|
All Forum Rules Apply in SAS/FIGHT ISLAND Forum-specific Guidelines - While these rules specifically apply to FIGHT ISLAND, please be aware of Hand Knit's over-arching Rules Thread for Supposedly About Sports, which is our parent subforum. Rules boiled down to their purest form
Rules in Brief
Rules at Length
Things to Know:
Current Mods/IKs: Mods - Brut | Junpei Hyde | karmicknight IKS - CarlCX Somebody fucked around with this message at 23:28 on Mar 6, 2022 |
#
¿
Sep 30, 2020 00:38
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 19:08 |
|
|
As people have requested something outside of Private Messages/QCS for feedback/queries on the rules, moderation decisions etc, I am leaving this thread open for that purpose and ONLY that purpose. Any off-topic post will be an immediate probation, but I will endeavor to answer any on-topic questions or concerns you want to bring up and discuss in public. I am also available via PM if you prefer to do this in private.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2020 00:43
|
|
|
I will probate based on the context. Anybody who is clearly going out of their way to be a dick and poo poo up the thread deliberately will get a heavier probation than somebody who forgets what thread they're in/drifts off-topic during discussion etc. Anybody who continually tries to derail the thread will get a far heavier probation. This thread is intended ONLY for on-topic moderation discussion, and only exists because enough people insisted they wanted a thread for that express purpose rather than via PMs.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2020 01:10
|
|
|
Eat My Fuc, see below. In your specific case, I believe you've earned being reset to a standard sixer, and I highly hope I never have any reason to ramp up your probations again.The Croc posted:The ramp thing how many chances are we working on here. Is it a probed x times in x weeks/months thing. Will how serious the infraction be taken into account? A poster who is clearly being a problem poster, either deliberately or because they seemingly can't help themselves, will get a "further probations will be ramped in length" added to their rapsheet, and at minimum each additional probation will increase in length in the order noted in the rules. Any probation-worthy post that is bad enough will warrant skipping steps to jump to longer probations or a ban as necessary, ramping probations just means a new baseline minimum is set for each new probation. If a poster improves and enough length of time passes, then they get probated again, they may go back to the baseline sixer minimum and a note will be made not to fall back into old habits and risk getting ramped up again. A lot of that will depend on context rather than some fixed identifiable structure. If other posters feel a user isn't getting the length of probation they deserve and that any mod note in a rapsheet doesn't adequately explain why, they can inquire via PM or in this thread and I will explain my thinking. Seth Rollins posted:can you please define what counts as "horny posting" with some examples of what is and is not allowed. i feel like this rule is too vague If somebody posts something obviously gross and overly sexualized it will be an immediate probation, and there is very little doubt about when that happens. For anything "borderline", as things currently stand, sometimes people have posted something that is drifting too close and other posters have been very good about reminding them "no horny posting". In almost every case people have pulled back on their own, and that's good self-moderation (and actual moderation follows if they then choose to continue on in that vein anyway). Defining a strict guideline of what constitutes "horny" is basically a roadmap for people trying to walk the line as close as possible without going over, so I far prefer a blanket rule of "no horny posting", since it means people are going to err on the side of caution. It got taken too far in the past, posters really didn't like it, and things are better now that it is entirely gone.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2020 01:25
|
|
|
flashy_mcflash posted:Obviously clearly objectifying wrestlers and expressing a desire to live in their rear end crosses a line, but I'm legit not sure where the line is. A good means test is probably,"Is what I am posting effectively saying I want to have sex with this person", at which point you have to ask yourself WHY you are saying that and why would anybody want to read that. Another good reminder is that a,"Hey no horny posting" response to a post you make isn't an accusation, it's a friendly reminder to you that you're taking things too far and should talk about something else on-topic instead and avoid an unpleasant derail and probable probation. If you really want to defend yourself and explain why no no what you posted wasn't horny at all, then ask yourself... is this really something you want to waste your valuable time and thread space arguing about? "No horny posting" is a written rule now but it's been in effect for the last few weeks and seems to have mostly worked out well. Gross posts get probated and there is rarely any doubt as to what those are. Less obvious or clearly "innocent" posts marveling at the attractiveness of a wrestler get responses from other users telling them not to horny post at which point the onus is on the original poster to get the message and change the subject, and they only have themselves to blame if they can't.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2020 01:37
|
|
|
