Jump to content
Honey Monster

Community Discussion - Moderation

Recommended Posts

Community, 

A little over a year ago this community had toxic relationship between members and moderators. It took us quite a bit to reach out to the community and develop a strategy that actually worked and eased some tension in that relationship. As the time passed we lost some of those old moderators, fresh eyes have rolled in and we have also gained and lost long time forum members and participation. 

I'm the kind of guy that believes that times change and people do too. When you mash together so many people from all over the world with different backgrounds, views, and stances.. some things that are restricted might seem taboo to others and things that are allowed may shock others as well. Which is why I come to you today, representing the moderation staff, asking you what we can do better?

I want to grow this community the correct way. Just like we did over a year ago, by taking positive feedback from the community and work with yall instead of against. 

 

Please check out this thread:

 

This is what we did back in 2016. We still operate on this structure...for the most part, but I'm cracking the whip on this. 

Please provide feedback, whether good or bad. I want to see what the problems are and correct them. Obvious poop posts are gonna be ignored. Please follow the rules and make this constructive. 

 

Help us shape the community for y'all! 

(Mods hold warns/moderation for this thread)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lose anonymity so you cop shit for unpopular and/or flat-out wrong decisions. Even when your mod team all agrees that something is bad or against the rules, you are still the mod team and have a power that none of the rest of us have - actions without consequence. 

Get rid of the "mod call-out" rule, since that just creates a superiority complex for the mods. See point 1. 

It's my opinion that threads shouldn't be locked for any reason, only act on individual posters rather than the topic. If the conversation evolves to include other facets regarding game or debate, then allow the conversation to continue without public warnings. Naturally branching topics shouldn't be shut down because only talking about a single issue can get challenging without other aspects being included in the discussion that may result in a cause or have a relationship with the original topic. Or any other topic brought up the thread for that matter. 

In essence, just tone it down.

I'd also like to see a distinction created between outright sexism/racism being banned and satirical threads like ones Roz often creates. For that matter, criticisms of demographics shouldn't be flagged under racism or sexism either, since they are legitimate points regarding differences between peoples and groups. 

  • Upvote 4
  • Downvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tag whoever is not the reporter of an incident so that they know they have a reason to check a thread. When I first went into this forum for a specific issue I was surprised to find five issues that had been reported about me, all with positive results for me, but it would still be extremely useful and appreciated if it could be required as part of submitting a report, or, if not that, included in the message somewhere prominently so IPB handles notification.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Gabranth said:

Lose anonymity so you cop shit for unpopular and/or flat-out wrong decisions. Even when your mod team all agrees that something is bad or against the rules, you are still the mod team and have a power that none of the rest of us have - actions without consequence. 

Get rid of the "mod call-out" rule, since that just creates a superiority complex for the mods. See point 1. 

It's my opinion that threads shouldn't be locked for any reason, only act on individual posters rather than the topic. If the conversation evolves to include other facets regarding game or debate, then allow the conversation to continue without public warnings. Naturally branching topics shouldn't be shut down because only talking about a single issue can get challenging without other aspects being included in the discussion that may result in a cause or have a relationship with the original topic. Or any other topic brought up the thread for that matter. 

In essence, just tone it down.

I'd also like to see a distinction created between outright sexism/racism being banned and satirical threads like ones Roz often creates. For that matter, criticisms of demographics shouldn't be flagged under racism or sexism either, since they are legitimate points regarding differences between peoples and groups. 

I'd been largely hands-off on moderation and leaving it to the mods recently, and I apologize for that. I'm here to offer more oversight and help moderating again.

We will not be removing the anonymous identities of mods. The reasoning is that it is very difficult to do an impartial job when the results of your moderation action can directly affect you in-game. I.E., someone doesn't like that you gave them a warning, you now your nation is under attack. That inhibits the ability to effectively moderate, and it discourages people from wanting to volunteer and help moderate in the first place.

The "mod call-out" rule is there to prevent "witch-hunts." It's very easy to criticize the mods without recognizing the important and good work they do keeping the forums a fun and friendly environment for everyone. If you have a problem with a moderator, send me a direct message and we can discuss it. That's always been my policy and I've overturned moderator decisions before.

1 hour ago, ComradeMilton said:

Tag whoever is not the reporter of an incident so that they know they have a reason to check a thread. When I first went into this forum for a specific issue I was surprised to find five issues that had been reported about me, all with positive results for me, but it would still be extremely useful and appreciated if it could be required as part of submitting a report, or, if not that, included in the message somewhere prominently so IPB handles notification.

