Moderation Appeal

[Grillick]

It doesn't have to be defined as spam to be against the rules. There are lots of things that are against the rules without being spam. The rules are clear, and clearly give the Moderation Team discretion to punish behavior not specifically prohibited.

 

I don't understand what you expect to gain by embarking on a crusade against the Moderation Team while the only authority who can overturn their decisions is away.

[LordRahl2]

If you want to talk about culture, then we should be allowing /b/ to come in and spam desu. Is that where this is going next? There is really not much difference.

Yes clearly I am for 4chan type posting here. And showing pride on a forum post topically related is clearly 4chan. Strawman much Ceres?

Edited March 25, 2015 by LordRahl2

[Kadin]

Yes clearly I am for 4chan type posting here. And showing pride on a forum post topically related is clearly 4chan. Strawman much Ceres?

It's not a strawman at all. There is nothing that makes your spam inherently better than desu spam. If a /b/ alliance were here and they had won the award, would it have been acceptable for them to spam desu?

 

This is a legitimate question.

[Buorhann]

It doesn't have to be defined as spam to be against the rules. There are lots of things that are against the rules without being spam.

 

 

And yet it was labeled as spam, but doesn't follow the current rules for spam.

 

If we had spread it around the forums in repetitive fashion, ok spam.  If one individual posted it several times in a thread, ok spam.

 

If you haven't noticed, each poster is a separate entity.  Each of us celebrating winning a community award with our unity.  It was kept to a single thread, a open community thread.

 

 

It's not a strawman at all. There is nothing that makes your spam inherently better than desu spam. If a /b/ alliance were here and they had won the award, would it have been acceptable for them to spam desu?

 

This is a legitimate question.

 

 

Description of Straw Man

The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position. This sort of "reasoning" has the following pattern:

 

1. Person A has position X.
2. Person B presents position Y (which is a distorted version of X).
3. Person B attacks position Y.
4. Therefore X is false/incorrect/flawed.

This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because attacking a distorted version of a position simply does not constitute an attack on the position itself. One might as well expect an attack on a poor drawing of a person to hurt the person.

[Kadin]

And yet it was labeled as spam, but doesn't follow the current rules for spam.

 

If we had spread it around the forums in repetitive fashion, ok spam.  If one individual posted it several times in a thread, ok spam.

 

If you haven't noticed, each poster is a separate entity.  Each of us celebrating winning a community award with our unity.  It was kept to a single thread, a open community thread.

 

 

 

 

Description of Straw Man

The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position. This sort of "reasoning" has the following pattern:

 

1. Person A has position X.
2. Person B presents position Y (which is a distorted version of X).
3. Person B attacks position Y.
4. Therefore X is false/incorrect/flawed.

This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because attacking a distorted version of a position simply does not constitute an attack on the position itself. One might as well expect an attack on a poor drawing of a person to hurt the person.

It's the same damn thing. What is it that makes your spam any different from desu spam? There is nothing.

[Baboon]

Locking this thread now, the modding staff have said all we need to on the subject.

[Pfeiffer]

It doesn't have to be defined as spam to be against the rules. There are lots of things that are against the rules without being spam. The rules are clear, and clearly give the Moderation Team discretion to punish behavior not specifically prohibited.

 

I don't understand what you expect to gain by embarking on a crusade against the Moderation Team while the only authority who can overturn their decisions is away.

 

I said that was why I didn't simply message Sheepy. I felt it warranted a broader discussion. Using 'moderator discretion' is fine, but I am of the opinion this went further than that, as spam is defined in the rules. Discretion is for when things aren't clear, or in extreme circumstances.