Golden-Road.net
Studio 46 - Non-TPiR Discussion => Technical Support => Topic started by: Grade_A23 on October 30, 2015, 06:39:19 PM
-
Torgo banned me from chat today but i have no idea why. I did nothing wrong. Can anybody fix this issue please?
-
I'm sure they'll get right on it.
(http://i1313.photobucket.com/albums/t555/TheTrueAnthony/repair_zpslbrh8zle.png)
-
I was banned by Torgo as well, for saying something which apparently came off harsh and negative. I almost never try to say things like what I said which got me banned, but even so, I was kicked before I even had a chance to discuss or apologize. I didn't intend to be harsh towards Torgo, and I respect his position, but I feel being quickly banned for making just a simple mistake and without warning wasn't a very nice thing.
Now, I don't know if I'm permabanned now or what, but do moderators have the privilege of changing ban settings or unbanning users? Or is that only an admin's privilege?
-
I was banned by Torgo as well, for saying something which apparently came off harsh and negative. I almost never try to say things like what I said which got me banned, but even so, I was kicked before I even had a chance to discuss or apologize. I didn't intend to be harsh towards Torgo, and I respect his position, but I feel being quickly banned for making just a simple mistake and without warning wasn't a very nice thing.
Now, I don't know if I'm permabanned now or what, but do moderators have the privilege of changing ban settings or unbanning users? Or is that only an admin's privilege?
Well i didn't say anything wrong at all and I was banned! i hope it isn't for long. I'm in the dark about mines!
-
Okay, I've known Schfifty long enough to know he is not the type of member to cause trouble in the chat room. If we're going to start banning members on a whim like that in chat, then perhaps we need to reevaluate who exactly has powers in there. I don't participate in chat often enough to know what's been occurring in there lately, but on behalf of Schfifty, I'm quite positive that he would never do anything within reason to be banned from the room.
-
I've sent a few messages to Torgo asking him why did he ban me and I haven't gotten any answer yet. I hope a mod answers me on this post or in a Message!
-
Okay, I've known Schfifty long enough to know he is not the type of member to cause trouble in the chat room. If we're going to start banning members on a whim like that in chat, then perhaps we need to reevaluate who exactly has powers in there. I don't participate in chat often enough to know what's been occurring in there lately, but on behalf of Schfifty, I'm quite positive that he would never do anything within reason to be banned from the room.
I totally concur. I don't know if I've been perma-banned myself.
-
(http://i.imgur.com/oALydwA.jpg)
14. In order to keep our bandwidth costs down, we allow one user account per person. Users found with additional accounts run the risk of having all accounts disabled.
Not to mention that attacking me on my work accounts is definitely a no-no.
Okay, I've known Schfifty long enough to know he is not the type of member to cause trouble in the chat room.
3. Members are asked to not act as back seat moderators.
Recurring problem.
I cannot speak for PriceBusterXL's ban; that wasn't me.
This type of behavior has gone on for far too long, and now that the moderation staff actually has the gumption to do something about it, we suddenly feel the need to throw fits over every single banning?
19. Members who select to violate any of these regulations will be subject to appropriate disciplinary action. The moderators of these forums reserve the right to define “appropriate”.
We're done here.
-
Actually, the full quote for Rule #3 is as follows:
3. Members are asked to not act as back seat moderators. If you notice a member is causing problems or doing something inappropriate on a thread, you are welcome to bring it to the attention a moderator.
Two things here: first, this rule doesn't specifically address the chat room. While it probably does apply to chat, it's specifically referencing forum threads. Using it as a guide to justify how you moderate the chat section seems sketchy to me. Secondly, was Schfifty bothering anyone else, or were you just personally annoyed? Was he given any warnings, not just from you, but from others, as well, or did you just get fed up and hit the ban button? You said this was a recurring problem, but I know I'm not alone in my high regard for Schfifty as a member, and I'm positive he would have stopped if it really was a problem. And quite frankly, I don't see this as enough of a problem to ban someone over unless it was as extreme as some of the cases we've seen here on the boards, and again, I've never observed such behavior from him. What goes on in chat is different, and I rarely participate there, but I still think you overreacted, and until someone else says differently, I will continue to hold that position.
19. Members who select to violate any of these regulations will be subject to appropriate disciplinary action. The moderators of these forums reserve the right to define “appropriate”.
