Board Problems, Suggestions and Updates

[Ricky (Br3)]

Well, there are some things here that I'd like to comment on.

You know, after your little demonstration of corruption in the IRC that you jacked, as dead as it may be, really hurts your credibility when it comes to any time of moderation suggestion, not that you had much to begin with.

I don't see why we should take advice,complaints and slander from the guy who basic ideal of moderation is "I don't care, as long as this place is active"

another thing, you seem very....dissatisfied with the way things are run around here. Why don't you just go? We're not forcing you to visit this place, if you want a new forum for brawl hacking, you could try out the new LST forum, or just go to Smash Boards. Theres no reason for you to stay in a place you've hated on so much.

What exactly are you trying to accomplish anyway?

That's not the approach the staff is supposed to take. The reason moderators exist is to make the forums as pleasing as possible for the users. So, how should a mod say "agree or GTFO"? That sounds just ridiculous.

Well, while it's true one can't please everyone, that's exactly what the staff is supposed to achieve.

There was something else, but my headache just won't let me concentrate in reading, and I'd need to re-read Miacis post entirely...
I'll leave it for later.

Oh, and the update to the rules was great. Makes it much more clear. There is still a couple of small holes, that I'll post here later when I'm feeling better so you guys can debate on them.

[Vyse]

Edit : The link to the pastebin was removed. I don't really think revealing hostnames and/or IP adresses from users on the boards is something that an IRC AOP should do. Please remove the aforementionned from your wall of text if you want to link it here.

Miacis, I know you mean well, but you really need to just not involve yourself with matters concerning the IRC, because frankly, you do not know a damn thing about it.

ANYONE, not just an op, has access to that information. Anyone could get on IRC right now, /whowas, say, Wolfric, and have the information present in that log. There's no point hiding it; anyone who wants it can get it easily just by knowing the person's nick. So there was no reason to remove that link.

I have a lot more to say on the subjects raised here, but I'm already going to be late getting back from my lunch hour. Soooooooo I'll do it later.

[Miacis]

It's not because I don't know that thing that I have to involve myself in nothing related to the Chat, right ? >w>
I find it to be a little stupid to work like that, but heh. Fixed anyway.

(Also, I kinda messed up and deleted your post by mistake Vyse. Though I had seen a double-post. ._.
It's fixed now, I think)

[dingo]

One could even hypothtize that it was Sorceress's thread that encourage Oizen to create his topic.

Not quite. The times don't seem to match up for starters. And before any of that, I brought it the idea of pointless goodbye threads to a mod's attention. The rule was put into place later that night even using the example of just being gone for a few hours. So something was decided in the admin section regarding that from my report and talking to mods.

Other threads could have been added ammo, but at least weren't the start of what caused the start of that rule about goodbye threads.

[Oizen]

Well, there are some things here that I'd like to comment on.

That's not the approach the staff is supposed to take. The reason moderators exist is to make the forums as pleasing as possible for the users. So, how should a mod say "agree or GTFO"? That sounds just ridiculous.

Well, while it's true one can't please everyone, that's exactly what the staff is supposed to achieve.

There was something else, but my headache just won't let me concentrate in reading, and I'd need to re-read Miacis post entirely...
I'll leave it for later.

Oh, and the update to the rules was great. Makes it much more clear. There is still a couple of small holes, that I'll post here later when I'm feeling better so you guys can debate on them.

Your entire post is based on the assumption that this a new thing for him.

Its been a good 4 months now. This isn't advice from a moderator I'm giving him, its just more of personal advice to someone who clearly like to torture themselves.

Not quite. The times don't seem to match up for starters. And before any of that, I brought it the idea of pointless goodbye threads to a mod's attention. The rule was put into place later that night even using the example of just being gone for a few hours. So something was decided in the admin section regarding that from my report and talking to mods.

Other threads could have been added ammo, but at least weren't the start of what caused the start of that rule about goodbye threads.

LordNoAh's stupid goodbye thread was actually what did it.

[Ricky (Br3)]

Your entire post is based on the assumption that this a new thing for him.

Its been a good 4 months now. This isn't advice from a moderator I'm giving him, its just more of personal advice to someone who clearly like to torture themselves.

What are you talking about? Looks like you completely missed the point of my post O.o

[dingo]

LordNoAh's stupid goodbye thread was actually what did it.

Which was what I reported and brought up at the time, I just wasn't pointing fingers here and now since I didn't see any need to.

[stickman]

I have a suggestion for rules for the help section:

Don't use non-specific titles or titles in all caps.
Instead, use titles such as "SFX question" or "Need help with PSA" or "Stumped on texturing snake" where a person with expertise in the area will recognize the title and be able to help immediately.

Also, how long should a user wait before bumping a topic like this? I would suggest at least two days, but that's just me. This could be another addition to the rules as well.


