International board, or something, and the mods, and ciao [Archive]

Shibumi

09-20-2011, 18:32

I just recently noticed that I was banned from the backroom, which is fair enough. This is a private forum, so of course you can set whatever rules you guys want.

I was somewhat surprised though.

The thing is, I joined up here because I had heard that aside from the TW content, this forum also offered political discussions of international standards, with some interesting characters, and dedicated moderators. For me, that was the selling point as to why I would sign up here instead of more popular TW forums.

I have noticed since I signed on that there has been quite some discussions as to how to keep the forum alive, and from what I have seen, this forum does not do as well as some others.

After having spent some time here, I have more understanding as to why this is. And I can't say I am much surprised. To be quite frank, I will just "bow out of here". Well, I was actually banned, so maybe I should just say I was kicked out.

The message I got regarding the ban:

Dear Shibumi,

You have received an infraction at The Org.

Reason: Major Infraction
-------
Couldn't resist, could you? Your Backroom access has been suspended pending staff review of your continued participation.
-------

This infraction is worth 2 point(s).

Original Post:
2053374337

I remember I was at home, a friend messaged me on ICQ (it still existed back then).

I watched the news fuss about it, had a beer, and thought: "cheers to whoever it was that slammed them"

Of course I am just joking, the third world should by then of course have learnt that it is unfair not to mention unseemly to fight back.

Someone replied to the post I made, and I at once stated that I was not joking about the joking..

The rage against my post would thus towards the part "the third world should by then of course have learnt that it is unfair not to mention unseemly to fight back"

Enough to warrant a ban on a board that claim to be international, maybe.

I did however see very very very very very worse comments in the OBL death thread. Didn't notice the ban stick being used much though.

Sure I said the 9/11 attack was "unseemly" and "unfair" instead of "a crime against humanity at large", but then, again, I am not from the US.

However, what actually made me decide that this was not really worth my time was the moderators reply when I asked what was wrong with the post.

I messaged you yesterday regarding this incident, maybe you missed it.

Regardless, my question was: what in my post was seen as offensive?

Hello Shibumi

No, I didn't miss your PM, I just had better things to do.

May I suggest you look at your post and the context it was made, and work it out for yourself. Let me know when the light goes on, and maybe your understanding will persuade us to lift your suspension.

Regards

BG

I have been in some contact with the moderators on other parts of the forum, and have been quite impressed. However, answers like this does not exactly impress me.

So, well, -1 member.

May I suggest you change the selling point of this board? "Org. - where americans can feel secure, and moderators grow their E-*****"

I am sure you can find a market :2thumbsup:

Ciao :bow:

drone

09-20-2011, 20:03

Hamata

09-20-2011, 23:08

go take your aurguian to twc they have a hole fourm reserved for debating

Shibumi

09-20-2011, 23:21

You did read post #1, written in green to denote the moderator's official rules for the thread, correct? Everyone was warned ahead of time to be on their best behavior. I'm not really sure what else you expected. :shrug:

Not really, as in reading the OP. I think I just pressed read last (option from the main page, you know), and then the new posts. Are we expected to read OPs? However, what was written in green, is it somewhat related to what is said about posting about dead people?

My point is, that there seem to be some double standards on this international forum.

Joking about slams and claiming it is rude when people fight back = AN OFFENSE!

Joking about sand******* and talking about chopping the balls off of less educated = quite ok.

I think my point is, it is a private forum, you can set whatever rules you want. But just be open about it. Make it clear what is ok, and what is not. Otherwise it is hard for people to adapt, and equally, people of certain political views might (read: will) get frustrated when what is their local mainstream thinking all of a sudden is some sort of horrendeous error.

edit: Pharoah - I have, since some months ago. Thanks for the advice though, no matter how you meant it, it was good advice.

drone

09-20-2011, 23:50

Not really, as in reading the OP. I think I just pressed read last (option from the main page, you know), and then the new posts. Are we expected to read OPs? However, what was written in green, is it somewhat related to what is said about posting about dead people?
How are you supposed to know what the topic is if you don't read the OP? :inquisitive:

Joking about slams and claiming it is rude when people fight back = AN OFFENSE!

Joking about sand******* and talking about chopping the balls off of less educated = quite ok.
Warnings and infractions are not made public unless the member makes it so, only perma-bans are posted.

I think my point is, it is a private forum, you can set whatever rules you want. But just be open about it. Make it clear what is ok, and what is not. Otherwise it is hard for people to adapt, and equally, people of certain political views might (read: will) get frustrated when what is their local mainstream thinking all of a sudden is some sort of horrendeous error.
Again, the rules were stated, quite clearly, in the OP of the thread.

PanzerJaeger

09-21-2011, 02:57

If a similar thread were made about, say, the recent Norwegian terrorist attack, and a member had made a similar "cheers to whoever slammed them" post, do you believe the moderator's response would be any different? The issue is the lack of respect (probably with the intent to troll) in your post, not the nationalities involved. BQ is Irish, Countarch is Australian, and Ser Clegane is German, and I think it is fair to say each leans towards your own critical point of view on recent American foreign policy. Only Seamus is American, and you don't seem to have had any issues with him. That backroom reputation you mentioned in your OP is based on a foundation of common decency and mutual respect, not any deference towards a particular country or countries.

I hope that you will reconsider your decision to leave. You are obviously a smart guy with strong opinions, which makes for an excellent backroom contributor. I was removed from the backroom for similar behavior for a little over a year in the past, and in that time I came to appreciate what that particular subforum represents and why the moderators are so proactive in maintaining decorum. It may have fewer members and it may get less traffic, but the quality of discussion on a bad day is tenfold better than what you can find on most other current events forums.

I know how entertaining it can be to play the game (and engage in all the drama that is associated with it such as this thread), but it is so much more rewarding to work within the established framework to bounce actual ideas off of those of other contributors without all the acrimony, personal insults, and flame wars that can be found on a million and one other forums. Trolling is ultimately a waste of time, but contributing with honest intentions will often yield a better understanding of opposing views, and sometimes even your own.

Tuuvi

09-21-2011, 03:06

It's possible to be anti-american without being a jerk and a troll.

a completely inoffensive name

09-21-2011, 03:30

I'm gonna be the lone ranger here and say he shouldn't have been banned from the backroom. Punished, yeah. But the backroom has a tendency to have disgusting opinions tolerated as long as they are "dressed up" nicely. I can find a few from the past couple months that I was surprised to see go unpunished.

Beskar

09-21-2011, 04:07

Banquo's Ghost is a pretty cool guy.

He might spank you now and then, but then you end up to the point where you tend to enjoy it and that is when you and him become good friends and chums.

ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88

09-21-2011, 15:34

Banquo's Ghost is a pretty cool guy.

He might spank you now and then, but then you end up to the point where you tend to enjoy it and that is when you and him become good friends and chums.

So does that make me and BG good friends now :laugh: :laugh4:??

I love reading these threads.

Dude, take my advice. Going ahead with Mods in public can be fun and stress reveling, it is, trust me, but you never win. Just cuss them out or whatever in your head and just stay good and don't cause anymore problems and you be ok.

:yes:

Hosakawa Tito

09-22-2011, 00:13

I think my point is, it is a private forum, you can set whatever rules you want. But just be open about it. Make it clear what is ok, and what is not. Otherwise it is hard for people to adapt, and equally, people of certain political views might (read: will) get frustrated when what is their local mainstream thinking all of a sudden is some sort of horrendeous error.

Wow.

Rarely have I taken the advice of someone who detest me (even if they might be somewhat late reaching the conclussion, and frankly put - stating the very obvious). I guess that just shows the brilliance of the mods around here.

Flying jetliners into buildings and slaughtering thousands is flippantly justified and considered "mainstream thinking"? That's quite a crowd you think with. I don't detest you, but I do pity you.

Samurai Waki

09-22-2011, 04:32

The backroom may be open to serious discussions and strong opinions; but even if it was a joke, it was in very poor taste and totally insensitive, if you were in my bar.. I'd kick you out too.

phantom

09-22-2011, 08:57

My point is, that there seem to be some double standards on this international forum.
what was your first clue??? your not part of the 'in crowd', either deal with it or go elsewhere. there is one law for you and me and another law for them and their favorites, the people that rise to be 'senior members', and eventually moderators. of course they will deny it and probably call me a troll, but as an observer ive seen it a lot here.

Flying jetliners into buildings and slaughtering thousands is flippantly justified and considered "mainstream thinking"? That's quite a crowd you think with. I don't detest you, but I do pity you.
so debating something like 9/11 has to be done in such a way that it does not offend your sensibilities? its a controversial issue and divides much of the world so your not going to like some of the opinions you hear, if a debate forum does not allow freedom of expression, especially politically: just close it down as its not worth a :daisy: and has pretty much become an exclusive 'old boys club'. if your going to 'moderate' people as soon as they post something which does not conform to your particular set of morals, then any 'debate' is without worth and it is also probably one of the main reasons this place has lost so many members.

Husar

09-22-2011, 11:10

what was your first clue??? your not part of the 'in crowd', either deal with it or go elsewhere. there is one law for you and me and another law for them and their favorites, the people that rise to be 'senior members', and eventually moderators. of course they will deny it and probably call me a troll, but as an observer ive seen it a lot here.

You're not a troll. But not a good observer either. I'm a relatively new moderator and didn't ask for it and so far I have never really found this in-club you're talking about, not as a member and not as a moderator with a bit more insight. Except if you mean that long-standing members know eachother relatively well, but that kinda comes with hanging out for a while, no?

so debating something like 9/11 has to be done in such a way that it does not offend your sensibilities? its a controversial issue and divides much of the world so your not going to like some of the opinions you hear, if a debate forum does not allow freedom of expression, especially politically: just close it down as its not worth a :daisy: and has pretty much become an exclusive 'old boys club'. if your going to 'moderate' people as soon as they post something which does not conform to your particular set of morals, then any 'debate' is without worth and it is also probably one of the main reasons this place has lost so many members.

This is mostly correct, except that the policy here has always been that you should state your opinion with some respect towards other members and in a non-inflammatory way, which is quite possible and has nothing to do with demanding that everybody agrees with anyone's opinion, it's about not starting flamewars. I've seen a forum where this wasn't enforced and the conclusion they came to was to close down the politics section completely because they saw how it affected relations between members who could otherwise be good friends.

In the last months I've often seen Shibumi make very short posts that only seemed to serve the purpose of ridiculing America or other behaviour that could be seen as trolling, so even if he was joking, it's entirely plausible that some would think he only claimed that so his troll post would not be deleted and he wouldn't be infracted. I remember a time where he would make lengthier posts and explain his opinions etc. and IIRC he didn't have a lot of trouble with Backroom moderators then. If he came here to debate, then he should do so and not post a few lines that make him look like he hates the USA and wants nothing but to troll Americans.

I've also taken the liberty to edit your quote a bit since your use of language does not comply with forum rules either, maybe you should read them and note that the forum aims to be PG-13, which means if you look for an adult forum, you may well be wrong here, which I hope isn't our fault.

Drunk Clown

09-22-2011, 14:28

InsaneApache

09-22-2011, 15:20

I'll tell you what. There is no clique. I have over the years received several warnings from mods and even one time, from admin. I've been on these boards nearly ten years so a lot of posters know my style and scintillating, rapier sharp wit. I have friends who joined after me and are now senior members or mods. As several of my friends have become mods, I tend to self police. Because they're friends and I wouldn't want to put them in an awkward position. Just as in RL.

It seems to me that someone hasn't bothered to read the forum rules.

That is all.

As an after thought.

I've come across this phenomenon on message boards several times over the years. Sometimes it's true. Sometimes it isn't. The .Org falls into the latter. It's all about perception IMHO.

Ja'chyra

09-22-2011, 15:53

Can I be in the in-crowd, probably not as a certain German mod wouldn't allow it :P

drone

09-22-2011, 16:00

I think I'm 1 centimeter off of this line with this post. Sure this is our line not the upper class his line. LOL I would still have a mile to travel for that line.
Why would you think your post is close to this "line"? There is no bad language, no personal attacks, no flaming, no pr0n, no spam, no piracy talk. It's a good post that expresses your feelings and opinions in a clear manner. More please. :yes:

Even if it's wrong. :tongue:

Husar

09-22-2011, 16:53

Would you punish one of your friends? Or colleagues?

Depending on what they did, yes.

Drunk Clown

09-22-2011, 17:17

Depending on what they did, yes.
Thread: Gender
Post: #2

There is no option. You shall have to just pick it up.

Here's a quick list of people you've already encountered in the Backroom:

Girls:
Secura - I think, could be a guy.
Louise VI the Fat (I worry a lot about my weight! Hence the name!)
Furunculus - British lass. Usually drunk. Which gets her horny, that little slut.
TinCow - she named herself after TinBull, her husband who also visits this forum.

Boys:
Frogbeast - won't stop talking about his visits to the gym. Bit of a macho, but alright.
Proletariat - 'beer and burps' kinda guy.
Sir Clegane - Collects WWI memorabilia. Smokes cigars. Sportscar.
AdrianII - the Backroom's bitter old man. He's 73 years old. Used to play strategy games in the 1980s, which he still thinks this website is all about.

Unclear:
PanzerJaeger - effeminate gay. Will instantly recognise sixties haircuts and talk about Polynesian interior design.
Lemur - loves men too, but more of a moustache and chesthair type. He's in love with Faggony, the Backroom's resident Muslim fag.
Banquo's Ghost - dunno! I think its a woman but I'm not sure!

Hope that helps! Maybe we can expand on it here!

Please explain this. Where's the censorship?
After all, I get a warning for something simple like this:

Dear Drunk Clown,

You have received a warning at The Org.

