Moderator Warnings [split from MM8BDM Challenge Thread]

[Watermelon]

Although it would be easier (Not better) to blame just one party I would have to say both parties are to blame, it could have been just one more simple warning to calm down the tone.

"just one more warning" implies that the first ones are/were useless and/or had no effect, which logically implies that there isn't a point to another warning.

[Tenchu]

As a player who's spent considerable time on both sides of the law in Skulltag, I can see where both parties are coming from. The staff is just trying to keep peace and order while the users think they're being unfair yadda yadda, it's the same thing we've been seeing for years.

Why can't we come to a compromise? If the staff is here to serve the players, why can't the players have a say in how they do it? IMO, the community as a whole should be able to have a say in the judgement of banned users so that personal opinions of staff members can be countered or agreed with by public opinion. There should be a place where community players can make their voice heard on recently banned users, perhaps a <Player> Ban Thread or some such idea. I'll use SwiftShot as an example. He was banned because he made a few trollish posts and annoyed Metal. But did he really deserve to be banned? I doubt the vast majority of active people here would agree with it. I can probably say the same about Decay.

I have no problems with warnings as long as they're not overused, but bans are something that should be seldom used on only the worst of community offenders, and I think most of the community would agree that SwiftShot and Decay do not fit that criteria.

[Dusk]

As a player who's spent considerable time on both sides of the law in Skulltag, I can see where both parties are coming from. The staff is just trying to keep peace and order while the users think they're being unfair yadda yadda, it's the same thing we've been seeing for years.

Why can't we come to a compromise? If the staff is here to serve the players, why can't the players have a say in how they do it? IMO, the community as a whole should be able to have a say in the judgement of banned users so that personal opinions of staff members can be countered or agreed with by public opinion. There should be a place where community players can make their voice heard on recently banned users, perhaps a <Player> Ban Thread or some such idea.

I have nothing to say here except that I totally agree we need to come towards a compromise.

I'll use SwiftShot as an example. He was banned because he made a few trollish posts and annoyed Metal. But did he really deserve to be banned? I doubt the vast majority of active people here would agree with it.

To be quite honest there's a lot more splits regarding SwiftShot than I had first thought, which justifies the ban a little more. Further, I'm told that the ban is 3 months in duration.

I can probably say the same about Decay.

In all fairness it's become quite clear Decay has no intention on being civil which reflects in his posting and attitude. Also apparently the ban is a few weeks in length which gives it some justification.

I believe there needs to be more transparency regarding the bans. People seem to be quickly assuming that the bans are permanent and nobody knows how much warning was given and where. If the software is preventing this, it should be addressed. If the forum software totally prevents transparency, maybe we should considering switching the forum software, as tedious as it sounds, or find another solution here.

But having a compromise also involves civilty and healthy attitude from both parties, staff as well as the opposing party. Let's be open, civil and respectful, OK?

[RedShirt]

As a player who's spent considerable time on both sides of the law in Skulltag, I can see where both parties are coming from. The staff is just trying to keep peace and order while the users think they're being unfair yadda yadda, it's the same thing we've been seeing for years.

Why can't we come to a compromise? If the staff is here to serve the players, why can't the players have a say in how they do it? IMO, the community as a whole should be able to have a say in the judgement of banned users so that personal opinions of staff members can be countered or agreed with by public opinion. There should be a place where community players can make their voice heard on recently banned users, perhaps a <Player> Ban Thread or some such idea. I'll use SwiftShot as an example. He was banned because he made a few trollish posts and annoyed Metal. But did he really deserve to be banned? I doubt the vast majority of active people here would agree with it. I can probably say the same about Decay.

I have no problems with warnings as long as they're not overused, but bans are something that should be seldom used on only the worst of community offenders, and I think most of the community would agree that SwiftShot and Decay do not fit that criteria.

I'd have to agree with most of this. Seeing as how We, the players, make up the community, I feel we should have a more say in the goings on of Zandronum.

