Quote from: Kupo on March 28, 2015, 07:29:54 PMQuote from: Decimator Omega on March 28, 2015, 07:00:46 PMThat's the thing. I've done it before and nothing happened. I reported Challenger on this many times, and yet he continued.There's one hell of a double standard here.Wait, I just heard that you posted your own name on Sep7agon before. Um... is that true?Because if it is, I'm not sure who's necessarily at fault for your predicament >.>Not exactly. I made a guess my real name thread in Anarchy. Nuka obviously knew it and it started from there.If I did post it before I don't know where but I'll redact it, though it's probably too late now.
Quote from: Decimator Omega on March 28, 2015, 07:00:46 PMThat's the thing. I've done it before and nothing happened. I reported Challenger on this many times, and yet he continued.There's one hell of a double standard here.Wait, I just heard that you posted your own name on Sep7agon before. Um... is that true?Because if it is, I'm not sure who's necessarily at fault for your predicament >.>
That's the thing. I've done it before and nothing happened. I reported Challenger on this many times, and yet he continued.There's one hell of a double standard here.
Quote from: Decimator Omega on March 28, 2015, 07:32:45 PMQuote from: Kupo on March 28, 2015, 07:29:54 PMQuote from: Decimator Omega on March 28, 2015, 07:00:46 PMThat's the thing. I've done it before and nothing happened. I reported Challenger on this many times, and yet he continued.There's one hell of a double standard here.Wait, I just heard that you posted your own name on Sep7agon before. Um... is that true?Because if it is, I'm not sure who's necessarily at fault for your predicament >.>Not exactly. I made a guess my real name thread in Anarchy. Nuka obviously knew it and it started from there.If I did post it before I don't know where but I'll redact it, though it's probably too late now.Oh >.> sorry to hear that.
Quote from: Decimator Omega on March 28, 2015, 01:05:05 PMQuote from: Noëlle on March 28, 2015, 12:43:39 PMBecause the moderation here is trash.Challenger's sig:QuoteI DONT GIVE A SINGLE -blam!- MOTHER -blam!-ER ITS A MOTHER -blam!-ING FORUM, OH WOW, YOU HAVE THE WORD NINJA BELOW YOUR NAME, HOW MOTHER -blam!-ING COOL, NOT, YOUR ARE NOTHING TO ME BUT A BRAINWASHED PIECE OF SHIT BLOGGER, PEOPLE ONLY LIKE YOU BECAUSE YOU HAVE NINJA BELOW YOUR NAME, SO PLEASE PUNCH YOURAELF IN THE FACE AND STAB YOUR EYE BECAUSE YOU ARE NOTHING BUT A PIECE OF SHIT OF SOCIETYUh huh. Sure it is.But he is right. It is just a forum, stop taking it so seriously. It is a place to waste time and fuck around on.
Quote from: Noëlle on March 28, 2015, 12:43:39 PMBecause the moderation here is trash.Challenger's sig:QuoteI DONT GIVE A SINGLE -blam!- MOTHER -blam!-ER ITS A MOTHER -blam!-ING FORUM, OH WOW, YOU HAVE THE WORD NINJA BELOW YOUR NAME, HOW MOTHER -blam!-ING COOL, NOT, YOUR ARE NOTHING TO ME BUT A BRAINWASHED PIECE OF SHIT BLOGGER, PEOPLE ONLY LIKE YOU BECAUSE YOU HAVE NINJA BELOW YOUR NAME, SO PLEASE PUNCH YOURAELF IN THE FACE AND STAB YOUR EYE BECAUSE YOU ARE NOTHING BUT A PIECE OF SHIT OF SOCIETYUh huh. Sure it is.
Because the moderation here is trash.