I just happened to see a topic in the help section and the poster was frustrated because nobody replied (within a few hours) to his thread: HELP ME PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (not to pick on that guy specifically, but I know things like this have happened in the past too)

[Vyse]

OK, time for some hot posting action.

1. Kitty Leaks Thread
I wasn't involved with this at all; I didn't know about it until after everything had been done.

Looking back, I can't think of much to say. All I can think of is that you made a pretty good point about the blog having its own content warning.

2. Leaks in the Family
Not involved with the Family at all. Can't really speak on it.

As for forbidding certain topics from discussion: I'll say now that you've already seen the phrase "moderator discretion" a few times, and you'll probably see it a lot more before this is over.

I, personally, don't see a need to forbid certain subjects. A lack of civility is the fault of the users, not the subject matter.

A note on being "ninja'd": Profile -> Look and Layout Preferences. "Don't warn on new replies made while posting."

Unless this box is checked, you cannot claim you were "ninja'd." Because you weren't. If this box is unchecked (and it is, by default), then if someone posts before you click "Post," you are taken to the Reply page with red text telling you that someone "ninja'd" you. Scroll down, and you can read the new post(s).

I just checked your profile, Noah, and that box is unchecked. Maybe it wasn't back then; I have no way of knowing.

But I can't think of any reason to ever check that box.

3. Kitty Leaks Returns, Post Deletions, and Locking Threads

On the other hand, it's quite dubious that the staff will properly delete posts.

There's a moderation log that records things like post deletions. It's very easy to hold us accountable for things like that.

I don't know about other users, but I don't like the idea of my post getting deleted because a staff member considered it inappropriate.

So you'd rather get a warning and have the "inappropriate" portion of the post edited out anyway?

Because those are your options in that scenario.

What if the staff member simply doesn't like my opinion about something and deletes my post claiming it was for the sake of keeping things in order?

Again, it's easy to hold us accountable for this. If this happens and you disagree, feel free to take it up in the Moderation Corner.

As for locking threads: I don't think I've ever done it. I can't recall being in a situation where I thought it was necessary. If a thread gets out of hand (off-topic, arguing, whatever), my approach is usually to delete the irrelevant stuff and make a post reinforcing the topic. But, you know, moderator discretion.

4. Goodbye Threads
First, yeah, Oizen's and Sorceress's threads were made the same day, but Oizen made his about 11 hours after Sorceress. One thing we don't do is punish retroactively. No one is gonna get modded for breaking a rule that didn't exist at the time. (At least, that better not ever happen. I would have some serious words for whoever did that.)

As for Starwaffle: I wasn't there, but if Star wanted to rant about unfair moderation, that's what this thread is for. That thread probably wasn't going anywhere good, so I can see why Oizen locked it.

5. Insults

after all, I have an homosexual friend that uses "gay" as "stupid", and he clearly doesn't have a problem with it... being gay himself... so why would anybody else (specially heterosexual people) feel offended by it?

I have several friends like that -- but I still wrote the rule. Anecdotal evidence is not sufficient.

Ok then, you're acting according to your rules, then.... why didn't this user get a warning too?

http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l17/cx_asuka/kc%20mm%20stuff/words1.png

Probably because it wasn't reported?

6. Warning Times

The Muted level was removed rather quickly and I'm sure the same happened with either the Moderated and/or Warned levels.
Why?

I wasn't around for this either, but here's my educated guess: All of those moderations were handed out at the same time, on posts that had all been made before the mod did anything. Later, someone, either the mod who did it or another one, thought it was unfair to hand out successive moderations so close together. After all, the point of the Warned status is to make users a bit more cautious about breaking rules. Obviously, if all these posts had already been made, there was no opportunity for Velen to do that, making the following moderations unfair. So they were removed.

Like I said, that's just a guess. But if I'm wrong, that means someone set Velen to Moderated, then allowed another rule-breaking post and Muted him, which is just wrong.

7. Censorship

I don't feel the need to insult other users, so when I use censored words by the filter it's just as an expression.

"Offend" doesn't mean "directly insult." It is possible, even very easy, to offend someone entirely on accident.

There are people who, for whatever reason, do not want to see those words. You should respect that. I don't care why you're doing it. Those people have a right to a pleasant experience.

When the rules are revised, I will be removing the phrase "to insult someone" from the rule on censor bypassing.

I'll get warned when I unconsciously post an auto-censored word because I can't avoid habits?

That's not our problem.

So, apparently, we can't use images or videos that could be "bypassing the censor filter"?
What if a song has the word [censored] used once or twice? I'll be instantly warned for it?
And if I use a meme image like "[censored] Yeah"? Apparently I'd get warned because of it.

Just include a warning for offensive language. If it's an image, spoiler tag it, like I did here. Easy enough.

