nexus hate?

[Cynster]

I have had problems at various forums before (not a trouble-maker or anything just preference) but never the Nexus. Not years ago, not now.

 

There is only one thing I have noticed, and it's just an observation... Sometimes the anti-piracy questioning of members that ask shady questions (where you suspect that they are probably a pirate) seems to me like a little bit of a witch hunt. And maybe it is that mentality that is upsetting the apple cart with people who tolerate pirating. But in my opinion, even though it may seem heavy handed, it really isn't. Some day it may be a site owner's obligation to report pirates to a government/group by law. A ban from a website is nothing compared to being fined for the property you have stolen and having it on your record anytime you are applying for a job. I think the sooner the pirates wake up from this dream of entitlement because it's on the internet, the better off they will be, and if it takes a ban from a website they like, it's a good thing in the long run if that shakes them up enough to stop.

 

Also the mods don't seem to tolerate the type of members that like to rile people up on purpose and be mean to get their internet kicks. And I guess those members that weren't well received here are probably contributing to the complaints on other forums.

 

But anyway the mentality of honesty and being considerate to others is why I like it here. It makes me proud to be a member here. I don't really care if it upsets people who don't come here anymore - it's probably better off we go our separate ways :)

 

Edit: For the record, about the witch hunt comment - because I don't want it taken the wrong way. I have absolutely no problem with pirates getting banned, I think they should, and I've reported them myself. As a personal preference, I don't try to get them to tell me they have pirated. I don't have a problem with the method of getting them to admit they pirated, but I think pirates do because they think they have been tricked. And I think that could possibly be adding to the complaints is all. But they shouldn't have pirated in the first place, so they have no leg to stand on :P I just didn't want anyone getting the impression that I was against it or anything >.> -stops digging-

Edited May 31, 2012 by Cynster

[tjobbins]

Back to the original topic, though. It's something I feel rather strong about, but I've got quite a few concerns regarding the way moderating is handled on the Nexus forums. I've thought about voicing my concerns numerous times over the past few months, but due to the site's zero tolerance policy of questioning moderators' actions, I've refrained from risking my account in such a manner, even though I'm probably risking it with this post. I can also honestly say, giving the site's track record, I don't see it helping anything or encouraging change anywhere

 

The way I look at it is pretty simple; if you wouldn't say what you write here to a total stranger in a pub, you shouldn't write it. If I said a lot of the things that people get banned for here to some one I didn't know in a pub where I live, I'd expect to get glassed in the face. Unfortunately we cannot glass people in the face over the internet (yet, *fingers cross* though..), so we ban them instead.

 

if I may, I'd like to add some thoughts on this topic coming as a relatively new user, but one who has already had a somewhat negative experience of Nexus moderation. I only just saw the topic tonight, hence my somewhat late quoting of the above two comments. And apologies in advance for the very long post, I do understand if it's a "tl;dr"!

 

Firstly, and importantly, I'd like to say that this is an awesome site. I hope it will be clear that I mean all comments constructively, and am giving them only because they seem to me relevant to the issues and questions raised by this thread, and because I feel I have some personal experience despite my newbieness. I want to emphasise that because as a new user, I have no "stake" here - no huge post count over many years to justify giving my opinion and my suggestions. So if anyone is feeling "who are you to come here and say this," then fair enough; just know that my intentions are constructive and are written because even as a newbie, I can see that this a great site worth spending time on.

 

First, a brief intro. I'd never modded a game before Skyrim - in fact I'd always had a rather negative impression of modding. I had (completely baselessly) assumed it was generally similar to the people who port Android to run on iPhones: in other words, technically challenging and clever, but in practice pretty pointless and full of caveats and problems. Or at least, far more effort than the results justified.

 

Skyrim - a game I've now played for 150+ hours, which is more than all other games combined over the last few years - has of course shown me that that is utterly untrue. I've got 35 mods installed so far, and they have revolutionised my playing experience. Many of them add content that I'm sure the original developers would have added, had they had more time and budget - in other words, they are of a quality worthy of a professional development team. All of them have made the game more enjoyable, immersive, and/or challenging. I honestly can't imagine playing the game without them now. And I'm already planning a couple of my own.

 

I'm now a major modding convert, and Nexus has played a vital part in that. I can say for certain that if modding was a lot of effort, I wouldn't ever have bothered. That's not because I'm not technical (quite the opposite), but simply because I'm lazy and too much technical effort, at least of the mundane kind, feels like work and not gaming. So Nexus with its comprehensive mod lists, comments, endorsements, screenshots/videos, and most of all NMM, has enabled and encouraged me to expand on Skyrim significantly. When I first got Skyrim, it was a great game. Now it's a great hobby. I'm extremely grateful to Nexus for that!

 

 

But unfortunately I have had an experience that has tainted my experience a little. Shortly after I started reading the site, I discovered chat. I went in and chatted happily and copiously for an hour or two, having some good conversations with several people. Then suddenly I was unceremoniously banned, without a warning or any other communication. We'd been talking about consoles, and I had said that I really liked the Wii, because although it has technical limitations, it was great that, unlike the 360 and PS3, it was possible to run homebrew. As I was writing that, I made sure to emphasise that I was talking about homebrew and the ability to add new features to games one already owns: which is exactly what I do use Wii homebrew for - ripping my legally purchased games to a HDD so I don't have to disk swap, and so I can enable cheats and the like. I knew that piracy talk was forbidden, and didn't want it to seem like I was encouraging anyone to play pirated games.

 

So I was rather surprised to be so promptly banned, with no warning. But I did realise that I'd gone into chat without fully reading the rules. So my first response was to PM the mod who banned me, apologising for not having read the rules properly, explaining that I had absolutely not meant any reference to piracy, and asking if he could please re-consider.

 

Shortly after that, I discovered the "I've been banned" thread in the "Forum rules and strikes" thread. It mentioned a form to fill out to request an unban, but that was a 404. So I posted in the thread. I said basically the same things as in the PM, but putting more emphasis on the apology and fully admitting that I should have read the rules first. I said that "ignorance is no excuse," but that I hoped I could have a second chance.

 

To that I got a single, somewhat sarcastic reply saying basically "so you found the unban thread but not the thread about no console modding?" That was when I first realised that all discussion of console modding was completely banned. I replied, explaining again that no I hadn't read that (or any forum thread) before joining chat, and agreeing that yes that was a mistake - for which I apologised again - and saying again that no harm had been intended and so I'd be very grateful for a reconsideration.

 

That was 11 days ago. I got no further response on the thread, nor did the original banning mod ever respond to my PM. There was a subsequent post to the Banned thread by a different mod, in response to someone else, saying one should "apologise and commit to not repeating the offence" and then unbans would usually follow. That's precisely what I'd already done. I could I suppose have responded to that and asked again, but frankly by that point (now two or three days later), I'd lost interest and chat had lost a lot of its appeal. I felt by then that I'd already been as apologetic and conciliatory as was necessary, and I certainly wasn't going to beg. In fact if anything, I felt I'd been more apologetic than should be necessary. In my original post in that Banned thread, I said the ban was "fair enough", but in retrospect I changed my mind: what would have been much more reasonable in my view would have been a PM'd warning with a link to the "no console modding" thread. That's certainly all that would have been required to ensure I never talked about it again. Perhaps with a kick for emphasis and so others in the room could learn from my mistake as well.

 

I suppose what I found most galling was the sarcastic response I got from one mod - who took the time to respond, but seemingly not to read my explanation or at least take any notice of it. It felt very much like I had been unfairly tarred with the same brush as those chatters who troll, who scream racist obscenities, or who try to ask for assistance with their pirated game. It seemed that the moderator hadn't really read anything I'd said but just assumed "you've been banned, you must be bad."

 

Now it's just a chat ban and clearly it's not kept me from wanting to enjoy - and contribute to - the rest of the site. Had I not seen this thread and the comments I quoted at the start of this post, I'd likely never have mentioned it again. But this thread exists, and I suppose therefore that there must be some general anti-Nexus feeling out there. It'd be easy to dismiss that as sour grapes from banned users, and to assume that all banned users got what they deserved, so I wanted to contribute my own experience and impressions.

 

 

I was struck particularly by Halororor's comment that there is a "zero tolerance policy of questioning moderators' decisions". I have to say that does ring alarm bells for me. Moderation is clearly of vital importance - the internet can be a total cesspool, and indeed usually is without good moderation. And I know from personal experience (I ran a fairly popular IRC chat server about 10 years ago) that moderation is often a thankless task. But if it's true that the mere questioning of decisions can lead to a punitive response, then to me that suggests that moderation might sometimes be going beyond what is necessary into the realms of power-play or censorship. In the wider world, a key hallmark of a free society is free speech and the ability to question the decisions of those in power.

 

I know of course that this is not a society, this is a privately owned site. You don't have to be accountable to anyone. But I feel that that's not a good road to go too far down. I've seen many sites fall foul of it: at worst reaching the point where they feel like 1984.

 

I can understand the temptation - when a moderator is working hard, without pay, to try and keep a site friendly and popular, it can seem rather galling to have decisions called into question. But without questioning, without accountability, it is in my view not moderation any more. I believe that moderation should be hard. Anyone can click ban and move on. It's much more challenging - and therefore rewarding - to try and resolve the root issue without having to get rid of anyone.

 

And I feel strongly that there should never be a problem with the questioning of decisions, because decisions taken fairly will be fair and reasonable and will stand up to any scrutiny. Of course when one bans an idiot for being an idiot, they're going to question it idiotically. But those cases should be pretty obvious for what they are, and can be closed down after the obvious explanation is given. But if one never allows polite, measured discussion of decisions, and therefore takes the stance of "its my/our way - right or wrong - or GTFO", then I think the whole attitude and nature of the site can change, for the worst.

 

The anonymous nature of the internet has created a generation of people with alter-egos who say one thing online, because they can get away with it, and say another offline to people's faces. I don't agree with that. If you can't be nice to people here, you're gone.

 

I agree of course. But I find it's not necessarily black and white. When I've moderated in the past, I've always taken the "banhammer" as the absolute last resort, with the first, second and third resorts always being communication - talking to a person, and explaining why whatever they did is not allowed. In very many cases, I've found that someone who at first glance appeared to be a trolling idiot is actually not. Maybe they thought they were being funny. Maybe they don't speak great English. Maybe they're just having a bad day. Whatever the reason, I've seen plenty of times when an "idiot sighting" has actually been borderline, and the "hard" way (talking to them patiently, at least at first) has revealed them to be decent people, where the "ban" would turn them into slathering trolls. One can certainly argue that decent people will always behave decently, but it goes both ways: if someone makes a genuine mistake, but is then treated with seeming contempt, they're far more likely to turn on their 'alter-ego' - indeed they may even feel they're just fitting in.

 

Of course there still are plenty of black-and-white cases. Someone who screams hate-filled obscenities (whether racist, homophobic, sexist, or whatever), can usually be taken at face value and dealt with immediately. But there are plenty of other cases that I believe need deeper inspection and more careful thought.

 

I should emphasise again that my experience at Nexus is only what I described at the start of my post. Anything else - e.g. people being banned for criticism - I am surmising purely from what Halororor said, and perhaps (I hope) is not true. And my own experience was certainly not terrible - I wasn't treated with contempt, just perhaps a little disdain. But I thought my experience, though mild and non-terminal, did speak to the same principles, and therefore meant I didn't find what Halororor said to be a big surprise.

 

Too many people act like utter idiots on the internet because they can get away with it. We don't want that here. And that's my take on it.

 

I agree with this completely. But I feel that an important corollary is that the non-idiots should be encouraged to be here, and that time and effort should be taken to establish on which side of the fence they fall. And treating everyone as "innocent until proven guilty" as a first stance does in my experience do wonders for helping as many people fall on the right side as possible.

 

It's a bit like those traffic wardens who give you a ticket if your car is parked 3 millimetres over the white line. "Rules are rules," they say. And technically, they're correct. But following only the letter of the law, not the spirit, and giving no-one the benefit of the doubt makes the world a much more unfriendly and tedious place.

 

In being banned without warning, I certainly wasn't given any benefit of the doubt. Perhaps the moderator was overwhelmed with idiots that night and had no time to talk to me. What I find much less understandable is that even after I bent over backwards with every effort to both apologise and to show that I wasn't one of those general idiots, I saw not the slightest shift: I got one sarcastic response that seemed to imply that maybe I actually was one of those idiots, and then I was just ignored. The mod who actually banned me ignored me completely, not even acknowledging that he'd read my PM.

 

I can understand the temptation to think "we have hundreds of thousands of users, most of whom have never broken a rule: why waste time on one who has." But I think that's the wrong approach. Whereas any one decision for any one user makes no difference (other than to that user,) if it occurs repeatedly and becomes a pattern, then it creates an unfriendly vibe which in turn could lead to an increase of dissatisfaction with the site. That'd be a great shame, because one of this site's great strengths is as a central, one-stop-shop repository: if people leave and post mods (and their feedback) elsewhere, inevitably users are going to find it harder to know about every great mod that is available.

 

Anyway, thanks for reading all this, if you did! I'll say again that I think that this is a wonderful site. I hope that the very fact that I've written all this will indicate my strong feelings in that regard - I'd not have bothered writing anything unless I felt the site was well worth the effort.

Edited May 31, 2012 by tjobbins

[myrmaad]

The unban form is for site bans, and was broken for about a week, but should be fixed now with a recent site update.

 

Would you mind terribly sending me a copy of your unban request via the PM system?

 

Also, we are normally very strict about discussion of individual staff actions in the forums, it leads to public debate of moderators and that is not good for the morale of the staff members who do this job on a volunteer basis, and believe me it is a thankless job.

 

All chat is logged and for some reason I feel like I've seen the log of your "event". I have been violently ill for a week though, so may be mistaken.

[JimboUK]

Maybe the rules (all of them) should be in one place clearly visible and accessible from the various sites. I'd been a member here for couple of years before I found them, not everybody uses the forum.

[tjobbins]

I'll look into it.

 

Thanks myrmaad, I'd appreciate that - it'd be nice to be able to go into chat again. But I just wanted to say that that wasn't my object in posting here: I didn't post my essay to get the ban lifted - I'd have posted back in the banned thread for that. I certainly don't want it to seem like I'm just whining over my circumstances or trying to escalate to the top to get a gripe resolved. I wasn't going to post about it again at all, but then I saw this thread and it seemed relevant to this topic, and (I hope) potentially of interest coming from something of a new, and outside perspective.

 

Actually I see now that it was your comment in the banned thread that I referenced in my post in this thread, when I said "a mod said that if you apologise.. unbans can follow". I thought yours was exactly the right sort of mod response: polite, reasonable, and open to further discussion. Exactly the sort of response I'd have hoped to have received. I'd actually already done everything you suggested, but I think that you weren't responding to me anyway - my post was several up by that point, and several days old, so I think your reply was to one of the newer unban requests posted after mine; my replies were probably buried by then, and I didn't raise it again after your response.

 

Anyway, I definitely don't want to derail this topic into a discussion of my ban specifically. I hope that my using it as an example along with my other points is constructive, as that was certainly my intention. This is a great site and I know that takes an awful lot of effort and energy to achieve, so thank you to all of you for that.

[Rational314]

Back to the original topic, though. It's something I feel rather strong about, but I've got quite a few concerns regarding the way moderating is handled on the Nexus forums. I've thought about voicing my concerns numerous times over the past few months, but due to the site's zero tolerance policy of questioning moderators' actions, I've refrained from risking my account in such a manner, even though I'm probably risking it with this post. I can also honestly say, giving the site's track record, I don't see it helping anything or encouraging change anywhere

 

The way I look at it is pretty simple; if you wouldn't say what you write here to a total stranger in a pub, you shouldn't write it. If I said a lot of the things that people get banned for here to some one I didn't know in a pub where I live, I'd expect to get glassed in the face. Unfortunately we cannot glass people in the face over the internet (yet, *fingers cross* though..), so we ban them instead.

 

if I may, I'd like to add some thoughts on this topic coming as a relatively new user, but one who has already had a somewhat negative experience of Nexus moderation. I only just saw the topic tonight, hence my somewhat late quoting of the above two comments. And apologies in advance for the very long post, I do understand if it's a "tl;dr"!

 

Firstly, and importantly, I'd like to say that this is an awesome site. I hope it will be clear that I mean all comments constructively, and am giving them only because they seem to me relevant to the issues and questions raised by this thread, and because I feel I have some personal experience despite my newbieness. I want to emphasise that because as a new user, I have no "stake" here - no huge post count over many years to justify giving my opinion and my suggestions. So if anyone is feeling "who are you to come here and say this," then fair enough; just know that my intentions are constructive and are written because even as a newbie, I can see that this a great site worth spending time on.

 

First, a brief intro. I'd never modded a game before Skyrim - in fact I'd always had a rather negative impression of modding. I had (completely baselessly) assumed it was generally similar to the people who port Android to run on iPhones: in other words, technically challenging and clever, but in practice pretty pointless and full of caveats and problems. Or at least, far more effort than the results justified.

 

Skyrim - a game I've now played for 150+ hours, which is more than all other games combined over the last few years - has of course shown me that that is utterly untrue. I've got 35 mods installed so far, and they have revolutionised my playing experience. Many of them add content that I'm sure the original developers would have added, had they had more time and budget - in other words, they are of a quality worthy of a professional development team. All of them have made the game more enjoyable, immersive, and/or challenging. I honestly can't imagine playing the game without them now. And I'm already planning a couple of my own.

 

I'm now a major modding convert, and Nexus has played a vital part in that. I can say for certain that if modding was a lot of effort, I wouldn't ever have bothered. That's not because I'm not technical (quite the opposite), but simply because I'm lazy and too much technical effort, at least of the mundane kind, feels like work and not gaming. So Nexus with its comprehensive mod lists, comments, endorsements, screenshots/videos, and most of all NMM, has enabled and encouraged me to expand on Skyrim significantly. When I first got Skyrim, it was a great game. Now it's a great hobby. I'm extremely grateful to Nexus for that!

 

 

But unfortunately I have had an experience that has tainted my experience a little. Shortly after I started reading the site, I discovered chat. I went in and chatted happily and copiously for an hour or two, having some good conversations with several people. Then suddenly I was unceremoniously banned, without a warning or any other communication. We'd been talking about consoles, and I had said that I really liked the Wii, because although it has technical limitations, it was great that, unlike the 360 and PS3, it was possible to run homebrew. As I was writing that, I made sure to emphasise that I was talking about homebrew and the ability to add new features to games one already owns: which is exactly what I do use Wii homebrew for - ripping my legally purchased games to a HDD so I don't have to disk swap, and so I can enable cheats and the like. I knew that piracy talk was forbidden, and didn't want it to seem like I was encouraging anyone to play pirated games.

 

So I was rather surprised to be so promptly banned, with no warning. But I did realise that I'd gone into chat without fully reading the rules. So my first response was to PM the mod who banned me, apologising for not having read the rules properly, explaining that I had absolutely not meant any reference to piracy, and asking if he could please re-consider.

 

Shortly after that, I discovered the "I've been banned" thread in the "Forum rules and strikes" thread. It mentioned a form to fill out to request an unban, but that was a 404. So I posted in the thread. I said basically the same things as in the PM, but putting more emphasis on the apology and fully admitting that I should have read the rules first. I said that "ignorance is no excuse," but that I hoped I could have a second chance.

 

To that I got a single, somewhat sarcastic reply saying basically "so you found the unban thread but not the thread about no console modding?" That was when I first realised that all discussion of console modding was completely banned. I replied, explaining again that no I hadn't read that (or any forum thread) before joining chat, and agreeing that yes that was a mistake - for which I apologised again - and saying again that no harm had been intended and so I'd be very grateful for a reconsideration.

 

That was 11 days ago. I got no further response on the thread, nor did the original banning mod ever respond to my PM. There was a subsequent post to the Banned thread by a different mod, in response to someone else, saying one should "apologise and commit to not repeating the offence" and then unbans would usually follow. That's precisely what I'd already done. I could I suppose have responded to that and asked again, but frankly by that point (now two or three days later), I'd lost interest and chat had lost a lot of its appeal. I felt by then that I'd already been as apologetic and conciliatory as was necessary, and I certainly wasn't going to beg. In fact if anything, I felt I'd been more apologetic than should be necessary. In my original post in that Banned thread, I said the ban was "fair enough", but in retrospect I changed my mind: what would have been much more reasonable in my view would have been a PM'd warning with a link to the "no console modding" thread. That's certainly all that would have been required to ensure I never talked about it again. Perhaps with a kick for emphasis and so others in the room could learn from my mistake as well.

