|
I think name calling another poster, either direct: "You're a moron" or indirectly: (When referring to an opinion someone has) "Only a moron would think..."/"Everyone who thinks that is a moron" Should be probatable. EW and no one else should be able to get away with it. If it is repeated and a continued issue, it should be ramped. It should also be said that 'moron' and 'idiot' word searches doesn't necessarily mean that he's calling any poster a moron or idiot. EW puts more effort into his stuff though, but I do also not like the condescending tone it takes sometimes. And he's been rightfully probed for it most of the time. But, you know what, comparing EW to YMB is absurd. YMB would do drive by shitposts most of the time. EW at least put effort into it.
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2020 16:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 10:00 |
|
|
fool of sound posted:Sometimes he went too far, but from conversations with him I think he understood that he frequently danced right on the line though, and generally took probations in stride. FYI this sort of thing here is very dangerous behavior. It's not too different from 'ironic X' in that they're knowingly testing the limits to try and achieve the undesired result without actually breaking the rules that are in place to prevent the undesired result from happening. You're the ref that swallowed the whistle and let the dog play basketball, as people are so fond of posting in D&D.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2020 16:37
|
|
|
Is it just that people expect an unrealistic level of professionalism from the tiny group of volunteers who are tasked with overseeing a bunch of grown-rear end adults having forum posting battles? This isn’t some impassioned plea to like, oh, think of the humanity of these poor mods. More that I believe every single person posting here would agree that moderating the Debate & Discussion forum seems like a taxing and unpleasant task that would cause anyone’s judgment to get weird. Because I haven’t been around all that long but I can remember FOS and MPF both being posters who wrote posts worth reading before all their posting time was dedicated to telling people to stop being complete degenerates on the internet where people can see them. We’re doing the same poo poo in the forums that people do in the wider stupid American political world. We’re individualizing problems that should be addressed in systemic ways. I don’t really think the problem is the individual mods, it’s that a forum like this could really use a greater number of active mods with a good range of ideological diversity and an interest in keeping lines of communication like this open to keep the community’s trust.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2020 16:37
|
|
|
rko posted:Is it just that people expect an unrealistic level of professionalism from the tiny group of volunteers who are tasked with overseeing a bunch of grown-rear end adults having forum posting battles? Hey, I may be having forum posting battles, and I may be grown-rear end, but... wait, what was the third thing you said? Seriously, it's not like I don't have complaints, but I have a hard time giving the mods too much poo poo for what they do, because it seems like an absolutely terrible job and they get no material benefit from it. And, like, I know that Helsing and MPF and fos used to post a lot, just participating in discussions, and they were all pretty good at it and seemed to enjoy it. Now their interaction with D&D is... this. It's gotta suck for them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2020 16:45
|
|
|
I think all this discussion is a good example of why I don't think ramping would be a good policy. Each poster is not assigned to a mod like they're a caseworker. You have multiple mods modding different ways, so there's no way a ramp can be fairly implemented. You also have different people with different reporting strategies. For example, I am just super unlikely to report stuff I see unless it's like truly gross stuff like MRA dogwhistles (like saying "believe all women" when referring to #metoo) or explicitly fashy poo poo. This is because stuff that I consider disruptive is normally handled by the posters in the thread or it's a derail everybody wants to have about food or concerts or w/e and I just don't feel compelled to try to gently caress up other folks' fun for the sanctity and integrity of our threads. Considering how often YMB must have gotten reported, that is evidently not the only criteria people use to report.rko posted:Is it just that people expect an unrealistic level of professionalism from the tiny group of volunteers who are tasked with overseeing a bunch of grown-rear end adults having forum posting battles? drat. Also all of this.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2020 17:13
|
|
|
Jfc you guys, your posting enemy was banned, you got what you wanted and you're still melting down because a mod said "eh he wasn't always bad, so I gave him plenty of warnings and time to change his behavior since he brought some good things to the forum too, but eventually he ran out of rope even with me". It's a good thing that it takes consensus from mods with different philosophies to forums ban someone, if you run that kind of modding out of the forums then I hope for your sakes that you always agree with the dominant philosophy among the mods VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 17:50 on Oct 21, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2020 17:47