I DONT GIVE A SINGLE -blam!- MOTHER -blam!-ER ITS A MOTHER -blam!-ING FORUM, OH WOW, YOU HAVE THE WORD NINJA BELOW YOUR NAME, HOW MOTHER -blam!-ING COOL, NOT, YOUR ARE NOTHING TO ME BUT A BRAINWASHED PIECE OF SHIT BLOGGER, PEOPLE ONLY LIKE YOU BECAUSE YOU HAVE NINJA BELOW YOUR NAME, SO PLEASE PUNCH YOURAELF IN THE FACE AND STAB YOUR EYE BECAUSE YOU ARE NOTHING BUT A PIECE OF SHIT OF SOCIETY
Quote from: Decimator Omega on March 28, 2015, 07:32:45 PMQuote from: Kupo on March 28, 2015, 07:29:54 PMQuote from: Decimator Omega on March 28, 2015, 07:00:46 PMThat's the thing. I've done it before and nothing happened. I reported Challenger on this many times, and yet he continued.There's one hell of a double standard here.Wait, I just heard that you posted your own name on Sep7agon before. Um... is that true?Because if it is, I'm not sure who's necessarily at fault for your predicament >.>Not exactly. I made a guess my real name thread in Anarchy. Nuka obviously knew it and it started from there.If I did post it before I don't know where but I'll redact it, though it's probably too late now.I vaguely remember that thread, but I do know that you confirmed your name when someone guessed it.
Quote from: Mega Sceptile on March 28, 2015, 07:18:13 PMQuote from: Sandtrap on March 28, 2015, 05:39:06 PMQuote from: Flee on March 28, 2015, 04:20:57 PMQuote from: Meta Cognition on March 28, 2015, 01:54:17 PMSpoilerIt's indicative of a problem that both Challenger and Verbatim ended up being banned. It ought to be the job of the moderators to head this shit off at the pass, and ban the instigator/worst offender before it becomes an issue. If you're banning two people involved in the same conversation, you didn't act quick enough.It's always easy to decide on what should've been done in retrospect. When things start turning sour, our first reaction rarely is to reach for the banhammer right away. We try to talk to people and defuse the situation with a verbal or formal warning. When I did so yesterday night before signing off, I thought the situation was difused. The split thread had been locked and both parties received a warning not to continue the fight in public. This works the vast majority of times.However, this morning, it turns out that the warnings weren't received all that well and that in a new, similar thread, the exact same argument was starting up again, insults and jabs included. At that point, there's no longer a first instigator or someone who isn't crossing the line. Both parties knew what they were doing. That it went too far, and that we almost had another derailed thread on our hands. Like LC pointed out, we aren't always around. And in first instance, we always try to settle things without going for a ban or warning straight away. Furthermore, we've said it time and time again. If you see a post breaking the rules, simply report it. If you choose to instead respond with similar insults and set off a fight that could've easily been prevented, there's a good chance that when the mods get to it, we'll just see both people fighting and breaking the rules. And at that point, we have to treat them fairly and equally. We can't ignore one person's 5 posts that break the rules just because the other guy did so first. This isn't kindergarten. "But he started it" won't get you very far. So while I agree that this probably could've been dealt with differently, I'm not going to stop trying to settle things in a mature way by giving people the benefit of the doubt, rather than reaching for the banhammer straight away. This works easily the majority times. But Challenger and Verbatim were both crossing the line and were both given enough warnings, which they both chose to ignore until the very end despite having been made very clear that it would result in a ban.[/spoiler]I'm curious here. Call it a theoretical.Two people start up a slap fight. A mod takes said slap fight posts out of the thread, and splits the fight into a new contained thread. Here's the wager.Everybody has to shut the fuck up some time.I mean as much as somebody can dislike somebody, there's not a fucking chance two people will spend the entire day going at it.Eventually that candle will go out. Somebody will get tired. Here's the way I figure it. Two sides are having a row. Mod comes in and ding dong bannus them.That argument is still waiting to pop up again. And if anything, it has more fuel when a mod intervines because both sides are sort of stuck in the mud disliking each other because "but he got me ding dong bannu'd."Just an idea is all. An argument starts. Mods contain it, separate it, and only said two users can comment in the thread. Sort of like how mods can still talk after the lock. Eventually somebody's going to burn out. Somebody's going to realize that they have a day to go to beyond the computer screen.They might pick it up again afterwards. But eventually, one side will give out. When that happens, at that point, there's nothing left to be said. Anyway. Just a muse, is all.Duuude, you just gave me an idea, those threads get a special forum called flamewars or some shit and in each thread everyone else gets to spectate and watch the fights burn out once every couple weeks, add some extra ads to that forum specifically and boom, a 'televised' internet fight night.that sounds terrible.
