|
Vol, I have to say, the raw bias shining off of your posts is pretty much enough to single handedly make me want to support RL. Its like you have a compulsive need to reject any possible defence of him outright. Like american politics. Its stopped being about the debate, and its just a shit throwing contest.
You seem unable to talk about the issues themselves without remembering that if you dare agree with something someone says, you might be endorsing RL.
I've been away for a few days, so I appologise GI from not responding, I'll try to catch up to the thread properly when I next get a desire to procrastinate my research (probably soon?  ) Really though Vol, I just thought I should let you know. Your unrelenting refusal to compromise ideas or points is really pushing me the other way I know you are not single handedly representative of all those in support of r/lol But it paints a picture of those against him being against him for the wrong reasons, that is, personal reasons.
EDIT: I mean, im sorry Vol, but honestly, that is the impression I get. Im not trying to insult you (although I can very much see how this could be taken that way) I'm trying to point out to you that I think you might be a bit too emotionally involved and perhaps not looking at this topic quite as objectively as you might hope you were. (even if you were pretending to be objective it would give your points more weight!)
EDIT AGAIN: To clarify a bit: When you take a stance (like yours seems to be) that 100% of the blame rests with one party and 0% with the other, its becomes a very dubious position, and in reality that is very rarely the case.
So even if in the end it turns out that RL -is- mostly to blame (I would be open to this conclusion) the fact that -your- position is one where he is entirely to blame and the mods are faultless beacons of moral standards just makes it impossible for me to agree with most of what you say.
While im sure some people are doing the opposite aswell (100% mods fault) they're either far less vocal than you, or I'm seeing their posts less. As at least most if not all people have accepted that RL -was- being a jerk and deserved to be banned, but then taking the debate further about the justification for the level of penalisation. I don't know who is right yet, but i'll tell you one thing, I -do- think that the r/lol mods have been behaving poorly as mods, or at least -not optimally- and that makes agreeing with your position very very very challenging 
EDIT AGAIN AGAIN: Imagine you were reading a poster who just refused that RL was in anyway to blame for anything that has happened, imagine how stupid and biased you would think that person was, would you ever be convinced by anything they said?
|
On May 19 2015 22:59 Raneth wrote:Vol, I have to say, the raw bias shining off of your posts is pretty much enough to single handedly make me want to support RL. Its like you have a compulsive need to reject any possible defence of him outright. Like american politics. Its stopped being about the debate, and its just a shit throwing contest. You seem unable to talk about the issues themselves without remembering that if you dare agree with something someone says, you might be endorsing RL. I've been away for a few days, so I appologise GI from not responding, I'll try to catch up to the thread properly when I next get a desire to procrastinate my research (probably soon? ) Really though Vol, I just thought I should let you know. Your unrelenting refusal to compromise ideas or points is really pushing me the other way I know you are not single handedly representative of all those in support of r/lol But it paints a picture of those being against him being against him for the wrong reasons, that is personal reasons.
I agree, I made myself vulnerable to attacks like these, so no surprise here that someone eventually slammed don the many balls I threw in the air. Indeed, I am biased*, and if I wouldn't find this whole thing ridiculous in the first place, I could've given a shit to present myself better. Shame on me, and even though r/lol community is just as shitty as I described, it's still not nice to keep calling stupid people stupid. I deserve a spanking and a soap in my mouth.
All right, now that we settled that Richard is not the only asshole in this world, let's see what good defence you, or really, anyone besides Clutz brought up. Let me see. Let me zoom in on this page. Right, still nothing, just the same ol':
- Wei2cool is still trying to twist this around, and he's basically saying Roman Polanski's work outweighs the fact he raped an underage girl, and if the authorities would dare to touch him, he'd totally flip out. Now, I'm willing to compromise that it worths a debate. It's still fucked up, but there you go.
