Moderation Feedback Thread Options

[Blackbuck]

Aren't you guys only supposed to use your 'powers' for dire emergencies though?

[pMASTER]

Aren't you guys only supposed to use your 'powers' for dire emergencies though?

Deutsch
Forum Led by: Moderators, Administrators, Root Admin, Flyer, pMASTER

[Blackbuck]

I'm going to shove that Icon somewhere painful At least Rewan isn't listed in the French section...

[Deadeye]

I don't think JdB handles post reports very well.

I cant't agree, JdB handles reports fair and quick and does a very good job moderating the forum

@Rest

The site teams moderating rights have been revoked, but as you can see OldBear, Flyer and Pmaster are taking care of the french/german section.

[pMASTER]

I cant't agree, JdB handles reports fair and quick and does a very good job moderating the forum

Latest criticism by some members just rolls off from you? It's silly to see how all the staff unites against a united front of alleged repeat offenders...The only conclusion which can be drawn from that fact is that the point of view of boths sides is pretty biased. Of course I don't exclude myself from that assessment.

The site teams moderating rights have been revoked, but as you can see OldBear, Flyer and Pmaster are taking care of the french/german section.

At what did Rewan hint then?

[Deadeye]

Latest criticism by some members just rolls off from you? It's silly to see how all the staff unites against a united front of alleged repeat offenders...The only conclusion which can be drawn from that fact is that the point of view of boths sides is pretty biased. Of course I don't exclude myself from that assessment.


At what did Rewan hint then?

I was talking about JdB's moderation in general !
If you are trying to hint to to the community chatter chunking, I can't say much yet ...haven't read through all these pages but judging from the posts in this topic and the "other" section it was legitimately to act against the people involved..still you can argue whether some punishments were a bit harsh or not, but as the the tension was eased let's don't bringt the debate back again, if someone wants to talk to me (about this issue or about any other problems) either drop a PM or contact me on ICQ/MSN

Sidenote : Other issues do not include dieseases

and I think rewan hinted that d@ve wants to become a part of the site...either as php code or as a newsposter/moderator. US meaning the whole team not only moderators

[Rewan]

DeadEye got it

[D@V£]

I cant't agree, JdB handles reports fair and quick and does a very good job moderating the forum

Aside from setting a member with 0 warn level to an instant 20 year ban for simply bringing light to the events which led to his previous dismissal from the team?

I'm sorry, the information appears to have been deleted. Apparently quoting JdB's Lt_HuNtEr's "retirement" message is against the rules. You still haven't commented on this yet. I know what was in that post. I saw it. There was nothing in that post that was against the rules. I'd like to ask Hunter, what's the real reason you decided to give The_Lord a PR Longer than the development time of DN:F? Was it because he posted a quote from the private section of a dead forum?

You can tell me as much as you like that that's you've banned him because he's breaking copyright or doing something like that, Hunter, but to be honest, that's bullshit and everyone knows it. You banned him because you don't like him. If, say, Mark had posted that he'd have gotten of scot free. You'd probably just have edited his post to remove it and give him a slight warning. You might not even have edited his post.

In the style of your retirement post, I'll put it in a method you might understand

Over the past few days I have lost confidence in this forums moderation team (Lt_HuNtEr). He does not want to moderate these forums with respect for the rules as they are, but just twists them to remove people who disagree with him.

Imagine this: Lt_HuNtEr at town.
If Lt_HuNtEr was to go out into the streets and start quoting his government when they might have said stupid stuff just once, people would generally just take that to be his opinion and carry on doing whatever they were doing. They might think for a moment that he might have a point, they might even, in very rare circumstances listern to every word and rise up against their capitalist oppressors. The police would not concern themselves with this.

The Police would not give Lt_HuNtEr a 9mm lobotomy the second he opens his lips.



Lt_HuNtEr has made the moderation of this forum empty. No one from the English section is really willing to stand up to this, because as The_Lord has shown, simply speaking out against him in what could be considered an aggressive manner will simply have you banned and your posts edited so that no one can question if or not you actually did something wrong.

This blatant display of dictatorism; no, before you say it, that is exactly the right word for this, in the moderation team (apologies to Copete for getting him embroiled in this, it really doesn't apply to you ) is the sort of thing that gets rid of some of the better members we've had.


Remember Hamster? One of the better members of the OFP.info and subsequently ArmedAssault.info forums, has left twice because he feels that Lt_HuNtEr is taking his task extremely. Is it right that people such as Hamster, people who made OFP.info what it was are being driven out by Lt_HuNtEr? I have no intention of sitting by while the people who made this community what it is are being thrown out for questioning the right of a power-hungry despot (and, yet again, that is exactly the right word) ruling these forums for his own malign purposes.

Whatever I get for this post I want you to know that I completely accept it. No form of punishment can change my feelings on this matter.
And in the event of this post mysteriously disappearing I have a few friends who will help this message get around, with The_Lord's deleted post thrown in!

