Support NeoGAF

[ilfait]

The moderation team felt it was necessary to provide a response to the recent banning of @KevinKeene. This is given freely and in the spirit of transparency. Obviously, we won't be doing this for every banning but felt this was a special case due to the response. We must first clarify that this wasn’t a decision made in the heat of the moment, nor by one outlying member of staff. It was also a difficult decision to make as we acknowledge the contributions Kevin made to the forum, but also weighed up the times he flew too close to the sun. Ultimately, after each staff member had given their input throughout the day in the moderation slack channel, the decision was unanimous and we felt action was necessary albeit unfortunate.


Certain topics will be contentious in their content and we appreciate posters will play devil’s advocate, or be contrary to open up debate. However, certain topics should not draw people in on a personal level. Distanced arguments framed in context, although difficult to read at times were untouched (There are a few examples in the thread itself). However, some of the responses from Kevin became a little too personal and emotive. And when you engage in a topic like this, with what could be construed as personal emotional investment, then it becomes very difficult to separate agenda and motivation from good faith arguments. It is also an expectation to enter debates like this with a fair bit of nuance, tact and with an empathetic attitude towards the adults/children who are/have/will be affected by life changing events/experiences.

Is the ban permanent?

 

[Bill O'Rights]

Is the ban permanent?

Yes.

 

[ilfait]

Alright, bye guys.

 

[Bill O'Rights]

That's too bad ilfait , you are quite the character. I would ask you to at least give it some serious thought.

 

[Yoshi]

May I suggest maybe rethinking whether it needs to be a full on permanent ban? In the past, NeoGAF has also made use of topic bans (I remember sales topic bans, I think for Tabris). Provided you perceived in particular his posting behaviour wrt. pedophilia problematic, it could be an option to just ban him from discussions on this topic. Considering the size of the active user base and the fact that it appears to be more of a tone issue than one with the thoughts themselves, this could be a solution that may be more acceptable accross the board?

 

[bitbydeath]

That's too bad ilfait , you are quite the character. I would ask you to at least give it some serious thought.

I’d like to point out there are other members who do a lot worse than Kevin such as suggesting violence against innocent civilians is OK due to their own prejudice. I can understand why ilfait would want to stop posting given the hypocrisy of it.

Modding is no simple task tho...

 

[Dunki]

The moderation team felt it was necessary to provide a response to the recent banning of @KevinKeene. This is given freely and in the spirit of transparency. Obviously, we won't be doing this for every banning but felt this was a special case due to the response. We must first clarify that this wasn’t a decision made in the heat of the moment, nor by one outlying member of staff. It was also a difficult decision to make as we acknowledge the contributions Kevin made to the forum, but also weighed up the times he flew too close to the sun. Ultimately, after each staff member had given their input throughout the day in the moderation slack channel, the decision was unanimous and we felt action was necessary albeit unfortunate.


Certain topics will be contentious in their content and we appreciate posters will play devil’s advocate, or be contrary to open up debate. However, certain topics should not draw people in on a personal level. Distanced arguments framed in context, although difficult to read at times were untouched (There are a few examples in the thread itself). However, some of the responses from Kevin became a little too personal and emotive. And when you engage in a topic like this, with what could be construed as personal emotional investment, then it becomes very difficult to separate agenda and motivation from good faith arguments. It is also an expectation to enter debates like this with a fair bit of nuance, tact and with an empathetic attitude towards the adults/children who are/have/will be affected by life changing events/experiences.

while it a great reply I also think he was judged more harshly then other people including.me. It went a bit more emotionally for quite a few people on both sides of the opinions . And the only thing I could ask to give him
One more chance.

 

[Bill O'Rights]

Thank you for the comments. We will take them on board. We do have a reply ban feature in xf software that we extend where possible to avoid proper bans.

 

[bitbydeath]

@mneuro said that people who hurt children should result in the most severe penalties.

Kevin replied that "Hurting a child is no worse than hurting anyone," and yall are really up in here still wondering why he was banned?

SMH.

Ah, I'm not seeing an issue with that one.
Obviously hurting anyone is bad, child or otherwise.

 

[JORMBO]

I’d be ok with giving Kevin another chance.

 

[Phoenix RISING]

No one cares what race she is or whether it's a diversity hire. We care that she is clearly a racist that despises white people and that the media is doubling down to protect her.

