You are currently looking at Flamebate, our community forums. Players can discuss the game here, strategize, and role play as their characters.
You need to be logged in to post and to see the uncensored versions of these forums.
Is this where we talk about wheels? | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Adapt Posted:
Oddly enough, our discussions are heading in the opposite direction. |
||||||
Posted On: 05/03/2009 7:02PM | View Sergeant Cid's Profile | # | ||||||
|
Sergeant Cid Posted:
I don’t understand. This thread has been seen by most mods, even ET said in IDC “I saw that thread. It’s awesome”. I asked a mod about posting the image before I posted it (which is what you’ve told other users to do multiple times in the past, and is Banhammers go-to solution to most questionable posts), and even said in the post that it wasn’t trolling and just a comic representation of how I felt when I read that post. If you really think “reviewing” is in order you are honestly just looking for reasons to ban people, and I think we can see why more and more people are getting frustrated with the way the site is being moderated. |
||||||
Posted On: 05/04/2009 1:16AM | View Indiana Jonas's Profile | # | ||||||
|
Sergeant Cid Posted:
Then let a harmless, sleeping (and somewhat entertaining for once) dog lie and walk away from the thread. There’s absolutely nothing that requires further “moderation” here. |
||||||
Posted On: 05/04/2009 1:17AM | View Indiana Jonas's Profile | # | ||||||
|
Hobart Bliggity Posted:
My sentiments exactly |
||||||
Posted On: 05/04/2009 1:21AM | View Adapt's Profile | # | ||||||
|
Love this thread.
Just getting my name in before another full of won |
||||||
Posted On: 05/04/2009 1:28AM | View Bigandtasty's Profile | # | ||||||
|
Hey it was directed at me, I don’t think it was an insult. I lol’d. |
||||||
Posted On: 05/04/2009 2:25AM | View Balloon's Profile | # | ||||||
Log in to see images! |
|||||||
Posted On: 05/04/2009 3:21AM | View Odalisque's Profile | # | ||||||
|
Less talking, more Log in to see images! |
||||||
Posted On: 05/04/2009 3:30AM | View Johnny Mac's Profile | # | ||||||
|
Johnny Mac Posted: |
||||||
Posted On: 05/04/2009 7:22PM | View Shii's Profile | # | ||||||
|
Hobart Bliggity Posted:
1. An absence of an immediate reaction by a Mod is not an indicator that it’s 100% acceptable.
2. Are we even discussing the same image? I didn’t single you or yours out in any way.
3. It was brought to my attention by another Mod, and it was brought to that Mod’s attention by a reported post, so please don’t bumume that I’m ‘looking for banworthy offenses’. If I was actively trying to hunt down banworthy offenses, I’m positive I’d find more than enough to keep me busy for hours. Contrary to popular belief, I don’t ‘bounty-hunt’.
4. You should be glad that it’s ‘being reviewed’ instead of outright banned. Reviewing the situation includes asking if another Mod gave the go-ahead.
You don’t want Mods to jump to conclusions. How about some of the same from you?
|
||||||
Posted On: 05/04/2009 7:35PM | View Sergeant Cid's Profile | # | ||||||
|
gj ruining this thread, its Log in to see images! |
||||||
Posted On: 05/04/2009 7:40PM | View Johnny Mac's Profile | # | ||||||
|
Johnny Mac Posted: |
||||||
Posted On: 05/04/2009 7:41PM | View Sergeant Cid's Profile | # | ||||||
|
Hobart Bliggity Posted:
Since all of the comics seem to be mostly harmless, tongue in cheek fun, I think we’re good here.
|
||||||
Posted On: 05/04/2009 7:52PM | View Sergeant Cid's Profile | # | ||||||
|
Blank Templates Log in to see images! Log in to see images! Log in to see images! Log in to see images! Log in to see images! Log in to see images! Log in to see images! Log in to see images! |
||||||
Posted On: 05/04/2009 8:41PM | View SIG-ENABLING-MOC...'s Profile | # | ||||||
|
Sergeant Cid Posted: But having nearly every mod but you, including the site creator, give me positive feedback about the thread is without a doubt an indicator that it’s 100% acceptable.
2. Are we even discussing the same image? I didn’t single you or yours out in any way. Your “looks like we have to do some reviewing” comment quoted spacekadt’s response to the image I talked about. Excuse me for bumuming that, by quoting another mod’s response to posted image, you were talking about the same image.
3. It was brought to my attention by another Mod, and it was brought to that Mod’s attention by a reported post, so please don’t bumume that I’m ‘looking for banworthy offenses’. If I was actively trying to hunt down banworthy offenses, I’m positive I’d find more than enough to keep me busy for hours. Contrary to popular belief, I don’t ‘bounty-hunt’. So why doesn’t every thread that is “being reviewed” have a post from a mod in it? If you just would have reviewed the thread, found nothing wrong with it, and moved on none of this would have been necessary. Instead you had to post, publicly, that you felt the itch to crack down on this, and now I’m making tldr posts and you’re busy trying to defend your position. I’ve never once seen Banhammer post that he might be taking action on a thread sometime in the future. Moderation, and arguing about moderation, should be kept private. But coming here and going “ho hum some of you might be getting banned look out!” and then not posting for 2 days is just drama whoring.
And, for the sake of thoroughness, how do you think your image as a “bounty-hunter” came to be? 4. You should be glad that it’s ‘being reviewed’ instead of outright banned. Reviewing the situation includes asking if another Mod gave the go-ahead.