Reason:
-------
Warning

Drunk Clown,

Insulting other members by calling them pathetic and their arguments rubbish is not acceptable.

Please refrain from these sorts of aggressive posts. Disagreements must be expressed politely.

Thanks,
CR
-------

Original Post:
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?p=2053365580
If I see one thing here, it's that people over idolize Morrowind. Just wake up.

Most of your arguments are rubbish anyway. Fast travel is a choice, you're not forced to do it. More options is better according to you, so why not fast travel.

This whole point of you missing places around Cyrodiil caused by fast travel isn't a flaw of the game, it's a flaw of you, you used fast travel right?
It's just pathetic, you want to convince others so much that Oblivion sucks that you look for non existent problems.

All the best,
The Org

Above there's a post about: "shoo fly"
How I interpret this is: Get out bothersome boy.
In my book, that's insulting and derogatory. And I call it an aggressive post.

I quoted bad words of a member, this is punishable, but it's the only way to make my point here. (do note that I have more)

Rhyfelwyr

09-22-2011, 17:53

The topic of an "in crowd" came up here before and I think we realised the only thing that could be said about the in crowd was that nobody thought they were in it.

Sometimes there can be a lot of in-jokes or what not but that doesn't really go beyond the bromance between Strike and Louis.

Centurion1

09-22-2011, 18:28

i get banned and get warnings and infractions all the time. If there is an in group i most certainly not among its members.

Strike For The South

09-22-2011, 19:01

Samurai Waki

09-22-2011, 19:22

The reason why a lot of us aren't Senior Members despite being around for a long time is that we've contributed rather little in the day-to-day running of the website. Some people have acquired it simply because they are a force in personality (Devastatin' Dave); but I've never really used the .org for it's intended purpose after about the first year of being around-- besides, it's a Senior Membership for a minor gaming website, so if it doesn't happen it's not that big of a deal.

Louis VI the Fat

09-22-2011, 22:53

Thread: Gender
Post: #2

Girls:
Secura - I think, could be a guy.
Louise VI the Fat (I worry a lot about my weight! Hence the name!)
Furunculus - British lass. Usually drunk. Which gets her horny, that little slut.
TinCow - she named herself after TinBull, her husband who also visits this forum.

Please explain this. Where's the censorship?
After all, I get a warning for something simple like this:

Most of your arguments are rubbish anyway. Fast travel is a choice, you're not forced to do it. More options is better according to you, so why not fast travel.

This whole point of you missing places around Cyrodiil caused by fast travel isn't a flaw of the game, it's a flaw of you, you used fast travel right?
It's just pathetic, you want to convince others so much that Oblivion sucks that you look for non existent problems.
Let me explain the difference. In the bolded bit of your post, below, do you make an insulting and derogatory remark?

Above there's a post about: "shoo fly"
How I interpret this is: Get out bothersome boy.
In my book, that's insulting and derogatory. And I call it an aggressive post.

No, of course not. Words take their meaning in a context. Your quoted 'Shoo, fly' means something entirely different in your post than in the one you quoted. It is pointless to bold two words and take them outside of their context.

This thread lacks Godwin, so here is proof Hitler loved Jews and wanted to kill Germans:

Hitler at rally, 1936: 'Nuremberg is the German mind carved in stone! I love [...] the Jews! Die by the millions will [...] the German people!

It should be obvious what I did there.

I think it should also be perfectly obvious that the 'Louise worries about her weight' post is light-hearted banter. Not at all prone to cause offense. Besides, that fat French cow has since got her weight back under control and looks great in her old dresses again.

Not that this means she goes out pubbing and slutting. Like Furunculus does. That drunk wanton wench. I tell you, this summer during her Labour Party Summer Camp she did all the guys there. Some lascivious little lass, she is. :no:

a completely inoffensive name

09-23-2011, 06:20

As long as the two people are buddies, they can call each other sluts and faggots because we all know it is just playful banter.

phantom

09-23-2011, 11:01

From the watch tower forum description

'A forum to discuss Org policy, organization, and features.'

The description does not say

'A forum to pelt those who do not conform with rotten fruits and buckets of piss'

The forum member made a complaint or raised an issue, whatever you think of his complaint it is clear that he has not been treated with respect, instead the same people are here again trolling and spamming this thread with trashy posts which are obviously only funny to the 'in crowd' (no wait they do not exist!), sadly moderators included. they can do this freely as they seem to have a free licence.

Yet the funny thing is that one moderator refers only to my use of bad language. he does not dare challenge his established circle of friends or the other staff.

'shoo fly' posted by a moderator - equivalent to 'don't let the door hit your ass on the way out', but that's ok here but his posts in the back room or his daring to make this thread is not?

Members following the same trend, copycatting the same behaviour. shameful.

Andres

09-23-2011, 11:03

Andres

09-23-2011, 11:21

Hello Shibumi

No, I didn't miss your PM, I just had better things to do.

May I suggest you look at your post and the context it was made, and work it out for yourself. Let me know when the light goes on, and maybe your understanding will persuade us to lift your suspension.

Regards

BG

I don't know if there's a long history or not between Shibumi and staff, but frankly, that's irrelevant and not the point here. Those who thought that that was the point, completely misunderstood the OP.

I can perfectly understand that moderating is sometimes a frustrating job and requires endless patience. That said, addressing a member in that way in the capacity of moderator is simply not done.

"I just had better things to do", "work it out for yourself" and "Let me know when the light goes on" are not only completely unnecessary additions, they are also condescending and insulting.

I don't know all the details of Shibumi's history with staff, but, as I said, that's completely irrelevant. Such a pm is a "no".

Let me explain the difference. In the bolded bit of your post, below, do you make an insulting and derogatory remark?

Above there's a post about: "shoo fly"
How I interpret this is: Get out bothersome boy.
In my book, that's insulting and derogatory. And I call it an aggressive post.

No, of course not. Words take their meaning in a context. Your quoted 'Shoo, fly' means something entirely different in your post than in the one you quoted. It is pointless to bold two words and take them outside of their context.

This thread lacks Godwin, so here is proof Hitler loved Jews and wanted to kill Germans:
Hitler at rally, 1936: 'Nuremberg is the German mind carved in stone! I love [...] the Jews! Die by the millions will [...] the German people!

It should be obvious what I did there.

I think it should also be perfectly obvious that the 'Louise worries about her weight' post is light-hearted banter. Not at all prone to cause offense. Besides, that fat French cow has since got her weight back under control and looks great in her old dresses again.

Not that this means she goes out pubbing and slutting. Like Furunculus does. That drunk wanton wench. I tell you, this summer during her Labour Party Summer Camp she did all the guys there. Some lascivious little lass, she is. :no:

A whole lot of blahblahblah.

The point remains that calling somebody a "fag" is not allowed here at the .Org. The mere use of the word "fag" in itself constitutes a rule violation, imo. The word is a derogatory term for homosexuals and is in itself insulting, regardless of context.

Saying you danced naked with Fragony at the local gay parade would've been funny in a certain context. Calling another patron "a Muslim fag" isn't. The latter also violates the rules, no matter how much disclaimers and "it's a joke!" you put around it. It's not allowed here; period.

***

A member posted a complaint in the Watchtower. Regardless of the past history of that member, such a complaint needs to be addressed in the respectful, friendly, helpful and civilised way we at the .Org claim ourselves to be known for.

The most important point of the complaint, namely a moderator sending a pm to a member which crosses the line, has been completely ignored. To make it worse, injury was added to injury. Then another member, Drunk Clown, raises another valid point and then we see a moderator trying his best to internet lawyer himself out of it.

Last time I checked, nobody ever died of admitting a mistake and apologising for it.

This thread makes me feel sad.

It also pisses me off.

phantom

09-23-2011, 12:32

I looked at shibumi's warning in the first post and agree that it is both condescending, dismissive and unnecessary. if this moderator does not have the time he should do the right thing and resign. it reminds me of a school teacher telling off school kid, which is not pleasant and should not happen in an internet forum. there is no excuse for a member to be addressed like that by forum staff in what is supposed to be an 'official' communication. it is simply a breach of trust and abuse of power.

It is clear the member was given the warnings for posting that 'joke' about the 9/11 attack, not because a rule was broken, but because the moderator felt personal offence or annoyance. yet as andres posted above, the moderators and their friends are allowed to make similarly tasteless and sexist 'jokes' about 'fags', 'slutting' and 'whores'. if i am to go to the front room now and start a worthless thread about 'fags' and 'whores' what will happen to me and the thread? this is what the real world calls double standards.

unfortunately there are a lot of normal people around the world who did welcome the events of 9/11 and accepting that instead of silencing and censoring those people is the first step towards challenging those thoughts, but both sides need to meet in the middle for any progress to be made. also 'forum lawyering' is a very good term for what is happening here.

if its ok to have threads which say for example that bombing iraq was necessary, carpet bombing berlin was ok and nuking japan was ok, then someone who thinks hitting those two towers with planes also needs to have the same freedom of speech, especially in a forum which is presumably closed to the public for these very reasons?

andres is clearly a 'senior member', but unlike some others I don't need to see his user title to come to that conclusion. thank you andres.

Andres

09-23-2011, 12:53

To avoid all misunderstandings. I agree that the pm Shibumi received in reply to his pm to the moderator contesting the warning is not done. I also agree that some of the comments posted here are not what you might expect from .Org staff. I'm also absolutely not impressed with Louis posting "Muslim fag" and it not being edited and not all by the way he reacted on it in this thread when Drunk Clown brought it up here.

However, the warning Shibumi received, seems correct, imo.

The thread in which he posted was opened by a moderator and the OP clearly stated the following:

Unpopular opinions are not disrespectful as long as they are carefully worded with regard to others' feelings and views. Similarly, opinions are not going to be censored merely because they may go against received wisdom.

That's very clear and is, in fact, nothing more than a reminder of how the .Org is run.

I watched the news fuss about it, had a beer, and thought: "cheers to whoever it was that slammed them"

This clearly crosses the line. Adding "but I'm joking" doesn't change that. There are a zillion better ways to express your opinion on those events.

If Shibumi's opinion is that the he doens't understand the fuss about 9/11 while more and bigger crimes against humanity have been committed which don't get as much attention, then he's entitled to that opinion. It's even a valid opinion. And everybody here is allowed to voice such an opinion, even in that very same thread. But not how Shibumi did it.

The warning in itself is not the issue here; it's the follow-up PM after Shibumi contested his warning that's the problem and on that point, I agree with Shibumi.

:bow:

phantom

09-23-2011, 13:35

Andres

09-23-2011, 14:00

sorry but i simply do not get the 'unpopular opinions' comment. i also do not understand a moderator opening a thread with extra rules at the top?

'unpopular opinions' differ greatly with geographical location and political views. in a political debate or discussion there will be 'unpopular opinion' otherwise it will be a forum where everyone agrees? i do not get what you are trying to achieve with that forum.

I see what you're trying to say.

Are only unpopular opinions to be carefully worded? What about popular opinions? Don't they have to be worded carefully as well? Why is it only the unpopular one that has to be carefully worded?

Yes, that phrasing leads to confusion. If you're asking that opinions are to be carefully worded, then you have to ask that all opinions have to be carefully worded, not just the unpopular ones.

You raise a valid point :bow:

if someone posts something like shibumi posted, i also see no immediate requirement to censor and kick that person out? it is a private forum so what is the danger? it appears that this was done on an impulse and that the moderator in question should apologise.

I don't know the history that lead to Shibumi's ban but I would be very surprised if he was banned only because of this one post. I assume there have been other occasions on which he crossed the line. I'm afraid that's something only staff and Shibumi themselves can clear out for us, if they want to.

I agree that a ban for that post alone seems way over the top, but I'm going to assume there is more than just that one post.

andres, it is difficult to speak out against the system which you are part of, risking losing friends. but you should not let your argument lose its focus now and take steps backward. you should be commended for correcting your friends. if they cannot see that, they are not good friends anyway.

Don't worry :bow:

PanzerJaeger

09-23-2011, 15:07

I see what you're trying to say.

Are only unpopular opinions to be carefully worded? What about popular opinions? Don't they have to be worded carefully as well? Why is it only the unpopular one that has to be carefully worded?

Yes, that phrasing leads to confusion. If you're asking that opinions are to be carefully worded, then you have to ask that all opinions have to be carefully worded, not just the unpopular ones.

You raise a valid point :bow"

Eh.. not really. How does one know what opinions are popular and which are not before they are posted? It is pretty clear that BQ was actually broadcasting to those who do not fall in line with the completely sympathetic viewpoint toward America that is often expected by Americans. He was attempting to open the discussion up as opposed to placing new limitations on it. He was saying that opinions that proved unpopular would not face punishment as long as they were baseline respectful. He was reinforcing a commitment to objective moderation.

Had Shibumi endorsed a version of the 'blowback' theory or any other critique of America and/or its foreign policy in a thoughtful and respectful way, his comments could have been as provocative as he liked and he would have faced no issue - regardless of their popularity with other members. Instead, he chose to shamelessly troll the thread by dropping a three sentence missive into the conversation that served only to insult without adding any depth - as he has done since he joined the backroom. And the thing that trolls feed on is the drama. If they cannot instigate it on the forum, they'll take it to an endless private message game of Hoola Hoop where righteous indignation and equivocation are standard operating procedure. The best way to deal with that tactic is to dismiss it outright.

Zim

09-23-2011, 15:09

Not even speaking as a mod but as a member who's been around quite some time I can confirm that Shibumi has a long history of seemingly purposefully stepping far over the line. Enough so that even I've noticed it and I very, very rarely visit the backroom.