Additionally, any policy that singles out a race or minority is inherently racist and support for that obviously racism. Not rocket science. I get that you're trying to deflect from this madness but it's not gonna work.

E: Forthefuture has been banned so you can ignore part of my gripe I suppose.

Let's be clear that you don't care what race she is or if she's a diversity hire. According to the NYT statement, they do.

With that said, whether or not you clarify who entails "no one," is up to you.

Given that you say any policy that singles out a race or minority is inherently racist, I suppose it's safe to say that you're not in favor of Affirmative Action.

 

[bitbydeath]

Maybe if we had a seperate Politics discussion board and we could just ban certain people out of that particular board if they go too far.

 

[Corderlain]

Let's be clear that you don't care what race she is or if she's a diversity hire. According to the NYT statement, they do.

With that said, whether or not you clarify who entails "no one," is up to you.

Given that you say any policy that singles out a race or minority is inherently racist, I suppose it's safe to say that you're not in favor of Affirmative Action.

No I'm not a fan of affirmative action. NYT using her sex and race as an excuse of her being a racist is also disgusting.

Maybe if we had a seperate Politics discussion board and we could just ban certain people out of that particular board if they go too far.

I've suggested this before and whole heartedly agree.

 

[Liberty4all]

To claim that a diversity hire, or that reparations are racist is an exposition of you rather than them.

Bolivar687 made a post in that NYT thread where the NYT defended their hire already. This is the opposite of the "outrage culture" many of yall dislike, which got Rosanne and Gunn fired.

But now, you are in favor of outrage?

K.

We are in favor of equal treatment. If that NYT editor had been conservative taking about black people on Twitter she would have been crucified and that's a fact.

 

[DeepEnigma]

We are in favor of equal treatment. If that NYT editor had been conservative taking about black people on Twitter she would have been crucified and that's a fact.

Nor would she have that job or the company defending her.

 

[All Hail C-Webb]

Was I just banned for 6 hours?
I was ready to write this place off after 15+ years, as a place where voices to the left of center were no longer tolerated, but happy to see that's not the case?

Things I learned about bannings:

1. They're automatically reviewed? That would be a great feature. Time consuming, I'm sure, but would prevent what was happening towards the end of the previous version of the forum.

2. It didn't provide a duration? Would definitely be helpful to know, unless no duration = permanent?

3. No post was specified. Can you be banned just for disagreeing with the majority? I took the same stance that the employer, and previous employer were taking, so it wasn't exactly out there.

To get back to the main point of this topic. That is a fantastic move by Evilore. So many people were banned for minor things when this place became an echo chamber for the far left, and rectifying mistakes is always appreciated.

 

[EviLore]

Was I just banned for 6 hours?
I was ready to write this place off after 15+ years, as a place where voices to the left of center were no longer tolerated, but happy to see that's not the case?

Things I learned about bannings:

1. They're automatically reviewed? That would be a great feature. Time consuming, I'm sure, but would prevent what was happening towards the end of the previous version of the forum.

2. It didn't provide a duration? Would definitely be helpful to know, unless no duration = permanent?

3. No post was specified. Can you be banned just for disagreeing with the majority? I took the same stance that the employer, and previous employer were taking, so it wasn't exactly out there.

To get back to the main point of this topic. That is a fantastic move by Evilore. So many people were banned for minor things when this place became an echo chamber for the far left, and rectifying mistakes is always appreciated.

Yeah, sorry about that. People can get emotionally compromised and cease seeing things clearly sometimes. Only takes a few seconds, and not that much emotional interference necessarily (thanks to the huge interpersonal disconnect w/ message boards etc.). Add in a dash of momentary self-righteousness to commit with turned off brains, and poof, there can go your account under some legitimate-sounding pretense or another. There was a brief lapse in someone's judgment, but I caught it and overturned. They've been lectured about not modding angry like that again. It wasn't stemming from a personal grudge or anything, fwiw, and it's rare to have disposition issues like that on the team nowadays, but I try to keep tabs.

Thanks for being chill about it!

We'll have some additional news on the transparency front soon as well.

 

[neohwa]

Yeah, sorry about that. People can get emotionally compromised and cease seeing things clearly sometimes. Only takes a few seconds, and not that much emotional interference necessarily (thanks to the huge interpersonal disconnect w/ message boards etc.). Add in a dash of momentary self-righteousness to commit with turned off brains, and poof, there can go your account under some legitimate-sounding pretense or another. There was a brief lapse in someone's judgment, but I caught it and overturned. They've been lectured about not modding angry like that again. It wasn't stemming from a personal grudge or anything, fwiw, and it's rare to have disposition issues like that on the team nowadays, but I try to keep tabs.

