You're right.
I fully deserved my ban and to be honest I should be executed for my heinous crimes
Is GAF too strict?
- Thread starter Kraftwerk
- Start date
- Status
You're right.
I fully deserved my ban and to be honest I should be executed for my heinous crimes
CoffeeJanitor
Member
I used to think that most people here were 18+, not so much nowadays...
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
re: nudity, blame one part advertising and one part people taking a mile when an inch is given. Either one by itself probably would be enough to torpedo much reform in that area. I don't really offer input in that particular discussion with the mods who care about the issue more than me, but that's my perception.
Honestly I feel like the US-centric tendencies of posters get in the way far more than any moderation in this respect. You could start a thread about any political issue in any non-US country and the first ten replies are "president this" "firs amendment", American conception of justice, free speech, bagged milk sucks, lol metric, how will this affect the Democrats.
Even in gaming, every thread that tries to discuss the problem of south-east Asian market piracy and cultural issues is responded to with dozens of people who basically post "in America, pirates are entitled teenagers therefor fuck everyone in China and deal with it!!!!!". That, to me, is a neon sign screaming to everyone that non-western viewpoints are not to be part of the conversation.
Meanwhile the use of non-US examples in context of American discussion, where applicable an helpful, are at best ignored and at worse marginalized or insulted.
Of course there's no hive mind and people exist with all sorts of viewpoints but this is a general trend I've noticed and found unfortunate.
Honestly I feel like the US-centric tendencies of posters get in the way far more than any moderation in this respect. You could start a thread about any political issue in any non-US country and the first ten replies are "president this" "firs amendment", American conception of justice, free speech, bagged milk sucks, lol metric, how will this affect the Democrats.
Even in gaming, every thread that tries to discuss the problem of south-east Asian market piracy and cultural issues is responded to with dozens of people who basically post "in America, pirates are entitled teenagers therefor fuck everyone in China and deal with it!!!!!". That, to me, is a neon sign screaming to everyone that non-western viewpoints are not to be part of the conversation.
Meanwhile the use of non-US examples in context of American discussion, where applicable an helpful, are at best ignored and at worse marginalized or insulted.
Of course there's no hive mind and people exist with all sorts of viewpoints but this is a general trend I've noticed and found unfortunate.
Sye d'Burns
Member
See, GAF can be merciful in its magnanimity!
Well in that case, you can go fuck yourself.
assuming M'm not misunderstanding what asexual means... googling now
I did... damn!
I laughed
after I realized I had just been put in the same company as Octomom.
PetriP-TNT
Member
As SA is mentioned here, the amount of shitposting on SA is exxxxxxxtreeeemeeelyyy low, even on the smaller shitposting subforums, especially considering how popular/huge the forum is. Of course the paywall helps, but the moderation quality there is mindblowing. And no one gets butthurt about getting 3 hours of probation and won't repeat their mistakes. And if they do, the probably get to go way of the dodo very soon.
Of all the suggestions that have been made thus far in the thread, the best one far and away is a public ban message. I think even the moderators would agree that a great deal of controversial bans occur not through violation of the hard explicit rules but in fluid context based discussions. It can be very confusing to people in the thread why exactly bans happen, and that usually has people surfing through post history to find bannable content all the time. Why not make them public?
I do understand why you might not want to, if the ban was something involving sensitive issues like violation of another members personal information, but in discussion issues something like that may be really helpful
I do understand why you might not want to, if the ban was something involving sensitive issues like violation of another members personal information, but in discussion issues something like that may be really helpful
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
One way that we've tried to encourage higher signal-to-noise is by restricting no-content list or voting threads on the gaming side and by example of trying to contribute ourselves.
But SA's many subforums have a dual effect--they are insular and prevent outsiders from contributing, but those who do are generally dedicated, diehards who are extremely knowledgable and have a very high quality of discussion. So that's a trade off where SA took an opposite side from us to different results.
