Is GAF too strict?
- Thread starter Kraftwerk
- Start date
- Status
Riposte
Member
Is quoting SquiddyBiscuit and writing:
36. Vita
Witty enough for you?
No because after a few months the posters on that list won't be dead.
Count Dookkake
Member
One need not be witty to report the truth.
Sye d'Burns
Member
More likely stuff like this:
LeBrick James said:
LeBrick James said:
LeBrick James said:This, but also that everything is more interesting with women you know personally, or maybe have even just briefly come in contact with. Who hasn't crept on Facebook before?
Dr.Palutena
Member
It has nothing to do with work and more so to do with them simply not wanting that info available, when Stump is gracious enough to sate us he usually gives us a bit of info that shows that all the info you want is there, just not visible. It just comes down to a choice of not wanting to disclose that info for whatever reason, probably because they think it will come to do more harm than good .
Lack of public ban transparency is intentional. The person who gets banned gets told why it went down, and bans are well-documented and vetted internally, and that's the extent of it. To everyone else, it's not relevant. Read the ToS and the FAQ forum and use some sense. Making everything a public spectacle invites gossip and constant questioning of the administration's decisions, which derails threads more than the idiot who got banned in the first place probably did.
It doesn't fly with you? Excuse me?
It doesn't fly with you? Excuse me?
Blackace
if you see me in a fight with a bear, don't help me fool, help the bear!
Well considering that's not the official reason they got banned (could be not sure myself yet) doesn't matter how much sense it makes
Devolution
Member
Oh no our other daddy is here.
TheGreatDivide
Banned
Do you not think keeping the information undisclosed just encourages this more? I don't see how making it so the only way someone can know for sure why another poster was banned is by asking in a thread like this isn't counter intuitive to the idea you don't want the reason for the ban to derail threads.
legacyzero
Banned
Riposte
Member
This is certainly true if recent events are anything to go by.
Blackace
if you see me in a fight with a bear, don't help me fool, help the bear!
lol
Count Dookkake
Member
lol.
Oh boy...
Count Dookkake
Member
I like the mystery. It's fun to see people get their hopes up that I have at last been felled.
If you really feel the need you can pm a mod and whether or not they disclose the reason is up to you. I usually go "oh, they're banned" and proceed about my business
It is just my opinion, obviously I'm not the one running the forums. It wasn't clarified but it seemed like to users that you used whatever profits gained from running neogaf to help fund your trip.
My thing was going "well that seems frivolous, as the admin shouldn't he spend that money back on the forums if that was where it was gained?"
But again, that was an initial assumption. It may be wrong and my arguement is unfounded.
I didn't mean to upset anyone v_v
Hehehe
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
I believe what they've said is that that would only cause even more ban drama and debates and "he only got a week but I got a month that's not fair!" and the like
Well, if they're asking here, they're not derailing the original thread.
A Pretty Panda
fuckin' called it, man
Someone ban Beef pls.
So people shouldn't use the profit from their business for travel? That seems a strange argument. But no worries.
TheGreatDivide
Banned
OK, but if the reason is public why would it derail the thread more so than if the reason is not public? The number one reason for thread derails as a result of a banning is "lol why were they banned".
SquiddyCracker
Banned
I dunno, it's some forum entertainment and deterrence at the same time. Even the banned posters can enjoy the festivities once they're logged out!
I think we're on the same page.
Professor Beef
Banned
Blackace
if you see me in a fight with a bear, don't help me fool, help the bear!
Not to speak for evil but you don't know how much he puts into GAF or how long he saved for his trip or anything
I think it should be fine. Though some of the blood lust in here was certainly borderline creepy though.
WanderingWind
Mecklemore Is My Favorite Wrapper
Plus, you know. We don't pay for using the site. Which entitles us to exactly...nothing, really.
A Pretty Panda
fuckin' called it, man
I was already banned once, though. You missed your chance to celebrate it.
I'm requesting not celebrating!
Right, as I said it was based on an assumption that I and others have mentioned (not in this thread though I think)
Sorry.
