I'm reminded every time on mumble that I am in every thread. I have a problem ;_;
Just caught this going through the thread. lol'd
Is GAF too strict?
- Thread starter Kraftwerk
- Start date
- Status
I'm reminded every time on mumble that I am in every thread. I have a problem ;_;
Just caught this going through the thread. lol'd
I have to say, it bothers me when people do this sort of post-hoc "Hey, these guys did something similarly bad and they did not get banned; why only me?" posts. You have to remember, (I think) all of the moderators either have jobs or school that they are involved in. We do not all moderate across the entire forum, but in the topics that interest us. I have days where I only look at my subscriptions and do not even look at the main page of the OT. And I did not see the particular topic in question (and good thing, because I had gotten off home from work about forty minutes before it was created and the last thing I am interested in doing is reading a thread about high school strippers that probably would be a chore) and no one PM'd me about it, which leads me to ask:
When you saw this topic, did you report it to a moderator? Did you PM anyone? Did you get on IRC and mention it? I don't feel particularly sympathetic when the only time I see people bringing these topics to the attention of moderators is as a post-hoc rationalization for why they should not have been banned or how the moderators are being unfair or inconsistent. It does not seem fair to me that you guys expect the fifteen or so reasonably active moderators not only not to miss any topics, but also to fail to give us the benefit of the doubt by automatically jumping to the assumption that there is some sort of intentional inconsistency going on, where we are looking at posts in similar contexts and simply arbitrarily deciding to ban people on a whim.
The vast majority of "inconsistency" claims are actually a matter of topics that were simply not read. That really is the extent of it for most topics. There are also some that are contextually different enough that they would not have been moderated or would have been given a different response, even if they had been seen. And there are some that were seen and we did not think they warranted anything. If this sort of inconsistency bothers you (or anyone else) and you want those topics to be moderated, PM us. If you link me to something that I don't see anything worth worrying about, I'll tell you that I got your PM but I do not see anything that needs my attention. There have been more than a few topics where I did not look at it until someone sent me a message on IRC or PM'd me saying, "This topic is awful, can you look at it?" I appreciate it when people point out (legitimate) problem topics, especially when they look innocuous from the outside.
So, tl;dr: For greater consistency, PM us when you see something problematic.
I cannot really discuss specifics, but yes mods can have disagreements about bans and discuss them. And on rare occasion they have been overturned or the length has been reduced / increased. The vast majority (~99%) of bans are uncontroversial, however.
You could not find anything because he requested his ban.
As I mentioned, you can request bans, though I am not taking this as a serious request. If you actually do want it, you can PM a mod and ask.
I think my main problem is the historical revisionism; you see something that causes a lot of bans, and hasn't previously caused bans, and the moderation staff goes, "no, that's always been a rule, GAF is always like that, we've always been at war with Oceania". It just seems like a way to deflect criticism.
blame space
Banned
it's never been like that.
A Pretty Panda
fuckin' called it, man
I was banned when that topic was posted.
And of course its not an intentional inconsistentcy between mods, I don't believe that in the slightest. It's just confusing on our end of things.
I don't think there is a way to fix it but if there was a way then that'd be cool.
Warnings or something idk.
And I will PM you later with stuff like that I see on gaf.
And of course its not an intentional inconsistentcy between mods, I don't believe that in the slightest. It's just confusing on our end of things.
I don't think there is a way to fix it but if there was a way then that'd be cool.
Warnings or something idk.
And I will PM you later with stuff like that I see on gaf.
I don't think that's (necessarily) true.
I obviously cannot comment on every issue, but I would pretend that moderation has not changed over the years. I think moderation has become stricter on issues involving minorities in the offensiveness of what you can say, or the topics and ways in which you can express sexual interest over the years has changed. I think that the general tenor of how much of a dick you can be to other posters has changed. I know that overt sexual content is more frowned upon than it used to be (remember the topics we used to have about explicit sexual acts and bodily functions) and are now verboten as topic material. And I think that given the differences in the size and culture of the forum that some buttoning up like this is inevitable.
I also do not think any moderator would deny that there have been changes over the years in these areas, most of which have been gradual, and some of which were more abrupt, changes. But sometimes things really were just policy and warnings that serve as reminders really were just reminders of existing, long-term policy.
For instance, as I mentioned earlier in this thread, I discussed my reminder / policy clarification regarding "cunt" in the Euro Cup thread with EviLore and several other moderators. Every moderator that I spoke to about it was on the same page as far as knowing what the policy was. It was viewed as little more than a "fair warning" to people who evidently had gotten the wrong impression somewhere along the way, I suspect primarily due to the fact that it was most often occurring in topics where they were doing it not really getting a whole lot of attention.