This is one of the primary reasons for this thread's existence. I always told people to take it to PMs because I figured the majority of posters didn't give a poo poo about an argument or discussion about posting taking place in, just as one example, the wrestlers on social media thread, and would prefer people deal with it elsewhere so they could use the thread for its intended purpose. Now there is this specific thread where people can discuss these issues in public and clearly on the record, and those who don't care about it don't have to deal with it/scroll past it or try to pick on-topic for the thread posts out of the mix.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2020 04:55
|
|
|
Dango Bango posted:You say this but situations like this are extremely common. Rap sheets so long you have to scroll and it's sixer after sixer. Yes, the feedback from the previous version of this thread was that once it was noted that a poster was incredibly lovely, endlessly disruptive etc to the point that ramping was considered required in the first place, the ramping of probations still wasn't consistently applied and it would be preferred to have a specific structure, which is what we have in place now. There are some posters who just every couple of months or so make a post that is worth a sixer or maybe a day, and over a long enough period of time that's gonna cause a lengthy rapsheet. I don't really think they belong in in the same grouping as posters who are regularly kicking off giant derails, trying to turn a thread into a shrine to themselves, making incredibly lovely posts and refusing to stop being shitheads etc, and I don't just run off my own judgement about that but the number and context of reports made by regular forum users about them which would indicate if they were an unwelcome/disruptive presence to other posters. Which is another reason why using the report button is so helpful to me and other mods and the admins in being able to keep track of stuff like this. CommonShore posted:Does making fun of Brazilians count as racism? Because that's pretty load-bearing in MMA discussion eg I always thought that Blanka image was a joke specifically at the Gracies - who happen to be Brazilian - expense for being notorious at making ridiculous excuses for why they lost (but really won!) fights? But the short answer is yes, don't make racist jokes! Cerebral Bore posted:Hi. This is explicitly covered under Don't Be a Dick, and the section about not bringing in off-site or cross-forum drama.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2020 07:10
|
|
|
mfcrocker posted:Some off-site issues are serious enough to become on-site issues. This is true, the rule is really more intended for people bringing grudges/arguments over from an offsite like Discord/Twitch/some video sharing site etc - petty little bullshit that has no place being dragged over to the sub itself, because those things are very specifically NOT part of SomethingAwful or FIGHT ISLAND. In terms of the caveat you'd like added, I will ask some of the other mods and the admins to detail exactly what they've found best practice for dealing with far more serious allegations for off-site things, so I can add an addendum to the rule.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2020 11:25
|
|
|
yea ok posted:All people want here is some consistency and instead we get blanket rules and gameified probation rules. I honestly fail to see how setting in place a specific framework to how ramped probations work is not providing consistency. You yourself have messaged me in the past on more than one occasion to point out that problem posters weren't getting an increasing length of probations consistently applied and that you wanted it to be more structured. I explained in the old thread why it wasn't consistently applied, how that was a mistake on my part, and how I intended to rectify it by sticking to a specific, fixed uptick in probation length. These new rules are based on feedback from the people who post in FIGHT ISLAND, and I've gone out of my way to try and make sure every viewpoint was considered when putting them together, and run them by multiple people before putting them up. They lay out clearly what is allowed, what isn't, and how that will be dealt with. If they prove ineffective, or I fail to enforce them consistently, then it puts the onus entirely on me as a moderator, which I believe is exactly the kind of accountability people have been asking for all along. Seth Rollins posted:so you're just not gonna respond to yea ok. cool. It's been less than 3 hours since they made their post, settle your kettle. Jerusalem fucked around with this message at 12:10 on Sep 30, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2020 12:06
|
|
|
Seth Rollins posted:you responded to mfcrocker's post 30 minutes after it was made Yes, because I caught up on the thread, answered mfcrocker's question first, followed up on it in the mod forum as I said I would, then came back and responded to yea ok, then saw your post declaring I was ignoring him. I really don't know what you think is happening here.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2020 12:18
|
|
|