We did discuss this privately and I think everyone is on board with the idea. I'll see that we make this an official part of our policy.

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ComradeMilton @Gabranth

Thank you for your input. 

Although, I wouldn't mind removing anonimity - because of the way I personally play and my in-game activity this is just something Alex wants to keep and this has always been that controversial debate. 

 

I have personally been a bit busy in rl. had a few business things pop up that left me traveling. Upon my return I noticed a few things that really need some fixing. The way new moderators handle themselves within threads, call outs, and rule breaks while enforcing a rule break. I have done this moderation here for a bit, even before my current name, and I have been directing them or guiding them on the way business should be handled on our end, but I wanted to make it a bit more visible - hence this post. Mistakes are made, but should be learned from and fixed quickly. 

 

Moderation and the community should be separate, but they should mesh and engage productively with each other when needed. That's what I'm trying to get back to. 

 

Don't be afraid to provide feedback. Communicate with us and we will work to bring this community back where it belongs. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually moderate, actually moderate consistently, actually follow your own rules, actually get rid of repeat offenders.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, durmij said:

Actually moderate, actually moderate consistently, actually follow your own rules, actually get rid of repeat offenders.

I agree with this. There is a disconnect it seems when it comes to someone stacking up warn points and then they just get away with it towards the end as warn points basically go away after a bit. So, they can refresh and start again. I'll look into our point system and see if there is something we can tweak that can cut that gap out. 

As far as consistency. That is something I'm personally working on with the moderators so everyone delivers the same consistent moderation for all forums and all community members regardless of personal in-game bias. 

 

Thanks @durmij for your input. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the key issues is the rules themselves.

They are far too open for interpretation and are rarely ever applied evenly because of this, but rather at the discretion of the moderator/s. This means a community member can read a rule, think hes not breaking said rule, break it based on the subjective standard of the moderator or moderation team, and be warned for doing so.

If you define the rules more clearly, than even if people don't agree with said rules, they know they are breaking them and have no defense against punishment for doing so. 

Quote

 

Flaming, Baiting, Trolling, Racism, Sexism, and Name Calling

  • Flaming - posts targeted at a player in an effort to anger, hurt, insult, harass, or provoke.
  • Baiting - coercing a player into breaking the rules.
  • Trolling - deliberately provocative posting with the aim of inciting an angry response.
  • Name Calling - abusive or insulting language referring to a person or group. *Prohibited everywhere except role play forums, and only in role play forums where it is being used within reason with no intent to flame, bait, troll, insult, or hurt.*
  • Racism and Sexism - having or showing the belief that a particular race or gender is superior to another.

 

 

According to the Flaming, Trolling and Name Calling rules, 70% of the posts on this forum would be considered against the rules.

Unless its actual harassment (which you still have to define) it should not be against the rules.

Then you have the Racism and Sexism rules, which are completely open to interpretation, especially if you pay attention to politics and see the wild degree by which people define those terms. It also doesn't even mention homophobia, so I could technically go around disparaging gay people without any justifiable punishment if the moderators were actually true to enforcing the forums rules.

You should clearly define what you mean by sexism and racism (and homophobia) rather than leaving the definition as vague as it is. The rules should be a clear instruction manual for the moderators to read and enforce, 

 

Quote

Topic Hijacking

Derailing a thread, or inducing topics that are not related to the original subject.

 

Another rule that is too open. Obviously some kid coming along and posting about the weather in a thread about X alliance declaring war on Y alliance is derailing the thread, but there are plenty of times when a thread naturally moves in a direction separate from the OP. Especially in the alliance affairs and general debate sections.

Also the correct way to respond to this should really be to warn the person and delete the derailing posts rather than lock the entire thread. 

Quote

Aiding Rule Violators and Ban Evaders

Having knowledge of a rule violation or ban evasion and not reporting it to the game staff.

I'm not even sure how you can feasibly enforce this one.

Quote

Nazism, Terrorism, and Other Hate Groups

It is against the rules to promote hateful ideologies such as Nazism, Terrorism, Racism, and others not listed here. We will allow references to, historical discussions of, and satirical usage that does not violate other forum rules.

This is probably the worst rule of all. For starters, what is considered a hate group is in many cases heavily subjective\, various sources will rule differently based on their own political ideology and in some cases pure political narrative pushing. Secondly, if you aren't going to list specific hate groups you can't really expect people to know which ones you consider to be hate groups etc. At which point it becomes at the moderators discretion and that isn't a good thing.

