Shadowrun
Catalyst Game Labs => Forum Business => Topic started by: Mirikon on <08-03-13/1438:33>
-
While I understand the reasons for not being able to send private messages while under a ban, when someone seemingly drops off the face of the planet as some thought I did during my last couple bans, it was frustrating to not be able to at least tell them that I hadn't gone and died somewhere. Perhaps having a thread, locked so only moderators can post, simply stating the name of someone under a ban, and when the ban will be lifted, would solve this problem? Nothing complicated or revealing personal information, naturally, just a post in the thread saying: Mirikon has been banned for 30 days. The ban will expire <Month> <Day>, <Year>, <Time>.
That at least lets people in discussions with the banned person know why they are not responding.
-
being a baaaaad boy again Mirikon??? <smirk>
welcome back.
-
Seems fair and will assist with the Play-by-Post guys
-
Or, you can weigh the risk of breaking the ToS versus your love of your PbP game and realize it's just not worth getting banned.
-
It's really pretty difficult to get warnings/bannings here, so long as you can actually be polite and can remember that you're not required to reply or even participate in some threads.
I have a rule that I think if the rest of the internet followed, it would be a much happier and more pleasant place: When I find myself in a disagreement with someone, I impose a three post limit. I will discuss my point of view for a maximum of three replies. If the person(s) I'm discussing things with wants to continue to argue or starts to escalate things, I step out. It's not worth my time nor the frustration of arguing something online. Much as I love Shadowrun, at the end of the day it's just a game, and what one single stranger on the other end of a bitstream thinks doesn't impact my game in the least.
It's slightly different when I'm dealing with official CGL and Missions stuff, but even then... I try not to allow myself to be dragged into arguments. I'll present my reasons, answer questions as best I can, but I try and ignore attacks and just let inane arguments dissipate.
Some days this philosophy works better than others, of course :)
Anyway, to the point at hand. This is honestly a terrible idea. Very little good can come of it.
Bull
-
I actually do the same thing, but for me it's more laziness. :) Topics where there's ban-worthy discussions are often very active and when I come back after a day (the only part of the forum I check more than once per day is the PbP part) I just don't feel like reading through 3-4 pages of back and forth between 2-3 people and I go read something else. Like I said, it's just laziness on my part, but it helps.
-
I'm betting its not possible to program, but maybe an auto-reply to any PM to a banned account that just says "This account is currently banned".
-
In my opinion, this is the same as if a player gets banned from a particular gaming store. They don't put up any signs or pictures saying the person is banned, they just know not to let him in. If that person was in a gaming group, it's not the responsibility of the gaming store to inform the group that the person made bad decisions that led to them being banned.
As I said before, the best way for you to keep from missing PbP games and joining in on the discussions here is also the simplest way. DON'T GET BANNED. It's REALLY not that hard to be civilized toward your fellow hobbyists.
-
"You couldn't answer your own question?" "It was hard."
-
To resurrect (in part), having just experienced my first (short) ban, I'm wondering if the 'warning' system has any sort of a reset. I'm presuming it does not, because the ban came as a result of the third warning over a period of essentially three years. In my opinion, a flat 'X strikes over a period of forever' is not a great idea, and while I agree that a rampaging psychotroll needs to be handled, someone who only very rarely gets irritated and drops the hammer should get time off for generally good behavior.
-
Violations are supposed to expire after a year, per the TOS
We have a statute of limitations on violations. All violations over one year old will be removed from a poster’s record and not considered in figuring bans. (Example: A poster has earned a five-day ban. His violations all reach the one-year mark. The poster’s “clock” starts again at 0. The poster commits three more violations under a new year. He will then receive a one-month ban).
-
Hrm.
-
possible glitch or someone didn't mark year on the excel naughty list? :P
I can admit to being guilty of the latter before, not for a naughty list but other lists that were accidentally going back over a year and confusion resulting when I thought someone was coming for an upcoming class when they actually had already attended.
-
When I find myself in a disagreement with someone, I impose a three post limit......I try not to allow myself to be dragged into arguments. I'll present my reasons, answer questions as best I can, but I try and ignore attacks and just let inane arguments dissipate.