Wow. The fact that a mod gave the go-ahead is listed twice in the thread, by me and the mod herself. I don’t understand why “reviewing” in this case would have to be an ongoing process.
As far as jumping to conclusions, as I don’t have any power any conclusions I jump to are of no consequence, and therefore it really doesn’t matter what I think. You, however, have been trusted by CZ to moderate the site fairly. While I don’t disagree with most judgement calls you’ve made in the past, and believe that you treat most of the community fairly, your entire presence in this thread just reeks of “lol ima ban someone”.
If you felt the need to review the thread, review it. If you had to consult other mods, consult them. Don’t come in here, call the entire thread in question publicly, then expect us to not react and defend ourselves as you disappear for a few days. |
||||||
Posted On: 05/04/2009 10:34PM | View Indiana Jonas's Profile | # | ||||||
|
Hobart Bliggity Posted: The thread is just fine. We were discussing specific posts within the thread.
It was quoted in reference to the “Humor is still allowed… for now” part of her statement, and not meant to chain back to your particular post, since many more had been made after she said that and before I posted. I wasn’t 100% clear, and you jumped to a conclusion. I’ve editted that post to more accurately reflect my intended meaning.
1. Fewer threads than you may think come under review. 2. Reviewing doesn’t automatically mean banning. 3. MC Banhammer’s style is different than mine. Fact of life. 4. There was no ‘arguing about moderation’. 5. It was barely 24 hours between that post and the final resolution. 6. This type of thread and the content within is relevant to our current Mod discussions.
Because a lot of people made incorrect bumumptions about which Mod banned which Player, and usually, they bumume I did it. And for the most part, except when it’s really blatent, as in a recent thread that someone got wared for, I let it slide. Also, I usually tagged my Mod Edits, since that was SOP at one of my other forums, and other Mods usually don’t, so the few bans I did hand out were fairly public. 4. You should be glad that it’s ‘being reviewed’ instead of outright banned. Reviewing the situation includes asking if another Mod gave the go-ahead. Your thread, as a whole, was fine. Certain posts within your thread weren’t ‘pre-approved’ by that Mod.
And yet, who’s been banned here in this thread?
I didn’t call the entire thread into question. I didn’t disappear for a few days. The issue has been resolved, and if a Mod chooses to make it known that a thread (or certain posts) are in a gray area, that’s not an accusation against the entire thread and all of the posters.
My post wasn’t intended to generate this drama, it was merely meant in an offhand manner, sort of a subtle hint that some people may have gone too far, but not to the point that we needed to come in ban-axes swinging just yet. Which hopefully, would have encouraged others to be a bit more careful in their decision about what to post.
It’s now concluded, and I’m looking forward to the next creative effort. |
||||||
Posted On: 05/04/2009 11:01PM | View Sergeant Cid's Profile | # | ||||||
|
Can we get away from arguing and back to wheels? The cartoon at the top of the forum is very clear about this. |
||||||
Posted On: 05/04/2009 11:09PM | View Possibly a Cabba...'s Profile | # | ||||||
|
Possibly a Cabbage Posted:
Sergeant Cid Posted:
Sergeant Cid Posted: |
||||||
Posted On: 05/04/2009 11:12PM | View Sergeant Cid's Profile | # | ||||||
|
I don’t want to take up the whole page pyramid quoting, so you’ll have to self-reference AF. I didn’t check post times so my apologies for saying you disappeared for a few days after posting.
First of all, I understand that only certain posts were in question, and that the majority of the thread was fine, but when you, a mod, come in and say “we have to do some reviewing” how does that not call the entire thread in question? If you had made any indication that it was only a few posts that were questionable, there would be no problem.
I’m not going to argue that some of the posts weren’t borderline, but how can you not see that posting “this needs to be reviewed” would be seen as calling the whole thread borderline, and not just a few posts. When a legit GD thread is made, and a few people troll in it, is that entire thread “up for review” or just those posts? If it was only a few posts here, why not just review those posts and not the whole thread?
On a more personal note, don’t blame me because I made a perfectly rational bumumption about the motive for your post. Blame yourself for making an unclear post.
Quite frankly, this whole progression from “needs to be reviewed” to “it seems ok but be thankful it’s only a review and not a ban” to “well your posts were all ok it was just a few other posts not the whole thread” just seems like a cop out. Nowhere in your is it clear that you were only looking at a few posts.
Now, we get to this gem The issue has been resolved, and if a Mod chooses to make it known that a thread (or certain posts) are in a gray area, that’s not an accusation against the entire thread and all of the posters.
First of all, this ain’t the military, so the issue is resolved when we both say so. For now, that just isn’t the case.
Second, you just basically said that if a mod chooses to make it known that a thread is in a gray area it isn’t an accusation that the entire thread is in a gray area. What? Even if this made sense, as OP and main contributor to this thread, how could I possibly think that you saying “this needs to be reviewed” didn’t apply to me or my thread in some way? |
||||||
Posted On: 05/04/2009 11:46PM | View Indiana Jonas's Profile | # | ||||||
|
Sergeant Cid Posted:
Sorry, the issue is concluded when I feel comfortable on where this stands. As of right now all you’ve offered me is blame for making a natural bumumption as to what you intended to review. |
||||||
Posted On: 05/04/2009 11:50PM | View Indiana Jonas's Profile | # | ||||||