- The guy with the Yorick picture said it just can't last forever. He was kinda right, because the mods just announced a chance to Richard - something they already did months ago as well regarding his account ban, which he did not give a single fuck about, just kept attacking with full force. All right, I guess it's settled.
- You point out that I'm a meanie. Maybe I am. I guess it wouldn't be fair to call you out for saying nothing as well in the defence of Rchard, because you are still reading through the posts, so I'm giving you the benefit of doubt that you will bring up some strong arguments that will shake me, or at least someone more on the neutral side. I definitely don't envy you, because you have to merge down into some deep shit, but I wish you luck.
- And ClutZ, who is trying, still ignores some important stuff, and I am having an absolute hard time coming to terms with his police analogy regarding the no mod week. Way over-dramatized, and he is ignoring Richard's acts just because he's an ass, and ass people always generate drama, and we all love drama. Just come to terms with the fact that he and his content was not banned because of his personality. Richard did painstaking work to create his own downward spiral and he got many warnings, because in the end, even the mods best interest to have a Richard around (they can live without him, but that doesn't mean it wouldn't be better to have his content in the normal way), but he just promoted himself into God, and wanted to tear r/lol apart in his anger. Turned out he's not God, and now people freaked out that there's an actual line when you get bitchslapped. Reminds of that video, where the guy keeps telling the security that this is a free country and they can not stop him going to... I don't know where. The guards warn him many times to back off. He goes Richard Lewis, then the guards shoot him with that electric gun. Some people just need to know their place.
*I hope you realize I'm hardly the sole biased person here, but whatever.
Edit: Damn. Well, I'm off to work, but when I'm there, and if I still find the idea funny enough to put work into it, I'll make a sugarcoated version just for you. Not a promise, though, but I'm already having bright ideas - and it's also a good showcase, that presentation counts, and the less the individual thinks, the more your presentation counts rather than its' content or validity. "Well, he might be right, but I don't like this guy, so I guess he's wrong." I mainly refer to the hive minds of many subreddits.
I'm also open to the idea to be surprised with an edit which has some legit argument for Richard. Is this the point where I put "" at the end of my sentence? I think it was.
|
Volband, I think the issue with your argumentative style is that you equate the acts that RL has done with murder or rape. If you think him googling people's person information is on the same level with those actions, as you've stated in the quoted texts below, then it really does end the discussion. You can't reason with someone who has that slanted of a view of the situation.
On May 19 2015 17:06 Volband wrote:Gotta love your point of view, where if someone with any value (good sportsman, actor, musician) is getting jailed for manslaughter or domestic abuse or whatever, it's the authorities' fault. "Great, now my favorite player sits in prison. Sure, he killed his wife, but fuck the police, why can't they let out for the games at least??"
On May 14 2015 06:13 Volband wrote:
... we are reaching some all time low here when someone so casually discards the fact that Rlewis hunts after people. God forbid he sees a young woman with a short skirt.... you know what's coming to her.
Now if you admit those are extreme examples and are not on par with what RL has or hasn't done in regards to the reddit community then we might get somewhere and stop having baseless conversation that devolves into circular arguments about what is or isn't condoned on r/lol. I don't even know why this thread still draws me in because I could hardly care less about either party in this discussion.
|
On May 19 2015 23:23 Volband wrote:
- And ClutZ, who is trying, still ignores some important stuff, and I am having an absolute hard time coming to terms with his police analogy regarding the no mod week. Way over-dramatized, and he is ignoring Richard's acts just because he's an ass, and ass people always generate drama, and we all love drama. Just come to terms with the fact that he and his content was not banned because of his personality. Richard did painstaking work to create his own downward spiral and he got many warnings, because in the end, even the mods best interest to have a Richard around (they can live without him, but that doesn't mean it wouldn't be better to have his content in the normal way), but he just promoted himself into God, and wanted to tear r/lol apart in his anger. Turned out he's not God, and now people freaked out that there's an actual line when you get bitchslapped. Reminds of that video, where the guy keeps telling the security that this is a free country and they can not stop him going to... I don't know where. The guards warn him many times to back off. He goes Richard Lewis, then the guards shoot him with that electric gun. Some people just need to know their place.
