Okay, prove it. - Page 3

***Shino*** · 12-09-2007, 10:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trey

Eh, I remember the incident exactly.

Also, even though it's better that you're back, the reason Shino gave for your ban reversal is such shit it's not even funny.

I never meant for it to be funny. It was the truth.

I never had any intentions of him serving the entire ban, I just felt like being slightly mean, I would've done it earlier today, but I had to work almost 14 hours today, so that delayed things. If I had really wanted to be a dick, I'd have waited minutes right before the ban expired and then reversed it, but that would've been just too mean....even for me.

RNB · 12-09-2007, 10:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarkAztek

Miburo, what exactly are we supposed to do if someone reports a post and claims to be offended and they're lying? If we find out that they aren't we can always undo the infraction. Seriously, how can you even make this complaint?

And it's not like we give out infractions for things that DON'T break the rules. It's simple: Break them and you get punished. In fact, we give people a ton of leeway to get out of these infractions. We double check the thread to see the context of it. If someone breaks the no flaming rule and the victim doesn't care, we don't do anything. We now have a way to give out infractions for minor insults.

It's a forum. It's not perfect but it's as good as it gets.

No it isn't. We can say that after you get rid of the flaming and trolling rules.

12-09-2007, 11:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trey

Also, even though it's better that you're back, the reason Shino gave for your ban reversal is such shit it's not even funny.

Which part was shit? The part where it wasn't a flame (Given the context that kind of sounds like what you're saying)? It wasn't, a flame is a direct insult towards the person, or just name calling. The context of what I said, coupled with the context of all my other 'report post spam' messages were not directed towards the person, but the content of the post itself.

If you mean what shino addressed though, then word. : )

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarkAztek

Miburo, what exactly are we supposed to do if someone reports a post and claims to be offended and they're lying? If we find out that they aren't we can always undo the infraction. Seriously, how can you even make this complaint?

And it's not like we give out infractions for things that DON'T break the rules. It's simple: Break them and you get punished. In fact, we give people a ton of leeway to get out of these infractions. We double check the thread to see the context of it. If someone breaks the no flaming rule and the victim doesn't care, we don't do anything. We now have a way to give out infractions for minor insults.

It's a forum. It's not perfect but it's as good as it gets.

Nah, that's not what I'm saying, man. I know that either way people are going to be lying about being offended sometimes. I'm not referring to that at all. As for the second paragraph, if someone isn't offended it's reversed anyway, so that's a moot point. The rule pretty much boils down to "A flame that offends the flamee is against the rules" not flaming in general, because obviously it isn't if the person isn't offended. Right?

What I'm saying is that keep the rules the way they are, just that there is a much, much more effective way of enforcing them. If you wait till the person who is being flamed actually reports it then you KNOW that the guy isn't going to later say that he wasn't offended, you already have a pretty definite idea of how the flamee feels about the flame. There's no room for error, no room for unnecessary time off. No one is ever getting banned needlessly, ever (Well, at least as far as this aspect is concerned. Mods can still fuck up and interpret things wrong, but that only goes for the ones with horrible reading comprehension...and there's only a couple of them with that problem. XD).

How can you say that's not an improvement? It's not a huge, drastic, sweeping revision or anything, but it's still a fuck load better than the current policy. Taking room for error out of the equation is always a good thing. There is no flaw in what I'm proposing, and there is clear benefits. I'd say that qualifies as being a bit better.

DarkAztek · 12-10-2007, 12:05 AM

Quote:

No it isn't. We can say that after you get rid of the flaming and trolling rules.

That's retarded. This is a forum that wants to keep things a bit more civil. Don't like it? Leave. There's other forums you can be a part of... And I think of all the Naruto forums, we're probably the best off with the smartest members too.

Quote:

What I'm saying is that keep the rules the way they are, just that there is a much, much more effective way of enforcing them. If you wait till the person who is being flamed actually reports it then you KNOW that the guy isn't going to later say that he wasn't offended, you already have a pretty definite idea of how the flamee feels about the flame.

Here's the dig: If we see posts that break the rules but nobody reports it and we don't do anything, a lot of people are gunna bitch and moan that we aren't doing our jobs. That has actually happened a number of times in the past. Then there are the newbs here who actually make up the majority of those who GET flamed all because NL members have no patience. They don't even know how to report a post let alone figure out WHERE to post.

And as it has been repeated before, over and over again, it's not the end of the world if someone is banned for a few hours from NL. I promise you, they'll survive.