yea ok posted:It made no sense to me to see people's rap sheets full of sixers, then 3 days or a week randomly, then back to sixers when they continued to exhibit the same behavior without change. That's when I would PM you, because you were doing a bad job. I do not believe that you are receptive to feedback like you claim based on literally years of evidence. I honestly really don't grasp how changing to a fixed progression of increasing probation lengths for problem posters is NOT being receptive to the feedback of,"You are not being consistent in increasing probation lengths for problem posters". I'm sorry you don't like how I moderate FIGHT ISLAND, but from the start of my time in this role I've gone out of my way to take onboard feedback, to do my best not to let any personal feelings dictate my decisions, and overall make this a place that people can use for its intended purpose of talking about pro-wrestling. You may not agree, and that's too bad, but go ahead and continue to tell me when you think I'm doing something wrong, and I'll continue to file it away with every other piece of feedback I get and use to get a sense of how people want this place to be.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2020 12:32
|
|
|
Seth Rollins posted:i think you're very slow to act on anything and your answer is always "i will discuss this with the other mods in the secret mod chamber, please pm me if you have any more problems," and nothing ever seems to happen after that. It was less than 3 hours to answer his post, and you're literally posting this in a thread I created for open, public feedback on moderation issues. Seth Rollins posted:i think you have a history of ignoring people and problems I have had literally one person on my ignore list (not from FIGHT ISLAND) since I first joined SomethingAwful, and I have gone out of my way to respond to and reply to messages and questions from people whenever they have been sent to me, and about the only time I don't reply is when they're bitterly angry obscenity laden tirades.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2020 12:42
|
|
|
JUNGLE BOY posted:Just want to point out that this isn’t even remotely an unreasonable or trolling request to want clarification and I’m not sure why someone would get probed for it. Messages from Seth Rollins to me before (I did not see and read it till after the probation) and after the probation confirmed that they were not actually seeking any kind of clarification with their posts at all, they thought it was a good joke.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2020 12:52
|
|
|
Seth Rollins posted:edit: and when i say slow to act, i mean stuff like waiting several years to ban rovert. i'm not sure how you could be misunderstanding me so badly. In the two years I was moderator and rovert was active, I banned him 3 times (and gave him multiple probations besides). A permaban was considered a step too far but the admins at the time wanted to try out a subforum ban as an experiment, with the agreement that if it didn't work a permaban would be considered. Happily, it worked.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2020 12:57
|
|
|
mfcrocker posted:I'd like a caveat to this. We had a situation when the LGBT+ megathread was in E/N where we needed to warn people about a predatory goon and the E/N mod at the time went absolutely bananas with their buttons about offsite drama. This situation largely led to the mod in question ending up being removed and I don't want to see the mods here make the same mistake. The following addendum has been added: In the (hopefully) rare event that you discover via an off-site that a poster from this subforum is involved in something extremely serious/dangerous/criminal etc, then please get into immediate contact with an admin (feel free to bypass the mods entirely, we'd only be passing it directly on to them anyway) with whatever proof you have so they can take whatever action is necessary, whether that be a permaban or getting into contact with relevant authorities or both. --- Hopefully this answers your concerns?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2020 13:23
|
|
|
Sorry, I promise to catch up fully on this thread as soon as I get a chance and answer everything posted to the best of my ability. The most recent thing I see is questions about Taintrunner, who I banned a couple of days ago. If they've reregistered to the forums since that ban then they're allowed to come back and post again when their month probation ends. If they post anything at all remotely resembling anything like the bullshit that got them banned before, they'll be kicked out again. They largely have been able to post normally here before now so I hope they can again, but if they can't they'll be gone again fast with either another lengthy probation or a ban. The forums as currently setup have always run under the rule that reregistering after a ban allows you to post again once you are off probation, with the obvious caveat that bans on your rap sheet make mods consider tougher punishments for bad posting. If you disagree with that setup or you think that Taintrunner is a candidate for a forums-wide permaban based on how they regularly post in other forums, then that is a matter for an admin, either via QCS or directly contacting one of them. It is beyond the scope of this subforum. Also, a quick bit of housekeeping. Chris James 2 has been in touch to let me know they need a break, and I've requested their removal as an IK as a result. I think CJ2 made a real effort to try and be thoughtful and open about their time as an IK, admitted when they made mistakes and made a real effort to learn from them, which is commendable. Once we have an idea of who the new IK might be, we'll let you know.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2020 23:52
|
|
|
