Camnator's the hero the Flood needs, but not the one it deserves.

fuck meta

Okay.

I believe the staff consider what actions to take against any specific thread or post accused of harassment based on their potential to offend and initiate drama (although some regard for consistency is also taken into consideration). General insults are more lightly handled but very specific derogatory remarks, especially those regarding things that users have stated to be personally offensive are taken more seriously.

The fact that more than one person has taken personal offense to trans jokes/insults, whether they were intended to be real insults or not, which has started very long, drawn out bouts of drama influenced the staff into making a decision to prohibit them more so than other insults.

I get that you want to shit on someone for laughs, but this is Cheat's site and, in certain instances, he doesn't want that.

noelle gets special treatment

Ye that's why she was banned for a month.

Quote from: DemonicChronic on May 01, 2015, 05:43:12 PM

I believe the staff consider what actions to take against any specific thread or post accused of harassment based on their potential to offend and initiate drama (although some regard for consistency is also taken into consideration). General insults are more lightly handled but very specific derogatory remarks, especially those regarding things that users have stated to be personally offensive are taken more seriously.

The fact that more than one person has taken personal offense to trans jokes/insults, whether they were intended to be real insults or not, which has started very long, drawn out bouts of drama influenced the staff into making a decision to prohibit them more so than other insults.

I get that you want to shit on someone for laughs, but this is Cheat's site and, in certain instances, he doesn't want that.

Everyone can take offence to everything. The special treatment you JUST admitted to is why this site is dead.

Site still seems up and active to me.

You're not getting it, then, because that NEVER happened. In fact, everyone was applauding the drag person.

I guess you glossed over a couple posts that were directed at/for Noelle.

Quote from: DemonicChronic on May 01, 2015, 05:43:12 PM

I believe the staff consider what actions to take against any specific thread or post accused of harassment based on their potential to offend and initiate drama (although some regard for consistency is also taken into consideration). General insults are more lightly handled but very specific derogatory remarks, especially those regarding things that users have stated to be personally offensive are taken more seriously.

The fact that more than one person has taken personal offense to trans jokes/insults, whether they were intended to be real insults or not, which has started very long, drawn out bouts of drama influenced the staff into making a decision to prohibit them more so than other insults.

I get that you want to shit on someone for laughs, but this is Cheat's site and, in certain instances, he doesn't want that.

Everyone can take offence to everything. The special treatment you JUST admitted to is why this site is dead. People don't tolerate BS like that.

"I get that you want to shit on someone for laughs, but this is Cheat's site and, in certain instances, he doesn't want that."

You're not getting it, then, because that NEVER happened. In fact, everyone was applauding the drag person.

I explained why certain insults are treated more seriously than others. The 'special treatment', as you like to call it, isn't for specific people, it's for the insults themselves. Trans jokes towards any user would be taken seriously so long as the user explains their offense. Obviously it has to be reviewed carefully since someone could just shitpost a few insults to another they talk to that obviously isn't trans, and that user could in turn put on a front and act like they're offended when they really aren't.

I know some of you want to be able to just shit on everyone for anything, but I don't think that's the type of community Cheat had in mind when he envisioned this site and spent all that time creating it.

Meta's thread wasn't insulting. That's entirely my point. It's just stupid to bar SOME insults and not all of them. That's the unfair special treatment that killed this forum. I've never wanted to just poop on anyone, so that doesn't apply to me. I just want to be able to post without being subjected to unjust moderation. Again, if you actually saw the thread, it was a joke, and people were actually sticking up for the drag person in the video. I'm not sure why you're having trouble reading that.

What you need to realize is that the justice you speak of that's apparently lacking is entirely subjective in nature. The staff can try to make the most objectively possible rules that they can, but we cannot control the multitude of different perspectives here in this community. We have to make compromises, and when issues arise that are blown to magnificent proportions compared to your average every day minor instance, compromises are made.

There is also the matter of consistency, and the blurry line that separates what is and isn't an insult. Offense is another subjective variable we have to deal with. What you see as a joke might offend someone else. The fact that trans insults were decided to be treated more seriously is why trans 'jokes' are also treated more seriously, as a matter of consistency. This is to reduce bias in moderation. Not the speculative 'bias' that people tend to complain about for whatever reasons, but legitimate real bias that would actually exist if consistency wasn't taken into consideration.

