Are the forums too strict?

Recommended Videos

sky14kemea

Deus Ex-Mod
Jun 26, 2008
12,760
0
0
stinkychops said:
sky14kemea said:
stinkychops said:
How'd your exercising go?

Didn't give up did you?

Feel free to hit up the Escapist Fitness Club with questions, for advice or simply motivation. It's pretty dead in there.

Also, since when are you a mod?
This is a random place to meet! xD

I never actually got started on it. I'm thinking of taking up swimming, since that's more fun then jogging or anything.

Also I was made a mod last week. I'm still getting used to it. =P
Well The Healer seems to have pretty extensive knowledge on swimming (I don't know shit about it) so if you're thinking of asking someone I guess he'd be a good one.

What's important with exercise is just to get started. And not to view it as a punishment (otherwise you end up giving yourself "rewards" for doing it). Even after the first couple weeks you'll not only notice improvement but with any luck you'll start to 'crave' it.

Don't be disheartened and goodluck.
Fair enough. If I have any problems I'll find the usergroup and ask him. ^^ Thanks!
 

AbsoluteVirtue18

New member
Jan 14, 2009
3,616
0
0
DJDarque said:
AbsoluteVirtue18 said:
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.
If whom I'm referring to has the initials J.M, then yeah, I know he got banned. And there was much rejoicing.

googleback said:
yeah but if it wasn't where would we be?

THAT'S RIGHT...


GAMETRAILERS
Or worse...

GAMEFAQS!
 

JDKJ

New member
Oct 23, 2010
2,065
0
0
stinkychops said:
I've seen some disgraceful bans in my time. Russ Pitts - Smelly Pitts banning was a bad one.
I searched "Smelly Pitts" but couldn't find anything relevant. More details, please?
 

JDKJ

New member
Oct 23, 2010
2,065
0
0
stinkychops said:
JDKJ said:
stinkychops said:
I've seen some disgraceful bans in my time. Russ Pitts - Smelly Pitts banning was a bad one.
I searched "Smelly Pitts" but couldn't find anything relevant. More details, please?
Russ Pitts is/was a high up on this site. From memory an editor.

Basically someone commented on a video submitted by him poking fun at his name, after Russ Pitts egged him into it (after bringing up his childhood bullying). Then the (probation I believe) was upped to a permanent ban for "private messages" that went on afterwards.

There was a fair bit of hulla-balloo over it; personally I think an editor and fully grown man should have been a bit more mature.
From my memory, he's the Editor-in-Chief. Not that the fact changes or adds to anything. I'm just throwing that out there for the fact-value thereof.
 

Brandon237

New member
Mar 10, 2010
2,959
0
0
Singularly Datarific said:
Not at all- the point of these suspensions and probations is to make sure that people stay courteous to eachother, and without them, the discussions would delve into idiocy.
In short: THANK YOU, ADMINS! YOU ROCK!
Agreed, they do a good job. And the rule most people don't get is this: Say what you like about the world or your mental sickness, but just don't insult the other posters who want to do the same.

It works surprisingly well, it allows freedom of speech while discouraging insults.
Abuse at another poster = bad.
Heavily racist / sexist / bigoted content that is insulting to a certain group = bad.
Most other things = fair game.

And the mods enforce this well.
 

NewClassic_v1legacy

Bringer of Words
Jul 30, 2008
2,484
0
0
My opinion of the mods hasn't really changed between me not being a mod, and me becoming a mod. It's a lot of work, the ones who do it are good - albeit fallible - and I appreciate the work they invest into it. Now that I'm a mod, it's just who helps me with the work we both have to do, but I appreciate everyone who works with me.

Generally, we all make mistakes. I know I have. I'm just glad someone's doing something. Given some of the things I've seen reported, I'd be worried if the mods weren't around.

Except that NewClassic guy. He's a terrible mod.

Also, just a quick appeal to the folks who agree with the opening post (and the opening poster his or herself), feel free to come stop by the Escapist IRC [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/chat/] and say hello to the mods who are online. If you ever need on-the-fly help, you're welcome to come see us personally. I also almost always have my IM clients and Skype open, and if I'm not away, am more than happy to talk and answer questions. My Steam, PSN, and Live accounts are all attached as well.

Failing that, don't be afraid to PM or send in a contact form. We're always happy to talk, whether or not you need something.
 

Hader

New member
Jul 7, 2010
1,648
0
0
maddawg IAJI said:
What he fails to tell you is that he was being 'satrical' several times in that thread and was caught insulting other users.