Some days this philosophy works better than others, of course
thats a good philosophy that I try to follow too :)
(but sometimes I fail )
with 3 Dances
Medicineman
-
I really hope this post doesn't get shut down. I feel like the flow of communication is important, even if the communication is constructive criticism. Constructive criticism has been, in my experience, the greatest form of advice that I have ever received. So I really hope that anyone reading this understands that when we post here about our concerns, it's being done out of a desire to see progressive change. I can't speak for everyone, but I do not take the actions that I am about to talk about personally. With that preface said, let's get into the meat of my post:
I have received a few bans in my time here. The most recent one happened about a week ago. At that point, I reminded the moderators that we are supposed to receive warnings between bans, which I have never gotten. Because I am not ashamed of my bans or anything, and I don't feel like hiding my history would accomplish anything, I'll give you guys a specific breakdown of my ban/warning history:
12/31/13 - 1st Warning
03/11/14 - 2nd Warning
06/03/14 - 5-day Ban
07/09/14 - 2-week Ban
08/05/14 - 1-month Ban (this was appealed and later revoked on 8/21/14 because the ban shouldn't have happened in the first place)
11/17/14 - 6-month Ban (revoked and changed into a warning)
Based on the TOS, I should not be at the 6-month ban level. The 2-week ban should have been a warning, and the 1-month ban should have been a 2-week ban. I should be at the 1-month ban level, with a warning already issued prior. When I appealed my most recent ban, I was told that the TOS was changed to allow a warning between bans, and that my ban was a mistake. When I look at the TOS thread, I find that the last edit was made on September 12th, 2011. That means it was changed before I ever came onto these forums (as a member anyway). I don't know how it's possible that a TOS that was implemented more than three years ago can be something a moderator can forget. In my mind, all moderators should be intensely aware of the TOS, as ruling on TOS violations is literally the crux of their responsibility.
I think it would be fair if all of these bans and warnings were reviewed, and the list was updated to reflect the proper application of the TOS, so that we are all on the same page. Additionally, I think it would be a good idea to implement a "review board" for appeals to TOS violations, with all the moderators able to perform reviews. As it is, the two appeals that I made involved me first tracking down several of the upper management members of Catalyst. Not an easy process, but one that is made easier by my association with the demo team. If I wasn't on the demo team, I think I would have been up a creek without a paddle.
-
I'm a little concerned that warnings and bans seem to be de rigueur here. Are we really that thin skinned?
I have been cruising the inter-tubes for over a decade now and have been involved in some pretty heated arguments and have NEVER received a warning until my very first week here. For pointing out that another poster was attacking a new member without provocation. I never insulted him or used profanity - (I felt) I was level headed and objective throughout the whole ordeal (but I have a PM for the record books from him that was NONE of those things). To my knowledge, he never received a warning for his attack on the other member (who has not returned to the forums since).
My point is, it seems that the only requirement to get a warning here is to disagree with someone and not be the first to run crying to mommy. I suspect that it is taboo to even suggest it, but perhaps the problem is not with the recipients of the warnings in many (though certainly not all) cases.
-
Without commenting on any specific cases:
There is a great variety in approaches to heated debates all over different communities. I can understand the motivations for many of those approaches, and in theory the one used here at SRT is one quite useful for treating a customer base where tensions could grow high and spiral out of control.
The last anyone wants is for people to be turned off from Shadowrun forever due to overheated debates, so a form of control is necessary. The system in itself is quite lenient with three violations needed before a short ban is applied, and one warning inbetween every next ban.
I have seen people on other forums who felt they had every right to personally insult people, claiming first amendment rights. I have seen wretched hives of scum and villainy that made me sick just by reading the language thrown around. So I fully support a fair and fairly-exercised warning system with a good TOS that still encourages good debates without turning people away.
Last, I would not say warnings and bans are de rigueur here. Leaving aside the occasional new troll, I suspect there's perhaps a dozen active members that occasionally lose their temper. While in each case one could argue about whether they tiptoed the line, were just near it or across it, do not be mistaken: Warnings and mod intervention are not the default mode here. And if anything, those heated debates that spiral out of control are evidence to exactly why we need the current system.
-
Speaking as one of those people that lets his temper get the better of him, Michael is absolutely right. There have been times when I have REALLY crossed the line, and times when I've just gotten to the edge of the line. I have tried VERY hard to control myself, and in many cases I control myself just fine by simply not posting anything. However, I am not always able to control my temper and sometimes I have made mistakes. To anyone that I have insulted or offended, I apologize with the hope that we can start fresh.
Now to the griping:
There seems to me a pervasiveness of people who decide they don't like someone and then just start reporting every single post of that person's in the hopes that they get a ban. On top of that, there are confirmed cases of new members of the forum receiving "warning PMs" from older members, saying that the new member should steer clear of members X, Y, and Z. And finally, there are the flamebaiters. These are people who make inflammatory comments with the express intention of pissing someone off. Not exactly as obvious as a troll, the flamebaiter is an insidious creature of the internet that should still be eradicated. Our TOS does not cover these three situations, and as a result they are prevalent.
We do need strong leadership on the forums, and those people in the administrative ranks used to be those leaders. It used to be that when a clamoring of people requested that a post get sticky status, it would happen. And it used to be that these elder members of our community would share their wisdom with others. Those posts are still present, and they are still useful even if the content is outdated. Now, when I see a post by any administrator, it means that either someone has gotten a ban or the post has been locked. Or both.
