Another Ban

danielcool1 · 2017-06-09 17:18:38

I got banned from the forums the 2nd time for minimodding.
I just wanted to tell that person to move the post to the Q&A, but what happens? A ban comes.
I mean, I've seen some few other people do that, and this happens. Does that mean it happened to
the other members who posted the remind the post to move? I was just being friendly, not strict.
Also, I didn't know I can get banned from that.
I would just like to say, I apologize for posting that reply up and getting another day ban.

Kirby · 2017-06-09 17:23:30

dude sTOP

Gosha · 2017-06-09 17:54:25

Kirby wrote:

dude sTOP

No. He should not stop.

Minimodding as warning is really stupid.

when i was a noob in 2015 i didn't know forum's rules, that's why i got like 4-5 minimodding warnings.
In those times minimodding was 0 warning points.

After those warnings i understood that i should just flag the user instead of helping him with a reply.
without any bans i could understand that, because mod talked to me instead of giving a warning.

What's the point of ban then? Seems like rules nowadays are working not to protect users from spammers, but for protecting forums rules which are in many cases superfluous.
Sometimes users are completly fine with spam (like when player is spamming to make a joke out of something and people like it (woot his post), but they still get warning "because of rules"

EE comunity is quite small, you see the same people on forums. So we are a little family here (sounds awkward), that's why rules shouldn't be always protected (your won't give away your girlfriend to the police if she steal 10$ thing from the shop)

It is not like we have 100+ people online here everyday.

danielcool1, kubapolish

LukeM · 2017-06-09 18:07:27

I think minimodding warnings are more to make people use the flagging system, as im guessing it makes it easier to moderate.
I guess it could also cause a bit of spam, and is completely useless and doesnt make sense after it is actually moved or whatever, maybe causing other people to reply to that reply saying 'it is in (correct subforum), cant you read' or something, just ending up in an off topic, basically spam conversation

hummerz5 · 2017-06-09 18:23:05

hey, welcome to the forums

I'm going to move this to forum discussion. For what it's worth, users cannot move their own topics.

Gosha, I don't know what to tell you. We've had rule-discussion topics in Forum Discussion before. I've tried to push the dialogue myself. Tbh it seems like folks are more open to complaining and accenting (exploiting?) flaws as opposed to working towards creating a reasoned system.

Gosha wrote:

Sometimes users are completly fine with spam (like when player is spamming to make a joke out of something and people like it (woot his post), but they still get warning "because of rules"

Should we address whether or not rules should be based on woots?

Well, I'm going to leave it be. I wrote an extensive, well-reasoned post but since those never seem to get any responses I'll just say something short like this:

Rules against spam (or not against spam) are better irrespective of humor content because I'm bound to not find your jokes funny. (see: imgs of chat/forums). So given that, y'all would want to err on the side of "could it be funny let it go" but that just means more spam, defeating the purpose of the rule imo

danielcool1

danielcool1 · 2017-06-09 18:37:13

hummerz5 wrote:

hey, welcome to the forums
I'm going to move this to forum discussion. For what it's worth, users cannot move their own topics.
Gosha, I don't know what to tell you. We've had rule-discussion topics in Forum Discussion before. I've tried to push the dialogue myself. Tbh it seems like folks are more open to complaining and accenting (exploiting?) flaws as opposed to working towards creating a reasoned system.
Gosha wrote:
Sometimes users are completly fine with spam (like when player is spamming to make a joke out of something and people like it (woot his post), but they still get warning "because of rules"
Should we address whether or not rules should be based on woots?
Well, I'm going to leave it be. I wrote an extensive, well-reasoned post but since those never seem to get any responses I'll just say something short like this:
Rules against spam (or not against spam) are better irrespective of humor content because I'm bound to not find your jokes funny. (see: imgs of chat/forums). So given that, y'all would want to err on the side of "could it be funny let it go" but that just means more spam, defeating the purpose of the rule imo

Hey Hummerz5, thanks for moving my post to Forum Discussion.

Gosha · 2017-06-09 18:55:06

hummerz5 wrote:

Should we address whether or not rules should be based on woots?

