Ziggy Stardust
Absolutely Sane
Speak for yourself. I'm a white middle class man who loves hearing other inferior opinions.
Red Diamond Threads
- Thread starter Birdjaguar
- Start date
I certainly don't feel I'm being pandereed to and I am in the apparent pandered to class.
Also, I have seen Americans infracted for a term that is not offensive to Americans (and most Americans would not even know it is offensive to anyone) but is apparently offensive to others. I would ask that the moderation better reflect middle class American standards.
Mise
isle of lucy
I am the 99%.
You're contradicting yourself. If there's eight different countries then surely the US only counts as one of them. The owner may be American but TF doesn't usually go about moderating.
I must say the discussion of moderation and red diamonds is one of the few things that are still entertaining on OT.
Now I could just as easily make the case that the RIP Steve Jobs thread is a troll thread on CFC and should be closed. Why is that? Well the Apple computer products are clearly inferior for gaming and particularly for Civ. As I recall one usually had to wait many months for Apple compatible versions of Civ to come out and there just isn’t as much development and selection for gaming on Apple products, at least historically. So it is obvious that on a forum of Civ gaming nerds and tech geeks PCs will be preferred and thus an Apple praise thread would meet the classic definition of trolling which is community specific baiting.
Now if this were the Mod POV I’m sure there would be a whole slew of reasonable sounding justifications and the handful of Uria Heeps singing the praises of this important moderation. The point being that any control of content and “tone” is highly subjective. The response of course is this is our site and we can do what we want and the whole site must be considered and the owner wants this and bla bla bla. Is it important one way or another? I can’t think of anything in the world less important. OT is just one of many vapid forms of entertainment. By squelching disagreeable lines of discussion it just makes it less entertaining for many people and apparently more so for others. Life will go on.
Now I could just as easily make the case that the RIP Steve Jobs thread is a troll thread on CFC and should be closed. Why is that? Well the Apple computer products are clearly inferior for gaming and particularly for Civ. As I recall one usually had to wait many months for Apple compatible versions of Civ to come out and there just isn’t as much development and selection for gaming on Apple products, at least historically. So it is obvious that on a forum of Civ gaming nerds and tech geeks PCs will be preferred and thus an Apple praise thread would meet the classic definition of trolling which is community specific baiting.
Now if this were the Mod POV I’m sure there would be a whole slew of reasonable sounding justifications and the handful of Uria Heeps singing the praises of this important moderation. The point being that any control of content and “tone” is highly subjective. The response of course is this is our site and we can do what we want and the whole site must be considered and the owner wants this and bla bla bla. Is it important one way or another? I can’t think of anything in the world less important. OT is just one of many vapid forms of entertainment. By squelching disagreeable lines of discussion it just makes it less entertaining for many people and apparently more so for others. Life will go on.
Wanted to acknowledge this. Your broad question should be addressed in my comments to MT below.
Not unwarranted at all. I'm fine w/ criticism. I thought what you wrote was a bit rude. That's all. You may disagree, but no need to go back and forth on it now.
Just as an FYI, I'm going to edit your large post to make my reply easier. So, I'm not trying to misrepresent you or anything, just cutting to the chase.
"only one opinion was welcome" is hardly a true statement. The thread itself has a range of reasonable, civil comments in it.
You ability to comment or critique Apple or Jobs wasn't removed at all. It if was particularly harsh (so as to venture into becoming rude) or turned into an OT discussion it was shunted off into a new thread. How is that bad or a problem or how you were prohibited from discussing whatever reasonable thing you wanted?
We do not need nor do I want a rule for "RIP" threads. As stated in my prior post, I'm acting on a premise of basic reasonably mature behavior for adults. So, if it was Osama* (an extreme example...is there anyone comparable alive today?) or Amy Winehouse or if, say, Bush Sr. died next week, if I was on I would probably RD those just because it is in poor taste to make a bunch of sick jokes or rip on people simply because they've died.
But, if in turn, someone started a thread to discuss the legacy of Amy Winehouse or George Bush Sr., etc... so long as it follows normal rules, as has been in the past, it would be fine. If the thread starter made it RD, then those rules would matter, but its the choice of the OP.
I think many of you are over-thinking this. Someone of significance died. By and large, their contributions were beneficial. Have some respect. If you want to argue how good or bad or their company/politics/music career was, fine, start a new thread. Is that so hard?