Thanks for being chill about it!

We'll have some additional news on the transparency front soon as well.

Mod asked me to PM you but I don't seem to have that function in my account, so here goes:

Hello Mr EviLore,

When you have time would you please review my account? Over 6 years I got 2 mod actions:

1. Last August I was banned for a month by a former mod and I don't think I deserve it. I don't think the celebrity was a good role model imo, which has nothing to do with their gender. It applies to both men and women. Was insulted and wrongfully labeled by the mob and mod, simply because of their assumptions.

2. 4 years ago I made a parody thread and got junior-ed. I deserve this one. I was immature, childish and the forum doesn't need a knee jerk reaction thread. I have learned the lessons and still regret it.

My question is that will my account ever gained back the "member" status? I don't have the ability to create thread and PM conversations for over 4 years now. I think I am a better poster and hopefully can contribute to the community more.

Thanks for your time and consideration!

 

[neohwa]

Thank you for the comments. We will take them on board. We do have a reply ban feature in xf software that we extend where possible to avoid proper bans.

The way I see it, if you are a fellow gamer and supporting the industry then we are friends. 90% of permanent bans I witnessed in gaming forums were not justified. It should be the last resort and reserved only for people who have malicious intentions and disruptive to the community. From what I read of his posts I think the ban is way too harsh and not justified. Also you can see that he is getting a lot of support from the best and active posters here so that means a lot.

My opinion is that you need to offer a gaming forum that is better than the others. We need a reason to post here instead of other places. What I'm liking so far is the mods engaging with the users and being friendly and reasonable. Also since the community is made for the members, so listening to our feedback is very encouraging.

I do like the strict moderation, but I don't think anyone would like a harsh moderation. That's all thanks for reading!

 

[Kagey K]

The way I see it, if you are a fellow gamer and supporting the industry then we are friends. 90% of permanent bans I witnessed in gaming forums were not justified.

My opinion is that you need to offer a gaming forum that is better than the others. We need a reason to post here instead of other places.

I do like the strict moderation, but I don't think anyone would like a harsh moderation. That's all thanks for reading!

I edited your comment into what I think is most important.

Most of the bans were not justified, they were gamers who accidentally crossed over to OT and got caught in a crossfire they weren’t aware of.


Either way it’s time to move forward from that, and this thread shows that’s where they are going.

The 2 bans above, Kevin and Matt, I didn’t read the posts they actually got banned for, as I try to avoid those high charged, no one is losing discussions. I did however, enjoy their contributions to other discussions I participated in with them.

I would like to see this forum more lively, and have more people participate, but not at the expense of other users. This can’t be a free for all and everyone, just says what they like until it gets going.

I have to say I agree with the moderation on this one, and it may come back to bite me in the butt later, but from what I have read it seems like a good call.

Edit: I also expected to come back to a banned account for writing “filling a vagina” the other night.

 

[Scopa]

Just to clarify, was Matt banned for using the word “cunt”? Because, as an Australian, that word is a colloquialism and used in everday language by millions. Or was it because he directed it towards a fellow member?

I’d never use it towards someone on here, but I do use it in everyday language. So I may drop it in a post here or there in the future.

Just want to make sure I don’t step out of bounds.

 

[ar0s]

Due to the Anihawk Amir0x stuff I can understand if the do not want to have discussions about pedophilia here, but then they should just state that instead of banning someone for suggesting his vision of a fair treatment (which is not contrary to any current laws, but additive). Also, the other ban wrt pedophilia, as far as I am aware was suggesting as a jab that someone may be pedophile, this does not count as pro-pedophilia I'd think.

There was at least one previous ban too a good while ago IIRC, while you were at Ree.

However, that said, I think a permanent ban from any topic relating to that subject would be fair - just give him the perma warning and tell him to keep away from those threads.

KK is an asset to the forum so it seems a shame to lose all of his contributions over one particular problem.

However, there is always the possibility he has already been warned to stay away from that particular topic, given it was at least his 3rd time (that we know about) getting banned for contributions in one.

I can understand the action though, sad as it is and certainly appreciate the reply by Bill to shed some light.

