1. AAB SEASON THREE

    Sign up now!
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Anime Awards for 2017 part 3 commences with genre awards! Please leave a vote or comment in one of the following competition threads!

    1 2 3 4 5 6
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Welcome to the forums! Take a second to look at our Beginner's Guide. It contains the information necessary for you to have an easier experience here.

    Thanks and have fun. -NF staff
    Dismiss Notice
  4. Stop Scrolling!
    Attention - When discussing new chapters of an anime or manga, please use a source from the official list of approved sources. If you would like to contribute to the list, please do so in the suggestions section.
    Dismiss Notice

[Complaint] The Cafe's moderation has gotten worse

Discussion in 'Questions & Complaints' started by EJ, Apr 9, 2018.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. EJ ely wins

    Messages:
    34,270
    Likes Received:
    1,024
    Trophy Points:
    1,669
    Reputation:
    Recent changes within the Cafe have been made it to where flaming, baiting or flame-baiting, in general, has been taken more seriously. This has resulted in a large abundance of post being deleted, users being warned, and even users being banned as of a result of this crackdown. Through a previous engagement, I have had with another user named @TheOnlyOne1, there was an altercation in which I briefly mentioned that I felt like he could have been a dupe on account of other occurrences (I'm not going to go deep into this).

    After two-three post, I continued my argument (that was relevant to the thread at hand) with the user in which @baconbits posted a warning in the thread literally two pages later "to move the argument we were having into a "Challenge thread", despite 1. The argument being on-topic, 2. I had not gone out of my way to insult said user.

    The argument goes from page 1, and ends on page three where you can see the mod's warning



    Yes, I told the mod to throw his weight elsewhere on account of there being no "drama" between the user and myself, even though he was applying that post towards me and him. On account of my post, he decided to thread ban me. When I continued the same discussion with the user in another thread, I was given an actual form-wide ban for "continuing drama into another thread." Albeit, there was drama. But that was through the user himself, in which he even admitted towards me.

    Upon coming back I asked for an explanation upon the matter, in which bacon has refused to give me an actual answer towards why this was justified. This is a clear abuse of power, and if this continues I would argue that it will ultimately deter users from wanting to post within the section. Arguments are going to be heated in which users get aggressive towards one another. The context of a post should always be kept into consideration.

    I would also like to point out that this same mod has engaged in some of the same kind of behavior he has targeted other users for and has even openly stated he would continue to do so because "he didn't consider it baiting." Strange though, he acknowledges that post such as that hypothetically "made me get in my feelings", but will continue his tactics. Because that's consistent with the pattern he wants to set within the section?

    I had no problem with the post being made in that particular thread. I'm not trying to make the argument that baiting such as that needs to get users banned since overall, a user like baconbits (as a poster within the Cafe) contributes to the section. Especially if I were to not even report it myself. I'm not one to report users for petty passive-aggressive bullshit, but I understand

    But it's hypocrisy at it's finest to ban users or go out of your way to warn other users for the same kind of actions you would take. That's what I had taken issue with. As well as my previous unwarranted threadban/forum wide ban. Didn't make sense.

    There's more I want to say on the matter, but I'm willing to wait to see what the moderation team has to say in regards to what I have stated, or if any other users agree/disagree with what I have stated, or have problems of their own with the current state of things.
     
    Last edited: Apr 9, 2018
    Tags:
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • List
  2. Ashi Ka-Ka!

    Messages:
    23,313
    Likes Received:
    1,435
    Trophy Points:
    1,319
    Reputation:
    Catdank Faction:
  3. Benedict Cumberzatch Gold Rays with Neck Ribbon

    Messages:
    19,147
    Likes Received:
    1,913
    Trophy Points:
    1,794
    Flag:
    Denmark
    The issue is - we had a, what?, 40+ page discussion in this Questions & Complaints section after bacon proposed the rules,? and nothing changed. bacon spent the majority of that thread arguing with Seto and Nello, while Reznor kept asking for summaries to act upon. When furnished with them, he removed himself from the conversation, only to come back after x amount of pages had elapsed to ask for more summaries.