This and your other comment point out what I see as one of our biggest problems. Rather than respect the spirit of the rules or try to go along out of a sense of community, you're just looking to find and exploit loopholes, to stir up trouble.
Why do do this? Because they know they can get away with it. They know they will get X points that will dissipate over Y days and thus, they can play with the forums like a toy. A lot of posters see the generous and lenient rules and rather than being grateful they see it as a sandbox to play in and treat it like their own little game.
Consider yourself lucky the rules are so generous.
Oh good lord. You're acting like you were just thrown in the brig for crimes you didn't commit. As noted, you can discuss Apple/Jobs all you want in the other threads. Big deal. It wasn't some conspiracy of the mods. It was 1 mod, me, (who could give a rats ass about Apple products), that wanted to prevent what I knew, based on past observation of this forum, would be a totally negative, crappy thread. That's it.
Save the faux outrage.... or continue with the wailing and gnashing of teeth. I've said my peace.
*"Osama" may be the next Godwin rule....
Yeah, but it happened very quickly. In retrospect, and for future considerations, lesson learned.
All the discussions folks seemed to want to have about Macs, Jobs, and what-have-you got directed into other more appropriate threads, I fail to see the problem here.
nonconformist
Miserable
From a thread this week, Shane:
Not a single warning or infraction.
Now as for "benefitial", I doubt the same courtesy will be afforded our British members when Maggie finally croaks.
Not a single warning or infraction.
Now as for "benefitial", I doubt the same courtesy will be afforded our British members when Maggie finally croaks.
nonconformist
Miserable
I will also link this thread:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=124209
A scumbag white nationalist died, and the UK CFC community was united in a resounding "good riddance"
Cue mass warnings:
Cue British poster:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=124209
A scumbag white nationalist died, and the UK CFC community was united in a resounding "good riddance"
Cue mass warnings:
Cue British poster:
I am not in any way outraged but amused. I am simply amused at attempts to control the uncontrollable and indefinable tone of internet discussions. Why anyone would want to be involved in such an endeavor is beyond me.
LucyDuke
staring at the clock
Amy Winehouse died thread.
There were plenty of really tasteless comments in that thread. They led to discussion about tasteless comments about dead celebrities. It was more interesting than an RIP thread.
And I think your first and second-to-last sentences completely contradict each other.
Looked to me more like an impulse to protest than just being an ass for the fun of it.
Lucy (and this goes to some of the things non-com posted and I hope will be my last comment here),
All I can say is that was during a time when I wasn't active on the forum, so I can't comment on why the posts were or were not infracted. I looked through the first 4 pages and saw only 1 reported post (which was dealt with).
So, if posts aren't reported, not much I can do. Nor do I possess a time machine to go and deal with things that I might have handled differently had I been more active at the time.
Do cops catch or even notice all crime? Of course not. While a lot of stuff gets reported to us, tons of stuff that should be does not.
I'm not sure what you mean about the contradicting sentences. And no, I'm not being obtuse.
All I can say is that was during a time when I wasn't active on the forum, so I can't comment on why the posts were or were not infracted. I looked through the first 4 pages and saw only 1 reported post (which was dealt with).
So, if posts aren't reported, not much I can do. Nor do I possess a time machine to go and deal with things that I might have handled differently had I been more active at the time.
Do cops catch or even notice all crime? Of course not. While a lot of stuff gets reported to us, tons of stuff that should be does not.
I'm not sure what you mean about the contradicting sentences. And no, I'm not being obtuse.
Mise
isle of lucy
You pre-empted it in the Jobs thread, but not in the Winehouse thread. Are you telling me that not one single mod noticed that Amy Winehouse had died? Why did no-one lay down some RIP thread rules in the Winehouse thread? I know that you, Shane, weren't there for the Winehouse thread, but it wasn't that long ago, and the difference in mod responses is plain as day.
You guys should just say that you screwed up with the Winehouse thread, or you overreacted with the Jobs thread. Either way, I don't mind, as long as you learn from it. Because if you can't learn from it, how the hell are we supposed to learn from it?
You guys should just say that you screwed up with the Winehouse thread, or you overreacted with the Jobs thread. Either way, I don't mind, as long as you learn from it. Because if you can't learn from it, how the hell are we supposed to learn from it?