Another problem with what you want is that it is going to normalize flaming. It's going to basically get rid of the flaming rules entirely and then we'll just break down into "You got offended? Pussy" kind of shit. You have to realize that people are assholes, especially when you combine them with the anonymity granted through teh tubes of the internet. People WILL just flame more and I honestly don't want NL to be that kind of a place.

Circe · 12-10-2007, 12:15 AM

Omg, OMG HE LOOKED RIGHT AT ME

12-10-2007, 12:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarkAztek

Here's the dig: If we see posts that break the rules but nobody reports it and we don't do anything, a lot of people are gunna bitch and moan that we aren't doing our jobs. That has actually happened a number of times in the past. Then there are the newbs here who actually make up the majority of those who GET flamed all because NL members have no patience. They don't even know how to report a post let alone figure out WHERE to post.

I don't know about you, but I never see any non dumb as shit member ever bitch because you guys do too little. In fact, it's quite the opposite.

And you're pretty much endorsing ignorance by saying that members are too stupid to read the rules to figure out the report post function. I'm sure if they're really offended they'll figure it out. Or just PM a mod. Come on, it's not rocket science.

Quote:

And as it has been repeated before, over and over again, it's not the end of the world if someone is banned for a few hours from NL. I promise you, they'll survive.

I never said it was. It's still better if it can be avoided whenever possible though, right?

Quote:

Another problem with what you want is that it is going to normalize flaming. It's going to basically get rid of the flaming rules entirely and then we'll just break down into "You got offended? Pussy" kind of shit. You have to realize that people are assholes, especially when you combine them with the anonymity granted through teh tubes of the internet. People WILL just flame more and I honestly don't want NL to be that kind of a place.

I could do the same thing now. If someone flames someone, gets banned, and the person doesn't PM a mod to get it reversed then I could say "You're offended by that? Pussy" under the current set up. This wouldn't normalize flaming anymore then the current setup does now.

In fact, this is exactly the type of thing that gets people all 'fight teh powar' on you mods. Even a tiny suggestion which involves almost zero effort to implement that serves to remove room for error (which is fucking awesome considering that some mods here are kind of error prone) is met with massive opposition. The only valid argument against this suggestion is that "ridiculously stupid people might be too fucking stupid to report a flame or PM a mod." Which, when you think about it, is pretty damn silly. Especially when the pros include pretty much eliminating unnecessary flaming bans and appeasing many of the quality posters on this site at the same time.

DarkAztek · 12-10-2007, 06:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Miburo

I don't know about you, but I never see any non dumb as shit member ever bitch because you guys do too little. In fact, it's quite the opposite.

And you're pretty much endorsing ignorance by saying that members are too stupid to read the rules to figure out the report post function. I'm sure if they're really offended they'll figure it out. Or just PM a mod. Come on, it's not rocket science.

That's because you haven't been around long enough. Sorry, but you're gunna have to take my word for it that we've had people bitch and moan about us "not doing our jobs" before.

Endorsing ignorance? Naw. I think of it as "being realistic."

Quote:

I could do the same thing now. If someone flames someone, gets banned, and the person doesn't PM a mod to get it reversed then I could say "You're offended by that? Pussy" under the current set up. This wouldn't normalize flaming anymore then the current setup does now.

In fact, this is exactly the type of thing that gets people all 'fight teh powar' on you mods. Even a tiny suggestion which involves almost zero effort to implement that serves to remove room for error (which is fucking awesome considering that some mods here are kind of error prone) is met with massive opposition. The only valid argument against this suggestion is that "ridiculously stupid people might be too fucking stupid to report a flame or PM a mod." Which, when you think about it, is pretty damn silly. Especially when the pros include pretty much eliminating unnecessary flaming bans and appeasing many of the quality posters on this site at the same time.

Christ, no. We're not rejecting it just to be difficult.

It's just like with the size limit for signatures. Maybe some people have T3 connections and loading a few 400 KB pictures isn't a big deal at all. However, we also have a good number of members with slow computers or with 56 K modems. We made the limitations mostly for their sake. It's protecting a minority. Silly? Possibly. Has it been proven to work over the years? Hell yes.

I'd say that the majority of reported posts are for things that don't deserve an infraction at all. ...And actually, most of the flaming here is one of the following things:

A) A newb is flamed and they get pissed off. Yup, see my argument before about them not figuring it out.