Also, to anyone who believes they have a problem with any of the moderators, then please send in the appeal form that comes with your punishment or post in the mod team's group (Which can be found here [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/groups/chat/Moderation-Team]
May I ask how the appeals process work exactly then? I am curious to compare things.
 

Hader

New member
Jul 7, 2010
1,648
0
0
NewClassic said:
Generally, we all make mistakes. I know I have. I'm just glad someone's doing something. Given some of the things I've seen reported, I'd be worried if the mods weren't around.
Well, that's why there's a mod team :p Mistakes are always going to happen, having plenty of others there to back things up only ever helps. Funny though, the biggest problem I used to have with training new mods on another site was using the vBulletin mod powers correctly. One actually banned himself once xD
NewClassic said:
Except that NewClassic guy. He's a terrible mod.
I disagree, so does everyone else. Case closed.
 
Apr 28, 2008
14,634
0
0
Its all over the place. Sometimes it seems too strict, sometimes not strict enough, and sometimes just right.

I do think having a bunch of moderators to moderate all forums isn't that great though. What I would do is assign a small group of modders to one forum, another small group to another, and so on. So, like a moderator would moderate off-topic, but not anywhere else. Not sure how hard that'd be to implement though, but I feel its something worth looking into.

Because then the forums would have some form of consistency. You'd know who's moderating, say, off-topic, and you know what they let through and what they don't. You'd know who's moderating gaming discussions, and so on. Maybe place a "moderated by: *mod names here*" line right under the forum links(on the page where you select what forum to go to). Perhaps even a sticky. That way people know who moderates what, and can easily contact them if needed. Could also alleviate the burden of having to mod the entire site, instead only moderating one forum.

Just my two cents.
 

Owyn_Merrilin

New member
May 22, 2010
7,370
0
0
JDKJ said:
Owyn_Merrilin said:
TriGGeR_HaPPy said:
Hader said:
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.
Is that really the way they do things?! If so, that would skew the censorship into a self-perpetuating cycle: we censored you this time because we had to censor you before which now makes you more likely to be censored the next time.
As far as not reading the forums, that's true for at least a couple, although I also know that there's at least a couple of mods that frequently post as regular posters, something that Aylaine was fairly famous for. I wish more mods would do that; to this day, Aylaine is the only mod who I have a rough idea of her modding style. As far as comparing the mod history, they definitely do that -- it's why some people will get a banned for the same offense that others get a warning. Heck, it's why I'm two fifths of the way to a neo badge, instead of one fifth; I started a controversial thread about piracy, and actually got a warning for "starting controversial threads that may insult other users." It was actually outright deleted, despite -- or maybe because of -- it being the best, most candid discussion of piracy this site has seen, at least since I joined. I'm almost positive that if my record hadn't been squeaky clean up to that point, I would have been suspended, or maybe even banned. Anybody who has sparred with me knows I don't go into ad hominems, so please don't say the warning was because of that; it was purely because of that piracy rule that doesn't actually exist in the written rules.

Edit: I had forgotten what the specific topic was, but I got a bunch of PMs over it, mostly in support of what I was saying; even the negative ones were just people wanting to argue without having to worry about the piracy rule. Anyway, as it turns out, the topic was me calling people out on an annoyingly common (at the time) anti-piracy argument. Nobody was named specifically, as it was the argument itself that I was refuting. Anyway, the specific argument was something to the effect that games are a luxury good, and therefore people who can't afford them but pirate them anyway are self entitled jerks. This smacked me and quite a few other people as sounding, well, like an entitled rich kid being the pot who called the kettle black, and that was the catalyst for the thread. It grew beyond that, though, into the single most candid piracy discussion I've ever seen on the site. It's a shame that it was deleted; other sites would have archived it.

Edit Edit: Also, before anyone says that I really was attacking individuals with the thread, I absolutely wasn't. It was really, really common at the time -- almost as common as religion bashing was. I actually created a thread about that, too, and it seems to have died down in the non-R&P sections of the forums. For a while there, if absolutely anything or anyone touched on religion, there would be a bunch of outright bashing from some very angry anti-theists. Both that habit and the one the piracy thread was talking about seem to have calmed down quite a bit since then, so I guess both threads did their job.
 

Yureina

Who are you?
May 6, 2010
7,098
0
0
JDKJ said:
From my memory, he's the Editor-in-Chief. Not that the fact changes or adds to anything. I'm just throwing that out there for the fact-value thereof.
Titles are not valuable simply for their own sake. They rely exclusively upon the people who have them, and how they act with them. A title by itself is worthless. It is the person who has it who makes it worthy of respect or not.
 

Yureina

Who are you?
May 6, 2010
7,098
0
0
sky14kemea said:
While you are seeking out exercise advice (something I ought to do myself :s), could you perhaps also find out why this thread got "sunk"?
 

Caliostro

Headhunter
Jan 23, 2008
3,253
0
0
Sir John the Net Knight said:
Oh, because backstabbing, subterfuge and harassment are clearly the fault of the victim. Right?
Let me stop you (and everyone else) here to say one thing:

Any and ALL concerns over the moderation (that includes the people selected as moderators) can be directed to Spinwhiz via a well written and educated PM. I assure you any and all concerns will be looked into.

I'm also fairly certain one of the people you mentioned before is me due to our past runnings. Feel free to bring this up with Spin (he can review any action I take against anyone, including you) if you feel it is a problem. I assure you that my personal animosity towards any and all users is kept on the "outside" of that login button.

This is valid for anyone and everyone on the website. If you're warned, probationed or suspended and HONESTLY feel you've been wronged, I suggest that you stop, breath in and read the forum rules again. If you still feel that whatever action taken against you was inappropriate, report to Spinwhiz in an educated manner and he WILL review your situation.
 

JDKJ

New member
Oct 23, 2010
2,065
0
0
Yureina said:
JDKJ said:
From my memory, he's the Editor-in-Chief. Not that the fact changes or adds to anything. I'm just throwing that out there for the fact-value thereof.
Titles are not valuable simply for their own sake. They rely exclusively upon the people who have them, and how they act with them. A title by itself is worthless. It is the person who has it who makes it worthy of respect or not.
Despite being an oft-repeated adage, it is not "possession" that is nine-tenths of the law. That's just a common but mistaken assumption. Rather, it is "title" that is 100% of the law.
 

Yureina

Who are you?
May 6, 2010
7,098
0
0
JDKJ said:
Yureina said:
JDKJ said:
From my memory, he's the Editor-in-Chief. Not that the fact changes or adds to anything. I'm just throwing that out there for the fact-value thereof.
Titles are not valuable simply for their own sake. They rely exclusively upon the people who have them, and how they act with them. A title by itself is worthless. It is the person who has it who makes it worthy of respect or not.
Despite being an oft-repeated adage, it is not "possession" that is nine-tenths of the law. That's just a common but mistaken assumption. Rather, it is "title" that is 100% of the law.
"We salute the rank, not the man", basically?

I'd be ok for that, but only if I deemed a rank worthy of respect (which is pretty much exclusive to the military for me). In all cases, it is the person themselves who has to earn respect... or they get nothing at all, no matter what is added to their name.

That's just how it is for me, anyway.
 

JDKJ

New member
Oct 23, 2010
2,065
0
0
Yureina said:
JDKJ said:
Yureina said:
JDKJ said:
From my memory, he's the Editor-in-Chief. Not that the fact changes or adds to anything. I'm just throwing that out there for the fact-value thereof.
Titles are not valuable simply for their own sake. They rely exclusively upon the people who have them, and how they act with them. A title by itself is worthless. It is the person who has it who makes it worthy of respect or not.
Despite being an oft-repeated adage, it is not "possession" that is nine-tenths of the law. That's just a common but mistaken assumption. Rather, it is "title" that is 100% of the law.
"We salute the rank, not the man", basically?

I'd be ok for that, but only if I deemed a rank worthy of respect (which is pretty much exclusive to the military for me). In all cases, it is the person themselves who has to earn respect... or they get nothing at all, no matter what is added to their name.

That's just how it is for me, anyway.
No. I'm just talking puns around what you said. As in it doesn't that you are in possession of the house, if the guy with the title to the house wants to kick you out of his house. Title always trumps possession.
 

Yureina

Who are you?
May 6, 2010
7,098
0
0
JDKJ said:
No. I'm just talking puns around what you said. As in it doesn't that you are in possession of the house, if the guy with the title to the house wants to kick you out of his house. Title always trumps possession.
Not at all what I was talking about, but okay...

Annnd... this thread still isn't getting bumped. Guess it really did get sunk after all.
 

JDKJ

New member
Oct 23, 2010
2,065
0
0
Yureina said:
JDKJ said:
No. I'm just talking puns around what you said. As in it doesn't that you are in possession of the house, if the guy with the title to the house wants to kick you out of his house. Title always trumps possession.
Not at all what I was talking about, but okay...

Annnd... this thread still isn't getting bumped. Guess it really did get sunk after all.
That's what a pun does. It plays of the original meaning with a different but closely related meaning of its own.