I can't speak for the mod who gave the infraction but I would be very much doubt this wasn't a major factor in the degree of the infraction given, and that it would have happened had a similar post been made in a thread about any other disaster, especially a memorial thread about an event long passed.

I don't know the history that lead to Shibumi's ban but I would be very surprised if he was banned only because of this one post. I assume there have been other occasions on which he crossed the line. I'm afraid that's something only staff and Shibumi themselves can clear out for us, if they want to.

I agree that a ban for that post alone seems way over the top, but I'm going to assume there is more than just that one post.

Drunk Clown

09-23-2011, 18:42

It is agreed that Shibumi's post was crossing the line. But how the particular moderator acted is shameful and needs to be justified. Shibumi's post is not relevant anymore as we all agree it was a tasteless joke not appropriate for this forum. So no more "Shibumi did this, Shibumi did that", we are past that. It's the inequity on this forum which needs to be discussed.

Back to Louis' post.
It is outrageous that the moderators did not adjust Louis' post.
For I do get an infraction for this:

Dear Drunk Clown,

You have received an infraction at The Org.

Reason: Minor Infraction
-------
Drunk Clown,

Asking in a serious manner whether someone is a fascist is a provocation not appropriate for the gameroom.

CR
-------

This infraction is worth 1 point(s).

Original Post:
2053365988

The reich shall prevail I'll wait for the release this game seems intresting
Wo... what? "The reich shall prevail"? You're not some sort of fascist, now are you?

Granted, I crossed the line and I don't harbor any bad feelings for the moderator who infracted me. As I agree with him.
But why am I not spared as it was a joke?

Another example, this time from the "One Word Story III":

Dear Drunk Clown,

You have received a warning at The Org.

Reason:
-------
Warning

Good evening, Drunk Clown.

Thank you for bringing the One Word Story posts of Populus Romanus to my attention, but in doing so I also noticed your own posts, two of which lowered the tone of thread and may have contributed to PR following suit. "Rape" and "sodomy" aren't really appropriate terms to bandy around the Org, after all.

I have changed both of the offending posts to something more appropriate yet in keeping with the structure of the following posts; please keep it clean next time! :3

- Sec.
-------

Original Post:
2053356700

rape

All the best,
The Org

I used rape and sodomy for making awkward sentences, though it was inappropriate. It's no excuse because it's a joke. Just like you said slut and "muslim fag" it was inappropriate no matter in what context. Heck, I was infracted by CountArach (2 points!) for using words like dick and this was in a thread in which we discussed whether we should tolerate some minor swearwords. Subsequently miss Froggbeast was allowed to use such words. Also got a warning for asking Prussian to the Iron (in his women boasting thread) if he was the girl's bitch. Then how is it possible that Louis' can get away with such a post?

I respect this warning from Secura, as she said it was inappropriate for the Org. And NOT saying this forum is PG 13. Which brings me to this point: The game this forum is all about is 16+. How does it make sense that the forum is PG 13? We don't swear because it's more civilized! Not because now and then a ten year old boy gets on this forum. If you say, just like secura, that it's inappropriate to use such words you make sense and know what it's about.

As final,

I demand that Louis gets 2 infraction points when he makes such a post again and that it gets deleted and that his post in gender will be deleted or edited. You moderators would do the same if I made such a post.

Also the moderators and other members who troll and make thrash posts (like Lemur and Psychonaut) should get warnings for making shameful, not-contributing and spam posts. Because, when I troll or make not-contributing posts I DO get warnings. However, this will not happen as we don't want to hurt our own class, don't we Moderators and friends?

P.S.
Respect to Andres, he's the only one of the in-crowd who admits that it's not acceptable that such things happen. In-crowd, you should all take him as an example for how to behave.

Gregoshi

09-23-2011, 19:25

The assumption being made here is that the staff does not discuss these kinds of issue amongst itself. That we are thought of as one mindless, hive entity is rather disappointing.

In-crowd, you should all take him as an example for how to behave.
As should the out-crowd.

Husar

09-23-2011, 19:31

Yet the funny thing is that one moderator refers only to my use of bad language. he does not dare challenge his established circle of friends or the other staff.

And you know this because you're the phantom or what? (hint: you're wrong)

It's also rather hypocritical of you to accuse the moderators of breaking the rules and then blatantly breaking them yourself since you feel secure behind your anonymous account. Hypocrisy isn't just possible on the Moderators' side you know.
It gives me the feeling that you're here to stir up trouble and divide the moderatorship, not something I feel the need to support.
I have no desire to feed a black sheep to a troll because I strongly prefer the sheep in that case.

Maybe I'd be more willing to listen to you if you unmasked your IP and used your regular account, if that is not possible since it's banned then I guess my point above is perfectly correct and you're here to take some sweet revenge on the moderators.

:bow:

phantom

09-23-2011, 20:11

why the hostility?

all accounts are anonymous here, or did you publish your name and address somewhere? i will not go any further than that because i do not have to.

so i am simply here to 'stir up trouble', is that the only way you know how to deal with dissent and disagreement by casting doubt on the users integrity?

so now i am ex banned user? because i have posted something you disagree with? my ip address is unmasked without an ip address i would be unable to connect to this site.

i am not going to defend this any more than that, because your claims are stupid and aimed at ending this uncomfortable thread quickly.

all i can say to this is

QED.

And you know this because you're the phantom or what? (hint: you're wrong)

It's also rather hypocritical of you to accuse the moderators of breaking the rules and then blatantly breaking them yourself since you feel secure behind your anonymous account. Hypocrisy isn't just possible on the Moderators' side you know.
It gives me the feeling that you're here to stir up trouble and divide the moderatorship, not something I feel the need to support.
I have no desire to feed a black sheep to a troll because I strongly prefer the sheep in that case.

Maybe I'd be more willing to listen to you if you unmasked your IP and used your regular account, if that is not possible since it's banned then I guess my point above is perfectly correct and you're here to take some sweet revenge on the moderators.

:bow:

drone

09-23-2011, 20:17

Heck, I was infracted by CountArach (2 points!) for using words like dick and this was in a thread in which we discussed whether we should tolerate some minor swearwords. Subsequently miss Froggbeast was allowed to use such words.
That post (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?131027-Acronym-junction-what-s-your-function&p=2053215508&viewfull=1#post2053215508) contained multiple f-bombs and one use of the c-word, which would explain the infraction.

Lemur

09-23-2011, 20:18

I demand that Louis gets 2 infraction points when he makes such a post again and that it gets deleted and that his post in gender will be deleted or edited.
The Org does not have a mechanism for giving warning points to mods. As Gregoshi indicated, we have extensive discussions about whether a certain action or post was in- or out-of-line. In some cases as mod is asked to pass the case off to someone else; in extreme cases mods have been demodified. I would think this was self-evident, but maybe it bears stating again.

I think you're making a bit much of this "in crowd" notion. This ain't Heathers.

Also the moderators and other members who troll and make thrash posts (like Lemur and Psychonaut) should get warnings for making shameful, not-contributing and spam posts.
What's a "thrash post"?

Husar

09-23-2011, 20:44

why the hostility?

Why ignore the point I made about your hypocrisy?

I also haven't claimed that you are this or that, I said you give me a bad feeling, you're the one who started to assume things about me which aren't true, at least I worded my "accusations" very carefully and told you under which circumstances I'm willing to give your advice more credibility.

Our tech admins found out that your IP belongs to an anonymous proxy, I called it masking since it's not the IP of your home, that is a lot more anonymous than most other members here, if you are not banned with your normal account, why don't you use it?

I don't really see what you proved either, you just come up with more baseless assumptions about me that you write down like they are facts, at least I don't hide the fact that I'm assuming although it seems that you either didn't notice it or ignored it on purpose.

You come here with an anonymous account, which means nobody can even guess your agenda if you have one (not giving your name and address is not the only thing that makes one anonymous, in this context your agenda and history here may be quite important) and then you start suggesting to others that they criticise their friends here, as soon as Andres criticised some moderators, you encouraged him to keep it up.
For someone who doesn't want us to know who his friends are and who his loyalties lie with that's pretty rich IMO.

It's possible that you are genuine but as I said, your behaviour and the fact you are hiding who you are (in the context of this forum) make me very, very suspicious of you.

I'm not anonymous here in the sense that everybody can look up my stance on Watchtower issues from back when I was a member, everybody can have a look at my friends and some of the members here should know that I only warned them and tried to resolve rule breaking in a friendly manner when an infraction may have been warranted (so much about me considering them lower class).

You however, obviously felt the need to start this discussion with a clean history, and I wonder why that is and what it says about your true motives?

Tellos Athenaios

09-24-2011, 00:33

Take the hint, don't do it immediately again and move on. :shrug: For all you know Louis got a whole week's worth of toilet cleaning and feeding the hamster that powers the ORG's server for that one. Come to think of it, compared to before he's been somewhat more quiet and withdrawn from the Backroom since as well. :thinking:

Drunk Clown

09-24-2011, 00:34

You guys fail to see the point. Except for Andres you haven't replied on my argument about Louis' post.

Yet you do view my post made in that swear debating thread and say it was a justified infraction. I never claimed it was unjustified, I do however claim it was injustice that miss Frogbeastegg did not get censored for mentioning "dick" and I did get censored.

But why do you focus on that point of the post? It's all about the inequality on this forum that some people have a free pass to say things other members can't. You begin with the motives of Phantom, it's irrelevant, he's spot on, no matter his motives. It is obvious that you don't exactly know what to say as you guys try to get around the main point. None of the reactions after my post are focused on the main problem. Which I find odd.

I think you're making a bit much of this "in crowd" notion. This ain't Heathers.
I'm not over exaggerating, do you think I would make the effort to address this problem if it wasn't that big? Heck, I find it even this big that it puts me off from posting in other threads. I am really sincere when it's about the inequality on this forum, even in this thread it's present.

And Gregoshi, of course the "out-crowd" should behave too, but it's about you guys this time. Andres is the only one who has the guts to agree that there's injustice in the moderating on this forum.

That moderators can't be warned isn't a problem, you shouldn't even make aggressive/provoking/etc. post in the first place. It's your job to execute the rules, and somebody who does that should under any circumstances follow those same rules they punish others for.

Now as it's late and I want to get some rest, so one last question of which I really would appreciate if the moderators plus other members who are active in this thread would answer this one question:

Was it justified that Louis did not get a punishment (as I do not know what you do to a moderator as you can't warn or infract them, according to Lemur) for making such an inappropriate (and against the rules) post in the Gender thread?

P.S. By thrash-posts I made an error I wanted to say trash-posts which mean posts full of garbage who aren't even worth mentioning.

Tellos Athenaios

09-24-2011, 00:46

It's not an issue really. Not every post is read by a moderator, and I know for a fact that as a moderator you can't be arsed to correct every little toe crossing that fine line all the time. I don't mean to be petty but this is really like one kid complaining to his mummy for telling him off when she didn't tell the sibling off for something else earlier. But.. but... but... he did it, too! Mummy told me early on that just 'cause that village idiot might jump in the lake doesn't mean I should. :shrug:

If there is an in crowd I know of it would be the EB team. I can assure you Louis is not part of it. Anyway, we've effectively got our own suite, with jacuzzi and all and a roomservice for free. And the management doesn't really bother with how messy we make things. Even the public bars where the fans hang out are moderated very leniently compared to the rest of the ORG.

Shibumi

09-24-2011, 00:47

First of all, I have recieved some PMs, cheers guys!

Wow.

I had no idea my post here would stirr up such a hornets nest!

To a lot of you, I say thank you :)

My history has been questioned - yes indeed, I have once before got 3 warnings points over my time here. With that said, I have made a whole lot of posts that did not get warning points, I might stretch it as far as saying I am more than confident in the fact that my posts at large are not deemed worthy of a warning.

However, that is not the main point, is it?

Was my initial joke in bad taste? YES! Yes yes yes. YES.

Did I two posts down make it utterly clear it was a joke, well, YES! Yes yes yes. YES.

Read that again from my perspective: "me as a general US basher says I dont care, but of course, I do, hence I point out this is a joke"

3000 lives lost is 3000 lives lost. It is bound to do what vacuums does. Is it worse than the other tragedies happening on a daily basis, specially ten years after, well, the jury is still out on that one.

That is, however, not my point. I said it was a jest, two posts down I once AGAIN made it clear it was a jest.

Are we supposed to be more sensitive to 3000ish Americans who died, not allowed to jest about it, compared to the thousands of kids who die a day cause of starvation? Are those 3000ish americans who died ten years ago somehow deserving more respect than, say, the gay rights or the struggle of the third world? If so, educate me as to why this would be on an international board.

From the way I see it, this board only allows allowed "different oppinions". We are utterly free to have different oppinions, as long as we adhere to what is ok to be different. To use "fag" as a derogatory term is quite ok eventhough it alienates 1/30th of the human population or so. But don't you dare jest with a fraction of the numbers of people killed by US carpet bombings over Afghanistan, or the people who have died in the war in Iraq because of their Weapon of Mass Destruction because these americans were INNOCENT.

Again, we have some things we can jest about, and some things we can not. This on a "international board".

Then we have the other thing, the way the mods are actually handling this.

"shoo fly" <- Obviously not demeaning. It is written by a mod - gettit? He means that as a jest, we are all sure, and it should be obvious to the reader.

The mod answering my PMs in the way he did - it is BQ, he would not do anything wrong. And if you see his answer to me as derogatory you obviously have a reading disorder.

And about Louis, we all know he mean well, far be it from him to have a malicious thought behind anything he writes. Because he is, you know, perfect, and thus whatever he writes could not possibly be taken as something negative except by someone clearly not meant to be on this board.

