[NEW MILLETIANS] Please note that all new forum users have to be approved before posting. This process can take up to 24 hours, and we appreciate your patience.
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the
Nexon Forums Code of Conduct. You have to register before you can post, so you can log in or create a forum name above to proceed. Thank you for your visit!
Comments
And I now start to see what a drainage this forum is. I don't visit this place very often, but whenever I do, something stupid always happens. I must either have some terrible timing, or it's just a norm at this point.
As far as I know, the rules were clear, but weren't ENFORCED clearly. They're all done pretty vaguely to reach "I can do whatever I want for any reason I want".
And trust in the authorities are diminishing. Probably because there are no one to leash these mods to begin with.
it pretty much is a guessing game, trying to find out what they're doing cuz' they never tell us anything, or so it seems.
plus it's kinda dumb how strict they've been recently
maybe its cuz there is never anything actually 'bad' happening so they're looking for somewhere else to use power?
though i've seen other forum users get away with insulting behavior too so idk
That's why we have this in CoC:
- We do welcome feedback and constructive criticism.
- Constructive criticism is the process of offering valid and well-reasoned opinions about the work of others, usually involving both positive and negative comments, in a friendly manner rather than an oppositional one.
unless you're me it seems, then all these hypocritrs decide theres not an issue with moderation until it happens to them
or not just me, but all the previous forumers getting the short end of the stick
i hope you are all aware you will not be getting any sympathy from us
That's roughly vague. "Constructive critism" is pretty opinionated today. People who can't take critique will always look at it as an attack. And then there are people who can't distinguish between critique and being a jack. No one is going to win.
For those who have taken debate courses, that's how constructive criticism should be developed.
Edit: And I mean real debate, not those silly shows many politicians get paid to participate in.
pretty much
The military taught me that the best way to deal with a problem was as such;
See a problem. Do not make your presence or attention known, if possible.
If it's a health/safety of self/others problem, immediately stop via whatever means necessary.
If the above is not true, approach the individual during (if somewhat urgent) or after the problem takes place. Even if the individual noted the problem themselves and corrected it, still follow up via the following steps.
Isolate them (do not make it obvious to others that that person is in trouble, rather just ask them to help you with a task or w/e). As generally advised, another person should be present to collaborate the account of what happened. This person should not be 'on your side', but rather a neutral, spectator party.
Note that you saw a problem (at this point do not specify the problem).
Ask them to identify any problems they may have seen or realized.
If they identify it, ask them to describe why it is a problem.
If they don't, identify the problem(s) and then ask them to describe why it is a problem.
Help them achieve an answer if they are unsure; do not give them the answer(s).
In any case, do not use accusatory 'I saw you ____' statements. Refrain from personal opinions or statements; heavily reference rules/Standing Orders as much as possible (and relevant); take out as much 'personal touch' of yourself as possible.
Reference the correct way to perform/overcome the incident/challenge/potential hazard in the future.
Have them achieve an answer of why this way/the rules/whatever in place is correct. If they have problems with it, reference a supervisor or relevant Safety Officer afterwards. Do NOT make any abrupt changes or corrections that may further cause harm or risk of injury.
Have them demonstrate the correct way to perform actions.
Supervise and monitor to ensure that things are done correctly in the future.
Document everything, including a signature that the conversation took place, as necessary.
So am I fair in assuming that things are done differently here? If so, why? (Not an interrogation, but I've said multiple times that my biggest complaint with Nexon is lack of communication, so it seems somewhat fitting that the same point is being repeatedly made in this and other threads).
If I'm going to responded to about one's experiences on here rather than real-time/voice/DMs I'd prefer if people kept their biases out of their responses.
I've always believed that a CM can make or break a game for the community, and so far I haven't had any criticism of Katherz or the Mod team, but I also haven't had any issues with anyone, either.
And then you get removed or "silenced" because you're "attacking" them.
That's always fun.
It depends on how the situation develops. Either a good civil debate with mutual respect for the other side is done or it becomes an attack where Our Dear Great Leader must purge kinda results.
Apologies, but the fact I have to behave in such a manner that a moderator has to manually lower my threat level is insipid for a number of reasons.
Moderators issue such things in order to moderate, when they perceive a need, yet following the rules does not welcome the same type of reactions as breaking them merely in reverse. I have to depend on the moderators to say "Oh hey, Bliss is behaving quite well, let us move her from Medium to Mild!" Which will essentially never happen, not because I continue to misbehave, but due to the attitudes shared between rectifying rule breaking and recognizing lawful behavior.
It simply does not work, as there is no immediate need to address my behavior when it is within the boundaries of the rules, no reason to report when I am being merely within the rules. It gives the reasonably apathetic moderators too much to handle, nor would most people take such a position as a mother would a child, or a fair legal system towards reformed inmates.
In essence, these warnings are essentially permanent, unless the moderators are somehow overwhelmingly pleased enough to do me a favour or two. This is particularly unwieldy, as I am solely obligated to not break the rules; not act in a sycophantic manner hoping to not be forgotten.
The absence of bad behavior does not mean being saint, but merely refraining from it. If I refrain from it and act within the rules, I should be able to go down a level, as I have demonstrated with enough nudging I am capable of following them. However, the system as it is wants me to act more than "someone who follows the rules", in order to butter up the moderators enough that they'll notice my plight.
Which wouldn't be bad if their moderating was on point, but it isn't, mainly as I cannot expect them to care all that much.
I don't blame them, (I actually wouldn't care enough to patrol the forums either, hence why I believe they don't either. Especially since Katherz got married. By the way, you actually got hitched. Proud of you Katherz @Katherz) I am simply saying the moderation system the moderators have to use on the new forums is idiotic.
Solution? Make warnings duration based.
What hasn't been able to leave my mind though is when someone said that this forum version was specifically made where we are censored more and what scares me is this feels a bit believable with how the forum works.
All I can say really is I hope it's just me being my paranoid self and I hope everyone can come together and get rid of that scary feeling and make the forums a happy place for everyone, no feeling like a mod is watching your every move with a hand on the warning/ban button 24/7, some new features to make it lively and make you more you, etc.
I think that would welcome a lot more people into the forums tbh
What do you mean?
Okay here's the thing. I got hit with the blanket statement too, that's why I'm in this thread, that's why I'm willing to openly talk with our moderators be they GM's of VFM's. Of course I don't like it, I honestly think the entire warning/ban system on the forums is garbage. A permanent warning for being annoying is a bit too much. However there's no point in bashing nexon in an attempt to be a martyr, regardless of context this line that you said There's nothing constructive, nothing that leads into a conversation, it's just an insult for the sake of being insulting. There's no context that would make that line acceptable. If you want to see change happen on the forums it needs to be done more civilly, even though it's unfair to users that we can't speak out in frustration without fear of being penalized.
That's fair, water under the bridge (there's a fee to go over it tho). So what do you think should be the next step in correcting the ban situation that several people have been tied up in.
blissful said a moderator can manually lower the warning level.
Hmmm, that's... Interesting.
*Hmmm intensifies*
Intense Hmmmm is equivalent to hummingbird wing flaps.