve a pimp-slap right there and then, but they're not the posts we're talking about here. If the mods are unsure about what to do with a post, they won't simply put that person on probation (or worse) and walk away, they will look at the prior conversation to get a feel for what's been said, why it's being talked about, etc. This, and the fact that they may have to work through a whole list of reports before getting to the one that you think needs to be looked at, is also why it may take a little longer for some people to get the probation that they deserve.

How do I know this? People have brought up this issue before, and some of the mods told us how they get things done when that little red button is pushed. Granted, maybe not all mods work this way, but as far as I understand it, most of them work this way. And I wouldn't want them to change. The system works, just stay within the rules and you're fine.

(The rules/code of conduct, by the way, can be found here:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/codeofconduct
They're fair, and easy to understand. It'll take you only a minute or 2 to read them, so if you haven't already, I'd highly suggest doing so.)

Can you dig up some of those posts? Because the way I remember it, the mods in question said they looked at the poster's history more than anything else; they said outright that they spend most of their time staring at the mod queue, and rarely actually get out and read the forums.

 

[NathLines]

Ordinarily I'd say they're just fine, but I saw a post the other day that really made me laugh, but the poster was put on probation for it. In short, he made a philosophical non sequitor look like a crack at Xbox fans (like myself). There was nothing inappropriate in the post, and the joke did not even denounce the Xbox or its fanbase. But somehow, that statement was enough to put the poster on probation because hordes of morons thought they were being insulted. That's just unfair.

What? That post got him a probation? There was nothing insulting about it. That's a bit too strict in my opinion. However, when I think about it, he probably got the probation because he singled out a group of people. Not because the post itself was insulting.

I agree with most probations and suspensions that I see, so I don't think it's too strict. The reason I frequent this forum is because it's way "cleaner" than others.

 

[Thespian]

Oh good jesus no. The Escapist actually hits a soft spot I haven't seen in a lot of other places. The last forum i frequented was so strict you could get banned for what they considered "flaming" but here would be considered a casual greeting. The Escapist has a pretty good balance of not letting people get away with too much, but not clamping down on the others, either.

 

[Canid117]

Seems fine to me.