Zero-Tolerance Concerns

[gala]

In regards to the recent topic by Zaysho outlining a new 'zero-tolerance' rule when it comes to member-to-member drama, I feel as I'm definitely not the only one who is concerned about it.

First off, the severity of "starting shit" and what exactly counts as "drama" is subjective. Something that is intended as non-offensive can easily be misconstrued as offensive and/or a genuine jab at someone. With an insta-ban rule in place, it's not really going to give the member a chance to explain their intention and explain that they have made a mistake.

This leads into another concern: if clashing over something petty can lead to an easy ban, people are obviously going to be more afraid and less willing to actually discuss their opinions on the forums, despite the fact that is one of the main things the forums are supposed to be for. I'm not going to sugarcoat it, because we all know it's true: There are people here who blow things way out of proportion and make a big deal of things that anyone else would brush off as not a big deal, which could essentially start some form of drama when the original intention was not to cause any drama. What is stopping these people from being banned when they don't even deserve it? It's bunching people who made a mistake with people who are legitimately insulting people and getting a kick out of causing drama, which in my eyes is very unfair.

I just feel that this is an overly harsh course of action for something that really shouldn't be a big deal. I like to think that most of us are mature enough to settle our own disputes between us rather than running off to the mods to get someone banned as an easy-way-out card (of course, if it is serious harassment/bullying etc, then it makes sense for the mods to be involved). What I'm getting from this rule is a sense of restriction on what we're allowed to say around here due to the chance of it being misconstrued and mistakenly seen as an attempt at starting drama, or for it to be blown out of proportion.

To close off, I also notice that the SSMB guidelines state that staff are required to hand out 3 strikes, with exceptions such as "demonstrating yourself to be especially hostile or idiotic", which I think is a little too extreme to describe these kinds of incidents, provided that they do not lead to serious harassment/bullying.

[Tori Himemiya]

Today has been an interesting turn of events. I'm only here to discuss more about it to pacify the fears some of our members have as well as fixing bridges between members and our staff. Lately I have been talking to people about SSMB and it does seem gloom and doom and this new announcement raised some concerns. I don't remember SSMB being this way before and I do wish to improve things in a calm manner. So please a moment of your time and consider my words.

I do firstly want to point out that Zaysho mentioned an instant ban on member to member drama. However there doesn't seem to be much clarity on what constitutes member to member drama and it has confused several members. Is it possible to disagree with someone in a very heated debate, which is very common here and not get an instant ban? Not only that but this is the internet after all and its hard to tell what emotions are going through other people's heads in a text format. We know that sarcasm is a common occurence here as well and that can add some fuel to the fire and mixed messages. People on SSMB can be very passionate about debates here and they can go for a while and that can cause harsh words thrown left and right. Does this also count as member to member drama? People here are worried that just saying their honest opinion will get them banned because of the confusion.

Second the instant ban is another worrying concern. This seems to be a very radical approach to solving a problem. I am tired of the drama as you all are but isn't just bypassing some rules? I can understand if it was a multiple offender but for years SSMB has always relied on the 3 strike rule before a ban. Now the fact that we could be banned for something that can be potentially be considered be a minor spat is just making everyone afraid to post. SSMB always encouraged discussion, even if it means playing devil's adovate every now and then. That's what I remember being SSMB's strong points but now it does seem we're limited on those kinds of debates. I guess one or two people did break it for all of us but this just again seem too radicial to add for a forum that encourages intellectual thought.

Finally I do want to say regardless of what happens, you the staff are people I do respect and may even consider to be friends with. You're only human and you do make the important decisions on the forum. But lately I feel like that SSMB has been in a slump myself and I wish to add more positivity to the place because I remember SSMB was a fun place to chat with friends and get into awesome debates and I do want to bring it back to that former glory. I ask for your cooperation in settling this issue in a calm, timely manner. I really can't stress this enough because people just don't know what to do with the threat of instant ban looming over their heads. I also ask of you to reply not as a member of staff but as an honest person because some people have been fearing the staff which shouldn't happen because you too are also a member of this site. All I want for everyone to do is spread happiness on this little forum and I need everyone's help including, you the staff. Thank you for your time and consideration on the matter at hand.