But Miacis is right: despite more than one discussion on the matter, this is something on which almost every mod has a wildly varying opinion. But that should be taken care of soon.

8. Missed Moderations
Yeah, we never saw those reports. By the way, only "report test 5" showed up. I dunno what the deal is.

9. Mods Above the Rules
Every example is Oizen. Hilarious.

[Miacis]

I'll also add a little footnote to Vyse's #6 remarks. Here's something I posted in the admin section and that I think will be in our moderation guidelines :

Sorry but you are not allowed to view spoiler contents.

The last sentence was underlined, because I guess people could wonder what the point of Muted if people posting rule-breaking stuff are already moderated, and their messages not accepted.

[Vyse]

OK, I've made a few small rule edits and cleaned up Miacis's notes on censoring. Changelog is first thing in the rules, as usual.

If anyone else has any questions regarding clarification or outright changing of the rules, tonight's a good time.

[Albafika]

I'll also add a little footnote to Vyse's #6 remarks. Here's something I posted in the admin section and that I think will be in our moderation guidelines :

Sorry but you are not allowed to view spoiler contents.

The last sentence was underlined, because I guess people could wonder what the point of Muted if people posting rule-breaking stuff are already moderated, and their messages not accepted.

Totally loving this, but...

• The user is completely uncontrolable and needs to get Moderated to stop his "flood". Try to at least calm the user down first. And if it fails, go for Moderated.

This, I assume, would be up to the Moderator's choice, or how would that be classified?

[Asuka]

"if it happened a couple months ago, it's way in the past and doesn't even matter anymore..."
=> "It doesn't matter anymore", because we're kinda more focused on making the present forum look correct, than actually trying to rebuild the past one. ;)

I disagree with that.
The past is always important, looking into our past mistakes so that we can avoid them in the future is something everyone should do.

In the case of the forums, looking back helps to create better moderation tactics, identify the mistakes in handling some situations, etc.
If you guys as the moderation team, see us users bringing things from the past, it's more likely to be because we don't see any significant change made about that situation.

Oh hey, this one is actually easy to reply to. ^^

Look at the time of your screenshots. Sorceress created her thread at 10:13:59 AM, Oizen his thread at 8:57:33 PM. Btw, it was already brought up somewhere else (maybe the Admin thread, I don't remember) and the same answer was given.

One could even hypothtize that it was Sorceress's thread that encourage Oizen to create his topic.

I highly doubt that the rule was suddenly created because Sorceress made that thread.
I would say it was more because of the previous goodbye topics that were quite useless and pointless.
As said here:
http://forums.kc-mm.com/index.php?topic=2555.msg611813#msg611813
http://forums.kc-mm.com/index.php?topic=2555.msg611813#msg611813

- I have a hunch that the auto-removal of warnings doesn't work all the time ... I'll need to investigate a bit on who warned what and see if there are any inconsistencies. But I'm freakin' busy all the time, so please be patient.

Well, yeah, I can be patient, no problem.
The thing is that it's something that has already been mentioned before, Vish told me he even had brought that up (I suppose within the staff section), but you claimed it didn't happen:

I personnally disapprove of removing ranks manually. Simply because the rank will always go away by itself.

I'm just saying that it would be nice if it could be fixed as soon as you guys have the time to do so.

I have the feeling that the custom ranks Hakumen gave you out of pure charity are messing with the Report system. I'll remove yours temporarily. Once it's done, could you please report any post (OUTSIDE of the Stages section) with a TEST mention on it ?

Already tried some reports with Vish before, then made 5 new tests.

I dunno about the Oizen's post you made ... I guess I'll add those as examples in out own "Moderation tactics topic".
The huge fonts thing was rather stupid though. I'll go and scold Oizen for that I guess. (But it's kinda too late to sanction it, since well, we don't even sanction regular user's  month-old posts for spammy/light flaming stuff, for obvious reasons.)

To be honest, I've never expected to see the staff to sanction themselves because it's more likely that it wouldn't happen. Or at least not in a way that we would know or see...

My goal wasn't to see him sanctioned, it was to prove a point, that the staff should play by the same rules the users do.
Because according to the rules, those posts where either flaming, trolling, spamming, or disruptive behavior.
After all, shouldn't they set the example for the users of what is allowed and what isn't?

"ID theft fad"
=> Had I been around, I guess I'd have asked for it to stop rather quickly, mostly for the same reasons as the Longnames fad.
But that's more like a "missed infraction" (more like an annoyance than an infraction to the rules, really) than a "staff above the rules", in case you haven't noticed.

Oh, I included it in the "staff above the rules" section because Oizen formed part of it.

______________________________________________________________________________________

I don't see why we should take advice,complaints and slander from the guy who basic ideal of moderation is "I don't care, as long as this place is active"

another thing, you seem very....dissatisfied with the way things are run around here. Why don't you just go? We're not forcing you to visit this place, if you want a new forum for brawl hacking, you could try out the new LST forum, or just go to Smash Boards. Theres no reason for you to stay in a place you've hated on so much.