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Jfc you guys, your posting enemy was banned, you got what you wanted and you're still melting down because a mod said "eh he wasn't always bad, so I gave him plenty of warnings and time to change his behavior since he brought some good things to the forum too, but eventually he ran out of rope even with me". Framing him as a 'posting enemy' belies your stance here. You're mad he got banned. We get it. This way you get to still think that the problem was with the people who took issue with his abusive posts, not him. Thanks for your input.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2020 17:54
|
|
|
Nah I mean ngl I enjoyed some of his posts and he had a knack for exposing hypocrisy, but he took it too far sometimes and I always figured this would happen eventually if he kept on. I just think it's good that it took getting mods with different philosophies all on board before the ultimate punishment, and examples of bad behavior from people on the other side of politics that didn't get punished or only got punished after a big outcry have already been posted itt so it's not like the other mods are unbiased, some people just agree with their bias.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2020 18:03
|
|
|
Yeah I don't agree with FOS's thought process but that hardly rises to the level of "you need to step down!" As others have said, this seems like a problem that would be solved by simply having more mods, so that when one mod has a weird like/dislike of a particular poster, the other mods can overrule them. That said, jokes and sarcasm may be allowed if they're funny, but if someone's "jokes" and "sarcasm" are generating a lot of reports, it's probably a sign that they're not very funny to the community at large.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2020 18:26
|
|
|
YMB is a good poster, whose posts are fun to read and contribute a valuable perspective. I propose bans for everyone mod sassing FOS about this.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2020 18:33
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Nah I mean ngl I enjoyed some of his posts and he had a knack for exposing hypocrisy, but he took it too far sometimes and I always figured this would happen eventually if he kept on. This: fool of sound posted:he genuinely brought a cutting wit and eloquence that I thought was a valuable part of the subforum. Sometimes he went too far, but from conversations with him I think he understood that he frequently danced right on the line though, and generally took probations in stride.  It should also help keep probated posters from reaching the threadban/forumban/banban stage by clearly deliniating where they should be dancing compared to where that line is.gently caress that call for resignation, though. I've disagreed with a number of your calls, particularly on ramping/severity across the political spectrum, but the modteam is still better for having you.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2020 18:46
|
|
|
If building a huge rapsheet by walking the line amd getting occasionally probed for the kind of posts you routinely make and don't get probed for is going to start equalling forum bans thats fine, but it hasn't been that way for years so its probably appropriate to tell people first. 'Hes been getting timeouts for three years so he should have known this was coming' is exactly wrong, its BECAUSE hes been getting timeouts for three years that the ban appears capricious and unexpected. Also, I still think its an unadressed factor in these situations where someone can raise legitimate arguments over and over only to be dismissed by people holding more conventional wisdom as an idiot, liar, secret conservative, etc. over and over and that poster gets increasingly confrontational and sarcastic in advancing their arguments because it seems like raising them obliquely and in a baiting way is the only tactic that might actually get people to engage. I echo the concerns of other posters pointing out that some people on this board are required to have A LOT more patience than others to avoid punishment.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2020 18:53
|
|
|
Crumbskull posted:If building a huge rapsheet by walking the line amd getting occasionally probed for the kind of posts you routinely make and don't get probed for is going to start equalling forum bans thats fine, but it hasn't been that way for years so its probably appropriate to tell people first. 'Hes been getting timeouts for three years so he should have known this was coming' is exactly wrong, its BECAUSE hes been getting timeouts for three years that the ban appears capricious and unexpected.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2020 19:02
|
|
|
TheOneAndOnlyT posted:"If you get probed a lot we're eventually going to ban you" has been SA (not just D&D) policy from pretty much the second that probes became a thing. The only part that's new is YMB being forum-banned instead of just banned outright. And it had always seemed capricious when the 67th probable post is all of a sudden the bannable one. I'm saying that if probes eventually mean a ban that should be better codified than just 'whenever some mod loses patience'.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2020 19:07
|
|
|
Maybe people with dozens of probations should learn to post better?