Team Filler
Member
Fair point. I do admit that I find it much easier to recall posters acting in that manner compared to mods.
But hasn't it been proven time and again that bagged milk sucks?
Especially since when a controversial ban happens, there are like 25 posts asking what is going on. Seems an explanation would curtail some of that and make the posting better over time as one can read about situations where people were banned and learn from it. I don't like the fact that regular posters have been permed and had no idea for what or why.
Contacting mods is a bit difficult if you can't access their profile details because you can't login... As I said, my last ban was deserved but those other bans? Nah. I still don't think so. I actually thought of contacting mods, I have looked for email addresses but never could find any. What's the support email address? Where is it mentioned?
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
I've been a Canadian my whole life, I'm in my late 20s, and I had it for the first time this week. It tastes the same, it's slightly less convenient to drink, it's more convenient to store extras of, and it's cheaper. *shrugs* Pretty neutral trade to me.
Not to derail this thread or anything.
Sye d'Burns
Member
People keep saying this but it's so vague, in what way do you "restrain yourself"? Do you have a natural tendency to type the word "fag" at the end of every sentence? I don't get it.
Not long after this Elsk get banned for jokingly calling someone a "funny cunt" or "crazy cunt". Now maybe that wasn't wise if he knew posters got banned for that word, but at the same time it was just a bit of banter.
They were no sexual or gender connotations, and it wasn't used to insult someone.
More or less. It doesnt even need to be much, and Im not saying all bans need to have a public message attached to it, but it would be super extremely nonsensically helpful in threads like say, the CFA one with people dropping like flies for essentially the same reason.
I will say though that most of that confusion could be avoided by people just reading the goddamn thread before posting in it but that is a proven failure of an expectation and you cant expect it to work even when you back it up with bans.
Not restricting myself in saying anything offensive, but for example, if you were to make a lighthearted joke which may be tolerable on other forums, but on here, you'd most likely be banned for it. And talking about a game, movie, or show without spoiling them can be tricky.
-COOLIO-
The Everyman
it's also fun to play with
Huevos de Oro
Member
People keep saying this but I'm not sure if I can really believe it.
Sye d'Burns
Member
Wow, those long winters really leave Canadians longing for entertainment, according to your sources.
Although, I have to admit -coolio- had me wanting to play with a bag of milk. Seems a little awkward to admit that now, though.
Buddha Beam
Banned
I don't want nudity. I browse GAF at work. That's just asking to get people fired!
I suppose if I had to make an observation about this place (I'm hesitant to call it a complaint, as I don't really disagree)... it would be that one the one hand, the community grows organically and I THINK that's encouraged and is what EviLore and the other GAF top brass more or less wants.
...but on the other hand, we sometimes see that organic grown tamped down on or even outright squashed, usually by declaring things are now banned. Again, I don't really see that as a bad thing as it keeps this place from becoming a shithole of obnoxious pigs forum like, say, that bodybuilding forum that seems to get linked a lot here.
But it does lead to you having to ask yourself, "Should/can I say this?"
Now, the obvious response to that question is "if you have to ask, don't say it!" which isn't a bad rule to live by in general... But on the other side of the coin, I feel like it leads to a feeling of inconsistency with what is and isn't cool.
Or, if you prefer, the rules are kind of open to a degree of interpretation (as rules often are), but those boundaries aren't clearly defined. At best, you know when you're getting close to the out of bounds zone, but it can be hard to know if you're in it or not.
... well, sometimes it's abundantly clear when you're in the out of bounds zone, but I digress. haha.
If any word really needed banning on NeoGAF, its this one. I dont understand the logic when its applied to this. And I never have.
EDIT: if you browse GAF at work, you should be doing so with images and avatars turned off, otherwise you're looking for a world of hurt.
BakedPigeon
Banned
So what your saying is if you dont like a poster or your opinion differs from a lot of the opinions of a poster they eventually will get the banhammer? I'm not accusing you of doing this, just trying to understand what you are saying..... because to me you should only be banned if a certain post is bannable offense, not for a poster having a history of posting borderline beliefs.
