So, what's up with this staff resentment lately?

[Tornado]

This is going to sound pretty pissy, but in my defense I'm pretty pissed off about it, so here goes:

What exactly is with the recent demands on moderators to justify their moderation actions for third parties who aren't even involved with said actions in the first place? I can understand when people started asking about Autosaver when he was banned. He's a long term member and people will naturally be curious as to what is up; even if I wasn't particularly impressed with people assuming why he was banned and then saying that their incorrect assumptions weren't proper reason for a ban without the staff meeting a bunch of prerequisites for it.

But then it popped up again today after the OP of the Shadow topic was banned, with people starting shit in the Status updates about it and for no other reason to complain about it. And while it's certainly annoying as all hell to see people who have no idea what they are talking about make big public spectacles undermining staff actions and trying to turn members against the staff over them, I'm more curious if anyone can think of why members are taking it upon themselves to start this crap with the staff and drag it all out into the open as frequently as possible.

I want to say it's because of how frequently staff lock threads for having no effort putting into them, since that seems to be a common bitching point lately ("So this new member got banned for making a first post that was considerably longer and more well thought-out than most first member's post?" was specifically said about the Shadow topic guy), but does anyone else have any ideas? Or perhaps ideas of what can be done about it?

Edited September 23, 2012 by Tornado

[Semi-colon e]

Because people like to gossip and people want to know what's going on even if it's not really for them to know or be involved in. We're also not supposed to talk about banned people so we get reverse psychology.

Also tied to the status updates thing again as well as that's where it all happens! It happens there because people are worried about questioning the staff directly, is my guess. It's also the quickest way to get as many people to see or respond to it due to the instantaneous nature of the statuses compared to PMs or especially threads.

As to what can be done about it I have no idea, I am already talking out my ass enough as it is.

Edited September 23, 2012 by Semi-colon e

[Wentos]

So you're saying it's too much to ask we be informed about why things are happening in our community?

[Tornado]

So you're saying it's too much to ask we be informed about why things are happening in our community?

I'm saying it's too much to demand that you be informed of things that happen behind the scenes on purpose, particularly when you aren't told what they are so you just make assumptions for why things happened instead.

Edited September 23, 2012 by Tornado

[Wentos]

I'm saying it's too much to demand that you be informed of things that happen behind the scenes on purpose, particularly when you aren't told what they are you just make assumptions for why things happened instead.

I never demanded anything. If the staff decides to keep things a secret, they can't expect people not to talk; people are gonna assume unless they know otherwise.

Edited September 23, 2012 by KatamariParadox

[Semi-colon e]

The wanting to know what's going on is natural, people talking and making assumptions is natural, people holding it against staff and using it as "ammo" against them is the issue. I haven't really seen it but I've seen a lot of questioning about people being banned lately.

Edited September 23, 2012 by Semi-colon e

[Wentos]

I want to make clear that I have no resentment against the staff for not informing us of things; if someone else does, that's not me. I was only ever curious, and I usually drop the subject pretty quickly.

[\gunther]

i take sonic discussing very srsly & the POOPHEADS AT THE STAFF just ruines everything for me

i call for anarchy whos w/me ????

[Autosaver]

When people started questioning my ban, it really wasn't some sort of staff attack, it was just wondering why I was banned. Well, at least from what I read. I know that the staff did delete/lock a couple statuses so I have no idea if people went farther than that. But yeah, I was banned for a reason. I posted a viral ad that had nudity in it (YES I KNOW IT WAS STUPID GUYS), just in case some of you wanted to know. I still see people asking about my ban and throwing in random reasons why I did so. No, it wasn't "the mods are mean!!" or anything, it was well deserved.

So yeah, 100% bans are actually deserved. The moderators aren't going to ban someone because they're a new user or they got only one warning. It usually consists of repeated or serious offenses. I know people want to know, but please don't yell at the moderators or start down talking them because something doesn't look right. Try to contact that banned member another way or ask around instead of jumping to conclusions.

What can be done? Don't spread misinformation about what happened and do not try to leave some snarky comments. If people started some uprising after I was banned I'm sure they would never let me back in. That would totally ruin the chances of having a reconsideration. If the situation doesn't involve you, then why do you have to step in? At least step in some way that doesn't cause a ton of drama. And even then, you're not entitled to know everything.

Another thing to note was that one thread complaining about a lock. I thought that thread was trying to get all the members to get on his side and argue with the moderators. I think it could have been easily solved by pm'ing a moderator or something.

Edited September 23, 2012 by Autosaver

[Blue Wisp]

i take sonic discussing very srsly & the POOPHEADS AT THE STAFF just ruines everything for me

i call for anarchy whos w/me ????

Anarchy Reigns up in this forum. HOO-HAW.

