Mods. Please show some sensitivity.

[ten_david197]

Just explaining to 1 member is a complicated enough affair, wait till a mod has to explain to the whole forum why a member is ban for that reason. There will be no end to it.
Especially those who already have a grudge against certain mod.

I may be incorrect but maybe what some of them meant was that if it is made clear that posts of certain nature is not condoned and flagged in the post and thread itself for everyone to see as either the user received a warning or infraction points, it will discourage other users from assuming that that type of post is condoned by moderators and administrators and they will refrain from posting similarly to avoid getting into trouble.

Perhaps this will at least show that even though moderators, as volunteers, can only afford the time to react on posts that are reported, there are no so-called favouritism or lack of impartiality, that posts of certain nature are consistently discouraged by every single moderator.

I know sometimes it is difficult, as everyone has their own perception of what is ok, and what is not ok, but if administrator bosssaizo can list down a few examples that are obviously out of line, then maybe moderators will have an easier job.

This kind of consistencies will help alleviate any suspicions of moderators having personal agendas or vendettas against certain users of certain inclinations towards stuff they hold dear.

Yes, I am sure many of us here respect "Your home, your rules" but the fact that many stayed despite everything, despite (unfunny) trolls, despite formation of alternative, spin off forums of rebellion - it means something, doesn't it?

 

[Perisher]

I may be incorrect but maybe what some of them meant was that if it is made clear that posts of certain nature is not condoned and flagged in the post and thread itself for everyone to see as either the user received a warning or infraction points, it will discourage other users from assuming that that type of post is condoned by moderators and administrators and they will refrain from posting similarly to avoid getting into trouble.

Perhaps this will at least show that even though moderators, as volunteers, can only afford the time to react on posts that are reported, there are no so-called favouritism or lack of impartiality, that posts of certain nature are consistently discouraged by every single moderator.

I know sometimes it is difficult, as everyone has their own perception of what is ok, and what is not ok, but if administrator bosssaizo can list down a few examples that are obviously out of line, then maybe moderators will have an easier job.

This kind of consistencies will help alleviate any suspicions of moderators having personal agendas or vendettas against certain users of certain inclinations towards stuff they hold dear.

Yes, I am sure many of us here respect "Your home, your rules" but the fact that many stayed despite everything, despite (unfunny) trolls, despite formation of alternative, spin off forums of rebellion - it means something, doesn't it?

I suppose we can have an example thread, shall let admin decide. As for discouraging members from posting certain things, we can use warnings instead of infractions.

 

[ten_david197]

I suppose we can have an example thread, shall let admin decide. As for discouraging members from posting certain things, we can use warnings instead of infractions.

cranthir is a perfect example.

He has PMed me twice to warn me, instead of issuing infraction points straightaway.

 

[Perisher]

cranthir is a perfect example.

He has PMed me twice to warn me, instead of issuing infraction points straightaway.

Issuing warning is the same. But I suppose people prefer to get pm instead as there isn't a mark. The problem with warning through pm is there are no records for other mods to reference to. So repeat offender of the same issue may get away from another warning from another mod.

 

[ten_david197]

Issuing warning is the same. But I suppose people prefer to get pm instead as there isn't a mark. The problem with warning through pm is there are no records for other mods to reference to. So repeat offender of the same issue may get away from another warning from another mod.

Well, I guess they were friendly warnings rather than official ones.

Maybe it's just me but I feel like gestures like these make users feel more paisey to behave inappropriately and reduce suspicions or assumptions that lead to ill-feelings.

I guess we shall not take internet and online forums too seriously but I also think different people will perceive online life differently.

 

[Perisher]

Well, I guess they were friendly warnings rather than official ones.

Maybe it's just me but I feel like gestures like these make users feel more paisey to behave inappropriately and reduce suspicions or assumptions that lead to ill-feelings.

I guess we shall not take internet and online forums too seriously but I also think different people will perceive online life differently.

You are right in that pm warnings feel less serious and members would be happier that way. There is a balance in there somewhere.

 

[ten_david197]

You are right in that pm warnings feel less serious and members would be happier that way. There is a balance in there somewhere.

Maybe and hopefully, can head in the right direction someday, even though some users will still be incalcitrant and insist on unprovoked attacks and spreading of misinformation but I guess since the forum comprises of users of varying age groups and levels of maturity - it's understandable that there will be some stubborn people who are actually serious with their negativity or outright hatred.