PJ, thanks for that post, but no, I could not possibly be back. The term set for me to get back is that I repent - and do I really seem eager to? If not, I am banned for life.

Tellos Athenaios

09-24-2011, 00:58

I thought the problem was the mods had put out a little green notice they were in a serious mood (tm) not appreciative of bad jokes for the day and you decided you had to go ring the doorbell regardless. It's like you're one of those people who just walk into these things. :shrug:

For a comparison our national statistics bureau/agency (charged with tallying all sorts of important and less important stats for the Netherlands) decided that they'd do a housing poll. So they'd cast ballots or whatever and picked me. So they sent me a letter. I read it, I didn't have time/energy/mood for filling in some online questions form which is invariably written by someone who should for the betterment of the Internet be made to live somewhere without Internet or computers and strictly forbidden to ever search or acquire or use any form or semblance of same. So I threw away the letter.

They didn't get the hint the first time, they sent me another one. I threw that one away as well.

They didn't get that one either. So they sent a third. In which they informed me that they might attempt to contact me by phone or in person instead because it was ever so important that they waste my time and patience again. They've made it on my ignore list which shows how remarkably effective they were at annoying me since (a) I don't have ignore lists on the Internet, and (b) RL doesn't even have ignore lists built in yet to begin with.

Shibumi

09-24-2011, 01:29

a completely inoffensive name

09-24-2011, 07:19

The only people who probably have more infraction points and warning than me are Strike and Meth. "Bad history" is such a cop out. I flooded the EB forums with Meth 4 different times with mundane back and forth conversations in 15 threads at the same time.

The ban was over the top because no one liked his opinion and no one likes him.

You all talk as if you are very hard on each other behind closed doors, give me a break guys. It's basic psychology. You are more lenient toward those you know and respect than some "stranger" in the group. You justify (subconsciously) the different lines that you draw because you "know" the motives of those you like and you don't know the motives of those you don't like.

Louis showed his sleezy Frenchman side which is disappointing, because he is much more tolerable when he is trying to be Tocqueville. He should have been punished but wasn't and that hasn't gone answered. But that's because everyone knows Louis and likes him so whatever right?

I don't mind the fact that you long timers all treat each other a bit nicer than others when the time comes to lay the hammer down, but don't try to deny it with clever jokes. Yeah, Strike has a lot of infractions but for the most part his insults are blunt and straight to the point and doesn't have a shred of fancying up to them. No offense Strike, you are my boy and I am not dissing you I am just saying that your insults are the kind that can't be ignored.

It isn't an "in-crowd" it is just a tight network of friends who have been on here a long time and because everyone here is human, they naturally differentiate how they treat those in their sphere of friendship and those that are not.

Most of the time, it isn't bad. But when this **** comes up: https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?137437-Women-know-your-limits
(https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?137437-Women-know-your-limits)
And everyone decides to just roll with it, as if it was some well crafted, thought provoking question that needed an answer? No lock? No infraction? Well Frags has been a mainstay of the org community since '03 so everyone knows it's just Frag being Frag right?

Catiline

09-24-2011, 09:31

You all talk as if you are very hard on each other behind closed doors, give me a break guys.

Ha!

For once I think I can genuinely speak for all of us in rags when I say 'If only you knew'.

PanzerJaeger

09-24-2011, 10:54

PJ, thanks for that post, but no, I could not possibly be back. The term set for me to get back is that I repent - and do I really seem eager to? If not, I am banned for life.

It seems to me that the post itself was the problem, not the opinion behind it. Surely a PM that says essentially the same thing that you've already stated about the post in this thread would go a long way... from my experience the mods only want to have confidence that you understand why the posted crossed the line and that you will make an effort to use more discretion in the future. They don't want to muzzle you!

In any event, it would be a shame to lose your perspective, as much as I disagree with it. :grin:

Most of the time, it isn't bad. But when this **** comes up: https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?137437-Women-know-your-limits
(https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?137437-Women-know-your-limits)

And everyone decides to just roll with it, as if it was some well crafted, thought provoking question that needed an answer? No lock? No infraction? Well Frags has been a mainstay of the org community since '03 so everyone knows it's just Frag being Frag right?

Why would he get an infraction or a lock? Far more controversial subjects have been discussed in the backroom than whether women are capable of being funny. Members are allowed to hold, share, and discuss politically insensitive/incorrect opinions in the backroom as long as they maintain a baseline level of decorum. It's all laid out pretty clearly in a sticky (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?109341-For-Reference-The-Backroom-Rules-Explained) in the backroom, which highlights another important point.

Some members seem to be surprised and/or upset at the fact that some are given more leeway than others in the eyes of the moderators. Well, at least in the backroom, both that fact and the rationale behind it are spelled out pretty clearly.

Trolling

Trolling is the art of provoking angry reactions. Some trolls are subtle, others show all the delicacy of an air-raid on an orphanage. This is an area of engagement that stretches the moderators, as one person's opinion may well look like a troll to their opponent. We tend to look at the poster and their track record, and punish accordingly. Yes, life is unfair. Your best remedy is not to get a reputation as a troll.

There it is: member inequity - stated plainly in the rules. There's no conspiracy, no secret in-crowd, and no subconscious favoritism - there is only your own reputation. If you are a relatively new member who has tangled with the mods repeatedly without contributing much to the forum, then yes, you are going to be given less leeway than a member like Louis, who, at this point, has racked up years of worthwhile contributions. And if you're an old member with years of mod battles under your belt, your posts are going to be scrutinized more closely than those with no such history.

People need to take five minutes to read through the rules. :book:

Drunk Clown

09-24-2011, 12:03

There it is: member inequity - stated plainly in the rules. There's no conspiracy, no secret in-crowd, and no subconscious favoritism - there is only your own reputation. If you are a relatively new member who has tangled with the mods repeatedly without contributing much to the forum, then yes, you are going to be given less leeway than a member like Louis, who, at this point, has racked up years of worthwhile contributions. And if you're an old member with years of mod battles under your belt, your posts are going to be scrutinized more closely than those with no such history.

People need to take five minutes to read through the rules. :book:

That is when trolling is involved, that isn't always the situation.

If your rules said: "Hi, most of our moderators don't take it lightly when you don't agree with us so you better be careful"
And: "We moderators and our favorites are above the rules"

If that was the case, then I would say: "Congratulations, you are sticking to the rules".

And Tellos don't say it isn't an issue, since it is. Of course it's not an issue for you, you are not affected.
Your comparison with mummy and her children isn't that adequate. If it happens over and over again then it gets annoying. At first, as I noticed it since the beginning I joined this forum, I let it be. I thought: "these things happen" just like your mummy comparison. But you can only take so much, at a certain point you are fed up with it. As I am now.

Still noticing there's no answer for my previous question. I still hope you get to a point where you are able to answer.
I also see Louis' post hasn't been edited yet, which I find strange. You say it's PG 13 right? So do it for those children you want to "protect".

a completely inoffensive name

09-24-2011, 21:38

Why would he get an infraction or a lock? Far more controversial subjects have been discussed in the backroom than whether women are capable of being funny. Members are allowed to hold, share, and discuss politically insensitive/incorrect opinions in the backroom as long as they maintain a baseline level of decorum. It's all laid out pretty clearly in a sticky (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?109341-For-Reference-The-Backroom-Rules-Explained) in the backroom, which highlights another important point.
It was blatantly disrespectful, the only thing keeping it from being in 4chan territory is the fact he didn't say, "When will they get back in the kitchen, amiright?". It doesn't matter what his track record is if it was a purposeful attempt at pissing people off. He did the same thing with the eugenics thread, which finally got closed after someone came to their senses about how the OP presented the topic. He then made a second eugenics thread that was baiting again and that got closed. Talk about a track record....

You know, the one thing about the women thread I noticed is that I can't recall a single female posting in it. I wonder if someone actually called out how terrible that thread was, someone would have done something.

There it is: member inequity - stated plainly in the rules. There's no conspiracy, no secret in-crowd, and no subconscious favoritism - there is only your own reputation. If you are a relatively new member who has tangled with the mods repeatedly without contributing much to the forum, then yes, you are going to be given less leeway than a member like Louis, who, at this point, has racked up years of worthwhile contributions. And if you're an old member with years of mod battles under your belt, your posts are going to be scrutinized more closely than those with no such history.
This is stupid and is favoritism enforced within the rules. I contributed nothing to this org for 2 years before making some fun threads I wanted to read that others enjoyed. It was great that the mods took notice of that, but the opposite has to be noticed as well. When someone who has been around for a while starts to dick around, you gotta place the hammer down. Otherwise it is favoritism. Praise where praise is deserved and punish where punishment is deserved. Nothing more, nothing less. Louis can call people fags jokingly in a PM.

Sasaki Kojiro

09-24-2011, 22:16

After all, I get a warning for something simple like this:

If I see one thing here, it's that people over idolize Morrowind. Just wake up.

Most of your arguments are rubbish anyway. Fast travel is a choice, you're not forced to do it. More options is better according to you, so why not fast travel.

This whole point of you missing places around Cyrodiil caused by fast travel isn't a flaw of the game, it's a flaw of you, you used fast travel right?
It's just pathetic, you want to convince others so much that Oblivion sucks that you look for non existent problems.

You said this to someone for "over idolizing" Morrowind and you are upset about being infracted? :laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:

And this was a 0-point warning.

InsaneApache

09-24-2011, 22:55

It was blatantly disrespectful, the only thing keeping it from being in 4chan territory is the fact he didn't say, "When will they get back in the kitchen, amiright?". It doesn't matter what his track record is if it was a purposeful attempt at pissing people off. He did the same thing with the eugenics thread, which finally got closed after someone came to their senses about how the OP presented the topic. He then made a second eugenics thread that was baiting again and that got closed. Talk about a track record....

You know, the one thing about the women thread I noticed is that I can't recall a single female posting in it. I wonder if someone actually called out how terrible that thread was, someone would have done something.

This is stupid and is favoritism enforced within the rules. I contributed nothing to this org for 2 years before making some fun threads I wanted to read that others enjoyed. It was great that the mods took notice of that, but the opposite has to be noticed as well. When someone who has been around for a while starts to dick around, you gotta place the hammer down. Otherwise it is favoritism. Praise where praise is deserved and punish where punishment is deserved. Nothing more, nothing less. Louis can call people fags jokingly in a PM.

The Backroom is all about controversial topics. Otherwise it would be called the Frontroom. It's not the topics, it's the posts in that thread. (all within the rules of the forum, after all we are guest in his house) There are plenty of members on here who are over 13 you know. :wink:

a completely inoffensive name

09-24-2011, 23:48

The Backroom is all about controversial topics. Otherwise it would be called the Frontroom. It's not the topics, it's the posts in that thread. (all within the rules of the forum, after all we are guest in his house) There are plenty of members on here who are over 13 you know. :wink:

Then there is still a problem, because the eugenics thread was closed because upon the way the OP presented the question.

Drunk Clown

09-25-2011, 00:07

You said this to someone for "over idolizing" Morrowind and you are upset about being infracted? :laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:

And this was a 0-point warning.

Are you unable to read? This is (I believe) my third post saying it's not about the infraction I got, but about the inequality on this forum.

It's bull**** that I get infraction for things I post while other members do the same but don't get the infraction just because they are buddies with those moderators.

By the way, I see what you moderators are doing. Let's not post in this thread anymore so it can die. Real professional guys, bravo.

And where's the answer to my previous question? It's yes or no, pick one. But you can't admit you're wrong now can you?

Populus Romanus

09-25-2011, 00:25

Would Andres' name color change have anything to do with the opinions expressed in this thread?

Kekvit Irae

09-25-2011, 01:10

The Org runs on a hierarchy and not a democracy. Members cant overrule Assistant Moderators, Assistant Moderators cant overrule Moderators, and Moderators cant overrule an Administrator. If you have a problem with how a Moderator is acting, or if you feel like other Moderators are overlooking such actions, send a private message to an Administrator. It gets better results than posting about the problem in public. If you feel the Administrator is not helpful, then by all means, rant away, but do at least take it up with them first.

Lemur

09-25-2011, 01:17

This is (I believe) my third post saying it's not about the infraction I got, but about the inequality on this forum.
So you believe that the Org is surmounted by an elitist corps of mods and their pet favorites, and that the rules are unevenly enforced, and so on and so forth. And you're fightin' angry about it.

Do you have any positive suggestion about what should be done? Beyond, say, you being put in charge?

Shibumi

09-25-2011, 01:48

So you believe that the Org is surmounted by an elitist corps of mods and their pet favorites, and that the rules are unevenly enforced, and so on and so forth. And you're fightin' angry about it.

Do you have any positive suggestion about what should be done? Beyond, say, you being put in charge?

I have one suggestion: Kindly ask some of the mods to step down, when they have expired their "best before" date. Replace with people who are more friendly towards the world at large, and members in particular.

I can not believe that some of the mods can still roam free around here.

You have such an excellent set up here, loads of friendly people, loads of people who dedicate themselves to these boards. Why let that be destroyed by a few rotten eggs wearing green?

Shape up and admit that some of the mods are doing a less than perfect job.

a completely inoffensive name

09-25-2011, 02:01

Do you have any positive suggestion about what should be done? Beyond, say, you being put in charge?

Clever ad hominem Lemur. Just throw out a random accusation that he wanted to "take some power for himself" in order to give less credit to the original point of inequality.

