Poll: New forum rules - Yay or Nay?

[Jedamethis]

I didn't realise it was that fucking hard to not be a dick. If you're that worried then you probably piss people off enough to deserve it...

Your use of 'you' here could be construed as offensive, because even in the general use of you it's a loaded word that obviously has a target of whoever is reading the post. You have one hard swear word and two mild swear words, your tone is accusatory and your post is only two short sentences long. Under the new rules I suspect that would be enough to get you reported.

I'm really really not trying to get you angry, or troll you, and I'm not going to report you, I'm just trying to point out how even what seems like the most innocuous of posts to you could be misread by anyone and reported. And unless the moderators are really on the ball (which I've never been entirely convinced about) then either everyone will get probations really quickly, or no one will report anyone.

And as for why i've never been entirely convinced of the moderator's alertness, because I know I'll have to justify that to avoid the banhammer. I've had three probations (that i can remember) that have been overturned because my original post wasn't actually offensive. When I've spoken to an admin and they've read it they've agreed that either it was misreported and the moderator never took the time to read it, or the moderator was overzealous. With this new system those mistakes will start getting people banned and probationed unfairly and unjustly, with no way to take back the mark against their record. And that isn't fair.

Actually yeah, I'm flame-baiting there aren't I?

I'm sure there is a way to take punishment off. The moderators are not bad people, and I'm sure they understand that mistakes happen on their end.

I didn't realise it was that fucking hard to not be a dick. If you're that worried then you probably piss people off enough to deserve it...

My first suspension was for low content(Which was probably just a simple mistake)nine days after I joined. It's hardly as clear cut as you make it seem.

Ah, low content. The only reason I have warnings. I can understand being told off for it, but a suspension? Cor' Blimey. Wonder what was going on there...

I didn't realise it was that fucking hard to not be a dick. If you're that worried then you probably piss people off enough to deserve it...

Its less about that, more about the permanency. Just because you can appeal doesn't mean it will work.

I made a joke about roofies, got probated or suspended, and when I appealed it I was told I was "advocating date rape", no question.

And why should something you wrote a year ago have an affect on what you write now, anyway?

I see your point about the roofies, but when was this?

...As for why it should have an effect on what you write now, I have no idea. I admit defeat on this, as all I can say is: "It just does."

 

[Qizx]

I think we all understand why there are forum rules and why there are mods to make sure everyone plays nice. What I disagree with is the extent to which the new rules have gone. Its simply rule-mongering and completely unforgiving. Hey, if you want to treat the people that contribute and maintain your site like pre-schoolers, go ahead. I prefer belonging to a community that respects its members. This heavy-handedness is insulting.

I'm out.

I'm afraid this is going to be a more and more prevalent opinion, a lot of people whom I have spoken to said they will stop posting for one of two reasons
A) They're offended like you are about these rules
or
B) They're afraid of getting more infractions for something silly they feel they don't deserve.

I'm going to keep posting about as often as I do (which isn't even too often) no matter how silly I might feel certain parts to be.

 

[thirdsonsaburo]

My agreement with the rules remains sort of tenuous. On one hand, I like that this will clean up forum discourse and make people behave a bit more politely in general... on the other hand, the strikes are a system that could backfire. Too unforgiving, though at least well-defined.

I guess we'll see how this plays out over the next few months. Hopefully very well!

 

[fix-the-spade]

I like it, it'll make my job a bit easier cuz less people will complain about inconsistency. If you have any questions about the new rules, please address them here [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/groups/chat/Moderation-Team].

Actually I think this is going to make your job harder.

I've had one probation, for referring to Ubisoft as French Morons, which a mod took exception to (apparently calling Paris based Ubisoft French and stupid is a racist perjorative). I thought it was harsh, especially as others were using far stronger and more offensive language with apparently no consequences, but didn't find it worth appealing as a three day Probie in three years of use wasn't going to cause many problems. Humans decide the bans, if I type something dumb in two years time they're going to see that it doesn't happen too often, all will be well.

Now it matters, I'm going to appeal it because it's going to follow me around forever if I don't and I think that's kind of harsh. That it applies retroactively is doubly harsh whilst leaving it in the hands of an automated system is plain dumb. From now on I have to appeal everything or have something stupid like that hang over me permanently. That's going to make more work for you if every decision you make is going to be srutinized.

It needs a time based cool down, six months or a year, some kind of moderation.

Also, the definition of mod-wrath worthy subjects seems to have changed to any opinion we dislike or feel is negative towards our advertisers. I find that worrying, in an IGN sort of way, I miss the escapist PDF days.

