StarGateWars Forums

Ĕɱƿŷ wrote:The following is a warning which has been issued to you by an administrator or moderator of this site.

This is a warning regarding the following post made by you: viewtopic.php?f=62&p=2172849#p2172849

"Odd, seems Admins stance differs. viewtopic.php?f=68&t=159134"

Section 4: Spam
a. Topics.
Topics will be considered spam if they fit into one of three categories.
i) They appear in the wrong section of the board.
ii) The poster has made more topics than is reasonable for one user within the day. (For a rough guide most users won’t start more than two topics in a single forum within a day however if they are all of interest and relevant to the forum then there is some flexibility to this rule.)
iii) The topic has already been locked by a moderator and the user has reposted the topic.

Consequence:
Topics in the wrong section will generally be moved to the correct section. Users who post too many topics or repost locked topics will be given one warning point.

b. Replies
Replies will be considered spam if they do not contribute to the discussion of the topic. This may include off topic posting or an excessive number of posts that contain nothing more than emoticons or small words such as ‘lol’. While it is appropriate to indicate something is amusing, drowning out a whole thread with such posts makes it hard to follow for all users.

Consequence:
A polite note from a moderator will be issued requesting the user cut down the amount of irrelevant posts. Repeat offenders will be given one warning point.

----------

Being that you were a Mod and Admin you know the rules... if you have a reply to a Moderator making a post as a Moderator then PM them. It's entirely not appropriate to reply in the topic. You have two previous verbal notes for spamming and no Board Warning after so you know the rule. On a side note you were right.

Ombudsmen, above is a warning I received from Empy.
You will be able to see the posts in the dump i presume.

I posted a reply in a GC thread where i respond to Empy but also was wishing Forgotten Serenity and Killtacular fun in their war.

I do believe that on many other occasions that when people post something on topic but also include something slightly off topic it is not warned for as spam. I've seen this a lot.

I do not believe my post should have been treated as spam.

EDIT:

Section 4: Spam
a. Topics.
Topics will be considered spam if they fit into one of three categories.
i) They appear in the wrong section of the board. It was not in the wrong section as I was mainly wishing the warring parties fun in their war.
ii) The poster has made more topics than is reasonable for one user within the day. (For a rough guide most users won’t start more than two topics in a single forum within a day however if they are all of interest and relevant to the forum then there is some flexibility to this rule.)This has nothing to do with the post.
iii) The topic has already been locked by a moderator and the user has reposted the topic.The topic was not locked and I did not repost it.

b. Replies
Replies will be considered spam if they do not contribute to the discussion of the topic. This may include off topic posting or an excessive number of posts that contain nothing more than emoticons or small words such as ‘lol’. While it is appropriate to indicate something is amusing, drowning out a whole thread with such posts makes it hard to follow for all users.The main point of the reply was clearly on topic.

indeed it is common to see banter slightly offtopic in GC, it helps keep the community vibrant.

Clarkey did you recieve a verbal warning first as stated is a consequence before a formal warning is issued?

Consequence:
A polite note from a moderator will be issued requesting the user cut down the amount of irrelevant posts. Repeat offenders will be given one warning point

It says in the warning that he had recieved 2 verbal warnings for spamming.

He had 2 verbal warnings for spam in his User Notes, PLUS he was a Mod/Admin so the excuse that he wasn't aware or anything like that is not useable. In addition sorry I didn't mean to copy the "Topics" part of the rules just the "Reply" part.

It's been my experience that users cannot get off spamming if they add a little clause in the end similar to "p.s. good luck" or "oh ya have fun." Even if you had paragraphs and paragraphs after the off topic portion I would have split it and warned you, the fact is that you wrote it and it was in your reply, doesn't matter what else you said.

You knew what you were doing but assumed you wouldn't get called out or wouldn't get a board warning for it, but you knew that what you were doing wasn't complicit with the way things are done (the rules basically).

I will leave this until the Oms give their opinions and thoughts.