Tellos Athenaios

09-25-2011, 02:29

And Tellos don't say it isn't an issue, since it is. Of course it's not an issue for you, you are not affected.
Your comparison with mummy and her children isn't that adequate. If it happens over and over again then it gets annoying. At first, as I noticed it since the beginning I joined this forum, I let it be. I thought: "these things happen" just like your mummy comparison. But you can only take so much, at a certain point you are fed up with it. As I am now.

Still noticing there's no answer for my previous question. I still hope you get to a point where you are able to answer.
I also see Louis' post hasn't been edited yet, which I find strange. You say it's PG 13 right? So do it for those children you want to "protect".

Ho hum. Backroom is run by different types of moderators than the Frontroom is. In the Frontroom they let pass quite a bit except that they move topics not appropriate to the forum. In the Backroom they are a lot more assertive and will slap you with a warning if only you quote some inappropriate language by a fellow poster (well at least that's what happens if you're me quoting PanzerJaeger...).

Now as to the real question: if you feel Louis is in need of some moderator love, you can always report the offending post. That puts stuff on the agenda instead of complaining about it now. Never ascribe to malice and all that. It also helps to ensure that everyone does get treated equally. Even if you are an old timer can appreciate some self-referential joke about members and know that those members will not feel offended about it, doesn't mean others won't. So yeah if it's all so bad you can whack that report button and remind moderators of why and how Louis is a serial forum offender or some such.

Me I'm of the opinion that no system is perfect and by and large we have a relatively well behaved crowd on the forum that by and large manages to keep things pleasant. Of course the new guys are going to be scrutinized a bit more. That's no different from communities in RL. Yes it is entirely unfair when people tend to dismiss the old timer pulling a stunt as that crazy Frenchman who occasionally says silly things like that, he doesn't mean anything by it just can't seem to help it. OTOH he doesn't do it nearly often enough for it to be noticeable by anyone but the hapless new guy who was the unfortunate audience for his joke.

Again, suggest that you take it up with the moderators directly through the report button if it bothers you. Instead of waiting for them to not read the thread (quite possibly they think oh, no not another girl's thread, I've seen enough of those...) and not do anything, say.

Crazed Rabbit

09-25-2011, 02:38

You deserved the PM you got Shibumi.

You have a history of provocative trolling and you've been politely warned. You did not seem to get the point when it was politely made to you. As is often the case with trolls, you came to whine in public when banned, putting on a show of being the well meaning and misunderstood victim.

Some people forget that moderators are people with full time jobs and families and we don't want to spend our days arguing with trolls trying to be internet rules lawyers. What do you say to someone who continues to post provocative trolling attempts after being politely warned? How much time out of our lives should we take to coddle unrepentant trolls?

If you're really surprised by the reaction to your provocations then you obviously did not understand why this forum has the high reputation it does.

CR

a completely inoffensive name

09-25-2011, 02:43

did not understand why this forum has the high reputation it does.

CR

:rolleyes: Usually places with high reputation attract lots of members...

Crazed Rabbit

09-25-2011, 03:36

:rolleyes: Usually places with high reputation attract lots of members...

Like how craft beers attract a lot more customers than Coors Light?

CR

Lemur

09-25-2011, 05:34

Clever ad hominem Lemur. Just throw out a random accusation that he wanted to "take some power for himself" in order to give less credit to the original point of inequality.
You use that word "ad hominem"; I don't think it means what you think it means.

What I'm getting from this thread is a lot of cries of "INJJUSTICE!" and very little constructive suggestions. If anyone wants to put forward proposals for better self-governance, then by all means, draft it up, propose it, put it on the table. Ask anybody who's worked in an organization successfully; you want something done, propose a sensible, workable solution. Merely complaining gets you nowhere unless you're a rich brat at a boutique store.

Speaking of which, let's have a look at what unhelpful suggestions look like:

Kindly ask some of the mods to step down, when they have expired their "best before" date. Replace with people who are more friendly towards the world at large, and members in particular.
And who shall make this determination of which mods have reached their expiry date? If anything, we have trouble retaining mods, given that modding is (a) thankless, and (b) unpaid. Shall we form a committee to decide which mods are expired? And who shall staff that committee? And how will we know when that committee is past its date? Or would you rather have global votes on which mods should be defrocked? But such a vote would need to be anonymous, so who do we trust to monitor an anonymous vote, if the mods are such a bunch of mutual-bear-soaping , clique-encouraging sycophants?

Shape up and admit that some of the mods are doing a less than perfect job.
I would be fascinated to find where you have found anyone -- anyone -- asserting that the mods are perfect, the admins are perfect, the internets are perfect or that love is perfect. ACIN, pay attention if you want to invoke rhetorical/logical fallacies; that was not an ad hominem, but rather a strawman that Shibumi shared with the group.

What does "shape up" mean in this context? How is this "shaping up" to be accomplished? What positive mechanism can you imagine? Are you capable of imagining and proposing a workable solution to this problem that has you so hot under the collar?

Try, please. Complaints without a plan are worthless.

a completely inoffensive name

09-25-2011, 05:46

Like how craft beers attract a lot more customers than Coors Light?

CR
Because choosing between products with different prices attached to them, are exactly the same as two different internet communities which are both free to join?

You use that word "ad hominem"; I don't think it means what you think it means.

What I'm getting from this thread is a lot of cries of "INJJUSTICE!" and very little constructive suggestions. If anyone wants to put forward proposals for better self-governance, then by all means, draft it up, propose it, put it on the table. Ask anybody who's worked in an organization successfully; you want something done, propose a sensible, workable solution. Merely complaining gets you nowhere unless you're a rich brat at a boutique store.

You want to get something done, do it, or at least show a path to it.

You attacked his character bro, instead of tackling his claim. Whatever the logical fallacy is called, that is what you did.

I got a sensible solution here. Make me an admin. I got no qualms with any of you. Centurion pisses me off a lot but I am still facebook friends with him. I got a contest running and I contribute to the game and backroom. I have a stake in this forum, and I always stick up on the side of not overly punishing someone even if what they say annoys me, like 9/11 was deserved.

However, as much as I like you all, none except a very few I would consider friends. I am out of the loop here with these old timers that have been around since before '06. If some moderator dicks around, I will make sure he is punished. People that feel as if they are not in the crowd can trust me.

EDIT: Everyone is complaining because there is no young blood, just oldies tainted with rose colored glasses at all his fellow moderators. So put in some young blood, that is the solution.

Beskar

09-25-2011, 06:11

I have to be honest, I have to sum up this thread in a similar style of Fluffy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNsrK6P9QvI

I believe some responses should definitely be categorised under "You should have known better" (especially the moderators involved) and no need really to bring them up again.

As for the 9/11 thread, I believe I posted a reply saying about the shame of the negative consequences by the actions which has lead to certain injustices. The thing is, posting an insightful view or opinion is perfectly valid, cheering with a beer as you speak of about planes "slamming them" is incredibly immature and you deserve an infraction point and some serious discussions about your future in the Backroom, Banquo's Ghost reply might not be up to standard but you can easily see where he was coming from, he probably took your reply to the infraction with "What I did wrong?" as a trolling attempt and he was simply caught during a bad moment. Doesn't excuse his behaviour but at least it is understandable on a human level. As a note, Glorification of death is never a good thing, it is disgusting, especially when it is aimed against 'innocents' 'citizens' adults and children.

Andres posts some good posts, he has a tendency to do that, big it up to the Belgium guy, Lemur too, my forum-adoptive father.

First thing I saw when I read your name, 'phantom' "Why does he have only 4 posts?", which has me curious, why aren't you posting from your main account? Are you simply here to fan the flames of this incident? You may not be having "Shiny 'senior member' title" as you put it, but I am instantly drawn to the fact you haven't been seen posting around, what does this matter to you, whos' sole contribution to the forum is replying to this thread?

As for the later example of the two warnings, one from Crazed Rabbit (ie: fascist) and Secura (ie: rape and sodomy one). I think Crazed Rabbit might have been a little trigger happy, since in that game there was rumours of extreme right-wing organisations, but the Secura warning was an example of really good moderation on the site. There is no way with a straight face you can consider "Rape" "Sodomy" as valid entries in a one-word story thread and Secura decided to simply politely inform you and did a minor edit with a nice friendly smile.

Beskar

09-25-2011, 06:26

It's bull**** that I get infraction for things I post while other members do the same but don't get the infraction just because they are buddies with those moderators.

Since "Senior Members" are classed as buddying with Moderators, I will show you something...

I posted this:

If I am mafia, so are you. We are the same alignment, dumdum.

I was given a warning and it was edited to:

If I am mafia, so are you. We are the same alignment.

[Be nice - GH]

I said "dumdum" comment in jest / lighthearted, but it was still the same, it was classed as a personal attack. Did I end up raging and posting in the watchtower? No, I understood why he did it, I apologised for wasting GH's time to him and simply continued on plodding around the forums. There is no bias, me and General Handkerchief are the best of friends, bosom buddies, but as soon as I crossed the line, he acted in his moderator duties to correct me.

Centurion1

09-25-2011, 09:51

you didnt get a warning you just got your post edited.

Drunk Clown

09-25-2011, 11:05

I some responses should definitely be categorised under "You should have known better" (especially the moderators involved) and no need really to bring them up again.

As for the 9/11 thread, I believe I posted a reply saying about the shame of the negative consequences by the actions which has lead to certain injustices. The thing is, posting an insightful view or opinion is perfectly valid, cheering with a beer as you speak of about planes "slamming them" is incredibly immature and you deserve an infraction point and some serious discussions about your future in the Backroom, Banquo's Ghost reply might not be up to standard but you can easily see where he was coming from, he probably took your reply to the infraction with "What I did wrong?" as a trolling attempt and he was simply caught during a bad moment. Doesn't excuse his behaviour but at least it is understandable on a human level. As a note, Glorification of death is never a good thing, it is disgusting, especially when it is aimed against 'innocents' 'citizens' adults and children.
Again we are past that. We all agree it was a bad and inappropriate joke.

Andres posts some good posts, he has a tendency to do that, big it up to the Belgium guy, Lemur too, my forum-adoptive father.
Yes, Andres made very good posts and I wished he would continue. Lemur however has only some jokes and some posts to get around the main problem this thread is about.

First thing I saw when I read your name, 'phantom' "Why does he have only 4 posts?", which has me curious, why aren't you posting from your main account? Are you simply here to fan the flames of this incident? You may not be having "Shiny 'senior member' title" as you put it, but I am instantly drawn to the fact you haven't been seen posting around, what does this manner to you, who sole contribution to the forum is replying to this thread?
Why does that matter? He was spot on.

As for the later example of the two warnings, one from Crazed Rabbit (ie: fascist) and Secura (ie: rape and sodomy one). I think Crazed Rabbit might have been a little trigger happy, since in that game there was rumours of extreme right-wing organisations, but the Secura warning was an example of really good moderation on the site. There is no way with a straight face you can consider "Rape" "Sodomy" as valid entries in a one-word story thread and Secura decided to simply politely inform you and did a minor edit with a nice friendly smile.
I do not complain about my infractions, I understand why they are infracted/warned. I said I respected Secura's way of warning/infracting me; it's a standard you other moderators should use too (solution Lemur?).

Now Lemur,

You already want solutions? You haven't even admit it you guys acted wrong! Let me tell you how it works. First you have a complaint, then the guy to whom you complain agrees or disagrees (not yet happened). If that's done we can find a solution together.So answer my question please about Louis, it pretty much sums up whether you think it's fair some people here have free passes.

But yeah, about solutions (as you want them already :no:). Promote ACIN a moderator, I'm sure he would be a great moderator. If there's one thing I notice about him that he's objective.

And Tellos,

Haven't I brought up enough attention to Louis' post? Yet it's still unedited. And no, mods didn't think "Gah! Another gender thread, let's not check this one" as they posted in it, reacting to Louis' post.

Papewaio

09-25-2011, 11:38

The rules aren't flat across the forums.

Most of the misc forums tend towards the other themes of the Org and as such have different rule biases to cater for different events.

Frontroom has the Bade and now the Hunk Threads.

Backroom is the place for politics. It generally more of a mature bent in the arguments with a less mature ribbing of each other. Play with the ball not the balls. Lots of people get warnings... heck I even tried giving warnings (to myself... didn't work, just had to apologise which is harder, much much harder) when I modded there... strange but true. Generally the idea is that you get a couple of points, have some time out, regroup and come back with better arguements.

The Backroom has always had a caustic vein... cleansing or deadly as the case may be... very addicitive if a little bit too base. When we had more assistant moderators it was seen as a place not fair to put an assistant moderator in. It does require a certain dark humour with some fairly big boots to use whilst trying to keep up with a 101 long thought provoking threads. For those who don't understand... try reading everypost in every thread in the Backroom for a week without getting entangled.

=][=

The Backroom is childs play compared with how the Moderators go head to head. We are selected for the forums we moderate in a manner in which we are seen as the best fit for the forum. We are also generally selected to cover time zones and personality types.

Yeap we have a broad spectrum of people with different opinions. They are human and guess what make mistakes, don't assign to malicous intent what can be explained by human error.

We do not always agree, in fact 100% consensus is a rarity. It is a good thing, we have the ability to still function without being droids. We sometimes debate things to the nth degree.

On the whole the moderators want to see the patrons self moderate. None of us what to spend our time sending out warning points, we want to spend our free time as particapents in the fun, not sweeping up after the elephant has passed through.

=][=

Are there in groups... well yes... but often it feels as a moderator one is a pariah and you and just get to sweep up the mess left over by the party hard in group.

Are there people who know each other over a long time, yes and they have a short hand in speech and jokes.

Was the Org a more rough and tumble place in the past. Heck yes. But we do try on the whole keep it PG in the main forums and always have done so.