I only made the police analogy because its the same childish mindset/it was fresh in my mind because the NYC police tried doing it on the small stuff(and only the mayor freaked out, because revenues).
I guess its like your neighbor who mows his lawn at 6 AM and wakes you up. Then when you ask him to please stop mowing when your are asleep, he just lets his yard turn into a jungle out of spite.
Also, I readily admit I don't understand these lines of Reddit. Someone informed me that some subs ban people from up/downvoting content they see linked from other subs. Very bizarre.
|
On May 19 2015 23:50 Zdrastochye wrote:Volband, I think the issue with your argumentative style is that you equate the acts that RL has done with murder or rape. If you think him googling people's person information is on the same level with those actions, as you've stated in the quoted texts below, then it really does end the discussion. You can't reason with someone who has that slanted of a view of the situation. Show nested quote +On May 19 2015 17:06 Volband wrote:Gotta love your point of view, where if someone with any value (good sportsman, actor, musician) is getting jailed for manslaughter or domestic abuse or whatever, it's the authorities' fault. "Great, now my favorite player sits in prison. Sure, he killed his wife, but fuck the police, why can't they let out for the games at least??" Show nested quote +On May 14 2015 06:13 Volband wrote:
... we are reaching some all time low here when someone so casually discards the fact that Rlewis hunts after people. God forbid he sees a young woman with a short skirt.... you know what's coming to her. Now if you admit those are extreme examples and are not on par with what RL has or hasn't done in regards to the reddit community then we might get somewhere and stop having baseless conversation that devolves into circular arguments about what is or isn't condoned on r/lol. I don't even know why this thread still draws me in because I could hardly care less about either party in this discussion.
Why do I have to explain everything? I admit that when I go on long rants, I have some random train thoughts which come from nowhere, or even lead to nowhere, so that's understandable if it's not a 100% clear, but do I have to spell out that I don't really mean Rlewis basically raped someone?
While I still expect some kind of an answer to my question, I will spell it out in advance: you can bring up the discussion of how much are you allowed to "break the law" if you are important/smart/handsome/etc., but it is a very very serious topic, and I expect some very thorough posts from those, who go there. Not one liners about how shitty it is that Rlewis' content arrives late and in a bad shape. Zero effort whatsoever.
Edit: oh, and people are surprised if I just laugh around some of these responses... if someone is incapable to bring anything to the table for the tenth time in a row, it's hard to make a serious response. Probably pointless as well.
On May 20 2015 00:36 cLutZ wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2015 23:23 Volband wrote:
- And ClutZ, who is trying, still ignores some important stuff, and I am having an absolute hard time coming to terms with his police analogy regarding the no mod week. Way over-dramatized, and he is ignoring Richard's acts just because he's an ass, and ass people always generate drama, and we all love drama. Just come to terms with the fact that he and his content was not banned because of his personality. Richard did painstaking work to create his own downward spiral and he got many warnings, because in the end, even the mods best interest to have a Richard around (they can live without him, but that doesn't mean it wouldn't be better to have his content in the normal way), but he just promoted himself into God, and wanted to tear r/lol apart in his anger. Turned out he's not God, and now people freaked out that there's an actual line when you get bitchslapped. Reminds of that video, where the guy keeps telling the security that this is a free country and they can not stop him going to... I don't know where. The guards warn him many times to back off. He goes Richard Lewis, then the guards shoot him with that electric gun. Some people just need to know their place.