Whilst Clarkey's post was neither off-topic nor silly enough to be considered spam, I also feel like pointing out that GC mods take a dim view of people discussing their moderation/the forum rules in war or vendetta threads. We have an entire section for that sort of discussion, and I see people told off time and time again for cluttering up war threads. A verbal warning would normally suffice, but given Clarkey's verbal warnings and user history I don't think the mods can be blamed for not first issuing one in this instance. I think the warning is valid.

Mordack wrote:Whilst Clarkey's post was neither off-topic nor silly enough to be considered spam

The warning was for apparently breaking the spam rule. You yourself have just said that my post was neither off-topic or silly enough to be considered spam. Therefore from your own words the warning should be invalid.

Mordack wrote:I also feel like pointing out that GC mods take a dim view of people discussing their moderation/the forum rules in war or vendetta threads. We have an entire section for that sort of discussion, and I see people told off time and time again for cluttering up war threads.

Your view on how the Mods handle such threads is irrelevant to this issue at hand. Any opinions on how mods take "dim" views on anything should be discussed with the mods and admins through the appropriate procedure.

Mordack wrote:A verbal warning would normally suffice, but given Clarkey's verbal warnings and user history I don't think the mods can be blamed for not first issuing one in this instance. I think the warning is valid.

You have already said that your opinion is that my post was not considered silly enough to be spam. As the warning was a direct warning for spam then based on your own opinion i should not receive a warning.


Here are some (and only a few) examples where Empy has posted as a Mod in the last month or so and other users have responded directly to him regarding his comments as a Mod. All those posts remain in their place on the forums, not a single one was modded or responded to by a Mod and not a single one given a warning, because if they had the post would not be there.

viewtopic.php?f=21&t=126939&p=2169162#p2169162
This one Empy posted asking people to stop spamming, two posts later there is a response. Please can I point out that the nature of that response is exactly the same as mine. A comment in regards to the mod's comments then an on-topic post to bump the thread.

viewtopic.php?f=21&t=157773&p=2165517#p2165517 (2 posts)
This one Empy posted asking people to stop spamming, two posts later there is a response directly to the Mods comments with absolutely no on-topic discussion. Then a further 5 posts down there is another direct response to the Mod's comments with another on-topic bump post.

viewtopic.php?f=23&t=171424&p=2163142#p2163142
Again, Empy posted asking people to keep on topic. 1 post later there is a direct response to the Mods comments with absolutely no on-topic discussion included.

viewtopic.php?f=68&t=167232&p=2151745#p2151745
Here is another post by Empy making a Mod comment. 1 post later is a direct response to the Mod's comments and absolutely no on-topic discussion included.

viewtopic.php?f=101&t=169341&p=2136466#p2136466
This post here is Empy joining in the discussion first off as a User of the forum. That post is off-topic. He then adds a Moderator text warning people for off-topic discussion including himself. Here is a quote of what Empy has said in this Oms thread:

It's been my experience that users cannot get off spamming if they add a little clause in the end similar to "p.s. good luck" or "oh ya have fun." Even if you had paragraphs and paragraphs after the off topic portion I would have split it and warned you, the fact is that you wrote it and it was in your reply, doesn't matter what else you said.

You knew what you were doing but assumed you wouldn't get called out or wouldn't get a board warning for it, but you knew that what you were doing wasn't complicit with the way things are done (the rules basically).

In your off-topic post where you gave a verbal warning you knew exactly what you were doing when you posted the off-topic spam and that is clearly apparent as you then went on to post as a Mod. If you weren't aware what you were doing you wouldn't have posted as a Mod. You clearly know the rules, that is why you posted as a Mod in the same post but to get yourself off the hook you gave a verbal warning. So your comment about me knowing what I was doing is exactly the same as you have done before.

viewtopic.php?f=124&t=167605&p=2110921#p2110921
In this thread Empy verbally warns two users for their behaviour in the thread. He says and i quote "Stop or be warned". The very next post one of those two users directly responds to Empy's mod comments with absolutely no on-topic discussion.