 

[2012 Wont Happen]

They're alright. The permanent probation thing is really the only difference I noticed.

I don't really like the idea of probations being permanent, but with four warnings before any probation now that should work out about right.

 

[Spinwhiz]

I find it rather unfair that there's absolutely no way to clear your record. Everybody slips up now and then. I'm usually the first to advocate harsh punishment for infractions, but this is ridiculous. With harsh punishments should come rewards for good behavior. So if you've not committed any infractions for a certain amount of time, your 'forum heath meter' should go back down.

Nobody should be able to slip up 8 times and being given more chances. If anyone can't learn how to be respectful and follow our rules after what is pretty much 8 infractions, they shouldn't be here.

Not even if the infractions are upwards of 6 months to year apart? Maybe even 2 years or more? 'Cause clearly if that's the case, that's not a person who's out to cause trouble; that's a person who just got a little carried away one day.

That is why we give 7 chances. Don't think I'm trying to push you, or anyone else, off either. I completely understand where you are coming from as we've had this discussion internally before we could even think about launching the new penalty system and updated rules (which has been months now). We just feel that we do give chances, 8 of them, and those who can not hold it together for The Escapist to have to tell someone 8 times that isn't how you behave is more than enough.

Ok, but what really gets me is I didn't get the four warnings and I'm already in the yellow zone. Under the old system I've received mod wrath, I think, 3 times, 1 probation, and 2 suspensions. I'm not going to pretend I didn't deserve them, 'cause I did. I let myself get carried away, what gets me is how does that translate into 5 warnings under the new system?
Edit: esp. since there's no chance for redemption.

Anyone with more than 2 probations (even suspensions) automatically received a yellow. Some people got lucky, having more than 2 suspensions and not getting a red automatically or even getting permabanned immediately. This would obviously be in bad taste, so we didn't do that. If you received 1 probation or less (warnings), you will be in the green. On a rare occasion where you had 4 or 5 warnings plus a probation, you will also be in the yellow probation category.

Well I just don't think that's right. I've only been in trouble with the mods 3 times and I'm already out 5 out of my 8 chances.

Then send in an appeal and see what happens.

 

[ProfessorLayton]

I didn't know there were new rules... but hold on let me check them. I'll be back shortly.

Well I'm back and I don't know if I liked what I saw. I mean... for one thing, I know that the forums used to work in pretty much the same way, it just wasn't displayed. I don't like the idea that my one warning 4000 posts ago and over a year ago is now publicly displayed, though. Because it could be for anything... I honestly still stand by the fact that what I said wasn't wrong... It was something about how I was tired of people constantly bashing religion with no real arguments. So now it permanently scars my page and there's nothing I can do about it. Also, the idea that once you're on probation you're always on probation is one I don't like.

See, I like having a strictly ruled forum. I've been to forums that have little or no moderation and while they're sometimes fun it's nearly impossible to have a real discussion... but this is not good. I liked the idea of rewarding people for not getting in trouble rather than punishing people even worse. Now I'm constantly stuck with a mark of shame on my profile because of something I said a long time ago that obviously didn't need enough attention to get me in any noticeable trouble. That's what a warning was supposed to be...

I've been on these forums for two and a half years... I was a member of the Publishers Club and an active poster. But I think that if it stays like this I might just leave for good... I was this close to renewing my PubClub account, too...

EDIT: To whichever mod saw this and got rid of my one warning, know that I really appreciate that. Though it wasn't just my warning that I was upset about (but it certainly was part of it). I still am not a big fan of this new setting. But I still really appreciate it...

 

[JoJo]

I got a low content post warning a couple months back and that little green box is going to haunt me for as long as I stay here

Kind of a bummer, even real life infractions go off your record it time.

Honestly no-one's going to care if you have just one warning, (I've got one too!), as soon as this came out I checked my entire friends list to see how naughty they had all been and only 7 out of 22 had no infractions, and about 5 are on a yellow, despite 99% of all members having two or less. Either I'm just friends with all the bad little boys and girls, or more likely most people who actually post more than say 50 posts ever (i.e. the minority) have some sort of warning.

 

[Spinwhiz]

I find it rather unfair that there's absolutely no way to clear your record. Everybody slips up now and then. I'm usually the first to advocate harsh punishment for infractions, but this is ridiculous. With harsh punishments should come rewards for good behavior. So if you've not committed any infractions for a certain amount of time, your 'forum heath meter' should go back down.

Nobody should be able to slip up 8 times and being given more chances. If anyone can't learn how to be respectful and follow our rules after what is pretty much 8 infractions, they shouldn't be here.