Mekchu already effectively answered questions re: MMA/Grappling stuff so I'll do my best to get to the rest. If I missed something, remind me and I'll get onto it.Veskit posted:Politics is genuinely unavoidable when it’s the fighters persona aka Colby Covington and gamebred and woodly replying black lives matter to anything. Wendy’s drive throughing it seems... I dunno not right? I believe this is covered pretty firmly in the Rules at Length section - it's acknowledged that politics is sometimes an unavoidable and natural part of the discussion - just as a couple of examples, WWE is extremely tightly wrapped up in the current Trump Administration and also regularly do literal propaganda pieces for the Saudi Royal Family so it is no surprise the politics can and do come up. The rule is explicitly about moving these discussions on to more appropriate subforums if the subject has started to completely overwhelm all other discussion and/or derailed far off the initial wrestling/MMA connection as to be indistinguishable from one of the politics threads. Normally a mod or IK will simply say that the derail has gone on long enough and ask people to move on to a different subject, and it's only if people refuse to let it go and keep digging deeper that any further action is required. flashy_mcflash posted:This is partly what I was getting at before, but I do appreciate the responses regarding hornyposting since then. In all honesty if you make a post where you have to think,"I hope this isn't crossing the line" then it is probably crossing the line. Having a predefined boundary of what is and isn't a "horny post" is just going to lead to people arguing whether they crossed that arbitary line or not, which is exactly what the situation was like before this rule, which I don't think anybody wants. If you make a post in complete innocence and other posters tell you that it's creepy, just take it on board like you said and adjust your posting accordingly. If you REALLY want a defined boundary, then hell just don't post anything you wouldn't want your mother to read. disaster pastor posted:Jerusalem, I love you, but I really don't think you're understanding what people are saying. I'm not as prolific a poster as I used to be here (honestly, for some of the same reasons people are complaining about), so maybe I shouldn't even be commenting. But a fixed progression doesn't address the overall issue of "mods need to display better judgment when modding FI" (of which "ramping up problem posters" is a sub-issue), it moves to a system where there's almost no judgment, and makes it so any discussion of probations feels pointless because "it was done according to The Rules." Gumball Gumption posted:J-Ru, I want to ask a big concept question. What's the point of the probation system? I think that's where a lot of frustration comes from. No one ever seems to be clear about the point of the probation system, why we use it, and what we expect it to do. I may be misreading these posts, but is there a misconception here that ALL probations are going to immediately go 6hr, 1 day, 3day etc now? Because that system is in place not for all posters but those who have shown through post history, number of reports generated and other posters' complaints etc that they're such a disruptive presence that they need heavier probations than other posters might normally get. If I've read the above posts wrong, please clarify, because I was sure that I'd made that clear in the OP and if not then I'll need to rewrite it. The idea of ramping is something that is forums wide, mods who have identified obvious problem posters will make a point of warning that further shittiness will lead to increasing probation lengths and eventual bans if these posters can't improve (or at least restrain) themselves. The big complaint that came from the feedback in the last thread was that while I'd made a point of identifying these posters, I hadn't been consistent enough in following through on the increased length of probations, which was nobody's fault but my own. The new rule is to lay out a clear structure so that everybody knows exactly what is supposed to happen to somebody who is causing nothing but trouble, not as a general principle for all probations going forward. disaster pastor posted:This example in particular. rovert is effectively permabanned; he hasn't posted anywhere else since his ban from this forum. Saying "we got rid of him long after the rest of the forum wanted him gone, and we did so by permabanning him in a way that isn't bureaucratically a permaban!" really sounds like the issues you're trying to address are way off from the issues people actually care about. As I've said before, the subforum ban for rovert was because I went to the admins asking about what options beyond a ban were available since the next obvious step was a permaban which at the time was really only supposed to be for incredibly monstrous acts, which rovert hadn't done but the bans and months off clearly weren't working either. It just so happened that this coincided with admins wanting to test out an alternative forum feature to permabans by effectively making a forum invisible to a particular user. If they hadn't been looking for a test subject for that experiment, and if the subforum ban hadn't worked out as hoped, rovert would have just been hit with a standard permaban instead. Also, while while plenty of members of the forum did want him gone for a long time, for a long time there were also a number of posters who were defenders of rovert and would contact me whenever he got a heavy probation or banning, saying they thought he was being unfairly punished. By the time he was kicked out though, few were bothering to defend him anymore and it was near impossible to say he hadn't used up every single chance he'd been given and had nobody but himself to blame. But this goes towards another point, which is that I often get conflicting messages (which is entirely fine, we're not a hive mind) from people about what "the forum" as a whole wants. Part of my role here is taking on board all of these viewpoints and trying my best to resolve issues that arise. My hope is that I'm mostly doing okay in that regard.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2020 06:15
