General Category > PKMN.NET
On the posting of 'This will be locked' posts, WAS: How To Care For Trans* People: A Friendly Guide
OVOxo:
That's not really justifiable for a warning though. It's a valid point; this topic had plenty of potential. The idea and intention behind it is great. However, the wording isn't helpful or subsequent reactions caused from particular posts. Yes, this topic can be educational and should be highlighted for that but right now it's not going to do that. As a former forum moderator I know how a topic can develop but I'd be surprised if people actually reacted to that comment. The second sentence adds to the contribution because the writing is the problem.
I guess though it's not my place to argue with the reasoning. I'm just disappointed by it.
-sigh-
I do hope people learn from this topic. Like I said, great potential here.
Joeno:
I split this off as it's still off topic...
The reasons for the warning are explained in the PM that was sent to you about it.
Second, all that is still not a justification for going off-topic. It's not a justification for adding on to the pile of messages. It adds, at best, nothing to the topic, but can draw people in to make it worse.
You say that you act as a former moderator - as one, you should know what it's like to post things to keep it calm, and then have someone else post two posts later saying this will be locked. By the time of your post, several forum staff has posted. None have locked it. They've put in a warning, but let it continue.
I see no reason for your post, and to me its more harmful than helpful.
Edit: It's worth remembering that at this point, doing anything about this topic would go against the sentiments expressed in this topic. We want this to be open for debate.
OVOxo:
I saw but it's still too far. If it was seen as against the rules then surely a deleted post and subsequent comment would have been enough? A 15% warning is too far. I'm not really gonna go into this part of it any more since it's not really necessary. I'll just talk about the topic instead =]
I said that post because that's what I thought would happen. Sorry.
As for the problems; well, that's still being discussed in the original topic... but surely the topic you quoted should be referenced (very good topic infact). I mean, there isn't really a problem with the act situation but the fact that it has been wanted to be brought up is fine, it's the particular approach that has been taken. A few comments here and there have been said which shouldn't have and have caused other reactions to take place.
Some people aren't the most aware and so maybe awareness could be added but in a manner which can come across as condescending.
An issue doesn't really need to be made of it. Meh.
f3raligatr:
--- Quote from: Gurren Lagann on June 21, 2012, 18:20 ---I saw but it's still too far. If it was seen as against the rules then surely a deleted post and subsequent comment would have been enough? A 15% warning is too far. I'm not really gonna go into this part of it any more since it's not really necessary. I'll just talk about the topic instead =]
--- End quote ---
Alex, you broke three rules in one post. Add to that the insensitivity of the comment in comparison to the topic, I'm not entirely sure how you can even remotely think you're in the right for making a comment like that.
--- Quote from: Gurren Lagann on June 21, 2012, 18:20 ---I said that post because that's what I thought would happen. Sorry.
As for the problems; well, that's still being discussed in the original topic... but surely the topic you quoted should be referenced (very good topic infact). I mean, there isn't really a problem with the act situation but the fact that it has been wanted to be brought up is fine, it's the particular approach that has been taken. A few comments here and there have been said which shouldn't have and have caused other reactions to take place.
--- End quote ---
But yours was one of them, and the only one that didn't offer anything to the topic. Do remember that you're not a moderator anymore, you cannot make a post like that anymore (you shouldn't have made a post like that if you was a moderator anyway but that's beside the point completely) and you've been warned for it.
--- Quote from: Gurren Lagann on June 21, 2012, 18:20 ---An issue doesn't really need to be made of it. Meh.
--- End quote ---
You made the topic..?
Edit made by thetotalidiot™ - Totally didn't see that Jeroen had split your post away from the main topic, sorry there
OVOxo:
I didn't really want to go into this but okay...
--- Quote from: theperfectdrug™ on June 21, 2012, 18:27 ---Alex, you broke three rules in one post. Add to that the insensitivity of the comment in comparison to the topic, I'm not entirely sure how you can even remotely think you're in the right for making a comment like that.