I suppose it might seem like it is just a way of deflecting criticism if you were in a community that previously had been getting away with something and now you are being told that you have to stop, but that does not mean the rule has changed. It simply means the issue is getting attention that it had not been getting as much of before.
You can also try IRC.
Quite a few of the mods are on irc.wiicafe.net in #ga, or you can find mods in various community IRC things (e.g. Pony-GAF or Anime-GAF or Footie-GAF (though that is mostly Kabouter or me); you just have to read the topic to find out where those are.
Though I doubt you would have cared that much while you were banned, yes. I had not thought of that. But IRC is still nice if you just want to talk to people outside of GAF.
This actually does happen. I have seen moderators warn people in threads, I have heard about moderators PMing warnings to people instead of making it public, and I have warned people in PMs or in posts.
Excellent. Though I suspect not everyone would be pleased by this, though I cannot place my finger on who that might be.
Finaika
Member
I've been on GAF since the beginning, and been a member since 2004, and never been banned once.
But 2 weeks ago I was banned for this: http://neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=40936923&postcount=112
I'm not complaining or anything, but I'm kinda baffled as to how that comment was offensive in anyway.
But 2 weeks ago I was banned for this: http://neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=40936923&postcount=112
I'm not complaining or anything, but I'm kinda baffled as to how that comment was offensive in anyway.
blame space
Banned
in their defense, Malaysia does sound pretty offensive.
BakedPigeon
Banned
You just have to find the right balance between extremely retarded post's and borderline offensive. Once you hit that g-spot it is smooth sailing.
I'm an expert
Formerly worldrevolution. The only reason I am nice to anyone else is to avoid being banned.
Figures..the one example I happen across is a guy who asked to be banned from a forum. Seriously.. why would anyone.. ugh nevermind.
Ban requests are not as rare as you might think, a lot of people request bans to better focus on studying, work or any number of things. Some people even request permanent bans.
Signs of weakness.
I've done it and it's actually the opposite, took all my willpower lol.
(procrastinating at GAF atm btw)
Per..permanent ban request?
Daaaamn I'd rather play Russian Roulette with 5 in the chamber.
Gaf4lyfe.
I'm an expert
Formerly worldrevolution. The only reason I am nice to anyone else is to avoid being banned.
Signs of weakness.
I dunno.. the hold over today's youth shit such as the internet and smart phones have is pretty insane. Though I agree it's disheartening that they haven't developed self control. These are the people who will inherit the earth!
Close the browser. Stop procrastinating. The end.
Thanks you cured every procrastinator.
I'm an expert
Formerly worldrevolution. The only reason I am nice to anyone else is to avoid being banned.
I accept paypal.
He'll pay you eventually.
I'm an expert
Formerly worldrevolution. The only reason I am nice to anyone else is to avoid being banned.
Yeah I dunno.. I mean.. if you need it, fine. But it's one site of zillions on the internet, not to mention you can still read the site even when banned, right? I just equate it to hiring someone to follow you around and not let you eat hamburgers all day, but then you most likely just eat pizza all day.
Eh, if I would've just replaced GAF with other sites (pizza), I wouldn't have been able to do the work that needed to be done now would I. I'm not even sayin I would've not been able to without the ban, but it eliminated one big time sink on my computer which I thought would help. And indeed I could've read GAF if I wanted, but didn't. That kinda shows exactly the opposite behaviour you are implying here.
You are being very "high horsey" here in my opinion.
I'm an expert
Formerly worldrevolution. The only reason I am nice to anyone else is to avoid being banned.
Right.. I'll just get off my incredibly tall horse now..
I don't even like Pizza 'n burgers.
NinjaBoiX
Member
I think the ban hammer should come down when someone is being intentionally hurtful or obnoxious. When people get banned just for thoughtfully expressing an unpopular opinion, it's like, "Really? You didn't like my gently and politely delivered POV, so boom, ban?" Especially when followed with plenty of apologises and an explanation.
I said something really stupid, that I shouldn't have said, and got banned. It wasn't intended to offend, but in hindsight, it was bound to, and it was a statement based on lack of knowledge too. I apologised profusely, and explained why I thought what I did, but I still got banned. A few people questioned the banning, stating that the apology and explanation should've been enough, but apparently not.
So two week ban, maybe a little heavy handed, but it was a stupid thing to say, so I took it on the chin. My ban was then extended by two weeks with no explanation. That part really fucked me off. The initial ban was questionable enough, but then to be doubled with no explanation? RAGE!