 

[SatansReverence]

I figured that might have been the one. I just was not sure if he was calling that person a cunt, or saying a phrase, however the comma is probably the deciding factor.

As a fellow Australian, I think this is reprehensible treatment! Us Aussies throw the c-bomb out every other sentence! No more countrism! Free the c-bomb!

Kidding, warrented for being a direct attack, hope it's not for too long though!

 

[All Hail C-Webb]

Yeah, sorry about that. People can get emotionally compromised and cease seeing things clearly sometimes. Only takes a few seconds, and not that much emotional interference necessarily (thanks to the huge interpersonal disconnect w/ message boards etc.). Add in a dash of momentary self-righteousness to commit with turned off brains, and poof, there can go your account under some legitimate-sounding pretense or another. There was a brief lapse in someone's judgment, but I caught it and overturned. They've been lectured about not modding angry like that again. It wasn't stemming from a personal grudge or anything, fwiw, and it's rare to have disposition issues like that on the team nowadays, but I try to keep tabs.

Thanks for being chill about it!

We'll have some additional news on the transparency front soon as well.

I just got the 'suck up' achievement, but I'm really going to earn it now.

Wow, I got lucky then. Thank You.

Would have been impossible to catch stuff like that when threads were flying. Hopefully, you're able to implement something that doesn't rely on you alone to catch all the issues.

I've been here for close to 20 years, basically grew up with GAF. It wasnt just the best gaming forum, it was the best place to debate, discuss, and learn about things that really matter, like why it's a bad idea to shave one's asshole.

I was amazed by how many smart and influential people were posting, and would always use things I learned from GAF to impress people in real life. You were able to turn that tiny community into a massive one, and you maintained its quality, that's no mean feat.

It seems like you're trying to get there again, and I hope you can. I think that some more progressive folks have to start posting, since we're currently skewing right by a wide margin. Going to make an effort to post more, so that some hopefully realize there's nothing to fear by posting at a place that welcomes different opinions.

 

[Redneckerz]

Alright, bye guys.

I find it very unfortunate that by this you gave credibility to my statement of dramatic. Whilst i respect your loyalty to Kevin, i do find it disappointing that GAF's future stops for you when one user says something debateable and gets actioned over it. In my opinion GAF is much more than just that user or such loyalty. Its far more than that. And it disappoints me that for you, the future is just a callback to the past, and not a outlook towards bigger and brighter things.

That's too bad ilfait , you are quite the character. I would ask you to at least give it some serious thought.

To be frank, i think his decision was already set in stone prior and he was just waiting for a confirmation. I mean, whilst i get that you would want to support a fellow user, the way this was set up implies a decision was already made way before a staff response would kick in.

And i think that's unfortunate. Because by leaving with that post you basically confirm that your prior posts were indeed threats - Despite saying that they weren't. Its why i called such postings a tad dramatic - and seeing the goodbye post, it makes it difficult to ignore that.

In a way it upsets me aswell - One banned user and you will leave on empathtic reasons for said user? A great case of loyalty that i can respect, no doubt, but what does that say about you as a user? Are we really going to leave entire communities because one guy said something that could be interpreted as appropiate for actioning? Like, is one bump on the road enough grounds for you to turn the car around and return home?

NeoGAF 3.0/4.0/Evilore's Holy Grail Edition encompasses way more than being loyal to a user who said a thing. In my eyes (Or atleast that's what i work towards to) its a new and universal platform where differing (reasonable) opinions are equally respected and disagreed upon with. And perhaps a lot of this needs its seperate subspace, like Politics. I don't know. But what i don't want to see is these acts of loyalty because one user said something wrongly. That to me gives off the impression that you are zooming in on GAF's atmosphere to a point where the global goal is replaced in favor of personal loyalties.

Now, below i talk about how tone takes a big part into assessing these kinds of commentary, so ill go further there.

I’d like to point out there are other members who do a lot worse than Kevin such as suggesting violence against innocent civilians is OK due to their own prejudice. I can understand why ilfait would want to stop posting given the hypocrisy of it.

Modding is no simple task tho...

Matt apparently is back. As for edgecases with Kevin, i did suggest a Parole system over time.

But in general (And i am going to make a rather sweeping generalization here) there are some users in here who use terminology that, for all its intents and purposes, has a different tone than other posts do. As such, my completely unverified observation is that these people are more likely to catch a ban or an action than others.