Quote from: Sandtrap on March 28, 2015, 05:39:06 PMQuote from: Flee on March 28, 2015, 04:20:57 PMQuote from: Meta Cognition on March 28, 2015, 01:54:17 PMSpoilerIt's indicative of a problem that both Challenger and Verbatim ended up being banned. It ought to be the job of the moderators to head this shit off at the pass, and ban the instigator/worst offender before it becomes an issue. If you're banning two people involved in the same conversation, you didn't act quick enough.It's always easy to decide on what should've been done in retrospect. When things start turning sour, our first reaction rarely is to reach for the banhammer right away. We try to talk to people and defuse the situation with a verbal or formal warning. When I did so yesterday night before signing off, I thought the situation was difused. The split thread had been locked and both parties received a warning not to continue the fight in public. This works the vast majority of times.However, this morning, it turns out that the warnings weren't received all that well and that in a new, similar thread, the exact same argument was starting up again, insults and jabs included. At that point, there's no longer a first instigator or someone who isn't crossing the line. Both parties knew what they were doing. That it went too far, and that we almost had another derailed thread on our hands. Like LC pointed out, we aren't always around. And in first instance, we always try to settle things without going for a ban or warning straight away. Furthermore, we've said it time and time again. If you see a post breaking the rules, simply report it. If you choose to instead respond with similar insults and set off a fight that could've easily been prevented, there's a good chance that when the mods get to it, we'll just see both people fighting and breaking the rules. And at that point, we have to treat them fairly and equally. We can't ignore one person's 5 posts that break the rules just because the other guy did so first. This isn't kindergarten. "But he started it" won't get you very far. So while I agree that this probably could've been dealt with differently, I'm not going to stop trying to settle things in a mature way by giving people the benefit of the doubt, rather than reaching for the banhammer straight away. This works easily the majority times. But Challenger and Verbatim were both crossing the line and were both given enough warnings, which they both chose to ignore until the very end despite having been made very clear that it would result in a ban.[/spoiler]I'm curious here. Call it a theoretical.Two people start up a slap fight. A mod takes said slap fight posts out of the thread, and splits the fight into a new contained thread. Here's the wager.Everybody has to shut the fuck up some time.I mean as much as somebody can dislike somebody, there's not a fucking chance two people will spend the entire day going at it.Eventually that candle will go out. Somebody will get tired. Here's the way I figure it. Two sides are having a row. Mod comes in and ding dong bannus them.That argument is still waiting to pop up again. And if anything, it has more fuel when a mod intervines because both sides are sort of stuck in the mud disliking each other because "but he got me ding dong bannu'd."Just an idea is all. An argument starts. Mods contain it, separate it, and only said two users can comment in the thread. Sort of like how mods can still talk after the lock. Eventually somebody's going to burn out. Somebody's going to realize that they have a day to go to beyond the computer screen.They might pick it up again afterwards. But eventually, one side will give out. When that happens, at that point, there's nothing left to be said. Anyway. Just a muse, is all.Duuude, you just gave me an idea, those threads get a special forum called flamewars or some shit and in each thread everyone else gets to spectate and watch the fights burn out once every couple weeks, add some extra ads to that forum specifically and boom, a 'televised' internet fight night.