[The Toxic Avenger]

I half agree. I do agree that community involvement is a good thing and definitely can help, but from what I saw with Skulltag's old bans/purgs section, it can go awry pretty badly.

[Tenchu]

I believe there needs to be more transparency regarding the bans. People seem to be quickly assuming that the bans are permanent and nobody knows how much warning was given and where. If the software is preventing this, it should be addressed. If the forum software totally prevents transparency, maybe we should considering switching the forum software, as tedious as it sounds, or find another solution here.

They actually do utilize a forum bans thread, but only the OP is updated and new posts aren't made to make people aware of new bans.

[TerminusEst13]

I believe there needs to be more transparency regarding the bans. People seem to be quickly assuming that the bans are permanent and nobody knows how much warning was given and where.

Like TTA said, Skulltag had a sub-forum which talked about how who was banned, how long, and why.
Also like TTA said, it was very easily abused. Everyone either posted "Yeah! Great job, goodbye to that BANANER!" or "WHY DID YOU BAN HIM/ME".

That being said, there's precedent with the IRC bans topic, I don't think information like that should be exclusive to what goes on in the IRC. I'd suggest a separate topic with posts about who's banned, why, for how long, and all that jazz--separated into permabans and tempbans.

EDIT:

They actually do utilize a forum bans thread, but only the OP is updated and new posts aren't made to make people aware of new bans.

Oh. Whoops.

[Stoner]

Heh. It takes a MM8BDM thread to start a shitstorm of this magnitude.

[Catastrophe]

Strange, I don't see mobius's name in that suspension list, nor a reason.

[HeavenWraith]

Strange, I don't see mobius's name in that suspension list, nor a reason.

Good point, will fix this.

[Razgriz]

After sleeping, I still honestly think Puhax's ban is not justifiable, even though it was reduced, I still don't agree that it should've been a ban regardless. It took a while for someone like Swift and Ral to be banned because they would not stop making useless posts after having so many warnings. Puhax's is listed as trolling, trolling, and was originally 1 month along with Decay's ban. In Decay's case, he was rude and offensive in his posting, so his ban is understandable to a degree. But if trolling can get you banned then half of these forum users should get banned as well in the future.

I would imagine in the future we could have far better, more legitimate reasons for banning people from the forums, so we don't turn into Bandronum over the littlest things.

[Metal]

Puhax is unbanned, added warn instead.

[Wartorn]

I have called some folk from this thread into the #zastaff channel in order to get a discussion going after today's unfolding, to resolve the issue of the flamewar that appeared today, and come up with some solutions to some of the problems mentioned here. The discussion also went into several different places which allowed us to collect feedback.

This is the unedited log of the discussion: http://pastebin.com/Jf38wVCB

Some of the talking points that unfolded were the following:

• Retroactive warnings are bad, generate confusion, and our moderators will start communicating more to keep the air clear.
• Editing warned user's posts to mark clearly why they were issued a warning on those particular offending posts.
• More transparent and lenient moderating in lighter-weight posts, and in handling things less "by the book".

In the future, I'd like to do more of these assemblies a little more frequently to collect more feedback in how we run things.

[Watermelon]

My only concern is that when you have people doing it 'not by the book' and others following it 'by the book', the wrong person on at the wrong time will result in a warning where as others will get away.
I figure there should be maybe reduction on the rules, but a clause where mods can delete a post for any/no reason if deemed necessary by the moderators.
The only question I have from this is where do the staff draw the line where someone responds sarcastically with something like "Oh what a great [item]", how do the mods handle that since it's a gray area?

I like the editing saying they received a warning.

There's a lot more that could be discussed I think as well, but it depends on the activity of the staff and willingness to discuss things.

[-Jes-]

But then, nothing is ever truly 'by the book' - the moderators aren't bots, and as such will always be subject to personal bias however miniscule it can be when tempered with logic and openmindedness. Some arguments will slip through where they shouldn't, and some won't where they should. But I digress.