I only made the police analogy because its the same childish mindset/it was fresh in my mind because the NYC police tried doing it on the small stuff(and only the mayor freaked out, because revenues). I guess its like your neighbor who mows his lawn at 6 AM and wakes you up. Then when you ask him to please stop mowing when your are asleep, he just lets his yard turn into a jungle out of spite. Also, I readily admit I don't understand these lines of Reddit. Someone informed me that some subs ban people from up/downvoting content they see linked from other subs. Very bizarre.
Yes, that example is better, but too black and white for me. What if the neighbour only have time to mow the lawn at 6 am? What if the complaining neighbour said the lawn only needs to be mowned once a year? Suddenly it just became complicated, and now it's not just about a petty neighbour.
And yes, as I said, every sub is different. There are subs with naming and shaming (shit reddit says is probably the worst), and if you don't agree with humiliating those people, you are banned in an instant. Their subreddit, their rules. You think it's funny to post a picture about a dog in r/cats? It's deleted and you are banned (or is it cats standing up? not sure). Or try to promote consoles on pcmasterrace, go ahead.
There is a sub about aborted children in blood and everything, I only lasted a few seconds on their frontpage, did not even click anything, but feel free to test the waters. Maybe the mod team there is nice, I don't know.
I believe the subreddit about dead, underage girls has only been deleted a few weeks/months ago, and not because reddit thought it's too much, but because the media interfered, and basically forced reddit to act all nice.
Don't try to find logic between subreddits. The mere fact r/lol allows some sort of complaining about their moderation already puts them above a lot of other subreddits, where they just instaban you, if you even try.
As for me, I already have to re-read my post 3 times if I want to comment on askwomen. Not that I post too much there, because I've seen enough people getting lynched there. It's like a minefield, and threads are constantly brigaded by bitter virgins or angry feminists.
|
So my initial feeling on the ban was to side with the Reddit mods. But the more I've learned about their systems and specifically those reddit threads yesterday where the mod from a 500,000 user forum suggests a public banned user/content thread and a mod from another reddit forum gives a bunch of ridiculous bullshit reasons why they can't.
I dunno, the whole thing is putting a bad taste in my mouth.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
it's a bit different with reddit because they are not managing users per se but maintaining a (stupidly idealistic) mode of mediation/prsentation of content creators and the like. it's not a simple forum
|
On May 20 2015 11:20 Sonnington wrote:
So my initial feeling on the ban was to side with the Reddit mods. But the more I've learned about their systems and specifically those reddit threads yesterday where the mod from a 500,000 user forum suggests a public banned user/content thread and a mod from another reddit forum gives a bunch of ridiculous bullshit reasons why they can't.
I dunno, the whole thing is putting a bad taste in my mouth.
Tell me again, how exactly it would be a great idea? Instead of complaining about why ban xy, they will complain about why ban xy for that, and people will be all worked up over half of the cases, because they won't bother to read the lines "repeated offender" and such.
I'm not saying it's very bad, but it's nothing special.
And why is a mod's opinion with 500k subscriber's more valuable than one with EIGHT MILLION? The only difference is the latter mod is telling the harsh, kinda boring truth, while the former is all "let's all love each other, love will change everything!" No, it won't. Once again, not a terrible idea, but he should've known better these people will try to make it their new holy grail, especially Tryndamere put the horse under them. The same Tryndamere who is responsible the shameful spectatefaker fiasco, mind you.
Though, honestly, the fact that a thread like the first one could born and it needed a second one to put it in its' place is just another thing to laugh at. I'm legit cringing at how these people just can't lay the fuck back and discuss lol or whatever, instead of trying to find the solution to world peace.
|
On May 20 2015 14:24 Volband wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2015 11:20 Sonnington wrote:
So my initial feeling on the ban was to side with the Reddit mods. But the more I've learned about their systems and specifically those reddit threads yesterday where the mod from a 500,000 user forum suggests a public banned user/content thread and a mod from another reddit forum gives a bunch of ridiculous bullshit reasons why they can't.