--- End quote ---
Let's break down the three rule breaks then:
--- Quote ---Posts stating 'Oh, I'm sure this will get locked':
1) Don't contribute to the topic and are therefore off-topic
2) Are rather unnecessary moderator-like warnings
3) Only make it more likely the topic descends into a flamewar
And should therefore not be made. Trust the moderators, report if it gets too bad, and stay out of it beyond that.
--- End quote ---
The post in question:
--- Quote from: Gurren Lagann on June 21, 2012, 14:16 ---I give it another page or two before this ends up getting locked. I can see people taking it too far. It's kinda standard thinking about it.
It's a shame I guess because the idea for the topic is great but the execution has been done in the wrong way. Oh well.
--- End quote ---
1) Contribution to topic -> I said it is a good idea but the execution of it wasn't. That's constructive contribution. Maybe if I expanded the point then it would have been slightly better but yeah. The first sentence really is where I presume the problem lies? I can see that... but not enough as a warning.
2) What mod-like warning? A mod like warning would be completely different. As a mod I would have approached it much different; in fact I would have probably left it. Position = different approaches. Shame it's that way but that's how it is.
3) That's making a presumption so to see the evidence of this you'd have to wait until subsequent posts. Jumping the gun isn't fair. If it did lead to a response then I'd then offer my suggestion of helping out.
I didn't make the post to be a douche. I did it because the topic could potentially be very good but yeah, it was approached in the wrong way.
So I can see at least two of those rule breaks being wrong. I guess that it's open to interpretation though. If I were moderating that though, I would have done what I presume was the standard thing which would have been to highlight the problem and simply delete the post. It's only two lines long so it's been pushed to be very excessive.
Having re-read the actual rules not one of them states specifically what I have done wrong. I can't even read the playing the mod one but I'm probably reading wrong or something (even though that is a widely known one... but yeah I didn't play the mod any ways).
--- Quote ---But yours was one of them, and the only one that didn't offer anything to the topic. Do remember that you're not a moderator anymore, you cannot make a post like that anymore (you shouldn't have made a post like that if you was a moderator anyway but that's beside the point completely) and you've been warned for it.
--- End quote ---
It did though! The second line doesn't break any rules and infact shows that I was willing to make contribution to the topic. Had a reply been made then it would have been extended. Maybe I should extended it initially too. Like I said, if I were still mod then it wouldn't have arose. Even so, it wasn't acting like a mod in any way. It was just a small comment that has been blown way out of proportion. I do believe the warning is excessive; the standard procedure would have been much more suitable to the situation. Plus, considering this is the first time that I've been perceived to break the rules in a long time a big warning such as that seems very harsh.
I do accept why it has been deemed that I have done wrong. I just don't accept the punishment whatsoever. It's like getting a straight red for kicking the ball away in football. Far too harsh.
I'd just like to add this in:
--- Quote from: PKMN.NET Rules ---Any breaking of these rules will result in edits of the posts, closing of topics, deleting of the posts, disabled signatures, warnings, or bans, depending on the severity of the offense. All of which can be discussed or in some cases appealled, but that's for then.
--- End quote ---
Call this an appeal. 15% of a warning is too harsh. I've given sufficient evidence that at least 2 of those are wrong and should be reduced. Plus of course that it's just not fair anyways.
I agree that mistakes can be made and I hope that this one can be seen to. I thank you for taking time to read this =]
(I also know that it would have been best to have done this in private; my apologies but considering it's already reached this phase we might as well carry on here. Plus, I don't think too many people are aware of this so it'd be another good learning experience for the forums. See, every little helps ^^)
EDIT: I found this too which should be mentioned:
--- Quote from: theperfectdrug™ on June 21, 2012, 18:57 ---Actually, I was going to leave this until later, but..
Consider this a warning actually; we're trying to keep this topic as one full of discussion, not full of childish insults. You're really not helping yourself there.
--- End quote ---
Yet no warning value had arised from this. Surely equal treatment should be added?
(I'll say this too; if it turns into out of fairness xhanatos gets a warning value then my bad, didn't intend for you to get a warning too, just want mine decreased which it should be; if it is deemed to be just a written warning then mine should immediately drop down to 10% without even considering the fact that it's harsh to begin with)
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version