There's also the "Moderation Team" user group here [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/groups/chat/Moderation-Team].CarlMinez said:Are there any moderators on this thread discussing this? Because it feels like an open dialogue between users and moderators is what we need right now.
Alright, cool. I have no problem with continuing to lurk here then.JoJoDeathunter said:I've already asked, we're allowed to discuss illegal stuff and whether it should be legalised, just not admit to doing it ourselves or advocate that others do it.staleBread said:I only have 1 question about the new rules:
Similarly, posts including, advocating, or linking to illegal or adult material are a very quick way to end your time as part of The Escapist community. An example of these are:
Illegal Drugs in the United States
Does this mean we can't have threads like "Should Drugs be Legalized in the US?" anymore?
Yeah, there should be a cutoff point. Not to mention I though warnings were NOT part of mod-wrath, and did not effect your history at all. Now they do? Whats with that?MagnetoHydroDynamics said:The forum health meter is ridiculous.
I have ~1400 posts, over three years of membership and I have "2 warnings."
(That is to say, I am not a bad guy on these forums.)
Even if I get to 2800 posts in three years those "2 warnings." are never going away.
This is exactly the same thing that is wrong with the Californian three strikes law.
Putting people in lifetime jail for stealing pizza.
Permabanning many year members with thousands of posts.
SAME THING PEOPLE! FUCKING GROW SOME SENSE.
I apologize for my strong wording of my opinions, but c'mon!
I'm not sure you are wrong actually, GeorgW does have two titles but Spinwhiz doesn't, but that might be by choice.subtlefuge said:I know that Staff and Mods have a double title if that helps you distinguish.Nerf Ninja said:I said this last time there was a discussion of the rules. You guys need a different colour name instead the dark blue. I'm colourblind, I can't see a difference to the black names of "normal" posters unless I concentrate hard on it.
Edit: actually, I'm wrong about that.
Alright, that answers my concerns then.Sevre said:The moderation on this site is for the benefit of the users, site statistics show almost 90% of you have never gotten more than a few warnings, as a result you shouldn't have any trouble.
The 8 strike system is to make it easier for trolls to be banned, however the system won't be used against normal users in the same way. If you're on level 5 because you were a naughty child two years ago, we'll take the 2 years of quality posting into account.
Ultimately this system is new and we'll tweak it as necessary, it shouldn't stop you from enjoying everything this site has to offer, so don't worry about it.
Again, PM Spin. I can't really do anything about that either way.HG131 said:I guess I understand that there's a difference between doing and advocating it (I'm worried as to how blurry that line is, though). However, what is "advocating" it? It's kinda hard to advocate. Is it not thinking they're awful people who should be shot on sight? Is it not caring if someone is or isn't? Is it activly being against people hating on them? Because I can't think of a way to advocate it unless it's a rule that says that you can't say something like "Go be a pedophile!", and if so, did that ever even happen? Like, here's a example. Would I be punished for liking Kodomo no Jikan? Mentioning it on the forums? Posting the end credits from the anime (they're ok with Youtube, so they're not pornographic or anything, but I've posted them several times, in threads about songs that you can't stop listening to or are stuck in your head)? It's just really, really unclear.GeorgW said:I brought up the paedophile point when I first became a mod, that it should maybe be specified to child molester, but it was buried in like 50 other questions so I never got a response to that. I never brought it up again cuz it felt like such a silly little thing, but if you haven't already, maybe PM Spin about it. The way I see it though, is that being a paedophile and advocating it isn't the same thing, but I see how that's confusing.HG131 said:Besides for the forum health meters, which I agree, are unfair, my main problem is the pedophilia one, actually. Mainly because they're lumping innocent people with scumbags. Pedophilia =/= child molester. There are pedophiles on here, and one actually got a ban or suspension for saying that he was, until they realized that it wasn't actually against the rules, or against US law, so they had to unpunish them. There are plenty of people who are sexually attracted to kids but know better than to actually act on it. I'm not "condoning" it, I'm just saying that there's a difference between pedophile and child molester, despite what the fear-mongering media wants you to think. However, if the pedophilia thing just means CP, fine, but say that.
This, especially the bolded part, disturbs me. Exactly how far are they going to go to make sure that the advertisers and governments aren't being "slandered"?If we find you being slanderous with regard to any part of The Escapist, you will be penalized. 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.No, that's what they're saying.Canid117 said:So wait? I am never going to go from yellow to green again? Or was that just poorly written?Hey GeorgW, nice to talk to you again. I'm quoting you to get your attention. Now that I have it, I'm sure you've read the rest of my post, but I'd like you to clarify, what does the pedophilia thing mean? Does it mean that people like LegendaryGamer0 can expect a banhammer visit soon, or is it just anti-CP?GeorgW said:snip
The auto-filing is a bit off at times, take it up with the appeal board.Inglip said:Also, I'm already on my fifth strike, despite only having one warning and one probation.
I was suspended, but it was removed so I'm assuming it was stricken from my record.
But, looking at the poll, that's not the case. It's just the vocal majority that doesn't like it, most people that like it apparently don't feel a need to come to this thread to complain.Ladette said:I'm vaguely reminded of the realID debacle on the old WoW forums. Everyone told Blizzard it was a bad idea but they tried to push it through anyways. If most of the community is against something then i'd take their advice.
Now this isn't intrusive and as insanely moronic, but from where i'm sitting it seems to be far from a good decision.