You can continue to announce the death of this board and all the reasons you've concluded in your head for it, and yet this community will continue to do as it does, and people will continue to disagree with you regardless.

Sure you can, by just prohibiting all insults or allowing them all. Picking and choosing is the issue.

A vote was taken to decide whether or not moderation would be very strict, very lax, or an area in between where the staff would decide on actions based on the degree of severity of whatever infraction and the context of those infractions. The latter option won with a landslide victory.

Consistency is the main problem, rather than the rules. Basically, no one should let insults offend them. That's just silly. Why should those insults be taken more seriously than any other? That's just bad practice and is why this place has such a bag image. That CREATES the bias, that, and not kicking out bad mods.

We are merely human beings, and not everyone has developed the capacity to shrug everything off. We aren't going to hold that against people or try to force them to change. You cannot change the unwilling.

No argument there. I can't make this forum help itself. I can only suggest how it can. You can't honestly deny the activity here has dwindled to a fraction of what it was. I've been here long enough.

I have never seen any forum that hasn't gone through bouts of less activity. Nor have I have seen one that didn't bounce back so long as members continued to care about the site.

Leaving forum moderation up to a vote is a sign it's already a failure. You're running a forum, not a popularity contest.

That is merely your opinion. As much as people like to say we're Nazi's, we aren't actually tyrants and like to give the community some degree of input on what the nature of this board will ultimately be. 

Then why ban only SOME insults? Let people use the mute option if they're so weak and emotional.

Again, as I explained, some insults were decided to be taken more seriously due to the overwhelming amount of drama that resulted from them.

You have a point, but a rapid drop in activity like this one has had is not normal, and a massive sign it's a failure.

I've seen boards bounce back from much worse actually. Some still alive to this day. It's not exactly a sign of failure as you are simply projecting your own personal perspective. There are no physical laws of the universe that dictate the exact nature of internet forums, and you cannot accurately measure and predict how they turn out.

Oh no, I have been subjected to moderator abuse with every ban I've received, so you can't make such false claims with me. Not you specifically, you're one of the best mods here, probably attributed to you not doing much. While it is my opinion, the way things are now is only backing up my points.

And that's precisely the problem. How can you say there's not selective moderation, and then immediately explain how there is selective moderation? Why do they deserve special treatment? How is insulting some shemale worse than insulting my choice to use cannabis? It isn't. Period. Nothing subjective about it. Period. It's hypocritical and it's why people are pissed with this site and why it CONSTANTLY has drama. How do you not see that?

You're right. People can be perfectly happy in a cess pool circle-jerk without having to think or be challenged, but is that what YOU want this forum to remain? If so, that's perfectly fine, I simply want nothing to do with it if that's the case. Just admit that's what it is if that's what it's going to be. Stop putting on a show.

I'm not overly critical of this community, nor am I prone to forming very strong opinions in general, for the most part. I enjoy this board. Enough to have accepted the position of moderator. However, this isn't the most important thing in the world to me and I don't spend the effort to try and pick it apart so that it might conform to my vision of what an optimal forum is.

I've explained to you that we, as staff, have to make compromises with moderation. But we don't act on the basis of favoritism. There are logical reasons for the compromises we make and, generally, issues are discussed with multiple mods before any action is taken, so long as they are not very miniscule. I never once claimed that there isn't absolutely any selective moderation, only that the nature of that selective moderation is founded in logic. The logic in keeping major bouts of drama to a minimum. And it is not based on specific members, but rather, specific infractions that any and every member would have to answer for in the event they had made any one of those infractions.

Enough of this, I have explained to you multiple times now what the reasoning is for the way moderation works on this board. You don't have to keep telling me that you think the staff are bad at what they do, nor that the site is failing due to it. I understood your view from the beginning. I only tried to give you a more in depth look on how and why things work the way they do so that you might form a better informed opinion. You have made it abundantly obvious that you disagree entirely and will continue to do so despite my explanations so I am done with this redundant debate.

Go ahead and tell us the staff are incompetent, I don't care. Regardless of your perspective, this community will continue to move forward. You aren't influential enough to dissuade me from my much more informed point of view, and by the looks of it, nor the other staff as well. I won't hold that against you though.