RiggenBlaque
Member
He's saying if a poster has a history of shit posting, they'll ban them when they feel it's been enough.
This is exactly why public ban records should exist because when someone gets banned for a seemingly minor infraction, everyone assumes the mods are on a power trip. On SA, you frequently see bans with descriptions like "okay you've had your chance, get the fuck out"
Thunder Monkey
Banned
It can seem like it when ideals align. But even those among selected groups have varying degrees of interest and personal investment. For the most part I don't feel like it's smart to fight battles for a corporation, or against a religion.
In the end you just burn perfectly usable bridges. And that's just dumb when you're on an island.
Can't it just say that this poster has a history of garbage and link to some of the garbage they are talking about?
I might be in trouble. For serious.
I sort of agree with this I guess (the fighting the battles part). I still think someone should state their opinion when asked even if it goes against a lot of what people think. But if it gets to that point where it's constant arguing for 9 pages or people quoting the same person and talking shit for a bunch of pages, it gets ridiculous.
Dude Abides
Banned
No. Sye Dburns was being silly and ridiculous so I followed his lead.
BadAss2961
Member
What's troubling is that you can be banned for not necessarily breaking the rules, but for offending the wrong person or group of people when that wasn't the intention. So you always feel like you're walking on such thin ice when posting on touchy subjects.
GAF might be improving on this lately, but how did mods like the transgender girl (can't remember her name...) and AmiRox reign for so long? With AmiRox i've probably heard more horror stories than i've actually seen though.
GAF might be improving on this lately, but how did mods like the transgender girl (can't remember her name...) and AmiRox reign for so long? With AmiRox i've probably heard more horror stories than i've actually seen though.
Knux-Future
Banned
Yeah?
Just because you think it's ignorance (it may very well be), doesn't give you the right to look down on them for it.
As long as they don't push it on you or act dickish about itt...what's the problem with them beliving that?
Let flip it.
Let say you or someone doesn't believe in gay rights or think that homosexuality is a choice. If they were a gaffer, it wouldn't be okay for them to bash or look down on them...they would get banned fast as shit. But if they think that it is ignorance, then why should they have to curtail their voice and you don't?
The fact is that NONE of us know who is really right or not. and we will never know because by the time we are able to figure it out...we can't exactly come back and tell people (unless ghosts are real...which would be awesome).
Everybody should be allowed to believe what they believe as long as they are nice about it.
There are a ton of intolerant dicks Christians/religious people...but being intolerant back to all for them is kinda counterproductive and lame.
Two wrongs and all that.
TlDR: basically if you are going to be a dick to someone over their beliefs then make sure they deserve it....or better yet ignore them and don't paint everyone in that group as the same.
But the thing is, people generally know when someone has a history of either shit posting or subtly trolling threads. Its usually pretty transparent in that regard. The public ban doesnt give ALL context. You have to naturally acquire that through reading the forum and topics. But it does provide immediate context for what is and isnt acceptable just in case you're about to make the same mistake in a topic.
TheChocolateWar
Member
It isn't so much the wanton use of profanities you have to be careful about, but the discussion of ideas that are a little bit out of the norm. Even if a poster isn't advocating a position but merely wishes to explore the ramifications of something a bit controversial that can lead to a ban. For instance, a poster may merely be wishing to explore the intricacies of the most vile of stances without actually personally supporting it. They want more than hostility from the PC point of view and actual, intellectual discussion.
It is a shame, because neogaf has a bit more of an intellectual community than found elsewhere.
This is supposed to be a site with civilized discussion, it shouldn't be an insulting spree just because somebody has a different opinion with you, calling people idiots or saying to go f yourself should be here.
For one example, you can't even give a hint that you are going to vote for Romney or don't agree with something Obama said without getting called names like an idiot or just being accused of being a troll. Some of you are better than that.