[Ryannumber1gamer]

I agree with Gala entirely on this.

I'm saying this because I don't think I'm the only member concerned and scared about this either, but this is something that needs clarification, and overall sense of calm on this board, because while it says it could be something that can only help this board, I see something that's only going to end up breaking it, and making things feel worse around here.

First off is the biggest thing. What qualifies as member-to-member drama exactly? Like if I happen to disagree with someone over a topic, and enter a debate about it, and don't act completely calm and nice towards them, despite my explanations being repeatedly ignored, or even attempts to make me the bad guy of the debate, does that mean I'm at risk of a insta-ban? What if there's something to justify being angry? Does that not matter? Does that mean I'm subject to an insta-ban? To bring it down to bare bones, in my eyes, this seems like something that might help the mods have an easier time, but only end up affecting members of the board badly.

I might not be a mod, but I think all of us can agree that every case that crops up isn't exactly the same as the other. There's differences. There's possible justifications, level of harshness, and more. I'm not saying that you mods are perfect. I'm not saying you have to be. A good few of you are my friends on here. I respect all of you as a team, and respect all of you for agreeing to look after SSMB, but at the end of the day, you need to look at situations as separate individual cases, with maybe the rare exception being repeat offenders. For example, how is it fair if one member were to go on a spree of insults towards random members for no reason (For example, that troll who was on earlier this year), and another member was driven to their breaking point, and end up making a mistake. 

The same way you mods say you are not robots who are perfect and don't make mistakes, you need to understand. We aren't either. We're all human. Every single one of us. I make mistakes, you make mistakes, the admins make mistakes, everyone on this board makes mistakes. Mistakes aren't something to be feared. They are something to be learned from. To allow us to better ourselves. How can we do that if after one mistake, it's a flat out ban, and being told to get out of SSMB, you aren't wanted here. I mean one of the main guidelines is a three strike rule before being banned isn't it, unless it's something extremely bad.

Going into my own personal feelings on it, despite the topic itself saying it's meant to help a positive atmosphere and allow people to post easier...I'm not seeing it. I'm feeling the exact opposite way. I'm now afraid to post. Let it be normal joking, a serious debate or whatever. What's stopping me from accidentally stepping over a line I wasn't aware of and being thrown out on my ear? What if one of my posts are seen the wrong way, and end up getting me banned despite there not even being any insults/anything against the rules? A lot of this is unclear, and now that issues are now "insta-ban" worthy, despite how big or how little they are, I don't even want to post because I'm afraid of being banned from SSMB. A community I spent the better part of two years interacting with and getting to know.

There's a better way of summing this up. About a year ago, I was in a debate about Sonic Adventure. Not going to go into detail, but the debate ended with another member trying to claim I was bullying him, and outright asked for me to be striked/banned on the spot. Of course because the mod team went into further inspection, and clearly saw I didn't do what was claimed, I wasn't striked/banned for it. Now, if we're going to treat all of these situations as an insta-ban right away, then what's stopping that kind of situation from occurring? 

On top of that, another way to look at it. If a member has a strike for doing something, one of the things the mods openly encourage is allowing you to speak up in private about in order to explain yourself, or explain why you feel it was unwarrented. If we're going to go by this zero-tolerance policy, then that means if I, or someone else screwed up, and ended up getting an insta-ban, the only thing that would mean we all lose the right to contest our punishment, or at the very least, speak our side of the story about it. How can we exactly if we're banned directly out of SSMB for something like this?