I agree that editing to state a warning is a good idea - I only noticed, after seeing this thread the first time, that I even had a warning. (which I fully accept and do not contest)

[*]More transparent and lenient moderating in lighter-weight posts[/list]

This one, though, I am not so sure of. What constitutes a 'lighter-weight post'?
Again, subjective posts scanned by subjective moderators, and this comment essentially means nothing. :/

[UnTrustable]

I have read every word of page 1 and page 2... but skipped the third...
I have read enough good comments there....
So, i ask the forum staff, what did you (staff people) learned from all those 5 past years?

To reply to some posts at page 1 and page 2 without quoting them, I dont want more and more.
Accually i want less.... less ban length.... AND a real warning system, not like Skulltag's and Zandronum's system.

I'll explain in a somewhat funny story:

Example 1)
25 years ago i commited a traffic offense.
Officer at my carwindow: "You just commited a traffic offense, sir."
Me: "What did i do officer?"
Officer: "You did this and that."
Me: "You're right officer..."
Officer: "Don't do that again, sir."
Me: "Okay officer, i'll try not to do that again."
And he let me off with a warning.
I've got respect for this officer, i really did.

Example 2)
Last time i commited a traffic offense.
Officer at my carwindow: "You just commited a traffic offense, sir."
Me: "What did i do officer?"
Officer: "You did this and that."
Me: "You're right officer..."
Officer: "Don't do that again, sir."
Me: "Okay officer, i'll try not to do that again."
And he gave me a ticket and let me off with a warning.
I really hated that officer, i really did.

Example 2, weither you like it or not, IS the Zandronum way.
I prefer the first example.
I know how to do this, but im NOT a moderator, AND i never want to become one.
I hate this place, because i've got banned for at least half a year, because some moderator found it funny to add "I'm a troll" underneath my avatar.
The next problem with Zandronum's staff AND community, from my perspective, IS... that for some of us an action might be a joke, but they forget that this same joke might be very insulting to the other.
So where is your respect towards each other?
We shout things to the staff, even though our shoutings are legit, it might be an insult to the staff, and visa versa.
You staff say...claims...that you are willing to help things out with your customers, clients, or community if you wanna call us that way....
I honestly still believe that you really mean it....
So why not starting off right now?

I still like to know who did add that sick joke "I'm a troll !" underneath my avatar.
I know, its gone, but it really got me pissed off by seeing it happening, so as being human, and having feelings too, i shouted too towards the staff since i had no clue of who exactly did that sick joke, so it was towards all of the staff. You guys shouldn't had gave me a ticket and a warning.
I wasn't the offender at start... 1 forum moderator was.

[UnTrustable]

As im waiting for a reply on my previous post, or maybe i am waiting till it gets removed?? Who knows... Im continueing reading the 3th page of this topic....

[quote=Watermelon] "just one more warning" implies that the first ones are/were useless and/or had no effect, which logically implies that there isn't a point to another warning[/quote]

So wrong dude. That is what happens for at least 5 years long... and nothing nor minor has changed for the better since.
I would recommend a different approache, and believe me, I now know after 5 long years , nobody is taking my good intensions and good advices... Or are they now willing to try them out?

[quote=Ten] Why can't we come to a compromise? [/quote]
Because they dont know HOW to make compromises.
I have asked...pleaded for so many times for compromises, and see what it gave me? Banning here, banning there, posts removals, labelled as being an idiot, being a troll, not taken seriously, labelled as being a high horse dude, my posts giving headaches to one......
Better not ask them for making compromises, treat them the way they treat the community... Maybe...just maybe some day they will open their eyes...
So far, they just don't, simply because they convinced themselves that there is NOTHING WRONG with them. Its the communities fault.... No ... its our fault. Both the parties. SO... again... what are WE going to do about it?