Anyway, I've learned the hard way, no matter how gently you approach certain topics, they are just too sensitive. I like this forum too much to not pay heed to my overlords! I'm keeping dumb opinions to myself from now on!
I said something really stupid, that I shouldn't have said, and got banned. It wasn't intended to offend, but in hindsight, it was bound to, and it was a statement based on lack of knowledge too. I apologised profusely, and explained why I thought what I did, but I still got banned. A few people questioned the banning, stating that the apology and explanation should've been enough, but apparently not.
So two week ban, maybe a little heavy handed, but it was a stupid thing to say, so I took it on the chin. My ban was then extended by two weeks with no explanation. That part really fucked me off. The initial ban was questionable enough, but then to be doubled with no explanation? RAGE!
Anyway, I've learned the hard way, no matter how gently you approach certain topics, they are just too sensitive. I like this forum too much to not pay heed to my overlords! I'm keeping dumb opinions to myself from now on!
Trent Strong
Banned
Is the phrase 'horse fucker' banned?
Trent Strong
Banned
Good idea. I'll have to try that.
Your best bet is Evilore.
Your initial ban was not questionable. And if someone sees their ban length increased (or decreased) it is either because the mod who banned you decided the original length was inappropriate independently or because it was discussed and another moderator convinced him or her to increase or decrease the length.
NinjaBoiX
Member
I wasn't the only one to question it. If I'd said it harshly, and offered no explanation or apology, then yeah, but it's not my decision I guess!
I agree, it was a stupid thing to say, both ill-advised, and plain wrong. I hold my hands up, I should've known better; better than to say it, and, well, better informed in general about the subject!
I regretted it as soon as I posted it, and felt that, although I knew I meant no harm, it would probably be seen that way. There is a time and a place and all that.
The extension wouldn't have stung so much with an explanation, but it was just, extended. It made me think that I'd really offended someone! I really didn't intend to.
Anyway, I can fully understand a zero tolerance policy on stuff like that, I know for the future.
My bad.
I'm an expert
Formerly worldrevolution. The only reason I am nice to anyone else is to avoid being banned.
Well, now you have to tell us what you said, you know, for public example.
NinjaBoiX
Member
Well, I'm embarrassed at how ill-informed it was, and also, it got me banned for over a month. Suffice to say, I'm reluctant to tell you!
It wasn't really that juicy, more just dumb. Maybe a mod will tell you. At least I apologised, I'm not that much of an idiot!
I'd give you a link myself, but I can't remember what the thread was called. Anyway, let's just say I've learnt my lesson.
And more about the subject. At least I got some education out of it!
TheRagnCajun
Member
I know I'm really late to the discussion, but I thought I'd chime in and say that moderation on GAF has noticably improved. Much more discernment and discretion.
mclaren777
Member
I don't think the moderators are too strict, but I do feel that GAF (especially OT) often has a fair amount of groupthink, especially once a trend has emerged in a thread. It seems nobody wants to be the "combo breaker" when the first 10+ posts are generally all expressing the exact same viewpoint.
And I realize that GAF probably attracts similar-minded people, but I just can't accept that everybody here is really that homogeneous.
And I realize that GAF probably attracts similar-minded people, but I just can't accept that everybody here is really that homogeneous.
LAUGHTREY
Modesty becomes a woman
To be fair I think in the case of liability with regards to illegal activities, it's probably better to be safe rather than sorry.
Yeah, and anyway who really wants to read topics about people saying "I FUCKING LOVE COCAINE"?
Jedeye Sniv
Banned
I've never been banned for talking about drugs. Just don't make threads about it and your golden, but if it's germaine to the conversation I'm sure you can talk about them a bit.
Maybe I just read too many Kentpaul posts?
Moral Panic
Member
What's up with all the constant copying and pasting of entire articles? It's rightly against the TOS, as well as being not a nice thing to do.
I really try to avoid doing this just because it's not fair to the author's who wrote it all for their website or blog. But I agree, I see this done all the time.
There's also the issue of compliance with Google AdSense.
NinjaBoiX
Member
I must admit, I do this quite often. I usually start with a link to the article though.
flippymittens
Banned
Well some forms of discrimination are tolerated/encouraged on NeoGaf andeven perpetrated by the moderators/admins themselves.
I think that Neogaf is somewhat an elitist climate with socially darwinistic rules (picking and chosing who to moderate based on whether the mods agree with the poster).
I personally am happy with the discussions other than that and rather enjoy the fact that some slurs are banned.
I think that Neogaf is somewhat an elitist climate with socially darwinistic rules (picking and chosing who to moderate based on whether the mods agree with the poster).
I personally am happy with the discussions other than that and rather enjoy the fact that some slurs are banned.
- Status