I dunno, the whole thing is putting a bad taste in my mouth. Tell me again, how exactly it would be a great idea? Instead of complaining about why ban xy, they will complain about why ban xy for that, and people will be all worked up over half of the cases, because they won't bother to read the lines "repeated offender" and such. I'm not saying it's very bad, but it's nothing special. And why is a mod's opinion with 500k subscriber's more valuable than one with EIGHT MILLION? The only difference is the latter mod is telling the harsh, kinda boring truth, while the former is all "let's all love each other, love will change everything!" No, it won't. Once again, not a terrible idea, but he should've known better these people will try to make it their new holy grail, especially Tryndamere put the horse under them. The same Tryndamere who is responsible the shameful spectatefaker fiasco, mind you. Though, honestly, the fact that a thread like the first one could born and it needed a second one to put it in its' place is just another thing to laugh at. I'm legit cringing at how these people just can't lay the fuck back and discuss lol or whatever, instead of trying to find the solution to world peace.
What? Am I being trolled? Do you work for reddit? Are you a reddit mod? You can't lie about it either. It's like if I ask an undercover cop if he's a cop. You have to tell the truth!
People have a problem with the way the mods do their job. They don't like the fact that everything is secretive and they don't understand the motives behind why threads are removed. So to solve the problem, it's been suggested to have a thread with all deleted and banned content in one place with the reason for why it was banned there.
The reasons to not have it were erroneous. Reasons like child porn, deleted threads like doxxing, and potentially mods being doxxed because they were the ones who banned the content. All of those things are super simple problems that you can circumvent. He gave no reasons why it wasn't feasible to set up the suggested thread.
I agree though, it is kinda funny that he felt compelled to come to the subreddit to defend reddit mods' ability to work in secrecy. It's really rather distasteful to me.
|
Russian Federation3631 Posts
I can't think of a single quality subreddit / forum that functions without borderline-oppressive / oppressive moderators.
In fact, complaints about moderation is A+ metric for whether they are doing a good job.
|
On May 20 2015 15:26 419 wrote:
I can't think of a single quality subreddit / forum that functions without borderline-oppressive / oppressive moderators.
In fact, complaints about moderation is A+ metric for whether they are doing a good job.
I don't think anyone is arguing over the subreddit being too stringent. People are questioning the mods for bias and inconsistency.
|
|
|
On May 20 2015 15:06 Sonnington wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2015 14:24 Volband wrote:On May 20 2015 11:20 Sonnington wrote:
So my initial feeling on the ban was to side with the Reddit mods. But the more I've learned about their systems and specifically those reddit threads yesterday where the mod from a 500,000 user forum suggests a public banned user/content thread and a mod from another reddit forum gives a bunch of ridiculous bullshit reasons why they can't.
I dunno, the whole thing is putting a bad taste in my mouth. Tell me again, how exactly it would be a great idea? Instead of complaining about why ban xy, they will complain about why ban xy for that, and people will be all worked up over half of the cases, because they won't bother to read the lines "repeated offender" and such. I'm not saying it's very bad, but it's nothing special. And why is a mod's opinion with 500k subscriber's more valuable than one with EIGHT MILLION? The only difference is the latter mod is telling the harsh, kinda boring truth, while the former is all "let's all love each other, love will change everything!" No, it won't. Once again, not a terrible idea, but he should've known better these people will try to make it their new holy grail, especially Tryndamere put the horse under them. The same Tryndamere who is responsible the shameful spectatefaker fiasco, mind you. Though, honestly, the fact that a thread like the first one could born and it needed a second one to put it in its' place is just another thing to laugh at. I'm legit cringing at how these people just can't lay the fuck back and discuss lol or whatever, instead of trying to find the solution to world peace. What? Am I being trolled? Do you work for reddit? Are you a reddit mod? You can't lie about it either. It's like if I ask an undercover cop if he's a cop. You have to tell the truth! People have a problem with the way the mods do their job. They don't like the fact that everything is secretive and they don't understand the motives behind why threads are removed. So to solve the problem, it's been suggested to have a thread with all deleted and banned content in one place with the reason for why it was banned there. The reasons to not have it were erroneous. Reasons like child porn, deleted threads like doxxing, and potentially mods being doxxed because they were the ones who banned the content. All of those things are super simple problems that you can circumvent. He gave no reasons why it wasn't feasible to set up the suggested thread. I agree though, it is kinda funny that he felt compelled to come to the subreddit to defend reddit mods' ability to work in secrecy. It's really rather distasteful to me.