Ok... 2 things.

1. I think that the "I don't care, as long as this place is active" line was allenmelon's (I tend to lurk that chat, so I saw almost all of that).

2. No offense, but why don't you follow your own advice Oizen?
Instead of using any chance you have to bring up that martyr-like act about how despite what you do, your "in-famous fame" will always be present and bla bla bla... why don't you leave?
If it really hurts you so much as you make it seem, it might be a good option... or not?

______________________________________________________________________________________

3. Kitty Leaks Returns, Post Deletions, and Locking Threads
So you'd rather get a warning and have the "inappropriate" portion of the post edited out anyway?

Because those are your options in that scenario.

Depends.
If I'm not notified of my post being deleted, yes, I would prefer to get my post edited and a warning saying why it was edited.
At least that way I could bring up my case in the Moderation Corner instead of just being censored without me noticing.

Also, I think it would serve as an example for other users to avoid the same mistake.
But that's just my opinion.

4. Goodbye Threads
First, yeah, Oizen's and Sorceress's threads were made the same day, but Oizen made his about 11 hours after Sorceress. One thing we don't do is punish retroactively. No one is gonna get modded for breaking a rule that didn't exist at the time. (At least, that better not ever happen. I would have some serious words for whoever did that.)

That's fair enough.

Probably because it wasn't reported?

I did report that.
But according to you guys, my reports weren't appearing so...

Just include a warning for offensive language. If it's an image, spoiler tag it, like I did here. Easy enough.

Thanks, that's something quite useful to know since nobody had pointed it out before.

8. Missed Moderations
Yeah, we never saw those reports. By the way, only "report test 5" showed up. I dunno what the deal is.

I made 5 test reports in different parts of the forums... seems like at least the last 1 did work.

9. Mods Above the Rules
Every example is Oizen. Hilarious.

Well, it's not my fault that it was so easy to find those posts Oizen made to make my point...
I guess I could mention some other things like: http://forums.kc-mm.com/index.php?topic=28800.msg600592#msg600592  as an example too... but I don't know if it would count according to the "moderator discretion".

______________________________________________________________________________________


And finally, thanks, it's good to see that some things have been cleared and that the rules are more specific and clear than before.

[Vyse]

Well, it's not my fault that it was so easy to find those posts Oizen made to make my point...

I think you misunderstood. I wasn't complaining.

I just honestly think it's funny that examples of Oizen breaking rules are so plentiful and easy to find.

[Miacis]

Sorry but you are not allowed to view spoiler contents.

Thing is : lots of problems from the past have already been settled, do not really have any solution anymore, or aren't pertinent anymore to bring up, because the context of the boards changed alot.

To take a simple example, what the hell would you want me to reply if you quoted the time during the post-count events where Oizen used that "Cool story bro" picture to reply to Noah's wall of acusations ?
I mean, Oizen was scolded for that (I personnally had asked for his demotion at that time because of how he had handled things), and it's obvious that we aren't gonna add to our Moderation Tactics : "Do not puost COOL STORY BRO pictures in topic that might degenerate."

Sorry but you are not allowed to view spoiler contents.

Uhhh ... you kinda, completely quoted me out of context, there.  :-\ I had posted this on the 7th July. Back in the day, I was sure that the auto-removal was working fine (simply because so far, it was).
These day, I was of course proven wrong by the good dozen of people who had a warning for a month because of a mere double-post/necropost, etc ... (and I removed their sanction to all these people, of course).

Already tried some reports with Vish before, then made 5 new tests.

Yeah, I saw that ... only the last one, in the family thread, worked.
In which boards did you report numbers 1 to 4 ?

It's kinda hard to fix things like that ... when a functionality of the boards just won't work for no specific reason. ._.

My goal wasn't to see him sanctioned, it was to prove a point, that the staff should play by the same rules the users do.
Because according to the rules, those posts where either flaming, trolling, spamming, or disruptive behavior.
After all, shouldn't they set the example for the users of what is allowed and what isn't?

"The staff" plays with the same rules (despite the obvious fact that they more or less make the rules and judge how to apply them ...), it's not news there. I'm pretty sure no one ever considered themselves above the rules and/or obviously took liberties in doing wheatever the hell they wanted.

Those are slip-ups that the user is doing, not the moderator. We really can't be saints (we tried, but we really can't). You can't just "always set the example". Neither can we ask of you users to be perfect.
So, really, if you see a moderator doing something wrong ... contact him, contact another mod, report, I dunno. Help the mod/admin help himself, even if it leads to a sanction. Again, anyone can slip up. Don't just assume that the guy does this because "the staff is above the rules", because there's nothing less true.  :-\