Censorship on MMO-Champion and Forum Guidelines

[Dorfie]

eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

[unholytestament]

I'm sorry to see that the discussion here is again, evolving around the two examples I posted early on instead of focusing on what my post was really about: Arbitrary and bias application on the forum guidelines. I almost get the impression people didn't bother reading the whole thing.

Why include examples if they are completely irrelevant?

It's hard to respond to a discussion when the thread is closed within 10 minutes because of "trolling"???

Must you exaggerate?

There was 16 minutes between when the topic opened and your next post and then the thread got locked 14 minutes later. Is half an hour not long enough for you to respond to actual people?

Let's be honest here, most threads started here about about personal opinions and more often then not, these are presented as facts. Sure, I might have used unreliable sources to make my point but at least I attempted to provide them in the first place. People generally accept 3rd party sites like WoL or raidbots as sources yet mine are taken under such scrutiny? Why?

People dispute any and all sources. It happens. However you were declaring that things didn't matter just because.

I make many posts on these forums and claim that 98% of them are at least semi-constrictive. I was quite honestly really surprised to see myself banned and still haven't gotten a real response as to why.

You already have. Boub himself has posted it. Others have spelled it out for you.

[fengosa]

The OP from the locked thread in question only copied part of his post from the official forums. He selectively omitted some parts which were misleading or blatantly false, as well as the part where he plugged swtor. Unnecessary controversary isn't really needed on blizz forums and is covered under their trolling policy. Kudos to mmo-champ for having the same standard.

[Elysia]

It's hard to respond to a discussion when the thread is closed within 10 minutes because of "trolling"???

When your only reply to the questions/arguments in the thread was:

Yes, of course you can keep questioning the sources but at some point you got to just accept the argument.

It's pretty damn clear that you weren't looking to have a "discussion."

Regardless, Boub pretty much nailed it on the head.

[Begottenson]

I'm sorry to see that the discussion here is again, evolving around the two examples I posted early on instead of focusing on what my post was really about: Arbitrary and bias application on the forum guidelines. I almost get the impression people didn't bother reading the whole thing.



It's hard to respond to a discussion when the thread is closed within 10 minutes because of "trolling"???

Let's be honest here, most threads started here about about personal opinions and more often then not, these are presented as facts. Sure, I might have used unreliable sources to make my point but at least I attempted to provide them in the first place. People generally accept 3rd party sites like WoL or raidbots as sources yet mine are taken under such scrutiny? Why?

But again, I don;t really wish to discuss the details of my ban but rather the objective measures by which they are applied.

I make many posts on these forums and claim that 98% of them are at least semi-constrictive. I was quite honestly really surprised to see myself banned and still haven't gotten a real response as to why.

People generally only view the first 3 sentences in a post, the first 3 sentences set the tone of the whole topic when most people post. Then when you close out a topic with stuff like this

"But again, I don;t really wish to discuss the details of my ban but rather the objective measures by which they are applied.

I make many posts on these forums and claim that 98% of them are at least semi-constrictive. I was quite honestly really surprised to see myself banned and still haven't gotten a real response as to why"

It defeats the whole purpose of the topic that was originally posted. Seriously if this wasn't about your ban then why do you YOU keep bringing it up?
Now obviously no one here other then you and the mods know what happened after the ban. You know if you emailed them or not, which after making this topic I surely hope you did or you really did just make yourself out to be an attention whore.


Onto what is supposed to be the original topic though. No there actually could be a bit more censorship.
Using "necro" threads as an example of getting banned is rather slow. There is a difference between bumping a necro thread for the hell of it and for posting in it because it still has useful info in it or still has room for actual meaningful discussion.

The line about
"I think part of the solution is accepting MMO-Champion for what it is, and not trying to make it the way you want it"
Is vague to say the least! What is Mmo-champion?? That's up to each individual to decide for themselves. The only people that make it what they want it to be is Boub and Mods.. So what they shouldn't do any censorship at all? They shouldn't try to mold their creation to their own vision??



