Hard Light Productions Forums
Site Management => Site Support / Feedback => Topic started by: Akalabeth Angel on March 25, 2011, 05:49:19 pm
-
Is it just me, or does any one else find it odd that people are moderating their own discussions on this forum? If a person doesn't like the way a discussion is going, they split it off and lock it?
I would assume this forum has multiple moderators to avoid exactly that. People here are all human and they're not necessarily objective when involved in their own discussions, that's why it's important to have an independent 3rd party observer to moderate for those who are either unable or unwilling to moderate themselves.
-
Shouldn't this be in Site Support? :nervous:
Otherwise I 100% agree.
-
We should totally start a Rate Your Moderator site.
-
Well, personally, I try not to use my moderator powers in a thread I have been actively participating in, especially not if there was some heated discussin going on that I was part of. Other moderators have different ethics there.
-
Well, personally, I try not to use my moderator powers in a thread I have been actively participating in, especially not if there was some heated discussin going on that I was part of. Other moderators have different ethics there.
A subsequent question to what you have above then is Why are there no guidelines into what is acceptable and what is not? Obviously all of the moderators are long time, dedicated and active members of the community and so they have demonstrated a desire to add to the community. However, cliche as it is there is also the saying that with power comes responsibility. There should be a set of rules, internal or transparent that dictate the proper ways to conduct oneself.
If people who post on a forum are subject to rules, why not those who moderate as well? They should have more rules to adhere to if nothing else.
Personal experiences excluded, it's a little disheartening to see other people try to become actively involved in a discussion only to have someone else tell them their opinion isn't wanted there. If this is a discussion forum, discussion should be free and open as long as those people involved stick to the topic at hand.
This belittling that goes on, backed up by threats of moderator privileges is not fostering any sense of community.
-
I think it should be general policy that moderators involved in a discussion should report potential problems to other moderators before action should be taken.
It's a little frustrating and intimidating to be debating with a moderator knowing they can splitlock your posts just because they disagree with you.
-
I think it should be general policy that moderators involved in a discussion should report potential problems to other moderators before action should be taken.
It's a little frustrating and intimidating to be debating with a moderator knowing they can splitlock your posts just because they disagree with you.
This. The last part especially.
-
Could it be maybe set in the forums that no moderator can lock a topic who has already posted in it? I am not sure if this is possible with the engine.
-
I pretty much agree with this sentiment, and I've felt uncomfortable over what's happened in the thread in question as a result. I don't think Battuta's actions have been in the right here...he obviously has a lot of personal investment in this thread, and there's clearly a conflict-of-interest going on over what does or doesn't constitute inappropriate posting in it. I mean, it's one thing to splitlock some of Marcov's "hurrdurr i didn't read the thread" nonsense, but Akalabeth was simply stating his reaction to the post. I may not agree with his assessment myself, but I certainly recognize it as a valid opinion, and I don't think there was any call for it to be split out like that.
Edit: Lucika, with some threads, that would mean that none of the mods would be able to lock it. That seems like a Bad Thing to me. :p If we're going to be getting into guidelines, I think instead that mods should be strongly discouraged from moderating threads that they themselves create, except in obvious cases like spambots.
-
with some threads, that would mean that none of the mods would be able to lock it. That seems like a Bad Thing to me. :p
Epic threadnaught generator.
-
Well, to be honest, I was the one who did the first split for this very reason, my argument wasn't really with the direction the thread had taken as the manner in which it had taken it.
Thing is, I wouldn't be surprised if the interviewee would pop by and browse the thread, and the interviewer was conscious of that. I'm not really in a position to know enough about the reasons behind the actions to make a judgement.
From my perspective, the moderation has been tough, but the thread is more than the usual conjecture stuff, it's a pretty relevant piece of journalism with regards to this sites' main focus. Possibly on this occasion there was reason for stricter moderation. As to the manner of that Moderation, well, that's something that would have to be taken up on a one-one basis.