Not even if the infractions are upwards of 6 months to year apart? Maybe even 2 years or more? 'Cause clearly if that's the case, that's not a person who's out to cause trouble; that's a person who just got a little carried away one day.

That is why we give 7 chances. Don't think I'm trying to push you, or anyone else, off either. I completely understand where you are coming from as we've had this discussion internally before we could even think about launching the new penalty system and updated rules (which has been months now). We just feel that we do give chances, 8 of them, and those who can not hold it together for The Escapist to have to tell someone 8 times that isn't how you behave is more than enough.

I just see one problem with this. One guy, lets call him Jason, gets 7 mod actions in 7 years. Jason gets permabanned. Another guy, lets call him Alex, gets 7 in 7 days. The punishment doesn't seem to fit the crime.

And I see that as "We told Jason and Alex 7 times how to act on our forums and they didn't listen."

 

[mireko]

Under the rules it says that you "better have evidence" to back up claims, so I understand that we can't just go off and make stuff up, but ins't that a bit of a double standard if you don't show US evidence that there AREN'T?

(again, I am not suggesting that this is the case, just pointing out that it's a contradiction)

You could apply that to anything, though. Proving a negative is impossible.

 

[MysticToast]

Posting to see rules. Will edit.

Wow, the penalties thing seems a bit harsh. No way to get rid of strikes? Ouch. I dunno, maybe that makes it sound harsher than it really is. Guess we'll have to wait and see

 

[Canid117]

99.9% of the forum members don't have more than 2 warnings (if I'm not mistaken, 82% don't have any infractions).

These numbers mean nothing when you consider how many people have created accounts and then never posted or posted very little.

If people can't learn how to be respectful towards others and follow very simple rules, they won't be here for long. Everyone has a bad day but even off of the internet, if you do something stupid on that bad day, you are held accountable. The same goes for The Escapist forums.

So people should be judged based on their past mistakes, not on their present ones.

Also, why are warnings held against you. That's unbelievably unfair.

Actually, those are numbers for people who post on The Escapist, in the forums, not everyone who visits or has an account.

Also, a warning is just that "stop doing this". How many times should we have to tell someone to stop doing something before they actually understand? With the new penalty system, now they understand.

Some people might... react negatively to what could be construed as an unfair system and intentionally be banned in as spectacular and offensive a way possible in what they see as a protest in a corrupt system. Not that I am saying that anyone should do that but dont be surprised if it happens.

 

[Queen Michael]

What worries me is that it seems that if I act like a jerk I'll lose my Neo badge. Not that I was planning to do so, but still... I dislike any plan that might lead to me losing my Neo...

 

[graverobber2]

Mr. Spinwhiz

I think there is a huge difference between 8 breakages of the rules and 8 breakages of the rules.

If someone let say over the course of 1 year makes some "LOL" posts or Firsts or something silly like this...that is not a serious reason to ban then. And it does not harm the community in no way.

Now someone being an asshole or racist or stuff like that...yes that is a good and justified reason to put the ban on a member. But if once in a long while someone goes a bit stray it shouldnt be a huge issue. You are being waaaay too strict with the rules.

Im genuinely scared to post now since both my previous warnings were really silly and from innocent mistakes X_X And how can i know if i wont make another one by accident.

while I agree that there's a huge difference between posting 'first' or [insert random insult],
the former is something you can easily avoid, while the latter might be influenced by personal emotions (i.e. beeing seriously enraged by someone's comments)
Emotions are a bit harder to control and while you might argue that stupidity is also hard to control (not going to argue against that; I'm no expert and it sounds pretty plausible), everyone here should be able to count till three and if your post contains less than three words, you might want to consider wether it's actually worth posting.

 

[Knight Templar]

I'm on probation? I do anything wrong and I'm, suspended?
That is absurd. I'll be held to account for my past, when I'm not that person anymore. Great.
There's no way for it to get better. I can be a shining exemplar of the site and I'm still halfway banned.
Meanwhile mods have been appointed from the formerly banned.

 

[drisky]

All right I've think about heres how I think a compromise could work.

Make probations longer but not permeant, lets say a good 2 months, and they still can only get suspend twice, starting form the rule change. Increasing accountability is fine but the "once you are on probation you are always on probation" rule kinds of defeats the whole point of the word "probation" other than a reminder of the old rules.

People need to learn good behavior, but it will ruin the community and drive many away if every one is too afraid to post.

