A few things

[FlyingJesus]

*Removed*


Edited by Catzsy [Forum Super Moderator]: Please do not make pointless/off-topic posts that contribute nothing positive to the thread. Thanks.

[Mentor]

There was quite alot of agreement in a previous thread that the posting to cause augument rules would be reworded for clarety. As banning augument is banning dicussion. Changing the word to disallowing flameing would make much more sence

Equally, if a mod if acting unfairly and overstepping there mark, contact a super mod and forward or CC them the message. If theres no luck there just head up the chain till you find someone who can help
There is a staff member specifically tasked with dealing with complains against mod's although off my head i cannot remember who

[colourpot]

if you have any forum issues, pm the forum manager, we cant do anything :S

[Immenseman]

There was quite alot of agreement in a previous thread that the posting to cause augument rules would be reworded for clarety. As banning augument is banning dicussion. Changing the word to disallowing flameing would make much more sence

Equally, if a mod if acting unfairly and overstepping there mark, contact a super mod and forward or CC them the message. If theres no luck there just head up the chain till you find someone who can help
There is a staff member specifically tasked with dealing with complains against mod's although off my head i cannot remember who

Either the Forum Manager - MattGarner or the Staff Editor - Bomb-Head although I think there is going to be a new one soon.

[nvrspk4]

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.

Perhaps the rule should be changed to "trolling". If someone causes an argument and you make a post that will continue an argument, that classifies as trolling or at the very least, feeding the trolls. We make an effort to stop arguments and part of that is not only punishing those who start the argument but those who continue it. If you don't rise to the bait it becomes a much less contentious issue because if the argument persists people start jumping in etc. etc.

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.

To me this sounds like a very specific case and not a generalization so that would be best PMd to myself and MattGarner. Since this is not a general issue but instead a specific staff issue this shouldn't be discussed on the public forums, so lets leave this aside for now.

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:

I don't discuss bans on the forum BUT Jake summarized it perfectly so I don't have to.

Well you worked that one out for yourself. If you think the system is flawed you create a thread like this or you PM the people who deal with it which in this case would be the Forum Manager. When you abuse the system what on Earth do you expect?

So once you got told you were abusing the system, which you have admitted and got a PM telling you so, you sent a reply telling the moderator they were trying to argue with you when they are merely doing their job. You genuinely can't see what you did wrong there...?

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.

If I recall we specifically removed "Lying" from the scamming/hacking rule not too long ago. Unless it was judged as aiming to provoke arguments then it shouldn't be an issue.

[lick]

If I recall we specifically removed "Lying" from the scamming/hacking rule not too long ago. Unless it was judged as aiming to provoke arguments then it shouldn't be an issue.

Then maybe the MOD should read over the rules because she keeps editing my posts for calling people liars

[Catzsy]

Then maybe the MOD should read over the rules because she keeps editing my posts for calling people liars

Well the only female mods are cyndia, luccy and myself. I can't imagine they would as they usually moderate Habbo and Trading. I know I haven't edited any of your posts for calling people liars so can you post the links of these posts please, mwah? I can then refer them to Matt Garner or you can pm him yourself.
Also it is also possible to break other rules while doing this such as insulting others/inappropriate remarks/posting to cause arguments. The only thing that was changed was that it was removed from the accusing of scamming/hacking rule.

[Mentor]

Perhaps the rule should be changed to "trolling". If someone causes an argument and you make a post that will continue an argument, that classifies as trolling or at the very least, feeding the trolls. We make an effort to stop arguments and part of that is not only punishing those who start the argument but those who continue it. If you don't rise to the bait it becomes a much less contentious issue because if the argument persists people start jumping in etc. etc.

Trolling would also be a good alternative to the wording, as the current wording implies all argument, even if its civil and constructive, is bad. Something i strongly disagree with

[The Professor]

Trolling would also be a good alternative to the wording, as the current wording implies all argument, even if its civil and constructive, is bad. Something i strongly disagree with

Heh, it was originally called trolling but the wording was changed to "Posting to cause arguments" to avoid people saying "no thatz not trolling, this iz". Posting to cause arguments is more black and white than trolling which is a word that hasn't been in use all that long and doesn't have a clear definition. Ironic that it now seems like the best thing to do is change it back

[Catzsy]

Heh, it was originally called trolling but the wording was changed to "Posting to cause arguments" to avoid people saying "no thatz not trolling, this iz". Posting to cause arguments is more black and white than trolling which is a word that hasn't been in use all that long and doesn't have a clear definition. Ironic that it now seems like the best thing to do is change it back

I personally don't mind the word trolling but don't like the expression ' Do not feed the trolls' because there is another definition of the word Troll which isn't very flattering (ugly little monsters) which could be interpreted to mods being rude to members.

I think the wording could be altered

My suggestion would be:

A10. Do not be a negative factor on the forum – This includes posting to cause or to fuel arguments, unnecessary attacks on forum staff or general bad manners and attitude towards other forum members. Moderators, as always, will have the final say on whether a member is constantly being negative on the forums.