 

Quote

 

Signatures and Avatars and Profiles

  • Avatars - must be in good taste. Any image that would not be allowed in a post will not be allowed as an avatar. Excessive flashing colors are not allowed. Using a moderator's avatar is not allowed.
  • Signatures - one image per signature which may not exceed the maximum size of 650 pixels wide by 175 pixels tall. You may have no more than 5 lines of text. Font size may not exceed size 14. Each quote-tag, image and empty line count as a line.
  • Profiles - No content should be posted in your profile that would otherwise be prohibited anywhere else in the forums.
  • Anything considered overly sexual, which would be loosely defined as "less than swimsuit area covered" will not be allowed in any image including avatar or signature. Those who fail to read and abide by these rules will have their avatars/signatures removed and receive a warning.

 

Good taste is subjective. Realistically this should just include the stuff reference under "inappropriate imagery".

As for the sexual rule, this one has been historically enforced unevenly. I had a picture of a chicks butt as a my avatar for like 6 months back in 2016-2017 and it wasn't an issue, then recently Durmstrang made a DOE with some ladies without about the same lever of clothing (swimsuit area covered) and it became an issue.

I think the mods messed up on that one and didn't read their own rules on the subject.

Quote

Questionable Actions and Content

The guidelines above may not cover every situation. Should we encounter something that we deem harmful to the community, we reserve the right to take action against it.

This should be removed or at the very least only apply to @Alex

The entire crux of the issue is you give the moderators way too much discretion over ruling on things, and this is a blank check to rule anyway they want.

 

The rest of the rules are mostly fine, since they are clear and you can obviously know when you are breaking them. I tend to agree with @Gabranth that the no call out rule is a bad one. I understand that the proper course of action is supposed to be to contact @Alex but as hes admitted already his oversight isn't 100% on point and he can't always be reached. Moderators should have accountability. 

  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Sketchy said:

Acknowledged

Sketchy,

Thank you for you feedback. I can personally tell you that as a moderator there is often that gray area of discretion that is exercised. Alot of times, when dealing with select reports, it comes to the point where we really can't determine a ruling because what you said, it's too vague. I do agree that rules listed should be more defined so that we don't run into that gray area as often as we have and are. 

Discretion is used on alot of things though and let me point out, most reports are discussed amongst the moderator team. As you could probably guess we do get reports that are post-argument phase. Where there is a discussion and someone doesn't like what the other person says and then boom, report. Then we have to figure out, you know, what exact rule was broken and then try and fit it within the vague descriptions of rule breaks listed. So, I definitely see the issue there. I think what led us to this error is the failure to grow with the community interior as well as the rapidly growing social world we live in. 

I'll personally check through the rules and hold a discussion with Alex and other moderators on what we can change to make them less vague and more defined as we move forward. 

In the meantime, I would gladly take any revised rules from you guys to use in those discussions, I just ask that you shoot them to my inbox here on the forums so we don't weigh down this thread with paragraphs of rule revisions. I'll also go further; once we get a discussion going and have solutions to share, I'll make a post with those changes so the community can also weigh in and be sure we are correct in those measures. I think that is only fair. 

One last note on discretion, albeit the vaguensss, I use and I ask other moderators to use certain discretion when it comes to handling reports. When it comes down to another member just trying to use moderators as a tool to one-up the other, I ask them to read the room, see what happened and what led to the report. Most times, the one reporting an incident has also committed the same rule break a few posts back, but it goes unnoticed. That has to change as well. 

 

Thanks again for your feedback, send any rule suggestions to my inbox and again I apologise for improper spelling and grammar - my phone autocorrect has been acting pretty nuts lately. 

Thanks. :)

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm more worried about Forum Mod activity. I've spoke to Alex about this before. But it seems some Forum Mods like to disappear off the face of the earth. It'd be good to see you guys more often. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Featherine said:

I'm more worried about Forum Mod activity. I've spoke to Alex about this before. But it seems some Forum Mods like to disappear off the face of the earth. It'd be good to see you guys more often. 

I can say for the first time in a while we have an active group of moderators. There was a time when there was just 1-2 working to keep up with the flow. We have boosted our own communication as well by creating a private discord to communicate quicker on events and discuss report outcomes. 