Some of us in shame have taken the black. Others have left the Org... my biggest regret is Pindar leaving. I'd happily take the black or even hot pink to have him back.

=][=

BTW if you think we only pick our non-warned members to be senior members please in 140 words or less explain the awesome-ness in boundless energy and warning points that is Devastin Dave.

Or that one of our biggest spammers became one.

We are simply not that organised to be facists and we haven't the access to the cool drugs to be the in crowd.

Lemur

09-25-2011, 14:46

Now Lemur,

You already want solutions? You haven't even admit it you guys acted wrong! Let me tell you how it works. First you have a complaint, then the guy to whom you complain agrees or disagrees (not yet happened). If that's done we can find a solution together.So answer my question please about Louis, it pretty much sums up whether you think it's fair some people here have free passes.
No, if you've ever attempted to effect change in an organization, you would know that what you describe bears no relation to "how it works."

As for your "question", which I shall quote for sheer amusement: "whether you think it's fair some people here have free passes," I mean, come on. When do you plan to stop beating your wife? Answer: nobody here has a "free pass." Some people are given a little more leniency than others, but that's due to track record, level of contribution, and general rep. If you're asking that these factors play no role, then you're demanding that human nature be circumvented.

Furthermore, your question about how rules are enforced in the backroom has been answered multiple times in this thread, which bodes ill for your reading comprehension and ability to assemble complicated devices from instructions.

People who are disruptive and/or gain a reputation for trolling will receive more scrutiny, and be tapped with warning points more quickly. It says so in the rules. PJ already made an eloquent post about this, which appears to have missed you entirely.

As for Louis' post, which appears to be giving you 10000 miles per gallon, may I point out that nobody reported it. Ever. You didn't report it. Ever. Nobody took offense and nobody was chuffed about it. His post only became an issue when you raised it here as PRIME EXAMPLE of EVIL DOUBLE STANDARDS.

So what happens when we obey your commands and edit it? Oh, you find another example from the past five years, and demand that SOMETHING BE DONE. And when we fix that? Another.

Sorry, these particular monkeys don't feel like dancing on your command.

A truly tasteless joke about 9/11 in an active thread where a mod has already said PLEASE DO NOT MAKE TASTELESS COMMENTS is a very different creature from an off-color joke that nobody reports or comments upon. Different is different.

Beskar

09-25-2011, 14:46

you didnt get a warning you just got your post edited.

I got a warning as well.

Tellos Athenaios

09-25-2011, 16:17

And Tellos,

Haven't I brought up enough attention to Louis' post? Yet it's still unedited. And no, mods didn't think "Gah! Another gender thread, let's not check this one" as they posted in it, reacting to Louis' post.

Funnily enough, no, the relevant moderator did not post there. You can look at who wields mod powers where by looking at the “Moderator” list in the forum index. As it happens, Secura is the only one with mod powers (aside from Admins) here. She also does the rounds in the Frontroom. Again if you disagree with Louis' post to such an extent either report it, or take it up with her directly.

a completely inoffensive name

09-25-2011, 21:08

no one even replied to my suggestion of making me an admin.

Andres

09-25-2011, 21:52

Would Andres' name color change have anything to do with the opinions expressed in this thread?

No need for conspiracy theories. I stepped down a long time ago out of my own free will. I only joined staff again temporarily, after Tosa's passing. Temporarily became 5 months which was too long. Because I have other, RL, priorities, I decided to step down again at the beginning of this month.

I've said what I had to say here; no need for me to keep repeating myself.

PanzerJaeger

09-25-2011, 22:07

What I'm getting from this thread is a lot of cries of "INJJUSTICE!" and very little constructive suggestions.

A lot of cries from the same four people, one of which doesn't even have the nerve to use his own completely anonymous account and may or may not be one of the other three. :grin:

a completely inoffensive name

09-25-2011, 22:35

A lot of cries from the same four people, one of which doesn't even have the nerve to use his own completely anonymous account and may or may not be one of the other three. :grin:

I don't really have an alt account. I said that for lulz to see what you guys would do.

Montmorency

09-25-2011, 23:19

The Phantom Menace?!?!?!

Beskar

09-26-2011, 00:45

no one even replied to my suggestion of making me an admin.

Because you would simply be too awesome and make everyone else feel little compared to you.

Secura

09-26-2011, 03:52

Wow, that was quite alot of stuff to get through; I've cleaned up the thread and removed everything I deemed irrelevant to the subject at hand or just inappropriate.

I know that this is quite an emotionally-charged subject and that the Watchtower is the place for bringing such grievances to light, but I'd like to ask that you keep it civil when you're posting; alot of good things have been said from both sides, it'd be a shame to drag the discussion through the mud. :3

This applies to both members and staff.

So put in some young blood, that is the solution.

By young blood, do you mean in terms of their time at the forum or their actual age?

I said I respected Secura's way of warning/infracting me; it's a standard you other moderators should use too

I'm always keen to hear feedback about my moderating from both fellow staffers and members, and I'm pleased that you took that warning for what it was, a simple heads-up about your posts; thank you for that.

Having said that, moderation is very much open to interpretation, and as such no two moderators respond the same way to things even if there is some consensus reached; my own moderating may be agreeable to some, but others may see it as pedantic or condescending (I always wonder if my PMs come across as too mother-to-child or not :<)... it should by no means be the basis by which other moderators follow. :P

As it happens, Secura is the only one with mod powers (aside from Admins) here. She also does the rounds in the Frontroom. Again if you disagree with Louis' post to such an extent either report it, or take it up with her directly.

Well-said, sir! The reported post function is there for a reason, don't be afraid to use it!

If you find someone's post in the Frontroom/Watchtower to be offensive, spam or whatnot, you should report it regardless of the colour of the poster's username; I do not treat anyone with favouritism, even those such as Beskar who I know 'IRL', and will always act in a manner appropriate of the robes.

This applies to other areas of the Org too; staff will act on reported posts, regardless of the source. :3

no one even replied to my suggestion of making me an admin.

I can't give a response to that offer (only being a mod myself and all! :P), but I do have something I think you could answer, given your posts thus far; what qualities do you think a staff member should have and which of those do you see/not see in the current team?

The Org's content and moderation starts with you guys, so now's your chance to really tell us what we're doing right and wrong.

Louis VI the Fat

09-26-2011, 04:29

We hold us selfs to higher standards then ordinary members on account of we of got the best edumacation of u all so we desserve preveligis. If u want in too u have to be in kraut with Ser Clegane

~~o~~o~~<<oOo>>~~o~~o~~

Banquo is under no obligation to play along with feigned ignorance. In fact, I am happy he took the responsibility of not indulging it, of not setting a precedent of endlessly explaining and PMing back and forth over the perfectly obvious. God forbid, if he'd done so, the next time time somebody does a quite conscious Fred Phelps* in a remembrance thread, and we don't correspond for weeks about it again, we would've been called out for favouritism.

* Fred Phelps of the Westboro Baptist Church, who heckle funerals of soldiers and policemen and shout at the relatives they had this coming.

~~o~~o~~<<oOo>>~~o~~o~~

I do not think any of this would've been handled at all differently if, say, this happened in a remembrance thread over the shhooting in Norway. The first one to next summer post 'Cheers to whomever it was that slammed those Norwegian kids' in a remembrance thread will get a major infraction. In fact, I remember at least one major infraction that was issued over a troll post in the 'Mass shooting in Norway' thread of three months ago.

So this is not about pro-American bias. (Of a European moderator no less with a personal history of active duty fighting terror groups losely supported by America...)

Kekvit Irae

09-26-2011, 05:32

The suggestion I posted at the end of page two would have ended this debate long before it started. :P

Drunk Clown

09-26-2011, 10:51

No, if you've ever attempted to effect change in an organization, you would know that what you describe bears no relation to "how it works."
Ah, so you know how it works? Please enlighten me.

As for your "question", which I shall quote for sheer amusement: "whether you think it's fair some people here have free passes," I mean, come on. When do you plan to stop beating your wife? Answer: nobody here has a "free pass." Some people are given a little more leniency than others, but that's due to track record, level of contribution, and general rep. If you're asking that these factors play no role, then you're demanding that human nature be circumvented. It appears you have missed my question, cos this was my question:
Was it justified that Louis did not get a punishment for making such an inappropriate post in the Gender thread?
Post #44
Your mention of track record is a total joke, fag is fag, a slur not allowed. And I call what you call "leniency" a free pass, as it's not leniency it's way past that.

Furthermore, your question about how rules are enforced in the backroom has been answered multiple times in this thread, which bodes ill for your reading comprehension and ability to assemble complicated devices from instructions.
Would you be so kind to tell me again, as I clearly missed it

People who are disruptive and/or gain a reputation for trolling will receive more scrutiny, and be tapped with warning points more quickly. It says so in the rules. PJ already made an eloquent post about this, which appears to have missed you entirely.
Nah, I didn't miss it. Post #52.
It appears you missed it.

As for Louis' post, which appears to be giving you 10000 miles per gallon, may I point out that nobody reported it. Ever. You didn't report it. Ever. Nobody took offense and nobody was chuffed about it. His post only became an issue when you raised it here as PRIME EXAMPLE of EVIL DOUBLE STANDARDS. You think a member wants to report a moderator's post if it already has been quoted by moderators? That not something you don't think twice about. If you do it, you're immediately in a bad spotlight. But yeah it does give 10000 miles per gallon, as it's the perfect example. If I would have posted it I think it would be 2 infraction points. That's quite big.

So what happens when we obey your commands and edit it? Oh, you find another example from the past five years, and demand that SOMETHING BE DONE. And when we fix that? Another.

Sorry, these particular monkeys don't feel like dancing on your command.
No, why would I do that?

A truly tasteless joke about 9/11 in an active thread where a mod has already said PLEASE DO NOT MAKE TASTELESS COMMENTS is a very different creature from an off-color joke that nobody reports or comments upon. Different is different.

Any kind of "flaming", slurs, or insults -- addressed to either an individual or a group -- is extremely inappropriate. Please respect etiquette at all times.
I find this quite similar. Fag under slurs. Shibumi's post under Tasteless comment.

Maybe another rule for you:
The Org expects its patrons to remain civil even in the face of disagreements.

InsaneApache

09-26-2011, 11:57

Fag has many meanings. To ban a word that is only offensive to north Americans is hubris on their part.

Lemur

09-26-2011, 14:53

Ah, so you know how it works? Please enlighten me.
Already described it, in detail. I've made change happen in large organizations, far larger than the Org, so I have a little bit of experience with this. The steps, assuming you want it laid out.

Establish problem
Establish scope of problem
Try to determine who has a stake in keeping problem around (there's always somebody who benefits from dysfunction)
Avoid those people as you work through this
Determine chain of command/responsibility
Who can I go to who is (a) as high as possible on the food chain and (b) will listen to me?
Determine proposed solution to problem (this is the crucial bit)
Start selling local stakeholders on the solution / build coalition
Avoid people who have a vested interest in keeping dysfunction around while building coalition
Approach the highest person on food chain in the following manner: (a) We have a small problem that does not in any way reflect on you or anybody you care about, (b) here is an easy-to-implement solution that already has a consensus, (c) by implementing this solution you will look like a smart guy, hep cat and savior of the company.

And as you can imagine, that course of action gets things done.

I call what you call "leniency" a free pass, as it's not leniency it's way past that.
And I am astonished that you did not report the post or express your concerns until this thread, where you are leaning on it like an aging one-hit rock band that has a single crowd-pleasing song which needs to be played with an extended instrumental and audience singalong. You think this is entirely about Louis and his mistake; I think that's a dodge at best. Indeed, the fact that you are only able to cite a single example of questionable mod behavior points to the barrenness of your argument. If you were on a board where the mods were running wild (and I've been on a few (http://www.tacticalunderground.us/smf/)) you would have hundreds of examples you could reference. You wouldn't be able to swing a dead cat without hitting a mod abusing his or her powers. But what's your ace in the hole? A non-native English speaker misusing a word for ciggies and gay folks. Weak.

You think a member wants to report a moderator's post if it already has been quoted by moderators? That not something you don't think twice about. If you do it, you're immediately in a bad spotlight.
Ah, so not only is there an in crowd and an out crowd, there's also a pervasive climate of fear. The Org is a rather wretched place, when looked at from your perspective; kind of like North Korea, but with less starvation.

Maybe another rule for you:
MM-hmmmm. Do tell. I do not perceive the inherent value in all of the fuss you have kicked up. From an organizational change perspective, your actions have been ill-conceived, ill-timed and ill-spent. If your goal is to change something, then you have gone about it completely backwards, less like a strategist working on large-scale change and more like an angry kid in a retail store. So from the perspective of (a) something is wrong and (b) I want to fix it, I just don't see how your actions line up.

Secura

09-26-2011, 15:26

Was it justified that Louis did not get a punishment for making such an inappropriate post in the Gender thread?

As one of the local moderators of the thread in question, I was one of the first ports of call in the event that the post was to be moderated, so I can only apologise that Louis' post has drawn so much ire.

You see, I read the post several times (with much eyerolling on my part, it must be said), and decided that the post was typical Louis, having seen his interactions with the moderating team and various Tavern patrons during my time at the Org. However, rather than leave it be entirely, I decided to wait and see if anyone reported the thread, especially Fragony who I felt to be the most likely to be offended by what was said... I wasn't certain if the 'fag' thing would be taken as friendly banter or a sly dig, given it's context here in the UK may not be the same in the Netherlands or wherever else.

Ultimately, the post wasn't reported and I let it slide; in hindsight, that may not have been the best decision and I apologise again for it.