The issue as I see it is in communication. We have no communication with anyone in charge of these forums. If we had more than one person actively moderating the forums, we might have more things done to these boards in a more timely fashion. If we had multiple active administrators, we might even have multiple perspectives on subjective decisions. I ran a video game guild with over 300 members in it, along with administering the website that facilitated events in 4 different MMOs. This board is worse (from an administrative standpoint). I had to have help on my board. I created an officer to manage each of the games, and an officer for every 50 members of the guild. A lot of that overlapped, but it made the whole process a LOT easier. I can't even begin to imagine trying to administrate a forum like this. We have 5052 members on the forums. And we have a team of 5 administrators. Of those 5 administrators, 2 have never posted EVER and 1 of them hasn't even been active this year. Of those 4 that have been active this year, only 2 have been active in the last 6 months. Of those 2 that have been active, one is Jason Hardy, who was active to create the Crossfire mission creation thread.
What I'm saying is that this is too much for one person to handle, and it's not fair to that one person. I cannot in good conscience recommend any member of this forum for administrator status, but I believe it is critical to the success of this forum that we have more than one person actively administering the boards.
-
It's because of my .sig, isn't it? I knew it was because of my .sig.
-
It's because of my .sig, isn't it? I knew it was because of my .sig.
LOL I actually really appreciate the honesty of your signature. And the marketing!
-
It's good to know that it isn't as common as the comments here were making it sound. I hope that my experience is an isolated one as walking on eggshells is not conducive to an honest exchange of ideas.
@Wyrm - I don't know where that quote comes from (Internet search incoming in 3..2..1) but I have a good friend that uses it frequently. I think it's awesome.
@Namikaze - Yes, I feel for Fastjack - it's a big job, and I can imagine that some bad calls get made as a result. That's why I'm not sweating my warning much. I have changed my approach to posting (mostly by avoiding any threads that have a notable level of conflict), so we'll see how far that gets me. If what Michael says is right, and I have no reason to doubt him, then I should be okay from here on out. Which is great, because I'd hate to face Mirikon's original situation as I am enjoying the PbP portion of the forum and a ban could be devastating.
Anyway, thanks everyone for the clarification.
-
@Wyrm - I don't know where that quote comes from (Internet search incoming in 3..2..1) but I have a good friend that uses it frequently. I think it's awesome.
Actually, it's me writing, based off what Critias said to me in regards to me shredding (http://forums.shadowruntabletop.com/index.php?topic=5901.msg100141) Tonatiuh for his question about the potential for his character (http://forums.shadowruntabletop.com/index.php?topic=5900.msg102321) to become a part of canon. I realized that y'know, I generally think of myself as a nice guy, and usually I'm pretty good, but jab me in the wrong way or at the wrong time and biting your head off will be only an afterthought. :P
-
@Wyrm - I don't know where that quote comes from (Internet search incoming in 3..2..1) but I have a good friend that uses it frequently. I think it's awesome.
Actually, it's me writing, based off what Critias said to me in regards to me shredding (http://forums.shadowruntabletop.com/index.php?topic=5901.msg100141) Tonatiuh for his question about the potential for his character (http://forums.shadowruntabletop.com/index.php?topic=5900.msg102321) to become a part of canon. I realized that y'know, I generally think of myself as a nice guy, and usually I'm pretty good, but jab me in the wrong way or at the wrong time and biting your head off will be only an afterthought. :P
Yeah, you are not someone I want to tick off :P
-
Who, me? I'm as cute and cuddly as a newborn lamb. (http://windowontheprairie.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Newborn_Lambs01-382x560.jpg)
-
Who, me? I'm as cute and cuddly as a
Really?
I always pictured you more like a wet koala . (http://i.huffpost.com/gen/703042/thumbs/r-WET-KOALA-PHOTOSHOP-600x275.jpg) ;)
-
Who, me? I'm as cute and cuddly as a
Really?
I always pictured you more like a wet koala . (http://i.huffpost.com/gen/703042/thumbs/r-WET-KOALA-PHOTOSHOP-600x275.jpg) ;)
.
..
...
Damnit Wyrm!! How many times i told you, NO SELFIES RIGHT OUT OF THE SHOWER!!!
:P
-
Who, me? I'm as cute and cuddly as a
I always pictured you more like a wet koala . (http://i.huffpost.com/gen/703042/thumbs/r-WET-KOALA-PHOTOSHOP-600x275.jpg) ;)
I said newborn lamb, not drop bear.
-
A poster personally attacked another on this topic and has been dealt with. Please refrain from personally attacking your fellow posters, either in a topic or within personal messages.
Can we get an explanation for this, please? Having read the thread, I cannot see where a personal attack occurred.
-
A poster personally attacked another on this topic and has been dealt with. Please refrain from personally attacking your fellow posters, either in a topic or within personal messages.
Can we get an explanation for this, please? Having read the thread, I cannot see where a personal attack occurred.
More than likely it was probably when a poster told someone to "get back to their bridge".
-
It may have also been in a PM, since those can be reported now.
-
Both A4BG and Malevolence are correct.