IrishNinja
Member
you can tell them if you see the same people posting that in every related thread, but a policy to ban based on not posting that you don't see the value in a given service? seems a bit much, doesn't it?
Is GAF too strict?
- Thread starter Kraftwerk
- Start date
- Status
you can tell them if you see the same people posting that in every related thread, but a policy to ban based on not posting that you don't see the value in a given service? seems a bit much, doesn't it?
This is probably just because it is 9:00 AM and I am slower than usual, but I have no idea what you are talking about. Can you rephrase?
For reals? I'm not being obtuse, but every time the subject of thread is a person, most often a woman, the thread is plagued by sexual affirmations. I don't recall anyone ever being banned for it. If this is covered in the TOS I don't see it.
I was just curious. Not really a big deal.
Not everything is covered in the TOS...it would be too large to account for every usage. It stands to reason that some logical leaps are made by the moderation team. Apparently every ban is peer reviewed anyway...although I'm not sure if it's a real review or just other mods going "Oh yah CrankyJay...let him sit." =P
Well "why can't this be on ps3" is empty, but it's also not the best case scenario of port-begging.
There are fair points to be made, sometimes, as to why a certain game would benefit from appearing on a different hardware, and interesting discussions to be had, be it more power for an open world game or a particular controller mechanic (if Project Zero were to be released on ps3 exclusively, you could make a good point about it being a missed opportunity for the wiiU controller, for example).
I think he means when people post "would" because something in the OP is humpworthy.
The Elite
BOSS
Most of those don't seem like that much of an issue. I think GAF may be a little too strict on stuff like this. Most of these statements don't derail threads and who hasn't wished that something would come to their console/handheld of choice at one time or another. Seems pretty harmless.
Agreed.
Both of you missed my point, completely. It's not their opinion, but rather the insults.
Port begging does not derail threads....anymore. Because it's enforced. It was a huge problem.
NinjaBoiX
Member
Check out this one.
That's some pretty innocuous stuff. But rules is rules I guess.
That one might be borderline but a few of the previous Rayman Legends threads were bombarded by port begging, so I'm guessing they wanted to nip it at the bud that time.
Context matters.
We do ban for that sort of thing, but we're not equally strict in every topic; the context of the conversation and the particular topic where it takes place matters and the particulars of an individual post matters.
Though you may well have seen things that might have been moderated were they noticed, I don't know.
Yes, he actually clarified what he meant in a PM.
NinjaBoiX
Member
Oh yeah, some of the examples were like, "why are they wasting their time on 'X' system" or "this would look much better on..." That's just being a troll, never mind port begging.
But yeah, I think some posters were just making a genuine comment, and got caught out by the zero tolerance policy.
Is it OK to ask rather than request if a game is coming out for another system?
Rebel Leader
THE POWER OF BUTTERSCOTCH BOTTOMS
There's a thread I THINK I would like to make but I don't know if it's a good idea =(
NinjaBoiX
Member
Here's a good a place as any to float it man! You aren't going to get banned for asking if you can make a thread, particularly in a thread specifically about GAF's policies and such.
black_vegeta
Member
Mods, how would a member that was "juniorized" be promoted back to "member" status?
Ultra good behavior? Contribution within threads?
Help a brotha out please.
Ultra good behavior? Contribution within threads?
Help a brotha out please.
NinjaBoiX
Member
By not asking.
And I'm not being facetious, stump specifically stated as such in this very thread.
But otherwise, all the other stuff you said.
charlequin
Banned
When in doubt, and if it's not listed in the OP or thread title, ask "what platform(s) is this game on?"
NinjaBoiX
Member
OK, that makes sense. I guess if you really felt the need, you could just PM one of the dev's if they're gaffers!
There's also Google.com
T.M. MacReady
NO ONE DENIES MEMBER
NinjaBoiX
Member
Rebel Leader
THE POWER OF BUTTERSCOTCH BOTTOMS
black_vegeta
Member
Thanks for the info Stump. It has been more than a year for me, but I'll keep being on my bestest behavior and contributing as much as I can.
EDIT: FFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU I'M A MEMBER!!!!! I thought this day would never come!!! Tears of joy! T_T
Thank you for whoever(s) memberized me! <3 <3 <3 <3 <3
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
forgive my ignorance, but why is saying that you wish you could play a game on the platform you have a bannable offense? I can understand some of them being justified on account of them being rude, but some of the others seem a bit rough.
I am a junior member and wasn't even aware the practice had been given name, so I don't really know the history of it on GAF
Canis lupus
Member
It caused thread derailments. :/
Visit places that allow it and you'll know why.
EatChildren
Currently polling second in Australia's federal election (first in the Gold Coast), this feral may one day be your Bogan King.