-
My issue is not limited to the thread splitting itself.
That thread quite frankly is rife with people telling people what to talk about. As early as the second page someone is telling another person their input is neither welcome nor relevant. The same thing happened with at least four different users, not counting myself. There's a difference between keeping a discussion on topic and telling people they're outright wrong for disagreeing and then in subsequent cases splitting similar posts off into other threads.
I sincerely hope the guy who got interviewed never actually comes around to read that thread. I suspect he may not walk away with a favourable impression.
-
From my perspective, the moderation has been tough, but the thread is more than the usual conjecture stuff, it's a pretty relevant piece of journalism with regards to this sites' main focus. Possibly on this occasion there was reason for stricter moderation. As to the manner of that Moderation, well, that's something that would have to be taken up on a one-one basis.
Or possibly the fact that the person who started the thread and did the journalism is therefore personally invested in it should be a warning sign regarding the way it's been moderated and their treatment of others in the subsequent discussion.
-
Thing is, I've not been privy to what happened in that thread from the point of splitting it because I got caught up in other stuff. I don't have a problem with a News item being moderated more strongly, even by the News poster, maybe it should have appeared in Announcements from the start, but the concept of moderating the thread more strictly to prevent problems was a sound one. If there were problems beyond that split, then there are ways to raise those concerns, the report button, or PMing the person involved, or even an Admin etc.
My main point was that the original split was by me, because I had already warned people that if they did not calm down I would do so.
-
The moderation problem really wasn't locksplitting people being stupid, but from my end, it seemed that the people whose FS experience wasn't revolutionized by the interview or people who didn't understand it were subsequently told they were ignorant, incapable of reading, and/or stupid.
Like I said before, we can debate our points of view on the interview without resorting to name-calling.
-
Exactly. Most of the information in the interview from my interpretation was pretty speculative and placating quite frankly. Certain members took from the speculation a very rigid and generous interpretation of what was actually being said and enforced their interpretation in the subsequent discussion to the derision of all others.
And if this is about journalism it should be about reporting. An unbiased report would present the interview with the very minimum of introduction and then discuss their interpretation of that interview thereafter. That's what journalism is, presenting facts so that the audience can both read and discuss. Journalism is not enforcing your interpretation through moderation or derision.
If the interviewed individual ever actually visited the forums and saw the results of his interview he would see people being put down for having a different interpretation rather than a free and open discussion of the varied possible interpretations. And personally I don't believe that's how this community would want to present itself.
Regardless, the thread in question is an example and it's probably happened before in other instances that I'm not aware of, potentially by other moderators than those involved in the referenced thread. It's simply the latest example of where this sort of thing becomes a problem.
-
There's a difference between keeping a discussion on topic and telling people they're outright wrong for disagreeing and then in subsequent cases splitting similar posts off into other threads.
There are times a user is indeed incorrect, and correction is not out of the question...
The moderation problem really wasn't locksplitting people being stupid, but from my end, it seemed that the people whose FS experience wasn't revolutionized by the interview or people who didn't understand it were subsequently told they were ignorant, incapable of reading, and/or stupid.
Like I said before, we can debate our points of view on the interview without resorting to name-calling.
^This sums up the problem perfectly though. It is the means by which a correction is made. I certainly have been in error at time, other times I've not felt I was. In any sense, the one to make "correction" often was blunt, unfriendly, and generally uncourteous. In short, in making their position known, or making a correction to a situation, they seemingly felt an example was needed of the one being responded to. There may be a time and a place for that, but it should never be the first resort.
-
There's a difference between keeping a discussion on topic and telling people they're outright wrong for disagreeing and then in subsequent cases splitting similar posts off into other threads.
There are times a user is indeed incorrect, and correction is not out of the question...
I would be happy with correction if the thread in question offered any (or if there were any grounds to even make a correction). Telling a person that they're wrong and telling a person WHY they are wrong are two different things. The latter is more accommodating and helps with clarity of position and mutual understanding, the former does not.