|
|
|
Gumball Gumption posted:Even bigger picture. This is an entirely arbitrary system. The rules we make and the way we enforce them is entirely made up by us. So why do we currently use this system, what do we expect the end results to be, and is it the best one we could use? And I'm asking this because I honestly think no one really stops to think about it. I've heard lots of conflicting ideas about what the point of the system is so I'd like to hear your answer and how you think about it. Well hopefully the end result is people who are real problems in the sub either get the message quick and adjust their posting to no longer be a problem, or they don't learn and very quickly get removed as a problem by the now established progression of probation lengths. The entire point of probations in general as I see it is to stop people from getting in the way of the threads and various subforums from being used for their intended purpose of discussing the subject they were made for. For most people, a dumb post or silly argument that gets them a warning or a probation is enough to make them correct themselves. For the few that simply cannot help themselves or won't learn, longer probations take them away from disrupting everybody else's posting experience for a longer time.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2020 03:28
|
|
|
Hey woah what? This is the first I am hearing of this, has this been reported to any of the admins? CJ2 just told me they needed a break because they felt being on the forums wasn't the best for their mental health at the moment. I will contact CJ2 about this, until I hear directly from the source this subject is off-limits because this is deeply serious poo poo.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2020 09:39
|
|
|
Right now I'm far more concerned about finding out as much details as I can about this death threat, and seeing what if anything can be done about it. I'm going to close this thread for a few hours so I can concentrate on that, it has to take priority.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2020 10:11
|
|
|
Don't be a dick, that is an incredibly poor taste post and this is a not a subject for you to be trying to score points on.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2020 05:38
|
|
|
I put CJ2 in touch with an admin to pass on any and all information they had available. If an account is identified as being the person behind sending them a death threat, they will be permabanned without a second's hesitation. I still cannot wrap my head around how somebody could be so utterly pathetic and miserable as to do such a thing in the first place.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2020 06:37
|
|
|
Rarity already posted an apology that they brought this up in the thread instead of PMing me about it. The situation since then has been dealt with as far as it can be in this forum, and that's an end to the matter unless we hear otherwise from an Admin. If nobody from this subforum sent the message to CJ2, then there's zero concern, and if somebody did, then they can go gently caress themselves as far as I'm concerned.
Jerusalem fucked around with this message at 13:16 on Oct 5, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2020 13:13
|
|
|
Yes sorry I was being careful about not providing too much info because I don't know how much CJ2 would be comfortable with being shared. Believe me, if I actually knew who the poster was who was pathetic enough to have emailed a death threat to another poster on a forum about pro-loving-wrestling of all things, I'd have already had them permabanned. As it is, all I could do was get as much information from CJ2 as possible and have them pass it on to somebody higher up who might potentially be able to use that information to find out more.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2020 01:01
|
|
|
Yes, Seth Rollins' probation was due to him trying to use the thread to be a dick. It was about a particularly bad and serious topic and warranted a stiffer probation length than a day which, as noted, is the longest probation that can be automatically given by a moderator before an admin needs to approve it.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2020 09:28
|
|
|
I do not for a single second believe that anybody's posting here justified or caused anybody to send a death threat. Whoever did that has absolutely zero excuse to have done so, no reason can justify them doing it, and the fact that at no point through the process did they stop and think,"Maybe what I am doing here is a stupid, gross and disgusting thing to do" is a pure indictment on them and nobody else. This is a forum for posting about wrestling, MMA, grappling, sumo etc. We come here to watch it, talk about it, shoot the poo poo and have some fun. That anybody could think anything said or done here justifies tracking down somebody's offsite details and sending them a threatening message is beyond pathetic and is utterly inexcusable. It's not an environment or a situation or a tale with two sides, it's one person being a gigantic piece of poo poo.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2020 13:37
|
|
|
