Reasons for decisions

[texta]

Dear moderators, when you edit or lock a thread or a post (including changing poll options) could you please make an actual post in that thread stating in plain English the reason for the change?

Thanks very much.

[TAT]

Seconded

[Stevorooni]

I can remember this coming up multiple times in the past.

[TAT]

Yes, well, every potential shitstorm arising from an unexplained moderator's decision could be avoided if this were implemented.

[Stevorooni]

Even when the reason is obvious it should still be stated and will stop people from drawing their own conclusions.

Well that will probably still happen, but at least you can point at the given reason when people accuse you of hatred and favoritism.

[aubergine]

Initiate Wah in Ten, Nine,

[TimmyJ]

There goes the jellybean thread :(

[Jay]

And I was sooo hoping to begin discussing other types of sugar based confectionary treats in there too.

Seriously, some of the shit that masquerades as drama to some people in here is retarded. Heaven forbid something actually dramatic and important happens in your lives.

[AranchineD]

Way to complain about people on an internet forum when people in Chile are undergoing indescribable hardship, Jay.

[Tonez]

Pretty sure you could describe their hardship Aran.

[AranchineD]

The description of their hardship is that their hardship is indescribable

SHOVE THAT UP YOUR STOCKING

[Tonez]

But I'm wearing socks.

[AranchineD]

Socks?!

What kind of transexual are you!

[Tonez]

The kind that can't get away with it at work :(

[Sweating Bullets]

It really does depend on the thread Texta. If there is stuff that is not ok to be shown on the forums we will move it. But threads that are retained - we will post the reason why it is being locked.

[Slippery]

The kind that can't get away with it at work :(

Bring back pep for this, thanks.

[texta]

It really does depend on the thread Texta. If there is stuff that is not ok to be shown on the forums we will move it. But threads that are retained - we will post the reason why it is being locked.
I hope this becomes the case. But that's only half the issue because where individual posts are edited or deleted there should also be an explanation.

[Watchers]

Personally, I generally leave text in the edited/deleted comment indicating why it was deleted. If a member's behaviour is unacceptable, PMs/infractions are sent before instabans (unless it's something clearly in breach of guidelines, like porn). As SB said, if something is locked, an explanatory post will be made at the end. Effort should be made to explain when threads go missing/deleted entirely, though, and maybe we've been a bit lacking with this. Currently with regard to the issue at hand, we are waiting on Darren/Daniel to make an official statement regarding racism on the forum ('cleverly satirical' or otherwise).

[aubergine]

It's possible that it's none of your damn business why a user gets disciplined by the mods. The user himself should be told, and if the user regards you highly then I'm sure they can tell you. If they don't have contact details beyond this site, then you probably don't rate, and your interest in their privat affairs just brands you as a busybody and an authority pervert.

[BB2K]

Oh man, it's the white devils bringing us down!

[Vindik8or]

That's right, stick it between some inverted commas, instant denigration without the hard work of having to justify it!

[Watchers]

Shoosh, Vin.

[TAT]

It's possible that it's none of your damn business why a user gets disciplined by the mods. The user himself should be told, and if the user regards you highly then I'm sure they can tell you. If they don't have contact details beyond this site, then you probably don't rate, and your interest in their privat affairs just brands you as a busybody and an authority pervert.
Yeah, because that attitude worked for you last time

[aubergine]

Worked great. I don't remember you being around though.

[JimmyKane]

privat

[Dunkurtin]

It's possible that it's none of your damn business why a user gets disciplined by the mods. The user himself should be told, and if the user regards you highly then I'm sure they can tell you. If they don't have contact details beyond this site, then you probably don't rate, and your interest in their privat affairs just brands you as a busybody and an authority pervert.

Changes made to the public sections of the forum are anyones business depending on them deciding if they care or not. Further disciplining of a user is their business and they can choose to keep it private but that's not really an issue as that is done in private anyway. If shit gets removed without an explanation whats to stop someone posting pretty much the same thing because they didn't realise that was the issue?

Take your hard on for the mods and dislike for open discussion and criticism elsewhere.

[texta]

It's possible that it's none of your damn business why a user gets disciplined by the mods. The user himself should be told, and if the user regards you highly then I'm sure they can tell you. If they don't have contact details beyond this site, then you probably don't rate, and your interest in their privat affairs just brands you as a busybody and an authority pervert.I don't care about decisions relating to users, that's why I haven't brought them up in any of the posts in this thread.

The issue is leaving reasons for locking threads or editing or deleting individual posts.

I'm glad the mods have agreed to my request as there have been a few instances recently where that hasn't occurred and I think this matter (pending evidence of this change actually taking place) is now resolved.