-
I believe the thread where I was trying to clear out that the issue wasn't clearly about me not reading the interview should really have been splitlocked, since I was trying to prove something specific and not that relevant to the topic at hand.
However part of said thread I was also revealing my stand on how the debate is quite improper, to say the least, due to heavy disrespect, which, as I see, is clearly the discussion here.
Let me see. At first it was something like "Ahh...I find Scott's ideas compelling, though not that much, as the seemingly "mysterious" Shivans aren't that complicated after all," then I was told "you don't understand the intent here at all".
Then I explained that I though FS 3 was somehow going to be made. He refused. Truth is, I somewhat screwed up at that point (I was led to believe it by the "Volition will murder" news").
But then S-99 swoops in and starts giving out the same "It isn't so interesting, but yeah thanks, you were able to do the interview" opinion, which got splitlocked and flamed upon again.
Then I start doing some minor reason of how the splitlocking should be done; why don't the moderators just transfer these posts to the "FreeSpace Open Trailer" thread instead? After all, it's, to say the least, ontopic to the said thread. But apparently Mongoose couldn't take me too seriously (explanation please) and did a "Shut-Up" comment. So, to elaborate more, I posted again, and eventually ended up getting splitlocked again (!). I confess, I rather view these "Shut-Up" posts pretty irritating, and somehow a form of minor flaming (heck, GB actually did a lot of flaming there), so that's why I want an explanation, whether Mongoose didn't take me seriously or simply didn't want me to reply at all anymore to the thread, for some reason I don't know.
This time, Akalabeth takes over, and does the same but with a harsher tone. GB, of course, with his impatience on the matter, will treat him more harshly than with me.
There have been a lot more splitlocked threads. You know what, I think the plenty offtopic posts don't have to be splitlocked unless they get TOO MUCH (IIRC there are dozens of past threads that have, at some point, offtopicness, but return back to normal after someone gives a warning), though can anyone give us a clear reason why Moderation is quite heavy here? Or is it because of GB's rather fiery temper against members who have different views??
E.g. "Gargantuan posts" were clearly offtopicness, but was it worthy to be splitlocked? It might come to stop in a while, though there appears to be heavy moderation indeed.
-
Hahaha this is awesome I can see like 40% of the posts in this thread.
Anyway, I assume this is complaining about threads getting split locked out of the big interview thread. Locking is generally a bit much but splits are cool as far as I'm concerned. If Akalabeth is worried about getting his own thread, it was left open for him to reply as much as he liked until someone else locked it out of the blue.
Debate is cool, but when people start making things up and tossing about wild accusations just to stir up ****, it's pretty obviously trolling, and that's what mods are here to prevent. S-99 and Marcov were both just ****ty posters. Akalabeth is generally able to string sentences together and had every right to keep posting in spite of his bizarre reading of the paragraphs meant to prevent mod politics from turning up, so I don't know why his thread was locked.
-
Call me a ****ty poster if you like, but S-99 clearly WAS NOT. His point was OBVIOUSLY THE SAME AS AKALABETH'S, SO THERE'S NO POINT IN CALLING HIM A ****TY POSTER.
Look, I don't want to turn this into a massive flaming thread, but you don't seem to be cooperating.
-
Hahaha this is awesome I can see like 40% of the posts in this thread.
Anyway, I assume this is complaining about threads getting split locked out of the big interview thread. Locking is generally a bit much but splits are cool as far as I'm concerned. If Akalabeth is worried about getting his own thread, it was left open for him to reply as much as he liked until someone else locked it out of the blue.
Debate is cool, but when people start making things up and tossing about wild accusations just to stir up ****, it's pretty obviously trolling, and that's what mods are here to prevent. S-99 and Marcov were both just ****ty posters. Akalabeth is generally able to string sentences together and had every right to keep posting in spite of his bizarre reading of the paragraphs meant to prevent mod politics from turning up, so I don't know why his thread was locked.