The issue in here is intent. Such posts are more difficult to discern as said in good intent than others, which is why imo these folks get banned. This is something difficult for both humans and even robots a like. How do you recognize good intent just by reading the tone of words or words itself?

This is why, among other reasons, i strongly advocate for new mod policies around these edge cases. My take on it is that despite the tone, these users operate within good intentions, assuming good faith. However, when one has a history of making commentary that could be interpreted in different ways, there should be an evaluation.

 

[neohwa]

Four years is pretty harsh.

Thanks for your support! But it's okay, I still contribute as best as I can, junior or not.

Yeah, sorry about that. People can get emotionally compromised and cease seeing things clearly sometimes. Only takes a few seconds, and not that much emotional interference necessarily (thanks to the huge interpersonal disconnect w/ message boards etc.). Add in a dash of momentary self-righteousness to commit with turned off brains, and poof, there can go your account under some legitimate-sounding pretense or another. There was a brief lapse in someone's judgment, but I caught it and overturned. They've been lectured about not modding angry like that again. It wasn't stemming from a personal grudge or anything, fwiw, and it's rare to have disposition issues like that on the team nowadays, but I try to keep tabs.

Thanks for being chill about it!

We'll have some additional news on the transparency front soon as well.

Respect +1

I just got the 'suck up' achievement, but I'm really going to earn it now.

Wow, I got lucky then. Thank You.

It seems like you're trying to get there again, and I hope you can. I think that some more progressive folks have to start posting, since we're currently skewing right by a wide margin. Going to make an effort to post more, so that some hopefully realize there's nothing to fear by posting at a place that welcomes different opinions.

Yeah got to give props to Tyler. He doesn't hold personal grudges even though you have personal insulted him many times in the Waypoint thread last October. It takes a lot of maturity and tolerance for him to forget and forgive, and go out of his way to overturn the mod and unban you. Much respect to him.

And as you said, I will do my part and try to bring more progressive folks over here from the other forum. Let's all do our best for the good of this community!

 

[Phoenix RISING]

Yeah got to give props to Tyler. He doesn't hold personal grudges even though you have personal insulted him many times in the Waypoint thread last October. It takes a lot of maturity and tolerance for him to forget and forgive, and go out of his way to overturn the mod and unban you. Much respect to him.

And as you said, I will do my part and try to bring more progressive folks over here from the other forum. Let's all do our best for the good of this community!

Do not confuse altruism with Business Decisions.

 

[Grinchy]

Was I just banned for 6 hours?
I was ready to write this place off after 15+ years, as a place where voices to the left of center were no longer tolerated, but happy to see that's not the case?

Things I learned about bannings:

1. They're automatically reviewed? That would be a great feature. Time consuming, I'm sure, but would prevent what was happening towards the end of the previous version of the forum.

2. It didn't provide a duration? Would definitely be helpful to know, unless no duration = permanent?

3. No post was specified. Can you be banned just for disagreeing with the majority? I took the same stance that the employer, and previous employer were taking, so it wasn't exactly out there.

To get back to the main point of this topic. That is a fantastic move by Evilore. So many people were banned for minor things when this place became an echo chamber for the far left, and rectifying mistakes is always appreciated.

A similar thing happened with me a couple days ago. I made a post that, when taken at face value, was definitely something that would warrant some kind of action. I wrote it in such an extremely ridiculous way that I thought it would be obvious to most people that it was a joke. Fair enough if some people wouldn't sense the sarcasm in text form, because that is often hard to do.

The weird thing about it was just how sudden and permanent the ban was. No checking post history to see if I was someone who would even be legitimately saying what I was actually mocking. Just an immediate, permanent ban (or at least it didn't say a date when it would lift). Just like that. Done. Get out of here and never come back.

But, of course, because of this ban review process, the ban was cleared up very quickly and all was forgotten on my end. It was just surprising how far a mod wanted to take things with such a suddenness.

 

[EviLore]

Phoenix RISING no one mentioned altruism except you. False premise, false conclusions.

A similar thing happened with me a couple days ago. I made a post that, when taken at face value, was definitely something that would warrant some kind of action. I wrote it in such an extremely ridiculous way that I thought it would be obvious to most people that it was a joke. Fair enough if some people wouldn't sense the sarcasm in text form, because that is often hard to do.