[Gilder]

It's possible that it's none of your damn business why a user gets disciplined by the mods. The user himself should be told, and if the user regards you highly then I'm sure they can tell you. If they don't have contact details beyond this site, then you probably don't rate, and your interest in their privat affairs just brands you as a busybody and an authority pervert.

One of the reasons for disciplinary action is to stop the action from being repeated. It lets the user and other members know what behaviour is unnaceptable. While there are a few instances where privacy is an issue and the particulars should not be made public, these are in the minority and the only reason not to make a disclosure is bad modding.

Back in the days, mods used to put their edits in red font, usually at the bottom of the offending post (I can't remember if we had editing comments back then). If a mod has time to delete/modify a post it wouldn't take too much effort to give a one liner as to why.

[TAT]

Worked great. I don't remember you being around though.
Hung out to dry. I remember.

[Spudzilla]

This message has been deleted by FrozenSoul80. Reason: Don't post that again

Though keeping with a wrestling theme, you could just use poor old Eric Bischoff.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v346/SpeedFighter/Stuff/ericfacepalm.jpg

[Vindik8or]

He's serious. Word from head office: vomiting dogs are right out this Winter.

[FrozenSoul80]

He's serious. Word from head office: vomiting dogs are right out this Winter.

They were having sex. Please, don't post sexual images of any kind.

[Spudzilla]

But come on, it was pretty funny.

You can PM me if you laughed at it.

[FrozenSoul80]

I'll admit it was a good nostalgia trip, but next time can you post something from the old days I don't have to delete? >_>

[Vindik8or]

They were having sex. Please, don't post sexual images of any kind.

Yeah, we wouldn't want to allow G rated content on the forums!

Kinda curious how all mods eventually flip out and become dissociative. It's becoming really sad and pathetic to watch, though.

[FrozenSoul80]

Yeah, we wouldn't want to allow G rated content on the forums!

Kinda curious how all mods eventually flip out and become dissociative. It's becoming really sad and pathetic to watch, though.

Back in the Manny M days people got 2 week bans for that picture, this isn't new.

[Watchers]

Shoosh, Vin.

[AranchineD]

maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaanny


m

[Spudzilla]

I'll admit it was a good nostalgia trip, but next time can you post something from the old days I don't have to delete? >_>

tbh, I was just seeing if it would be deleted again. Well played.

[Gilder]

Back in the Manny M days people got 2 week bans for that picture, this isn't new.

If I recall correctly that was for spamming the picture, not for its content. Lazlow would know.

[FrozenSoul80]

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d56/FrozenSoul80/radical.jpg

[Dunkurtin]

If I recall correctly that was for spamming the picture, not for its content. Lazlow would know.

Pretty sure it was spamming it after having it deleted the first time.

[Spudzilla]

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d56/FrozenSoul80/radical.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v346/SpeedFighter/Stuff/MustardMan.jpg

[AranchineD]

Poor Hurley, he never gets a break :(

[Spudzilla]

I need ear plugs to look at that shirt

[AranchineD]

http://img97.imageshack.us/img97/4811/watuj.jpg

[Sweating Bullets]

This thread is being locked as it has turned into a spamfest as well as serving its purpose.

We will post why the thread is being locked - this thread was a bad example of this.

[Sweating Bullets]

Due to popular demand - thread re-opened.

[Vindik8or]

Reason for the bizarre deletion of pictures the art thread?

[Jay]

Reason for the bizarre deletion of pictures the art thread?

pictures 'in' the art thread I think you'll find, Vin. ;)

[Vindik8or]

Most likely. I'll leave that one as a mark of my own failings.

[Lazlow]

Actually I have a question; does the forum come under much heavier scrutiny than the magazine?

Understandably since we've had people complain to both Next head honchos and Internet Federales, there's a stricter code of conduct. But when we're told that the actions of the forum reflect upon the magazine, it seems odd that the magazine maintains a more mature tone than the boards do. We're told that that board must maintain a PG13 friendly environment for people of all ages; is that not how the magazine is operated as well?

For instance Manny's deleted post in the Heavy Rain thread. He posted a link to a Kotaku article detailing how a glitch in Heavy Rain gives you a nude female character model, complete with pastied screenshot and a video that requires age verification. Hyper has had articles about sex in games in the past, complete with their own pastied screenshots. So it seems misleading that content allowable in the parent publication is not allowed in the related forum.

I'm aware I raised the issue of that post - saying it was as pornographic as Readman's thread was racist - merely to highlight the perceived overreaction to Readman's thread. I'm sure people are well aware that racial slurs and blatantly prejudiced conduct is not acceptable, but no one could foresee the reaction to an obviously satirical tongue-in-cheek jab. Does this mean Manny is now benched for 48hrs for his offence? Hope not, because that would be an equal overreaction.

