Can someone shed some light on the "Discussing moderator based actions" rule?

[Dmitri]

Would someone mind shedding some light on the reason for this rule :

Discussing moderator based actions

Actions taken against a member of the community are not to be discussed in public on the forums. Opinions about specific moderators or moderator actions (locking, deleting threads, etc) are also not to be discussed in posts or threads.

If you have questions, remarks, suggestions or complaints about moderating in general or specific moderators, please contact our website admin through a private message.

At face value this seems like it's intent is to prevent whining or spam from people who feel they were unfairly treated, however it also seems quite oppressive. I understand "this is not a democracy" but isn't this a very dystopian concept? In the end I suppose it's a pointless conversation since the admins end up doing what they want regardless, but it's disappointing none the less.

[Fuzzzie]

The idea is to discuss actions with the mods or if you have problems, the admins.

If you complain about an infraction or a thread being closed on the forums then it derails things badly. Everyone wants to jump in and give their two cents. It's best to send PM's to us and let us work it out and explain it to you.

[noteworthynerd]

You are not supposed to publicly talk about moderator action... If you have a complaint about a specific action taken by a mod, PM an admin (Sunshine or Boubouille to be precise, I'm not sure if Chaud is a willing or able to help). I don't necessarily view the rule as oppressive, I mainly view it as a way to keep clutter/spam/flaming to a minimum.

Edit: Fuzzzie beat me to it. >.<

[Dmitri]

If you complain about an infraction or a thread being closed on the forums then it derails things badly. Everyone wants to jump in and give their two cents.

I understand this, however isn't that the point of posting something on a forum? Getting other peoples opinions, thoughts, contributions and ideas? The idea behind transparent authorities is that it keeps people accountable. Inevitably your response would be something along the lines of "When it comes down to it, other peoples thoughts, opinions, contributions and ideas don't matter since they don't affect the action taken." but this is a fallacy, if such opinions were allowed to be posted, it WOULD affect the action taken...

[seam]

You would end up having new threads any time someone got Infracted because they disagreed with it, or thought that yelling and flaming wasn't worth it "Because he deserved it."

It would clutter up the forums, and kill off any other form of discussion(Or at least hurt it. See: Sparkle Horse).

If you have an opinion strong enough that you think it would affect the action taken, simply PM Sunshine or Boubouille. And if multiple people did so, yes, it would affect things.

[Dmitri]

And if multiple people did so, yes, it would affect things.

I guess I'm unclear on this...How would anybody else know about the action taken if you can't post about it? Just seeing the mod write "User was banned for this post."?

[Fuzzzie]

We welcome opinions. The forums aren't always the best place to share them. Especially in active threads. We want to keep things on topic and running smoothly, not get bogged down every time someone has a problem with what a moderator is trying to do. Once one person posts something about what a moderator has done, 10 more will chime in and now the discussion is ruined.

It's far better to take your concerns to the mods directly. We'll answer any question you have, I promise.

---------- Post added 2011-10-06 at 12:45 PM ----------

I guess I'm unclear on this...How would anybody else know about the action taken if you can't post about it? Just seeing the mod write "User was banned for this post."?

There is a small red icon at the bottom right of posts that are infracted. You can click on it to see the reason too.

[seam]

I guess I'm unclear on this...How would anybody else know about the action taken if you can't post about it? Just seeing the mod write "User was banned for this post."?

Well, it takes multiple infractions to be banned.

And while I can't speak for the other mods, I for one tend to leave a reason as to why they got the infraction on the post, and I even leave my name so they can PM me if they have a problem with it.

[Jarflock]

We'll answer any question you have, I promise.

What is the meaning of life?

[Judge Malthred]

Is scrapbot an automatic thing or does it have to be initiated by a mod? If you disagree with a scrapbot infraction, who can you discuss it with?

[Fuzzzie]

What is the meaning of life?

42


next????????

---------- Post added 2011-10-06 at 12:49 PM ----------

Is scrapbot an automatic thing or does it have to be initiated by a mod? If you disagree with a scrapbot infraction, who can you discuss it with?

Scrapbot is an interface we use to give infractions.

ALL infractions are given out by actual human mods. If you disagree with any infraction given you can PM a mod or admin about it.

[Elysia]

Posting this here again from another thread we had on the topic:

- If you ever have issues moderator behavior/actions, send a PM to Sunshine/Boubouille or use the 'Contact Us' form at the bottom of the site.
- If you wind up getting banned and feel it was unjustified, there is an appeals forum for you to use.
- If you get an infraction you don't agree with, PM Sunshine or any other mod to bring it up in appeals for us to look at it.

[RedDragon4275]

Well, it takes multiple infractions to be banned.

This isn't entirely true. I've been banned for 3 days with No prior infractions and a first time offense before.

[Elysia]

This isn't entirely true. I've been banned for 3 days with No prior infractions and a first time offense before.

That happened back before the new system. Bans used to trigger from 5 points before. They trigger at 15 now. Although, it's still not entirely true. If a poster goes absolutely insane and posts a ton of garbage, they can be hit with a 15+ point infraction right off the bat.

[RedDragon4275]

Gotcha. I wasn't aware there was a new system in place.

[Lysah]

Actually, there used to be a time where infractions didn't exist, and moderators just invented ban times on the spot when they were getting rid of someone.

Spamming meme image crap everywhere...hm...two weeks sounds good this time.

I tell you, we're living in the future!

[Belloc]

Except we don't actually need everyone and their mother giving opinions on some "y u bann me????" thread. More often than not, all the trolls come out of the woodwork just to pour gas on the fire, and yet they'll still continue to visit the forum as if they're normal, civil posters once it's over.

Not to mention that it is no one's business how this place is moderated except for the person/people running it. There doesn't need to be "transparent authorities."

This isn't a democratic government -- it's a dictatorship website. If we don't like it, we can choose to stop visiting it.

[Pancaspe]

This isn't entirely true. I've been banned for 3 days with No prior infractions and a first time offense before.

Then don't call somebody a #%^*~€££¥#!