At the end of the day, I see this being something that's only going to make things more fearful around here so to speak. I don't see this encouraging a positive atmosphere. I don't see this making people more friendly. I see this causing people to be scared to even speak up about concerns, or even enter debates, or discussions, because now that three strike system is gone. That thing about mods looking at our problems and situations individually and perhaps seeing justifications, and other things is quite possibly gone, and it overall makes things harder for members. I agree about mutual respect being needed, but this isn't the way to go about it. At the end of the day, situations aren't just black and white, and can be all thrown into the one category, and I think this decision hasn't been thought out at all from our perspective. This might make things easier for the mods, because they won't need to look at each individual case, but that means for all members, all of our problems and cases are being lumped together. Even if we have a justification, or reason, or anything, we'll end up being treated as jerks who's only here to cause trouble, and I don't think that is right

[Spin Attaxx]

Yeah, I can't say I'm very comfortable with these new guidelines myself either. I mean, if everyone's one misinterpreted post away from a ban they can't even contest/explain, why should they feel comfortable discussing things here at all?

[Wraith]

1 hour ago, Spin Attaxx said:

Yeah, I can't say I'm very comfortable with these new guidelines myself either. I mean, if everyone's one misinterpreted post away from a ban they can't even contest/explain, why should they feel comfortable discussing things here at all?

You can contest a ban. I've seen more than a few people get banned(some of them for a good reason) and just come back not too long after once they hashed it out. They're really pretty loose with the rules in general, especially lately.

I understand you guys's concern but I think you're overreacting a tad. They'll still look into the situations as always and be as loose as the usually are. They'll just come down a bit harder if they find you're in the wrong. I kinda want to see where this goes before I start worrying about it and I suggest you guys do the same.

[Rey Skywalker-Ren]

Basically just look at my thread and don't make the same mistake I did. 

I know we all do it when we make comments passive under our breath weather it be on SSMB or on Tumblr and I think that thread was trying to address that. Everyone is guilty of this.

[PickleBrows]

I'll admit it's late so I might well have misread what was said in the topic but from what I understand, this is more about people 'stirring the pot' than anything else through this whole vague wording thing that's clearly written in relation to something in particular and the vague wording is simply used to let them vent without actually letting people find out what caused it.

For example, member A and B get into a heated (but not personal) debate in a forum. Member A then posts a status update about how they 'wish people could just respect other's opinions'. That's clearly being made purely out of spite and it's actually a cheap way of 1-upping the other member since they can't respond back without blowing the whole thing wide open.

To me, this new policy isn't about mods looking for things that could be in some way twisted or perceived as trouble-making and just insta-banning people to be safe. It's about cracking down on the whole passive-aggressive atmosphere that happens when people go too far with their arguments and, instead of dropping it or trying to peacefully remedy things, opt to draw it out and make things worse by taking under-the-breath pot shots at each other.

Rule 1 of debating: You don't get personal. Nobody's going to get banned for having an argument, it's those that deliberately choose to draw out a situation or make it even worse rather than actually try to patch things up and move on with everybody happy.

I mean I'm just a simple member, I don't know anything about moderating a site. Maybe the new policy will have some kinks to work out but the mods aren't robots, if this somehow ended up doing more harm than good then they'd see it and they'd adapt. If you aren't out to cause trouble, you've got nothing to worry about!

This whole move is about bringing a bit of positive atmosphere back. Even if the road there's a little rocky, I can't fault an end goal like that! 

 

 

[Ryannumber1gamer]

1 minute ago, Joy said:

This whole move is about bringing a bit of positive atmosphere back. Even if the road there's a little rocky, I can't fault an end goal like that! 

You know the saying. The road to hell is pathed with good intentions. Just because it's a good end goal does not make this a good way of achieving it.

[Spin Attaxx]

30 minutes ago, Wraith said:

You can contest a ban. I've seen more than a few people get banned(some of them for a good reason) and just come back not too long after once they hashed it out. They're really pretty loose with the rules in general, especially lately.

I understand you guys's concern but I think you're overreacting a tad. They'll still look into the situations as always and be as loose as the usually are. They'll just come down a bit harder if they find you're in the wrong. I kinda want to see where this goes before I start worrying about it and I suggest you guys do the same.

 

Quote

In short, if you start shit, you will be banned on the spot.

Doesn't really seem like they're going to be "loose as they usually are" if they're going to skip the three strikes thing and just ban you on the spot should they judge you to be in the wrong. And as mentioned, it's very possible for something intended to be fun to be mistaken/twisted into something that's not, and if you're banned, that's that, no questions asked.

Or (and I'd like to emphasise that this is a potential possiblity, and I don't intend to say or imply anything definite about the staff) what if a mod - present or future - happens to hold a grudge against some members and abuse their power to get rid of them at the slightest slip-up they make? Even if it's over something trivial as "this person had an unpopular opinion, and other members blew it out of proportion and muddied up a topic"?

[Tails spin]

4 minutes ago, Spin Attaxx said:

 

Doesn't really seem like they're going to be "loose as they usually are" if they're going to skip the three strikes thing and just ban you on the spot should they judge you to be in the wrong. And as mentioned, it's very possible for something intended to be fun to be mistaken/twisted into something that's not, and if you're banned, that's that, no questions asked.

Or (and I'd like to emphasise that this is a potential possiblity, and I don't intend to say or imply anything definite about the staff) what if a mod - present or future - happens to hold a grudge against some members and abuse their power to get rid of them at the slightest slip-up they make? Even if it's over something trivial as "this person had an unpopular opinion, and other members blew it out of proportion and muddied up a topic"?

mods are suppose to be fair. So if the potential possiblity were to happen couldn't you appeal the ban as unfair treatment then the mod in question would be in a hot mess.

[Wraith]

1 hour ago, Spin Attaxx said:

 

Doesn't really seem like they're going to be "loose as they usually are" if they're going to skip the three strikes thing and just ban you on the spot should they judge you to be in the wrong. And as mentioned, it's very possible for something intended to be fun to be mistaken/twisted into something that's not, and if you're banned, that's that, no questions asked.

Or (and I'd like to emphasise that this is a potential possiblity, and I don't intend to say or imply anything definite about the staff) what if a mod - present or future - happens to hold a grudge against some members and abuse their power to get rid of them at the slightest slip-up they make? Even if it's over something trivial as "this person had an unpopular opinion, and other members blew it out of proportion and muddied up a topic"?

This is all "What if"s. You guys aren't even really giving them a chance. It's just paranoia. 

And you keep saying "no questions asked". Are you ignoring the part where you CAN contest a ban even if it does happen(which I doubt it will for most of you)? 

Again, I think you guys are just being paranoid.

[Rey Skywalker-Ren]

I will agree that the way the topic is worded can send the wrong signals; but it's not all what it seems. It's basically don't start shit with others and don't get upset over stupid shit. I will say that it DOES seem like they are coming hard on those who have low self esteem. People generally do have high self esteem to where nothing bothers them; but not everyone is wired that way. Something do make people unconformable and telling them to "get over it" isn't really gonna magically boost their confidence.

[Ryannumber1gamer]

9 minutes ago, Wraith said:

This is all "What if"s. You guys aren't even really giving them a chance. It's just paranoia. 

And you keep saying "no questions asked". Are you ignoring the part where you CAN contest a ban even if it does happen(which I doubt it will for most of you)? 

Again, I think you guys are just being paranoid.

What isn't paranoia is the sheer fact they said if you screw up, that's it, you're banned. You can appeal a ban yes, but that takes at least six months if I remember correctly. and only in special cases do you get back earlier. The fact you can be judged without a chance to even defend yourself isn't paranoia when that's what it outright said. If a mod deems it wrong, you are out. 

5 minutes ago, Mikyeong said:

I will agree that the way the topic is worded can send the wrong signals; but it's not all what it seems. It's basically don't start shit with others and don't get upset over stupid shit. I will say that it DOES seem like they are coming hard on those who have low self esteem. People generally do have high self esteem to where nothing bothers them; but not everyone is wired that way. Something do make people unconformable and telling them to "get over it" isn't really gonna magically boost their confidence.

And it seems you haven't read our concerns. As in the parts where something that's meant to be a joke can be taken as an insult. Things can be justified. Things can have a reason, people snap, they reach breaking points, they get pissed off and make something they regret later. This removes your mistakes. This means once you've fucked up once, you're out. That's it. No second chances, no explanations, no defenses.

[Danj86]

Haven't looked at Zaysho's post yet, but I do feel the need to mention that I have frequently misunderstood/misinterpreted posts on many occasions. I've also had my own posts cause the same thing for others. They're some of us that will naturally be unable to grasp certain content in the way it was intended. I dunno if it's the same for everyone, but I personally want to blame me Aspergers.

That being said, when I have been unnerved by something that came across as questionable to me, I had spoken to staff who are always nice and patient and they helped explain how I was seeing something that was unfounded.

I couldn't possibly begin to know how much work the mods and other staff do here, but I do trust them and I'm sure they'd give a clear explanation of the offense that had occurred to the people or persons involved and be able to judge if it had malicious intentions or not.

[Sean]

General rule of thumb: we always discuss major staff decisions before going ahead with them. Banning members is not an action we take lightly, and each individual case is thoroughly discussed in the staff forum, sometimes even over the course of days. There have been plenty of times when we considered a ban, or even a strike, and relented due to factors such as a member's prior history, us coming to the conclusion that their actions ultimately don't warrant it, or a verbal warning better suiting the situation. We also always consider the consequences of our actions and weigh scenarios.

I would also like to clarify that the topic wasn't Zaysho's idea alone. It was a unanimous staff decision to post it, and like with all forum announcements, it was edited and scrutinized so that we mods were all on the same page. Chris will be here to address your concerns soon.

And yes, Wraith is correct: bans can be appealed, and they have been several times before.

[Wraith]

1 hour ago, Ryannumber1gamer said:

What isn't paranoia is the sheer fact they said if you screw up, that's it, you're banned. You can appeal a ban yes, but that takes at least six months if I remember correctly. and only in special cases do you get back earlier. The fact you can be judged without a chance to even defend yourself isn't paranoia when that's what it outright said. If a mod deems it wrong, you are out. 

It doesn't take six months. I saw someone who legitimately fucked up come back after a week. People who were banned over misunderstandings came back even sooner.  They're REALLY not and never have been as tight with bans as you think.  This is being blown out of proportion a tad, but I guess I can't really speak for the mods here. 

[Ryannumber1gamer]

5 minutes ago, Sean said:

General rule of thumb: we always discuss major staff decisions before going ahead with them. Banning members is not an action we take lightly, and each individual case is thoroughly discussed in the staff forum, sometimes even over the course of days. There have been plenty of times when we considered a ban, or even a strike, and relented due to factors such as a member's prior history, us coming to the conclusion that their actions ultimately don't warrant it, or a verbal warning better suiting the situation. We also always consider the consequences of our actions and weigh scenarios.

I would also like to clarify that the topic wasn't Zaysho's idea alone. It was a unanimous staff decision to post it, and like with all forum announcements, it was edited and scrutinized so that we mods were all on the same page. Chris will be here to address your concerns soon.

And yes, Wraith is correct: bans can be appealed, and they have been several times before.

This is the thing I don't understand though. We're being told that all bans are taken seriously, go through proper discussion and such, and yet Zaysho's opening post literally discusses things like Mods being sick of having to deal with these matters individually, and that these matters will result in an instant ban. It's a total contradiction when said the opening post of the other topic basically stated bans were going to be going around so lightly at this point if you screw up in a matter, with no strikes or anything. No offence but if the mods are willing to ban without giving warnings/strikes/whatever, that does not sound like a decision that's been given the proper time and research into ensuring it's correct, and that's going by what was stated in the other topic.

1 minute ago, Wraith said:

It doesn't take six months. I saw someone who legitimately fucked up come back after a week. People who were banned over misunderstandings came back even sooner.  They're REALLY not and never have been as tight with bans as you think.  This is being blown out of proportion a tad, but I guess I can't really speak for the mods here. 

I just said that Wraith. Literally.

22 minutes ago, Ryannumber1gamer said:

What isn't paranoia is the sheer fact they said if you screw up, that's it, you're banned. You can appeal a ban yes, but that takes at least six months if I remember correctly. and only in special cases do you get back earlier. The fact you can be judged without a chance to even defend yourself isn't paranoia when that's what it outright said. If a mod deems it wrong, you are out. 

Special cases being cases in which you've been wrongly banned, something that's irrelevant if it's a case of mods looking at something, determining it's meant to spark something when it isn't, and deciding to ban you for it.

[Agie]

Regardless, this is a very real concern, and one that should be addressed.

I only hope we won't have to worry. I'd hate to see people worried about getting banned.

[JezMM]

Honestly it does seem a bit overkill for me.  It feels like the sort of thing that younger, stupider members could be afforded a second chance on.  It's not something that'll affect me personally because I grew out of the ole "mad at someone, post passive-aggressively about them in a place where they are extremely likely to see it!" thing years ago (now I post passive-aggressively in places where they are extremely unlikely to see it like a grown-up).  But I just worry about the kids y'know.

 

Regardless, this needs to be added to the rules page if you guys are serious about it.  You can't tuck away an insta-ban offense in a pinned topic that a new member (and hell, even casual members who only visit now and then) is not going to seek out and will eventually be dead and buried with the... frankly kind of growing number of "sub-rules" that float around on the forum in pinned topics and announcement threads (or at least it feels like it).

[Nepenthe]

I'm going to be blunt: Human emotion is not an excuse for breaking the rules. When you sign up here, you automatically agreed to abide by them at all times. If you are admitting right now that you can't follow the rules, you either need to exit of your own accord or suffer a ban.

If anything, it's this constant appeal to emotional behavior- where people continually insist that they physically can't help calling names, being passive-aggressive, and cynically shitting on topics because they're unhappy with Sonic or something else like actual programmed robots, instead of just clarifying what someone means or stepping away from the keyboard for two seconds like the adults people claim themselves to be would do- that has allowed everyone to get away with far more than what the law should've allowed in the first place. Our own empathy, our own anxiousness about going overboard, our ability to take into account low self esteem and mental illness every time something happens only extends so far, and you can't keep calling on it to bail you out from the consequences of your actions. Not everyone on staff is in perfect mental and emotional health and yet surprisingly they manage to remain out of trouble. This is not impossible.

If you are seriously concerned about being banned, you should be just as willing to take a look at your own behavior as much as you're willing to bring up concern about ours. The fact is, bans will be processed as they normally are: A judgement call will be made and we will discuss it except in particularly egregious cases where an individual mod can just get it over with (note: discussion doesn't mean every single staff member sits in a bar with ale and their petticoats on and discusses the ethical and moral ramifications of a ban for five hours. Decisions can and do happen pretty quickly). And yes, they can be contested. Basically- the crap that's been happening in the personal forum, in statuses, and PMs was added to the list of things that can get you banned the moment Zaysho posted the topic last night, a topic which was commissioned by administration long before Zaysho volunteered to be the messenger. Furthermore, we're not talking about you guys arguing over Lost World's story for the billionth time (hint: it's still awful). We're talking about the crap that concerns the members themselves that's been going on.

[Agie]

But that's the thing; we're worried that one goof up could get us banned out without so much as a chance to explain ourselves or learn from it. No strikes; just gone.

I can't say I'm not scared; even if it doesn't affect me (because I don't really engage in debates too often), this does concern a lot of members.

[Zaysho]

8 minutes ago, SurrealBrain said:

But that't the thing; we're worried that one goof up could get us banned out without so much as a chance to explain ourselves. No strikes; just gone.

I can't say I'm not scared; even if it doesn't affect me (because I don't really engage in debates too often), this does concern a lot of members.

We are cracking down on very specific behavior that's been carrying on in the status updates, in the personal discussion, and even outside of our purview in the PMs. We do not want drama stirring on this forum, we do not want in-fighting over stupid things because of some personal grudge with particular members, we don't want vague-post sniping at people in public parts of the forums because someone called your ship trash. We are asking for people to be more proactive in their reporting, we are asking people to take a step back and not get involved in every little conflict and complicate issues. This isn't hard.

We will still carry on examining each case and report and deciding what to do with discretion. We're not going to randomly target people.

[Ryannumber1gamer]

26 minutes ago, Nepenthe said:

I'm going to be blunt: Human emotion is not an excuse for breaking the rules. When you sign up here, you automatically agreed to abide by them at all times. If you are admitting right now that you can't follow the rules, you either need to exit of your own accord or suffer a ban.

If anything, it's this constant appeal to emotional behavior- where people continually insist that they physically can't help calling names, being passive-aggressive, and cynically shitting on topics because they're unhappy with Sonic or something else like actual programmed robots, instead of just clarifying what someone means or stepping away from the keyboard for two seconds like the adults people claim themselves to be would do- that has allowed everyone to get away with far more than what the law should've allowed in the first place. Our own empathy, our own anxiousness about going overboard, our ability to take into account low self esteem and mental illness every time something happens only extends so far, and you can't keep calling on it to bail you out from the consequences of your actions. Not everyone on staff is in perfect mental and emotional health and yet surprisingly they manage to remain out of trouble. This is not impossible.

If you are seriously concerned about being banned, you should be just as willing to take a look at your own behavior as much as you're willing to bring up concern about ours. The fact is, bans will be processed as they normally are: A judgement call will be made and we will discuss it except in particularly egregious cases where an individual mod can just get it over with (note: discussion doesn't mean every single staff member sits in a bar with ale with their petticoats on and discusses the ethical and moral ramifications of a ban for five hours. Decisions can and do happen pretty quickly). And yes, they can be contested. Basically- the crap that's been happening in the personal forum, in statuses, and PMs was added to the list of things that can get you banned the moment Zaysho posted the topic last night, a topic which was commissioned by administration long before Zaysho volunteered to be the messenger. Note: we're not talking about you guys arguing over Lost World's story for the billionth time (hint: it's still awful). We're talking about the crap that concerns the members themselves that's been going on.

The rules also state that there is a three strike system in place before a ban. In which, unless it's an extremely serious case in which it occurs, you will be given a warning, strikes, and finally a ban for doing so. How is it fair to bring up one rule when this new one blatantly breaks one of this forum's main guidelines that have been in place for years? I don't know about all of you, but I would hardly call an emotional outburst an full reason for outright banning somebody unless they were a repeat offender, in which case it would be determined that despite warnings that should not enter debates and such if they get easily riled up, then maybe a ban would be suitable. As a first time, or even second time offender? It's too serious an punishment for something that can have justification and actual reasons behind them.

Let's also keep in mind the mod team are adults. This at the end of the day is a Sonic forum, and you can't deny the fact there's going to be teenagers on this board. It should be obvious that they are not going to be capable of handling their emotions as well as an adult, and therefore are more prone to anger, and going overboard. An adult has already reached maturity. They know how to better handle their emotions. I'm pretty sure everybody as a teenager as gotten pissed off, done something stupid they regret big time. Again, which is why the three strikes system is in place, and designed to ban repeat offenders unless it's a very serious case. 

And telling us to look at our own behavior isn't going to do much if the ban already occurs and we have no power to discuss or fight it. I'm not saying we don't have a part in it. What I'm saying is by removing our ability to even make mistakes, you take away our ability to realize our mistake, improve on it, and perhaps even make amends with members in question. 

Now obviously, it's a terrible excuse if you're a repeat offender, and then try using excuses like "I can't help being cynical, I can't help doing this, or that, or the other", it's different. That's clearly just trying to break out of trouble with a bad excuse while attempting to get special permission to act like assholes. That isn't our concerns. That isn't the problem we have with this. Our problem is people who legit might be at their breaking point, or extremely angry, or something else, and begin getting angry in a debate, and perhaps saying something they didn't meant to, something that even the mods aren't immune because I've seen heated debates get like this when an argument keeps getting repeated, or the other person in the debate is so full of themselves, they won't listen to your argument, or whatever. I've seen it happen, and it can happen to anyone, members and mods alike. We all get angry, we all do stupid things in the heat of the moment, and it's happened to all of us. I don't see why we have to jump to intimidate banning because of that. Again, maybe if it was a repeat, and the person in question always kept stirring shit, or being passive-aggressive, or whatever. I just don't think the punishment suits the offense, especially if it's a first offender.