It occurs to me that a Global Mod probably shouldn't have a set of people on ignore. Context, and all that.
EDIT: Oh hey Marcov, he can't hear you. Yelling doesn't help.
-
Possibly, but it doesn't seem to have done any harm - the issues here are Flipside's decision to start splitting and locking the bad posts out of that thread and Mongoose's decision to lock another split thread. I don't have much to contribute.
-
EDIT: Oh hey Marcov, he can't hear you. Yelling doesn't help.
You ALSO don't seem to be cooperating.
Possibly, but it doesn't seem to have done any harm - the issues here are Flipside's decision to start splitting and locking the bad posts out of that thread and Mongoose's decision to lock another split thread. I don't have much to contribute.
Your posts, plus the splitlocking of Flipside and Mongoose, contribute to the thread here. In fact, your posts are the backbone of why this is here anyway.
-
Debate is cool, but when people start making things up and tossing about wild accusations just to stir up ****, it's pretty obviously trolling, and that's what mods are here to prevent. S-99 and Marcov were both just ****ty posters.
Sometimes people just don't understand, or there's a different interpretation. From what I read, that was the case with Marcov and Alkabeth at least. I don't think anyone was intentionally trying to stir up the pot.
It's springtime at HLP...raegjuices are flowing.
-
First of all, Battuta, if you have people on "ignore", it sort of defeats the purpose of being a moderator. Second, your behaviour in that thread was not what I would call "exemplary".
Noone came out of that thread all shiny, least of all you.
-
And your flippant dismissals continue to do you no credit, Batts.
-
I don't understand what there's still to talk about in that AT LAST THE TRUTH thread, to be honest...
Everything that needs to be said has been said.
-
Debate is cool, but when people start making things up and tossing about wild accusations just to stir up ****, it's pretty obviously trolling, and that's what mods are here to prevent. S-99 and Marcov were both just ****ty posters. Akalabeth is generally able to string sentences together and had every right to keep posting in spite of his bizarre reading of the paragraphs meant to prevent mod politics from turning up, so I don't know why his thread was locked.
Do you reall ythink calling people "****ty posters" helps the situation at all? :rolleyes:
Here's my take on the whole thing, for what it's worth.
This thread, I knew was coming. As soon as that interview thread got split for a third time (AFAIK, a record), I suspected we'd have some annoyed posters. And I'm not sure I entirely disagree with the sentiment. There ought to be restraint showed by mods, and there definitely ought to be real thought before using any mod powers on a debate which the mod in question is actively involved in. In fairness, I think Batt only did this once, but I also think his posts in the thread were among the most inflammatory. I personally disagree that most of what was split out was trollish, but I'll accept a degree of interpretation in what is a subjective term.
Now, for my own part, I left the thread more or less alone, with the exception of moving it back to Interviews after the third split (hoping that it would go back to being quiet, but it was locked before it had a chance to). The reason for that was that I personally have an aversion to moderating other moderators, but honestly, there were posts by both Battuta and Mongoose that they should have been called on (the others, I'm not going to comment on, except to say that I think it's appropriate to hold mods to a higher standard). As I said, in the past, I've not liked moderating other mods (that's always seemed to be something admins are for) but I think in future that may have to change, for my part at least. Granted, there's not much I or anyone else can actually do that the other one can't undo, but maybe it'll mean something. We'll see. Or hell, better yet, not have to see - this could all have been avoided if people would stop and think before they post. As a general rule, IMO, if you're telling someone to shut up, or that they're stupid/moronic whatever, you're probably making a bad post.
-
Hahaha this is awesome I can see like 40% of the posts in this thread.
And that strikes me as fairly wrong and somewhat abusive and negligent.