Again, this is referencing the boards, but I assume it extends to chat, too. However, your mod powers only exist because you agreed to take over as recap guide. You have the power to regulate traffic in chat, and that's fine, but I don't consider what you deem as "appropriate" to be held in the same regard as that of a mod who was put in place because of their standing with the site and their trustworthiness to keep things around the site under control. If those mods (Steve Gavazzi, Prizes, CU, etc) find your reasoning for banning Schfifty or anyone else appropriate, then fair enough, but until then, I still see no clear basis for it.
-
Again, this is referencing the boards, but I assume it extends to chat, too. However, your mod powers only exist because you agreed to take over as recap guide. You have the power to regulate traffic in chat, and that's fine, but I don't consider what you deem as "appropriate" to be held in the same regard as that of a mod who was put in place because of their standing with the site and their trustworthiness to keep things around the site under control. If those mods (Steve Gavazzi, Prizes, CU, etc) find your reasoning for banning Schfifty or anyone else appropriate, then fair enough, but until then, I still see no clear basis for it.
The above quote is so SO true, but the bolded portion is something that I think needs to be addressed.
I actually think that part of the problem is that too many people who have moderator status in certain sections have moderator status in chat. As it stands now, you have (IIRC) the admin, site mods, forum game hosts (past and present), and recappers (past and present). I don't know what the exact number is, but I think it's well above what it needs to be. Just because you have jurisdiction over a section of the site shouldn't mean you automatically have control over chat too. It probably won't happen, but I say that if you're not admin or a "The Talk Is Right" mod, you shouldn't have mod status in chat. That way, you'll have better consistency and less people abusing their powers (yes Torgo, this means you).
And while I can't speak for all, I don't think Schfifty wasn't causing problems in chat today. I think he just chose the wrong day to come to someone's defence.
-
(http://i.imgur.com/oALydwA.jpg)Not to mention that attacking me on my work accounts is definitely a no-no.
Recurring problem.
First off I was attacking u at all! I just asked u a simple question! Second off u had no right to ban me in chat because First off I wasn't warned that I would be banned and second their wasnt any behavior coming from me that would justify a ban! So someone needs to me unban me from chat please.
-
Wasn't* on the last post
-
I was banned by Torgo as well, for saying something which apparently came off harsh and negative. I almost never try to say things like what I said which got me banned, but even so, I was kicked before I even had a chance to discuss or apologize. I didn't intend to be harsh towards Torgo, and I respect his position, but I feel being quickly banned for making just a simple mistake and without warning wasn't a very nice thing.
This is true, I even have the chat log as proof.
Although I haven't been a member for very long, Schfifty has always been a very kind person to me, he frequently answers my questions about various things on the show. He doesn't seem like the type of person who'd be sparking trouble. And as for the comments that got him banned, he was trying to be as polite and respectful as possible when posting them. He wasn't explicitly insulting anyone. I definitely do not think he should have been banned.
As for Grade_A's ban, he didn't say anything negative either - I'll just say that some of his posts raised some people's suspicions. I don't really think that was worthy of a ban either though.
-
Maybe this will help justify the situation from this morning:
Long story short...Rat Race showed up; OP says "RATTY!"; OP is banned from Chat with a statement something along the lines of, "Nobody calls Rat a silly nickname like that"; I say I thought it was a little uncalled for; Torgo asks if I have a problem with his moderating during the SCSD, and says "Because you can join [OP] if you do."; I say I don't have a problem with it; I get banned with the message "I DO".
-
Maybe this will help justify the situation from this morning:
Long story short...Rat Race showed up; OP says "RATTY!"; OP is banned from Chat with a statement something along the lines of, "Nobody calls Rat a silly nickname like that"; I say I thought it was a little uncalled for; Torgo asks if I have a problem with his moderating during the SCSD, and says "Because you can join [OP] if you do."; I say I don't have a problem with it; I get banned with the message "I DO".
WOW! Thank U Schfifty! That shouldn't had gotten me banned at all! Abuse of power!
-
Hm. Just because one can be a moderator does not always mean that they should.
This is true, I even have the chat log as proof.
I say post the relevant portions.
Torgo asks if I have a problem with his moderating during the SCSD, and says "Because you can join [OP] if you do."