 

Thank you for your feedback. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As someone close to being banned off the site due to these, frankly corrupt actions taken against me, I think I can hit quite clearly where the failings are here, well "failing", just as it is wanted may well be the case.On the bigger sites out there such as Youtube, Facebook, you get the picture, there has been this type of policy in place. In the past they thought if they simply hit the obviously bad people then it'd be dandy, however they soon saw that people can get views out there while staying within the rules. As such even when people don't violate rules they have been hitting people over their videos, comments, so on. Now in their cases due to the nature of their sites this does not neccessarily mean bans or warns/strikes, they have after all other tools available to them. This here is ultimately a smaller scale version of that. Lets look at the rule to start:
 

Quote

 

Racism and Sexism - having or showing the belief that a particular race or gender is superior to another.

 

I received a total of 4 warns for this rule, most under sexism though they have hit me for racism too (other was a "mod callout" by you know, posting here in moderation questioning the choice in warning me). Nowhere can the Admin, any mod, or any user that supports the warns point to this. At best all they had was during 4 wives the line in 4 wives that parodied Islamic law (will mods hand out warns to any Muslim who posts here in support of Islamic law? Doubtful). Something which I may add during the vote counting (which I also got a warn for) I did not apply.

I posted a comment or two right before my latest warn and I see another case with TKR's thread of "What is the most important step a man can take?". What the mods have set down is a clear corrupt precedent where the mods are able to warn anybody for the slightest "sexist" thing. Even something as tame as the above can be warned and locked if the mods don't like the person or think they can get away with it. Corruption is what that is called.

The fixes are simple. First off the 4 warns for sexism should be stricken from my account, you can keep the "mod callout" if you like, but that is stupid too and this right here is what it was calling out and ultimately it resulted in this thread so... yeah, you can take that too. Second and what will appeal to you most is to expand the rules greatly if this type of environment, sterile and dull, is what you want. Take one of Admin's many excuses, the claim that I broke the sexism rule by treating women as if they were "pieces of meat". Now leaving aside his own behaviour as been promoted by some people on twitter where he did far worse than anything I ever did and has yet to publicly disavow if it is so great a sin... where in the rules does such moralising nonsense apply? Nowhere. Now if he wants it to then that is up to him, put it in there, I'm sure it can be worded better but say... something that "devalues another gender's worth" or something. Of course that will likely also be applied to race so when white self cutting soy boys like @Big Brother get triggered that I pointed at stats that show white men are the most desired by all women, he'll report me, and I'll get warned simply for pointing at factual stats. That will be stupid too sure, but at least you'll have these pathetic rules on the books as being enforced. 

In my years I've hit into this wall before and trust me when I say it is always you lefty types. The far-right types at worse will throw some names, which I will return in kind as they do not act as men do (oh crap, another warn right there), however they can't deplatform me or get me smeared as a racist. The left, the racist left types, however can. My threads always start as a bit of fun, an extension of the stuff I've done on my server and the KT one. It is the Admin and his mods who have made a big deal about them and shown ultimately how they are opposed to interracial relations, well, if they involve a white man anyway as it is quite clear.

Now some will look at this and think, this must be crazy, Roz you must be jumping to a wild claim surely? No. I stand by what is above. The mods have shown a clear campaign against threads involving non-white women. The recent Muslim women thing is the most tragic as in my post I noted that your religion, race, or sex was irrelevant when posting in... something that Muslim women do not have the luxury of in RL. Even the "nicest" Muslim will often allow it in the case of a non-Muslim men but, keyword there, but, if they convert. Muslim males are very dominating and racist against non-Muslims for certain and that has the effect of limiting Muslim women's options. Ask the men and women who either been killed, acid attacked, or simply beaten over such things. Ah but of course, Admin and his moderation cares not for such issues, heck raising such issues would likely get the thread warned and locked. They'd rather protect Muslim men who abuse women then do that... so much for being on the side of women. 

So lets save some time here. I will not kowtow to this pressure from moderation to stop talking about women, or more specifically non-white women. In the above I have leveled the charge of corruption and racism against you all, which are clearly big no-nos as you all are to not be questioned or attacked for your behaviour. I said the far-right do not act as men on the matter of sexual relations and that is another hit, toxic masculinity or something. I also did point out how Big Brother hates his own sex and race and that is apparently offensive as I know, you know, and everybody knows that moderation is very likely the same as him. As I told the Admin who has decided to simply ignore me now. If I am angry it is not only because of the corrupt acts taken against me, but also on what exactly is being targeted. It seems any promotion of non-white women will hit instant problems on here. Admin once was so direct in this statement I had to give him the chance to walk it back and rephrase it as it came off as extremely racist (I said I'd continue to promote love between men and women whatever the background, and he told me I won't be doing it in P&W), and were I dishonest person I could have easily used that against him to paint him as a huge racist. However I need no such dishonest tactics, it is clear to see that if he and his mods realise it or not, they are promoting racism. 