And while people may be people regardless of their Position and as such will have their behaviours and beliefs and preferences to match, there comes a time when you DO have to separate those from your responsibilities and to take a step back or walk away. You are being less and less help in moderating situations when you seem to decide it's "funneh" to throw gasoline on a situation.
In any case, something has to be going on where you may want to consider taking a break, take a step back and re-evaluate what you are doing and how you are doing it when it comes to how you handle your responsibilities, because it quite honestly doesn't look to me like you are in the least. And if you want to ignore me saying it, take a closer look at the fact that others have been trying to tell you for a while now. If you want to persist that we are ALL wrong, then I don't honestly know what to say.
-
Debate is cool, but when people start making things up and tossing about wild accusations just to stir up ****, it's pretty obviously trolling, and that's what mods are here to prevent. S-99 and Marcov were both just ****ty posters. Akalabeth is generally able to string sentences together and had every right to keep posting in spite of his bizarre reading of the paragraphs meant to prevent mod politics from turning up, so I don't know why his thread was locked.
I'm sorry, but when the first response to my post in that thread is "Jesus Christ what is wrong these people" I consider that "stirring **** up" as you call it. I offer an opinion, you react as though I'm a lunatic and the discussion degrades from there.
As for mod politics having no bearing on that thread, I consider that a point very much in contention considering that your preface to the interview seeks to validate creative choices in mods you are yourself involved in, specifically Blue Planet. Validation and "Legitimacy" which quite frankly was never required in the first place (and is not expressly stated by the interviewed individual either). As I said, if this is a journalistic piece the interview should've been offered up free of opinion and thereafter discussed at liesure by all the community with respect and consideration by all contributors.
The fact is unless you have more information from that interview than you've chosen to reveal, then your interpretation of what was said is no more valid than any other responder in that thread. Telling Titan that he's wrong, or telling Mobius who cares, or telling Luis Dais to not fill the thread up with his meaningless opinion is both baseless and uneccesary.
-
For that matter, why has half this thread not been banhammered for incredibly inflammatory content? We are supposedly operating on zero tolerance.
-
For that matter, why has half this thread not been banhammered for incredibly inflammatory content? We are supposedly operating on zero tolerance.
Don't tempt fate...
-
Don't tempt fate...
I'm fine with getting the hammer for myself as long as we get the zero tolerance thing either actually carried out or announced to be now-discarded. Pretending Karaj never announced it as is currently ongoing here only cheapens the apparent powers of the administration to control their own board and adds fuel to the fires.
-
It's alright, six days until Epic HLP Silly Day™, hopefully we can get a lot of our steam out for the summer.
-
Nah, we don't do April Fool's anymore, remember?
-
Nah, we don't do April Fool's anymore, remember?
...
I feel great distress and frustration about this. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufsf_-a_H9Q&feature=related)
-
Could Battuta please just be nicer with his replies and more patient with those of us less intelligent than they? More "godlike" if that imagery helps at all. What happened to Oldttuta? :(
-
Okay, let's see if I can manage to hit a few points at once here...
Then I start doing some minor reason of how the splitlocking should be done; why don't the moderators just transfer these posts to the "FreeSpace Open Trailer" thread instead? After all, it's, to say the least, ontopic to the said thread. But apparently Mongoose couldn't take me too seriously (explanation please) and did a "Shut-Up" comment. So, to elaborate more, I posted again, and eventually ended up getting splitlocked again (!). I confess, I rather view these "Shut-Up" posts pretty irritating, and somehow a form of minor flaming (heck, GB actually did a lot of flaming there), so that's why I want an explanation, whether Mongoose didn't take me seriously or simply didn't want me to reply at all anymore to the thread, for some reason I don't know.
Marcov...you posted the same exact inane statement twice on the same page. That was after a chain of people spamming quotes from the FS1 intro, and immediately after I told said people, and everyone else, to keep the spam out of that thread. You proceeded to completely ignore my statement, and chose to post something that made absolutely no sense either time you posted it. (Really, would you like to explain to me in what universe a few spam posts would be "on-topic" for a thread about a fan-created cutscene? I'd love to hear it.) Since you apparently couldn't take the fairly-obvious hint, I decided to make it even more obvious with a direct "Shut up." The next step was recommending some level of time-out to one of the admins.
In other words, what I said had nothing to do with what you posted earlier in the thread, my opinion of said posts aside. It had everything to do with you continuing to post glorified spam after a moderator warning to not do so. Oh, and please keep in mind that telling the mods exactly when and how they should be doing their jobs (with the exception of a thread like this, which is about a larger issue) is a very bad idea no matter what forum you're on. I hope this is all clear enough to you.
Hahaha this is awesome I can see like 40% of the posts in this thread.
Debate is cool, but when people start making things up and tossing about wild accusations just to stir up ****, it's pretty obviously trolling, and that's what mods are here to prevent. S-99 and Marcov were both just ****ty posters. Akalabeth is generally able to string sentences together and had every right to keep posting in spite of his bizarre reading of the paragraphs meant to prevent mod politics from turning up, so I don't know why his thread was locked.
Battuta, if you really can't see why I chose to lock a split thread that was essentially you and Akalabeth flaming each other to pieces, I have to question your competence to wear that Global Moderator badge. That was Mod 101 right there. You were pretty much the person who created that situation in the first place, so I did what was in my power to bring it to an end. As I noted in the thread, that was only half-effective, seeing as how you were obviously still able to post there, but it was the best I could do.
Also, as others have noted, the fact that you as a Global Moderator are using the "Ignore User" feature is troubling at best, and utterly asinine at worse. You're undermining your ability to do your job properly. Hell, I don't know why we have that ****ing awful feature enabled in the first place, as it does nothing but make whole chunks of threads utterly unreadable to people who choose to use it.
And more in general, if you can honestly claim you don't see what all this fuss is about, I think you need to take a good hard look at your behavior fairly recently, especially in that thread. You snapped at several people out of nowhere, over posts that should at worst have been ignored. That isn't proper behavior for a moderator anywhere, least of all in a thread that he himself created.
Finally, Black Wolf, I hope what I said to Marcov helps to clear things up on my end. I saw Marcov ignoring a moderator's request immediately after it was made, and I responded in turn. That was pretty much it.
-
Could Battuta please just be nicer with his replies and more patient with those of us less intelligent than they? More "godlike" if that imagery helps at all. What happened to Oldttuta? :(
Oldttuta died with that epic misogyny thread cluster****. [REDACTED for avoiding flamefests]
-
Could Battuta please just be nicer with his replies and more patient with those of us less intelligent than they? More "godlike" if that imagery helps at all. What happened to Oldttuta? :(
redacted post
Uhm. I'm not sure a post like this is exactly constructive or helping this situation at all in any way shape or form, could we perhaps refrain from doing something like this in the here and now please?
-
I'm officially prescribing these for everyone here:
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_40rEjkyf2zY/TEfz9nIHcyI/AAAAAAAAI-k/GDfiK22aTPs/s1600/chill_pill.jpg)
-
Actually, that's a good point. Post redacted for chillness.
-
For that matter, why has half this thread not been banhammered for incredibly inflammatory content? We are supposedly operating on zero tolerance.
We indeed are. And I've already booted this upstairs to the other admins to decide exactly who is getting hammered and why.
-
*snip
Maybe you have me there...it was more of a "LOLZ we can actually do this" comment anyway. Sorry.
But please be more tactful next time.
I think we have the general intent clearly shown now.
-
S-99 and Marcov were both just ****ty posters.
If you're going to insult other members of the board you'll soon find yourself unable to post in public.
-
I also said in the past that people who try telling the admins how to do their job will also find themselves in trouble.
-
Which is why I didn't tell anyone anything. Nevertheless you have a fair point, and I apologize if my post was out of line. I just really don't want to see this incident establishing a precedent of disciplinary immunity. I meant no disrespect to the HLP Admins.
