Appeal?

[God Save The King]

You generally appeal a ban, not an infraction. A ban appeal goes over all your infractions that lead to said ban. So there's not much point in appealing an infraction. Don't break any more rules and the infraction will drop off.

If you really want to appeal, PM one of the mods of the forum you received the infraction in and they'll handle it internally.

[Darththeo]

Interestingly that is literally a discussion i had with mods a few years ago. They however felt differently - and i can actually quote some of them saying it is subjective in pm's to me. And that its not a very fitting title but its one used as a general "we dont like this post" infraciton.

Quite the argument here. An unnamed mod who cannot be verified, and maybe isn't even a mod any more voicing an opinion to you.

Also, you have a hard time understanding objective vs subjective. There is a standard that the forum used, violations are objectively measured against said standard. There is no subjectivity there.

[callipygoustp]

This is outrageous! Outrageous I tell you!!!

[UnifiedDivide]

I love how predictable it is to see a thread about moderation get hijacked by perpetual victims. You'd think they would just leave if it was so bad...

But yeah, its the holidays, can't expect volunteers to be here 24/7 to look at why someone got an infraction that didn't even lead to a ban lol

[Lochton]

I love how predictable it is to see a thread about moderation get hijacked by perpetual victims. You'd think they would just leave if it was so bad...

But yeah, its the holidays, can't expect volunteers to be here 24/7 to look at why someone got an infraction that didn't even lead to a ban lol

Basically this.

[Daedius]

You can directly PM the mod that gave the infraction, assuming they made an edit to your post to add the red "infracted" text to see who it was.

[Darththeo]

I love how predictable it is to see a thread about moderation get hijacked by perpetual victims. You'd think they would just leave if it was so bad...

But yeah, its the holidays, can't expect volunteers to be here 24/7 to look at why someone got an infraction that didn't even lead to a ban lol

But then they would have nothing to complain about.

[UnifiedDivide]

But then they would have nothing to complain about.

Oh, they absolutely would. They'd just complain in other places, about the exact same things. If they found a forum lax enough, they could also spew their bile on it. Which is really what they're complaining about not being able to do here.

Unless you think people saying "this very very dead forum is scared of cancel culture making them pander to them" are looking for reasoned/factual discussion, of course.

[Endus]

Quite the argument here. An unnamed mod who cannot be verified, and maybe isn't even a mod any more voicing an opinion to you.

Also, you have a hard time understanding objective vs subjective. There is a standard that the forum used, violations are objectively measured against said standard. There is no subjectivity there.

There's an objective standard. For edge cases, there always will be subjectivity as to whether it crosses the line on those standards, and it's often contextual to boot. For instance, calling someone a "fool" one time out of the blue probably won't earn an infraction for flaming, but if you're calling people "fools" constantly and baiting them that way, the cumulative effect of that conduct will likely cross the line. How many "fool" posts it takes, that's subjective. It's not like there's a metric saying you get 4 "fools" and then the 5th earns an infraction. To pick an example that's made up and doesn't actually reflect any incident I'm aware of from my time modding here.

Just because there's subjectivity doesn't make it "wrong" or "bad". It's just an acknowledgement that it requires judgement calls, which is why you have human moderators in the first place. And why ban and infraction appeals go to what's essentially a vote by mods as to whether the infraction was valid or should be overturned. And often, there isn't unanimity in those votes. Because it's a judgement call.

[Shadowferal]

[Polybius]

Its about politics not if its constructive or not. Thats been glaringly obvious for a while now.

If you are an ultra feminist/lgbtq supporter you can get away with anything on this forum

Or you can just practice good etiquette. You don't visit someone's home to insult them without risking being kicked out. As time passes it becomes glaringly obvious "troll" (what an insult to the old definition) posters skipped a vital part of social development.

[Darththeo]

There's an objective standard. For edge cases, there always will be subjectivity as to whether it crosses the line on those standards, and it's often contextual to boot. For instance, calling someone a "fool" one time out of the blue probably won't earn an infraction for flaming, but if you're calling people "fools" constantly and baiting them that way, the cumulative effect of that conduct will likely cross the line. How many "fool" posts it takes, that's subjective. It's not like there's a metric saying you get 4 "fools" and then the 5th earns an infraction. To pick an example that's made up and doesn't actually reflect any incident I'm aware of from my time modding here.

Just because there's subjectivity doesn't make it "wrong" or "bad". It's just an acknowledgement that it requires judgement calls, which is why you have human moderators in the first place. And why ban and infraction appeals go to what's essentially a vote by mods as to whether the infraction was valid or should be overturned. And often, there isn't unanimity in those votes. Because it's a judgement call.

Having some subjectivity in it doesn't make something subjective.

For example, all laws have that nature to it. But, it doesn't change that the laws are what they are and there is objectivity there.

The only people I ever hear arguing "Laws are subjective!" are either people who do not wish to be subjected to consequences or arguing at a level that generally doesn't happen on internet forums.

[SpaghettiMonk]

The politics forum is full of liberal trolls who have perfected passive aggressively triggering everyone else into infractions. For example, Endus will repeatedly say, "This is a lie" to get a response because he knows that's not going to get him an infraction, but if you respond to him directly and accuse him of something, you will get infracted. There's a similar game that's played with calling people racists all the time.

People think it's about the conversation, but it's really about getting people infracted and banned and winning the argument that way.

[Makabreska]

The politics forum is full of liberal trolls who have perfected passive aggressively triggering everyone else into infractions. For example, Endus will repeatedly say, "This is a lie" to get a response because he knows that's not going to get him an infraction, but if you respond to him directly and accuse him of something, you will get infracted.

People think it's about the conversation, but it's really about getting people infracted and banned and winning the argument that way.

Now that's a quality conspiracy theory over there. An ex-mod uses 5head forum tactics to get people infracted and banned.

[Endus]

The politics forum is full of liberal trolls who have perfected passive aggressively triggering everyone else into infractions. For example, Endus will repeatedly say, "This is a lie" to get a response because he knows that's not going to get him an infraction, but if you respond to him directly and accuse him of something, you will get infracted.

People think it's about the conversation, but it's really about getting people infracted and banned and winning the argument that way.

Was it a lie? That's the part people always skip over in their rush to cry persecution.

If your point is that I don't break site rules (generally; I cross the line sometimes and get slapped appropriately when I do) and others can't help themselves because they get so incensed at my existence or something, I'm not seeing how that's a "me" problem.

[SpaghettiMonk]

Was it a lie? That's the part people always skip over in their rush to cry persecution.

You can't know that, which is the point. Maybe it's untrue, but you're accusing them of lying.

[UnifiedDivide]

The politics forum is full of liberal trolls

Aren't you the dude that used to post on a different account before getting banned and making this one, Coniferous?

Literally you, complaining about exactly what you said above lol

[Endus]

You can't know that, which is the point. Maybe it's untrue, but you're accusing them of lying.

You don't need to be a mind reader to tell if someone's lying, dude.

Especially if they post something obviously wrong, you provide evidence proving it wrong, and they insist on repeating the debunked talking point. That's provably a lie, at that point.

You're still skipping right over the question of whether they are lying, which is pretty darned relevant to the question of whether that accusation is correct or not. And I'll note there's a reason the complaint is always that I'm being a meanyface and calling out what I see as a lie, and never a defense of the false statement's merit.

[SpaghettiMonk]

Aren't you the dude that used to post on a different account before getting banned and making this one, Coniferous?

Literally you, complaining about exactly what you said above lol

Just forgot my password and had to make a new account.

[UnifiedDivide]

Just forgot my password and had to make a new account.

My point is, as mentioned before, if its so bad here, why come back?