The people who make threads keep getting banned!

[Elijin]

You got a warning for being openly antagonistic and insulting the moral character of the mod. Or are you going to pretend that didnt happen, or that openly saying the mod was making up nonsense so they could later lock it, isnt insulting her moral character?


I....will admit to not being totally sure on where insulting someone's moral character sits on the 'no-no' list though, because it's pretty common practice in the R&P section.

 

[Signa]

You got a warning for being openly antagonistic and insulting the moral character of the mod. Or are you going to pretend that didnt happen, or that openly saying the mod was making up nonsense so they could later lock it, isnt insulting her moral character?


I....will admit to not being totally sure on where insulting someone's moral character sits on the 'no-no' list though, because it's pretty common practice in the R&P section.

I can't disagree with anything you said, but there is one part I have to remark on. You said I was openly antagonistic, but would you consider the mod's tone also antagonistic? Up until the point she posted, our discussion was civil. I considered it antagonistic to accuse us of being unruly and needing mod attention. Respect goes both ways, and as much as it will cost me, I'm just replying in kind.

 

[Elijin]

Amusingly, I am the one her tone was directed at.

It was clarified to me that calling people human spam bots is being considered a personal attack, and that I should not do it.

I have mixed feelings because I dont see anything I said to be inaccurate, but I guess I can see how calling someone a spam bot is insulting.

 

[Signa]

Amusingly, I am the one her tone was directed at.

It was clarified to me that calling people human spam bots is being considered a personal attack, and that I should not do it.

I have mixed feelings because I dont see anything I said to be inaccurate, but I guess I can see how calling someone a spam bot is insulting.

I know, right? I'm on Arnox's side and I still felt you were within your rights to make that accusation.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

The escapist far-left circle-jerk is almost complete.
Since the far-left always eats itself, the bannings won't stop either.
Once any semblance of a centrist of right of center individual is gone, the journey to the extreme will begin.
Woe betide anyone finding themselves the least extreme one, or just accused of being so.

Most of my favorite users have been banned, and if you are one of them still lurking here, I hope to see you coming Into Sanctuary.

And yet, you never were,

Maybe they got banned because they broke rules and not due to some ideology thing?

 

[Fiz_The_Toaster]

You...

Amusingly, I am the one her tone was directed at.

It was clarified to me that calling people human spam bots is being considered a personal attack, and that I should not do it.

I have mixed feelings because I dont see anything I said to be inaccurate, but I guess I can see how calling someone a spam bot is insulting.

And you...

Amusingly, I am the one her tone was directed at.

It was clarified to me that calling people human spam bots is being considered a personal attack, and that I should not do it.

I have mixed feelings because I dont see anything I said to be inaccurate, but I guess I can see how calling someone a spam bot is insulting.

I know, right? I'm on Arnox's side and I still felt you were within your rights to make that accusation.

Can really cut it out. Either take it to PMs or just stop, or I will give the both of you infractions.

 

[anthony87]

Can really cut it out. Either take it to PMs or just stop, or I will give the both of you infractions.

Infractions for what?

They're having a perfectly civil back and forth.

 

[Fiz_The_Toaster]

Can really cut it out. Either take it to PMs or just stop, or I will give the both of you infractions.

Infractions for what?

They're having a perfectly civil back and forth.

That was not what I would call 'civil', and I wanted to stop it now before it went elsewhere, off-topic, and derailed the thread.

 

[Elijin]

Wait, what?

I thought it was being condemned for being too conversational, and should vanish into private.

But uncivil? Even if you did read the first few responses as being charged, that was obviously defused by the last, which left very little else for me to say, and didnt seem hostile in the slightest.

This apparently just got ridiculous.

 

[Signa]

Can really cut it out. Either take it to PMs or just stop, or I will give the both of you infractions.

Infractions for what?

They're having a perfectly civil back and forth.

That was not what I would call 'civil', and I wanted to stop it now before it went elsewhere, off-topic, and derailed the thread.

I'm very confused. I wasn't speaking in an aggressive tone. What are you taking away from our conversation?

Elijin, were you taking anything I said in a negative tone? I thought we were basically having a laugh at the absurdity of it all.

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

Lets get back to the topic at hand, namely a fear that the more active members of the community are, through stacked infractions, being banned for repeated CoC infractions and a sense of dwindling community interaction.

Now I do take the mods at their word that in their eyes they saw infractions. That's fine. But I think the larger conversation should be more members making more threads more often.

 

[Signa]

Lets get back to the topic at hand, namely a fear that the more active members of the community are, through stacked infractions, being banned for repeated CoC infractions and a sense of dwindling community interaction.

Now I do take the mods at their word that in their eyes they saw infractions. That's fine. But I think the larger conversation should be more members making more threads more often.

In your opinion, is it better to make a bunch of threads that are summarized as just an announcement by the OP, like, "guys I just got a Tesla!" And have the conversation flow out around how good such cars are, if you even are allowed to drive, the most people you've shoved in your vehicle, etc, or is it better to start with a structured topic like how Tesla cars are very niche for a lot of people and keep the discussion all on one car type?

 

[Vendor-Lazarus]

Lets get back to the topic at hand, namely a fear that the more active members of the community are, through stacked infractions, being banned for repeated CoC infractions and a sense of dwindling community interaction.