Seriously though, if the staff do something well... They must have a reason for it, it's not their fault if you don't agree with their decisions. Albeit I don't really defend anyone in this argument thing.

[Bright Eyes]

This is going to sound pretty pissy, but in my defense I'm pretty pissed off about it, so here goes:

What exactly is with the recent demands on moderators to justify their moderation actions for third parties who aren't even involved with said actions in the first place? I can understand when people started asking about Autosaver when he was banned. He's a long term member and people will naturally be curious as to what is up; even if I wasn't particularly impressed with people assuming why he was banned and then saying that their incorrect assumptions weren't proper reason for a ban without the staff meeting a bunch of prerequisites for it.

But then it popped up again today after the OP of the Shadow topic was banned, with people starting shit in the Status updates about it and for no other reason to complain about it. And while it's certainly annoying as all hell to see people who have no idea what they are talking about make big public spectacles undermining staff actions and trying to turn members against the staff over them, I'm more curious if anyone can think of why members are taking it upon themselves to start this crap with the staff and drag it all out into the open as frequently as possible.

I want to say it's because of how frequently staff lock threads for having no effort putting into them, since that seems to be a common bitching point lately ("So this new member got banned for making a first post that was considerably longer and more well thought-out than most first member's post?" was specifically said about the Shadow topic guy), but does anyone else have any ideas? Or perhaps ideas of what can be done about it?

I asked a legitimate question to the moderators in the thread.

Calm the heck down.

[Solkia]

I would have banned his ass too.

What, do people actually want more topics like that?

Though I've only seen this happen twice so far, I don't think it's necessarily a big deal atm personally.

Edited September 23, 2012 by 2-Dollar Solkia

[Autosaver]

I asked a legitimate question to the moderators in the thread.

Calm the heck down.

It came off as extremely elitist and anti-staff in your post. I can see it as a jab at the moderators.

"On another note why has the OP been banned for one post and without even a warning.

A bit ridiculous."

You don't even know what happened, and you're assuming that he made one post and the mods banned him off the spot. There was probably something bigger involved, and it would have been better if you just gave a moderator a private message. Making it in the public seemed like you were degrading the moderators.

And we can't calm down, this is the internet.

[Remy]

So you're saying it's too much to ask we be informed about why things are happening in our community?

SSMB is actually a lot more transparent about moderator actions then most other forums I've been on.

People are never banned on SSMB "for no reason, without warning". Just because the reason isn't immediately clear to you as a member doesn't mean we're doing it just because we can.

[Blacklightning]

To be honest, I kinda miss being able to view profiles on banned members. Being able to go through their recent posts/threads, and by proxy their last unbanned moments, is something I always found interesting in that it helped serve as one specific example of what not to do at a time. I never actually read the rules in depth here because I felt I could learn a hell of a lot more just by reading up on people who drew the last straw. XD

...not that it would've helped with the specific example in the OP, seeing as he only had one post and was banned for reasons pertaining the nature of the account rather the content of his posts anyway, but I imagine the demand for staff explanations otherwise could probably be a hell of a lot lighter if members could do their own reading without having to go through a custom Google search for it. Not that I have a massive problem with it personally - if some guy gets himself banned, chances are it's not my fuckin' problem.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

Thing is, we veteran members know how the Mods work...in general.

And they don't up and ban people for no reason. In the 7 years I've been a member here, there's always been some reason someone gets banned, and it's spelled out in the rules. When someone gets banned, you can't assume that it's because the mods don't like this guy or anything shallow because considering the history we've had a number of fanboys and hatedom that we could do without.

SSMB has some of the nicest moderators you can find, and that is saying a lot considering the nature of the internet. And considering how we've had previous topics on this, it goes without saying that since we have a lot of new members who are unaware of this they need to be aware of who they're talking about. They're not unreasonable.

[Diogenes]

People are never banned on SSMB "for no reason, without warning". Just because the reason isn't immediately clear to you as a member doesn't mean we're doing it just because we can.

Maybe, but it's hard to know that for sure when we don't know what's going on behind the scenes.

I mean, I've been around here long enough to know the mods are pretty cool, and I'm not accusing anyone of power-tripping or anything like that. But it's no surprise that people are confused when they don't have all the information. Personally I don't see the harm in a bit more transparency; if the actions are legit, there's nothing to hide, and people can know what's going on rather than seeing people get banned with no clear reason.

[Remy]

Maybe, but it's hard to know that for sure when we don't know what's going on behind the scenes.

I mean, I've been around here long enough to know the mods are pretty cool, and I'm not accusing anyone of power-tripping or anything like that. But it's no surprise that people are confused when they don't have all the information. Personally I don't see the harm in a bit more transparency; if the actions are legit, there's nothing to hide, and people can know what's going on rather than seeing people get banned with no clear reason.

