The OFFICIAL GRIPE THREAD

[rah]

Good distinction. I am always happy to listen to disappointments. And usually make more of an effort to understand and correct. Bashes have a tendency to be tuned out. The difference between constructive and destructive. Unfortunately it is now always in our power or ability to correct all the disappointments. But think how grand life would be if we all could.

[jkp1187]

Originally posted by Agathon
Why are people griping? Being banned from Poly is hardly the end of the world.

The moderation here is pretty light. I stopped posting for a long time because I thought it had become too lax.

Quite so. I agree that things have been far too lax at 'Poly, all things considered.

[Spec]

Originally posted by rah
Unfortunately it is now always in our power or ability to correct all the disappointments.

I'm sure you ment "not" and not "now", right?

Otherwise


Spec.

[Ninot]

to Rah for this thread.

[Solver]

People's comments about moderation are always interesting. Some now say that it's too strict, others say it's too lax. I have a hard time myself seeing how our moderation could be called strict. It was some years ago, where PCRs would commonly be handed out for spam and starting to attack somebody would often lead to a short-term chilling ban. These days, bans are pretty rare, there are a few repeat offenders that get banned more, buy by and large, moderation is far more relaxed here than it used to be.

It also apparently isn't true that people tend to flock to softer moderation. CFC, which is well large than we are these days, has much stricter moderation. It's stricter than what we had in our stricter times, IMO.

[rah]

More proof that no matter what we do, we can't please everyone.

And for the record, more lax in the OT was an actual decision that was discussed. God, it was such a boring discusion. rah "Ming, you're such a hard ass" ming "rah, you're such a wuss" Dan "it's the OT, whatever"


disclaimer, this may or may not have been the actual discussion, and does not reflect the actual feelings of the management.

[rah]

Originally posted by Spec


I'm sure you ment "not" and not "now", right?

Otherwise


Spec.

yeah


now prepare to be banned for 24 hours for being a spelling nazi to a mod.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by Solver
People's comments about moderation are always interesting. Some now say that it's too strict, others say it's too lax. I have a hard time myself seeing how our moderation could be called strict. It was some years ago, where PCRs would commonly be handed out for spam and starting to attack somebody would often lead to a short-term chilling ban. These days, bans are pretty rare, there are a few repeat offenders that get banned more, buy by and large, moderation is far more relaxed here than it used to be.

It also apparently isn't true that people tend to flock to softer moderation. CFC, which is well large than we are these days, has much stricter moderation. It's stricter than what we had in our stricter times, IMO.

I don't think it is the strictness that people are complaining about. I believe it is the attitude.

[Spec]

Originally posted by Solver
People's comments about moderation are always interesting. Some now say that it's too strict, others say it's too lax.

You dont get it....


Its not constant! Not even through out poly members. Not fair to everyone...

Its not by the book, but by how the Mod feels at that particular moment and who he talks too. Cant make it anymore clearer than that.

Spec.

[jkp1187]

Originally posted by rah
More proof that no matter what we do, we can't please everyone.

And you shouldn't try to. You're going to catch flack no matter what you do. If someone is heaping abuse upon other posters (or the mods, for that matter,) there's no point in tolerating it. Sure, there will always be a few people whining about it (not to mention the occasional false promises of leaving forever,) but how many people just quietly leave the forum altogether when they see such behavior go unchecked by the mods?

And, honestly, it doesn't matter what happened in the past. If someone new comes to the forum and see user A heaping abuse on other users, the mods, and the owners, and sees nothing done to stop it, they're not going to care if that person was 'unfairly' banned for life two years ago, reinstated, then treated rudely by the mods since. No, all they'll see is some jerk going on and on about nothing.

[Grandpa Troll]

Originally posted by rah


yeah


now prepare to be banned for 24 hours for being a spelling nazi to a mod.

/me thinks rah aint hard enuff to ban Spec

[Solver]

To be fair, though, Spec, I don't believe we ever claimed to have by-the-book moderation. We could indeed do it like CFC and go by-the-book, but we never have really and haven't particularly aimed to.

Repeat offenders get treated more strictly. Certain offenses that we let slide in the OTF are viewed seriously in on-topic areas. Each of the five admins and the regular mods has a different style - one mod might ban where another would only give a warning.

We sure make mistakes and I'll be damned if I agreed with every decision ever made by a mod here but I think that our moderation generally works well. I've always thought that Ming in particular does a great job at it.

Somebody has Rah's phrase in his signature, like "people are screaming for consistency but they're not going to get it from us".

[Spec]

Originally posted by Grandpa Troll


* Grandpa Troll thinks rah aint hard enuff to ban Spec

Spec.

[Arrian]

Is it really that friggin' hard to stay out of trouble on this Site? I don't get it.

-Arrian

[b etor]

Originally posted by Solver We could indeed do it like CFC and go by-the-book,

booooo