Then this Gem of a statement!
"Again, the general problem is that many of those points are either very open to interpretation or simply aren't enforced. Personally I have no problem not having them enforced but then at least make it official. I mean, I'm pretty sure I could browse MMO-Champion at any time of the day and find at least 3-5 Non-Constructive posts on the front-page. It's not a problem, but again, make it official."

Most of your discussion is based off of an open interpretation. The 3-5 post that aren't constructive enough for you, report them! You said so yourself that this is a hard job to hit every single guideline and make sure that ever letter of the law is being enforced. Most post probably only get enforced after someone has reported a post in it, so guess what you don't like a post or a topic report it.


SHORT VERSION!!

In the end, if you really wanted to make a difference you would've emailed Boub himself. Instead you decided to publicly bash the mods/boub here because you got banned and felt it unjustified. Good day.

[Eggers]

Well, the fact that Boub himself replied here means that you are making your argument in at least the proper way.

I also have experienced my threads being deleted, locked, and getting myself banned just for posting a thread that puts blizzard in a negative light.

But it's really to be expected... why?.. --->

Think about it this way:
- MMO-champ is owned by Curse gaming
- Curse gaming is the number one handler of all WoW addons.
- They are probably payed by Blizzard,
- but even if they are not payed directly, they get more ad revenue the more ppl that come to their site.
- And the more WoW players there are, the more people come to their site.

Thus, MMO-champ definitely has an agenda to try to paint Blizzard and WoW in a positive light.

[unholytestament]

Well, the fact that Boub himself replied here means that you are making your argument in at least the proper way.

I don't think getting a response from Boub means you're doing something "right"...

Thus, MMO-champ definitely has an agenda to try to paint Blizzard and WoW in a positive light.

Riiiiiight. It couldn't be for the obvious reason that people don't want to put up with a topic that starts off negative and has little hope of going anywhere else.

[Endus]

I'm sorry to see that the discussion here is again, evolving around the two examples I posted early on instead of focusing on what my post was really about: Arbitrary and bias application on the forum guidelines.

Point the first; if those examples weren't relevant to what your post was "really about", why include them?

Point the second; the mod staff does not engage in arbitrary application of the forum guidelines. Many of those guidelines deliberately have a great deal of vagueness to them, yes, but that is precisely to prevent any users from trying to play lawyer games with us over their infraction, trying to claim a loophole that justified their trolling because they were infracted for breaching clause 41.2a (c) when in fact it should have been 41.2a (e). Rather than set out a 386 page rule document that clearly defines each and every possible infraction, we have a very simple, yet vague, set of rules that covers the same kind of range.

In short, you not understanding the clear infraction message you received does not mean the infraction was not justified.

I make many posts on these forums and claim that 98% of them are at least semi-constrictive. I was quite honestly really surprised to see myself banned and still haven't gotten a real response as to why.

That 2% of your posts that are unconstructive will likely continue to earn you bans, until you learn to stop posting unconstructively. Which is the purpose of the system.

If you managed to get through 98% of your conversations in reality without punching anyone in the face, that 2% where you get all punchy is still going to get you a visit from the cops. Because the proportion of good to bad doesn't make a whit of difference; there shouldn't be any bad in the first place.

[Phenomina]

I was surprised and thought it was an extremely over-zealous moderator abusing power to have locked the Blizzard = Soviet Russia thread..

Was it really that surprising?

A new user who used his first post to create a thread called " Blizzard = Soviet Russia " in which he portrayed his negative opinions as fact? I would have expected to get more flak from the community for leaving that thread open then for closing it.

[Simca]

Yeah... no.

I'm going to continue to lock any thread that has no discussion potential, has a flamebait title, or is entirely a repeat of a previous thread. Especially ones like "Blizzard = Soviet Russia" which matches all three requirements.

That's the job of a moderator.

