|
Discussion about Mod Notes is no longer acceptable in this thread. -micronesia (added post #9) |
In the Ailuj thread, a number of posters such as this were warned for their posting.
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=366932¤tpage=4#70
On September 08 2012 05:33 Horuku wrote:
It should be interesting to note that if a diamond player attempted to join a team that was in the same situation as she is, except that they were male, would they be accepted so easily?
They point out that she was the "first female" player on the MLG mainstage, where her play was very suboptimal against Losira (anyone remember how she changed the map view with her left hand o_0 ). If she was a male instead, there wouldn't have been any attention given towards that event and obviously more snowballing into easier team signing.
Signing her was done from a PR standpoint. She can try to argue that she has the dedication, but dedication without results doesn't show much. Same thing with maximus'black (he isn't on maximus anymore is he?), they are on teams simply because they provide an entertainment service and PR for their team, but they don't come anywhere near the skill levels of the pros.
User was warned for this post
After ETT posted: a mod note was added.
On September 08 2012 05:49 EvilTeletubby wrote:
Hey guys.
How about we drop the conversation regarding her gender and the signing? How does it affect you? Is this really anything new? What are you going to accomplish by attempting to tear her down? The hate/jealously going on here is embarrassing actually.
Christ. Some of you need to grow up. Any discussion on the subject after this post will result in a mandatory temp ban.
Now, this I find quite unneeded. What is the point of news if it cannot be effectively discussed. The gender of Ailuj is a highly relevant part of her being signed onto the team, as a number of factors do indeed indicate some sort of link between here gender and her being signed on.
I have no problem with people being banned for being sexist. Memes like "get back in the kitchen" are banworthy and deserve it. But when a polite post analyzes the situation, or when a person makes a joke that is not offensive in any way, as
On September 08 2012 05:29 Regorr wrote:
cant wait to see what results see will have. Do not believe anybody else deserves it as much as her!
User was temp banned for this post.
did, then something is wrong.
I believe that ETT put that mod note up immediately after he posted it, thus making any sort of internal discussion about the mod note impossible. In fact, he probably did it without asking anyone or any other mod.
I am certain that although ETT is a mod, and I normally trust their judgment as evidenced by my signature, it is HIGHLY inappropriate for a mod not simply stick a mod note on a thread, thus stifling a discussion because he personally disagrees with the opposing side.
KwarK, tofucake, and Falling, two mods who have become highly invested in threads before, have never gone and banned someone because they disagreed. They have never put up a mod note because they disagreed. They have not taken any action on their TL account because they disagreed, and neither should ETT.
It is TOTALLY wrong.
|
Yeah, I wasn't happy with the moderation of the thread. I think it's fine that the made the subject of her gender was made off topic - I don't like the precedence that sets though - yet a few of the warnings/bans were undeserved.
|
You can't have it both ways. You can't celebrate her, "Yeah good for her!" and then deflect what is the truth about the situation. Meaning you can't think it's awesome that a girl got signed and then deflect the criticism that she doesn't really have a track record of being good at the game. It's like the elephant in the room: the only reason it's news is because she's a girl, that's the fact, and to say not to talk about her gender or her ranking? Too many mixed signals here.
People should be being banned for making sexist jokes or saying "you suck" (because it's rude), but making valid points about the situation shouldn't be moderated, even if the observation could be politically incorrect.
EDIT: I also notice the word "jealous" being used in threads involving signings like this. It seems a brash way to brush off unpleasant opinions.
|
Yea, that warning was unwarranted. It was a quality post, it's not like he was being a dick about it (get the pun?), and I'm not even just talking about in comparison to the rest of that thread. It offered what he thought was an issue that bothered him, it was by no means unintelligent posting.
|
I totally agree, MDJ, it's like a regular "stop the hate" post, but when a mod uses it to get rid of criticism, it's just a terrible and irresponsible move.
|
3030 Posts
I'm pretty sure tofucake can't ban...
|
Oh. Well he has the special icon and all.
I'll edit that out.
|
Yes, I also think that warning was uncalled for.
The rest of the warns/bans in the thread I completley agree with.
|
So, the mod note is still there, that warning is still there, is anyone going to respond?
|
United States42558 Posts
I'm not informed on the particulars of that topic but I absolutely feel some aspects of a discussion can be off limit without making the entire exercise pointless. There are some opinions sufficiently unpleasant or just plain stupid that you wouldn't dare voice them in public and voicing them on the internet is simply taking a dump where other people are trying to have a discussion. I've been accused countless times of shutting down all discussion in topics which have gone on to have pages of active discussion between multiple people with civilised viewpoints.
I have used mod notes and bans in discussions where I have a strong view on the matter before although I tend to only use it against the truly awful posts. Those which I just disagree with I debate against as a user rather than a mod and if I feel in doubt I report it for another mod to deal with. One thing to remember about the moderation staff is that we aren't so far removed from the rest of you, we started on this forum as browsers and posters and we're still just volunteers. Often the line can get blurred and in those situations feedback such as this topic and internal discussion help.
|
Canada11349 Posts
There have been cases where certain side-related topics of discussion have been limited in a thread when two conditions are met
1) Every single time we have a new thread, the discussion always tangents back to the same side-related topic
2) It's a discussion where people get super heated and generally poor posting results.