lost world's story is pretty bad though so we can agree on that at least

8 minutes ago, Zaysho said:

We are cracking down on very specific behavior that's been carrying on in the status updates, in the personal discussion, and even outside of our purview in the PMs. We do not want drama stirring on this forum, we do not want in-fighting over stupid things because of some personal grudge with particular members, we don't want vague-post sniping at people in public parts of the forums because someone called your ship trash. We are asking for people to be more proactive in their reporting, we are asking people to take a step back and not get involved in every little conflict and complicate issues. This isn't hard.

But we weren't told this. What we were told was any and all drama-stirring would be banned. That's it, no ifs, ands, or buts. We don't know what counts as drama stirring in your eyes, because it's all subjective, and for example, one thing I say to my friend, others might see it another way. For example, if I sent a friend a joke status saying something like "get on so i can kick your useless ass in *insert game here*", my friend would know I'm kidding with him, and just want to play a game. On the other hand, someone else can see it, see it as an insult, and report it, which then means we don't know which way it'll be taken. In terms of warnings and strikes, we'd at least have a chance to clean up a misunderstanding or something. Now, if it's going to be an insta-ban, what is going to stop something being misread, or misunderstood, leading to a ban for something that wasn't even meant to be taken as offensive? 

[Ryannumber1gamer]

29 minutes ago, Zaysho said:

We will still carry on examining each case and report and deciding what to do with discretion. We're not going to randomly target people.

And to add onto it since I just saw the added part at the bottom, we also were not told of this. We were told this exactly:

Quote

We will no longer tolerate this sort of drama stirring from members' petty differences and passive-aggressive behavior, and if we see anything of this nature from now on, it will result in an immediate ban. Learn to settle your differences, and if there's some issue going on on-site (harassment, generally abusive behavior) that we should actually know about then you come to us immediately.

We weren't told that the cases would still be looked at individually, we weren't told the mod team would still be doing any of this. We were told that if there was an issue found, it'd be a ban right away. No warnings. No strikes. No nothing. Something that I still see as extremely harsh, but the point still stands. None of this information was given to us, which means it's very very easy to misunderstand it, and not know what's going on. I still think this is all still heavily harsh, but that still doesn't change the fact a lot more clarification was needed for such a massive change rather than just making it sound more serious as a "mods cracking down" topic.

Edit: and I have no idea why my posts didn't merge.

[azoo]

We can tell when something's a joke and not to be taken seriously, and whenever something Miami Heated™ has happened on the forums. We're not dumb, and neither are we trigger happy.

The only reason the words "ban" came out of anyone on the mod team's mouth as a possibility was because the amount of shit-stirring and forum inanity was originally reacted to with a slap on the wrist, to strikes, to suspensions, and now finally to bans. And the only reason we're ready to drop the hammer at will now is because we've spent a long time on here giving folks the benefit of the doubt for extremely specific situations. And now as soon as we're giving the heads up that we're going to be doing our jobs as intended, it's seen as crazy, corrupt or too strict?

Listen, folks.

If you're paranoid because you think playful banter and simple things such as salty exchanges over competitive games (granted it not be inflammatory) is gonna get you banned, then calm down because it's not. Under the 5% chance we misunderstand something and it happens, you will be formally apologized to and things would be mended extremely quickly. No harm, no foul. Scout's honor.

And if you're paranoid because you've partaken in aforementioned forum inanity, drama dragging and shit-stirring, then you probably need to swallow your pride and reevaluate your actions. No fingers being pointed here, by the way, just making something clear here.

The mod team is human, and they're tired and frustrated with this, but we are not unreasonable nor unknowing of what our job entails. If anyone is still caught up over the fact that the OP doesn't spell it out for you rather than taking in what the moderation team themselves have said on the matter, then the point probably went over your head.