Mod Squad Update for the week of April 2-8

Well, that stinks.

 

Dude, it's pretty obvious the Mods were not aware that Dushoni is also a DB member (c'mon guys, I'm not even in the DB and I knew that), or else he would've had his bootie banned too.

AND I'd like to point out that my first post about the fact that another member was banned for posting a suicide thread was ignored except for one edit in a mod's post. It didn't even get its own post. Just an edit.

 

That may be so, but it is kind of ironic that for the general users there is no evidence in which to make their own judgement. If it wasn't a biased decision, and if the decision was fair. Then locking the thread and leaving it would have been enough. There would be no need to delete it. I don't see the DUSHMINISTRATION thread deleted.

 

Sorry cb, that just doesn't cut it.

A mods first responsibility is to get rid of the immediate problem, in this case, to edit the post, if you wanted other mods to see it you take a screen shot or copy and paste.

It was clearly beyond the rules, if it was decided it was enough for a ban or not is another thing but there is no excuse you can make for not editting it, except perhaps that you have no idea how to actually moderate.

 

By wanting me to keep them seperate it shows that some in the administration feel users are unintelligent and can not think rationally. Perhaps the administration should should consider that the general population of the JC is in fact educated enough to distinguish the difference.

Well, I don?t know if I?m alone when I say: pardon? Thinking users unintelligent and not thinking rationally? Where do you get that? I certainly don?t see that. Without further explanation, all I see is that you?re saying by making generalisations, users are thinking intelligently and rationally. However, I am confused by your statement.

This just shows once again that the people in the positions rush to judgement or base their punishment on a bias.

Not all (I?m not dismissing the possibility that some might have been. Who knows.) mods who participated in that discussion were biased against DB, or anything. I think the decision was made without preconceptions.

To be brutally honest, I don?t even know who belongs to the DB base and where I can find them even if I wanted to.

Cb, I like your username .

 

The hamster is truly dead.

This goes to prove that I will be staying on the FF side of the boards from this point. Other than the occasional need to stop by the collecting forum and costuming and props forum I have no need to post in the rest of the JC. The administration has reminded me why I stopped caring what was going on over there and why I stopped reading Comms in the first place.

Thank God the Fanforce forums aren't like this.

 

Certainly a mod would know nothing of putting their own "spin" on things, eh CB?

Obviously, there is nothing in the TOS about sarcasm. Therefore, an insult derived from sarcasm is really at the discretion of the person reading it, am I right? Because YoungJedi defended those in question, said he wasn't offended, nor did he feel flamed. The mods took everything out of proportion and used it to ban. Not to warn, not spank, but to BAN. So if you'd stop posting smart ass remarks rollseyes... hey, that's real productive!) and actually started listening, something may get accomplished here.

 

Just then, you put your own spin on the thread in question. By saying it was meant as "bait" is an assumption, an unfair bias. To the authors in question, it was an attempt at humor, and also a slight jab at the current administration. Besides, how bad can a little sarcasm be when it doesn't even offend one of the people it was directed at. It was humor , something the JC sorely lacks. And you know why? Because of crap like this. Everyone is so scared of whether or not they'll be banned for this or that, and we miss out on a potential goldmine of humor. And this lastest travesty is pure proof of that... harmelss sarcasm, now outlawed at your JC.

While we're at it, it is our JC, isn't. The mods run it like some militaristic playground, some kind of house of cleanliness when sometimes all people want to do is cut lose. So what if someone throws a little biting wit towards you? If you're honestly offended by it, contact the user and discuss it with him/her. It's not like they're saying, "Hey, you're an idiot!" It's just a little joke, something we could all use in light of recent world events. If you guys would relax, maybe the JC would be, gasp, fun!

 

What happened in there was baiting, it was an attempt to elicit a negative response.

No it wasn't. It was an attempt to use humor to make a point. And all of the posters in such thread maintained the spirit of the original post and did not lapse into flaming. The "impersonate a JCer" thread in the JCC and others have much more direct commentaries. I've been involved in numerous threads where I have made a tongue in cheek comment only to have the next poster give me crap for it. Part of the give and take of the psuedo-conversation nature of a messageboard.

Seeing YoungJedi's mature reaction here compared to some of the mods, perhaps it really is time to make YoungJedi a mod.

 

Oi.

 

Ok, cb, if that truly is what you believe, then why hasn't the "Impersonate a JCer" been locked yet? That thread is truly at the expense of other users. I'm not saying this to get the thread locked, I'm pointing out a bias and an unfair judgement call.

 

And communications isn't supposed to be 'fun'. In a perfect world it would be productive.

God forbid a messageboard be fun . . . (and if it's not supposed to be fun, why the usually hollow attempts at humor in the MS updates?)

 

As DDH can attest there is no tolerance regarding flames.

Yes, very little tolerance indeed, seeing that it took nearly two hours and lots of pressure from us "regular" posters before DDH was given a temp ban from someone else.

 

So what if someone throws a little biting wit towards you? If you're honestly offended by it, contact the user and discuss it with him/her. It's not like they're saying, "Hey, you're an idiot!" It's just a little joke, something we could all use in light of recent world events. If you guys would relax, maybe the JC would be, gasp, fun!