-
My point was it should have been obvious that I was well aware of what was said in this thread since I'd already booted the question upstairs and I think it can also be assumed that I would have remembered what I said in a board-wide announcement from only a week ago. So the implication left is that you were trying to tell me how to do my job.
And as I mentioned in my post, I've already pointed out that there can be severe consequences for doing that and getting it wrong. We've had too many people back seat moderating with InB4Lock comments, etc. If you start posting "Ban this user" or "Lock this thread" and none of the admins or mods agree with you then you're basically spamming the thread. Which puts you in danger instead. And even if you're right you've still added nothing to the discussion.
-
It's saddening in a way, a thread that was posted with the best of intentions has been the cause of more Drama than I've seen on HLP for a fair while. I know it's Spring and this is normal, but it would be nice to think that we could manage to interview one of the original Freespace team without embarassing ourselves.
-
Wait.
Is it normal that everyone goes uncharacteristically mad around spring?
-
It's a trend I've drawn attention to before, don't know if it's a mating season thing or something, but yes, HLP does tend to get much more argumentative and confrontational about this time every year.
-
Ok, I wasn't going to post anything here, but having seen the latest three pages I have to state something that is crossing my mind.
Regardless of Battuta's attitude in that thread (which I didn't like as well, but understood GB at an emotional level), what I find in this thread is much worse than there.
In here, I see mods and old timers flaming Battuta's actions for everyone else to see, when this should be clearly done indoors and in PM fashion. You know, don't clean up the mess in front of everyone.
In here, I see enraged people that are trying to take some kind of revenge from GB's demeanour. There is a mod button for that, you know "Report to moderator", at the right bottom. In my experience, if you click in it in the relevant thread and argue your point with a moderator, privately and discreetly you'll get your point accross and even perhaps something will be done about it. You know, ****ing decently.
In here, I see a moderator proudly announcing he's incapable of moderating at least 40% of the current commenters in this thread alone. And laughing it up. (Am I one of the lucky ones?)
-
If there were problems beyond that split, then there are ways to raise those concerns, the report button, or PMing the person involved, or even an Admin etc.
These options are still open, but when a single thread splits off into multiple threads, multiple arguments and a whole load of bad blood. Something is wrong.
-
In here, I see mods and old timers flaming Battuta's actions for everyone else to see, when this should be clearly done indoors and in PM fashion. You know, don't clean up the mess in front of everyone.
And right here, you are making an assumption that such action hadn't already been taken.
In here, I see a moderator proudly announcing he's incapable of moderating at least 40% of the current commenters in this thread alone. And laughing it up. (Am I one of the lucky ones?)
And that part right there may not have become common knowledge if not for the lulz'ing it up way in which it was presented, and is a significant cause for concern no matter the method of it's coming to light.
These options are still open, but when a single thread splits off into multiple threads, multiple arguments and a whole load of bad blood. Something is wrong.
Emphasis mine.
-
And right here, you are making an assumption that such action hadn't already been taken.
No, just sad that it *also* took place "outdoors". No big deal, we are all humans and I think it'll be easy to get over with.
-
It's a trend I've drawn attention to before, don't know if it's a mating season thing or something, but yes, HLP does tend to get much more argumentative and confrontational about this time every year.
I generally noticed this trend in RL oftentimes. Definately a hormone thing.
In here, I see enraged people that are trying to take some kind of revenge from GB's demeanour. There is a mod button for that, you know "Report to moderator", at the right bottom. In my experience, if you click in it in the relevant thread and argue your point with a moderator, privately and discreetly you'll get your point accross and even perhaps something will be done about it. You know, ****ing decently.
As I understand it that report to moderator button reports the post to ALL mods and admins, not just one. Could be wrong though.
-
More or less, yes. It reports the post to all admins, all global mods, and whichever people might be mods in the forum where the offending post resides.