Ziggy Stardust
Absolutely Sane
This is probably what happened. And it's no big deal. But since we're here anyway.
Attica! Attica!
Just to note, there was a grand total of one reported post in that thread, and that report resulted in infraction. I'm happy to say we screwed up there, but I honestly don't know whether we did or not, because I've not had any involvement with that thread, and it simply wasn't on staff's radar.
Please help us screw up less in the future by reporting posts you think are bad at the time, rather than complaining about them months later.
We still attempt to work to an American standard (always have, as far as I'm aware; if the standard is going to change, that's up to the admins). As said, an American standard as interpreted by moderators from 8 countries. Most members are from the US as well, which is another reason to centre the standard there.
Things like trolling and inappropriate content necessarily rely on taking into account who our members are and setting the standard accordingly (that's what I mean by 'pandering to our members'). What might generate a negative reaction in this setting might not generate a negative reaction in every setting in the world, and propriety works in a similar way. We aren't banning the word 'damn' because most members aren't of a demographic that would have a problem with that. We do ban breasts because that's not considered suitable for children where most of our users are from. Likewise, we don't infract people for expressing happiness at the death of OBL, because it's still conforming to common decency by the standard of who our members are.
Please help us screw up less in the future by reporting posts you think are bad at the time, rather than complaining about them months later.
We still attempt to work to an American standard (always have, as far as I'm aware; if the standard is going to change, that's up to the admins). As said, an American standard as interpreted by moderators from 8 countries. Most members are from the US as well, which is another reason to centre the standard there.
Things like trolling and inappropriate content necessarily rely on taking into account who our members are and setting the standard accordingly (that's what I mean by 'pandering to our members'). What might generate a negative reaction in this setting might not generate a negative reaction in every setting in the world, and propriety works in a similar way. We aren't banning the word 'damn' because most members aren't of a demographic that would have a problem with that. We do ban breasts because that's not considered suitable for children where most of our users are from. Likewise, we don't infract people for expressing happiness at the death of OBL, because it's still conforming to common decency by the standard of who our members are.
Mise
isle of lucy
A lot of people here won't think you screwed up the Winehouse thread, because a lot of people believe that the Winehouse thread was exactly how a "dead celebrity" thread should have been moderated. You know, with people posting negative opinions as well as positive ones. And people posting the jokes they've heard on twitter and the radio and whatnot. There's no "unreport" button, so don't fall into the trap of thinking that more reporting will resolve this issue by itself. More reporting in the Winehouse thread might very well have made even more people angry and upset, and brought this whole argument forward 2 months.
The Winehouse thread was one way of dealing with dead celebs. Another way is the Jobs thread way. I'm not saying the Jobs way was the best, just that it was inconsistent with the Winehouse way. If you think that the Winehouse thread was inadequately moderated, then that's not our fault; perhaps the lack of reporting means that the users think it was perfectly adequately moderated, and that the Jobs thread was overmoderated. Of course, as I say, there's no "unreport" or "this post is inoffensive" button, so there's no way for us to tell you that.
The Winehouse thread was one way of dealing with dead celebs. Another way is the Jobs thread way. I'm not saying the Jobs way was the best, just that it was inconsistent with the Winehouse way. If you think that the Winehouse thread was inadequately moderated, then that's not our fault; perhaps the lack of reporting means that the users think it was perfectly adequately moderated, and that the Jobs thread was overmoderated. Of course, as I say, there's no "unreport" or "this post is inoffensive" button, so there's no way for us to tell you that.
nonconformist
Miserable
It is *not* our job to report infractable posts, it is a way of helping out, but to say it is our job to is just lazy and disingenuous.
"Common decency"? Why don't you just come out and just say, that some opinions are more worthy than others, instead of this pretence of neutrality and equality?
At least then we know where we stand.
"Common decency"? Why don't you just come out and just say, that some opinions are more worthy than others, instead of this pretence of neutrality and equality?
At least then we know where we stand.
No one's saying that it is your job; implying otherwise reflects a misunderstanding of what has been said.
If you would like to think that, go ahead. Doesn't look like we can stop you.
nonconformist
Miserable
That's beside the point, and you're being completely disingenuous here; you have pretty much said "some opinions are more "right" than others on CFC". When will this be reflected within the rules?