For one example, you can't even give a hint that you are going to vote for Romney or don't agree with something Obama said without getting called names like an idiot or just being accused of being a troll. Some of you are better than that.
Skellig Gra
Member
Definitely not, sometimes it can be too lax if the mods agree with your hateful opinion of someone else's posts. Not saying its the norm at all but it can happen. Overall I'm perfectly happy with the "level of strictness" so to speak.
Buddha Beam
Banned
You know what I kind of wish we had is the ability to ban people from specific threads or topics.
It'd be great if we had the ability to tag threads with keywords and then apply a ban on entering those threads to certain users, if need be. I've noticed that sometimes you get posters who are really appreciated in a certain area or community, but they get banned because they (frequently) say or troll other, unrelated threads. It ends up being a blessing to be rid of that person for some members, but a loss for other members of something completely unrelated.
Other people deserve to be outright banned, though. heh.
At any rate, I feel like that might help some with respect to knowing why someone was banned and what is and isn't responsible to post.
It'd be great if we had the ability to tag threads with keywords and then apply a ban on entering those threads to certain users, if need be. I've noticed that sometimes you get posters who are really appreciated in a certain area or community, but they get banned because they (frequently) say or troll other, unrelated threads. It ends up being a blessing to be rid of that person for some members, but a loss for other members of something completely unrelated.
Other people deserve to be outright banned, though. heh.
At any rate, I feel like that might help some with respect to knowing why someone was banned and what is and isn't responsible to post.
Sye d'Burns
Member
That's pretty clever.
definitely.
Really? I can't imagine things are that heated in political threads. They seem to generally be well moderated whenever I take a short peek in there. I'd like to think that I could talk about any of the things I disagree with Obama on, and there are a few major ones, without getting shit from other users, as long as I've substantiated it.
Yes, yes, I realize the red name might make how people approach you slightly different, but even then, is it really that bad for a regular user?
I think what happened w/ PKM is a pretty good example of the gang mentality on here that gets way out of control. People were even attacking his kid.
'Regarding Cunt' is now the title of my tender coming-of-age novel.
Thunder Monkey
Banned
But a really bad idea.
The entire point of a discussion board is having a dialog with someone holding an opposing viewpoint from you. If you're not doing that you're not playing the game right.
But that means (within reason) that both you and the other person have to be willing to listen to one another. You can always hold your own personal view. But that in no way invalidates theirs. Unless it's something repugnant.
Being religious or not are not some of these things. Out and out mocking someone for having faith in something greater is. Denying there is a problem in the Catholic church is. Religious people may believe in things I find absurd. But I incessantly post on a message board and dedicate untold hours to fantasy worlds.
We're all flawed. My depiction means different things to different people. Some may be offended. And for that I apologize. It's not my intention to diminish what you believe is true. But you gotta admit. It was funny right?
I have seen some posts by conservatives get nailed with some pretty vicious shit, like "you're a horrible person" type stuff. Granted, a lot of those posts are somewhat asking for it as well, but the response isn't warranted a great deal of the time.
its not that frequent though. I'm more concerned with people jumping at posts and reading into them and calling people bigots and such. I see that way more frequently in feminism/gay rights and race threads. And I'm a liberal.
Most of the time the people who get branded with that shit arent even bigots, just incapable of understanding perspective or confused because of lack of personal experience. Either way the 'hivemind' is very real in some of these topics.
I'd say yes, it is that bad. It's a large part of my problem with the OT forums. To me, OT lost its purpose to me once OT-Community was created.
Most of what seems to get posted in OT is depressing news and tag fishing threads (a lot of dumb "e-celeb" stuff is posted to, but that's unrelated to this). The news threads specifically seem to get heated every time someone gives their opinion that the majority doesn't agree with. A lot of these threads are either political or religious debates that go nowhere. That's not to say GAF is incapable of civil discussion, it's definitely IS capable of it, but a lot of the debate threads look like they devolve down into shit-throwing-fests.
I absolutely loath 90% of the OT-Forum.
- Status