 

[Spinwhiz]

*snipped*

Hi Spin quoting you because I think this is your domain:

This includes, but is not limited to communication of a statement that makes a claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may give The Escapist, an individual creator, advertiser, site sponsor, product, group, government or nation a negative image. In short, if you say something you better be able to back it up with fact.

Is that bolded bit there ^^^ just standard legal-ese to disassociate The Escapist with any negativity aimed at America/American government by posters or is it an actionable offence? I infer that it's just for when people are being dicks and saying "Lol.America." to a random news post but I thought it would be prudent to check.

We can't be perverts anymore!? WHAT!? The likely hood of me getting banned in the next few days is very great now.
-image-

That was in the rules? Great, there goes half the forum.

...and the rant rule gets rid of another third


Personally even though these rules were always there unspoken having them explicitly stated intimidates me a bit.

Yup, exactly. We didn't want it to include just The Escapist or just America. Overall, we are asking people just to not say mean and slanderous things that aren't true.

As for rants, people can still let loose in a forum thread, we ask that they have a point, make sure it adds or helps discussion and that the caps and swearing are negated. Some of the best debates have a 3 paragraph "rant" but there is reason and purpose for it. Just blasting out an opinion because of hate or anger does not benefit discussion, it only stops it.

Thank you for clearing that up. I thought that would be the case but better safe then sorry and all.

Sure thing. If people have a problem, they can send in an appeal but honestly, with over 99% of the posters in this forum having less than 2 warnings ever, they just need to keep doing what they are doing because the rules haven't changed, just been updated.

Just out of curiosity but how does that number change when just active members are considered? Or people that have been active for over a year? From glancing at people's health bars from this topic I haven't seen a single person below 2 warnings. Admittedly the people I've picked haven't been chosen purely at random and this could very easily be a biased sample. It could just be that those complaining about the rules are more likely to be the one's on probation.

Also, about that 'no saying negative things about advertisers/governments/escapist etc.' rule. Where is the line drawn on this? A few days ago there was a guy talking about military advertisements being immoral, would he receive a warning? Won't this completely neuter the entire religion and politics board? They love complaining about governments and the like. Hell, are half the posters here in violation of the rules for talking negatively about the escapist's new rules?

Well, we figured most of the people who would be most vocal about the new penalty system would be the ones on the ropes with their accounts (I did say most), so that could be part of it. Part of it also could be that certain people need to appeal to get things in order.

As for the negative things, we just don't want to hear slanderous things. So, if you don't like the military, that's fine. That isn't negative, that is your opinion but you also aren't slandering the military either. If you instead state something slanderous about them killing people in Kuwait, then yes, a warning is going to come out. As this is a games site, we are going to have games advertisers that people will be talking about, much like DA2. If you don't like the game, that is fine but if you state The Escapist is getting paid for a good review, that is where we draw the line, because it isn't true.

While I don't think, nor I am suggesting that there are paid reviews on this site...

Under the rules it says that you "better have evidence" to back up claims, so I understand that we can't just go off and make stuff up, but ins't that a bit of a double standard if you don't show US evidence that there AREN'T?

(again, I am not suggesting that this is the case, just pointing out that it's a contradiction)


Anyways, I'm not sure how much I want to post here, because I can't tell what's changed or what has not other than the health bar thing.

I think it is a VERY bad idea to have all infractions a permanent thing.

Rather, not ALL should be.

If a post is outright insulting, doing something illegal, or posting obscene content, then I wouldn't mind if those do not go away.

However, low content posts and other things like that should not be a unchanging strike against someone, nor do I think it should be able to break the last straw and cause a perma ban.

Perhaps grouping the infractions in to two groups, "minor" and "major", and allowing minor ones to go away after a while.

Perhaps making minor ones not count as much as major ones, too.

From now on I fear that anytime I wish to state anything that ANYONE may find BARELY not politically correct, I will PM a mod to see if it is OK or not.

So far I have only seen around 4 posts in this thread for this new rules other than a mod saying so, so the fact that a large majority of the posters here are against it should say something.

Some of the best conversations I have had here would not be able to have anywhere else because of the sheer tolerance this community has (for the most part), I remember quite a few threads about topics such as pedophilia that were very intelligent discussions, with barely any arguments or disrespectful comments.

I fear that now one of the few places without anonymity that allows discussion of controversial content will be lost, which I think is essential, if we never talked about things deemed such, then our society would never change, be it for better or worse. The civil rights movement, for example, relied on peaceful reactions to controversial subjects.

I am seriously considering not posting again until these rules are improved or changed.