[pMASTER]

I'm not going to call the way JdB is moderating the forum dictatorship, that is just pure exaggeration. And I don't mind JdB as a person, how could I if I don't even know him personally.
He takes things too seriously though, even those who advocated his way of moderation here have admitted that, and many of his replies, above all in this thread have proven that as well.

I will give them some time off to think about their decision to ignore me.

why they hate me from the past

I pity you if you really feel like being hated here which is for sure not the case. This forum is certainly among the most nicest places on the internet, free from racism and personal insults.

A kind of a bad excuse is the statement that members with a longer history in these forums would be the only group to whinge about punishments. Even if this was the truth, what difference would it make?

What I politely want to ask for is at least one thing: It poisons the good atmosphere in these forums to read in lets say every fifth moderators reply things like "I got a new ban stick for christmas" or "six scumbags have bitten the dust", "the next person to do the same will be banned on the spot regardless of their current warninglevel".
In real life I don't see the police walk around and yelling at people things like "Come on do it I wanna bust you" or "Will you be the sixth person I'm going to arrest today?" either.
Please refrain from this behaviour hereafter.

[JdB]

Aside from setting a member with 0 warn level to an instant 20 year ban for simply bringing light to the events which led to his previous dismissal from the team?

I'm sorry, the information appears to have been deleted. Apparently quoting JdB's Lt_HuNTeR's "retirement" message is against the rules. You still haven't commented on this yet. I know what was in that post. I saw it. There was nothing in that post that was against the rules. I'd like to ask Hunter, what's the real reason you decided to give The_Lord a PR Longer than the development time of DN:F? Was it because he posted a quote from the private section of a dead forum?

You can tell me as much as you like that that's you've banned him because he's breaking copyright or doing something like that, Hunter, but to be honest, that's bullshit and everyone knows it. You banned him because you don't like him. If, say, Mark had posted that he'd have gotten of scot free. You'd probably just have edited his post to remove it and give him a slight warning. You might not even have edited his post.

The member that gave him the content of the post caused The Lord's ban, as he provided him with information from the Private (that's not a randomly chosen name) forums. This is because of Cervo's very simple rule: "What goes on in the team, stays in the team". Major public differences of opinion between team members reflect badly on the image of the team, and therefore site, and are therefore kept Private. That is also the reason I do not enter into any kind of discussion regarding the content of the post. The Lord's friend in the site team chose to ignore team regulations, and The Lord got the punishment for it. This is part of the logic that if a section is not visible, and is in fact called "Private", the information is not open to the public.

Like was said before, Rewan was removed from the Site team for posting Private information in public (which was pretty much harmless, but still a violation). We don't hate Rewan either, but no matter if we consider you to be our friend, or not, we will take action against people that violate Cervo's instructions since they are there to maintain consistency and cohesion. Site team members have rules that apply to them that are not posted in public for obvious reasons.

[D@V£]

Which is all good and fair, I'm not trying to say that The_Lord or his source are exactly completely innocent. I'm merely saying that you've given him an excessive warning for something relatively minor. It's like giving someone a public execution for breaking the speed limit. After all, Rewan wasn't given 15 years or so of post restriction for it, was he?

I don't see how you justify effectively banning a member for a first offence (I really don't see this site lasting more than 15 years).

I can see where your coming from. But I don't think it's really fair blaming The_Lord for Slimiman's actions. What I think would suit everyone would be if his sentence was lightened a bit (maybe 2wb and a PR until the end of the month). Who knows, it might even change his opinion of you.


(I apologies for my previous post, as you've not doubt noticed it was made in the early hours)

[JdB]

Which is all good and fair, I'm not trying to say that The_Lord or his source are exactly completely innocent. I'm merely saying that you've given him an excessive warning for something relatively minor. It's like giving someone a public execution for breaking the speed limit.

I don't see how you justify effectively banning a member for a first offence (I really don't see this site lasting more than 15 years).

I can see where your coming from. But I don't think it's really fair blaming The_Lord for Slimiman's actions. What I think would suit everyone would be if his sentence was lightened a bit (maybe 2wb and a PR until the end of the month). Who knows, it might even change his opinion of you.

For bans I type "Suspend account for [5000] days", which in this case runs until 2021 I believe, as I said to other moderating staff, it is most likely a temporary ban, for a few weeks or months (probably the latter, seeing as it's an attempt at undermining the functioning of the site and forum), to get the message across to all people, including Site team, unless Cervo decides otherwise. This is on the same level as people hacking the site or posting MP cheats or exploits, and we ban such individuals permanently. If we would make an exception for The Lord however, it would mean inconsistent moderating, and I've read some complaints about that earlier.

[pMASTER]

The member that gave him the content of the post caused The Lord's ban, as he provided him with information from the Private (that's not a randomly chosen name) forums. This is because of Cervo's very simple rule: "What goes on in the team, stays in the team". Major public differences of opinion between team members reflect badly on the image of the team, and therefore site, and are therefore kept Private. That is also the reason I do not enter into any kind of discussion regarding the content of the post. The Lord's friend in the site team chose to ignore team regulations, and The Lord got the punishment for it. This is part of the logic that if a section is not visible, and is in fact called "Private", the information is not open to the public.