Yes, because how dare someone have an issue with how a moderator does things. :roll:
-
Yes, because how dare someone have an issue with how a moderator does things. :roll:
(http://media2.popsugar-assets.com/files/2014/01/28/059/n/1922398/1419e82a252ea39f_seinfeld-clapping-gif.gif.xxxlarge/i/so-much-clapping-felt-like-you-should-clap-home.gif)
When GWF has something to say, it's real. I applaud you, sir. ;)
-
[Grade_A23]: RATTY
[G-R Daytime Chat]: Grade_A23 has left at 11:38 am
[G-R Daytime Chat]: Grade_A23 has left at 11:38 am
[Torgo]: no new user knows our nicknames
[wildbill0962]: woah
[prizes22]: Yeah, between that and forking, that's too much
[UniquePerspective]: what'd he do
[Schfifty]: ...I think that was a little uncalled for.
[prizes22]: Uncalled for?
[silverice878]: Why did you kick Grade A?
[Schfifty]: I don't want to talk further about it, but I just feel... yeah...
[prizes22]: Suspicions it's Mr. X again
[prizes22]: Number of reasons
few minutes later
[Torgo]: Schfifty
[Torgo]: do you have a problem with my moderating
[Torgo]: because you can join A23 for all I care
[Torgo]: oh look, another PM
[Schfifty]: I don't have a problem with it.
[G-R Daytime Chat]: Schfifty has left at 11:43 am (I can confirm his ban reason was "I DO" or something similar to that, even though it doesn't show in the chat log)
[G-R Daytime Chat]: Schfifty has left at 11:43 am
[OneBidTris]: I don't think you should've banned Schfifty.
[Torgo]: I don't care what you think
[Guint]: Schfifty should've been banned a while ago
-
Well, that's...interesting. Again, I don't participate in chat, so any thoughts and opinions expressed here are based purely on what I've seen on the boards. With that being said, this is no longer an argument I'm interested with participating in, so yeah...
If you'll excuse me...
:pint:
-
I don't participate in chat, so any thoughts and opinions expressed here are based purely on what I've seen on the boards.
For the record, neither do I -- either I forget about chat entirely, or end up sleeping past Noon.
[chat logs]
This tells me everything I need to know. I thank you, sir.
[Torgo]: no new user knows our nicknames
So at no time can a new user have previously been a lurker (whether for days, weeks, months, or years) and hence picked up on the nicknames? :roll: Suspicions of a duplicate account or not, this is a rather rash assumption, sir.
[OneBidTris]: I don't think you should've banned Schfifty.
[Torgo]: I don't care what you think
While I have not filled the position myself, I feel reasonably certain that as a moderator, you should care what people think. If someone questions your moderation, you should perhaps double-check yourself and see if the things being questioned have any merit. Responding as you did was, I feel, rather the wrong way to go about it.
-
few minutes later
Wow!! I think he shouldn't be a mod for a minute. Anyone agree with me?
-
Thank you for sharing the logs, TF2000.
And, again, let me just say wholeheartedly that I didn't purposely intend to stir up trouble. I said something I didn't mean to say. I only thought it was weird that somebody would be banned for not being familiar with nicknames, and it came out the wrong way. I'm sorry if I offended Torgo, and with all due respect, hope he and others don't take this too personally. I'm not trying to go a bad route here, but I understand that what I did was probably wrong and won't happen again.
While I have not filled the position myself, I feel reasonably certain that as a moderator, you should care what people think. If someone questions your moderation, you should perhaps double-check yourself and see if the things being questioned have any merit. Responding as you did was, I feel, rather the wrong way to go about it.
To be honest, I think what happened was also a combination of acting as a moderator, and recapping the show at the same time. It can be a stressful job, and that certainly could be to blame.
-
To be honest, I think what happened was also a combination of acting as a moderator, and recapping the show at the same time. It can be a stressful job, and that certainly could be to blame.
Fair point. Perhaps the recapper should not be a moderator in chat, if only so they can remain focused on recapping the show?
[Torgo]: Schfifty
[Torgo]: do you have a problem with my moderating
[Torgo]: because you can join A23 for all I care
[Torgo]: oh look, another PM
[Schfifty]: I don't have a problem with it.
[G-R Daytime Chat]: Schfifty has left at 11:43 am (I can confirm his ban reason was "I DO" or something similar to that, even though it doesn't show in the chat log)
Perhaps Torgo thought Schfifty was responding to the PM remark? That would explain the ban reason being along the lines of "I DO"...although based on the above, it does look like Torgo would have banned Schfifty no matter what his response.
(My point remains that "Questioning how a moderator acts and reacts? BANNED!" is not particularly a good way to go about things. Further, like JustBecause below, I do not believe you have anything to apologize for.)
-
Wow!! I think he shouldn't be a mod for a minute. Anyone agree with me?
Technically, he isn't a mod. He's the official recapper, which means he gets mod status in the recap section and in chat (which, again, I believe is the crux of the issue). If you remove the mod in chat status from the "False Moderators," (Torgo, Guint, Adam, etc.) and allow them to focus on their respective sections, I think there'd be fewer issues... just like GWF said.
And let me just say wholeheartedly that, again, I didn't purposely intend to stir up trouble. I said something I didn't mean to say. I only thought it was weird that somebody would be banned for not knowing nicknames, and it came out the wrong way. I'm sorry if I offended Torgo, and with all due respect, hope he and others don't take this too personally. I'm not trying to go a bad route here, but I understand what I did was probably wrong and won't happen again.
Schfifty, let me say that I don't think you did anything wrong. You were doing the right thing; it just happened to be the perfect storm of stuff beforehand for it to backfire.
-
Technically, he isn't a mod. He's the official recapper, which means he gets mod status in the recap section and in chat (which, again, I believe is the crux of the issue). If you remove the mod in chat status from the "False Moderators," (Torgo, Guint, Adam, etc.) and allow them to focus on their respective sections, I think there'd be fewer issues... just like GWF said.
There's a problem with that solution. Most, almost all, of the global moderators aren't always around whereas Torgo, Guint, Fireball, and Adam are. To take away their mod powers would leave no mod in the chat and that just can't be. These "False Moderators" as you call them are important since most of the, I guess, real mods aren't around. I assume Marc, John, Steve, cu, Alfonso, and Army either are working during the show or their interest in watching the show live isn't there. Also, some of the mods in chat aren't even mods anymore. Frank15 and FPGWillyT still have mod status and once again, thank goodness they do. Someone needs to oversee the chat and not one person can do it everyday. Giving the chat mod powers to all mods means everyone works together to help maintain the chat.
I think the problem people are seeing is that prior to this shift in power there were hardly any mods in chat. It was usually just Adam on most days and when he was lucky Frank or cu was available to help. And before Adam or cu or Jess became mods there was typically no one in chat at all. Now all of a sudden, there are actual mods there who aren't going to let everything fly like they used to and it's a problem since people aren't used to it. That said, I don't agree with everything that's been done and you'll see that below.
First off, I've only perused this thread. The reasoning as I understood it from Torgo was that GradeA_23 had quite a bit of knowledge of slang here on this site for someone who just joined. In the past, we've had members who have acclimated very quickly to the climate of the site, only to be discovered that they were in fact a former banned member sneaking in (and thereby breaking another one of those rules you all have quoted in this tread). That's a no-no and does deserve discipline. Unfortunately, it perhaps seems that GradeA_23 is on the up and up and that the ban was made in haste. But I certainly don't think it wasn't fully unjustified.
First off I was attacking u at all! I just asked u a simple question! Second off u had no right to ban me in chat because First off I wasn't warned that I would be banned and second their wasnt any behavior coming from me that would justify a ban! So someone needs to me unban me from chat please.
While I understand your intent and wouldn't consider this an attack, I do think it was inappropriate to contact him on Twitter about an issue you had on this site. You had the options of PMing him (which I know you did) or making a thread as you have now.
I did not agree with the Schfifty one. He was simply wondering why GradeA_23 was banned and "because I said so" isn't a good reason and banning him certainly doesn't quell the situation. It just adds fire. I don't care what rule 19 says, there's some cases where one person's definition of appropriate isn't the right one.
While I'm here, I'll state that I did not and do not agree with the ban on scoot either. Scoot has not been allowed been back into the chat after what I considered an actual unjustified ban. He did indeed state his displeasure for boats in caps and exclamations, but I don't think he was given proper warning before recieving such a harsh penalty. I hope that is rescinded.
Also, I don't know how banning works in the chat (perhaps a tutorial with pictures would be nice for us non-mods to see), but it's my understanding that mods do not have the ability to time out the duration of the bans they hand out. It would be nice if they'd be given such power so that the penalty of a ban is not the same for every infraction, whether it be little or small.
-
There's a problem with that solution. Most, almost all, of the global moderators aren't always around whereas Torgo, Guint, Fireball, and Adam are. To take away their mod powers would leave no mod in the chat and that just can't be. These "False Moderators" as you call them are important since most of the, I guess, real mods aren't around. I assume Marc, John, Steve, cu, Alfonso, and Army either are working during the show or their interest in watching the show live isn't there. Also, some of the mods in chat aren't even mods anymore. Frank15 and FPGWillyT still have mod status and once again, thank goodness they do. Someone needs to oversee the chat and not one person can do it everyday. Giving the chat mod powers to all mods means everyone works together to help maintain the chat.
I think the problem people are seeing is that prior to this shift in power there were hardly any mods in chat. It was usually just Adam on most days and when he was lucky Frank or cu was available to help. And before Adam or cu or Jess became mods there was typically no one in chat at all. Now all of a sudden, there are actual mods there who aren't going to let everything fly like they used to and it's a problem since people aren't used to it. That said, I don't agree with everything that's been done and you'll see that below.
First off, I've only perused this thread. The reasoning as I understood it from Torgo was that GradeA_23 had quite a bit of knowledge of slang here on this site for someone who just joined. In the past, we've had members who have acclimated very quickly to the climate of the site, only to be discovered that they were in fact a former banned member sneaking in (and thereby breaking another one of those rules you all have quoted in this tread). That's a no-no and does deserve discipline. Unfortunately, it perhaps seems that GradeA_23 is on the up and up and that the ban was made in haste. But I certainly don't think it wasn't fully unjustified.
While I understand your intent and wouldn't consider this an attack, I do think it was inappropriate to contact him on Twitter about an issue you had on this site. You had the options of PMing him (which I know you did) or making a thread as you have now.
I did not agree with the Schfifty one. He was simply wondering why GradeA_23 was banned and "because I said so" isn't a good reason and banning him certainly doesn't quell the situation. It just adds fire. I don't care what rule 19 says, there's some cases where one person's definition of appropriate isn't the right one.
While I'm here, I'll state that I did not and do not agree with the ban on scoot either. Scoot has not been allowed been back into the chat after what I considered an actual unjustified ban. He did indeed state his displeasure for boats in caps and exclamations, but I don't think he was given proper warning before recieving such a harsh penalty. I hope that is rescinded.
Also, I don't know how banning works in the chat (perhaps a tutorial with pictures would be nice for us non-mods to see), but it's my understanding that mods do not have the ability to time out the duration of the bans they hand out. It would be nice if they'd be given such power so that the penalty of a ban is not the same for every infraction, whether it be little or small.
Well I come to the site every and just look at the forums about the show esp the one on the line-up that happen everyday so thats why ive picked up on some slang as a guest before i finally decided to join on Friday. I saw the chat option and I was like oh they chat about the show when it comes on at 11 so I wanted to chat about it. Im a LFAT of the show who has watched it every since I was 4 yrs old. My grandmother hooked me on to the show. I did PM Torgo twice today but I got no answer thats why I tweeted him and I PMed a few Mods also but no answer too. Im sorrry I tweeted him but I was really pissed. Thats why I started this thread because I totally thought my ban was totally unfair and they should lift the ban.
-
Schfifty has been unbanned, as have the two users previously "caught in the revolving door": pannoni1 and Chad1787.
-
Okay, where to start with this one? First and foremost, regardless of what you think, my apologies and regret as a moderator to letting this situation get to this level of chaos.
As for the chatlogs, I should give my stance on these, since, well, they're the important precursor to this thread. I will say though, that moderators can unban users at will with a given command, that I forgot about until last night, hattip to CU.
On the first ban, it was unfortunate element of circumstance on Grade_A23's end of matters. Recently, we have had a LOT of members coming in, claiming to be 'new', but wind being someone who was banned, for just cause, finding a backdoor into the chat. These members mysteriously know a ton about the site's inner workings, nicknames, etc. I would not at all say that it is an abuse of power, if an accidental banning, in lieu of circumstances. Given the frequency of this happening of late, suspicion levels are always high. I do apologize on behalf of the staff for a misunderstanding of your identity. However, as JJ pointed out, Grade's not squeaky clean in all this either, having gone to not only Twitter, but a personal, work account of Torgo. There were alternate paths, and that one was likely the least classy of them.
Instead, PM Torgo, PM me, PM somebody. I'm usually online if you've got an issue with something with respect to the chat (heck, forums too), be it a banning, something someone said to you, etc. I'll hear out your problem, and try to work out a solution, aside from blatant trolling, in which case I'll get an admin involved. If your status is in limbo, as in confirming if you are another member or not, my response is likely to be delayed until either a moderation team/trusted panel comes to a consensus, or I as an individual reach a verdict. Yesterday, we had the mod team, and it was pretty clear across the board you were someone else. If nothing else, that teaches you were are human as well and make mistakes. The actions taken yesterday truly were an imperfect story and should not be held against anybody, from those banned, doing the banning, etc., nor should it be seen as representative of moderation efforts as a whole, from any particular user with ban abilities in chat. In that sense, I agree with JustBecause, wholeheartedly.
As for Schfifty's ban, this gets a bit more complicated. Nobody agrees this should have been a permanent ban, and in fact, when it was delivered, it was intended to be a one show/rest of show ban. I can understand some of the reactions you may have to this action; however, it is slightly misguided. Furthermore, the reasons that he was banned were not solely based upon the quoted section of 2000's transcript. To claim otherwise, not that anyone has, would be disingenuous. Guint and I were discussing member behavior as well, and came to the conclusion, for this show, Schfifty was violating the one unwritten rule of message boards everywhere: Don't suck. No, not you as an individual, but in this case, individual contributions to the chat were deemed not to be of chat standard.
As we enter a new era of Golden-Road, one where I'd like to get Mike and Drew involved (and where I have some third-party connects to the former) quality and maturity will have to be emphasized. However, the other matter was such that Schfifty appeared, notice I did not say was, to be undermining Torgo's authority to ban this user. Neither of these actions is ban worth on its on. Combined together, however, and it is a separate story.
While I respect people's opinion's about disagreeing why certain people should not have been banned, and need to be unbanned, that is rather uncouth of the members of this board. It stands highly of backseat moderation, and I would like to suggest this not take place on a public level. To call individuals false moderators, and claim abuses of powers, are matters that you should direct to me, CU, or Steve. It has no business out in the open like this. I've had many times when I've had issues with moderators and those in authority before, but this approach rarely works--for those that know me closely, you might know a good example of what I mean. If other members had issues, this likely should have been directed to me through private message. The only one I cannot give comment about, to an adequate degree, is PriceBusterXL's. This was Adam's decision, and I'll leave him to explain that.
Let's let this one go. Most members concerned about banning, besides PriceBuster, for the aforementioned reason, should be unbanned. However, Grade_A23, while not still absolutely still banned, will be subject to review for a different reason; not as a repeat user, which is my mistake, but for personal Twitter harassment, with irrefutable evidence. Once a decision is made, later tonight, to have the ban rescinded or not, this user will be given a personal message about his future in the chat.
Let's move on, unless you want to discuss my post, and the site's actions going forward a bit, as it concerns show connections, overall quality, and so forth. The part of matters, in fairness, is previously undiscussed, on a broader scale, and warrants further messages.
As for how banning goes in chat: You click on the user's username, on the righthand side of chat. From there, you get a drop down box, that gives options of Ban/PM/Ignore/etc. If you click ban, you get the option of banning by room, the chat itself (for chats with multiple rooms), or by IP. Above that is a message where you state your ban reason. Then you click ban, on the bottom middle part of such a screen, almost as if sending a private messaging to someone, and the user is banned.
PM me if you want to go into chat so I can make an image by image description of how this works, for our visual learners. I won't actually ban you, but I need another member to demonstrate the action steps, get the screenshots, upload, and edit them into this post.
-
Let me start with the fact that this entire discussion shows a lack of the ability in technology. On many chat technologies, we have the ability to kick, not ban, which is meant as a "I am getting a point across but not banning you." The current software has a time ban option, but that's only for Chelsea, Marc and John as administrators. If we had that, alone, we can still make our points, but the technology would quickly let people back in.
As for the red herring in the room, lemme just state that PriceBusterXL's kickban was basically trying to get a point of across of behaviors that should not be accepted in chat, especially after multiple warnings. It should really have been timed or just a kick in general, because people will understand what the point being made was, and I made it quite clear that a point was being made when I kickbanned him.
As for the power trip theory, let me just state that in general, the site has needed some extra moderation for a while and while I don't think that someone needs to be kicked for disagreeing, there was justification in the ban on Grade_A23 and because we have a long history of people who will make new accounts and be blatantly the same poster. That said, I don't think the solution is to rip Jess, cu, Torgo, Guint or myselfs faces off. The solution is to ask for the technology to be upgraded to that we can ironically get some extra power in being able to kick or timeban people so it's not permanent. We don't have a solution otherwise for the revolving door disasters like what pannoni and Chad went through.
-
That said though, Adam, the kicks are set for 999999999 days, though I'm not quite sure why. That badly needs to be fixed.
My wishes of importance, that everybody in this thread should want, for a mix of reasons: As Adam said, moderators need to be able to control the time out of the chat room, from like 1 second joke bans, an hour for rest of show bans, a week for poor behavior, lifetime bans for Shaffer, just to name a few examples. Furthermore, we as moderators need the ability view IPs, at the bottom right corner of posts, as admins currently do. This would easily clear up any confusion anyone has about members repeating, as it'd be a simple ID match, and would have fixed yesterday's problem before any of this even started.
-
If we're going to start banning members on a whim like that in chat, then perhaps we need to reevaluate who exactly has powers in there.
"Start" implies this is the first time such an event has happened. :) At least it was only from chat, and for a short time period.
I agree that Schfifty is a regular and never been one to stir trouble and think it's bizarre that he would get banned. I have always found it a bit confusing as to why Recap Guides and CSS Hosts had moderator privileges but always shrugged it off as a necessity for having at least 1 moderator in chat during all shows. I've dropped off in activity recently so my opinions can be taken with a grain of salt but I concur with Prizes on this subject.
-
I want to offer my sincerest apologies for anything I said last night that may have come across as offensive to anyone, particularly those in power -- and especially Torgo. My sentiments were not meant insultingly but rather as a questioning of authority on the grounds of the information I had been presented with at that moment, as well as some preconceived notions I held beforehand.
Jess is absolutely right about bringing matters such as these to the attention of moderators first, especially those with tight connections to forum admins. However, I do think discussions like these can be healthy for us. We all have differences in opinion, and from time to time, a bit of checks and balances isn't a terribly bad idea -- if just to ensure that things continue to be run as they should and that everyone is on the same page.
With regard to the current state of affairs regarding moderators here, I do think it's time the powers that be look into evaluating the 'who does what' and what powers should be handed out. While this doesn't necessarily relate to the present discussion, I still believe the primary mods (Jess, CU, Steve -- and to a lesser extent these days, Army and Alfonso) should be given the power to ban members, at least on a temporary basis until an admin is able to make the final decision.
On the admin side of things, it's no secret that Marc and John really aren't doing much more than keeping the lights on around here. The only true admin is Chelsea. I think it's time to consider adding another admin to help keep things in line, and if it were up to me, I'd offer the job to Gavazzi. His dedication to the site over the years is almost second to none, and I think he would be perfect for the role. That would give us two admins (in addition to Marc and John) overseeing the site, and I can't see that being a bad thing as time wears on.
Also, I mentioned that Army and Alfonso really aren't all that active anymore, so essentially, we only have three "global," or whatever you want to it, moderators. I'd like to see at least two more added to the list. I believe there are a host of excellent members to choose from, so making a selection shouldn't be too cumbersome. I will add that new mods probably shouldn't get the ability to ban right away, should that power ever come to fruition -- but for the other roles, I believe it's time we add a couple more people to the mix.
These are just my throughts, and I again, I do apologize for anything I said last night that came across as less than reputable to some.
-
Well my fate was handled down to me and I am unbanned from chat now. Thank you all for your input on this subject. I apologize to Torgo If I came off as attacking him on twitter. That wasn't my intent at all. I will see y'all in chat on Monday morning. Mods are welcome to lock this if they want to.
-
All non-troll chat bans (all of them) have been purged. Watch this space.