Quote from: Flee on March 28, 2015, 04:20:57 PMQuote from: Meta Cognition on March 28, 2015, 01:54:17 PMSpoilerIt's indicative of a problem that both Challenger and Verbatim ended up being banned. It ought to be the job of the moderators to head this shit off at the pass, and ban the instigator/worst offender before it becomes an issue. If you're banning two people involved in the same conversation, you didn't act quick enough.It's always easy to decide on what should've been done in retrospect. When things start turning sour, our first reaction rarely is to reach for the banhammer right away. We try to talk to people and defuse the situation with a verbal or formal warning. When I did so yesterday night before signing off, I thought the situation was difused. The split thread had been locked and both parties received a warning not to continue the fight in public. This works the vast majority of times.However, this morning, it turns out that the warnings weren't received all that well and that in a new, similar thread, the exact same argument was starting up again, insults and jabs included. At that point, there's no longer a first instigator or someone who isn't crossing the line. Both parties knew what they were doing. That it went too far, and that we almost had another derailed thread on our hands. Like LC pointed out, we aren't always around. And in first instance, we always try to settle things without going for a ban or warning straight away. Furthermore, we've said it time and time again. If you see a post breaking the rules, simply report it. If you choose to instead respond with similar insults and set off a fight that could've easily been prevented, there's a good chance that when the mods get to it, we'll just see both people fighting and breaking the rules. And at that point, we have to treat them fairly and equally. We can't ignore one person's 5 posts that break the rules just because the other guy did so first. This isn't kindergarten. "But he started it" won't get you very far. So while I agree that this probably could've been dealt with differently, I'm not going to stop trying to settle things in a mature way by giving people the benefit of the doubt, rather than reaching for the banhammer straight away. This works easily the majority times. But Challenger and Verbatim were both crossing the line and were both given enough warnings, which they both chose to ignore until the very end despite having been made very clear that it would result in a ban.[/spoiler]I'm curious here. Call it a theoretical.Two people start up a slap fight. A mod takes said slap fight posts out of the thread, and splits the fight into a new contained thread. Here's the wager.Everybody has to shut the fuck up some time.I mean as much as somebody can dislike somebody, there's not a fucking chance two people will spend the entire day going at it.Eventually that candle will go out. Somebody will get tired. Here's the way I figure it. Two sides are having a row. Mod comes in and ding dong bannus them.That argument is still waiting to pop up again. And if anything, it has more fuel when a mod intervines because both sides are sort of stuck in the mud disliking each other because "but he got me ding dong bannu'd."Just an idea is all. An argument starts. Mods contain it, separate it, and only said two users can comment in the thread. Sort of like how mods can still talk after the lock. Eventually somebody's going to burn out. Somebody's going to realize that they have a day to go to beyond the computer screen.They might pick it up again afterwards. But eventually, one side will give out. When that happens, at that point, there's nothing left to be said. Anyway. Just a muse, is all.
Quote from: Meta Cognition on March 28, 2015, 01:54:17 PMSpoilerIt's indicative of a problem that both Challenger and Verbatim ended up being banned. It ought to be the job of the moderators to head this shit off at the pass, and ban the instigator/worst offender before it becomes an issue. If you're banning two people involved in the same conversation, you didn't act quick enough.It's always easy to decide on what should've been done in retrospect. When things start turning sour, our first reaction rarely is to reach for the banhammer right away. We try to talk to people and defuse the situation with a verbal or formal warning. When I did so yesterday night before signing off, I thought the situation was difused. The split thread had been locked and both parties received a warning not to continue the fight in public. This works the vast majority of times.However, this morning, it turns out that the warnings weren't received all that well and that in a new, similar thread, the exact same argument was starting up again, insults and jabs included. At that point, there's no longer a first instigator or someone who isn't crossing the line. Both parties knew what they were doing. That it went too far, and that we almost had another derailed thread on our hands. Like LC pointed out, we aren't always around. And in first instance, we always try to settle things without going for a ban or warning straight away. Furthermore, we've said it time and time again. If you see a post breaking the rules, simply report it. If you choose to instead respond with similar insults and set off a fight that could've easily been prevented, there's a good chance that when the mods get to it, we'll just see both people fighting and breaking the rules. And at that point, we have to treat them fairly and equally. We can't ignore one person's 5 posts that break the rules just because the other guy did so first. This isn't kindergarten. "But he started it" won't get you very far. So while I agree that this probably could've been dealt with differently, I'm not going to stop trying to settle things in a mature way by giving people the benefit of the doubt, rather than reaching for the banhammer straight away. This works easily the majority times. But Challenger and Verbatim were both crossing the line and were both given enough warnings, which they both chose to ignore until the very end despite having been made very clear that it would result in a ban.[/spoiler]
SpoilerIt's indicative of a problem that both Challenger and Verbatim ended up being banned. It ought to be the job of the moderators to head this shit off at the pass, and ban the instigator/worst offender before it becomes an issue. If you're banning two people involved in the same conversation, you didn't act quick enough.
why did challywally get banned?