The weird thing about it was just how sudden and permanent the ban was. No checking post history to see if I was someone who would even be legitimately saying what I was actually mocking. Just an immediate, permanent ban (or at least it didn't say a date when it would lift). Just like that. Done. Get out of here and never come back.

But, of course, because of this ban review process, the ban was cleared up very quickly and all was forgotten on my end. It was just surprising how far a mod wanted to take things with such a suddenness.

There was discussion about it internally trying to determine your intent, but that discussion landed on taking it at face value. When I looked over the posts in question I didn't see much of an issue and it looked tongue in cheek to me (as you had tried to clarify in your appeal).

TBH, I don't know if forum moderation in general has ever been as challenging as it is right now. Everything's so heated and politicized all the time. Basically, you could look at your situation as the moderation being a little too stoic and literal and the previous issue as an emotionally heated response. It's really tricky to be able to handle both of those kinds of situations correctly since they require different sets of attributes to handle well, perhaps to an extreme degree in each respective case. A big part of why we have a collaborative moderation system here is supposed to be to cover each other's bases so that the outcomes are fair. Most of the bad bans being overturned in the main list were unilateral actions by bish, charlequin, or besada, often logged inaccurately. There are a whole lot of bans turning up that were logged as "junior perms" performed on non-juniors, for example. Looks like it was a popular way to slip unjustified bans through the system without much scrutiny, since junior member was a probationary status.

Part of how the system works as intended is through appropriate logging and user-facing ban messages. You should be able to justify your bans to the user, and justify it in the ban record to hold up to my scrutiny and anyone else checking up on it. I've noticed that standards are a little lax right now on the logging and user-facing messages front. It certainly doesn't guarantee fairness -- just look at other places and how things can be superficially professional looking but totally mental in truth -- but it's a useful check. Can't explain your ban action rationally? Probably shouldn't be taking the action.

We're going to just expose the data publicly so that there is greater accountability.

 

[Phoenix RISING]

???

I don't even know how to respond to "nobody mentioned _____ but you." Like what does that even mean? If I applied it to the thread I made about Obama's Birthday, what does that phrase mean? "Nobody mentioned Obama's birthday but you."

Wut? Of course nobody mentioned it; I wouldn't have made a thread to be redundant otherwise, nor would I have highlighted the improbability of altruism here had someone else thought of it first.

 

[Panda1]

Look at this bullshit : I complain about double standards and told its ok to generalise about whole groups of people when making insults!!!! then when I ( a double minoirty call out a white guy!) then i have no right of reply and this mod shut down the conversation!! what a pussy an a joke. I copy the last message here for transparency. ,

Your message (Happy Barack Obama Day!) contains inappropriate content:
Nobody_Important said:
Barrack Obama isn't the best president, but he is without a doubt the best president I have seen in my lifetime (27yrs) and is likely the best one I will see in in likely the next 27 years.


He is much better than this country ever deserved.
Click to expand...
Just say it - look at me I voted for a black guy ! Im progressive forgive my white guilt and ignore the increase in deaths and military and press freedoms, complete meltdown in race relations and an unhinged immigration policy! You like him because of his race - Hillary policies would be exactly the same had she won i..e neo con !

Racism -lite is still racism you racist bigot.
Click to expand...
If you continue to make every post about racial tensions or attempt to use them as responses to posts which make no such claims, then you will be banned.



So if a Trump supporter says Trump is the best president ever and probably will be = he OBVIOUSLY IS A WHITE NAZI - if a peson says Obama is (and only because of his skin tone) and I call that out for being the very definition of racism judging someone by their race/skin colour- thats not racist!!! PMSL
So I cannot call out anyone for beeing racsit or a bigot when they are but anyone white can call whole groups of people racsit, anti gay etc etc...

Im happy to fuck off like any other reasonable person unless someone can explain to me why I am treated less than a white guy - If I were to say Trump fans are racist idiots thats ok if I am virue signalling white kid. Well done for the mods again for making this place a shit hole.

 

[Bill O'Rights]

The full transcript of the above is in the moderator forums. Including the original report, moderated action, user PM and PM response. Can another mod please review for Panda1

 

[Yoshi]

So if a Trump supporter says Trump is the best president ever and probably will be = he OBVIOUSLY IS A WHITE NAZI - if a peson says Obama is (and only because of his skin tone) and I call that out for being the very definition of racism judging someone by their race/skin colour- thats not racist!!! PMSL

Where do you see any indication that Nobody_Important liked Obama because of his ethnicity? I would absolutely agree with Nobody_Important when it comes to Obama being the best US president in my lifetime (31 years in this instance), which covers Ronald Reagan, George Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, Barack Obama and Donald Trump. He is not the best viable candidate from my perspective, Al Gore would take that position from my point of view, but he is the best who actually was elected. If you are left-leaning and not much older than 30 years, then Obama does not really have a huge competition when it comes to being the best US president in one's lifetime, you know...

So I'd say the point of your ban should be that you are super-aggressive and turn Nobody_Important 's valuation into an ethnicity one without any justification. If you did the same thing to me, if I had posted the same as Nobody_Important did (and I would sign what he has written here), I would have reported that posting.

EDIT: I didn't know mods were this quick with answering such requests now. Major props and sorry for interupting.

 

[Nobody_Important]

Um...I'm not familiar with the protocol of this thread? Am i supposed to defend my post or my opinion here? Or is my input not needed at all? I just got a notification that I was mentioned here and I am not sure what to do with that information?

 

[Yoshi]

Um...I'm not familiar with the protocol of this thread? Am i supposed to defend my post or my opinion here? Or is my input not needed at all? I just got a notification that I was mentioned here and I am not sure what to do with that information?

Oh sorry, I mentioned you. I have no idea what the protocol is, this is a pretty new situation I'd guess. From Bill O'Rights ' Posting I would guess no non-mod input is needed.

 

[Bill O'Rights]

Um...I'm not familiar with the protocol of this thread? Am i supposed to defend my post or my opinion here? Or is my input not needed at all? I just got a notification that I was mentioned here and I am not sure what to do with that information?

Yeah your input is not needed, you were just cross tagged You can read through the thread though if you want!

 

[Nobody_Important]

Oh sorry, I mentioned you. I have no idea what the protocol is, this is a pretty new situation I'd guess. From Bill O'Rights ' Posting I would guess no non-mod input is needed.

Yeah your input is not needed, you were just cross tagged You can read through the thread though if you want!

Oh okay. My bad. I saw the notification and saw my name popping up in your post and panda's post and was wondering what I was supposed to do.

 

[Panda1]

Where do you see any indication that Nobody_Important liked Obama because of his ethnicity? I would absolutely agree with Nobody_Important when it comes to Obama being the best US president in my lifetime (31 years in this instance), which covers Ronald Reagan, George Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, Barack Obama and Donald Trump. He is not the best viable candidate from my perspective, Al Gore would take that position from my point of view, but he is the best who actually was elected. If you are left-leaning and not much older than 30 years, then Obama does not really have a huge competition when it comes to being the best US president in one's lifetime, you know...

So I'd say the point of your ban should be that you are super-aggressive and turn Nobody_Important 's valuation into an ethnicity one without any justification. If you did the same thing to me, if I had posted the same as Nobody_Important did (and I would sign what he has written here), I would have reported that posting.

EDIT: I didn't know mods were this quick with answering such requests now. Major props and sorry for interupting.

Of course I am eing super aggressive to make my point that one type of view is allowed then i do the same to make a point and am banned! its a double standard. And yes its ok to like Obama but maybe you might tell us why than state he is amazing . If i did this about Trump people would say its just because you like his racist policies.

 

[Panda1]

I see too many posts like this breaking TOS and nothing being done about them. Im happy not to engage in any debate if its stated that we will not allow other opinions just tell me so we can stop wasting our time pretending people want an honest discussion

Hamster Plugin said:
Conservatives don't care. Russia has gained influence by sucking up to the populist right-wing. Russia is an extremely conservative country where you can kill gay people without having anyone investigate and the worst crime you can commit is against their religion. Funnily enough, it's not much different from Islamist lands.

Trump supporters love that shit and want things like that in America because they believe gay/transgender people to be degenerate, believe that civil rights are a "liberal agenda" and want to put an end to it. Russia is a great ally for them.

 

[Bill O'Rights]

That post has been actioned here:

https://www.neogaf.com/threads/nbc-wsj-55-of-swing-voters-going-left.1464336/page-2#post-253375479

Panda1 if you continue this antagonistic display and petulant tone then I will have no option to temporarily ban you until the rest of the mod team have reviewed your appeal/concerns. I have extended you a courtesy and am treating you like an adult. Please act like one.

 

[Redneckerz]

Do not confuse altruism with Business Decisions.

