Jump to content

Photo

All Newbies Read This Before Posting


  • Please log in to reply
360 replies to this topic

#21
Wheel83

Wheel83

    Enthusiast

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 159 posts
Well, I dont know what to say. Mostly because I'm honestly kind of afraid to present any argument at all, because i fear i may be terminated for "Harassment".
Look, I understand that rules are needed. The internet has become an abusive cesspool of people trying to hurt people. I really like this site because most people i've come across have always been very kind and helpful.
But it does seem to me that in the end it all comes down to the specific moderator's opinion.

QUOTE(Wheel83 @ Jun 5 2008, 12:47 AM) *
(does that quote not break some kind of law, "retard-speak"?)
Nope. He is not personally attacking another member. This person is expressing a frustration with a subject matter, not an individual.

I personally resent this remark "retard". Although he is not directing this remark towards any individual. The very meaning of the word "retard" refers to a person who is mentally challenged, therefore he is insisting that mentally challenged people do not speak well.
Now, in my eyes, this word is much much worse than the "F-word" or "vulk". But it seems that my opinion is not the one that matters. If you are making these rules to protect the members of this site, then perhaps some consideration should be taken into the members opinions.

I ended up getting 2 strikes for swearing in a topic called "Is swearing Ok"?
The topic was a question...not an affirmation. You should have known better and this is a ridiculous ground to stand on.

Yes I agree that perhaps my comments were unnessecary, but in my defense I presumed the topic was up for debate on whether the mod author should be able to use his freedom of speech in his mod. I found the censoring system misleading, I figured it was okay to swear if it was being censored into words such as "vulk" and "poo". All people would see are these words. Is "vulk" considered a swear word on these forums? The censoring system is a little ridiculous in itself, what in the world is a "vulk" anyway? I think this censoring should be eliminated entirely and replaced with an inability to post any swear words at all. Just like you would see in old games where if you tried to for example enter your name as a swear word you would recieve some sort of message informing you that it was inappropriate.
It is obvious that everyone has a different view on what is swearing and what it is not, the "f-word" is not acceptable but the "a-word" is? "Retard" is acceptable but the "S-word" isn't?
I find this to be a dictatorship. The only way to avoid this would be to completely eliminate the censoring system. It is much too misleading.

Obviously my comment struck a chord with you somehow, I found your reply a bit demeaning, the tone in which it was composed left me feeling like you felt I was well lets just say "stupid" or "less than thou". Perhaps not, maybe that was just my interpretation.
I apoligize if I have "Harassed" anyone, i honestly tried to make my comment as respectful and kind as possible while voicing my own opinion on the matter. That is all.

Anyway, If it is your interpretation that i am trying desperately to debunk the rule system then that is your right. But I am only trying to offer helpful suggestions on how to avoid kicking people out, and thus decreasing the number of good, honest modders who just only want to give the Nexus members everything they can, such as myself.

I feel that a lot of these rules and systems need to be looked over again. It is a great system, dont get me wrong, but it is not perfect yet, and has lots of room for improvement.
I dont want to be allowed to curse and swear all over the site, I would just like a little more warning. Simply telling people that "they must read this" obviously does not work. You need to shove it in thier face and tell people immediately that what they are doing is wrong, before you start issuing multiple strikes. I feel that the 2 strikes i recieved was un justified, even if I had carefully read the rules, i dont remember reading anywhere that displaying the word "vulk" was against the rules. I now know the error of my ways.
-Wheel83

P.S. Once again, I am not trying to be harmful or disrespectful or debunkful. I am only discussing this topic of the rules & strike system.

#22
LHammonds

LHammonds

    Ghost in da Machine

  • Supporter
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,333 posts

Yes I agree that perhaps my comments were unnessecary, but in my defense I presumed the topic was up for debate on whether the mod author should be able to use his freedom of speech in his mod.

Have another look at what you are defending.

Your 1st reply (Post #10) was a legit reply with your feedback and even had some humor in it.

Your 2nd and 3rd reply was completely unnecessary and had nothing to do with the topic. It was a 100% uncontrolled rant and I don't see how you could say your comments were "perhaps unnecessary" when they were most certainly not.

Obviously my comment struck a chord with you somehow, I found your reply a bit demeaning, the tone in which it was composed left me feeling like you felt I was well lets just say "stupid" or "less than thou". Perhaps not, maybe that was just my interpretation.

The chord you struck was one of the few topics I have a subscription to that emails me a notification anytime a post is made. I happen to have seen the very post that Buddah handled because I was about to handle it myself but he beat me to it.

My reply was stated in a "matter-of-fact" tone. I do not look down on any members here but when you are on the receiving end of a moderators judgment, it always seems that way. Similar to how people love to have the police only a phone call away to help them in times of need but quickly turn on the police if they themselves become the "suspects." It is a natural human emotion.

I feel that a lot of these rules and systems need to be looked over again.

If this is true, it is most certainly not because of that rant that got 2 strikes against you.

Simply telling people that "they must read this" obviously does not work. You need to shove it in thier face and tell people immediately that what they are doing is wrong, before you start issuing multiple strikes.

The vast majority of people do not need it "shoved in their face" and this site is a testament to that. Look at the amount of "police" on this site and look at the amount of users, daily submissions and postings. We have very few issues that require "moderating" and most are harmless.

LHammonds

#23
Wheel83

Wheel83

    Enthusiast

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 159 posts
("Your 1st reply (Post #10) was a legit reply with your feedback and even had some humor in it.")

So, what you are saying is that my 1st reply was legitimate because I used the swear word to stress my point. And a little ironic humor made it seem more harmless.
Okay, i agree with that. So swearing is acceptable in a few certain rare situations?

("Your 2nd and 3rd reply was completely unnecessary and had nothing to do with the topic. It was a 100% uncontrolled rant and I don't see how you could say your comments were "perhaps unnecessary" when they were most certainly not.")

Yes, perhaps I should not have added "perhaps" in this comment. I agree, my comments were unnecessary for this topic. Although, the sole purpose of these 2nd and 3rd comments were for comic relief alone. I found the words vulk and poo, etc.. humorous (because I am a very stupid, childish man) and thought maybe other people would get a chuckle out of the censoring system. Once again, I stress that I had no idea that utilizing this censoring system was against the rules. I thought that since the swear words were being censored, then there would be no swear words to be seen. Thus not breaking any rules. Otherwise, what is the point of having the censoring system? Why not just prohibit any post that has swear words in it? Having words replaced with words such as "vulk" or "poo" just makes the poster more curious. It does not send them a clear message that they have broken a rule.

("The chord you struck was one of the few topics I have a subscription to that emails me a notification anytime a post is made. I happen to have seen the very post that Buddah handled because I was about to handle it myself but he beat me to it.
My reply was stated in a "matter-of-fact" tone. I do not look down on any members here but when you are on the receiving end of a moderators judgment, it always seems that way. Similar to how people love to have the police only a phone call away to help them in times of need but quickly turn on the police if they themselves become the "suspects." It is a natural human emotion.")

Ok, I understand. Sometimes typed messages can inadvertently communicate the wrong emotions that were not originally intended. I agree it is a natural human behaviour to defend oneself when accused, that is why it is so important that the police throughly investigate whether the suspect is innocent or guilty.

QUOTE(Wheel83 @ Jun 5 2008, 03:19 PM) *
I feel that a lot of these rules and systems need to be looked over again.

("If this is true, it is most certainly not because of that rant that got 2 strikes against you.")

First of all, I don't know if i would call my posts "rants".
Second, it is only in my opinion that these rules and systems need to be looked over. It may be true in some people's minds and not in others. And yes I do feel that 2 strikes was a little hefty of a sentence for the posts I made. The censoring was completely misleading and as for spamming well, i didn't flood a whole page. It was maybe 2 lines of text for each post, I was completely unaware of the amount of harm that would do to the forum, if any. Before I joined this forum, I was under the illusion that spamming was strictly when an individual flooded a page with jargon. Flooded, not 2 lines. I believe that I should have received two separate warnings about the swearing and the spamming before the strikes were issued. This is what is said to be normal protocol in these situations in the rules. "Except in extreme cases". I really can't see why my posts would be viewed as an "extreme" case. But thats just my opinion.

QUOTE(Wheel83 @ Jun 5 2008)
Simply telling people that "they must read this" obviously does not work. You need to shove it in thier face and tell people immediately that what they are doing is wrong, before you start issuing multiple strikes.

("The vast majority of people do not need it "shoved in their face" and this site is a testament to that. Look at the amount of "police" on this site and look at the amount of users, daily submissions and postings. We have very few issues that require "moderating" and most are harmless.")

I realize that the majority of people on this site are decent, respectful people. I am one of those people, believe it or not. I am just one of those few people that misunderstood the rules and was penalized for an honest mistake. This is not a plea to have my strikes lifted, it is simply a matter of principle. If these rules are to be followed it is only fair that they also be followed by the moderators. In my case, I believe a warning would have been the correct course of action. With all due respect to Mr. Buddah. Even 1 strike might have been acceptable. But not 2 on my first offence. It could be argued that swearing was my first offence and spamming was my second but there was no way i could've known I committed my first offence having posted my second offence seconds after the first. Also, it does say in the rules that strikes may be lifted if the individual does "good deeds". Does this mean being kind, respectful and helpful as possible to other members of Nexus? If it does, then I believe I may have already justified some consideration into my case. But, once again, this is not a plea. I do not wish my strikes to be lifted, my problem is not with the strikes I was issued, it is with the grounds on which I was issued them. I am really not concerned about my own fate in this matter, but rather the fate of any other well-meaning, helpful modder or member of this site that may "misunderstand" the rules in the future.
I understand that I am guilty as charged according to the rules whether I understood them correctly or not, but I also believe there was a mistake made when issuing the strikes.

All due respect to Mr.Buddah and yourself, L.Hammonds, and any other moderator. I do not wish to be a trouble maker or tell you how to do your jobs. I am only trying to be helpful and bring some issues to your attention.
I would not stress my points so passionately if I did not believe that this site was great. I think that you guys are awesome for doing what you're doing, and making this site as pleasurable as you can. In fact I believe that you yourself commented some kind words on one of my own mods. This is really one of the first sites I've seen where people actually respect one another and give kindness freely out of the bottom of thier hearts. That is truly unique in today's aggressive, abusive internet world. I find myself so disgusted by the amount of ridiculously mean, cold hearted comments posted on sites such as facebook and others.
It is a sad, sad world we live in when kids kill themselves over comments that some (bleep) (bleep) posted in a desperate attempt to make themselves feel better about themselves...or for whatever other dark, twisted reason.

Long live the Nexus!
Keep up the good work boys,
and thanks for creating a refuge for the kind-hearted.

-Wheel83

p.s. sorry for not using the quote system, I'll remember next time.

#24
Dark0ne

Dark0ne

    Webmaster

  • Admin
  • 21,064 posts
The terms and conditions and rules were looked over by myself recently and edits were made. If I had to note down a rule for every single action that might get a strike or ban in no uncertain terms then the ToC would be longer than my auto-biography and noone would read it. Ergo blanket terms are provided because 99% of people will know what the blanket terms do and don't entail. A final word on moderator disgression is added to cover the fact that people's own opinions might be different from ours -- but we're the ones who get the final say.

This isn't an issue. Your strikes were justified cause you were being daft. Strikes are warnings and should be taken as such. I suggest you simply leave this thread and go enjoy the forum (and try not to let that devil to take over your hands again).

#25
bluekatt

bluekatt

    Fan

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 296 posts
i am wondering howver does a trike against you dimish and be taken away al together on good behavior or wil you always have that strike against you ?

#26
LHammonds

LHammonds

    Ghost in da Machine

  • Supporter
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,333 posts

i am wondering howver does a trike against you dimish and be taken away al together on good behavior or wil you always have that strike against you ?

Allow me to answer: The strike system is not a database with time settings and kudos point countdowns or anything elaborate at all.

It is basically a piece of note paper with peoples names written down, date of offense, type of offense and maybe a link to the offending post/reply.

We do not go through the list and see if we can "remove" strikes or warnings issued...we don't have time and there is no reason to do such as thing. So in reality, the do not go away by themselves.

If we need to issue a warning/strike, we 1st check the warning/strike list to see if there is a history. If your name is not anywhere on the list, the moderator might issue an informal warning that won't even go "on the books" but if your name is found with an Official Warning attached to it with a recent date, you get a strike. If you already have a strike with a recent date, you get another.

If the name is found and the dates are old, we have to do a bit more investigating. We look at the posts that you have made, the ratings, articles written, kudos points awarded, content uploaded, etc. If you have been stagnant and not doing anything to help the site or its members, the current warning/strike remains and is then added upon along with a current datestamp.

If we feel that you have been doing the site and its members a good service (beyond being a normal user) then you may have your level decreased one or more notches before being issued your next warning/strike level.

I hope this explains the system we use a bit better. Keep in mind that if you have warnings or strikes against you, you need to be active AND a positive influence on this site and members beyond that of a normal user in order to have them removed. Being Good to remove warnings/strikes <> being quite. Being quiet is simply not being bad. At least that is what I tell my kiddos.

Also keep in mind that even though we try to apply the same logic to mod comments in the upload area, we have more a more strict policy for various reasons. But the general issue/removal process is the same.

LHammonds

#27
Wheel83

Wheel83

    Enthusiast

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 159 posts
Alright, I'll leave you guys alone. Thanks for taking my suggestions into consideration. I do have a couple more questions though if thats alright.

How do you use the Quote function?

and

Dark0ne
"Ergo blanket terms are provided because 99% of people will know what the blanket terms do and don't entail."

What are Ergo blanket terms??

Also, Dark one said this:
"Strikes are warnings and should be taken as such."

but L.Hammonds said this:
"If we need to issue a warning/strike, we 1st check the warning/strike list to see if there is a history. If your name is not anywhere on the list, the moderator might issue an informal warning that won't even go "on the books" but if your name is found with an Official Warning attached to it with a recent date, you get a strike. If you already have a strike with a recent date, you get another."