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2020 19:14
|
|
|
Crumbskull posted:And it had always seemed capricious when the 67th probable post is all of a sudden the bannable one. I'm saying that if probes eventually mean a ban that should be better codified than just 'whenever some mod loses patience'. That's the way it always is. "I've seen enough" is a sufficient reason. Like it or not, modding is not a democracy. It is, at best, a benign dictatorship. The best mods have a clear vision of what the forum should and should not be, and dole out probes and bans with impunity while laughing at the complainers.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2020 19:20
|
|
|
Conversely I would suggest that is the worst kind of mod outside of the actual nazis and child molesters. The worst type of moderation perhaps. I would rather just not have them than have that kind. They add nothing, and we have no need for them. There is no reason for them to exist.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2020 19:25
|
|
|
whydirt posted:Maybe people with dozens of probations should learn to post better? If I know I can do one last really fun post to make every night when I'm done browsing and the probe will cleared by the time I check the forums next what is my incentive to do that, especially if I can get away with it for years? Edit: while its not to my taste I'm sympathetic to the idea that 'bad posting' needs to be excised. But if that is the goal currently the systems in place are very poor.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2020 19:35
|
|
|
Crumbskull posted:And it had always seemed capricious when the 67th probable post is all of a sudden the bannable one. I'm saying that if probes eventually mean a ban that should be better codified than just 'whenever some mod loses patience'. "If you post badly we will probate you, and if you continue to post badly you will get probated for longer and eventually banned" is a perfectly reasonable policy even if there aren't exact numbers attached to it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2020 19:37
|
|
|
Crumbskull posted:If I know I can do one last really fun post to make every night when I'm done browsing and the probe will cleared by the time I check the forums next what is my incentive to do that, especially if I can get away with it for years? Are you really asking "if I know that I can openly troll D&D with only minor consequences, why wouldn't I?" while also protesting posters getting more serious consequences? Also none of this applies to the poster in question who wasn't getting just 6'ers, they were also getting bans and much longer probations. Like, if you're approaching the question of ramping and subforum bans from the context of "I appreciate being able to relentlessly troll D&D with minor consequences and am concerned that this might no longer be possible, which seems quite unfair to me" I just don't know what to say. Most people would find what you're objecting to as something good.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2020 19:37
|
|
|
Crumbskull posted:If I know I can do one last really fun post to make every night when I'm done browsing and the probe will cleared by the time I check the forums next what is my incentive to do that, especially if I can get away with it for years?
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2020 21:16
|
|
|
Holy gently caress why is this thread so thirsty for blood? Permaban demands on the first page. Now demodding demands because one of the mods explained themselves following a forum ban that y'all apparently actually wanted. I'm reminded, suddenly, of the abuse Literally A Bird suffered during the attempted coup by Koala's March. No action taken was good enough, no reasoning or explanation was acceptable, and any delay was a sign of secret offsite allegiance and organisation; all of it projection, of course, by bad actors who were willing to hurt people to get what they wanted.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2020 21:32
|
|
|
Yeah, i totally agree with crumbskull and therefore support ramping. sixers have no deterrent effect, they're only useful as a "this person who was posting goatse across every thread is now unable to post goatse while we wait for an admin to approve their ban" bandaid. also its fine for mods to have preferences and likes and dislikes. It's a discussion forum not the loving hague.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2020 21:34
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Conversely I would suggest that is the worst kind of mod outside of the actual nazis and child molesters. The worst type of moderation perhaps.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2020 21:42
|
|
|
Pander posted:Maybe your idea of having fun that repeatedly results in probation is actually bad posting and you shouldn't be posting bad? Again if the metric is bad posting there are people who do it day in and day out in the same threads at the same time and yet you're not baying for their blood. Which leads into: why would one kind of bad posting irk you so much more than other types of bad posting? If you want to claim you're using criteria like "bad faith" or "low effort" or per this thread "prior record" then those criteria have to be applied to everyone and not used as a post hoc rationalization of why specifically someone you don't like should stop posting. Watching you and others attempt to cajole and browbeat the mods has if anything strengthened my stance on preferring a more hands off approach to moderation, because attempting to strictly enforce fairly ambiguous rules results in people trying to weaponize those rules and constantly going mods??? MODS??? when it's seen as a viable method of "winning" witchy fucked around with this message at 22:39 on Oct 21, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2020 22:36