    It's clear nothing is going to be done unless we get a change of staff. CB is dwindling in activity. Maybe people can start posting news articles there.
     
  4. Eros 同性愛者

    Messages:
    15,024
    Likes Received:
    1,099
    Trophy Points:
    894
    Reputation:
    Flag:
    France
    Catdank Faction:
    I remember this. By the time, I saw the thread, things had almost spiraled into a flame war. I ended up PMing an administrator to put the kibosh on the situation. There was no reason for the argument to continue like that. Yes, the user in question got banned, but if things had continued, multiple members might have been banned or section banned, which is what happens when people participate in a flame war.
     
    • Dislike Dislike x 4
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • List
  5. Benedict Cumberzatch Gold Rays with Neck Ribbon

    Messages:
    19,147
    Likes Received:
    1,913
    Trophy Points:
    1,794
    Flag:
    Denmark
    You're ruining the section.
     
  6. Gunners .

    Messages:
    43,925
    Likes Received:
    540
    Trophy Points:
    1,244
    Reputation:
    :kobeha

    1) You played a part in derailing a thread. It's worth noting that this was flagged as an issue by members.

    2) You received a warning.

    3) Ypu ignored the warning and received a thread ban.

    4) You ignored the thread ban and continued your argument in a different thread.

    If you're trying to show tyranny, pick a better example. Any mod looking at this will see the rule breaking, see that you were given a warning and see that a ban was used when the other options did not work.
     
    • Dislike Dislike x 2
    • Like Like x 1
    • List
  7. Normality venus

    Messages:
    3,316
    Likes Received:
    281
    Trophy Points:
    288
    Reputation:
    Nothing Gunners loves more than caping for suspect black dudes.
     
  8. Ashi Ka-Ka!

    Messages:
    23,313
    Likes Received:
    1,435
    Trophy Points:
    1,319
    Reputation:
    Catdank Faction:
    Mods don’t have to answer to their booshit it’s a fact of life around here

    Don’t make him show you his law degree
     
    Last edited: Apr 10, 2018
  9. Eros 同性愛者

    Messages:
    15,024
    Likes Received:
    1,099
    Trophy Points:
    894
    Reputation:
    Flag:
    France
    Catdank Faction:
    I guess the gays ruin everything. :blobmod
     
  10. EJ ely wins

    Messages:
    34,270
    Likes Received:
    1,024
    Trophy Points:
    1,669
    Reputation:
    "Almost", if shit had transpired into a flamewar and people were going way over the top then let the moderation team decide what should be done. But on that note, I don't remain optimistic about how they exercise judgment so yeah there's that. You running around being a boy/girl scout trying to "protect other users from flaming" should be called out on, since it's ultimately up to users if they want to partake in that shit.

    Swear, you have an incredibly stupid way of accounting for what has previously happened.

    Even upon the three post in which I questioned if the user could be a dupe, I continued with the actual argument at hand and dropped it for well into the discussion at hand. It's not surprising you would go out of your way to ignore this and cape for bacon's actions.

    I didn't just receive a warning for something that was talked about briefly but I was also told:

    You're welcome to show me at what point within my rhetoric wasn't civil. Have fun with that.



    Again, I stated that there was nothing uncivil about my argument. You're welcome to show where I breached any of the Cafe rules . Anyone that isn't stupidly trying to defend baconbits in spite of whatever reason can see that there was no justification for the thread ban. Of that same note, was there any post that I had made which showed that I was breaching forum rules?

    I continued the same argument I had with another user where I did not:

    1. Flame said user

    2. "Continuing drama/baiting the user from another thread into the convo" (this is what the justification was behind my ban)

    I accounted for previous arguments that were consistent with the actual op at hand. I find it telling how quick you are here to opt for a policing to the highest degree in which users cannot even engage one another on previous arguments they have had, even if there is no fixation of "uncivil drama" attached towards it. If the user had a breakdown and began flaming others, that's upon them. Not the users that continued their discussion.