[quote=Ten]I have no problems with warnings as long as they're not overused, but bans are something that should be seldom used on only the worst of community offenders, and I think most of the community would agree that SwiftShot and Decay do not fit that criteria.[/quote]
Rrrriight.... ;)
I don't know this SwiftShot dude, I don't know Decay either, but anyways, i would have give Decay an ONE DAY or maybe TWO DAYS 'ban' instead of give him 1 or 2 MONTHS...(OR xx weeks)...
Come-on !, Month ban's WILL NOT create respect, you staffmembers SHOULD have known that by now, dont you? Learn from 5-, or to some of you even longer, years.

[quote=UnTrustable]Maybe...just maybe some day they will open their eyes...
So far, they just don't,..........[/quote]
I must admit that i have seen a slight change of improvements, so my claim 'no change at all' is not entirely true....
I had to say that too...
Alright, end of editting this post. ( :p i've editted this post now multiple times )

[Watermelon]

"just one more warning" implies that the first ones are/were useless and/or had no effect, which logically implies that there isn't a point to another warning

So wrong dude. That is what happens for at least 5 years long... and nothing nor minor has changed for the better since.
I would recommend a different approache, and believe me, I now know after 5 long years , nobody is taking my good intensions and good advices... Or are they now willing to try them out?

I would TRY and respond to this complete bipolar mess of a post but I have no idea what the hell you are trying to say.
If I think I understand that garbled example-less mess above, whatever you said missed my point anyways and is just based on a subjective opinion.

I genuinely cannot tell if your post is a troll one or not...

[Metal]

stuff

Admins and moderators warn once, twice, sometimes 3 times before it becomes a suspension. Suspensions are temporary. Swiftshot was suspended already before he was banned. Please do your homework.

With your logic, would you go up to a police officer and say "Get fucking bent"? Absolutely not, it's disrespectful. Thus, you have Decays 2 week ban. Again, please read things before jumping the gun.

If we never warned or banned, people would be more inclined to outrage like they have been lately. We don't ban nearly as often as we did on Skulltag, and yet, people still find ways to complain about it when someone is banned for the right reasons. We're not going to let people disrespect others, break the rules and let them run free.

If you honestly have THAT big of a problem with moderation here, maybe you shouldn't be here.

[Torvald]

"just one more warning" implies that the first ones are/were useless and/or had no effect, which logically implies that there isn't a point to another warning

So wrong dude. That is what happens for at least 5 years long... and nothing nor minor has changed for the better since.
I would recommend a different approache, and believe me, I now know after 5 long years , nobody is taking my good intensions and good advices... Or are they now willing to try them out?

Why can't we come to a compromise?

Because they dont know HOW to make compromises.
I have asked...pleaded for so many times for compromises, and see what it gave me? Banning here, banning there, posts removals, labelled as being an idiot, being a troll, not taken seriously, labelled as being a high horse dude, my posts giving headaches to one......
Better not ask them for making compromises, treat them the way they treat the community... Maybe...just maybe some day they will open their eyes...
So far, they just don't, simply because they convinced themselves that there is NOTHING WRONG with them. Its the communities fault.... No ... its our fault. Both the parties. SO... again... what are WE going to do about it?

In regards to your reply to watermelon, I really didn't get the point of your post. You "recommend a different approach", but I didn't see a suggestion anywhere besides you saying "believe me on this one". Sorry but I don't feel like digging through a mountain of possibly outdated posts to validate your argument. We'll need more than just your word on this one if you want to make a good point.

The whole "eye for an eye" thing is just terrible to begin with. You think that if we treat them they way they supposedly treat us, it will miraculously make them stop in their tracks and have an epiphany? "Is that really what we are like?!". I think the general response would be more along the lines of "stop being an asshole." It accomplishes nothing and just creates an even bigger gap.

I can't really gather anything constructive from your argument. There's nothing to support it other than your word on the matter, and the only possible solution you actually gave was a very immature approach to try and fix things.