[Kisuro]

Yeah... no.

I'm going to continue to lock any thread that has no discussion potential, has a flamebait title, or is entirely a repeat of a previous thread. Especially ones like "Blizzard = Soviet Russia" which matches all three requirements.

That's the job of a moderator.

And trust me, some of us are really grateful and appreciate the work you do.
Disclaimer: this is not sarcasm.

[Deleted]

That 2% of your posts that are unconstructive will likely continue to earn you bans, until you learn to stop posting unconstructively. Which is the purpose of the system.

Or you know, those 2% could just be lame attempts at humor, sarcasm or irony. But yeah, maybe there really are only two types of posts....

[Leeuwke]

If you agree they're lame attempts, then why post them? Or you could at least make it clear that it's a lame attempt at humor/sarcasm/irony (like I do)?

If a post has the potential to offend someone or to be seen as a big troll, it has the potential to get you infracted/banned.

[Badpaladin]

There's a massive difference between a reasonable assertion and a hyperbole. Unfortunately, "Blizzard = Soviet Russia" falls into the latter category.

[Brytryne]

The internet is not a democracy, if anything I would prefer to see heavier moderation regarding the massive QQ going on (how many threads haven't derailed into a "Stars: Exploiting or not?" thread in the last 3 days? But since it isn't my forum I'll let them run it as they wish.

High five non-haters o/

[SuperomegaOP]

You have to be the baddest motherfucker in the world if you wanna post on the MMO-champion msg boards.

I have been banned 8 times and am working on my ninth.

The proper response to dissent is not more bias.

only been banned like 5 times on this account and like 2 prema-ban on my old account

[Resentful]

only been banned like 5 times on this account and like 2 prema-ban on my old account

So your evading the ban?

[Buckwald]

Thus, MMO-champ definitely has an agenda to try to paint Blizzard and WoW in a positive light.

The only "agenda" we have is to report news and information pertaining to WoW. We all have, at least, one thing in-common; We play World of Warcraft. Some more than others. I haven't raided in over 2 months and I'm not 13/13 heroic (but I have progressed into heroic raiding). We are critical of WoW and Blizz, but we don't do it in the way some forum goers do (Doomsday threads). BTW, Some mods hate the mount/pets in the store, some love them. I love them and the tears they cause.

Bibi is a good enough ... "boss" ... to allow us to moderate, within the forum rules, how we deem necessary based on the topic at hand. If it's a good discussion with minor trolling/flaming, then so be it. But, if it's just "lawl umad/ujelly" then, No, it's not going to stay open. Each person that is banned is only banned after X number of infractions. Each ban, when appealed, is discussed. Some are over turned, some ban appeals turn into good conversations.

Unfortunately, we can't possibly cover EVERYTHING that happens here. But, please note that we are doing what we think is best for the forums. If someone takes an opinion loosely based on some facts and tries to force it as the "be all, end all" the topic will rarely turn out good. If you feel that we aren't moderating right, or that we are bias, or that we are "incompetant" (spelling error is intentional) then let me quote Ron Burgundy "It's Spanish for 'A whale's vagina'" ... No, wait I mean "Agree to Disagree".

[Lysah]

So many mod posts, OP should be proud.

Allow me to point out another difference between us and EJ. For them, the forum is basically the entire site, their front page is largely unimportant and unvisited. For us, the front page is pretty much the entire site, the forum is just a nice addition for those of us who enjoy yelling at each other, and those of us who enjoy locking threads. The decision to lock one thread isn't going to make or break the site, and you should be thankful that the moderators here do their best to keep the forum clean so you don't have to look at waves of tears drowning the sun.

[Sunshine]

Don't confuse the general forum rules with the Off-Topic specific rules.

Politics, religion, and any non-WoW discussion are generally prohibited across the WoW-related part of the forum (what the general guidelines in the FAQ pertain to).

In the Off-Topic forums, the rules are slightly different, and there are forum-specific rules posted in each.