|
|
|
Somfin posted:Holy gently caress why is this thread so thirsty for blood? Permaban demands on the first page. Now demodding demands because one of the mods explained themselves following a forum ban that y'all apparently actually wanted. To be clear I'm good with FoS as a mod here is and am glad to see at least some ramping happening again.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2020 23:30
|
|
|
Epinephrine posted:It's one post Somfin, the rest of the posts about the statement are loling at the irony of people complaining about the mods being liberal and biased against non-liberals when in fact, we have now learned, they've gone way out of their way to give aggro posters leniency because they liked the poster's (decidedly not liberal) politics. That is not what FoS said; if you think that it is, you're projecting your own meaning onto his post. And the bloodthirst has been, as I've said, visible in several posts, from several posters, starting from asking for permabans on page 1 of this thread and continuing through the whole thing. It's unsettling.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2020 23:51
|
|
|
Somfin posted:That is not what FoS said; if you think that it is, you're projecting your own meaning onto his post. It’s not bloodthirsty at all, the vast majority of the posts are pointing out how loving toxic this place is, how more and targeted moderation would be helpful and the one person calling for permabans is talking about it only in the context of people who literally do nothing but poo poo in people and have done so for a significant amount of time. Anyone can go back to the first page, read them for themselves and see that there is significant thought and effort being put into them. Odd that you didn’t mention this context in your posts, why is that? In light of that, what makes the tone of those posts so bloodthirsty, specifically? Why are so many here so adamant about being allowed to just be toxic assholes to each other?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2020 00:14
|
|
|
Somfin posted:And the bloodthirst has been, as I've said, visible in several posts, from several posters, starting from asking for permabans on page 1 of this thread and continuing through the whole thing. It's unsettling. I knew something about the whole "nominating posters for modship via pm" thing was rubbing me the wrong way and it's because of this. Posters are lobbying for nominations based on how effectively they'll clean out the undesirables. I think 30 day probation should be the highest penalty for regular badposting. The problem with trying to get rid of the worst poster is that there will always be one. Harold Fjord fucked around with this message at 00:35 on Oct 22, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2020 00:17
|
|
|
Somfin posted:That is not what FoS said; if you think that it is, you're projecting your own meaning onto his post. Also, since you haven't actually addressed the topic of the week: do you agree with the YMB forum ban? Epinephrine fucked around with this message at 01:00 on Oct 22, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2020 00:18
|
|
|
Solkanar512 posted:It’s not bloodthirsty at all, the vast majority of the posts are pointing out how loving toxic this place is, how more and targeted moderation would be helpful and the one person calling for permabans is talking about it only in the context of people who literally do nothing but poo poo in people and have done so for a significant amount of time. Anyone can go back to the first page, read them for themselves and see that there is significant thought and effort being put into them. Personally I think some of the loudest critics of YMB are more toxic than he ever was, but I don't want them banned just because we have different perspectives on issues. The conflict goes both ways.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2020 00:57
|
|
|
FoS's willingness to offer a transparent account of their own perspective on ymb's removal is evidence actively in favor of that they're being a generally good steward of moderation, and I don't like that it becomes tepidly focal in asking them to step down.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2020 01:41
|
|
|