You see, the explanation from L.Hammonds is what I presumed was a warning.
Did I have a "history" before I was issued 2 strikes? I wasn't aware I had done anything to be put on "the list". I know I never recieved any "informal warning" from anyone.

Dark0ne
"Your strikes were justified cause you were being daft."
Could you explain what you meant by this? How was I being "daft"?

two more things...

Buddah never replied when i asked him some questions after I was issued the strikes by him. I dont know, maybe the message got lost somewhere or something.
One of my questions to him was: What are the consequences of getting 3 strikes? Do I get kicked off the forums? Or do I get kicked off the site? Do I lose the ability to upload/download?

L.Hammonds
"if we feel that you have been doing the site and its members a good service (beyond being a normal user)"

How would one go about going beyond being a normal user?

Anyways, sorry to bother you guys so much, i'm just still a little confused about some of these things.
Well, thats it for now then. Thanks for the help.
-Wheel83

#28
Wheel83

Wheel83

    Enthusiast

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 159 posts
Oh ya, and could someone please tell me exactly which curse words are unacceptable so I can avoid this sort of thing in the future.
I already know the "F-bomb" is one of them. But I have seen "female dog" posted by lots of people, including moderators. So, if I could just get some clarification that would be awesome.
thanks a bunch

#29
Wheel83

Wheel83

    Enthusiast

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 159 posts
Also, I've seen people use words like this "F*ck". I've even seen it used as a signature in one case. Is this acceptable?

#30
LHammonds

LHammonds

    Ghost in da Machine

  • Supporter
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,333 posts

How do you use the Quote function?

Is this for real? It is not a hard feature to grasp. Here are some of the multiple ways you can use the quote system:
  • Simply click the reply button under a member's post and it will quote their text for you.
  • When replying to multiple people, click the QUOTE button for each post rather than clicking the reply. Once all posts have been marked using the quote button, click Add New Reply and it will add all of them to your message box.
  • Manually copy/paste text and wrap them in the QUOTE and /QUOTE tags (using bracets around the tags).

Dark0ne
"Ergo blanket terms are provided because 99% of people will know what the blanket terms do and don't entail."
What are Ergo blanket terms?

"ergo" is a Latin word which mean "therefore"

Blanket terms are conditions that "cover" an entire area rather than being very specific.

Also, Dark one said this:
"Strikes are warnings and should be taken as such."

but L.Hammonds said this:
"If we need to issue a warning/strike, we 1st check the warning/strike list to see if there is a history. If your name is not anywhere on the list, the moderator might issue an informal warning that won't even go "on the books" but if your name is found with an Official Warning attached to it with a recent date, you get a strike. If you already have a strike with a recent date, you get another."
You see, the explanation from L.Hammonds is what I presumed was a warning.

1, 2 and 3 are all numbers.
A, B and C are all letters.
Informal warning, Official warning, strike #1, strike #2, strike #3 are all warnings prior to getting banned.

Did I have a "history" before I was issued 2 strikes? I wasn't aware I had done anything to be put on "the list". I know I never recieved any "informal warning" from anyone.

I'm getting really tired of quoting here. PLEASE READ. In Post #21 above, I said the following which should have explained it to you:

Read the Strike Rules to understand how things work. You will notice that there is a lot of room given to a moderator regarding the dealing-out of punishment. Depending on the situation, the offending member can be given an informal warning, an immediate strike or even multiple strikes for severe situations. Keep in mind that these rules apply to members that normally post directly in these forums. We have tried to apply these same rules to members making comments on the mod uploads area but have found that it was inadequate in many cases since accounts are commonly created for the express purpose of publicly trashing mods, skewing the ratings and generally attacking mod authors...one of TESNexus' primary content providers. Many of TESNexus members never post on the forums and only post comments on the uploaded mods so we have implemented a new and separate terms which is displayed when voting/commenting and informs the members that certain behavior can result in an instant ban (insta-ban)

After reading the above, you should have realized that your case was one of those "severe situations" and if this were found in a mod's comment page being directed toward a mod author, you would have been insta-banned in that situation.

Dark0ne
"Your strikes were justified cause you were being daft."
Could you explain what you meant by this? How was I being "daft"?

"Daft" is an old English term which can be substituted for "silly" or "foolish"

If you are having trouble understanding how your posts were foolish, just write this off as a learning experience and simply associate those comments with the words "daft", "silly" and "foolish" for future reference. ;)

L.Hammonds
"if we feel that you have been doing the site and its members a good service (beyond being a normal user)"

How would one go about going beyond being a normal user?

Of the 619,000+ members on this site, it is a relatively small percentage of them that "contribute" to making this site better for it's members. Are you sure that I have to spell this out for you or can you figure this own on your own by looking around on the site and seeing how some people are being helpful and contributing to this site? BTW - I'm being serious here when I talking about writing an article on how to become a contributing member.




Page loaded in: 0.872 seconds