Page 1 of 1
Taking it to the correct section for you Deni.
Posted: Wed Jan 13, 2010 6:30 am
by Norbe
So Duderanch posted a warning in the FUAll vs TAF thread that no-one should be making multi accusations there. Perfect.
Bebita made another post continuing his usual rant about beliblisk and marmott, accusing them of being multis. AGAIN. After the post was made by duderanch.
A few more posts later and ~Solus reitterated Duderanchs' warning.
Now in my post I meerly stated that bebita should be adhereing to the rules like everyone else has to. This was the reply I got from Deni.
deni wrote:I am not going to discuss the modding of the forum in a war thread. I suggest you do the same, if you do not want to see warnings given out. This goes not only for you Norbe, but for everyone. It is about time to realize that we have a dedicated section for modding/forum issues.
Whilst its a fair enough comment, and I have no problem with it per say, it does leave the mind wondering about how strictly the rules are applied. I would just like to ask if the publically posted mod warnings are even taking into consideration when deciding if/when someone should recieve formal warnings/bans. Or rather i'd like an explanation what the actual procedure is? 2 posted warnings by different mods then formal warnings/bans are given out?
EDIT: I see in the ombudsman section that bebita was warned for this, but my question does remain about the procedure for making such warnings. Thanks.
~Norbe~
Re: Taking it to the correct section for you Deni.
Posted: Wed Jan 13, 2010 6:56 am
by J-ronimo
Norbe wrote:EDIT: I see in the ombudsman section that bebita was warned for this, but my question does remain about the procedure for making such warnings. Thanks.
~Norbe~
From my experiances...
Regular forum users need to report.
And if is not dealt with, you need to make line of pm's and show them (mods) why should be sanctioned with warning.
Re: Taking it to the correct section for you Deni.
Posted: Wed Jan 13, 2010 8:41 am
by semper
you cannot be warned for disobeying a mod per say.
So you can ignore the mods and pretty much do and post whatever you please so long as you don't break any of the written rules....
as stipulated in this thread.
viewtopic.php?f=71&t=101808and as proven by the fact Sarajevo was let off his warning as it broke no written forum rules. Even then, it clearly depends who you know. For instance Earindil warned TT for spamming with a smiley, TT found many examples of the same thing that went without warning.
Being on the mod team for a little time and having continued access to the mod forum I can assure you there is absolutely no official procedure. If you break the written rules, and someone who doesn't particularly like you see's it... you get a warning.
You're wasting your time, the admins will 100% back anything Deni or a GM has to say, Deni will bully, attack and twist anything and everything you have to say until they agree. I can assure you of this 100%... they're currently allowing Solus to ignore anything Clarkey has to complain about (because 'he's Clarkey' was the accepted explanation by the administration), they ignored me for the best part of a fortnight and they have let Deni bully MLH in the past without so much as a warning. You are dealing with an admin and forum team absolutely RIFE with double standards and little in the way of actual procedure, but we're all expected (the mods and the community) to know exactly what and how to do things.
So good look with your complaint Norbe, hopefully my vicious tirade will pressure them into giving you an actual response... a luxury some of us had to fight to get.
Re: Taking it to the correct section for you Deni.
Posted: Wed Jan 13, 2010 9:48 am
by Juliette
Tetrismonkey wrote:It's not my place to speak on Solus behalf
End of your part in this story.
Re: Taking it to the correct section for you Deni.
Posted: Thu Jan 14, 2010 2:04 pm
by Empy
Let's start fresh, shall we?Norbe wrote:would just like to ask if the publically posted mod warnings are even taking into consideration when deciding if/when someone should recieve formal warnings/bans. Or rather i'd like an explanation what the actual procedure is? 2 posted warnings by different mods then formal warnings/bans are given out?
Please post off that note, and do not deviate...
~Empy
Re: Taking it to the correct section for you Deni.
Posted: Thu Jan 21, 2010 8:01 am
by Norbe
I still havn't had an official answer from a GM or from the admin team.
~Norbe~
Re: Taking it to the correct section for you Deni.
Posted: Thu Jan 21, 2010 8:03 am
by deni
Norbe wrote:I still havn't had an official answer from a GM or from the admin team.
~Norbe~
I did reply but it seems my reply was split. Here it goes:
deni wrote:Norbe wrote:deni wrote:I am not going to discuss the modding of the forum in a war thread. I suggest you do the same, if you do not want to see warnings given out. This goes not only for you Norbe, but for everyone. It is about time to realize that we have a dedicated section for modding/forum issues.
Whilst its a fair enough comment, and I have no problem with it per say, it does leave the mind wondering about how strictly the rules are applied. I would just like to ask if the publically posted mod warnings are even taking into consideration when deciding if/when someone should recieve formal warnings/bans. Or rather i'd like an explanation what the actual procedure is? 2 posted warnings by different mods then formal warnings/bans are given out?
EDIT: I see in the ombudsman section that bebita was warned for this, but my question does remain about the procedure for making such warnings. Thanks.
~Norbe~
The "procedure" for giving out warnings is described in the forum rules. Different "offenses" are handled differently.
For example: If an user derails topics by spam, they are asked to refrain from spamming. This can be done by pm or by posting in the thread in question. If they continue to spam or make off-topic posts then the mods have several instruments ranging from an official warning to a short time ban.
If an user evades the word filter by masking a word, then an official warning is given out without a prior verbal warning.
To answer your question: yes, verbal warnings, be they by pm or by a post, are taken into consideration when an official warning is given.
J-ronimo wrote:From my experiances...
Regular forum users need to report.
And if is not dealt with, you need to make line of pm's and show them (mods) why should be sanctioned with warning.
I disagree. Reporting a post surely links the attention of the mods to possible offenses. Not every reported post does warrant a warning or any mod action. In fact, this is the case in over 80% of the reported posts.
Tetrismonkey wrote:Now Norbert, there is no written prodecure. It is at the mods desretion to give a verbal before a warning. If you want a more detailed explanation, pm me, I'm at work ATM so I don't have much time to explain it. I'll get back to you asap.
I disagree again. Look up for example Bazsy's sticky about masking or the forum rule about spam.