    On top of all that, there was no justification behind the threadban within itself.

    Find someone more credible to cape for.

    Truthfully, this is what many users had an issue with in regards to baconbit's targeting of flaming/baiting. It was obvious he would overreach on this regard, to where it didn't call for it. Someone such as him cannot exercise good judgment to spot a genuine troll, or what can be constituted as baiting. He did so himself within the Cafe convo, but it's funny to see you go out of your way to ignore this aspect.

    Please, come back in here with the "I told y'all! This is what y'all asked for!" I have seen you making that same terrible argument from a consistent basis.
     
  11. Gunners .

    Messages:
    43,925
    Likes Received:
    540
    Trophy Points:
    1,244
    Reputation:
    I'm going by your description and the information you have provided. As I said, you need to pick a better example of tyranny, an example where you have not broken the rules, ignored the warnings, and shown disregard to the lesser counter measures.

    I don't know what you hope to achieve by presenting this matter to a group who has wanted the cafe on a short leash for some time.
     
  12. EJ ely wins

    Messages:
    34,270
    Likes Received:
    1,024
    Trophy Points:
    1,669
    Reputation:

    He demanded that the debate be moved to a challenge thread despite there being no consistent drama between me and the other user. The idea to apply a warning towards me and TheOnlyOne1 was stupid, on account of myself staying on-topic for most of our conversation. The idea of thread-banning for disagreeing with the belief that there was an 'uncontrollable amount of drama' between TheOnlyOne1 was stupid and that our argument had no other choice but to be moved to a challenge thread was dumb as well, and a clear showcase of one throwing their weight around. On a side note, I would like to see a rule that dictates what users can talk about on account of one being thread-banned and continuing the same conversation with no drama attached towards it initially.

    Anyone reading that thread could see perfectly well that the thread wasn't spinning out of control, and nothing new in terms of users remaining argumentative. The idea behind moving the argument to a "challenge thread to keep things clean" is a clear showing of one who is not using good judgment in the given situation, considering there was still a debate that was largely on topic.

    If there are moderators that feel as though the section needs to be kept on a short leash, I would want to address their concerns or whatever arguments they have had here. Going through shadow and bacon as mouthpieces for them is useless in which it has proven to be counterproductive. This is a forum that has been consistently losing activity, and they are trying to implement strict measures that clash with how the section has been run for a long time which I feel can deter others from wanting to post in it.

    In these recent changes, most users as what I recall did not want a wide crackdown on flaming, or a radicalized shift with how things were run. There was only a call to do something about users who made it to their point to troll within the section. The idea of baiting/flaming was brought up to make a correlation between blatant trolls and other users in which it was clearly brought up by not just myself, but others who argued that there should be a gray line somewhere in which leniency is allowed as it has always been within the Cafe.
     
    Last edited: Apr 10, 2018
  13. Huey Freeman The Gent

    Messages:
    35,997
    Likes Received:
    548
    Trophy Points:
    1,143
    Reputation:
    Promoting a guy to mod who is set in his ways, refuse to admit his wrong doings or just out being wrong, double down on his behavior, throw his weight around and selectively apply the rules against opposition, and supporting discriminatory baiting or posts isn't making this section any better.

    This is because when Mega's around I wasn't this vocal about his modship that's how annoying this is.
     
  14. Gunners .

    Messages:
    43,925
    Likes Received:
    540
    Trophy Points:
    1,244
    Reputation:
    A lot of waffle.

    He asked that you take your argument to the debate thread. In respect of feedback, the request was fair enough. The two of you were derailing the thread.

    That you were mostly on topic is an excuse that the likes of Chie would use. I personally wouldn't give a shit but that section wanted baiting dealt with. To deal with it you can't turn a blind eye to those looking to sneak it between content which is what you did when you continued to question his/her identity.

    The staff have already made their thoughts on the section when they moved the section to the bottom. They made it clear when they went through a period of strictly enforcing the rules but sure, ask their views...