I wanted to make some funny remark about how you must be from the USA with this "FREEDOM FOR EVERYONE" mindset, then I actually went back to check it out. Not sure if it's actually a thing there, or I just got dead lucky (most of TLers are from the US).
Anyway, let me take on a stereotype as well, the Eastern-European one. Any time I hear lines like "we deserve it" "you can't lie about it", "no secrets!!" it's like interacting with extraterrestrial species. My country's most celebrated acts here are revolutions which we lost, then got punished pretty badly for them. We literally dress up to remember every time we tried to be heroes and bring equality and just to our lives, but pretty much just ruined everything. I could go on, but you get the picture: it's sad. No glorious victories over opressive powers whatsoever.
You see, I'd like full transparency on everything, and I'd like honest politicians, I'd like a democracy where we can sit down and talk about things instead of being in a race of which party can manipulate those who are either uneducated, or undecided. I'd like if every discussion board and community site on the internet would have mods and admins who do their job just as down to earth and in a nice way as the police would in this utopystic world. I'd really like all of this, and even more!
Then I wake up, gather my experience (I had this fight a million times now, being on the "good" side), and reach the conclusion that you will either become a clown, and ask for everything you just did, or learn to swallow and make realistic demands. People have all the power in their own site, and subreddits are basically whole different sites using the same layout. If you really want these people to be the avatar of righteousness and justice, you might as well paint your face white and find a big red nose for you to put on. To make an example, politicians steal. Not necessarily in a literal way, but come on, we all know friends win tenders and such. Is it ethical? No. Is it nice? No. But personally, I learned to accept it, because after all, that money is nothing compared to the impact some of their decision may have to a country's entire population. Give me a decent salary, a decent chance to get a job, give me healthcare, give me a way to plan my future, and I couldn't care less that your already rich friend got richer. So what. So what if a reddit mod licks Riot's ass because he wants to be a Rioter? So what is that sarah gal is an asshole? So what if among the thousands of threads some (rather low impact ones, like funny gifs) gets deleted, even though the rules kinda allow it? Seriously now, what then?
And let me launch another approach while some of you guys might still be in shock that I just told you how things work without warning you with a spoiler alert. Why are these mods even allow things like:
- People constantly trying to tell Riot how X and Y should work, despite at least 50% of these suggestions are utter shit. Holly molly, those days when literally half of the front page's threads started with "Riot,...".
- People riding Richard's conspiracy theory.
- Keep giving Richard Lewis a second, third fourth, etc chance just because he's Richard Lewis. Any "common" people could've been happy if they got at least one warning before being cut down.
- People writing huge ass essays about how Riot is dumb, and stupid, and greedy because Chroma packs cost RP. No one ever said they wouldn't. No one. Even r/lol got fucking tired of the chroma shitposts and actually started defending Riot and calling out people on their BS.
- People turning a joke (reddit team) into something with SERIOUS weight and consequences, and the possibility of scamming tens of thousands of people. It's like what the boston marathon killer hunting was for reddit. A complete shame which should have never reached it's boiling point.
- Kinda the opposite here: I loved how despite their rules against witch hunting, they showed the way for the community as to how to post the contents exposing that LoL youtuber club. I believe the original gnarsies video got deleted due to rule violations, but even that stayed there for hours, at least from what I remember. Anyway, it was definitely not oppressed, unlike the discussions about Rlewis.
Let me give you a third ball to juggle: how much do you think these mods earn? I mean money. Personally, I'm not even sure if they earn any. Anyway, if we'll get an answer (even if just a good guess), think about whether it's worth cleaning up toilets after ~700,000 people, and whether they would die to slave away for another ~2hours a day just to keep a thread updated with "jimmy got banned for spam.". With the added extra of eventually threads will start to appear, because if you delete hundreds of threads and warn/ban dozens of people each day (because that must be the average for such a huge community, even if you are a saint mod), people will find something to nag them about. Then threads like "X got banned for spam after 3 comments, but Y only after 2. r/lol mods are illuminati?". Then you either delete them, because the last thing you need is to cater for someone who is clearly bored and decided to play the justice warrior for a day, or get into some kind of ridiculous argument.
Like it or not, r/lol works, and well within the boundaries of your "average corruption". Everyone bashes r/funny, it still has 8.5 million subscribers, so I guess it's OK? (Yes, it makes you autosubscribe, but come on, two clicks and you are unsubscribed if you don't like it). You can learn to enjoy it, or you can keep fighting a war which has not yet been won in the history of mankind.
But you know what? Let's root the mods will make a banned content thread, now I'm genuinely curious. Some people - like you - are over the roof about this idea, but I'm fairly confident that it would a.) change nothing b.) just breed more controversy. Either way, both a.) and b.) results in the same thing: someone will come with a new craze, like mods should make a stickied thread with their faces in it, because "a good mod should not be ashamed of his/her face" or something stupid like that, and people will be "wow, THIS is it! Our last effort was a total goofball, but this will bring justice and real transparency and I will feel safer in this sub!"
edit: whoops, not baltimore but boston!
|
I also don't think a banned thread would solve the problems I have, because the problem isn't lack of documentation, its lack of consistency. I am sure that the thread, had it existed, would not have convinced them they were being hypocrites, it would just make the case levied against the mods stronger/weaker based on the evidence contained therein. I guess its useful in that it makes that less of a conspiracy theory thing.
What I gathered from your little country tangent is that you like anonymity so you don't die during a failed revolution? Which is a strange analogy because the mods are the incumbent government in this analogy.
|
I love how much work people invest into discussing this issue lol
|
I'm pretty amazed too. This is some next level hate. :')
|
On May 21 2015 01:57 cLutZ wrote:
I also don't think a banned thread would solve the problems I have, because the problem isn't lack of documentation, its lack of consistency. I am sure that the thread, had it existed, would not have convinced them they were being hypocrites, it would just make the case levied against the mods stronger/weaker based on the evidence contained therein. I guess its useful in that it makes that less of a conspiracy theory thing.
What I gathered from your little country tangent is that you like anonymity so you don't die during a failed revolution? Which is a strange analogy because the mods are the incumbent government in this analogy.
That's the idea of a ban thread. It gives users proof that the mods are inconsistent with their decisions.
@Volband
That's an interesting piece of Hungarian history. I don't agree with the premise of letting things slip out of fear that those in power will make things worse out of punishment.
|
On May 21 2015 01:57 cLutZ wrote:
I also don't think a banned thread would solve the problems I have, because the problem isn't lack of documentation, its lack of consistency. I am sure that the thread, had it existed, would not have convinced them they were being hypocrites, it would just make the case levied against the mods stronger/weaker based on the evidence contained therein. I guess its useful in that it makes that less of a conspiracy theory thing.
What I gathered from your little country tangent is that you like anonymity so you don't die during a failed revolution? Which is a strange analogy because the mods are the incumbent government in this analogy.
I believe in not wasting efforts, and being conservative when and how I play out the "hero" card. I like putting my eggs in one basket, so if I grab a pitchfork, I want to be sure I'm fighting the good fight, and not one which might make me look like some nice and honorable fella, but my intentions and demands are unreal. It's easy to paint a perfect picture about yourself and gain the equivalent of karma in real life, but I rather achieve something instead of just polishing my dick.