Epinephrine posted:I think it's pretty clear what words are written, so agree to disagree. And again this is in the context of a group of posters complaining, for months now as I recall, that the mods were actually secretly out to get posters who happen to agree with YMB on most things and protecting posters who happened to disagree with YMB. This played out in this very thread, on the same page as FoS's statement. It's clear what words are written, and it's clear that none of them explicitly indicate that FoS's decision was based on YMB's politics. If you'd like to show me in FoS's posts where he indicated that, I'd love to see that reasoning. It's clear that you have found that meaning there, and I'd be keen to know where you saw it. I'm also interested in whether YMB was on your list of people as indicated on page 2. As for YMB, I don't actually mind too strongly one way or another. I dislike bans in general, in keeping with my beliefs regarding justice, and would usually prefer to err on the side of discussion, trust, and willing exits without parting shots, but I agree with FoS's reasoning as presented here. I'd recommend not trying to steer the conversation away from the topic at hand, though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2020 01:48
|
|
|
It seems like we've devolved into trying to peer through FoS's soul, which is not going to accomplish much, so let me suggest a reasonable compromise that only an idiot would disagree with: free YMB, and ban evilweasel instead
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2020 06:57
|
|
|
Kavros posted:FoS's willingness to offer a transparent account of their own perspective on ymb's removal is evidence actively in favor of that they're being a generally good steward of moderation, and I don't like that it becomes tepidly focal in asking them to step down. This is how I feel; I’d rather have a mod go “Alright, this is why I didn’t punish this person for a bit, my bad.” than have a group of ban-happy mods that just go with however the wind is blowing. I think the punishment is honestly fair enough in the end, so I don’t really get why people are so upset beyond “I want people punished harder and faster.”, which would remove a solid 60% of the DnD population tbh.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2020 07:18
|
|
|
Crane Fist posted:It seems like we've devolved into trying to peer through FoS's soul, which is not going to accomplish much, so let me suggest a reasonable compromise that only an idiot would disagree with: free YMB, and ban evilweasel instead Found some of the bloodthirst you were talking about, somfin.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2020 07:59
|
|
|
Pander posted:Found some of the bloodthirst you were talking about, somfin. I just meant we should stop him from posting so much, I don't want him to die or anything
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2020 08:27
|
|
|
Seven Hundred Bee posted:Are you really asking "if I know that I can openly troll D&D with only minor consequences, why wouldn't I?" while also protesting posters getting more serious consequences? I was using the first person to avoid the impression that I was complaining about other posters, if everyone wants to take that in the most bad faith possible way that I am admitting to personally relentlessly trolling then thats fine because it proves my point. If you don't want people to troll relentlessly do not allow it for years and years, if you don't want people to crow about how unfair and biased moderation is then enforce some kind of standard and don't decide apropros of nothing but your blood sugar is low or something that nigjt and decided that behavior that has been getting a slap on the wrist for years and years is now bannable. If you want to read this as me complaining that I can't troll with impunity then I guess that explains why you would have equally moronic political opinions (the you in this sentence is not directed at anyone in particular, it is up to the reader to decide if it applies to them). EDIT: Extremely funny that people are upset that guy got a probe because he said Obama was owning all the no joes or whatever. Definitely does not indicate, as I have argued, that a lot of these issies of mod bias perception are simply intractable.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2020 18:47
|
|
|
Crumbskull posted:EDIT: Extremely funny that people are upset that guy got a probe because he said Obama was owning all the no joes or whatever. Definitely does not indicate, as I have argued, that a lot of these issies of mod bias perception are simply intractable.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2020 19:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 10:00 |
|
|
Crumbskull posted:I was using the first person to avoid the impression that I was complaining about other posters, if everyone wants to take that in the most bad faith possible way that I am admitting to personally relentlessly trolling then thats fine because it proves my point. If you don't want people to troll relentlessly do not allow it for years and years, if you don't want people to crow about how unfair and biased moderation is then enforce some kind of standard and don't decide apropros of nothing but your blood sugar is low or something that nigjt and decided that behavior that has been getting a slap on the wrist for years and years is now bannable. Everyone understands the arguement you're making, it's some sort of shitposter version of afffluenza where everyone has gotten use to the standard that if they ignore the rules they'll just get a slap on the wrist so how can anyone expect them to follow the rules? It's like getting a speeding ticket and challenging it on the basis that you've been speeding on that road every day and have only ever gotten warnings when caught.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2020 19:06
|
|