    The users wanted a crackdown. The problem is that many of you thought you could twist logic to escape the new measures in place. You thought arbitrarily labelling members trolls would be enough to continue flaming, flamebaiting and derailing threads at your leisure.
     
  15. EJ ely wins

    Messages:
    34,270
    Likes Received:
    1,024
    Trophy Points:
    1,669
    Reputation:

    Again, another idiotic account for the events that had transpired within that thread. He didn't ask, he demanded that if the one on one debate were to continue, it would be moved to a challenge thread:

    I wonder, why do you continuously gloss over this? You also have gone out of your way to ignore your boy's baiting, on top of things

    That we were mostly on the topic is relevant to this complaint, considering that we had moved on from it and disengaged without drama between the two of us stands to reason that we were able to account for ourselves on our own interactions. I would argue that the moderation team should consider this as opposed to demanding that users take their arguments to 'one vs one' debates and so forth.


    I couldn't care less. I'm going to continuously call out the bullshit as I see fit. If you don't see a point to this thread, see yourself away. From where it stands, you're just a distraction towards the underlining issue here.
     
  16. Mider T VM Rapist

    Messages:
    74,230
    Likes Received:
    1,508
    Trophy Points:
    2,544
    Reputation:
    Going to go ahead and say thanks for them. It's appreciated.
     
  17. Gunners .

    Messages:
    43,925
    Likes Received:
    540
    Trophy Points:
    1,244
    Reputation:
    You're being pedantic and funnily enough strengthening my point. You can't argue that the nature of the request was ambiguous. You knew you were given a set of instructions that you had to follow and you decided to go around them.

    I'm not glossing over it :oh. Thank you for making it even clearer that you decided to ignore instructions in response to you dereailing a thread and flame baiting.

    They did consider this in the past. The result was characters like Chie throwing jabs before settling back into a reasonable conversation and acting all innocent after they stirred up a commotion. It is not something I had a problem with as I thought members should be mature enough to keep their head, but others didn't feel the same way. The result is that members will come under greater scrutiny when provoke a member and go out to bait them into conflict so that the drama can spew elsewhere.

    I would say your post pinpoints the actual issues. The inability to handle criticism and contrasting views. The more these complaints continue is the more it looks as though the overall agenda is creating an environment where a clique can operate with free reign.

    It's not going to happen and you are tarnishing whatever goodwill you started with. At some point, you have to embrace compromise. If you want to goad members in front of your peers, call people lazy pieces of shit, or an ignoramus you have to be prepared to deal with the odd troll. If you don't want to deal with the odd troll, you need to carry yourself in a more civilised manner.
     
  18. EJ ely wins

    Messages:
    34,270
    Likes Received:
    1,024
    Trophy Points:
    1,669
    Reputation:
    I flat-out stated within the OP of this thread that I told baconbits to throw around his weight elsewhere. It's good to know I've been arguing with someone that hasn't read the thread in its entirety but has "argued with the details that I have given." No, your point hasn't been strengthened because I have been consistent within my measure that the need to move the discussion in a challenge thread was unneeded. Anyone that has read that thread from my standing can see that I was not the ultimate cause to the thread being locked down eventually or more bans given.

    Good judgment is something I have called you out towards lacking before along with baconbits so it's no wonder why you fail to see the issue with demanding users to move their arguments to challenge threads when its unwarranted. If you're suddenly for that type of care-bear modding, then just...lol ok.

    Essentially what you're saying is "You disagreed with the views of a moderator, so you deserved to get yourself thread-banned", despite even upon my disagreement I didn't continue on that drama piece. Your caping for this style of moderation is pathetic.

    What was argued against was people making it their extreme purpose and motive within the section to post, for the main purpose to troll within it. The users that were accounted for doing this were a selective few out of the majority, but it's funny watching you trying to generalize the complaints on that end. Again, you cannot account for past events in a genuine manner.

    Listen. I'm going to call you out on your bullshit narrative if you claim to have read through my post but you begin 'pointing out' key arguments I have already addressed within my OP. That has nothing to do with any "inability to handle criticism."