Here is the best thing I can offer you when posting in a heated debate, because we want to you have heated debates, don't make it personal and don't flame. If you, or anyone, can stay away from doing that, 99.9999% of the time you will be fine. Most of the warnings, probations and suspensions that come out of a debate are direct flames! Don't make it personal, you won't have a problem. For people that can't have a discussion without calling someone a moron, you are right, they shouldn't post.

 

[GeorgW]

Don't care about the punishments but one thing that I see commonly on this website is people being told off for low content posts. Why not just set a lower limit for the number of characters in a post? Then that's one less thing the mods have to worry about and everyone's happy.

Good question. In regards to the other sites I frequent, most people just fill the extra character spaces with crap. We have no doubt members of The Escapist have lots to say, as most of the debates I see are spectacular and most opinions are well thought out and helpful.

Still, sometimes there's not much to say. What counts as low content?

I'm probably waay too late for this, as I said earlier, it's really busy right now and I try to read through this entire thread and answer all of your questions. But it's all in context. There's a huge difference IMO of what constitutes a low content post in R&P in relation to RP&games.

And really, the mods aren't perfect. If one gives you a stupid sentencing that they then refuse to revoke even though you see it as unfair, as does everyone else in the thread, then that gets counted against you forever.

And that's why there's an appeal system.

the appeal system doesn't work. i got put on probation for mentioning i pirated a game that i was going to pay for later even though (on the same day) Steve Butts mentioned that he pirated MULTIPLE games that he paid for later.

hypocrisy much?

This goes back to the report and move on rule, just cuz someone else breaks the rules doesn't give you the right to do the same thing. Did you report Steve Butts? Besides, they handle that kind of stuff internally, so just cuz you don't see him getting punished doesn't mean he's getting off for free.

 

[Ashcrexl]

ok, i'm going to post something now so i can see these rules. then i will give my opinion.

alright, they seem fair. i don't see how it's any different from before as i didnt memeorize the previous incarnation.

 

[Woodsey]

I didn't realise it was that fucking hard to not be a dick. If you're that worried then you probably piss people off enough to deserve it...

Your use of 'you' here could be construed as offensive, because even in the general use of you it's a loaded word that obviously has a target of whoever is reading the post. You have one hard swear word and two mild swear words, your tone is accusatory and your post is only two short sentences long. Under the new rules I suspect that would be enough to get you reported.

I'm really really not trying to get you angry, or troll you, and I'm not going to report you, I'm just trying to point out how even what seems like the most innocuous of posts to you could be misread by anyone and reported. And unless the moderators are really on the ball (which I've never been entirely convinced about) then either everyone will get probations really quickly, or no one will report anyone.

And as for why i've never been entirely convinced of the moderator's alertness, because I know I'll have to justify that to avoid the banhammer. I've had three probations (that i can remember) that have been overturned because my original post wasn't actually offensive. When I've spoken to an admin and they've read it they've agreed that either it was misreported and the moderator never took the time to read it, or the moderator was overzealous. With this new system those mistakes will start getting people banned and probationed unfairly and unjustly, with no way to take back the mark against their record. And that isn't fair.

Actually yeah, I'm flame-baiting there aren't I?

I'm sure there is a way to take punishment off. The moderators are not bad people, and I'm sure they understand that mistakes happen on their end.

I didn't realise it was that fucking hard to not be a dick. If you're that worried then you probably piss people off enough to deserve it...

My first suspension was for low content(Which was probably just a simple mistake)nine days after I joined. It's hardly as clear cut as you make it seem.

Ah, low content. The only reason I have warnings. I can understand being told off for it, but a suspension? Cor' Blimey. Wonder what was going on there...

I didn't realise it was that fucking hard to not be a dick. If you're that worried then you probably piss people off enough to deserve it...

Its less about that, more about the permanency. Just because you can appeal doesn't mean it will work.

I made a joke about roofies, got probated or suspended, and when I appealed it I was told I was "advocating date rape", no question.

And why should something you wrote a year ago have an affect on what you write now, anyway?

I see your point about the roofies, but when was this?

...As for why it should have an effect on what you write now, I have no idea. I admit defeat on this, as all I can say is: "It just does."

Recently - and I've had a number of other odd strikes against me too; some of which I've gotten taken back, admittedly, but ones that shouldn't have been there in the first place. And I don't like the idea of being told I'm advocating date rape when I'm evidently not. The vast majority of my offences have also occurred from around the start of this year, which is went the rules started changing a fair bit and when.

This whole measuring system makes things unnecessarily strict. It is not a fun place to be in when everyone's afraid having a debate that gets a little bit heated because it'll tip them permanently closer towards a ban.