You think a member wants to report a moderator's post if it already has been quoted by moderators? That not something you don't think twice about. If you do it, you're immediately in a bad spotlight.

I stand by what I said earlier, and still encourage you to stand your ground and report the post regardless of who says it and who has quoted it; you shouldn't feel uncomfortable or hesistant, the Org is as much your site as anyone's. :3

Drunk Clown

09-26-2011, 15:52

Already described it, in detail. I've made change happen in large organizations, far larger than the Org, so I have a little bit of experience with this. The steps, assuming you want it laid out.

Establish problem
Establish scope of problem
Try to determine who has a stake in keeping problem around (there's always somebody who benefits from dysfunction)
Avoid those people as you work through this
Determine chain of command/responsibility
Who can I go to who is (a) as high as possible on the food chain and (b) will listen to me?
Determine proposed solution to problem (this is the crucial bit)
Start selling local stakeholders on the solution / build coalition
Avoid people who have a vested interest in keeping dysfunction around while building coalition
Approach the highest person on food chain in the following manner: (a) We have a small problem that does not in any way reflect on you or anybody you care about, (b) here is an easy-to-implement solution that already has a consensus, (c) by implementing this solution you will look like a smart guy, hep cat and savior of the company.

And as you can imagine, that course of action gets things done.
I prefer bringing attention to a problem this way. It actually has quite a big impact and raises awareness.

And I am astonished that you did not report the post or express your concerns until this thread, where you are leaning on it like an aging one-hit rock band that has a single crowd-pleasing song which needs to be played with an extended instrumental and audience singalong. You think this is entirely about Louis and his mistake; I think that's a dodge at best.
No, that's what you think. You think it's all about me wanting to bring Louis to justice. It's the perfect example.

Indeed, the fact that you are only able to cite a single example of questionable mod behavior points to the barrenness of your argument. If you were on a board where the mods were running wild (and I've been on a few) you would have hundreds of examples you could reference. You wouldn't be able to swing a dead cat without hitting a mod abusing his or her powers.
Haha, no you and other mods are proving my point pretty well too in this thread. You are disrespectful and hostile.

But what's your ace in the hole? A non-native English speaker misusing a word for ciggies and gay folks. Weak.
Are you using Louis being a non-native English speaker as an excuse? Although most posts are joking he is great in formulating sentences and I believe his grasp in the English language is more than good.

Ah, so not only is there an in crowd and an out crowd, there's also a pervasive climate of fear. The Org is a rather wretched place, when looked at from your perspective! Kind of like North Korea, but with a little bit less starvation.
Well done, make me the bad guy.

MM-hmmmm. Do tell. I do not perceive the inherent value in all of the fuss you have kicked up. From an organizational change perspective, your actions have been ill-conceived, ill-timed and ill-spent. If your goal is to change something, then you have gone about it completely backwards, less like a strategist working on large-scale change and more like an angry kid in a retail store. So from the perspective of (a) something is wrong and (b) I want to fix it, I just don't see how your actions line up.

So, first you said I had my head up my butt. I'm an angry kid in a retail store. My arguments are really weak. I have apparently a very puny mind. And you edited your post over 20 minutes, but first it said you were doubting my integrity. That I'm trolling here and nothing else but being disruptive.

How do your action line up as a moderator?

Lemur

09-26-2011, 16:00

I prefer bringing attention to a problem this way. It actually has quite a big impact and raises awareness.
Ah, "raising awareness," that old saw. There are lots of ways to "raise awareness." You might want to consider the efficacy of various means.

No, that's what you think.
Yes, when I write I express what I think. I don't see how that's remarkable or intriguing.

You are disrespectful and hostile.
To quote an Orgah, that's what you think.

Are you using Louis being a non-native English speaker as an excuse?
Dear lord in heaven, you are stuck on repeat. Andres has repeatedly argued that a simple apology from Louis would resolve this issue; I do not agree, largely because I am unsure of your motives.

[Y]ou edited your post over 20 minutes, but first it said you were doubting my integrity. That I'm trolling here and nothing else but being disruptive.
Yeah, I edited my post because I wanted to be more clear about how I feel your stated goal does not line up with your behavior. I believe I am allowed to modify my posts when I think I am being overly aggressive, yes? I believe that is somehow related to exactly what you have been talking about, yes?

I believe there are effective ways to cause change in an organization, and that "raising awareness" is the typical rationale put forward by people who have not given it any serious thought.

So, first you said I had my head up my butt. I'm an angry kid in a retail store.
No, I said your question was in that condition, and I compared complaining for complaining sake with no offered solution to an angry kid in a retail store. In both cases I was referencing your ideas, not your person. I am allowed to engage your ideas with as much energy as I like.

How do your action line up as a moderator?
I am an Orgah first and foremost. Trust me, if I were not saddled with the green, I would not be a tenth as gentle as I am being now.

Andres

09-26-2011, 16:10

Drunk Clown is an Orgah too. Instead of trying to figure out his motives, why not just addressing the points he makes?

If a valid point is raised, then that has to be addressed, regardless of who made the point or what the motives behind the making of said point are. The point is relevant, the rest isn't and just causes you to lose focus on what is actually being said by the member in question.

Let's say Drunk Clown is on a mission to overthrow the .Org dictatorship and somewhere in his posts, he points out that a staff member said 1+1=3, then there's no shame in admitting that indeed that staff member made a mistake and that 1+1 is of course 2.

Why you simply dismiss everything he says, because of his suspected "motives" or the way he handles this (not all of us have experience in changing policy in large organisations following the Lemur 10 steps program (tm) ), goes beyond me.

Lemur

09-26-2011, 16:17

Drunk Clown is an Orgah too. Instead of trying to figure out his motives, why not just addressing the points he makes?
Motive matters. To pretend otherwise is either mendacious or criminally naive.

Let's say Drunk Clown is on a mission to overthrow the .Org dictatorship and somewhere in his posts, he points out that a staff member said 1+1=3, then there's no shame in admitting that indeed that staff member made a mistake and that 1+1 is of course 2.
Indeed, but Drunk Clown's litany of complaints is long and detailed, and moves from a specific act of stupidity to what he appears to believe is an oligarchic group of despotic incrowd free-pass persons and a pervasive climate of fear. I'm not Louis so I won't speak for him.

To quote someone else, mods are not word filters. There's software for that. Mods are expected to use judgment and consider context. This means we have human justice, which is imperfect, but less horrid than machine justice. If someone posts something that is going to create a flame war, mods are expected to step in. If, on the other hand, an ill-conceived post like Louis's slips through and causes no fuss, it's entirely on the judgment of the mod for that sub-forum. The spine of Drunk Clown's complaint is that the rules are enforced unevenly. That is a feature, not a bug.

Why you simply dismiss everything he says, because of his suspected "motives" or the way he handles this (not all of us have experience in changing policy in large organisations following the Lemur 10 steps program (tm) ), goes beyond me.
If I were "dismissing" what he has to say I would simply refrain from posting; instead I am engaging him and challenging his ideas. I have refuted and/or challenged most of his talking points (which includes outlining in picayune detail how you get things done, a fact that is apparently less than worthless to both you and him). Why you think that is inappropriate goes beyond me.

Beskar

09-26-2011, 16:24

Fag has many meanings. To ban a word that is only offensive to north Americans is hubris on their part.

'Damn' is banned as it is apparently very offensive in Norway. So it would make sense to do the same with other words. Though, they won't be banning 'Democracy' as a swearword just because it is one in China, though.

Motive matters. To pretend otherwise is either mendacious or criminally naive.

I have to agree with Lemur here, motive matters. What is the point in responding when some peoples motive is only to 'troll' or attempt to cause trouble ?

Louis and other mods might have already been addressed or spoken to or undergoing investigation. Either way, it will be handled and dealt with and it will not be public, unless you see name of members changing colour. So if that is the issue, it is getting tackled.

What are the other issues? Simply list them.

Secura

09-26-2011, 17:32

As one of the local moderators of the thread in question, I was one of the first ports of call in the event that the post was to be moderated, so I can only apologise that Louis' post has drawn so much ire.

Silly Secura... this is what a lack of sleep and lots of work does to you!

It seems I was of the belief that the Gender topic was in the Frontroom when it was actually right here in the Watchtower and thus I was completely unable to moderate it at the time. In fact, the WT had no assigned moderator at that point whatsoever, and it's unlikely that Fragony would have seen such a comment to be offended by it, frequenting the Tavern as he does, whereas he may have done so had it been in the FR as per my initial belief.

Not that this excuses what has happened, indeed what I said still stands; I'm sorry that I didn't act on it at the time, but you can be certain that now I have moderating abilities in this subforum, the same will not happen again.

Strike For The South

09-26-2011, 17:37

It's very interesting, a free message board, whose staff is all volunteer, about a highly popular game with plenty of other messages boards illicits such a vitriolic reaction.

I do hate to quote Shakespeare so close to lunch but, Something’s rotten in the state of Denmark

Drunk Clown

09-26-2011, 19:37

Yes, when I write I express what I think. I don't see how that's remarkable or intriguing.
Of course I mean it in a different way. I meant to say, you think it's all about Louis' post, for me it's about the inequality. Louis' post just functions as evidence, good evidence that is.

Yeah, I edited my post because I wanted to be more clear about how I feel your stated goal does not line up with your behavior. I believe I am allowed to modify my posts when I think I am being overly aggressive, yes? I believe that is somehow related to exactly what you have been talking about, yes? You are allowed to do that yes. Still I find the thing you say do not line up as being respectful.

I believe there are effective ways to cause change in an organization, and that "raising awareness" is the typical rationale put forward by people who have not given it any serious thought.
As I PM'd you I did not expect this to grow this big and I would've thought it went something like this: Moderators admit there's inequality and from then on they would try something like that would not happen again (Secura already did). Instead a lot of members condone the word fag, to my disbelieve.

No, I said your question was in that condition, and I compared complaining for complaining sake with no offered solution to an angry kid in a retail store. In both cases I was referencing your ideas, not your person. I am allowed to engage your ideas with as much energy as I like.
My ideas and conviction is what make me, it's who I am. What I think is what makes my personality. However, you think I troll, so not making the link as I do.

I am an Orgah first and foremost. Trust me, if I were not saddled with the green, I would not be a tenth as gentle as I am being now.
That is good to hear.

Husar

09-26-2011, 19:45

Drunk Clown, concerning the conceived lack of a reaction from me in terms of punishing Louis and your general behaviour here, I have two things to say which also count for the moderator team of course, but the second is especially for you as I will explain:

How can you say to your brother, 'Brother, let me take the speck out of your eye,' when you yourself fail to see the plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye.

“Therefore, the kingdom of heaven is like a king who wanted to settle accounts with his servants. 24As he began the settlement, a man who owed him ten thousand talentsg was brought to him. 25Since he was not able to pay, the master ordered that he and his wife and his children and all that he had be sold to repay the debt.

26“The servant fell on his knees before him. ‘Be patient with me,’ he begged, ‘and I will pay back everything.’ 27The servant’s master took pity on him, canceled the debt and let him go.

28“But when that servant went out, he found one of his fellow servants who owed him a hundred denarii.h He grabbed him and began to choke him. ‘Pay back what you owe me!’ he demanded.

29“His fellow servant fell to his knees and begged him, ‘Be patient with me, and I will pay you back.’

30“But he refused. Instead, he went off and had the man thrown into prison until he could pay the debt. 31When the other servants saw what had happened, they were greatly distressed and went and told their master everything that had happened.

32“Then the master called the servant in. ‘You wicked servant,’ he said, ‘I canceled all that debt of yours because you begged me to. 33Shouldn’t you have had mercy on your fellow servant just as I had on you?’ 34In anger his master turned him over to the jailers to be tortured, until he should pay back all he owed.

35“This is how my heavenly Father will treat each of you unless you forgive your brother from your heart.”

Source: http://biblos.com/

Basically I've tried to be nice with you when you stepped way over the line and now you call for me to punish Louis for something that is at best hardly worse than what you did and obviously very, very controversial?

I suggest we all take a step back and relax, not to forget what happened, but to calm down and get some perspective now that things have heated up way beyond what I find reasonable. Your argument was taken seriously, at first anyway, but the more impatience you show and the more demands you make, the less sincere it seems, especially since you're not an angel yourself and often show a very aggressive tone in your own posts, leading many to believe you're just a troll.

If you fail to see the point in that, I suppose you want me to ban you the next time you encourage people to post rape jokes in the Arena, right?

So again, take a step back, relax, things will get sorted, but not in a heated, unthoughtful swing of the axe. :bow:

Beskar

09-26-2011, 21:35

Lemur said about solutions, so I have a proposal for a possible solution.

There are arguments about Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? "Who watches the watchmen?", did Moderator A step too far? Did Moderator B did something questionable? Did you feel you received a warning unfairly and you don't know who to turn to?

What about an Independent Complaints Commission, ICC or you can make it something more Org-like with a reference to a ninja clan or similar.

This is how it would work:

There are three-to-five people (non-staff members, possibly ex-moderators / Senior Members) who have their little forum and address anything there together. Based on their verdict and decisions, they put forward recommendations (since they have no actual powers, they cannot make rulings, but their decision could be treated as such) towards the moderators/staff/Ser Clegane on what their opinion of the matter is. This is merely for an more "Independent View" since having such discussions between the staff members themselves can get difficult and it dampens moral, so having a trusted outside source is a good solution.

Since everyone seems to agree with Andres and like him, perhaps he should lead such a hypothetical team with two people of his own choosing which he values the contributions and opinions of.

The idea of odd-numbers being for tie-breaking, which Andres himself hypothetically would be the tie-breaker as the leader of the operation.

