A few things

[buttons]

1) "Posting to cause an argument" rule. So so flawed. Anything can be seen to be posting to cause an argument, in spam quite a lot of things are yet only a few are actually edited. Example: I was infracted in a thread aimed at me and a few others, I was the one infracted for a post I made in there for "posting to cause arguments." The argument was already caused, my post wasn't rude/insulting at all and therefore shouldn't have been edited or punished at all. Think that was the one that was reversed but yeah this one realllllllllllllly needs sorted out.


2) Mods taking things personally. Example: One mod pming me to ask if I had a problem (PMING TO CAUSE ARGUMENTS - CLEARLY!), when I ask them to stop because I can't be done with it they carry on. They then act the victim, they gave me an infraction for saying "laughing at disabled people is disgusting" - apparently this looks like I'm calling another member, who was the one laughing at a disabled person in the first place, disabled. This mod then says they find it "suprising" I could say something like this (completely getting the wrong end of the stick). Why should mods be allowed to attack someone so personally, it's not their job to deal specifically with just one person and how they act, obviously they give out punishments but why should I be constantly pmed asking if I have a problem with the mods? Yes, I do with a few and that's up to me, I know others have had this too. I don't want Mods pming me calling me "suprising" and asking why I don't like you, then them acting like the victim.

Another example of mods taking things personally. I abused the reporting system to make a point - not exactly the best way - and was told if I didn't stop I'd be cautioned. I stopped. Sent back a pming saying they were pming me to cause arguments. I was cautioned for being "rude". The whole point was to show that rule (go bk 2 da first paragraphzZ) was flawed and I end up getting cautioned for something I wasn't meant to and just for being "rude" to one mod, clearly not fair.:rolleyes:


3) Accusing people of lying. Yeah, it's fine to be infracted for accusing someone of hacking (HEY THAT'S SOMETHING THAT TIES INTO POSTING TO CAUSE AN ARGUMENT ) but LYING? lol i think not. some mods don't like to be proved wrong obviously.


seriously just sort out the rules, give the right punishment for the right rule broken, don't infract with causing arguments which were already caused, if it was rude it would be accepted as valid but don't make people out to be starting arguments when they haven't.


maybe this should be in complaints but what the hell. sorry, did i just post to cause arguments?? damn.


Thread Closed by MattGarner (Forum Manager)

[lick]

Yeah same i was "posting to cause arguments" for avoiding an argument and posting a picture... got me a spam ban :S

[Plank]

One thing I noticed yesterday is that a lot of threads were closed because of being about another member. I didn't even know that was in the rules, as I have never seen it happen before.

[lick]

One thing I noticed yesterday is that a lot of threads were closed because of being about another member. I didn't even know that was in the rules, as I have never seen it happen before.

The thing is, that user did not have a problem and neither did servel other mods when they looked at them. But as soon as the mod who closed them came online.. they had a problem an closed them all...

abit stupid doing that if you ask me

[iAdam]

Read the rules properly, not just the main title, and you will see it. Alot of rules tie into each other and the moderator has to decide which one it is more swayed to. In my opinion, the rule is fine, if someone posts someone in a way that will provoke them. Surely it's posting to cause arguments?

[lick]

Read the rules properly, not just the main title, and you will see it. Alot of rules tie into each other and the moderator has to decide which one it is more swayed to. In my opinion, the rule is fine, if someone posts someone in a way that will provoke them. Surely it's posting to cause arguments?

We are not trying to provoke people but it gets seen as that, its not like we try to start arguments. The most stupidest things get edited because certain mods think its trying to cause arguments

And i have read the rules, it took me two reads to find the posting to cause arguments one because its stuck between being negative an something else.. most rules need to be clarified more

[leah]

The rules are justified in my opinion. If you feel a mod is targetting you PM their manager with evidence and it will be sorted. If you get infacted or cautioned unfairly, again report it and it should be sorted.

[lick]

The rules are justified in my opinion. If you feel a mod is targetting you PM their manager with evidence and it will be sorted. If you get infacted or cautioned unfairly, again report it and it should be sorted.

She could have done that if she wanted, but she wanted peoples opinions on it, she did not want someone telling her to PM a manager.

[buttons]

The rules are justified in my opinion. If you feel a mod is targetting you PM their manager with evidence and it will be sorted. If you get infacted or cautioned unfairly, again report it and it should be sorted.

lol. that's not my point. all my unfair infractions have been reversed as did my caution. my point is giving them out in the first place. i don't think they're targetting me at all, just some like to be personal when dealing with some members. please don't try to patronize me. you'd make a great mod in that aspect.

[Yoshimitsui]

I think the posting to cause arguments flaw comes down to the fact personal judgement is required of a moderator dealing with the incident, people think in different ways and can often lead to a situation being analysed differently. It's not like avoiding the filter as the blatant evidence is in front of you without question.

It has often happened that an infraction has been issued and is then said to be that of a joke between users. Or in other cases the situation is misunderstood and those caught up in it are penalised as well or instead of the offender. This brings in the part where someone above mentioned negativity or a direct cause to arguments.

It's a tricky one and varies from each situation but maybe something should be trialled so that the particular infraction cannot be issued without 2 or more moderators agreeing and having looked over the situation, in the mean time any existing problem would result in a thread lock. Or taking it to an extreme of only allowing super moderators to issue it.

This still would have it's flaws considering the more laborious tasks and also having the case where people have to agree and who agrees and what not. It's a slightly strange process or possibly rather pointless but i think the infraction is being used very regularly and having possibly the most reversals. Much like the pointless posting infraction was abolished due to unfairness and overuse, but that's just my personal opinion.

And in response to you mentioning being infracted for accusing someone of lying, that was abolished a fair bit ago so if that exists it shouldn't have been used.