Long and short of it, because it doesn't really add to actual discussion of a game, and often encourages derailment discussion centred around why the game should/should not be ported and so on. Like, Game X gets announced, or a new trailer is shown, or previews come out, somebody says "I wish the game was on Platform Y", and suddenly everybody is talking about Platform Y and not the game, the trailer, or the previews.
ShinNL
Member
Nope, keep the bans regarding that going. It can get out of hand really fast where the thread completely derails for stupid shit like this,
fair enough. cheers for the explaination
Phoenician_Viking
Banned
I am wondering, is it true that some mods/admin have it for certain posters?
All bans are moderated so it wouldn't matter, if a mod did have it in for a poster(s) and kept banning them unnecessarily or giving harsh bans then they would probably be deemed unfit to be a mod.
I think 1-2 mods have it in for joke posters like blame space, Eggman etc (I don't blame them either). blame space was recently pema'd by someone then it was reduced to like 4 months. I guess it was decided he worth worth keeping around, despite the fact he has multiple bannings and is just around to joke and skirt the rules all the time.
Phoenician_Viking
Banned
That´s a huge problem then. Why would you not blame them? Sure, mods can dislike some posters here but that should not mean that they let their dislike of certain posters dictate their actions. The great thing here is that mods don´t ban people who have opposing views from them, or people who are not serious posters.
From my point of view joke posters are allowed to get away with things other posters wouldn't, because they are 'funny' and have a character on the forum. I am simply in support of the mods that don't like them because I think it brings joke posters in line with regular posters.
You can see the note on blame spaces last ban. To me is shows at least one mod is tired of his posts breaking the rules.
The saving part probably means other mods reducing the permban to a tempban. I think I read that mods decide bans together these days.
A Pretty Panda
fuckin' called it, man
Wow...
ShinNL
Member
I personally don't like how I can't ignore posts from mods 
I can understand not being able to ignore administrators and owners and chiefs, but most of the time regular moderators don't post 'in duty'. They get that advantage of "I can be really annoying and irrational and never stop posting about it and you can't ignore me". That's kind of a shame, especially when they take a stance that's bother line unacceptable moral wise.
I can understand not being able to ignore administrators and owners and chiefs, but most of the time regular moderators don't post 'in duty'. They get that advantage of "I can be really annoying and irrational and never stop posting about it and you can't ignore me". That's kind of a shame, especially when they take a stance that's bother line unacceptable moral wise.
A Pretty Panda
fuckin' called it, man
Amir0x is no longer a mod.
Sometimes mods will post some sort of warning. Like "every post after this one saying __ will be banned" or something like that. Probably don't want to ignore that.
I personally don't like how I can't ignore posts from mods
I can understand not being able to ignore administrators and owners and chiefs, but most of the time regular moderators don't post 'in duty'. They get that advantage of "I can be really annoying and irrational and never stop posting about it and you can't ignore me". That's kind of a shame, especially when they take a stance that's bother line unacceptable moral wise.
Pretty sure you can alter the Neogaf user highlight script to allow blocking of anyone you want, at least for Firefox. Personally though if I had to go that far just to block mods/admins/evilore then I wouldn't even want to be on the forum. If it has come to that point then I would be questioning why I even bother coming here. Not saying that is the situation for you at all btw.
It's ok, I like you
I haven't seen you shit up threads or make really stupid joke posts or threads like Eggman and blame space do.But do you disagree that joke posters get preferential treatment and are allowed to get away with more things than regular members? and if so please tell me why you disagree.
ShinNL
Member
I don't even know what this script thing is, but what you say is true. I'm not suddenly going to do 1000 steps just to make sure I don't see 1 person's posts. It's not like my time here is miserable because I can't ignore someone.
But it's more or less a strange feeling to know that I really like the nice and high morals of the mods and admins, except that I've noticed a really dis-likable one in the bunch with morals completely the opposite my own. I don't think it's bad enough to cry "de-mod!" but I would assume his/her morals would mismatch with other mods as well.
In that sense, I cannot see GAF police as 1 entity, and my first thought with the thread title "Is GAF too strict?" is "depends who's modding at the time". Oh well. Can't go into details, I'm not that kind of person to go all rumor spreading. I already went into conflict at the time and no mod powers were abused anyway. I just wish my ignore power wasn't stolen from me
Ya it's totally who is modding at the time. Some posters get more slack, some do not. We are all people at the end of the day so it's going to come down to personal discretion. I feel ya though I am not going through some crazy ass steps in a script to block anyone, screw that noise. Rather play a game or something.
Well, you can't take each individual post in isolation when deciding whether to ban someone. Past actions and behavior are going to get factored in. And inevitably, sometimes personal dislike will as well. Not much you can do about that as a mod besides try not to let it influence you too much. Or ask another mod's opinion.
This is sort of a weird thing to say. Do you mean that their style of modding seems wrong to you? Or do you literally mean that you think that they, personally, are an immoral human being? Because really, if it doesn't affect their modding, who cares?
- Status