There was absolutely nothing done by Empy or any other Mods or Admins in regards to those posts which are ALL exactly like my case and some worse as there was no on-topic discussion included.

Those threads are dotted about the place, some are in the GC, some in the Alliance section and some even in the Market of which Empy is GM of.

That is plenty (but not exhaustive) evidence of other occasions where users have directly responded to Empy as a GM and nothing done as a result of it.

Your post was not spammy in the traditional sense, no, as it wasn't a lolcat or a thousand emoticons. Your 'spam' was using that thread as an inappropriate means through which to discuss admin/mod policy in the GC; a topic relevant to neither the thread nor the section. You have picked my post apart and quoted it in such a way to make it appear that I am disagreeing with myself; I am not, and I hope this post clarified where I'm coming from. Quotes can be used to great effect, but are often misunderstood and misinterpreted when not applied in context.

Alas, policing the consistency and overall performance of moderators is beyond the realms of my power. I can only look at individuals cases based on their individual merits. Policing the wider spectrum of a moderator's behaviour is the responsibility of the administration. If you feel you are being singled out, or that the rules are being applied inappropriately, then I'd recommend contacting them via PM or in the appropriate section.

Jack may disagree with my ruling, in which case he and I will discuss the case together. I have said where I stand, and I'll wait until he's posted here before commenting further.

What is Jack's opinion?

And Mordack, I understand that it is not your place to police the consistency etc of mods. But I do feel that when I report the same "crimes" that I have committed and got warned for and Earendil closes and ignores those reports that it shows completely unfairness on the forums.

Does an Ombudsman not get involved in that?

where is this section to complain about mods ????

Clarkey wrote:What is Jack's opinion?

And Mordack, I understand that it is not your place to police the consistency etc of mods. But I do feel that when I report the same "crimes" that I have committed and got warned for and Earendil closes and ignores those reports that it shows completely unfairness on the forums.

Does an Ombudsman not get involved in that?

Well, I guess that depends. If I felt that a specific moderator's behaviour had become an urgent issue, and if a considerable amount of users agreed with me, then I'd feel honor bound to present an official complain to the administration on their behalf. The ombudsman is, after all, here to speak on behalf of the users as well as mediate for them. On the other hand, we have no real substantive on issue of that nature. All we have is our voice, and with it whatever influence or weight that carries. Whilst I prefer not to complicate individual cases with overview type theses, I'm by no means above becoming involved in such issues.

It may be that Jack hasn't seen this thread, or that he's been busy and hasn't had time to post. I'll try to catch him on MSN and mention it to him when I can. Please be patient.

Rican wrote:where is this section to complain about mods ????

If you're complaining about a specific warning, then this is the right section. Please consult the rules at the top for guidelines on how to go about making a query.

The other two sections where discussion of that nature happens are the 'Forum and Mod Feedback' and 'Talk to the Mods Direct' forums. I've linked to them below this paragraph. I hope this helps.

https://talk.gatewa.rs/viewforum.php?f=128

https://talk.gatewa.rs/viewforum.php?f=129

I've been busy, real life has been crazy for me.


My opinion is as it has always been on this issue. Tacking on a line or two of on topic discussion does not make an off-topic post on-topic.

Dr. House wrote:I've been busy, real life has been crazy for me.


My opinion is as it has always been on this issue. Tacking on a line or two of on topic discussion does not make an off-topic post on-topic.

So are you saying a post can contain no off topic at all. Or are you saying that if the off-topic is first in the post and followed by on topic that the post is then off topic?

I think what he's saying, essentially, is that he agrees with me; ergo we've reached a verdict.

If you're still unhappy, then I'd recommend trying either 'Mod Feedback' or 'Talk to the Mods Direct' to air your grievance with the staff themselves. Thank you for using the ombudsman section. Topic locked.