How not to get banned.

[JoJo]

12: Don't forget advocating illegal activities is against the rules, the mods turn a blind eye to fairly innocuous ideas like legalising weed or gay marriage but people have been modded for advocating arson or murder.

Looks like I've dodged a few bullets... >_> <_<

Yeah, I don't like the rule because it's dealt out very inconsistently: the mods will basically allow anything they consider reasonable, whether because it's a minor crime or because the person you're threatening is a murderer/rapist. The rule is badly written as it stands, as is the entire posting guidelines right now actually, they go into far too much detail and repeat themselves in several places, plus lead to odd technicalities like advocating pornography technically being against the rules (though no-one has ever been modded for it).

 

[Sanat]

Personally I think it should also be "How to not get banned", it's a more logical title. Otherwise, this is a good thread for any new posters that aren't familiar with the ins and outs of posting, as it gives a more insightful view on the rule-set.

 

[manic_depressive13]

Yeah, it seems that many people forget that the rules also apply to usergroups as well.

Boudica...

Boudica asked for a ban because she got tired of all the sexism on these boards.

Anyway, this thread is pretty pointless. It's just repeating what's already outlined in the Code of Conduct.

Let me just say that this epidemic of pink text to depict sarcasm is the most ridiculous and upsetting thing I've seen in a long time. None of this "it's hard to convey sarcasm in text" bullshit. Was 'A Modest Proposal' written in pink? Did 'Catch-22' have /sarcasm tags? No, because that defeats the entire fucking purpose. Satire and sarcasm loses all its subtlety when it's written in garish pink. If you need to outright tell someone that you are being sarcastic you're either doing it wrong or they are reading it wrong, and as long as it's the latter it ought to be fine. I don't think people should be punished just because other people lack understanding of the finer nuances of communication.

 

[manic_depressive13]

Ooh yes, I'm well aware.

The point I was making was that she got mod wrath'd for saying something in a group, and then she requested to be banned.
It was the group related stuff I was referring to specifically.

The way you phrased it implied that she thought she could get away with more because it was a user group. I don't think she would have said anything differently even if it were somewhere on the forums. She was angry at all the sexism. When she saw that the mod's priority was on punishing mildly offensive language rather than the deeper issue of pervasive sexism on these forums she asked for a ban. I don't think it's fair to suggest that she hid in a user group because she thought the mods would be more lenient there, or she "forgot" the rules applied.

 

[Lionsfan]

Yeah, it seems that many people forget that the rules also apply to usergroups as well.

Boudica...

Boudica asked for a ban because she got tired of all the sexism on these boards.

Anyway, this thread is pretty pointless. It's just repeating what's already outlined in the Code of Conduct.

Let me just say that this epidemic of pink text to depict sarcasm is the most ridiculous and upsetting thing I've seen in a long time. None of this "it's hard to convey sarcasm in text" bullshit. Was 'A Modest Proposal' written in pink? Did 'Catch-22' have /sarcasm tags? No, because that defeats the entire fucking purpose. Satire and sarcasm loses all its subtlety when it's written in garish pink. If you need to outright tell someone that you are being sarcastic you're either doing it wrong or they are reading it wrong, and as long as it's the latter it ought to be fine. I don't think people should be punished just because other people lack understanding of the finer nuances of communication.

I sort of get it (the pink tags). I agree that you shouldn't need special tags to denote sarcasm, but thanks to Poe's Law it can be kind of hard to tell when someone is being sarcastic, or if they're actually being an asshole. I think it's a good way to lets the mods know, and avoid banning

 

[hooksashands]

Hold on, let me just make a quick revision...

1. Be on the Escapist's payroll.

Everyone else is fair game.

 

[JoJo]

Let me just say that this epidemic of pink text to depict sarcasm is the most ridiculous and upsetting thing I've seen in a long time. None of this "it's hard to convey sarcasm in text" bullshit. Was 'A Modest Proposal' written in pink? Did 'Catch-22' have /sarcasm tags? No, because that defeats the entire fucking purpose. Satire and sarcasm loses all its subtlety when it's written in garish pink. If you need to outright tell someone that you are being sarcastic you're either doing it wrong or they are reading it wrong, and as long as it's the latter it ought to be fine. I don't think people should be punished just because other people lack understanding of the finer nuances of communication.