So for the saving of time, feel free to enforce your corruption and racist agenda on me now. Make clear that such talk will not be tolerated. Only far left and far right racism will be tolerated. 

Edited by Rozalia
  • Upvote 5
  • Downvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you should remove the mod anonymity. That would alleviate many problems.

 

Then make Sketchy a mod.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mod anonymity is a huge issue

I for one support our secret, ideologically motivated forum police. 

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd also like to see more frequent & consistent moderation on the forums. I do however yonder from the NationStates forums, which are heavily moderated in an efficient and consistent way.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Rozalia said:

Of course that will likely also be applied to race so when white self cutting soy boys like @Big Brother get triggered that I pointed at stats that show white men are the most desired by all women, he'll report me, and I'll get warned simply for pointing at factual stats.

It's kind of cute how hungry you are for my attention. I appreciate the effort you put into trying to insult me, but I think you can do better than this. Keep trying though, I believe in you.

Regardless, I haven't reported anyone, ever. Believe it or not, the things posted on this forum are (evidently) far less important to me than they are to you. Hell, I have several warnings from the mods myself. They don't bother me, if I get any kind of forum punishment for speaking my mind, so be it. The world won't stop spinning.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think mods forget that this is the internet and it's Trump Era, not 2013 and an Obama Era safe-zone liberal college.

 

This game is played by a certain demographic, that's your target audience. Just because 2-3 very loud and obnoxious people find certain topics to be too triggering for them doesn't mean there isn't a silent majority who thinks it's funny or true. There's a reason why the onset of the edgy posts got so far. Hell, 2 years back and a year ago being edgy wasn't an issue. Now it is because it turns out a lot of people share controversial views. The needs of many outweigh the needs of the few.

There's a definite war on right-wing, male driven, and heritage themed topics. 

Either way, the forums can turn into UC Berkeley Trigger Riots over the edgy posts, I and a few others will remain in the outer reaches of moderation off on Discord.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/16/2018 at 2:24 PM, Rozalia said:

Read. 

Thank you for your feedback. I'm not sure if this was more a "I get warned and I'm upset about it" or you actually feel you are not deserving of your warns. 

Either way, rules are what we are looking into yo clarify exactly what they should mean. 

On 1/16/2018 at 2:40 PM, Kastor said:

I think you should remove the mod anonymity. That would alleviate many problems.

 

Then make Sketchy a mod.

I fail to see how removing anonimity would "alleviate many problems" - I personally don't care about that rule Alex made, id use my personal account and not care. I just don't feel like having anonymous mods really causes that issue - unless it pertains to personal grudges being used with mod power, which I'm working on changing.

 

If you could elaborate on the specific problems if moderator anonimity, that could help us out better. 

On 1/16/2018 at 4:14 PM, Sergey Kirovich said:

I'd also like to see more frequent & consistent moderation on the forums. I do however yonder from the NationStates forums, which are heavily moderated in an efficient and consistent way.

Thank you for your feedback. This topic has been create so we can know where we are weak and failing. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Lucifer Morningstar said:

I think mods forget that this is the internet and it's Trump Era, not 2013 and an Obama Era safe-zone liberal college.

 

This game is played by a certain demographic, that's your target audience. Just because 2-3 very loud and obnoxious people find certain topics to be too triggering for them doesn't mean there isn't a silent majority who thinks it's funny or true. There's a reason why the onset of the edgy posts got so far. Hell, 2 years back and a year ago being edgy wasn't an issue. Now it is because it turns out a lot of people share controversial views. The needs of many outweigh the needs of the few.

There's a definite war on right-wing, male driven, and heritage themed topics. 

Either way, the forums can turn into UC Berkeley Trigger Riots over the edgy posts, I and a few others will remain in the outer reaches of moderation off on Discord.

You bring up some good points here and I want to thank you for your feedback. 

Alot of people get turned off by heavy moderation and then when moderation takes a knee, we aren't moderating enough - so we are looking for that balance. Off-site communication platforms are a positive way to carry on a discussion with like-minded people and offer a debate that might be on the edge of rule breaking here on these forums. 

Regardless of the era we live in and regardless of views. This is a privately owned forum/site and rules expressed are agreed on upon forum account creation. This needs to remain a neutral ground of expression and discussion. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Frank Castle said:

Thank you for your feedback. I'm not sure if this was more a "I get warned and I'm upset about it" or you actually feel you are not deserving of your warns. 