JOHN CENA posted:im thinking it was probably The Other Forum on here that he frequents that by coincidence seems to have to regularly ban users for posting death threats Let's not start speculating about whether it was people in other subforums who did it, that's outside the scope of this thread and this sub and is pure guesswork since none of us were directly involved. CJ2 believes it was most likely somebody from here as this was where they said they were experiencing hostility from before the message came through to them, and I don't see any value in instead trying to post about why other subs might have done it instead. If it was nobody from here who did it, then that's great. If it was, they know who they were and I can only hope they feel even the slightest level of remorse or regret for doing it.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2020 13:45
|
|
|
For anybody who hasn't seen the announcement update: the sale is final, Lowtax no longer owns SomethingAwful.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2020 01:14
|
|
|
Handy stuff! Particularly for those of you who don't want the old donation tags under your avatars anymore.astral posted:
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2020 03:02
|
|
In celebration of Jeffrey of YOSPOS's recent forums purchase:
|
Mekchu posted:It was fixed multiple times but then various issues would make it break. I don't really blame Lowtax, a guy I doubt who is very good at coding, to not know how to fix it. A lot of the technical stuff happening now is down to astral being given the ability to look under the hood. I don't understand most of the magic they do, but that little search bar is a Godsend and I deeply appreciate how much interest they take in working on the site's various idiosyncrasies.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2020 09:14
|
|
|
Hey you know how there's a vbulletin link at the bottom of each page? Did you know it actually links through to a changelog of recent forum upgrades/changes that astral and/or Jeffrey have been making? Because I didn't! Really handy way to keep track of a lot of the great stuff that they've been working on, including the ability to ignore PMs from users which is an option people have been asking about for years.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2020 04:49
|
|
|
Alright, the news of Lowtax's sale was significant enough to post about in here, but this isn't a thread to talk poo poo about other admins/wider forums crap. This thread is back to only on-topic discussion of FIGHT ISLAND rules/moderation.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2020 22:44
|
|
|
If you don't like seeing the same joke, make different jokes  This really seems like a complete non-issue, it's the same as when a thread is on a discussion topic you might not find particularly interesting, just make a post about a subject of discussion you find more interesting and maybe people will find it interesting too and now there's a whole new conversation happening. That's how forums work.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2020 07:31
|
|
|
Thank you karmicknight for agreeing to be an IK, I hope the experience is an enjoyable one.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2020 07:54
|
|
|
Basically if there's somebody who looks like they're a pretty active member of the sub, have demonstrated an ability in helping keep discussion interesting/fun and don't have a notable history of being poo poo-stirrers, they just kind of naturally come to mind when it's time to find an IK. Junpei and I check with each other to make sure neither of us has any concerns about somebody the other might have suggested, then put the offer out to the person to see if they're interested. If they are, we ask the admins to IK them, at which point if there is any concerns on the admin side they'll let us know and might ask for clarification on something before flipping the switch. Sometimes context might change exactly how or why an IK is chosen, but the above is basically in general how it is done, at least for F(R)IGHT ISLAND anyway.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2020 13:44
|
|
|
I legitimately, and I have no idea how, missed an entire page of this thread. There were a bunch of completely off-topic/lovely posts that I'm gonna run through and give out probations for those now, and a reminder that this thread is meant for actual proper feedback and discussion and not cracking wise or white-noise posting.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2020 14:30
|
|
|
As long as people are making these utterly harmless jokes and people are finding them funny, there really isn't a problem. The people who don't like them can just scroll past, and if they think a thread is bad because it has some people enjoying jokes they don't like, there is nothing stopping them from making different jokes or talking about something else on-topic for the thread, and if people are interested then the conversation shifts and everybody's a winner. This isn't a moderation issue at all, I'm not gonna probate people for posting jokes that people enjoy even if some people are tired of seeing it. This is just a difference of opinion between posters about what posts they like or dislike, and if people stop finding these jokes funny they'll just stop posting them and the "problem" solves itself.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2020 14:51
|
|
|