Dizney has explained why the guy was banned already, so I'm not really sure which bans you have an issue with.

There's no actual reason for us to expose every single suspension or ban other than to satisfy member gossip oriented curiosity. Most of the time, if you actually notice members are usually banned with what is practically a public hazing.

[Sean]

I'm sorry but it's really none of your guys' business for us to give you reports on everything we do. What are you, our parents?

Anyone who makes assumptions about bans can take it out the back door, too. Huge peeve of mine.

[Conando]

Well, I can see why people would be curious as to way Autosaver was banned but, I had no idea people were demanding that the staff tell people why someone is banned or whatever else. They clearly do it for a reason, anyone who has been here for more than 30 minutes should know the staff aren't out to get them. I've been here a long time now, and I've seen plenty of banned members who were given more chances that I would have given them. The staff here are a lot more fair than general forum staff.

Edited September 24, 2012 by King Of Awesome

[Danielius]

I'm not interested who is banned and why because I trust the staff and moderators.

You can call them harsh and so on, (bla bla bla), but I'm sure their doing their job right. Those who complain should consider how much nerves they go through managing this forum.

Why instead of always complaining, no one does a topic "Why we like the SSMB staff"?

I have been in the same boots some years ago, and I know, how others can piss off with hate messages and teaching how everything should be done. Not everyone can be Zen all the time

So basically I'm mad at those who are mad And it's not a gossip show. And.. I HATE GOSSIPS *caps lock off* as they're most of the time untrue. Also it's not healthy to dig at the trash-bins.

Edited September 24, 2012 by Danielius

[Tornado]

Personally I don't see the harm in a bit more transparency; if the actions are legit, there's nothing to hide, and people can know what's going on rather than seeing people get banned with no clear reason.

Popular, long term member gets banned. Because staff has "nothing to hide" they go out of their way to divulge why, essentially opening up the moderation forum up for all to see (and defeating the purpose of it in the process).

"That's not a good enough reason."

Or

"He would never do anything like that. I know him."

Or

"He acted like that way on purpose because the moderators wouldn't do anything about it."

So now, aside from it not really being any of their business in the first place, there is a (public) rallying point to demand the moderation action gets reversed. And I've seen it happen before, including on here; and not too long ago at that (because I agree with what Autosaver said above). And while I certainly have issue with the profiles of banned members being unviewable and would like that restored to how it was, even that wouldn't necessarily change anything because a lot of times the truly massive member flameouts happen it tends to happen in Status Updates, posts or threads that are deleted afterwards.

SSMB staff are already considerably more transparent about moderation actions than at the other (larger and older) forum I frequent because staff actions (warnings, strikes and sometimes even bans) are generally made public rather than done through PM so the people can see what not to do. Short of a staff-maintained banned user log (which the other forum has for some members, but I don't think SSMB could handle), I'm not seeing what way the staff could even do it without causing dissent with staff decisions.

Edited September 24, 2012 by Tornado

[Chooch]

I don't really concern myself with people who get banned and such.

All I know is.. I'm never ever fornever ever trying to be those people.

Edited September 24, 2012 by Chooch

[JezMM]

Personally I like the idea of it being said exactly why members were banned but...

Popular, long term member gets banned. Because staff has "nothing to hide" they go out of their way to divulge why, essentially opening up the moderation forum up for all to see (and defeating the purpose of it in the process).

"That's not a good enough reason."

Or

"He would never do anything like that. I know him."

Or

"He acted like that way on purpose because the moderators wouldn't do anything about it."

None of this. We still shouldn't be allowed to discuss it. Just say why it happened, end of discussion. That way there's no gossiping but nosy people like me get their closure and aren't left forever wondering if it was a weird isolated case or what.

I've been to forums which simply have a short sentence of reason for ban under the "BANNED" tag on their profile in general, or on the offending post, "<Username> was temporarily/permanently banned for this post". Etc.

Edited September 24, 2012 by JezMM

[Blackthorne]

Maybe, but it's hard to know that for sure when we don't know what's going on behind the scenes.

I mean, I've been around here long enough to know the mods are pretty cool, and I'm not accusing anyone of power-tripping or anything like that. But it's no surprise that people are confused when they don't have all the information. Personally I don't see the harm in a bit more transparency; if the actions are legit, there's nothing to hide, and people can know what's going on rather than seeing people get banned with no clear reason.

I don't think it's anybody else's business why someone else got banned. It's between the moderator who did the banning and the person who got banned. Of course there's going to be speculation about why it happened, but if you don't trust the moderators' judgment in making the call, are you going to trust their explanation for why they did it?

Edited September 24, 2012 by Blackthorne