Either way, rules are what we are looking into yo clarify exactly what they should mean. 

Except you know, the message is I get warned by the crappy phantom rules that don't exist. Go back to the threads I created and pinpoint exactly in each one where I professed the superiority of the male sex or some race. Go for it. This to remind you is what you're looking for:

Quote

Racism and Sexism - having or showing the belief that a particular race or gender is superior to another.

4 Wives Islamic law parody has been gone over. You'll either hit me as a sexist by taking it straight or you'll hit me as a racist for daring to parody Islamic law, BECAUSE SHARIA LAW IS TO BE PROTECTED FROM ANY POSSIBLE PARODY/MOCKING BY MODERATION. Whatever. However lets hear you explain each one and how the rules were broken. When you can't (or get your post destroyed as you'll talk nonsense), remove the warns and unlock the threads please. 

14 hours ago, Big Brother said:

It's kind of cute how hungry you are for my attention. I appreciate the effort you put into trying to insult me, but I think you can do better than this. Keep trying though, I believe in you.

Regardless, I haven't reported anyone, ever. Believe it or not, the things posted on this forum are (evidently) far less important to me than they are to you. Hell, I have several warnings from the mods myself. They don't bother me, if I get any kind of forum punishment for speaking my mind, so be it. The world won't stop spinning.

What are you? 8? This isn't the playground buddy. 

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Rozalia said:

No.

You complain about being warned when you know heckin well that you like to cross the line. It doesn't matter if you are stating facts or delusions, if it is a rule break you get the repercussion. You hide behind the only reasoning you can find every time, no matter what the occasion; "these are real facts" and then a pointed finger in another direction. 

If you have discussions that you know are going to be on the edge or spill over into violation territory, take your discussions off site onto another communication platform. 

Like I said above, it doesn't matter what era we live in, who's the president or what group has the political power hold on society...this site has ruled which must be followed in order to remain here. 

Granted, we want to revise to make less vague - but what is written should be a good enough guideline as to what is and isn't permitted. 

  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Frank Castle said:

You complain about being warned when you know heckin well that you like to cross the line. It doesn't matter if you are stating facts or delusions, if it is a rule break you get the repercussion. You hide behind the only reasoning you can find every time, no matter what the occasion; "these are real facts" and then a pointed finger in another direction. 

If you have discussions that you know are going to be on the edge or spill over into violation territory, take your discussions off site onto another communication platform. 

Like I said above, it doesn't matter what era we live in, who's the president or what group has the political power hold on society...this site has ruled which must be followed in order to remain here. 

Granted, we want to revise to make less vague - but what is written should be a good enough guideline as to what is and isn't permitted. 

Excuse me? Yes, the rules as written are the facts yes. Where does a discussion on which woman you like best break into racism or sexism? You can't answer that because you know it doesn't break the rules. The Admin, Mr "I'd like a woman as a present for Christmas" himself and his mod staff are simply uncomfortable with such conversion which if they don't want on the site, fine, then put it in the bloody rules.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Rozalia said:

Excuse me? Yes, the rules as written are the facts yes. Where does a discussion on which woman you like best break into racism or sexism? You can't answer that because you know it doesn't break the rules. The Admin, Mr "I'd like a woman as a present for Christmas" himself and his mod staff are simply uncomfortable with such conversion which if they don't want on the site, fine, then put it in the bloody rules.

Now you're just breaking off into randomness. 

Thank you for your feedback, let us put this thread back towards the original topic. 

Thanks. 

  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Frank Castle said:

Now you're just breaking off into randomness. 

Thank you for your feedbac, let us put this thread back towards the original topic. 

Thanks. 

Randomness? What? You wouldn't be doing this thread if moderation hadn't been so consistently stupid in their enforcing of the so called rules against me. You as I said, cannot actually state where the rules were broken because I did not in fact break the rules. I know it, you know, everybody knows it. 

So again, do it, prove that I broke the rules of sexism/racism as they are written. If you cannot then you must reverse the enforcement that went on against me. However you won't, because as Lucifer Morningstar says, this is more than likely politically motivated. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just want to thank everyone who positively and constructively contributed to this thread. You've been a great deal of help! 

I'm gonna leave this thread open for a while to allow more people to reply and comment while we work to shape up our moderation. 

I think in closing, we know there are faults and we know there are issues with moderation - that is why we reached out to the community with this post. We can't change and get better without knowing what to fix. On that note, we will be back soon with some updates. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.