The problem is that on many occasions users have been modded for obvious sarcasm and the justification the mods gave on their user-group when challenged about it was (paraphased) "if someone reported it, they must have thought it was real and found it offensive and so it's infringing the rules, even if it's sarcasm." People can't take the risk as it's only takes one idiot out of a hundred readers to not notice the sarcasm and hit that report button.

 

[manic_depressive13]

I sort of get it (the pink tags). I agree that you shouldn't need special tags to denote sarcasm, but thanks to Poe's Law it can be kind of hard to tell when someone is being sarcastic, or if they're actually being an asshole. I think it's a good way to lets the mods know, and avoid banning

It's really not hard to tell if someone does it properly. Go ahead and do it if you want to play it safe, but I just wanted people to know that I think it's lazy and annoying, and naturally the things I find annoying are of the greatest concern to everyone here. That's why I did you the favour of letting you know.

 

[Xan Krieger]

I'm on the fence. I've been taken to the execution ground, had my head in the noose, and walked away. There are some more colorful members (All in the R&P Section) I would like to jump down their throat and explode out of their body like an Ebola virus with legs, but I want to continue to use the forums. So I hold my tongue, let their own ignorance be their undoing, and watch the cold merciless ban hammer do its work elsewhere.

It's okay, I love you to.

Simple way to not get banned: Don't go to R&P, the topics there can make your blood boil and cause you to say stupid things that will get you banned.

 

[DugMachine]

1. Just don't be a dick?

Seriously people. Being a subtle asshole/sarcastic prick gets very tiresome after awhile. Granted, these forums would probably get very boring if EVERYONE was nice to each other but I just dislike confrontation and don't enjoy arguing or being insulted when I haven't done the same :/

 

[manic_depressive13]

-snip-

Again, if her intention was to avoid mod wrath by posting in the user group she wouldn't have asked for a ban. That's just logic. I don't know why she said that in the user group rather than the thread but I think it is unfair suggest her motivation was that she though she could get away with it there.

 

[Sassafrass]

1. Just don't be a dick?

And we have a winner.
Seriously, it's just as easy as this one rule. If you're not a dick when debating with people or bringing up topics you shouldn't, you'll be fine here.

And queue all the quote saying it's not that easy, they were mod wrathed in groups, blah blah blah.

 

[C. Cain]

SNIP

If the rules on the forum also apply to the usergroups, then usergroups should technically be avoided at all costs.

A single page of your average usergroup's chat might be more than enough to suspend or even ban each and every participant involved. On the grounds of the 'low content post' rule, n'est-ce pas?

 

[Evil Smurf]

HOW TO NOT GET BANNED IN ONE EASY STEP:

1. Don't be me

I've been banned twice, one time was because I was a dick and the final part was a misunderstanding, the second was because of a computer bug caused it to go twice and ban me.

HOW TO NOT GET BANNED, 4 SRS:

1. Stay out of threads you don't like
2. Don't make obvious troll threads/posts
3. Don't call the OP a ******, even if he really, really, really is acting like one

I'm acting like a ******?

Just pointing out things that can save a user

 

[Woodsey]

Just follow my example, you'll all be dandy.

 

[maddawg IAJI]

SNIP

If the rules on the forum also apply to the usergroups, then usergroups should technically be avoided at all costs.

A single page of your average usergroup's chat might be more than enough to suspend or even ban each and every participant involved. On the grounds of the 'low content post' rule, n'est-ce pas?

We do not enforce the low-content rule in usergroups. We leave most moderation in user groups up to the group owners, with the exception being if there is verbal harassment of another user, mod sass (Note: Complaining about Moderation is fine, we just don't want to see "OH MY GAWD! MADDAWG SUCKS SO MUCH DIK!" or something similar) and professing of illegal activities such as pirating. Even than, only staff members can punish you for posts made in user groups. Red Guard members are limited to the forums.