These could have an extra role of handling arguments and infighting between any moderation staff too.

The idea of such a body is that it has trusted orgah's who can handle things in a mature matter and not too directly involved in any of the arguments themselves. Being trusted Orgah's, the moderator staff would also trust their judgements on such matters.

So if this is put into practise, what is the most likely outcomes?:

In order:
1. Infrequent discussions upon practises and issues which simply compliment the current way of doing things. (55%)
2. Virtually unused, redundant, another layer of bureaucracy. (30%)
3. Frequent and very-active discussions upon practises and issues which add a lot to the current way of doing things. (12%)
4. Completely empty, simply taking up a few kb's of data on the server. (2.9% Chance)
5. They are neck-with-neck with majority of the moderator team and they all hate eachother (Less than 1% chance)

Ser Clegane

09-26-2011, 22:26

OK – where to start?

First thing – I would like to apologize for not having been able to to join this thread earlier. Ideally, I should have been – but there you are.
Some thoughts – in a somewhat random order:
There seems to be little disagreement that the post that triggered Shibumi’s Backroom ban was of very poor taste and justified a formal reaction.
The post was a rather obvious and rather blunt attempt to provoke in a thread that was explicitly made with the purpose to have a respectful exchange.
A ban might be seen as a harsh reaction – but the ban from a part of the forum is a next step that should not be too surprising when other steps are ignored.
The tone in Banquo’s PM reply might appear “flippant” and – standing on its own – perhaps condescending; however it is not standing on its own – it is the reaction to the somewhat baffling question what might have been wrong with the post in question – after a track record of similar forum rule violations.
Yes – patrons deserve that staff takes the time to clarify issues – at the same time voluntary staff should also not be expected to play along indefinitely with patrons that are perfectly aware of what the issue was and simply would like to extend the “fun” via PM (in the context I found the e-***** remark somewhat ironic).

About the issue of inequality – I acknowledge that this issue exists to a certain extent. I think it would be silly to claim otherwise. We have quite a number of moderators, each of them being given a certain room for interpretation of the forum rules – we do not hand out a thick manual and we do not conduct 4-week boot camps for new moderators. The role of the moderators is to make sure that a friendly atmosphere is maintained in the part of the board for which they are responsible.
The nature of a subforum as well as the individual moderator play a role in how the rules are applied – and there are certainly differences between e.g. the Backroom, the Frontroom and the Arena.
We try to be consistent in how rules are applied and there are frequent discussions and requests for second (or more) opinions among staff to make sure that we are aligned – but there will be inconsistencies – we are neither clones nor saints.
While I acknowledge inconsistencies, I do however not agree that we systematically separate between the “in”-crowd and the rest. As has been mentioned before – often we react to reported posts while other posts that also violate forum rules seems to slip through the cracks.
It is certainly easy to pull examples of “senior member” or “moderator” posts that were not in line with forum rules and went “unpunished” – however, it will be as easy to find such posts of patrons that are not part of the perceived “in”-crowd.

It has been observed that we should not dismiss valid arguments, just because they come from patrons that might not be “liked” by staff. This is a fair point. It should be understandable however that people generally tend to get somewhat defensive when they are lectured about good manners by people who consider it to be perfectly fine and mainstream to be insulting and dismissive in their own posts on a regular basis.
Remarking that the Watchtower is no place to pelt people who voice different opinions with rotten fruit and tell them “don't let the door hit your ass on the way out” is a valid point – it leaves a bitter taste of dishonesty when it comes from a patron whose (IIRC) very first post on this board and in a Watchtower thread was “If total war center is what floats your boat - the door is wide open”.

Please excuse the longwinded post – if you don’t want to read it perhaps the following quote from the sig of an absent staff member summarizes best what we should all keep in mind to make sure that this is a friendly place to be at:

Be well. Do good. Keep in touch.

:bow:

Populus Romanus

09-27-2011, 00:23

I like the way moderation is done. The .Org has friendly mods, and if that comes at the cost of some minor bias then I don't care. I actually find it amusing. I much prefer jovial mods to Crandar.

Visor

09-27-2011, 03:01

The tone in Banquo’s PM reply might appear “flippant” and – standing on its own – perhaps condescending; however it is not standing on its own – it is the reaction to the somewhat baffling question what might have been wrong with the post in question – after a track record of similar forum rule violations.

If I understand what you're saying correctly.... I will have to disagree.

I can perfectly understand that moderating is sometimes a frustrating job and requires endless patience. That said, addressing a member in that way in the capacity of moderator is simply not done.

"I just had better things to do", "work it out for yourself" and "Let me know when the light goes on" are not only completely unnecessary additions, they are also condescending and insulting.

Andres sums it up perfectly.

I must admit, that the moderation in the Throne Room I have no problems with. I am aware that it isn't the backroom, and the topics that have been discussed are not the same, but I, and I don't think anyone else has any problems with Zim's or phonicsmonkey's moderation there. Props to them, maybe you should take a leaf out of their book. :tongue:

Anyway, I would like to agree with whoever said that Louis's comments were inapporopriate. I suppose some kind of punishment would be necessary, but I wouldn't know what you guys have to do.

And I'd like to point out that some of the comments I've made in the Frontroom, I'm quite surprised I haven't been infracted for. (That was probably a bad idea to point that out, but I don't think I've gotten any favouritism, and I would be surprised if I did.)

EDIT: Besides BG's message, and CR's police thread thingy (which is more a personal gripe of mine) I haven't really noticed any problems with the moderation itself.

Shibumi

09-27-2011, 22:13

*coughs a little*

Sorry for interrupting you all.

I am just trying to sum this thread up:

* I get a permanent ban from one of the sub forums: Reason is - Joking about 9/11. I very much clearly stated it was a joke, even clarified the point two posts down.

* Reason given: I Should have read the OP dictating the 9/11 thread were held under special rules. I did not read that OP, I just clicked last post, scrolled up some few posts, and anwered in the same general direction as those posts "What I thought when it happened". I really did think that compared to some of the stuff I have read in the backroom my post was nothing but well mannered.

* Somehow you can not joke about 9/11. You can joke about pretty much anything else, fags, africans, women, immigrants, polish people - list goes on- but don't you dare joke about some 3000 americans who died some ten years ago.

* A thread about 9/11 is sensitive to our american friends. More so than threads using gay in a derogatory meaning is sensitive to our gay members. Also immigrants will not take offence to slurs about immigrants. Do not get me started on the arab and negro thing. Thank god we have such a nice board with people properly into the american thinking, so we don't have to cater for the more unwanted beings in society.

* Members are asked to be polite and respectful, the mods however can go rampant. Before flicking me the bird, I had been nothing but respectful to BQ.

I only made the opening post because I have seen how much some of you care about this board, and I wanted to share what I think is one of the reasons as to why it is falling behind and struggling to stay boyant.

Cheers, and thanks for the tactical insights towards Empire and TWS2. Also thanks to some of the political thinkers in the backroom - Panzer Jaegr, Fragony and Rhy(whatever) comes to mind.

Beskar

09-27-2011, 22:29

*coughs a little*
* I get a permanent ban from one of the sub forums: Reason is - Joking about 9/11. I very much clearly stated it was a joke, even clarified the point two posts down.

* Reason given: I Should have read the OP dictating the 9/11 thread were held under special rules. I did not read that OP, I just clicked last post, scrolled up some few posts, and anwered in the same general direction as those posts "What I thought when it happened". I really did think that compared to some of the stuff I have read in the backroom my post was nothing but well mannered.

* Somehow you can not joke about 9/11. You can joke about pretty much anything else, fags, africans, women, immigrants, polish people - list goes on- but don't you dare joke about some 3000 americans who died some ten years ago.

* A thread about 9/11 is sensitive to our american friends. More so than threads using gay in a derogatory meaning is sensitive to our gay members. Also immigrants will not take offence to slurs about immigrants. Do not get me started on the arab and negro thing. Thank god we have such a nice board with people properly into the american thinking, so we don't have to cater for the more unwanted beings in society.

Quit trolling.

To Sum up the thread - Everyone agrees you was completely out of line and you started "playing the victim" because of your own actions caused you to face repercussions and you was fully aware of what you was posting. This post alone shows exactly how much of a troll you are and not sincere in the slightest. If you was at least sincere about any of this, you would be remorsefulness and apologise for offending people, you are clearly not.

Good thing this forum has an ignore function, I am going to use it.

Shibumi

09-27-2011, 22:34

Quit trolling.

To Sum up the thread - Everyone agrees you was completely out of line and you started "playing the victim" because of your own actions caused you to face repercussions and you was fully aware of what you was posting.

Good thing this forum has an ignore function, I am going to use it.

I think you might be wasting your time with the ignore function. No?

Kralizec

10-02-2011, 21:45

* Somehow you can not joke about 9/11. You can joke about pretty much anything else, fags, africans, women, immigrants, polish people - list goes on- but don't you dare joke about some 3000 americans who died some ten years ago.

* A thread about 9/11 is sensitive to our american friends. More so than threads using gay in a derogatory meaning is sensitive to our gay members. Also immigrants will not take offence to slurs about immigrants. Do not get me started on the arab and negro thing. Thank god we have such a nice board with people properly into the american thinking, so we don't have to cater for the more unwanted beings in society.

You can't tell by my looking at my posts, but I can enjoy almost every sort of humour - no matter how objectionable. I have an impressive portfolio of holocaust jokes, for example, but I only share them with friends who share my refined tastes and who can appreciate a joke for what it is. I imagine that a joke at the expense of women or minorities might be acceptable on the Org depending on the context or the delivery (probably not, most of the time), while one at the expense of thousands (or millions) of murdered people is not. And yours wasn't even funny.

As for Louis' post, the only way that could have been more obviously in jest was to add "disclaimer: this is a joke" at the end. I can respect the opinions of say, Andres or Crazed Rabbit, when they say that it's still inappropriate. What bothers me is when it's coming from members who routinely excrete foul language, as a constant stream with no coherence or solid substance.

Drunk Clown

10-03-2011, 21:40

As for Louis' post, the only way that could have been more obviously in jest was to add "disclaimer: this is a joke" at the end. I can respect the opinions of say, Andres or Crazed Rabbit, when they say that it's still inappropriate. What bothers me is when it's coming from members who routinely excrete foul language, as a constant stream with no coherence or solid substance.

If you're talking about me you misunderstood me. I'm not offended by the use of the word fag. I'm offended that when I post bad words I get censored because this forum is PG 13 and when someone else does, who has a higher rank, it does not get censored.

Kralizec

10-05-2011, 23:07

I don't think that the post we're talking about should have been censored, regardless of who wrote it. The point is that it was an elaborate, obvious joke (Louis even made fun of himself) as opposed to "OMG lol fag" (note: I'm not suggesting that this is you) I can understand why people think the word should be banned regardless of how it's used, but it's clear to me the two are different.

It's worthy to note that moderation on this board, or probably anywhere, isn't always perfectly consistent, and not necessarily because of bias. Without telling a long story, I once got a warning for doing something. A couple of weeks later another mod was explaining moderating policy in an unrelated thread, and implied that what I did would have been permissable. I didn't publicly complain about it, but I did ask for clarification, and the answer was basically that all moderation is done on a case-by-case basis.

Sarmatian

10-06-2011, 12:08

ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88

10-06-2011, 16:45

I got 5 warning points bya overzealous Mod by being saratic during the Nowreaigen shooting and I never was intending to insult the people that was killed.

I think we need to stop being hypocritical. Ethier you warn EVERYONE for Anti-Muslim, Anti-American, Chrstian,Serb,Croat,etc.... posts or...

YOU DON'T :shrug::computer:

Kralizec

10-06-2011, 17:34

I'm just going to say something about this part because all that green text actually made me a little mad. I didn't say anything then but in my opinion it was disgrace to the .Org.

First of all, Backroom is a place where we discuss controversial issues. We can discuss everything as long there aren't any personal insults. That's the gist of it. Now, we've discussed wars, famines, genocides, discrimination, religion, tortures, mutilations, invasions etc... in all corners of the world and not A SINGLE ONE got a special treatment besides 9-11 thread. Yes, indeed there's more Americans on this board than Iraqis for example, but rules are rules. No moderator intervened when Serbs (insert any other nation recently involved in a conflict) "had it coming" but when Americans "have it coming" than it's infractions and bans all around.

In light of this, I suppose we should have a new rule that states that Backroom is a place where we discuss controversial topics as long as those topics are not offensive to Americans and won't hurt American feelings.

I sympathize, but I don't think the comparison holds. If someone posted "the Serbs had it coming" in a remembrance thread about Serbians casualties in the Yugoslavian wars it would have been different. I like to think that the mods would have punished that, too.

I got 5 warning points bya overzealous Mod by being saratic during the Nowreaigen shooting and I never was intending to insult the people that was killed.

This I don't sympathize with, and I saw the post you're talking about.

Secura

10-06-2011, 23:39

This thread has run it's natural course at this moment in time, but I'd like to say something first.

I'd like to apologise again for the furor that was caused by both this thread and others in the Watchtower; grievances were aired, in earnest or otherwise, with old wounds being reopened and new ones being created in the process as friendships were pushed to their very limits. We saw some pretty negative aspects of one another over the course of events, but there was also alot of good to be derived from this, most of all that the Org has some passionate and articulate members who really care about the site and the community.

Thank you for both the kind words and the criticism, without which we wouldn't really be able to function; it's been said before but it bears repeating that the Org is your community, it'd be nothing without your input! Everything that has transpired over the last few weeks been taken to heart and will be discussed in relation to policy adjustments in the very near future.

Thanks again. :bow: