(OLD) Contest Unfair Infractions Here

[Mipha]

I make a lot of posts fairly often. Period. I spend a lot of time posting here.

If you would look at my activity on a normal day, you will see that I spend most of my posts within the gaming sections of the forum. Making discussions, answering questions, pondering game design and the psychology behind games. I make a lot of posts here, so of course you will hear a fair few sexual jokes here, but they are minuscule compared to my normal posting activity.

Even so, is this a bad thing? Should there be a tally stating how many harmless sexual jokes a user posts per day? Should someone be banned or punished for making too many harmless sexual jokes or commentary? If so, than a poster such as Dan or would be banned. I think it's safe to say they shouldn't be banned nor punished. Something such as that should not be held against them regarding "repeated affairs". Going to far with my jokes rarely happens that moderators need to intervene and punish is certainly not a "common occurrence".

I don't think dans bicuriosity is sexual joke in nature as he said it means something else in England

 

[Nathanial Rumphol-Janc]

Hasn't this conversation just turned into a regular old crap fest? Obviously I was not involved in this decision - I'll be honest, I've only vaguely skimmed the ruleset here. What I do hate about how this was handled was that two different mods did two entirely different reactions to it. One with a warning, the other wiping out a bunch of posts, and then later chatting after the fact to figure out how to best sort the issue (I saw this discussion happen on skype and I stayed out of it as I don't feel it's right for me to step into these discussions just yet).

This is the exact sort of thing I was talking about preventing with my original proposal to rework the rules and unify staff actions - eliminating possibilities of staff interpretation. Why? Because different staff interpret things in different ways and different actions are taken depend on on which staff saw the situation. To me, that constitutes unfair treatment. Ideally, staff should basically be robots in a certain sense - well aware we're all humans, but with clearly defined actions for any given situation, rather than different actions by different mods to the same issue.

As for the actual incident - there is blame all around. Vanessa explained herself poorly in even mentioning there were multiple reports. Who cares - your actions should never be based on reports or on if people are offended. She worded it in a way that inferred the actions were due to reports and people being offended. The actions should be because it goes against the forum policy.

Lozjam is adamant it didn't break any rules. To the letter of the law - it only did through interpretation, but how one interprets it seems to vary even among the mods, let alone the members. Open interpretation is really what lead to this issue in the first place.

PERSONALLY: If we want to call this a family friendly place, there are many changes that need to happen rule wise, because I'd hardly call this place family friendly. Miiverse is family friendly. This place is much, much edgier and definitely slanted towards an upper teenager mentality. As for whether or not a "12 year old (they are actually 13) is offended" - that really shouldn't matter either. It's either okay to say you'd bang a member, or it's not. Rules shouldn't change due to age. It needs to be set standard. Standards here are far too open to interpretation, as are punishments.

Just my take. It's likely not going to change, and it's one of the primary reasons I wanted to keep the two site's boards separated. There is a lot engrained here that while I think the staff is open to working on new rulesets, I am not sure any of them (or any of you) agree with my premise in the first place.

 

[Jamie]

Honestly, I don't want to sound like a complete asshole, but with the rhetoric you're putting forward right now, I'd rather you just decided not to become a staff member here. Interpretation is extremely important. As @Matt has alluded to, there is a big difference between a joke and not a joke. You can't turn your emotions off and make this decision. This isn't ZI, this is ZD. ZD is buying ZI, so by extension, ZI will become ZD. You can keep your ZI moderation to yourself. I have some complaints about the mods, but I'm happy enough to not change them as much as you'd like to.

 

[DARK MASTER]

If we want to call this a family friendly place

Personally I think ZD/ZI should be open to children, but generally geared toward adults — a chill relaxing to place to talk about whatever (including of course Zelda) that has clear rules with some minor interpretation based on context — a place where people can relax and talk about Zelda and not be emotionally abused. What is your ideal community, Nate? Also due to everything we're all a bit tense, which is why there is more negativity.

 

[Mipha]

Personally I think ZD/ZI should be open to children, but generally geared toward adults — a chill relaxing to place to talk about whatever (including of course Zelda) that has clear rules with some minor interpretation based on context — a place where people can relax and talk about Zelda and not be emotionally abused. What is your ideal community, Nate? Also due to everything we're all a bit tense, which is why there is more negativity.

I could design the rules(and run them through with the staff, of course.) I am good at designing rules with few loopholes due to enjoying to exploit loopholes.

 

[Guest_1]

Hasn't this conversation just turned into a regular old crap fest? Obviously I was not involved in this decision - I'll be honest, I've only vaguely skimmed the ruleset here. What I do hate about how this was handled was that two different mods did two entirely different reactions to it. One with a warning, the other wiping out a bunch of posts, and then later chatting after the fact to figure out how to best sort the issue (I saw this discussion happen on skype and I stayed out of it as I don't feel it's right for me to step into these discussions just yet).

That sounds like there's still a bit of inconsistency in how moderators handle issues like this. We're all human, we all make mistakes, but while the rules should be open to a degree of interpretation, I also think that there should also be general standards in how moderators should handle situations like this. That would help avoid situations like this in the future.

This is the exact sort of thing I was talking about preventing with my original proposal to rework the rules and unify staff actions - eliminating possibilities of staff interpretation. Why? Because different staff interpret things in different ways and different actions are taken depend on on which staff saw the situation. To me, that constitutes unfair treatment. Ideally, staff should basically be robots in a certain sense - well aware we're all humans, but with clearly defined actions for any given situation, rather than different actions by different mods to the same issue.

While I agree with you, I don't think you should completely eliminate staff interpretation. What I think would be better is if there were standards on how stuff like this is handled within staff. Rules shouldn't be completely black or white. We live in a world with shades of gray, and no matter how much we write the rules, shades of gray are always going to exist. Although I agree that the actions of staff should be more consistent; if one case with x member was handled this one way, then generally, other cases with y members should be handled in that same way, unless the nuance of the situation dictates otherwise.

As for the actual incident - there is blame all around. Vanessa explained herself poorly in even mentioning there were multiple reports. Who cares - your actions should never be based on reports or on if people are offended. She worded it in a way that inferred the actions were due to reports and people being offended. The actions should be because it goes against the forum policy.

Lozjam is adamant it didn't break any rules. To the letter of the law - it only did through interpretation, but how one interprets it seems to vary even among the mods, let alone the members. Open interpretation is really what lead to this issue in the first place.

Well, okay, Vanessa made a mistake. I agree that it should have been about a violation of forum policy and not about how many reports x has filed against someone. Doing it by x reports opens up the report system for abuse, and considering just how much this situation has been blown out of proportion, that might need to be looked at as well.

PERSONALLY: If we want to call this a family friendly place, there are many changes that need to happen rule wise, because I'd hardly call this place family friendly. Miiverse is family friendly. This place is much, much edgier and definitely slanted towards an upper teenager mentality. As for whether or not a "12 year old (they are actually 13) is offended" - that really shouldn't matter either. It's either okay to say you'd bang a member, or it's not. Rules shouldn't change due to age. It needs to be set standard. Standards here are far too open to interpretation, as are punishments.

That's true. ZD has a different demographic it caters to compared to Miiverse. Otherwise, when it comes to jokes of that nature, I agree- it's either allowed to happen for everybody, or it shouldn't be allowed to happen at all. Even if both parties think a specific joke or comment is funny, not everyone shares the same sense of humor as you do. Even if the joke was completely harmless, if it isn't something allowed in the rules, then it probably shouldn't be told or kept to other channels not directly tied to the forums.

I'm not saying we need to dole out punishments left and right. I'm saying that we should talk to those users and say, "hey, that joke was funny, but that's probably going to get you in trouble of you tell it. Might want to take it elsewhere."

Just my take. It's likely not going to change, and it's one of the primary reasons I wanted to keep the two site's boards separated. There is a lot engrained here that while I think the staff is open to working on new rulesets, I am not sure any of them (or any of you) agree with my premise in the first place.

I know how you feel. I'm pretty bummed that certain issues I see happening on the forums aren't better addressed due to the vagueness present in the way some of the rules are worded. We have rules to protect the members of the forum. If we aren't willing to take a look at them to determine what's best for the community... then can we really say that we're helping this community at all?

We're going to be having a merger soon. We should all be on the same page on how the rules should be addressed going forward. It's a shame stuff like this keeps on happening to distract us from the bigger picture.

Honestly, I don't want to sound like a complete asshole, but with the rhetoric you're putting forward right now, I'd rather you just decided not to become a staff member here. Interpretation is extremely important. As @Matt has alluded to, there is a big difference between a joke and not a joke. You can't turn your emotions off and make this decision. This isn't ZI, this is ZD. ZD is buying ZI, so by extension, ZI will become ZD. You can keep your ZI moderation to yourself. I have some complaints about the mods, but I'm happy enough to not change them as much as you'd like to.

That's a bit much, don't you think? All Nate is suggesting is that we hold everybody to the same standards. Should we see things in black or white? No. Should things be up to a degree of interpretation? Sure, I agree with you there. Not everybody reads the rules the same way, but the more you remove the vagueness present in the rules, the better the standards set for the community. We want everybody to be held to the same standards at the end of the day.

 

[Jamie]

I've made this judgment over a period of time, now. I'm not happy with Nathanial's ideas thusfar, and I won't be happy with him as staff. It's not like I'll be mean to him or leave or something.

 

[Guest_1]

I've made this judgment over a period of time, now. I'm not happy with Nathanial's ideas thus far, and I won't be happy with him as staff. It's not like I'll be mean to him or leave or something.

I think we all have our concerns on just how this is going to play itself out over the next month or so, but I think it's unfair to judge someone when they haven't really done much of anything beyond bounce ideas off the community or talk to Mases. We don't have to be happy about this merger at all, but since it's going to happen no matter how much we complain about it, we may as well see how it all pans out. If Nathan doesn't live up to his promises, then that's a conversation we'll all have then. No point in passing preliminary judgment before actions regarding the merger have been taken.

I remember a time when ZI was a lawless place that only had one vague rule - "Don't be a dumbass." I hope that when the merger finally goes through, this community isn't subjected to that. That would be a pretty disappointing way for the community to go. The only way I will know that is by judging actions, not words.

 

[Nathanial Rumphol-Janc]

Honestly, I don't want to sound like a complete asshole, but with the rhetoric you're putting forward right now, I'd rather you just decided not to become a staff member here. Interpretation is extremely important. As @Matt has alluded to, there is a big difference between a joke and not a joke. You can't turn your emotions off and make this decision. This isn't ZI, this is ZD. ZD is buying ZI, so by extension, ZI will become ZD. You can keep your ZI moderation to yourself. I have some complaints about the mods, but I'm happy enough to not change them as much as you'd like to.

Just a note, ZI is still ZI. ZD is still ZD. There is no x buys y and thus becomes x. If that was the case, both sites would just be merged together as a single entity instead of ran 100% independently. WHat's happening is ZD's boards are moving off of ZD and becoming ZI's boards. They are rebranding to a different outlet, but maintaining the same feel.

That being said, it doesn't really matter what I am saying here. I have openly admitted my ideas and thought processes mean little. Bouncing ideas around doesn't inherently make me "ill fit to be staff". If nothing else, it should tell you the opposite. Because I am not enforcing my ideals, but maintaining the status while expressing what I feel would make a community better. I am not forcing anything here. And it's not "staff member here". I run ZI. These will be ZI's boards in the future. I by default would always be a staff member. HOWEVER, I have entirely conceded the top dog role to Jimmy as I don't really want to cause any issues. He runs the joint, I just provide input and moderate when needed. Plus create a bridge for the ZI members to not feel foreign.

I've stated repeatedly I am against the merge specifically because the ideals for a community don't match 100% with what I want to happen at ZI long haul. But, at the same time, I think much of what ZD Forums are today are largely the same to what the rest of the ZI user base is today.

I've made this judgment over a period of time, now. I'm not happy with Nathanial's ideas thusfar, and I won't be happy with him as staff. It's not like I'll be mean to him or leave or something.

Ideas are not actions. I mean, I don't like a lot of folks ideas here, but I don't hold it against them regardless of who they are. It matters how they perform their duties more so than what ideas they have. I didn't like two different mods doing different actions. But it's not like I can actively stop it or change why it happened, which is interpretation.

I think we all have our concerns on just how this is going to play itself out over the next month or so, but I think it's unfair to judge someone when they haven't really done much of anything beyond bounce ideas off the community or talk to Mases. We don't have to be happy about this merger at all, but since it's going to happen no matter how much we complain about it, we may as well see how it all pans out. If Nathan doesn't live up to his promises, then that's a conversation we'll all have then. No point in passing preliminary judgment before actions regarding the merger have been taken.

I remember a time when ZI was a lawless place that only had one vague rule - "Don't be a dumbass." I hope that when the merger finally goes through, this community isn't subjected to that. That would be a pretty disappointing way for the community to go. The only way I will know that is by judging actions, not words.

I don't really have much in the way of promises going. The place is going to stay the way it is now for the most part under a new banner with an influx of members from Zelda Informer. I'm not doing anything unless needed really. All I am really doing is keeping you guys informed. It's going to be pretty hard to go back on promises or anything else when I don't have much going anymore. I'll be fairly hands off outside of contributing myself. Now that things are fleshed out more to me, it's clear the goal is basically for me to not do much of anything save input.

 

[Jamie]

Not an infraction, but I posted some pics in the TOYM thread, the pics were deleted with no PM or message, and then I made a thread here asking why I can't post them, and that thread was also deleted with no PM or message.

I'm starting to feel like @Matt here like there's some big conspiracy going on to censor us.

 

[Krazy4Krash]

Not an infraction, but I posted some pics in the TOYM thread, the pics were deleted with no PM or message, and then I made a thread here asking why I can't post them, and that thread was also deleted with no PM or message.

I'm starting to feel like @Matt here like there's some big conspiracy going on to censor us.

As corrupt moderators, anything that does not please us will be removed without consideration for anybody else.

It's because the posts were spam (not adding anything to the thread) in protest of one image being removed we had complaints about that was present on the front page of the forums. Usually members are notified where their posts are removed, when it may be unclear why. This is not one of those times, as the users were well aware of what they were doing.

 

[Jamie]

As corrupt moderators, anything that does not please us will be removed without consideration for anybody else.

It's because the posts were spam (not adding anything to the thread) in protest of one image being removed we had complaints about that was present on the front page of the forums. Usually members are notified where their posts are removed, when it may be unclear why. This is not one of those times, as the users were well aware of what they were doing.

Were they really well aware of what they are doing? The Things On Your Mind Thread--sorry to spam in a thread that is literally pure spam. I had no idea what I was doing, I was just posting pictures and having a fun back and forth with a fellow member. Maybe if the "non-corrupt" moderators pulled their head out of their buttocks and asked the users in question if they knew what they were doing, I wouldn't be complaining here. But they didn't, and I am, especially since my THREAD ASKING WHY IT WAS DELETED meaning I CLEARLY didn't know, was ALSO deleted with absolutely no reason provided.

 

[Vanessa28]

The only thing I want to leave here is that whenever you delete a thread or remove posts, LEAVE A MESSAGE. It can lead to very uncomfortable situations if you don't do this.. Like in the case with Lozjam, I made a decision to leave the posts and just leave a message in the thread at first. A bit later another moderator deleted the posts including my warning and the only notification left was "your post has been moved" which is a automatic notification and not personalized. We know how it turned out. Personal communication about a subject can clearify a huge lot. @Lozjam sent me a message in which he appologized and actually said if he didn't bring it up, this mess would never have happened. I think that's a very nice and very classy move. But there is nothing he should appologize for. No matter if a warning/infraction is justified or not, members ALWAYS HAVE THE RIGHT TO BRING IT UP. Nobody should ever feel like they should keep their mouth shut. What is becoming very clear is the lack of proper communication between mods and members or heck even among staff members themselves is poor and should get better. I see members getting very frustrated because of their posts being deleted or even topics being deleted. Then there is a lot of anger and accusations going on. And this can be prevented if there is proper communication. When we're frustrated or angry we can all say or do things which we don't really mean. That's understandable. But we can also do things which may have very bad results. That's why the communication absolutely need to get way better.

 

[Spiritual Mask Salesman]

Just established better communication with members with this stuff and let's move on. Like seriously, this is getting a little out of hand.

 

[Dan]

Don't worry guys, let's group together and report Krazy's avatar as being offensive seeing as how these are the ridiculous circumstances we have fallen into. I'm sure the pressure of 4 or 5 people will force him to remove it?
The picture in question is poorly edited and a little laughable at best. I was shocked and burst into laughter when I actually saw my picture had been removed. This isn't Krazy's usual Mo for those of you who aren't familiar with him, I would believe it if someone told me he was hacked by the likes of Wyatt, and it was he that removed it.

The picture is no worse than a picture of soggy bread, and yes some people have a phobia of soggy bread so let's make sure we remove any images of soggy bread aye, while we're at it let's just remove every picture from the board because there's a tiny chance it could offend people.
While the image is on the FRONT PAGE, let's not try to use that to strengthen our already weak argument for removing it, the reality is only those that follow me can see it on the front page, I have 115 follows most of which are inactive and haven't been seen since 2012, so that's probably like 20 active users at best that saw it?

What about all the people that found my image amusing? Do they get any say in this? Probably not because why give power to the community?
There are tools the 20 INDIVIDUALS can use if they don't wish to see my picture. Firstly they have the choice of using the unfollow button if they wish to no longer see my status updates on the front page. The second method is good old ad blocker, which can be used to remove the majority of content you don't wish to see, let's give it a try shall we?

So here's an example of a pretty offensive image I found laying around. Let's hope it doesn't get reported by a few people or I may receive an infraction this time!


I'm using Ublock but the more highly used adblocker has the same function.

Well that's one element removed but the image itself is still pretty offensive...

Now it's looking great! All the garbage has been removed and I didn't even need to force my perception of garbage onto the community, how amazing is that!