Now I do take the mods at their word that in their eyes they saw infractions. That's fine. But I think the larger conversation should be more members making more threads more often.

The fear is not only by being more active, but having the wrong opinion or arguing against the wrong users.

The one thing one can't do, is force people to post threads.
Well, one could, but I bet it wont go anywhere fast.

What you can do is try to foster an environment which favors discussions.
Either by "the less rules the better", or a very, very well crafted and understandable ruleset which is applied fairly.

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

Lets get back to the topic at hand, namely a fear that the more active members of the community are, through stacked infractions, being banned for repeated CoC infractions and a sense of dwindling community interaction.

Now I do take the mods at their word that in their eyes they saw infractions. That's fine. But I think the larger conversation should be more members making more threads more often.

In your opinion, is it better to make a bunch of threads that are summarized as just an announcement by the OP, like, "guys I just got a Tesla!" And have the conversation flow out around how good such cars are, if you even are allowed to drive, the most people you've shoved in your vehicle, etc, or is it better to start with a structured topic like how Tesla cars are very niche for a lot of people and keep the discussion all on one car type?

Neither is better - both are valid. A topic beginning with announcing your new car, then asking what other users drive is a perfectly acceptable topic. Likewise discussing a single car, your example Tesla. Start with the new car announcement again, then open the floor up to anyone who has owned a Tesla and ask what they thought about it, etc.

Now some annoucement threads have more merit than others. New PCs, Cars, jobs, moved city, etc. those are big life moments and worthy of discussion. But just 'I had breakfast' or 'I walked!' I think would run the risk of mod wrath.

 

[Drathnoxis]

Now I do take the mods at their word that in their eyes they saw infractions. That's fine. But I think the larger conversation should be more members making more threads more often.

I don't think there's much that can be done about that. Some people are more predisposed to making threads than others. I'd wager that some of the people here haven't made a handful of threads in all the years they've been here. It takes a bit more effort to come up with a topic of discussion and to frame it in a way which will engage people. Some people just don't have the time or the inclination.

Which is why it's so bad that the people that do put in the extra effort so often keep getting banned.

 

[Marik2]

Since then the forums have become more and more toxic. The situation worsened when the Wild West was closed and numerous posters who were accustomed to "Shit Posting" and extremely adversarial commenting were obligated to move to the regular forums if they wished to continue to post on this site. It has become routine for people to comment on how toxic and hostile the Escapist community forums have become.

This kind of makes me wonder why the Wild West is still closed then given most of the community either liked it or didn't care, and pretty much everyone understood it was a good containment subforum for shitposting and allowed for a place for those who wanted to vent to do so. I mean for god sake I was the primary target of toxicity in that place and I can summarise how things where with one picture.

I've been saying this ever since the place was shut down but I'll say it again, I think the Wild West was an objective benefit to this site. It allowed for a healthier balance of the community's clashing internet subcultures on this site and gave reason for people like me (one of the few active users suspended when Kross gave everyone lifetime Pubs and was thus not granted it) a reason to buy it, which I did while the place was open, and would again if it was reopened.

All it needed was a final rule against bullying, threats, and suicide jokes to make the place fun again.

 

[Elvis Starburst]

I don't think there's much that can be done about that. Some people are more predisposed to making threads than others. I'd wager that some of the people here haven't made a handful of threads in all the years they've been here. It takes a bit more effort to come up with a topic of discussion and to frame it in a way which will engage people. Some people just don't have the time or the inclination.

IE: Me. I've tried making some interesting threads in the past (And I wear a badge front and center that showcased one of my few successes in that goal), even in the earlier days my threads never really took off. Maybe it was how I framed it, or the topic, or something else, I dunno. But few threads I ever made actually made much of an impact. Cause of that, I tend to just keep to reading content rather than make it myself.

Which is why it's so bad that the people that do put in the extra effort so often keep getting banned.

Well, as long as said more active posters aren't being complete shitlords elsewhere that warrant them being banned... It'd be nice to have more active posters, but said active posters need to still stay within the rules of the CoC. And if they can't do that, then they simply aren't gonna be around for long

 

[Saelune]

Maybe instead of being more lenient to people with less warnings OR being more lenient to people with more warnings, we just be fair to everyone?


I also think a shorter amnesty period would be helpful. 6 months is too long.

 

[Catnip1024]

Maybe instead of being more lenient to people with less warnings OR being more lenient to people with more warnings, we just be fair to everyone?


I also think a shorter amnesty period would be helpful. 6 months is too long.

Personally, I'd be happy if health bars actually bothered to reset any more. Mines been sat one away from a suspension for months now.

And to be fair, I'd question whether it's even worth perma-banning the people who get repeated minor infractions (not the grossly offensive people who go out in a burst of flame, mind), often spaced fairly widely apart. Also noting that they probably have less warnings per post than a lot of people who are still posting, they were just more active.

But hey ho, don't like the rules, don't play the game...

 

[MrCalavera_v1legacy]

WolvDragon has had lost his temper couple of times here, so seeing him go eventually wouldn't surprise me.
However, the post he was banned for? Yeah, seems like a weird choice.