B) Someone purposefully is a dick and fully expects to be banned for their actions. I have no pity for these guys.

C) The last group consists of things that just came out as a flame or are due to the heat of a thread. I have no pity for these people either since it's not all that hard to make sure that what you're saying isn't a direct insult.

And how often is a person banned unnecessarily here? (Yours was different seeing as how Shino purposefully made it last longer than 10 seconds. NR made a stupid mistake in giving it in the first place too.) It might happen only because a mod doesn't know the full situation and that's just a turkey mistake on the mod's behalf.

jsaviers · 12-10-2007, 07:08 PM

...
Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah!
...

12-10-2007, 09:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarkAztek

That's because you haven't been around long enough. Sorry, but you're gunna have to take my word for it that we've had people bitch and moan about us "not doing our jobs" before.

Nah, don't get me wrong. I'm sure it's been said, I totally believe you. However, if you had to rate the intelligence of the posters who said it I'd be willing to bet that you'd put them somewhere between the intelligence of a jar of pickles and a house plant, amirite?

Compare that to the caliber of posters who say things could use some tweaking, and I'm sure the ratings would be drastically different (Er, for the most part anyway. I know we've got some duds, but guys like 48 and Jaxon are top notch. And people like Kat and UT, among others, also have shown support as well. We've got the backing of some of the most quality posters on the site, no doubt about it.).

Quote:

Endorsing ignorance? Naw. I think of it as "being realistic."

When your only argument against it is that some people might be too stupid to figure out how to report a post or PM a mod, and thusly deduce that the rules should be centered around catering to those types of individuals, I think that crosses the line of simply being realistic. Yeah, there's stupid people, but come on. The rules shouldn't revolve around them, that just brings the level of the entire forum down.

Quote:

Christ, no. We're not rejecting it just to be difficult.

It's just like with the size limit for signatures. Maybe some people have T3 connections and loading a few 400 KB pictures isn't a big deal at all. However, we also have a good number of members with slow computers or with 56 K modems. We made the limitations mostly for their sake. It's protecting a minority. Silly? Possibly. Has it been proven to work over the years? Hell yes.

That's entirely different. I'm not suggesting that we dick anyone over, it's not like it'll cost someone extra cash to read the damn rules like they're supposed to when signing up for the site like it would for them to get a faster connection. It's just a simple suggestion that removes the possibility of error and makes things more efficient, with the added benefit of appeasing some good members of the site and making it look like the moderation team puts forth an honest effort to continually improve the forum.

Quote:

I'd say that the majority of reported posts are for things that don't deserve an infraction at all. ...And actually, most of the flaming here is one of the following things:

A) A newb is flamed and they get pissed off. Yup, see my argument before about them not figuring it out.

B) Someone purposefully is a dick and fully expects to be banned for their actions. I have no pity for these guys.

C) The last group consists of things that just came out as a flame or are due to the heat of a thread. I have no pity for these people either since it's not all that hard to make sure that what you're saying isn't a direct insult.

First off, I hope those guys get spamming infractions for reporting things that don't deserve an infraction. XD

Secondly, I'm not entirely sure of the relevancy this has on this discussion. I obviously can't disagree with what you're saying here as I've got no clue as to what gets reported, I just don't see how this acts as an argument against a passive moderation style. If it's reported, then it's all good. All we're suggestion is that mods do not act until the flamee reports the post either via the report post function or through PM so that there is no room for mistakes. That's all.

Quote:

And how often is a person banned unnecessarily here? (Yours was different seeing as how Shino purposefully made it last longer than 10 seconds. NR made a stupid mistake in giving it in the first place too.) It might happen only because a mod doesn't know the full situation and that's just a turkey mistake on the mod's behalf.

That's the entire point. A simple change from an aggressive moderation style to a more passive one would pretty much eliminate the chance of mistake on the mod's behalf, assuming they know what the rules are in the first place. I don't see why a suggestion that proposes going from a policy that allows room for error to one that all but eliminates it is being met with any opposition. Pretty much nothing changes rule wise, you're just taking away a lot of the wiggle room that allows mods to mess up, which in turn gets people riled up, which then leads to 'fighting teh powar' and shit. This would just give people less reasons to bitch about the mods, while at the same time actually upping the efficiency of how infractions are handled.