I'm just trying to gain some understanding behind the rationale of the recent regulatory crackdown; especially when it flies in the face of the magazine's own conduct at times. More so when you decide to start censoring the art world.

Is it essentially a case of one more slip up and the whole thing is gone; therefore heavy handed hammering of regulations are required?

[AranchineD]

Man, this (http://www.pcpowerplay.com.au/forums/showthread.php?t=122703) PCPP thead is pretty sweet.

[jawsy]

I don't think I've ever really gone down the mod bashing route before, but as a team they seem to be doing a pretty crummy job at the moment.

[Lazlow]

As an addition to my previous post; could it simply be about zero tolerance and eliminating grey areas?

[texta]

Actually I have a question; does the forum come under much heavier scrutiny than the magazine?

Understandably since we've had people complain to both Next head honchos and Internet Federales, there's a stricter code of conduct. But when we're told that the actions of the forum reflect upon the magazine, it seems odd that the magazine maintains a more mature tone than the boards do. We're told that that board must maintain a PG13 friendly environment for people of all ages; is that not how the magazine is operated as well?

For instance Manny's deleted post in the Heavy Rain thread. He posted a link to a Kotaku article detailing how a glitch in Heavy Rain gives you a nude female character model, complete with pastied screenshot and a video that requires age verification. Hyper has had articles about sex in games in the past, complete with their own pastied screenshots. So it seems misleading that content allowable in the parent publication is not allowed in the related forum.

I'm aware I raised the issue of that post - saying it was as pornographic as Readman's thread was racist - merely to highlight the perceived overreaction to Readman's thread. I'm sure people are well aware that racial slurs and blatantly prejudiced conduct is not acceptable, but no one could foresee the reaction to an obviously satirical tongue-in-cheek jab. Does this mean Manny is now benched for 48hrs for his offence? Hope not, because that would be an equal overreaction.

I'm just trying to gain some understanding behind the rationale of the recent regulatory crackdown; especially when it flies in the face of the magazine's own conduct at times. More so when you decide to start censoring the art world.

Is it essentially a case of one more slip up and the whole thing is gone; therefore heavy handed hammering of regulations are required?

Going on from this, the thing I find really interesting is the way the magazine is happy to stand up for an R18+ rating and oppose the Internet filter, but at the same time there's PG rated images getting deleted. What a mixed message being sent here.

[Vindik8or]

As an addition to my previous post; could it simply be about zero tolerance and eliminating grey areas?

And yet the 0.5 tolerance thread remains, and even when you don't contravene it, they take exception.

[Watchers]

I agree with you, Laz, and I'm interested in finding this out as well. I'll take your post to the mod forum and try and get some sort of response out of Daniel/Darren on this issue.

I think context has a lot to do with it, and personally I'd like to be able to deal with things on a case by case basis. The problem with that is people seem to want the same decision applied across the board, regardless of context. I guess ideally some sort of happy medium between consistency and tolerance depending on context should be met.

[Vindik8or]

Well I'm sitting on a whole bunch of stuff that I'd like to post in the Art thread, but I've got no idea if they will be deleted or not, or if I'll cop a ban on one of your f***en case-by-case whims or not.

I seriously cannot tell what it is that is "borderline" in SB's words that those three images were taken down for, and why others in the thread were left alone. They're as divergent as three Giger paintings can be (which is why I chose them, they all show something appreciably different in his work), and as Texta pointed out there was nothing beyond a PG rating about them (if that is still your new gold standard).

You idiots, with your sudden and unassailable overreactions which you refuse to be reasoned with over are killing the creation of good, interesting threads on this forum. I mean the deleting of the innovations in gaming thread, you're so paranoid about conflict of any kind I'm at a loss for words to describe the state of things. Nothing is going to happen in this place with everyone just agreeing and stepping down from their positions for fear of the mods having a hissy fit.

[Mr.Mew]

Going on from this, the thing I find really interesting is the way the magazine is happy to stand up for an R18+ rating and oppose the Internet filter, but at the same time there's PG rated images getting deleted. What a mixed message being sent here.

You're always free to appeal for an R18 rating to slap images of Xtreme gore and porn on a community forum.

[Ryan Hayward]

Guys, I think I may be ODing....

[aubergine]

Ooding?
(http://tardis.wikia.com/wiki/File:26.jpg)

[Vindik8or]

MODS!

Stop cloistering the f*** out in your lockdown and SOMEONE give me an answer as to why pictures were deleted from the art thread. How hard can it be for you to explain it all?

