Hummerz needs to chill.

Enurp · 2018-07-03 21:19:12

I like the guy, he's a damn good admin and rather intelligent when he has to deal with his daily share of tards. However, some of his rule enforcement are... a tad strict. I'd say even more strict than the original Cyclone owned forums (The ones where a ban means an instant perma).

I think we could all understand if a user is breaking a rule, such as flaming or spam. When it comes down to banning people for replying to someone with a single word or acronym is wayyyy too hard.

I shouldn't have to write a paragraph if I want to say "yes", yes is a respectable answer to a question. If they want details we can continue that discussion.

Again, he does a great job at kneecapping people and teleporting away with the coin sound but I think sometimes warnings need to be reasonable.

mrjawapa, soniiiety

IanJanes · 2018-07-03 21:23:23

I'm afraid I must disagree, hummerz is a god and you should obey him. If-(What does this s-say?) If you fail to listen you must face the consq- conseq- consequences! So just don't talk bad about him and we'll all be fine, alright alright! (He's right behind me, send help)

Kirby, soniiiety, TundrumMax

Zoey2070 · 2018-07-03 21:25:31

nah, i think he's doing just fine tbh

TaskManager, Jorc, LukeM, Vitalijus

XxAtillaxX · 2018-07-03 21:30:55

one second let me check my warnings and see if he is a bad mod™

edit: no get rid of bobithan instead

soniiiety

hummerz5 · 2018-07-03 21:31:59

Enurp wrote:

I shouldn't have to write a paragraph if I want to say "yes", yes is a respectable answer to a question. If they want details we can continue that discussion.

If that's the situation that has you upset, you should at least present it accurately. You quoted someone who said "There is no Earth" and you replied "Yes." They had plenty of other points to make (well, they tried to anyway), but you plucked out that nonsense to simply respond with "yes" to.

Furthermore, bans are automatically handled by the system. If you have prior offenses, you get the ban that reflects it. What you're suggesting is that a person who has previously flamed should not be reprimanded for lesser offenses. Obviously that's nonsense, as it'd be essentially a free pass to flood the forums once a user had flamed.

edit: I incorrectly construed the OP to mean that spam should receive no penalty because our current system makes it an automatic ban. So that wasn't actually their intent, though I am slightly confused yet.

soniiiety, St1ckS4m(EE)

TaskManager · 2018-07-03 21:33:54

Enurp wrote:

I think we could all understand if a user is breaking a rule, such as flaming or spam. When it comes down to banning people for replying to someone with a single word or acronym is wayyyy too hard.
I shouldn't have to write a paragraph if I want to say "yes", yes is a respectable answer to a question. If they want details we can continue that discussion.

are you talking about a specific post that received a warning?
can you link it?

soniiiety

Enurp · 2018-07-03 21:42:23

hummerz5 wrote:

f that's the situation that has you upset, you should at least present it accurately. You quoted someone who said "There is no Earth" and you replied "Yes." They had plenty of other points to make (well, they tried to anyway), but you plucked out that nonsense to simply respond with "yes" to.

I wasn't exactly speaking of that one instance, considering that one was rather ****. I was speaking from others who've had this problem. They've answered a serious question with a serious one word answer and get warned. I also should've used "warning" instead of "ban" in my original post, due to my experience being different than others.

hummerz5, soniiiety

Raphe9000 · 2018-07-03 21:43:06

Quite the contrary in my opinion. I don't yet have one warning from hummerz.

soniiiety

Anak · 2018-07-03 21:47:34

I think hummerz is doing fine and this thread isn't necessary. He gave me a warning once before which I felt I didn't deserve so I talked to him about it and we came to an agreeable conclusion. If you feel like you didn't deserve a warning you got, I'm sure you could have just PMed him or another admin on the forums (although from the context provided it sounded like you did deserve it).

soniiiety

Tomahawk · 2018-07-03 23:11:14

Hummerz wrote:

What you're suggesting is that a person who has previously flamed should not be reprimanded for lesser offenses. Obviously that's nonsense, as it'd be essentially a free pass to flood the forums once a user had flamed.

Well now let’s not ‘slippery slope’ that argument. Diff floated the idea of that kinda warning system a while back, and there’s been plenty of support for something like that - i.e. where lesser offences cause lesser bans (previous larger offences notwithstanding, to an extent).

But then I see no reason not to be strict on people with recent transgressions, which is what the current system achieves. It’s not too bad for the sort of community you try to uphold, but it’s not perfect either...

Perhaps the warning expiry time should be shorter, or proportional to the severity of the offence.

soniiiety

Anak · 2018-07-03 23:14:33

Tomahawk wrote:

Hummerz wrote:
What you're suggesting is that a person who has previously flamed should not be reprimanded for lesser offenses. Obviously that's nonsense, as it'd be essentially a free pass to flood the forums once a user had flamed.
Well now let’s not ‘slippery slope’ that argument. Diff floated the idea of that kinda warning system a while back, and there’s been plenty of support for something like that - i.e. where lesser offences cause lesser bans (previous larger offences notwithstanding, to an extent).
But then I see no reason not to be strict on people with recent transgressions, which is what the current system achieves. It’s not too bad for the sort of community you try to uphold, but it’s not perfect either...
Perhaps the warning expiry time should be shorter, or proportional to the severity of the offence.

I'm actually surprised the system isn't stricter (but I suppose really not much has changed in my absence). As a mod on another website we just have a 3 strikes and you're out system, here there still don't seem to be permabans save for spam accounts. Judging by that warning leaderboards thread most people here wouldn't last a week lol. Still dazzles me that people who continuously cause trouble aren't just permad

soniiiety

Tomahawk · 2018-07-03 23:30:12

Anak wrote:

Still dazzles me that people who continuously cause trouble aren't just permad

An image comes to mind of Diff and Hummerz sitting on rocking chairs with their banhammers on their knees, watching tumbleweeds blow by.

Nah. Troublemakers are still more interesting than a dead forum.

Bimps, soniiiety, Slabdrill

Norwee · 2018-07-04 00:21:13

As much as i think Hummerz5 is a overly devoted rule maniac i’m pretty sure the forums would have become anarchy without him. I think we should be grateful that we have someone as devoted as him here. I mean what’s the alternative? Jawapa? Lmao.

soniiiety

hummerz5 · 2018-07-04 00:30:34

Tomahawk wrote:

Well now let’s not ‘slippery slope’ that argument. Diff floated the idea of that kinda warning system a while back, and there’s been plenty of support for something like that - i.e. where lesser offences cause lesser bans (previous larger offences notwithstanding, to an extent).

You're right. But, there is a distinction. That system allows for "lesser bans" -- what I'm taking from the OP suggestion is that spam shouldn't have a penalty. Maybe I'm misconstruing

soniiiety, St1ckS4m(EE)

mrjawapa · 2018-07-04 03:30:45

NorwegianboyEE wrote:

I think we should be grateful that we have someone as devoted as him here. I mean what’s the alternative? Jawapa? Lmao.

This is so off hand. I'm not sure what you're trying to get at.

soniiiety

Kira · 2018-07-04 03:52:45

hummerz come netflix and chill with me bub

soniiiety

soniiiety · 2018-07-04 06:51:08

NorwegianboyEE wrote:

As much as i think Hummerz5 is a overly devoted rule maniac i’m pretty sure the forums would have become anarchy without him. I think we should be grateful that we have someone as devoted as him here. I mean what’s the alternative? Jawapa? Lmao.

I could be new mod one day, also i agree with ernup about what he said. etc

people are not open minded and only thinking it like their own view or only one set of views etc

Ruhufdiashrfisdu_2 · 2018-07-04 14:57:03

IanJanes wrote:

I'm afraid I must disagree, hummerz is a god and you should obey him. If-(What does this s-say?) If you fail to listen you must face the consq- conseq- consequences! So just don't talk bad about him and we'll all be fine, alright alright! (He's right behind me, send help)

So do we have to create a new religion where we have to worship Hummerz literally everyday 24/7 for all eternity?

What kind of disagreement is that!

HeyNK · 2018-07-05 00:26:10

The reason hummerz made the secret rule forum game is because he wasn't getting enough people to ban for real

SirJosh3917, Norwee, soniiiety

Official Everybody Edits Forums

#1 2018-07-03 21:19:12

Hummerz needs to chill.

#2 2018-07-03 21:23:23

Re: Hummerz needs to chill.

#3 2018-07-03 21:25:31

Re: Hummerz needs to chill.

#4 2018-07-03 21:30:55, last edited by XxAtillaxX (2018-07-03 21:32:12)

Re: Hummerz needs to chill.

#5 2018-07-03 21:31:59, last edited by hummerz5 (2018-07-04 06:18:43)

Re: Hummerz needs to chill.

#6 2018-07-03 21:33:54

Re: Hummerz needs to chill.

#7 2018-07-03 21:42:23

Re: Hummerz needs to chill.

#8 2018-07-03 21:43:06

Re: Hummerz needs to chill.

#9 2018-07-03 21:47:34

Re: Hummerz needs to chill.

#10 2018-07-03 23:11:14

Re: Hummerz needs to chill.

#11 2018-07-03 23:14:33

Re: Hummerz needs to chill.

#12 2018-07-03 23:30:12

Re: Hummerz needs to chill.

#13 2018-07-04 00:21:13

Re: Hummerz needs to chill.

#14 2018-07-04 00:30:34

Re: Hummerz needs to chill.

#15 2018-07-04 03:30:45

Re: Hummerz needs to chill.

#16 2018-07-04 03:52:45

Re: Hummerz needs to chill.

#17 2018-07-04 06:51:08

Re: Hummerz needs to chill.

#18 2018-07-04 14:57:03

Re: Hummerz needs to chill.

#19 2018-07-05 00:26:10

Re: Hummerz needs to chill.

Board footer