The only argument against it is that stupid people might be too stupid to report a flame. If that's really the case (I mean, I don't doubt it, but people are really that fucking retarded? Damn. Just the type of people we'd want more of on here, amirite? XD) then just throw a in an explanation as to how to report shit using the report post feature into the rule listing. Hell, I'll even write it out for you guys if you want. If they don't read it, then tough shit. You guys didn't cut me any slack when I 'spammed' the report post thing even though I don't see anything even in the rules about it, so I had no way of knowing it would actually be infraction worthy. People get infractions when they couldn't even possibly know they'd get into trouble for the shit they did sometimes. If it's actually written in the rules, what possible excuse could they have?

UchihaTaijiya · 12-10-2007, 10:01 PM

^ Appropriate? I think so.

12-10-2007, 10:11 PM

^UT for mod. : )

Also, the rules could use a little re-writing so that they're not so horribly vague and inaccurate in regards to how things are actually enforced. But that might require a small amount of effort, so I don't really think that's too feasible of a suggestion. ; )

Shikamaru · 12-18-2007, 05:40 PM

QUICKLY, TO THE BATMOBILE! WE MUST GO INFORM THE CARE POLICE...

-_- he stills whines eh?

12-10-2007, 12:15 AM	#35
Circe Academy Student Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Basilique Ste-Madeleine Posts: 29 Thanks: 0 Thanked 19 Times in 8 Posts	Re: Okay, prove it. Omg, OMG HE LOOKED RIGHT AT ME __________________ THE IMPERIAL SWINE DRAW CLOSER GRAB YOUR RATIONS AND RUN, youth is the belief that anything is possible; aging, 'a lot less is possible than i originally thought. i shouldn't even try.' a young person of 8 will feel wonder and energised. the feeling of being 16 years old will inevitably be missed by those who are no longer 16 years old. when a 17-year-old wears old clothes, it accentuates his individuality and sense of irony. when a 37-year-old wears old clothes, it accentuates the fact he is 37. a divorced 42-year-old man will think, 'sure would be cool if i could hook up with a 22-year-old girl'. After weeks of bar-hopping, the smart ones at least, will amend, 'sure would be cool if i could hook up with a 22-year-old girl...who's an old soul.' the puzzle with the essence of youth is that no one has it anymore. fortunately, the loss of youth was solved by vegetarians who didn't eat many vegetables, but did smoke a lot of grass, so everything is perfect. ...too perfect.

12-10-2007, 07:08 PM	#38
jsaviers Chuunin Join Date: May 2007 Location: Juneau Age: 24 Posts: 414 Thanks: 0 Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post	Re: Okay, prove it. ... Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah! ...

12-10-2007, 10:01 PM	#40
UchihaTaijiya sublimis ab unda Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 2,777 Thanks: 7,387 Thanked 3,312 Times in 1,249 Posts	Re: Okay, prove it. ^ Appropriate? I think so. __________________ If the elephants have past lives yet are destined to always remember It's no wonder how they scream Like you and I they must have some temper And I am dreaming of them on the plains Dirtying up their beds Watching for some sign of rain to cool their hot heads And how dare that you send me that card when I'm doing all that I can do You are forcing me to remember when all I want is to just forget you If the tiger shall protect her young then tell me how did you slip by All my instincts have failed me for once I must have somehow slept the whole night And I am dreaming of them with their kill Tearing it all apart Blood dripping from their lips and teeth sinking into heart And how dare that you say you'll call When you know I need some peace of mind If you have to take sides with the animals Won't you do it with one who is kind And if the hawks in the trees need the dead If you're living you don't stand a chance For a time though you share the same bed There are only two ends to this dance You can flee with your wounds just in time or lie there as he feeds Watching yourself ripped to shreds and laughing as you bleed So for those of you falling in love keep it kind Keep it good Keep it right Throw yourself in the midst of danger but keep one eye open at night

12-10-2007, 10:11 PM	#41
Miburo Guest Posts: n/a	Re: Okay, prove it. ^UT for mod. : ) Also, the rules could use a little re-writing so that they're not so horribly vague and inaccurate in regards to how things are actually enforced. But that might require a small amount of effort, so I don't really think that's too feasible of a suggestion. ; )

12-18-2007, 05:40 PM	#42
Shikamaru ░░░░░░░▲░░░░░░░ Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Although I may not go down in history I will however go down on your sister Posts: 666 Thanks: 1 Thanked 5 Times in 4 Posts	Re: Okay, prove it. QUICKLY, TO THE BATMOBILE! WE MUST GO INFORM THE CARE POLICE... -_- he stills whines eh?

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode