courthouse/banroom

[ResserGD]

There we go then, permanent bans because a mod overreacts ( unbeatable, coolboy ), wrongful scam cases, banned for koxping, etc... all these bans could be argued in a courthouse.

really it's just painful to see these juniors not want to unban anyone because "they weren't the guy to ban them" and the person who banned them has too much of an ego to admit his mistake and unban them. A courthouse might actually give these guys some balls to say that the decision was wrong and not care about stepping on some other guys toes to unban or something.

that kind of "our words final and thats that" attitude shouldn't fly around here

In principle the idea of a banroom isn't bad as I said above. However at the same time you strike me as a person who, when your view isn't seen as the right one, you'll keep badgering people and feel they are wrong, just because they disagree. You need to remember that no one on this forum posts without bias and each has their own reason to say what they do. There will always be conflicts of interest between people. And in this situation the view of a moderator, junior or not, is the one that will stand. Doesn't mean that people can't debate something (and this may be where your idea comes in) but your attitude is such that if a moderator disagrees with you they must be wrong and abusing their powers. I think before you continually question the actions of moderators you should also take a step back and consider that just because they don't agree with you doesn't make them stupid and unable to do their jobs.

[MrRapist]

really it's just painful to see these juniors not want to unban anyone because "they weren't the guy to ban them"

We aren't allowed to do so. As far as I know, it's always been like that too.

I agree with cama, though. I've never perma banned anyone other than for scamming or bypassing a ban.
I also fully agree with ResserGD.

[mythlost]

there has been alot of peop banned though for flamming hijacking threads and other things if you read some of the banned users

[Vice]

Let's not go offtopic.

Unbeatable 2013

[Josh]

In principle the idea of a banroom isn't bad as I said above. However at the same time you strike me as a person who, when your view isn't seen as the right one, you'll keep badgering people and feel they are wrong, just because they disagree. You need to remember that no one on this forum posts without bias and each has their own reason to say what they do. There will always be conflicts of interest between people. And in this situation the view of a moderator, junior or not, is the one that will stand. Doesn't mean that people can't debate something (and this may be where your idea comes in) but your attitude is such that if a moderator disagrees with you they must be wrong and abusing their powers. I think before you continually question the actions of moderators you should also take a step back and consider that just because they don't agree with you doesn't make them stupid and unable to do their jobs.

What does that have to do with anything? What my attitude is has nothing to do with this, because I'm not a moderator, it's when these moderators have that type of attitude that causes problems...

I doubt it would be that hard to set-up, and whilst it may not be used a lot, it's a useful thing to have in a forum. I guess it would be more use in a more active forum that bans for time periods straight, and not auto bans from infractions or straight permanent. Debating infractions given would be a bit too much of a time waster and moderators seem to have a mind set in stone over permanent bans.

We aren't allowed to do so. As far as I know, it's always been like that too.

Isn't moderating meant to be a community effort? Why does it seem so isolated and individualistic? What's next, a $20 starbucks gift certificate to the mod with the most bans in a month?

[camaz0tz]

Let's not go offtopic.

Unbeatable 2013

So as I said, I have accepted my ban, I know that back then I did over step my bounds questioning the authority of the admins on this forum, and I guess that was simply because I was flying sky high with ego and thought I was invincible, especially with a record of consecutive previous unbans. - Unbeatable 2012, campaign ruined.

[razor]

i dont get it

[Vice]

So as I said, I have accepted my ban, I know that back then I did over step my bounds questioning the authority of the admins on this forum, and I guess that was simply because I was flying sky high with ego and thought I was invincible, especially with a record of consecutive previous unbans. - Unbeatable 2012, campaign ruined.

Wait... What, are you telling me I'm late for the party?

Next step would be for him to jack it in San Diego.

History repeats itself.

[ResserGD]

What does that have to do with anything? What my attitude is has nothing to do with this, because I'm not a moderator, it's when these moderators have that type of attitude that causes problems...

I doubt it would be that hard to set-up, and whilst it may not be used a lot, it's a useful thing to have in a forum. I guess it would be more use in a more active forum that bans for time periods straight, and not auto bans from infractions or straight permanent. Debating infractions given would be a bit too much of a time waster and moderators seem to have a mind set in stone over permanent bans.


Isn't moderating meant to be a community effort? Why does it seem so isolated and individualistic? What's next, a $20 starbucks gift certificate to the mod with the most bans in a month?

I guess what I said is proven right by this post.

[Josh]

Flawless victory! No matter what's said you can just pawn it off as evidence of your original point. Credit where credits due.

[ResserGD]

Flawless victory! No matter what's said you can just pawn it off as evidence of your original point. Credit where credits due.

Look the bottom line is while I and I'm sure other moderators appreciate your input about what you think we are doing wrong, it isn't as if there are hundreds of people coming here and saying the same thing as you, which in itself says they and I aren't doing a bad job. Your entire fuss about this is is caused by the bans of a couple of people, or even just one person. We did discuss it in the mod section and amongst ourselves also disagreed with each other - some stood for the ban some thought it was harsh. You can't please everyone and sometimes decisions will go against you, and you just need to accept that mate. And I'm not saying mods don't make mistakes. They do. But your understanding of what happens if something is questioned is wrong - they don't try and cover it up, instead we actually talk about things in the mod section. We shouldn't have to and won't do that in public.

[Josh]

There is no personal agenda here. It may seem like that because how whole-heartedly I argued in the past over similar issues, but that's because this forum is boring and a good discussion brightens things up. I thought this section was to suggest improvements for the forum? Why is it being met with so much hostility.. Another forum I visit has this and with the recent talk about bannings it came to my mind to suggest it here, that's all. Whilst I have argued about peoples bans in the short past, it wasn't personal affections motivating that, more the obvious wrongful banning which I would argue the case for anyone in that position, because - and this is only going to solidify your original point here - I felt I was right and still do.

Again, this suggestion was from seeing that drama and thinking this could help to prevent that happening again, not seeing it, not getting my way and thinking of another platform to argue on. If all suggestions are met with such hostility I can see why the only update to the forum in years is a couple of prefixes.

P.S: I've never criticized moderators specifically, just critisized the attitudes of moderators as a whole ( with no fault of their own, as it seemed to be a rule ).

P.SS: The forum would be lucky to have hundreds of active members, so can't see hundreds of moderator complaints coming in. There was large complaints over the new moderators a while back, but that died down as people started to care less.

[ResserGD]

Actually I said your idea wasn't bad. I said it could be useful. My gripe with it is people like you, who if banned wouldn't form a mature discussion but rather a show of attitude and anger and wouldn't accept anything other than to be unbanned. I think in principle the idea is good, but these are the problems I would foresee 1) It would end up eventually becoming a flame fest and a hate section on moderators. Whether someone deserved a ban or not they will post there because it is an opportunity to vent anger. 2) It would actually be inactive. Not many people are banned permanently believe it or not and those who get infractions through experience PM the moderator to discuss. 3) I personally feel this section is sufficient. If a ban is made people on here tend to find out and post about it (take funkz and coolboy for example) if it warrants a discussion. You have to remember 99% of people who permanently banned on here are scammers, who only get banned once there is enough evidence. And this is my issue. For 99% of cases and bans its useless. For a couple of cases it would be useful. Whether those rare cases make the section warranted is up to admins.

[razor]

It would end up eventually becoming a flame fest and a hate section on moderators

would only be visible to banned users and mods

[thing]

Let's face it. The community is dying and unless something is changed, it will cease to exist. If we change the rules so that only scammers or out of control flamers/spammers are permanently banned, we can have this courtroom. It would be cut and dry; if you scammed go away, if you were banned for some other reason, we'll hear you out.