Like was said before, Rewan was removed from the Site team for posting Private information in public (which was pretty much harmless, but still a violation). We don't hate Rewan either, but no matter if we consider you to be our friend, or not, we will take action against people that violate Cervo's instructions since they are there to maintain consistency and cohesion. Site team members have rules that apply to them that are not posted in public for obvious reasons.

Which is all good and fair, I'm not trying to say that The_Lord or his source are exactly completely innocent. I'm merely saying that you've given him an excessive warning for something relatively minor. It's like giving someone a public execution for breaking the speed limit. After all, Rewan wasn't given 15 years or so of post restriction for it, was he?

I don't see how you justify effectively banning a member for a first offence (I really don't see this site lasting more than 15 years).

I can see where your coming from. But I don't think it's really fair blaming The_Lord for Slimiman's actions. What I think would suit everyone would be if his sentence was lightened a bit (maybe 2wb and a PR until the end of the month). Who knows, it might even change his opinion of you.


(I apologies for my previous post, as you've not doubt noticed it was made in the early hours)

Now we have something to clarify here. The Lord was a then member of the team, so he witnessed what was going on at that specific time. Let's assume he had not directly quoted from the internal area, but wrote about the incident from memory, had he violated a rule then?
If you ask me, Rewan has violated the rules by far more then. He made information available to public about a huge change in the history of the .info- sites, whilst The Lord - what I don't particularly appreciate, too - "only" wrote something about the background of a personal conflict which I regard as minor compared to Rewan spreading news about a new forum of us.

By the way, I still wait for someone certain to take stand to my second to last reply.

[JdB]

Now we have something to clarify here. The Lord was a then member of the team, so he witnessed what was going on at that specific time. Let's assume he had not directly quoted from the internal area, but wrote about the incident from memory, had he violated a rule then?
If you ask me, Rewan has violated the rules by far more then. He made information available to public about a huge change in the history of the .info- sites, whilst The Lord - what I don't particularly appreciate, too - "only" wrote something about the background of a personal conflict which I regard as minor compared to Rewan spreading news about a new forum of us.

He can't have know anything about that conflict other than that some kind of difference of opinion took place, unless someone from the Site team told him about it, which is a breach of team protocol. Without any real knowledge it would be pretty much impossible for him to talk about it. I'm not going to discuss the Rewan case in more detail here, since I've only said what was public knowledge, that he got removed from the Site team group for leaking private information.

Also I don't think it's appropriate for you to discuss team policy, or the way action is taken to ensure it's privacy here pMASTER, seeing as you're Site team yourself. Some may want to have everyone involved in team-business, but Cervo does not as you know. What is discussed in the Private forums, is a matter of "need to know" for none other than Admins, Moderators and Site team, as is the decision making process on how the site and forums are run.

[pMASTER]

He can't have know anything about that conflict other than that some kind of difference of opinion took place, unless someone from the Site team told him about it, which is a breach of team protocol. Without any real knowledge it would be pretty much impossible for him to talk about it. I'm not going to discuss the Rewan case in more detail here, since I've only said what was public knowledge, that he got removed from the Site team group for leaking private information.

Also I don't think it's appropriate for you to discuss team policy, or the way action is taken to ensure it's privacy here pMASTER, seeing as you're Site team yourself. Some may want to have everyone involved in team-business, but Cervo does not as you know. What is discussed in the Private forums, is a matter of "need to know" for none other than Admins, Moderators and Site team, as is the decision making process on how the site and forums are run.

You've misinterstood me. I've asked whether your decision about The Lord would have been the same if the scenario I described had taken place.

[JdB]

You've misinterstood me. I've asked whether your decision about The Lord would have been the same if the scenario I described had taken place.

And as I said, if he had not gotten the information from the Private forums, he wouldn't have known enough about it to mention it, so there would have been no action taken as we can't take any action against things that aren't posted. That quote showed just one side of the story , from a biased source, in an attempt to make me look bad, aimed at nothing else than tackling the moderating process on these forums for the good of spam (others might call it their vision of how these forums should be).

[Blackbuck]

No not for the good of SPAM. To make you more human in your moderating process, as it stands you don't take into account the way people word their posts very well as your understanding of them differs e.g the Biggles incident. You do your job well but are sometimes to analytical and indeed swift IMHO.

[Rewan]

I am asking myself why is everyone trying to compare me to The_Lord

I would honnestly say that I did big mistakes because I've said that there will be a new forum. But I would say too that talking about that... is violating the rule 2.7) Do not start threads relating to discussions on other boards

Because I've posted in OFP.info and I've did the mistakes there. And I got only 180% warn

So please don't talk about my case anymore: thanks

[D@V£]

For bans I type "Suspend account for [5000] days"

So, basically, this is your way around none of the admins supporting your decision to ban someone?

[pMASTER]

Cervo and Deadeye expressed their support for his decision.