Moderaters are infracting for no reason?

[Decode]

This is not a complaint so dont move it to the complaints forum, its just feedback.

21-07-2008 10:10 PM recieved from SyrupyMonkey

I merely said "I am pretty sure my signature has hurt nobody and it isn't asking for reputation.. what does rep bring me? a bigger e-penis?"... never did i be rude to him in this PM..

Sarcasm is a form of rudeness, infraction fair. ~ Kaotix12

That is 100% unfair, there is nothing rude about that?

This is ridiculous I got infractions for posting info that yesterday about big brother

Sarah was sick on the floor after a party Coldplay infractioned me for not using spoilers everyone knows -.-

There are new rules regarding the use of spoilers, therefore the infraction is fair and please only use this thread to report infraction problems. ~ Kaotix12

The spoiler rule is getting rediculous, I don't watch Big Brother, but if sarah was sick on the floor they have obviously showen it on TV so there realy isn't anything to "spoil".

Does anyone else think moderaters are going over the top?

[Janczyk]

I got infracted for telling someone that someones problem in the relationships forum wasn't about Habbo :rolleyes:

[Lee]

I do not agree with the 1st infraction as it wasn't rude..

[Elkaa]

I'll double check these for you shortly.

[--ss--]

Surely the users are meant to get a pm regarding the offence first , then a warning, then another warning , and then finally and infraction for each different offence or what ever silly way it's being done :eusa_whis.

[Paulio]

Infractions are pointless all together. SCRAP EM'

[e5]

If it was aired on c4 you don't need to use spoiler, if it wasn't you do. that's the basic rule
but the sarcasm one was unfair lol

[Rixion]

bit harsh there.

[Elkaa]

Okay, checked them now and I'll try and sort the spolier siutation.

Edit: I've gone through the entire thread and reversed some of the more harsh ones. The spoiler ones will, however, remain as that's the rule for the moment.

[mat64]

An infraction is still abit harsh though isn't it for such a minor offense? As from what I can remember infractions are only used for harder rule breaks or repeat offenses. I fail to see how not using a spoiler would count as a hard rule break and even on repeat offense I would see that as rather harsh because infractions count for so much these days. The first was also rather harsh for an infraction or even a warning, especially if the person targetted wasn't offened by the comment made.

I would have hoped the moderation departement would have evolved abit since the time I was around but it still doesn't seem the case. At a guess I'm going to say that moderators are still been evaluated on the amount of logs and infractions that they get per month which is a rather silly way of evaluating someone if that is the case because then you end up with problems like this. Other sites don't have this problem because they don't appoint any old joe to the position in the first place, and afterwards they are only watched very lightly for activity and troubles. I don't think I've every agreed to evaluating moderation in this way, although it does work well, it has the side effects of what is in the OP and what you see in the infractions problem thread day after day.

Obviously the above can be disregarded if that's no longer the case.