I just think we should stop being vigilantes and let the moderators do their job. Although the 'PM on lock" idea is good, we have to remember posting here is a privlege and that it's not for us to tell them how to moderate.
To the moderators of the Escapist:
- Thread starter scotth266
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I was with you right up till the end there. I don't know that anyone, anywhere could support the idea that the mods should (or did) ban someone because they felt that being on the forum was hazardous to their mental state. There are not a lot of webboards that are less controversial and attack-oriented than this one. If he went from here to, say, /b/ or SE++ or even Y!A he would find himself in a much more confrontational environment that would be less conducive to someone with "tragic circumstances" and an "[inability to] draw a line between his personal life and his forum presence." For that matter I cannot think of a single offtopic board on the web that is more civil and calm than this one, for better or for worse.Cheeze_Pavilion said:
I think he's referring to "Monday-morning quarterbacking" just using the wrong word.Haliwali said:
Again: It wasn't just that postXojins said:
And to clarify, he wasn't using it like people use 'Retarted' or 'Gay', because those are insensitively used to attack the victim, incidentally attacking the disabled or homosexual. Mobius used the term 'Christian' to attack those of faith, anvilling it into that situation with little provocation, going so far as to provide a link to show everyone his intentions. He wasn't using it to imply that the victim of his ire was something to be detested, he was trying to link Christianity with things he percieved as negative, out of one of his many long-standing grudges. Having spoken to him via IM's and PM's, I don't doubt that he believed the majority of the things he said. Unprovoked attacks are bannable, that is what he did.
Samurai Goomba said:
Thirded up. Hopefully this means that our ever-loving mods have decided to experiment with the idea a little, and see how it turns out.Shapsters said:
Pardon? What part about this is vigilante-like? We're calmly requesting something: not angrily demanding it.Scarecrow38 said:
This Christian (Catholic, actually) would disagree. He was using the word Christian as a synonym with stupidity. That's offensive, regardless of whether or not he intended it to be a joke.Xojins said:
Trolls tend to take delight in being recognized for being complete dipsticks, and as such will typically attempt to come back to communities they've been banned from when they realize that people were disturbed by what they did. In fact, we recently had a troll re-visit us, when he was mentioned in some thread somewhere.Multi-Kill said:
Your thread would have given a number of trolls recognition, which might have led to some sort of trolling wave sweeping the forums. Hence, your thread was locked. As for the probation, that's a warning to everyone else (and especially yourself) to not make that sort of thread again. I'm sorry that you got a probation for it, but look at it this way: a probation is one of the lowest levels of moderation. And at least you can still post.
Hope that answers your question!
Meh, even though I've been moderated like, once, I think, and it was just probation, it's the moderation that has made me come to the forums less and less often.
Too bad all the people who get banned/suspended are the ones who usually entertain me with their posts.
Too bad all the people who get banned/suspended are the ones who usually entertain me with their posts.
You've got to wonder why he did such a thing. The mods are listening to us, therefore they must be watching this thread like hawks.Shapsters said:
That's my point, he must have expected to be banned for quite some time if not forever.Shapsters said:
Either that or he is the most intelligent troll I've come across.Knight Templar said:
The amount of shit thats been stirred up because of this.
Or maybe it was just unintentional, still I think the mods here do a great job and complaining about them isn't going to get anyone anywhere.
Any probation/ suspension/ ban could be avoided by just following that rule. If we just stick to the forum guidelines, there would be no need for any form of mod wrath to be brought upon someone. However, the problem comes when people don't know their limits and think their invincible, so they post racist comments like Darth Mobius did (especially with his history of grudges), or post porn like pimppeter2 did, and they have to face the consequences as a result. The mods don't keep these rules in place because they want to censor everything, they keep these rules in place to make posting on these forums fun.3.141592654 said:
I too would deserve a snack for reading all eleven pages (at this time) if I hadn't gotten hungry during and already had Doritos...we're out of cheez ballz. And admittedly I derailed myself a few times following links. I am not going back to find exact quotations.
Someone mentioned something about popular people receiving leniency. Isn't that something we cry foul about in the real world? As I recall most people were unhappy that celebrities were getting slap-on-the-wrist penalties for things John Q. Public would see jailtime for. Granted being rich and famous should get you some perks but not of the scope that was going on before we made a show of cracking down on it. Paris Hilton ... ~facepalm/headdesk/seizure~
I do find that I like the explanation next to certain posts that aren't in-your-face obvious because we are generally as a species quite curious and we delve into mysteries, seeking answers. While I find that I understand most probs/susps/bans, sometimes what one finds offensive doesn't translate uniformly across the community. If you're one of those people who is easily offended, you're more likely to press the report button than someone that isn't. You might stare at the post and wonder, "Dude, who is this wacko and are the mods crazy for not doing someone about it? Srsly!!" If you're one of those people that isn't easily offended, you might find yourself staring at the mod-action announcement wondering, "Dude, what gives? Totally bogus ban, dude."
I don't think anyone so far has quite come out to say that your personal tastes for offensive content can affect how you view moderator action.
Someone mentioned something about popular people receiving leniency. Isn't that something we cry foul about in the real world? As I recall most people were unhappy that celebrities were getting slap-on-the-wrist penalties for things John Q. Public would see jailtime for. Granted being rich and famous should get you some perks but not of the scope that was going on before we made a show of cracking down on it. Paris Hilton ... ~facepalm/headdesk/seizure~
I do find that I like the explanation next to certain posts that aren't in-your-face obvious because we are generally as a species quite curious and we delve into mysteries, seeking answers. While I find that I understand most probs/susps/bans, sometimes what one finds offensive doesn't translate uniformly across the community. If you're one of those people who is easily offended, you're more likely to press the report button than someone that isn't. You might stare at the post and wonder, "Dude, who is this wacko and are the mods crazy for not doing someone about it? Srsly!!" If you're one of those people that isn't easily offended, you might find yourself staring at the mod-action announcement wondering, "Dude, what gives? Totally bogus ban, dude."
I don't think anyone so far has quite come out to say that your personal tastes for offensive content can affect how you view moderator action.
Well, they have to eat and use the rest room like everyone else, and unless they have a fridge beside them and sit on a Toilet-Armchair they can't be there all the timemetagaia said: