Community Notification Discussion!
By
Aura_Familia,
Posted on: 2007-10-05 16:59 in News, Events and Announcement Discussion
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
what does /jranger stand for anyways? I never understood that one.
[/ QUOTE ]
JRanger would reply to every thread he disagreed with:
[ QUOTE ]
no
[/ QUOTE ]
He was then banned. /jranger is now used in memory of his permeating dissent.
[/ QUOTE ]
Oh wow, he got banned? I was wondering when that would happen... Although I really don't like that people are trying to "immortalize" his inane nonsense.
[/ QUOTE ]
I see him as a victim and a martyr of the system. He was only stating his opinion. He wasnt insulting anyone.
May god bless JRanger. He fought for freedom til the end.
I may disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
Voltaire
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So Ex, did you neglect to mention the PvP forums as exempt, or will all of PWNZ be banned come tuesday? 
[/ QUOTE ]
You say that like it's a bad thing. :P
[/ QUOTE ]
That's not very nice 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
what does /jranger stand for anyways? I never understood that one.
[/ QUOTE ]
JRanger would reply to every thread he disagreed with:
[ QUOTE ]
no
[/ QUOTE ]
He was then banned. /jranger is now used in memory of his permeating dissent.
[/ QUOTE ]
Oh wow, he got banned? I was wondering when that would happen... Although I really don't like that people are trying to "immortalize" his inane nonsense.
[/ QUOTE ]
I see him as a victim and a martyr of the system. He was only stating his opinion. He wasnt insulting anyone.
May god bless JRanger. He fought for freedom til the end.
[/ QUOTE ]
Poor little Opinion, it gets abused so much by the online community. It justifies everything and absolves everyone, all because grade school teachers are so fond of telling students that all opinions are equally valid and meaningful and we should accept everyone's opinion.
Well, in the real world that's not the case. Oftentimes people hold opinions that clash harshly with society, community, culture and government. If these people act on their opinions in an overly aggressive manner, they then get punished by the society. This is as it should be, because all opinions are not created equal and many are downright hostile to certain other groups of people or cultures.
Grow up, "Opinion" is a child's excuse for bad behavior.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As for "/no" posts being singled out, I think it should be obvious to anyone who thinks about the situation. It's not like we're running some kind of democracy here where you're voting on these issues; what we're doing is having a conversation and saying "no" is about as childish and argumentative as you can get. If someone said that to me in conversation I'd be baffled and annoyed.
[/ QUOTE ]
That, however, is not a universally-held opinion. You cannot even (with a straight face) claim to know with any certitude that it is a majority opinion.
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't understand this because I made four statements in the quote but you don't specify what you're talking about. That's probably because you don't really know what you're saying either. So, if you care to, elucidate me as to which part of the quote you refer.
[ QUOTE ]
Nah, only 270 words. And six sentences. ^_^
I'm planning to tweak it a bit, though. Maybe aim for 300 words.
EDIT: made it to 376 words before reaching, I think, the "stretch limit" for the format selected.
[/ QUOTE ]Link please? Sounds good.
Orc&Pie No.53230 There is an orc, and somehow, he got a pie. And you are hungry.
www.repeat-offenders.net
Negaduck: I see you found the crumb. I knew you'd never notice the huge flag.
LOL.
Not to worry all. Just don't respond to suggestions you don't like, if you are afraid of the moderation.
I for one no longer take anything here seriously, since its just for fun. and honestly I stopped thinking the devs did over a year ago.
too many flame wars.
Blazara Aura LVL 50 Fire/Psi Dom (with 125% recharge)
Flameboxer Aura LVL 50 SS/Fire Brute
Ice 'Em Aura LVL 50 Ice Tank
Darq Widow Fortune LVL 50 Fortunata (200% rech/Night Widow 192.5% rech)--thanks issue 19!
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As for "/no" posts being singled out, I think it should be obvious to anyone who thinks about the situation. It's not like we're running some kind of democracy here where you're voting on these issues; what we're doing is having a conversation and saying "no" is about as childish and argumentative as you can get. If someone said that to me in conversation I'd be baffled and annoyed.
[/ QUOTE ]
That, however, is not a universally-held opinion. You cannot even (with a straight face) claim to know with any certitude that it is a majority opinion.
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't understand this because I made four statements in the quote but you don't specify what you're talking about. That's probably because you don't really know what you're saying either. So, if you care to, elucidate me as to which part of the quote you refer.
[/ QUOTE ]
He is responding to your "it should be obvious to anyone who tinks about the situation." most certainly it is NOT a universally held opinion.
if someone just doesn't like an idea there is no requirment that they explain why.
just as there is no requirement if someone likes an idea.
Blazara Aura LVL 50 Fire/Psi Dom (with 125% recharge)
Flameboxer Aura LVL 50 SS/Fire Brute
Ice 'Em Aura LVL 50 Ice Tank
Darq Widow Fortune LVL 50 Fortunata (200% rech/Night Widow 192.5% rech)--thanks issue 19!
Wonder if this means I'll be moderated again for not having a smiley in one of my posts...
And just for safe measure, here's the smiley 
.
Let's Dance!
[ QUOTE ]
So yes, you do advocate an atmosphere of suspicion and paranoia directed at one's fellow posters, because you do think one should have to go through any possible quotes with aforementioned fine-toothed comb.
Thank you for confirming that sad fact.
[/ QUOTE ]
The quote feature is just a tool to make responses more clear and concise - it is still as if you have written it. Just like when you quote someone in real life.
On the other hand, I have PM'd Ex asking how this kind of edit looks on the record. And if you have this kind of thing happen regularly enough to be put on the watch list, then you do need to pay more attention to what you quote, "paranoia" if you will.
Orc&Pie No.53230 There is an orc, and somehow, he got a pie. And you are hungry.
www.repeat-offenders.net
Negaduck: I see you found the crumb. I knew you'd never notice the huge flag.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you're goin to disagree with the premise, you have to provide the reasons because they have not already been presented. Simply posting "No" doesn't do that.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think I'm just gonna start posting, "I do not like this idea" That should get the point accross. [censored] whiners. I don't owe you, or anybody else and explanation for anything.
[/ QUOTE ]
Same here, I dont owe any of those whiny little feces factories a damned thing. Besides, some of the dummies who post a suggestion wouldnt accept any kind of disagreement, no matter how well thought out, because they cant accept they are wrong.
[/ QUOTE ]
QFT
[ QUOTE ]
So yes, Virginia, any edit meets the criteria.
[/ QUOTE ]
For being tracked? You bet. The moderators, even if they don't post, hold an EXTREME amount of influence on how people see these boards, which is City of's main public face of it's community - anyone can view it. It is where the companies and us, the gamers, have the most interaction.
Every edit, deletion, etc, is tracked. To whom, by whom. It is another way of also protecting the edited, etc. I once had a post edited because it was a little too political-critical, and got reported. The moderator didn't leave "edited by ModeratorX", no the mod changed what I said. I reported the moderator via PM to Lighthouse, also with a complaint about consistency as a couple of posts that had been reported before I even posted still had their personal attacks against fellow posters in there. They know exactly who did it, and talked to the person who edited my post.
The problem is, you seem to be unaware that they have always tracked edits. All they are doing is adding a bell to draw attention to people who regularly require edits. And, IIRC, they keep notes on what was edited, so they know what kind of stuff is going on.
I presume that there is no auto-banning. Too much can go wrong - and they do give notices if you are nearing the line. I don't think they have ever perma-banned someone without prior temp bans either (short of being spammers/porn linkers, etc, if any have ever visited here).
We are a huge community here, and it's not one that is very very self moderating. I have mod status on a very self-modding board, and there is something like four of us there, and 11k registered names have posted there since a little after 2000. And numerous are 1 time posters, or people who have changed their names. We would of gone under/quit if we had the community here, I think.
Orc&Pie No.53230 There is an orc, and somehow, he got a pie. And you are hungry.
www.repeat-offenders.net
Negaduck: I see you found the crumb. I knew you'd never notice the huge flag.
[ QUOTE ]
The question that arises is how much detail one has to give in a negative response before it becomes "constructive feedback." "No" is now considered "unconstructive." How about "I'm afraid I don't agree with that idea, for reasons that I can't quite put into words right now?" How about "/unsigned, for the reasons given above?" How about "/unsigned, for the reasons given above, particularly X, Y, and Z?"
[/ QUOTE ] I would call the first example nebulous, but 10 time better than /no. The other two would be solid.
Orc&Pie No.53230 There is an orc, and somehow, he got a pie. And you are hungry.
www.repeat-offenders.net
Negaduck: I see you found the crumb. I knew you'd never notice the huge flag.
[ QUOTE ]
I am not my brother's keeper. Cryptic and NCSoft don't pay me enough to be
[/ QUOTE ]
I agree. Heck, 18 years of room and board isn't enough either, and I am still stuck with it. :P
Orc&Pie No.53230 There is an orc, and somehow, he got a pie. And you are hungry.
www.repeat-offenders.net
Negaduck: I see you found the crumb. I knew you'd never notice the huge flag.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As for "/no" posts being singled out, I think it should be obvious to anyone who thinks about the situation. It's not like we're running some kind of democracy here where you're voting on these issues; what we're doing is having a conversation and saying "no" is about as childish and argumentative as you can get. If someone said that to me in conversation I'd be baffled and annoyed.
[/ QUOTE ]
That, however, is not a universally-held opinion. You cannot even (with a straight face) claim to know with any certitude that it is a majority opinion.
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't understand this because I made four statements in the quote but you don't specify what you're talking about. That's probably because you don't really know what you're saying either. So, if you care to, elucidate me as to which part of the quote you refer.
[/ QUOTE ]
Picked out in color for you. Sorry, but I expect single paragraphs to address single topics, usually defined by the first sentence; the colored bits are what I thought the whole thing was about.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So yes, you do advocate an atmosphere of suspicion and paranoia directed at one's fellow posters, because you do think one should have to go through any possible quotes with aforementioned fine-toothed comb.
Thank you for confirming that sad fact.
[/ QUOTE ]
The quote feature is just a tool to make responses more clear and concise - it is still as if you have written it. Just like when you quote someone in real life.
[/ QUOTE ]
Nope.
In real life, if I alter what I purport to be quoting, I am in fact guilty of misquoting the person involved. Furthermore, I have had people go absolutely ballistic on me for simple quoting as I have been here - in pieces and chunks. What do you think will happen if I start inserting [omitted] or [censored] in place of questionable terms, words, or even whole phrases?
Flames, is what.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So yes, you do advocate an atmosphere of suspicion and paranoia directed at one's fellow posters, because you do think one should have to go through any possible quotes with aforementioned fine-toothed comb.
Thank you for confirming that sad fact.
[/ QUOTE ]
The quote feature is just a tool to make responses more clear and concise - it is still as if you have written it. Just like when you quote someone in real life.
[/ QUOTE ]
[censored].
In [omitted], if I [censored] what I purport to be [censored], I am in fact [omitted] of [censored] the [censored] involved. Furthermore, I have had [omitted] go absolutely [censored] on me for simple [omitted] as I have been here - in [censored] and [censored]. What do you think will happen if I start [censored] [omitted] or [censored] in place of questionable [censored], [omitted], or even whole [cows]?
[censored], is what.
[/ QUOTE ]
Not helping, G. 
It's mad libs!
Just use ellipses. It's what they taught us to do in college. Put some footnotes, or a parenthetical citation, in there so that people can go see the original quote in context.
"I wish my life was a non-stop Hollywood movie show,
A fantasy world of celluloid villains and heroes."
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As for "/no" posts being singled out, I think it should be obvious to anyone who thinks about the situation. It's not like we're running some kind of democracy here where you're voting on these issues; what we're doing is having a conversation and saying "no" is about as childish and argumentative as you can get. If someone said that to me in conversation I'd be baffled and annoyed.
[/ QUOTE ]
That, however, is not a universally-held opinion. You cannot even (with a straight face) claim to know with any certitude that it is a majority opinion.
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't understand this because I made four statements in the quote but you don't specify what you're talking about. That's probably because you don't really know what you're saying either. So, if you care to, elucidate me as to which part of the quote you refer.
[/ QUOTE ]
Picked out in color for you. Sorry, but I expect single paragraphs to address single topics, usually defined by the first sentence; the colored bits are what I thought the whole thing was about.
[/ QUOTE ]
My invisible "from an educated/thoughtful perspective" tags always get me in trouble. If you look at this scenario in the real world, it will be obvious. I guess that level of extrapolation is not common amongst posters though so I erred, or maybe it's just that people have different expectations from an online community than they do from a real life community.
By the way, you should update your concept of paragraph because multiple supporting facts can and do go into one paragraph, each of which can be disputed. Again, I'd like to say that concepts like "opinion" and "paragraph" take on a different meaning in real life than they had in grade school or high school.
So... what was the verdict on PWNZ? Is the whole forum going away or what?
Well, let me put it this way:
If PWNZ goes away, every poster will probably go on a rampage with the express purpose of getting themselves banned. Read: not pleasant for the mods.
I doubt the forum will be going away.
[ QUOTE ]
It's mad libs!
[/ QUOTE ]
lol....wait..../em runs and hides
I just want an official word before I do a barrel roll over there. *grin*
Part 1 - To be or not to be
Moderation begins with the self... in all things. When applied to a thread topic... It begins at the Topic Title.
If you see a topic that you are tired of seeing over and over; or a topic that otherwise doesn't do it for you... you have the option of walking away from it without entry. If you decide to enter such a thread... you are putting yourself into trouble's path.
It continues once you've entered the thread and have decided to read the post (the whole entire post with an objective mind). If you go into said thread and do not give the entire topic details the benefit of being fully read... you are not only insulting the poster's intelligence but your own as well. If you are going into said thread with a closed mind, you are doing the same.
The third step is deciding whether to respond to a thread topic that you've thoroughly and objectively read. (If you haven't done this... chances are that you probably shouldn't be responding)
The fourth step is deciding what kind of response you are going to give.
Part 2 - /yes vs. /no
this is comparing apples to oranges.
If the OP posts and details a topic and someone /yesses it... then that's pretty much the end of the discussion between the OP and that particular responder; the responder is echoing what the OP stated and it would be redundant for the responder to regurgitate the OP.
When the OP posts and details a topic and someone /noes it, it creates questions that the OP or other casual readers may want answered. Once you have gone out of your way to enter a thread, read it and respond... expect to provide an explanation for your response if it's bound to bring up questions.
Part 3. - The sad thing is:
It's the usual suspects that are getting outraged over this.
They're worried about getting retroactively punished for all of the free passes (in the form of edits and warnings - as opposed to outright bans) they have gotten in the past for things they could've avoided in the first place (had they the mind and discipline to do so)
They are looking for exclusion to (as well as whining about) rules that would apply to them... while playing the role of 'rules lawyers' against other people when attempting to justify their own actions
They are actively showing no regard to the people that have the power to give them (how do they put it) the privilege of posting here and would have you believe that they are acting with maturity and constructivity in mind when they approach the threads of people who lack such power.
They still aggress with the same attitude that they have recently been warned about and warned again... and again.
Good luck buckos, you reap what you sow
Apparently, I play "City of Shakespeare"
*Arc #95278-Gathering the Four Winds -3 step arc; challenging - 5 Ratings/3 Stars (still working out the kinks)
*Arc #177826-Lights, Camera, Scream! - 3 step arc, camp horror; try out in 1st person POV - 35 Ratings/4 Stars
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you're goin to disagree with the premise, you have to provide the reasons because they have not already been presented. Simply posting "No" doesn't do that.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think I'm just gonna start posting, "I do not like this idea" That should get the point accross. [censored] whiners. I don't owe you, or anybody else and explanation for anything.
[/ QUOTE ]
Same here, I dont owe any of those whiny little feces factories a damned thing. Besides, some of the dummies who post a suggestion wouldnt accept any kind of disagreement, no matter how well thought out, because they cant accept they are wrong.
[/ QUOTE ]
Again, if you want your objections to be paid attention to, you have to support them. Otherwise, they're meaningless, and a waste of everyone's time.
Likewise, calling people names does nothing to strengthen one's argument.