I actually do read the MMA threads though, and even if I didn't I get reports for those threads the same as I do for any other and make probations as seems necessary. They get less probations in general because there are less active posters on the MMA side of things than the pro-wrestling side, and they have two fairly active IKs who are there to stamp down any issues before they can get out of hand. In terms of probations being arbitrary, I can't speak for how other posters feel but the rules I think are pretty drat clear: effectively they boil down to don't be a creep and don't be a dick. Nobody is getting probated for making interesting, creative or discussion-stimulating posts. Probations in general usually happen when somebody won't let go of a stupid argument or are just being a total dick for no reason, and nobody should ever feel comfortable being able to post that way, and the removal of that type of posting is in no way a decline in quality of posts. A lot of leeway is given for people just joking around and shooting the poo poo with each other, I think the idea of there being a culture of fear of people who feel like they're in constant danger of probation is pretty drat overblown. As I've mentioned in the past though, every report I've ever dealt with I've had to provide a justification in the record for why I took the action (or no action) that I did - if there is a genuine belief by posters that I'm being arbitrary or just handing out probations without cause, and they feel that coming to me with their concerns either in this thread or via PM etc isn't satisfying them, they are more than welcome to take their concerns to any member of the admin team they wish. Just because I disagree with the notion of posters being too scared to post without being probated, that doesn't mean I'm right, and there is a record that can show an admin exactly what I've been doing and what my reasons were. If they agree with the criticism then they're well within their rights and power to remove me as a mod or tell me I have to change up the way I'm moderating etc.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2020 15:30
|
|
|
Gumball Gumption posted:I still really hate that system because it seems to work on the idea that there isn't really anything that goes into being a good mod or IK except being nice and level headed. And that's not true. Lots of very nice people have been mods or IK and ended up wilting under pressure because there is a lot more to it. From the outside looking in I think at it's best the system works despite itself and has a lot of room for improvement. At it's worst it seems lovely and isolating and takes people and tosses them into lovely situations they're not equipped to handle until they gently caress up and make everyone mad, burn out, or get revealed as a petty posting tyrant. Which isn't really anyone on our fight Island mod team, y'all are cool though I think we care more about letter of the law than the spirit of it. But everything about how this website functions is such a mess. In all seriousness, a wider ranging look at or criticism of the selection of IKs forums-wide is probably a good thread for QCS, as I'm really, really not the authority to speak on forums wide policys/structures/functions etc. To be specific about F(R)IGHT ISLAND itself though, being nice and level-headed isn't by itself enough to make somebody an IK, but it goes a long way towards making Junpei and I think "well we should probably consider this person", they just kind of naturally come to mind when it's time to make that decision. As an example: the recent decision to offer karmicknight an IK role came about when Junpei suggested them, I thought it was a good idea, and then a deeper look solidified my read on karmic as an active and engaged poster who makes good threads, and has never really caused problems for anybody before. Brut and Mekchu were chosen because they are active, regular participants in MMA threads and encourage a lot of good posting. Having posters like this around who have access to a couple of extra buttons is pretty beneficial I feel. Before that, I picked CJ2 because they'd demonstrated a real interest in keeping threads on-topic and in line, and given feedback I got in the previous iteration of the feedback thread, I felt that would be helpful as an addition to my own moderation. Unfortunately CJ2, as genuine as the efforts they put in were, found the whole experience pretty miserable and that's not at all what I want the IK experience to be for anybody. CommonShore posted:This is a much more effective way to phrase the text of the rules. I'm serious. This should be the rules as written. Added it to the top of the OP as a "these are the rules boiled down to their purest form" thing.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2020 22:12
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 19:08 |
|
|
When I see a joke I don't find funny, I scroll past it because who loving cares, it's just a joke. If I see a joke that is in horribly bad taste, has been reported, and is causing problems in a thread, then I either post a warning in the thread to not do that or I give somebody a probation. There really isn't anything more to it than that, it is kind of baffling to me that anybody would think otherwise. Seth Rollins posted:you do probate people for posting jokes that people enjoy, when you personally aren't one of the people enjoying them. As I have noted multiple times, if you genuinely think I'm being unfair and biased in my moderating choices, and you're not satisfied with the responses you're getting in this thread, then take it to an admin and tell them what you think. Posting snarky responses in this thread isn't particularly helpful for anybody.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2020 22:50
|
|