Sure, the good fight is subjective, and I bound to misjudge certain cases; or maybe fail to realize something is not black and white, and attacking side A or B with full force is futile and silly.
I'm not saying I never get worked up over a storm in a cup of water, quite the opposite, but it has to have something which offends my moral code - or call it whatever you'd like! And no, mods being lousy in a huge ass community site is hardly something which makes me flip over.
But credit where it's due, maybe these futile outroars are necessary to keep the higher powers at bay? You will never banish corruption, but if the people with power see that you are willing to raise your voice even for the tiniest shit, they will think twice whether or not they will actually do something outrageous. I dunno, I always think about this when I see protesters at the street. The government obviously doesn't give a crap about them, but maybe these are still not worthless?
I'm definitely guilty of thinking it's pointless, even if I happen to be right.
On May 21 2015 02:27 TitusVI wrote:
I love how much work people invest into discussing this issue lol
It's quite a fascinating topic. Not Lewis, but the discussion about moderators around the internet.
On May 21 2015 04:24 Sonnington wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2015 01:57 cLutZ wrote:
I also don't think a banned thread would solve the problems I have, because the problem isn't lack of documentation, its lack of consistency. I am sure that the thread, had it existed, would not have convinced them they were being hypocrites, it would just make the case levied against the mods stronger/weaker based on the evidence contained therein. I guess its useful in that it makes that less of a conspiracy theory thing.
What I gathered from your little country tangent is that you like anonymity so you don't die during a failed revolution? Which is a strange analogy because the mods are the incumbent government in this analogy. That's the idea of a ban thread. It gives users proof that the mods are inconsistent with their decisions. @Volband That's an interesting piece of Hungarian history. I don't agree with the premise of letting things slip out of fear that those in power will make things worse out of punishment.
So a thread by these inconsistent mods where they can dress up their decision whichever way they want will suddenly change things. You do know people who cheat out money, steal government money, launder money, etc. have papers which prove their innocence? The only way you can get actual proof if you create a body which sole purpose is to monitor the moderator's activity and make reports on a week to week basis. Everything else is just circus from both sides.
And do you agree with running naked into 100 soldiers with military weapons, whenever you are right and they are not? Don't wage war just for the thrill of it; funny video thead no1 was deleted while funny video thread no2 (with the same video) did not. Sure, it's not right, but don't try to blow it up into something huge. Ask the mods if they could adress this problem, maybe make a survey about it, and cross your fingers that they will listen. And if they not? Well, unless you would complain in someone else's house about their rules in their house (however ridiculous said rule might be), let it go~~ Unless you feel that in memoriam funny video thread no1 you should participate in a riot.
Edit: Oh, and meanwhile... www.reddit.com I bet China would've let funny video thread no1 stay!!
Edit 2: And I would have no problem people trying their best to somehow force Riot to come up with a solution so this could not happen even, even fi the chances are 0.00000000000000000000000%. This is something I would never ever consider stupid to rage against, because it's corruption at its' worst. Fighting things like these also takes some balls comparing to nagging some mod on his OWN community site for being inconsistent and for the grass being green.
|
The consistency issue at times can be pretty incredible.
![[image loading]](http://puu.sh/hUwLx/c3bfb39f7b.png)
![[image loading]](http://puu.sh/hUwHU/4515a459ac.png)
|
I don't really see what there is to argue about. He's being a bitch to the mods, ignore their warnings on other stuff, and they ban him. There isn't really any defense to be had.
I think the whole 'mods abusing their power' argument is complete bullshit. If you don't like it, why don't you try modding? I sure as hell don't want to even if they paid me to do it. Fuck that shit and everything that comes with it. I would go as far as to say let them abuse their power a little bit if someone's being a constant nagging jackass on twitter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