SHIT!

[AranchineD]

So, only 4 days to really crack, Watchers is going to totally clean up the bet pool this time.

[Lazlow]

So it seems misleading that content allowable in the parent publication is not allowed in the related forum.

To cite a more recent example, an excerpt from the latest issue (taken from the 'Games of 2010' article written by Dan Staines);


Brink
A philisophical meditation on the Japanese art of opening and closing one's eyes? Fortunately not. Brink is a first-person shooter being developed...

Now correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that opening line a "gag" based upon a racist stereotype?

http://www.hyper.com.au/forums/image.php?u=245&dateline=1248179242&type=profile

?

[Jay]

It's okay, though, because he knows lots of Japanese people.

Personally I find it tasteless, in the same way that I find the use of the gay as a substitute for lame/crap offensive, and that is ****ing rampant on these boards.

[AranchineD]

Says the man who once made a joke about the Jewish people who died in the Holocaust!

[Jay]

Really? Did I? Must have been a good joke... :p

[JimmyKane]

Jay you're so gay sometimes :p

[AranchineD]

Well, I now realise that banning Readman is having other consequences, look at this series of posts in the neg thread on PCPP

Perma-banned from Hyper so I guess I'll hang out here now.

Lol Hyper. I read one of their mags once. They were basically spazzing out over Halo 1.

What'd you do? I thought it was impossible to get banned from there.

People get banned all the time.

Hyper recently had a thread where people were arguing that Aboriginal culture was primitive, so I made a satirical thread about how white people were evil and got banned for racism.

Basically, Hyper thinks that real racism against non-whites is OK, but satirical racism against whites is a bannable offence.

That's fluffing sick. You were probably banned for the satire and purposely offending the people on the forum (who I assume were whites), but really... that's just wrong. fluff you Hyper, that's why I read PC Gamer.

Oh, I mean PC Power Play. *cough*

Don't give shit to a businesses customer base, a forum is not a place of total freedom of expression - this much is certain.

I agree.

I just wish they'd be honest and come out and say 'racism against non-whites is OK, but racism against whites is bannable', which is what they're enforcing.


Now while being kept on the outside, Readman is actively working to degrade the reputation of both the Hyper forums and Hyper magazine, and he is succeeding, I wonder what Readman holds in store for us next, I'm sure it will be exciting.

[JimmyKane]

He will start his own forum: "No Hypers"

Mods at Hyper will proceed to call it "Narcotic Hermaphrodites", "N***er Harlots" and other such things.

[Watchers]

Shut up, Juvenile Krapface.

[Vindik8or]

Okay, W... uhh, Wa... nup. I've got nothing :(

[AranchineD]

The Wanking Eunuch

[Watchers]

Anal Devourer.

[JimmyKane]

Wizzle

[Watchers]

....woozle wuzzle?

[9warbane]

More Readman goodness.

Readman
What's it like not to be naturally witty and intelligent?
Am interested in finding out. Do you all look up to people like me who are smart and always have a funny quip or interesting story at the ready? Or are you just jealous of us?

PCPP Person
Demonstrate.

Readman
What, like your mum last night?

Someone sounds bitter.

[texta]

But threads that are retained - we will post the reason why it is being locked.

Well that lasted a long time.
http://www.hyper.com.au/forums/showthread.php?t=20550

[Sweating Bullets]

Well that lasted a long time.
http://www.hyper.com.au/forums/showthread.php?t=20550

http://i116.photobucket.com/albums/o7/BlasphemousMartyr/clap.gif

[Second]

http://i116.photobucket.com/albums/o7/BlasphemousMartyr/clap.gif

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e388/Rudaroo/0406_f28b.gif

[Watchers]

Well that lasted a long time.
http://www.hyper.com.au/forums/showthread.php?t=20550

You seriously can't work out why that thread was locked on your own? Really? Or are you just looking for something to complain about for the sake of having something to complain about?

I could have said "Locked because it's a pointless, shit thread", but no-one looking at that thread will wonder why it was locked. Even Second probably knew it would get locked.

[texta]

You seriously can't work out why that thread was locked on your own? Really? Or are you just looking for something to complain about for the sake of having something to complain about?

I could have said "Locked because it's a pointless, shit thread", but no-one looking at that thread will wonder why it was locked. Even Second probably knew it would get locked.That misses the point entirely.

It doesn't matter how obvious it is, just do it all the time. That's what was agreed to and I don't understand why it's so hard.

[Watchers]

No, it doesn't. Why bother posting a reason when everyone is already aware of said reason? Find something else to do with your time, Texta.