I would appreciate it if you made a thread with proper arguments instead of these rather petty potshots towards the staff. Ive written about tone before but intent is another. The reason why i say this is because you have interesting views that i think would make more amends in a seperate thread.

Look at this bullshit
So I cannot call out anyone for beeing racsit or a bigot when they are but anyone white can call whole groups of people racsit, anti gay etc etc...

You called someone a racist bigot for appreciating Barack Obama. Just take that at face value. What do you think your response shows?

Oh okay. My bad. I saw the notification and saw my name popping up in your post and panda's post and was wondering what I was supposed to do.

*Puts you on ignore as requested pre-edit*

Of course I am eing super aggressive to make my point that one type of view is allowed then i do the same to make a point and am banned! its a double standard. And yes its ok to like Obama but maybe you might tell us why than state he is amazing . If i did this about Trump people would say its just because you like his racist policies.

Panda, please calm down. Posting in anger isnt going to solve anything, especially when you are making sweeping generalizations.

I see too many posts like this breaking TOS and nothing being done about them. Im happy not to engage in any debate if its stated that we will not allow other opinions just tell me so we can stop wasting our time pretending people want an honest discussion.

Posts can be reported, as you are likely aware of.

 

[Corderlain]

I feel like Panda's comment was pretty clearly over the line and he's not going to apologize for it nor will anything anyone says make it clear to him. There are a lot of people out there that get so heated and politically charged they can't be reasoned with.

 

[Corrik]

Pretty much nothing should be moderated unless it attacks someone.

Calling someone a bigot is an insult.

If you feel someone said something bigoted, say "your comment is bigoted". and why you feel it is so. Not that the person is.

It is really not that hard to not insult people.

 

[Palliasso]

After careful review, Panda1 has been given a (non-permanent) ban for attacking another user.

This decision was not politically motivated. He was not banned for his argument or the side he took in this particular discussion. The validity of his argument is irrelevant and his particular stance on this debate did not weigh in to this decision. It was not acceptable for him to frame his rebuttal as a directed insult at another member, full stop.

 

[Phoenix RISING]

I would appreciate it if you made a thread with proper arguments instead of these rather petty potshots towards the staff. Ive written about tone before but intent is another. The reason why i say this is because you have interesting views that i think would make more amends in a seperate thread.

I wasn't taking a popshot. It was a unbiased observation. GAF needs traffic to thrive. An efficient way to give it an adrenaline injection is to unban users who are likely to be disaffected due to their bans from GAF's previous era.

A Business. Decision.

Don't confuse petty with keeping it real!

 

[Dirk Benedict]

I feel like Panda's comment was pretty clearly over the line and he's not going to apologize for it nor will anything anyone says make it clear to him. There are a lot of people out there that get so heated and politically charged they can't be reasoned with.

This is a growing problem. It is one that I take concern with.

 

[Redneckerz]

I wasn't taking a popshot. It was a unbiased observation. GAF needs traffic to thrive.

I mean, its fairly obvious that you represent a different POV towards Evilore's recent actions, right? Its not hard to see that passer-by comment as a potshot, even when it is not.

An efficient way to give it an adrenaline injection is to unban users who are likely to be disaffected due to their bans from GAF's previous era.

A Business. Decision.

I sense ulterior motives based on prior posts.

Don't confuse petty with keeping it real!

If you are actually going to keep it real, write a proper thread with your views. Invite discussion instead of spreading it out over multiple posts.

 

[Deleted member 752119]

I don't see anything negative toward EviLore or the site in that sentiment.

Going through all the unjust bans is a HUGE task. Of course the main reason to do it is hoping a lot of those members will come back as the site needs traffic to go up if it's going to survive and make enough ad revenue to be worth Tyler investing so much time into this place.

There's nothing at all wrong about that, and it's awesome that he's spending his time and energy on that and I hope that helps the site keep improving in quantity and quality of posts!
But otherwise, it's a silly game site and there's really no reason anyone would spend all that time going through old bans and reversing unjust ones without some financial incentive in doing so.

In any case, I'm definitely interested to see how many do come back vs. how many are just happy on The Bore, ResetEra or wherever they went in the months/years since being banned.

 

[Redneckerz]

Bill O'Rights Terminology like actioned which is reminiscent of ERA's Newspeak is going to attract attention. In fact, that's why i am making this mention, because it does.

And also because we aren't like that, obviously.

 

[pimentel1]

...