Public Service Announcement

i see you joined after the ppp was shut down
yeah uhh long story short:
you just described it
except it was amazing and your hypothetical situation is not

insufficient data, boss?

This is an excellent idea and should have been done when you first became an administrator. Ban everyone who causes drama and make pathetic posts

This post has been edited by General on Apr 7 2009, 07:17 PM

And history repeats. Problem is nobody learns.

Well in the past things had been lax, but I think with more forcing and examples things will get better.

As someone who's been here for a while and watched these things, I can say that a few years ago things were really bad, but compared to that, they're noticably better now.

If there is just a little more effort to keep the good structure of the place without being completely unfair, then we'll be good.

This post has been edited by Parakarry on Apr 7 2009, 10:31 PM

I'd also like to voice my opinion on perma-bans. just for the sake of it, because I've noticed that the moderation has been really perma-ban-happy-go-lucky lately.

perma-bans really get on my nerves, because unless a member is A.) a dupe, or B.) a spammer, they don't deserve to be locked away from MFGG forever. I've seen some really really really unfair perma-bans that pissed me off, such as FuzzMaster's perma-ban. (I don't want you guys yelling at me for supporting him, he got on my nerves to, I'm just trying to make a point here) he made a small slip-up, and got banned for ... wasn't it a few days? then SGG comes in and perma-bans him because he's been banned "too many" times. (not picking on SGG here, he's cool) it's stupid, if you truly want the person to think about their actions, just ban them for a month or something. I know very few people who actually deserve a perma-ban, much less without warning.

and BAM my post is done, whether it's really relevant or not I don't care, I just wanted to let that out.

This post has been edited by Razz on Apr 7 2009, 10:35 PM

Really? I've been around longer than you... in my experience things were a lot better in terms of less rudeness and they definitely weren't lax a few years ago.

I agree with Razz.


Oh and about the moderator flak thing, you wouldn't be getting as much from the forum as a whole if you didn't publicize bans in a sticky in the news forum, or at all. Sure you'll get flak from the people you banned and a handful of friends but it wouldn't be as bad as far as the forum as a whole goes.

You're kinda asking for it as it stands now.

This post has been edited by SonicProject on Apr 7 2009, 10:44 PM

In fairness, from the sound of it it seems like FuzzMaster had already been given a last-chance warning, and that the person who had tempbanned him originally had not noticed that he was on the last-chance list.

(Don't get me wrong, FuzzMaster has actually made me laugh a lot in the past with some of his posts, so I'm not bashing him. However, I can see why he was banned. Sort of a similar situation to that of Duckboy, in my eyes.)

This post has been edited by Grant on Apr 7 2009, 10:46 PM

I'm talking more like the frequency and effectiveness of bans.

Around 2006 and 2007 there was a lot of bad vibe. Nasty posts, rude attitudes were happening left and right and almost nothing was getting done to stop it. I was really discouraged.

Thankfully we're a lot stricter and more effective now.

But stricter doesn't have to mean completely unfair and totalitarian. There's a pretty good balance and there aren't many unjust bannings.

This post has been edited by Parakarry on Apr 7 2009, 10:46 PM

I do not remember this at all.

Rudeness and gremlining are at least 10x worse on the forums today than they have ever been.

I disagree SonicProject (about the ban topic). Without that topic, there would be confusion. When the Cave of Flames became a hidden forum, bans weren't shown at all except in the users own private warn log, and suddenly when someone disappeared and showed as being banned people wondered what the heck happened.

The cave of flames was too "messy" to be public and people are ignorant enough not to view the users personal warn logs, so if nothing else, at least it shows who was banned, when and for what.

This post has been edited by Redux on Apr 7 2009, 10:48 PM

I honestly haven't the foggiest idea why someone needs to know why x member was banned. I guess I don't mind the open warn log thing we have now, but you don't need it publicized in the news forum.

This post has been edited by SonicProject on Apr 7 2009, 10:50 PM

I guess I just have a bad memory of the whole U thing and that time. Things were pretty bad at the time.

I'd still like to see people stop the crap today though of course.

This post has been edited by Parakarry on Apr 7 2009, 10:51 PM

The ban thread is a pretty good idea. It keeps all the bans organized well enough, and it sets a good example: every ban thread starts out with something like "Don't do what these [whatevers] did."

The topic means well, it really does. It's just questionable to continue such a thing when mods themselves are complaining about members *****ing at them.

Well I recall a lot of confusion when nobody was told who was banned for what, as someone said, it's organised and it shows an example of what NOT to do if nothing else. Really, if you have a problem with being made an example of, try not to get banned. It's that simple.

Parakarry: I think things are worse in ways now. It's small things that, funnily enough, I seem to remember someone predicting that if they were removed, things would get worse. Things like the swear filter, you might think it's "fair" to have things like that allowed or optional, but the moment people can swear, the moment they will. And suddenly, half the posts are filled with swear words, which might not seem a big deal but it sure as heck doesn't make this place pretty to look at from the outside and it does contribute to the atmosphere in a big way.

Just my opinion and one example however.

Don't piss off appointed meatbags? Gotcha!


Like any of the moderators or administrators are even KIND-OF objective. Their objection to that fact is a pretty big "**** you" to all of the members of this forum. AGAIN, there should be at least a team of *three* moderators in the General Chat forum and more global moderators who semi-frequent the other forums to institute a checks-and-balances system in the moderation of this forum.

This post has been edited by Tony Trombone on Apr 7 2009, 10:56 PM

I don't really care, what I'm saying is that if moderation is having a problem coping with the *****ing, then they shouldn't publicize their actions quite so much.

Do you honestly believe people would complain less if their actions were or weren't shown? History has pretty much shown that regardless, people are just going to climb on an instant messenger or make a dupe to PM the admin in question or find some other way to harass an answer out. Either that or they'll just whine that they got banned in the first place.

This post has been edited by Redux on Apr 7 2009, 11:01 PM

Mods don't have as much of a problem with this, they don't want it publicized on the board (it wouldn't end up on the board quite as much if it weren't publicized on the board). But either way, coping with the *****ing's part of the job. Elected officials don't get to send members of the US into exile just because the media made a mockery of them, lol.

The problem here is that some moderation is taking their job too seriously and letting it get to their heads. That it's THEIR forum alone and are beginning to develop the mentality to ban anyone who disagrees with them, but without members they wouldn't even have a "job" to do and they seem to forget that.

Attitude on this forum is a mutual thing. Members want mods to treat them better, mods want members to treat them better. Everyone has to make a better effort imo.

It's pointless, but trying is better than threatening to go on a banning spree.

This post has been edited by SonicProject on Apr 7 2009, 11:07 PM