[Second]

No, it doesn't. Why bother posting a reason when everyone is already aware of said reason? Find something else to do with your time, Texta.

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e388/Rudaroo/Z%20-%20Misc/arrrrrrrrrrrggggggggg.gif

[texta]

No, it doesn't. Why bother posting a reason when everyone is already aware of said reason? Find something else to do with your time, Texta.Sigh. Way to reinforce the us against them mod mentality.

It obviously takes the exact same amount of time to lock a thread with a comment that isn't a reason for it being locked as it does to lock a thread with a comment that is the reason why the thread was locked, so even though you think it's obvious, why not just make an undertaking to give a reason in all cases?

I really think it's easier for mods and users if there's as little ambiguity as possible. That thread might be obvious in why it was locked, but you're creating an unnecessary subjective line and as well as making the decision of whether a thread should be locked you now have to also decide whether the reason is so obvious an explanation isn't needed. Why not pre-empt the forum drama when the "obviousness" is slightly less than it is now and just always give a reason.

It doesn't make your job any harder and it improves the relationship with regular members. Why wouldn't you do it?

[Watchers]

Sigh. Way to reinforce the us against them mod mentality.

lol wut

I'd rather make a quick, vaguely witty/humourous/fun/relaxed comment in the context of that thread than be boring and straight-laced about it. Everyone knew the reason it was locked. If anything, I should have just removed it (actually, I might go do that). I sincerely doubt the relationship with any users was damaged as a result (right Second? RIGHT?!), and no-one cares but you. In the case of a thread where there is some ambiguity/continued traffic/point/controversy, I would post a reason before locking. In this case, it simply doesn't matter.

Now, feel free to continue the argument with yourself, and I'll be over here with my fingers in my ears screaming "LALALALALALA" over and over.

[texta]

lol wut

I'd rather make a quick, vaguely witty/humourous/fun/relaxed comment in the context of that thread than be boring and straight-laced about it. Everyone knew the reason it was locked. If anything, I should have just removed it (actually, I might go do that). I sincerely doubt the relationship with any users was damaged as a result (right Second? RIGHT?!), and no-one cares but you. In the case of a thread where there is some ambiguity/continued traffic/point/controversy, I would post a reason before locking. In this case, it simply doesn't matter.

Now, feel free to continue the argument with yourself, and I'll be over here with my fingers in my ears screaming "LALALALALALA" over and over.I'm not talking about the lock. I'm talking about your responses to my posting.

I don't think my request that moderators leave reasons for decisions is unreasonable and I've been able to avoid personal attacks and expressed my opinion in a way that complies with the forum rules so I don't know what you're trying to achieve here.

I don't think it's the job of moderators to attempt try to be funny or to put their fingers in their ears instead of listening to the concerns of users and to speak candidly I think that perhaps things would run a lot smoother if neither of those things occurred.

[JimmyKane]

Time for a new location, ala Aran.

[Stevorooni]

I've been able to avoid personal attacks and expressed my opinion in a way that complies with the forum rules so I don't know what you're trying to achieve here.


Well you did have that line in your other post accusing him of being butthurt over something but you edited it out, but you mostly avoided personal attacks so well done!

I agree that the reason should also be given even when completely obvious, but don't see the point in getting upset if it's not when it's blinding stinking obvious. Lighten up a little.

Also smart arse locking messages should include Horatio Caine pictures.

[Slippery]

I've been able to avoid personal attacks


Well you did have that line in your other post accusing him of being butthurt over something but you edited it out,

Oh snap?

[texta]

That simply isn't true. While I may have used the word "Butthurt" in a previous post, it definitely wasn't as part of an accusation against another user. But regardless, I removed it because I didn't think it was helpful to the discussion.

[AranchineD]

Time for a new location, ala Aran.

Try putting an image in your location. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised.

[Stevorooni]

That simply isn't true. While I may have used the word "Butthurt" in a previous post, it definitely wasn't as part of an accusation against another user. But regardless, I removed it because I didn't think it was helpful to the discussion.

You said he was butthurt.

You can edit your posts but you can't edit my brain.

[Second]

You said he was butthurt.

You can edit your posts but you can't edit my brain.

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e388/Rudaroo/329f3bf8.jpg

[AranchineD]

*Fenrir hacks Stevo's brain*

[Stevorooni]

*Fenrir hacks Stevo's brain*

There's nothing of interest in there, just random Doctor Who facts and a continuous loop of level 1-1 in Super Mario Bros

[AranchineD]

Javer:

to frozensoul80: just quit while you're behind buddy. the best thing you can do for both the forum and for your own sanity at this point is just to hang up the green name and stop trying to expect people to be reasonable about a completely unreasonable administration.