It's possible to do this with vbulletin, yes. Other forums have this feature setup.
NinjaBoiX
Member
Both my bans have been absolutely understandable. Both instances were stupid comments that didn't contribute at all to the discussion.
The mods are usually very amiable and informative with regards to questions and requests. The fact that you can still contact admin via email if you really feel your ban is unreasonable is above and beyond too.
So no, GAF isn't too strict IMO. I don't agree that it isn't strict enough either, generally a ban is obvious from a mile away, as the rules are pretty consistent.
The mods are usually very amiable and informative with regards to questions and requests. The fact that you can still contact admin via email if you really feel your ban is unreasonable is above and beyond too.
So no, GAF isn't too strict IMO. I don't agree that it isn't strict enough either, generally a ban is obvious from a mile away, as the rules are pretty consistent.
Huevos de Oro
Member
Sort of like Capt. Universe Spiderman?One time I was accidentally made a mod for like 5 minutes. I've seen their ban threadthat was years ago though
I wouldn't mind this. I know the policy is that 'transparency' is irrelevant but that's just not taking into account the community. Having a distinction between perms and regular bans wouldn't derail threads I don't think, it would just offer a bit of clarification and not lead to people asking about their favorite ___ community gaffer being permed or not.
If it's a coding thing, I get it, but from a principle standpoint it wouldn't really do much harm. We don't need to know EXACTLY why every single person is banned, but knowing whether or not it's a perma can be quite helpful. Especially when that person is a contributing user to a specific thread or community.
Just my thoughts on it... either way, I don't think it's fundamentally broken or anything as it is, as some are trying to suggest.
D
Deleted member 47027
Unconfirmed Member
Reasons and backgrounds for bans are between the mods and the user, and nobody else. It shouldn't be talked about, and for people to actually change, keeping it private between the two parties is necessary.
Basically it's nobody's business but their own. The end.
Basically it's nobody's business but their own. The end.
legacyzero
Banned
Alligatorjandro
Banned
Congrats Bish on that work.
Riposte
Member
Until they look at that user's post history.
You go out in public, and yell out "God damn those *racial slurs*"
You get arressted.
The papers don't say "Sunflower was arrested" and leave it at that, they generally say why. Neogaf is still a public forum, and as such your activities aren't private. What's the difference here?
In my opinion at the start of such threads there is an Acceptable Joking Period for the first few pages where people crack all their brilliant jokes before getting down to business. Rolling an unfunny attempt at humor out well after that is just bad form unless it's relevant to the turns to the thread and not just "sony is da wors, vita is ded 5ever".
Just saying "that vita sure is looking PRETTY dead to me" with no attached humor or reasoning does nothing to help the discussion or contribute to the Laughter Quota. After all, everyone knows GAF takes place in the post-movie Monster's Inc universe, where being unfunny causes worldwide blackouts.
In the case of that thread, the 3DS is a more at-risk individual, as it has an extra camera.
Well done, kudos to you. <3
Saying the Vita is dead because reasons and then going on to intelligently defend your points is different from just saying "lul look at that dead vita" and giving no further thought.
Just saying "that vita sure is looking PRETTY dead to me" with no attached humor or reasoning does nothing to help the discussion or contribute to the Laughter Quota. After all, everyone knows GAF takes place in the post-movie Monster's Inc universe, where being unfunny causes worldwide blackouts.
Is quoting SquiddyBiscuit and writing:
36. Vita
Witty enough for you
In the case of that thread, the 3DS is a more at-risk individual, as it has an extra camera.
yes i know that was in bad taste
Well done, kudos to you. <3
Saying the Vita is dead because reasons and then going on to intelligently defend your points is different from just saying "lul look at that dead vita" and giving no further thought.
Devolution
Member
Because discussions start getting bogged down in posting histories, previous bans and then people want to constantly debate whether something is bannable material even though I'm sure some bans are literally people already on the brink. It's not up to us, that's the main message you should just understand.
- Status