    What "clique?" How do you get anything out of what I have stated as "You're just trying to form a clique with free reign?" These arguments have been of the basis that if trolling is to be allowed within the forum, then there needs to be a level in which users are able to flame. The justification given towards this was the Cafe in general, in the wide range of topics it can cover and users becoming passionate or emotionally invested in a specific topic.

    Part of the justification for this thread is a moderator baiting himself in which he has been targeting other users for the same shit. You have a failure to account for past events or consider what is specifically being argued. Like I stated, if anything, you're more of a distraction at this point. If you find this thread pointless, don't post within it.

    This has a lot more to do with you wanting to prove some unwaivering loyalty towards baconbits.
     
    Last edited: Apr 10, 2018
  19. Gunners .

    Messages:
    43,925
    Likes Received:
    540
    Trophy Points:
    1,244
    Reputation:
    Am I arguing with someone who is not reading my posts or someone who is determined to recycle Seto's failed arguements?

    My point is strengthened by the clarity you brought to my words. There was not a misunderstanding over the nature of the instructions you were given. You knew that they were orders, yet you decided to ignore them and got banned.

    I don't know what you hoped to achieve by drawing a pedantic distiction between "ask" and "demand". In the context of him stepping in the middle of a quarrel and letting you know what was acceptable, they hold the same meaning.

    I'm not for the care bear modding. It's not what I argued for. I was prepared to deal with the odd troll and suffer through this section being at the bottom to avoid this situation.

    It wasn't what other members wanted. You wanted new measures to deal with the trolls and ypu wanted the section to move up where it would be more tightly regulated.

    That you couldn't appreciate the consequences is on you.

    No, what I'm saying is that you broke the rules and got slapped when you didn't respond to fair warning. You baited the member and tried goading him into conflict in another thread after getting warned and thread banned.

    Effectively you were arguing to turn the section into your playground. As I said before, that was never going to happen.

    The moderators are not going to go by your arbitary definition of what a troll is and for good reason. In the midst of these conversatins Aiyanah was labelled a troll for what? Going against the clique's sensibilities.

    No. It was always going to be the case that the new rules what target behaviour as opposed to one's subjective view on what makes a troll.

    Again, it is on you that flame baiting and flaming are actions you have in common with the trolls who were such a bother to you.
    Beforehand more leeway existed to flame :oh. This isn't debatable. The fact that you're complaining about the cafe getting worse after your punishment is proof of this.

    It is not my fault that you couldn't appreciate what you could have previously gotten away with. It's not my fault that you fault you and your clique would be an exception to the measures pyt in place to deal with trolls.

    You had a chance to consider the above. I made it clear that this would happen but your approach was the same as it is, decrying me as someone caping for baconbits.

    Point out the examples of him baiting. I'm sure we can work towards removing playful ribbing if enough people want it.
     
  20. White Wolf Super Moderator

    Messages:
    28,863
    Likes Received:
    5,406
    Trophy Points:
    2,719
    This topic's already been done and changes were made that people seemingly wanted, the fact that this new complaint comes so soon after a ban of your own is a bit... interesting to say the least. Fact of the matter ignoring a warning will end up with some kind of action taken.

    If you want to file a complaint about baconbits / mr.shadow and their modding styles specifically, make a thread in the and it'll be discussed. Bring forth instances where he/they crossed the line and/or what would be an ideal change for the section as a whole that people will support.

    If you want to make a suggestion towards new rules not long after the last changes were already made the cafe has you covered with the .


    As far as baconbits ''joking'' in the cafe convo and people having a problem with it, that's understandable if it was new but since it's something that's been happening for a long enough time where most would see it as an inside joke that someone suddenly has a problem with it's a hard thing to complain about in any drastic measure like this, that said he's already agreed to leave the people alone who are more specific about jokes.

    Other than that this topic has no real end point to keep it around so will be locking it. Would advise using the S.C.R or the Suggestion Box depending on the nature of any additional complaints you may have.

    Hopefully that helps.
     
    • Dislike Dislike x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • List
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...