Recommended Posts

No - you complain about moderation issues without knowing all the details which led to warns/bans or without knowing how exactly the system works. It is an entirely different discussion whether or not staff ought to be more transparent to warned/banned members as to the reasoning behind the moderation actions though.

The point I'm basically trying to make in the previous post is that the moderation system is for the most part fair. Admittedly some rules seem to have been used inconsistently, which is down to who moderates the channel at the time and is something moderators et al. need to look into.

That's the crux of what people in this thread are saying, but in your previous post you said it was making you lol. All evidence so far suggests that a system is there but isn't used consistently - IRC rules state that a verbal warning will be given and action follows if it's ignored. In my last case, I was warned by one person and five minutes later I was banned by another.

It seems also that some members of staff are crossing forum warns and IRC warns as being the same system, when previously they were entirely separate - case in point, mail was permabanned from IRC but is still on the forums. Unless I missed the point where they were changed to be the same thing, but I don't believe my warn level on the forums is anything above zero after my warnings on IRC.

We should get rid of it and just use IPB Chat *pings Timan*

You don't want that. If IPS goes down you lose the chat. Not fun.

Lay off the booze tbh neobond, we are trying to give you guys feed back here and all i can see is just blatant stone walling, if you cant even see an issue with the IRC moderation then close it and be done with it, stop wasting bandwith and peoples time it looks stupid

That's the crux of what people in this thread are saying, but in your previous post you said it was making you lol. All evidence so far suggests that a system is there but isn't used consistently - IRC rules state that a verbal warning will be given and action follows if it's ignored. In my last case, I was warned by one person and five minutes later I was banned by another.

It seems also that some members of staff are crossing forum warns and IRC warns as being the same system, when previously they were entirely separate - case in point, mail was permabanned from IRC but is still on the forums. Unless I missed the point where they were changed to be the same thing, but I don't believe my warn level on the forums is anything above zero after my warnings on IRC.

We want to merge the IRC and Forum warn system. I really don't see why certain people feel like they can be "in the clear" for being a dick in IRC and get away with still participating in the forums, or even vice-versa?

The forum rules aren't that hard to live by, and as I keep saying, it's the ones who continually break them that take up most of our time bitching about it.

This is a clear Example of how the Right hand Doesnt know what the Left hand is doing, you want to merge the IRC warns and forum warns together thats cool then tell people, until then it hasnt been and both systems are seperate so again why was Sam banned from the forum with 0% warn?

I'll say it again since it fell on deaf ears, SORT THE IRC MODDING OUT RATHER THAN DOING IT HALF ARSED

That's just silly, IRC is much more flowing and instant, like talking to someone face to face. Rather than a forum that gives the user time to write a reply, re-read it and make modifications before hitting go. To apply the same rules/warning levels and standards ignores that totally.

We want to merge the IRC and Forum warn system. I really don't see why certain people feel like they can be "in the clear" for being a dick in IRC and get away with still participating in the forums, or even vice-versa?

The forum rules aren't that hard to live by, and as I keep saying, it's the ones who continually break them that take up most of our time bitching about it.

Because IRC is a chat room and the forums are a message board. They have different rules and work in different ways. What's safe on one isn't safe on another, etc etc. Do what you please but like Fubar keeps saying, Sam was banned from the forums while only (debatably) being a naughty boy in IRC so you should make your mind up sometime soon.

I only temp banned Sam for several days, I do not have the permissions to permaban anyone from the forum so I did not permaban Sam. If you wish to discuss this further, please PM on IRC.

Ok then thats fair enough but when you're saying IRC and forum Warnings bans are seperate and you have the owner saying differently then its clear to anyone with a brain that nothing is sorted regarding the modding of IRC...

Oops I may have not made that clear enough, we want to merge warn logs with IRC + Forum.. and I do feel that severe enough infractions on IRC should also warrant a forum restriction as well, in many cases this isn't needed, but in some they clearly are.

We want to merge the IRC and Forum warn system. I really don't see why certain people feel like they can be "in the clear" for being a dick in IRC and get away with still participating in the forums, or even vice-versa?

The forum rules aren't that hard to live by, and as I keep saying, it's the ones who continually break them that take up most of our time bitching about it.

Ok then thats fair enough but when you're saying IRC and forum Warnings bans are seperate and you have the owner saying differently then its clear to anyone with a brain that nothing is sorted regarding the modding of IRC...

Please read the bolded parts.

Please read the bolded parts.

Please read my posts regarding the moderation of the IRC channel, THERE ARE NO CLEAR RULES OR CONSISTENT MODDING.... Really guys why are you making it out to be so harder than it is? Modding an IRC channel is the easiet thing out of the whole social networking stuff, if you dont know how it works then dont have one....

Oops I may have not made that clear enough, we want to merge warn logs with IRC + Forum.. and I do feel that severe enough infractions on IRC should also warrant a forum restriction as well, in many cases this isn't needed, but in some they clearly are.

Well, we can't see our own warn levels so it's for your information if you aren't a regular on IRC. However then you enter into another debate where does someone with 80% warn on the forums who then accidentally posts a NSFW link in IRC get a permaban? Again opening the door for inconsistency.

But not every situation is black and white. That's where personal judgment comes in and discussion between staff. Every decision about a (temp-)ban is discussed at length, either on IRC or on the forum and the majority rules.

Please read my posts regarding the moderation of the IRC channel, THERE ARE NO CLEAR RULES OR CONSISTENT MODDING.... Really guys why are you making it out to be so harder than it is? Modding an IRC channel is the easiet thing out of the whole social networking stuff, if you dont know how it works then dont have one....

Current topic title in #neowin

Welcome to #neowin | Rules: https://www.neowin.net/ircrules | Revenge of the 5th! | <Laura> what if i like being a fat hairy beast? | <kontroll> I feel like a woman. | <Colin-uk> Man. i'd like to feel a woman. | <The_Decryptor> Also, Heath Ledger wasn?t that good an actor

Bolded for emphasis

But not every situation is black and white. That's where personal judgment comes in and discussion between staff. Every decision about a (temp-)ban is discussed at length, either on IRC or on the forum and the majority rules.

Thats the worst excuse for inconsistent IRC modding ive ever seen in the 11 years ive been running IRC networks...

But not every situation is black and white. That's where personal judgment comes in and discussion between staff. Every decision about a (temp-)ban is discussed at length, either on IRC or on the forum and the majority rules.

Which is why you can't merge the forum and IRC systems. You also have no need for chat mods to use as scapegoats to hand out bans when the staff makes a team decision.

Please read my posts regarding the moderation of the IRC channel, THERE ARE NO CLEAR RULES OR CONSISTENT MODDING.... Really guys why are you making it out to be so harder than it is? Modding an IRC channel is the easiet thing out of the whole social networking stuff, if you dont know how it works then dont have one....

These rules should be clear enough: https://www.neowin.net/ircrules

Also, no one is making anything harder than it actually is.

Which is why you can't merge the forum and IRC systems. You also have no need for chat mods to use as scapegoats to hand out bans when the staff makes a team decision.

Are you implying that chat mods are lowest of the lowest? They are gods!

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Guess it's one of those things best used by devs to thoroughly test stuff.
    • is it all upside down there? traffic lights reverted too?
    • Bluesky COO warns social media regulations could destroy competition from small startups by Paul Hill Fears that increasing government control of social media risks regulatory capture by the biggest social media firms were raised again recently. Bluesky’s chief operating officer said in an interview that social media bans for children and tighter regulations for social media firms risk creating a world where there are only a few social media platforms run by companies with the deepest pockets. Regulations on social media firms have been very lax since they appeared for mainstream users in the 2000’s. This gave Meta, Snapchat, and Google time to build up their user bases and get entrenched, with Meta being the most successful. Now that Meta has succeeded, it has been attempting regulatory capture. By pushing for more regulations of social media, Meta hopes to make it more difficult for rivals to challenge it. For its part, it doesn’t need to worry about the cost of regulation because it has a lot of money to spend, whereas startups do not. Speaking to CNBC, Rose Wang, Bluesky’s chief operating officer, said: “I support the protection and the safety of youth, the question that we have then is at what cost, because essentially what I’m scared of is in the long term, we’re headed to a world where there’s about three to five platforms, and extreme heavy regulation of those platforms, and basically the whole compliance teams of these platforms are 10 times the size of our entire team. So, basically, we’re living in a world where it’s almost impossible for smaller entrants to come in and build healthier spaces. These platforms have led to a place where the bottom line is the thing that drives what they do... so I understand why governments have to step in and regulate, because the platforms have done nothing right.” She said that while she is not against regulation, there needs to be more channels between the small to mid-sized players and regulators to help protect them. She says that big tech players, on the other hand, “who we know are circumventing regulation,” need to be regulated. Essentially, the Bluesky position is one of nuance, rather than absolutes. While Bluesky’s proposal may preserve competition in the social media space, it still doesn’t address the massive privacy implications these age verification measures introduce, such as handing over sensitive identity documents to access age-gated content. Source: CNBC
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Month Later
      DJC50PLUS earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      DJC50PLUS earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Proficient
      Eric Biran went up a rank
      Proficient
    • Dedicated
      Conjor earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Week One Done
      Windows Guy earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      493
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      249
    3. 3
      Steven P.
      71
    4. 4
      +Edouard
      70
    5. 5
      ATLien_0
      69
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!