Some people get offended by sarcasm. What if they do contact the user in question and that user refuses to settle it? Do you contact a mod? It may sound unbelievable, but sometimes behind sarcasm is an ounce of truth. The administration (made up of many individuals) could easily get offended by that ?slight jab?, too. For example, if a user says ?the mods don?t do their job like their supposed to?, it reflects on every single person in the administration. When I see that, I do get somewhat offended, because I always try to do my job to the best of my ability. That thread wasn?t completely in jest. I believe some would disagree with you when you say JC isn?t fun. I know that drama isn?t fun, but the friendship and good times that go on at these boards are.

No it wasn't. It was an attempt to use humor to make a point.

Can you inform me of the point? Was it that the JC needs more humour, or that the current mods aren?t doing their job? I wonder how the users suggested in that thread were picked, and how the other three feel about this situation. It wasn?t fair for their names to be used without their permission to make a parody thread.

Am



EDIT: Ooops, forgot something.

 

Well, I'm heading off, but I still think it was too harsh. They weren't intending to flame anyone.

They were being sarcastic, sure, but I don't think it caused any permanent physical harm. I for one got over it.

 

I hereby give permission for my name to be used in any sarcastic thread.

/s/ Ric Olie's Hairdresser

 

You do realize what you just said, right? "Some people get offended by sarcasm." People get offended by all sorts of things. If you want to ban everything that offends people on the JC, we'll have nothing but flirtacious socks running around. I'm sorry that people can't take a little sarcasm, but does that mean I should stop using it? I truly hope not. You can't just get rid of all forms of humor and hope to make this place like a nice cozy bible study. Life isn't like that. The JC is fun (or at least used to be) because all sorts of different people come together and discuss everything, not just roses and candlelight. But the mods are trying to homogenize the place, to take everything worthwhile from it and make it a shining palace of goodness! Why? Is it really that important that everyone play nice? After all, like Ric said, we aren't in Stepford here.

 

Yes, very little tolerance indeed, seeing that it took nearly two hours and lots of pressure from us "regular" posters before DDH was given a temp ban from someone else.

Mods do not have the ability to ban VIPs!! I would highly recommend reading the thread that you are posting in. Once someone who was able to ban a VIP was contacted and the matter was discussed, it was taken care of. Let's all try not to put our own "spin" on things. There was no reluctance to punish DDH for his problem post.

 

Are the basis of the humor in the MS updates founded upon belittling another user?

Often times they are. There are jabs at one another. I'm sure that these are all good natured in-jokes, but seems a little disingenuous to allow mods to do that but not "regular" posters. In fact, many a thread has been locked in the JC when friends were obviously trading good-natured barbs.

 

"For the most part all that is just harmless jesting back and forth."

And who can judge what is harmless and what isn't? What you say is harmelss in that thread may be hurtful to someone else. If that is the case, then it could be the opposite for the other thread (as has already been proven by YoungJedi's many ignored replies).

"But communications isn't the time and place for that."

Everyone defending the thread has conceded that. The real question is why you didn't just warn what is so clearly not a bannable offense, and why it was everyone who posted in the thread who was banned and not just the creator, since you (now) say that is the issue.

Edited to fix punctuation.

 

As opposed to the 24 hours plus that was spent discussing the bannings in the thread in question?

So you and the other admins had to spend that long to decide whether sarcasm and not blatant flaming was a bannable offense?? If the issue isn't all that clear, then why go on a banning spree for something which doesn't have much of a precedent?? Wouldn't a strongly worded warning have sufficed, or would that require even more deliberation??

 

Mods do not have the ability to ban VIPs!! I would highly recommend reading the thread that you are posting in. Once someone who was able to ban a VIP was contacted and the matter was discussed, it was taken care of. Let's all try not to put our own "spin" on things. There was no reluctance to punish DDH for his problem post.


My point wasn't over how long it took for the temp ban to be issued. It was to illustrate that they don't seem too clear on what it is they're banning people over. I don't care that Moderators can't ban VIPs. If cbjedi was so ardently against making sarcastic remarks to others, then he should have posted something condemning DDH's post rather than let it go for a few hours.

 

Kyle. There are STRICTER guidelines for Comms now. They were clearly posted weeks ago. This whole thing happened because people ignored the new guidelines and did what they did. My understanding of the situation, that I have gotten from THIS THREAD, is that the Mods, in light of the new stricter guidelines, discussed in detail what should be done, a lot of them contributed to the decisions and action was taken. Perhaps you see no precedent because this is the first major incident challenging the new Comms guidelines.

 

There are STRICTER guidelines for Comms now. They were clearly posted weeks ago. This whole thing happened because people ignored the new guidelines and did what they did.

That seems like even more of a reason for giving a stern warning rather than an outright ban.

Nobody doubts that comms was the wrong forum for the thread--but if that was the only issue at play, a warning and reminder of the new policy would do the trick.

 

strilo? do you, Dagsy, and Genghis12 all have the same drama coach???