 

I suppose what I found most galling was the sarcastic response I got from one mod - who took the time to respond, but seemingly not to read my explanation or at least take any notice of it. It felt very much like I had been unfairly tarred with the same brush as those chatters who troll, who scream racist obscenities, or who try to ask for assistance with their pirated game. It seemed that the moderator hadn't really read anything I'd said but just assumed "you've been banned, you must be bad."

 

Now it's just a chat ban and clearly it's not kept me from wanting to enjoy - and contribute to - the rest of the site. Had I not seen this thread and the comments I quoted at the start of this post, I'd likely never have mentioned it again. But this thread exists, and I suppose therefore that there must be some general anti-Nexus feeling out there. It'd be easy to dismiss that as sour grapes from banned users, and to assume that all banned users got what they deserved, so I wanted to contribute my own experience and impressions.

 

 

I was struck particularly by Halororor's comment that there is a "zero tolerance policy of questioning moderators' decisions". I have to say that does ring alarm bells for me. Moderation is clearly of vital importance - the internet can be a total cesspool, and indeed usually is without good moderation. And I know from personal experience (I ran a fairly popular IRC chat server about 10 years ago) that moderation is often a thankless task. But if it's true that the mere questioning of decisions can lead to a punitive response, then to me that suggests that moderation might sometimes be going beyond what is necessary into the realms of power-play or censorship. In the wider world, a key hallmark of a free society is free speech and the ability to question the decisions of those in power.

 

I know of course that this is not a society, this is a privately owned site. You don't have to be accountable to anyone. But I feel that that's not a good road to go too far down. I've seen many sites fall foul of it: at worst reaching the point where they feel like 1984.

 

I can understand the temptation - when a moderator is working hard, without pay, to try and keep a site friendly and popular, it can seem rather galling to have decisions called into question. But without questioning, without accountability, it is in my view not moderation any more. I believe that moderation should be hard. Anyone can click ban and move on. It's much more challenging - and therefore rewarding - to try and resolve the root issue without having to get rid of anyone.

 

And I feel strongly that there should never be a problem with the questioning of decisions, because decisions taken fairly will be fair and reasonable and will stand up to any scrutiny. Of course when one bans an idiot for being an idiot, they're going to question it idiotically. But those cases should be pretty obvious for what they are, and can be closed down after the obvious explanation is given. But if one never allows polite, measured discussion of decisions, and therefore takes the stance of "its my/our way - right or wrong - or GTFO", then I think the whole attitude and nature of the site can change, for the worst.

 

The anonymous nature of the internet has created a generation of people with alter-egos who say one thing online, because they can get away with it, and say another offline to people's faces. I don't agree with that. If you can't be nice to people here, you're gone.

 

I agree of course. But I find it's not necessarily black and white. When I've moderated in the past, I've always taken the "banhammer" as the absolute last resort, with the first, second and third resorts always being communication - talking to a person, and explaining why whatever they did is not allowed. In very many cases, I've found that someone who at first glance appeared to be a trolling idiot is actually not. Maybe they thought they were being funny. Maybe they don't speak great English. Maybe they're just having a bad day. Whatever the reason, I've seen plenty of times when an "idiot sighting" has actually been borderline, and the "hard" way (talking to them patiently, at least at first) has revealed them to be decent people, where the "ban" would turn them into slathering trolls. One can certainly argue that decent people will always behave decently, but it goes both ways: if someone makes a genuine mistake, but is then treated with seeming contempt, they're far more likely to turn on their 'alter-ego' - indeed they may even feel they're just fitting in.

 

Of course there still are plenty of black-and-white cases. Someone who screams hate-filled obscenities (whether racist, homophobic, sexist, or whatever), can usually be taken at face value and dealt with immediately. But there are plenty of other cases that I believe need deeper inspection and more careful thought.

 

I should emphasise again that my experience at Nexus is only what I described at the start of my post. Anything else - e.g. people being banned for criticism - I am surmising purely from what Halororor said, and perhaps (I hope) is not true. And my own experience was certainly not terrible - I wasn't treated with contempt, just perhaps a little disdain. But I thought my experience, though mild and non-terminal, did speak to the same principles, and therefore meant I didn't find what Halororor said to be a big surprise.

 

Too many people act like utter idiots on the internet because they can get away with it. We don't want that here. And that's my take on it.

 

I agree with this completely. But I feel that an important corollary is that the non-idiots should be encouraged to be here, and that time and effort should be taken to establish on which side of the fence they fall. And treating everyone as "innocent until proven guilty" as a first stance does in my experience do wonders for helping as many people fall on the right side as possible.

 

It's a bit like those traffic wardens who give you a ticket if your car is parked 3 millimetres over the white line. "Rules are rules," they say. And technically, they're correct. But following only the letter of the law, not the spirit, and giving no-one the benefit of the doubt makes the world a much more unfriendly and tedious place.

 

In being banned without warning, I certainly wasn't given any benefit of the doubt. Perhaps the moderator was overwhelmed with idiots that night and had no time to talk to me. What I find much less understandable is that even after I bent over backwards with every effort to both apologise and to show that I wasn't one of those general idiots, I saw not the slightest shift: I got one sarcastic response that seemed to imply that maybe I actually was one of those idiots, and then I was just ignored. The mod who actually banned me ignored me completely, not even acknowledging that he'd read my PM.

 

I can understand the temptation to think "we have hundreds of thousands of users, most of whom have never broken a rule: why waste time on one who has." But I think that's the wrong approach. Whereas any one decision for any one user makes no difference (other than to that user,) if it occurs repeatedly and becomes a pattern, then it creates an unfriendly vibe which in turn could lead to an increase of dissatisfaction with the site. That'd be a great shame, because one of this site's great strengths is as a central, one-stop-shop repository: if people leave and post mods (and their feedback) elsewhere, inevitably users are going to find it harder to know about every great mod that is available.

 

Anyway, thanks for reading all this, if you did! I'll say again that I think that this is a wonderful site. I hope that the very fact that I've written all this will indicate my strong feelings in that regard - I'd not have bothered writing anything unless I felt the site was well worth the effort.

 

 

 

Evidently the don't talk about consoling modding rule still flies over your head, and I'm sorry your PM got buried amongst the other things I had to do, guess you should have wait longer then 20 minutes before deciding to take it to the boards. Though now you've decided to make a giant wall of text taking cheap shots at my self, and another member of staff. Not a great way to convince me to allow you back in to the chat.

 

Think a little harder before you post next time.

[myrmaad]

I want to correct something here: it is not true that we have a "zero tolerance policy of questioning moderators' decisions".

 

You may question all you like, politely, and in private. Via PM.

[Thandal]

I want to correct something here: it is not true that we have a "zero tolerance policy of questioning moderators' decisions".

 

You may question all you like, politely, and in private. Via PM.

Expanding on that bit, here's the relevant part of the ToS (link in the top-right of every page):

 

Nexus site staff

 

Nexus sites are owned and maintained by Robin Scott (member name "Dark0ne"). Robin is regarded as the law on Nexus sites and he has the final say on any action that might need to be taken regarding a breach of the terms of service for any Nexus site. What Robin says goes irrespective of whether there has been a breach of the terms of service or not.

 

Nexus sites and the forums are staffed by un-paid volunteers (known as moderators and "staff") who work hard to insure the smooth operation of Nexus sites and encourage a healthy community. The moderators and other admin on the site have been given specific privileges by Robin to keep the site clean of the bad articles listed in these terms and use their own personal judgement, that Robin trusts, to come to decisions.

 

These moderators have a right to carry out their task without harassment, insult or hassle. Members who believe that a member of staff is not conducting themselves properly should get in contact with Robin via the forums or email [...or the Nexus Private Message System]. Know that if Robin receives word of any members harassing or being rude to Nexus site staff then he will take every action possible to permanently remove them from his sites.

[Deleted4709949User]

Actually no. It was Dark0ne's last line, not your's. And no, I won't reconsider either, even if it's me or my family hit by a law enforcement mistake. Those rare cases when it might go wrong should not stop us enforcing it at all. No, sir.

If it's only punishment which makes people realise their wrongdoing, then we need more of it, so other people learn from it by example and be warned for the future not to do the same in the same erroneous belief. That's my point.

trolls won't stop being trolls until they get their identity taken away or they forget about trolling or their anger.

[dzorro]

Indeed, but most of them trolls are hiding behind proxyies.. Take that toy away, and you get rid of them permenantly. Witch is what i don't understand. I have seen other sites bann the use of proxies to prevent this. How feasable is it to have something similar in place here ??