I didn't mean "woots" by that. I mean some rule breaks should be allowed in some situations.
Rules can't describe everything in people's psychology.
Spam can be really annoying (like forum raids)
Spam can be totally accept by public, because sometimes spam is not bothering anybody

Imo rules should be working for people and if spam is fine to people there shouldn't be a warning for it.

"rules against spam" includes all kinds of spam, which is not user-friendly.
This forums are not some govement project. This forum is for a silly little game and people should relax here and feel free to discuss whatever they want here.
And when you can't make a really cool post because superfluous rules will not allow it - it sucks

For me Diff is the best mod here because modding is not his 1st role, that's why he bans only really f-word'ed up s-word, but not every little silly post.

when soniiiety makes his posts - i can't understand any of it, but i am okay with it because he tries to discuss something. It's bad to ban people because they don't have understanable posts. He is what he is.
If i don't wan't to see soniiiety's post - i just don't read it
he is not type of person who makes hundreds of post even on useless things *cough* whirl *cough*

i am just trying to make a simple point: rules on this forums shouldn't be so well carried. We are a small comunity in a small game, useless bans only divide us. ( i really think that bans are useless. People will understand the rule much much clearly if you had a talk with them, instead of bad with a little comment)

danielcool1, kubapolish

hummerz5 · 2017-06-09 19:26:39

Gosha wrote:

Imo rules should be working for people and if spam is fine to people there shouldn't be a warning for it.

You have a point on the spam situation. I, for one, apparently have less tolerance for the useless fluff. But--as I've tried to promote--certain rules, especially spam, can be tailored to the group. So, if I'm an outlier in my beliefs about spam then that should be addressed to match the general consensus about
spam.

Of course, that topic is somewhat more difficult to get community input. After all, we've been here a few times before, you and me. Naturally the most vocal crowd would be the one that aims to get fewer bans for same conduct. Conversely, the content group might not weigh in. So yeah.

Gosha wrote:

I didn't mean "woots" by that. I mean some rule breaks should be allowed in some situations.

I get that's not what you mean, but that's essentially what would happen, no? If you're pointing out some situations where people aren't bothered by posts (as evident by their woots) then the conclusion follows

Gosha wrote:

This forums are not some govement project. This forum is for a silly little game and people should relax here and feel free to discuss whatever they want here.

well, no. It's a silly little game for a group that potentially includes children, so you're limited by legal issues in general and then certain content to try and tailor towards children. But yes, the manner.

Gosha wrote:

And when you can't make a really cool post because superfluous rules will not allow it - it sucks

'first post' doesn't count as really cool

Gosha wrote:

he is not type of person who makes hundreds of post even on useless things *cough* whirl *cough*

But when you look at the results, how are these different? If whirl makes hundreds of useless posts, the net value is zero. If soniiiety makes ten posts that have no comprehensible value, why should his be any better?

Gosha wrote:

i am just trying to make a simple point: rules on this forums shouldn't be so well carried. We are a small comunity in a small game, useless bans only divide us. ( i really think that bans are useless. People will understand the rule much much clearly if you had a talk with them, instead of bad with a little comment)

But one idea behind bans is to emphasize that need for understanding the rules. With no bans, your users don't care. If they still don't care after many bans, then I don't think it's a misunderstanding, they just legitimately don't care to discuss the rules or understand them. They want the rules to meet their needs, reason notwithstanding

LukeM, danielcool1

Official Everybody Edits Forums

#1 2017-06-09 17:18:38

Another Ban

#2 2017-06-09 17:23:30

Re: Another Ban

#3 2017-06-09 17:54:25

Re: Another Ban

#4 2017-06-09 18:07:27, last edited by LukeM (2017-06-09 18:07:34)

Re: Another Ban

#5 2017-06-09 18:23:05

Re: Another Ban

#6 2017-06-09 18:37:13

Re: Another Ban

#7 2017-06-09 18:55:06, last edited by Gosha (2017-06-09 18:55:57)

Re: Another Ban

#8 2017-06-09 19:26:39

Re: Another Ban

Board footer