(Granted this is more an observation from past moderation as opposed to an actual rule we have somewhere.)
But to give two examples.
A) Gun killing spree- the topic without exception devolves into the same old, tired gun control debate. So I've seen several similar topics just cut it off at the pass and direct people to discuss gun control in a separate thread. The topic simply morphs away from the original news post and turns every thread into a gun control debate. And people get pretty heated. It's a relevant side topic, but it becomes the only topic.
B) Female tournaments- without exception, they all turn into the same debate. Female tournaments do or do not limit females progress. And the tournaments are or are not sexist/ bad for the SC2 scene. And people get quite heated/nasty. The actual tournament get's left behind as we tread over the same tired ground. So again, it's probably better to block that avenue of discussion and direct it to it's own thread. Again, it's a relevant side topic, but it becomes the only topic.
So it seems to me, we're starting to run into this with everytime a female is signed on. There might be a time and place for arguing about how/why females are signed on to teams. But does every time a female get signed, do we need to turn THAT thread into the same topic, over and over again. Especially when people become heated/nasty.
Edit
Actually even LR could also be seen in terms of that. Caster's may be doing a crappy job, but LR is not the place to complain about it. It turns every LR into caster bashing. Caster feedback where it's actual feedback and not heated needs to be in it's own thread. Same thing with balance whine in LR. Every LR would turn into balance whine (or maybe we're fighting the losing battle.) But in both cases, they are relevant side-topics, but they turn every LR thread into bashing and whining and it's pretty poor posting anyways. It's not like 'zerg imba' explicates anything of interest compared to a well thought out post and LR is a bad place for well thought out posts.
|
The guy was saying a female player was only invited to a team because she is female, and then pointed to a game vs. Losira as an example of why she is bad. Show me one person in the world who could defeat Losira 100% of the time. Show me all the people who can defeat Losira 50% of the time. The list gets larger as you decrease the percentage, but I'd very much doubt that the list of people who can take a series off him numbers above 50.
From the logical point of view, if she had gotten into a game with XX_AZNBOI_XX666 and lost 2-0, you'd see the logic he used actually apply. But "she lost to Losira! She must be bad!" is about as great a point as "You died to a nuclear bomb! You must be weak!".
It shows that his bias is a lot more against the fact that a female player was signed, and not an issue with her actual skill level or her ability to beat reasonable opponents.
That is to say, he just wanted to express his discontent with female players, and not bad players.
You also have posts like this
On September 08 2012 03:28 Dr.Frost wrote:
Is Infused even a team? I think it is sad to see a girl being taken advantage of and lied to just because she is stupid. Infused isn't a team, who lied to her? Please don't warn me for this post.
User was temp banned for this post.
On September 08 2012 03:49 synd wrote:
nude pics or it didn't happen
/it'sAJOKEyo
User was warned for this post
On September 08 2012 03:34 absoluteX wrote:
Id tap that.
User was temp banned for this post.
On September 08 2012 05:05 Avril_Lavigne wrote:
You guys, exploiting women. It's the inevitability we have to face. Society has always favored whatever makes their image stand out
User was warned for this post
On September 08 2012 07:37 WINter0 wrote:
She should not be allowed to join any teams because shes never 1v1'd me , and I have asked her multiple times, so obviously SHES AFRAID! but I am better so it makes sense.
(hopefully her computer is at least in the kitchen.)
User was temp banned for this post.
All topics regarding women in this community at some point devolve into this shit. "She's a woman, she must be stupid, she must be bad, she's only signed cause she's hot" etc. etc. etc. No one ever considers that she enjoys gaming. No one ever considers that maybe she is actually more intelligent than they are. No one ever considers that maybe she isn't as bad as you think she is. No one ever considers that people with vaginas and 46 X chromosomes can do things too.
But what can you expect in a community of young males? A community who has more experience with pornography than actual women? This is why you aren't allowed to express your opinions in full and uncensored. They will necessarily breakdown into the spewing of vile and stupid outright sexism, with no logic attached. The mods just end it before it takes off.
Ignoring most of the bullshit in that thread just so that you can complain about the lesser offenses is silly of you.
But yes, it's pretty clear that ETT misread that ONE post.
Regorr was just temp banned for 1 week by EvilTeletubby. That account was created on 2011-02-23 14:07:16 and had 220 posts. Reason: Show nested quote +On September 08 2012 05:29 Regorr wrote:
cant wait to see what results see will have. Do not believe anybody else deserves it as much as her! Because hating is cool!
Unless of course he was being sarcastic, in which case, let him rot in the automated ban list for a week.
|
Well played micronesia!
|
On September 09 2012 01:51 Praetorial wrote:Well played micronesia!
You're talking about it. That's a perm ban, my good man.
|
Zurich15325 Posts
Generally, if you want to discuss moderation, there is the Website Feedback forum. It really wouldn't make sense to discuss moderation in other threads, that's just derailing everything.
|
zatic, this is the website feedback forum!
|
On September 09 2012 04:30 zatic wrote:
Generally, if you want to discuss moderation, there is the Website Feedback forum. It really wouldn't make sense to discuss moderation in other threads, that's just derailing everything.
But this is the website feedback forum?
|
Zurich15325 Posts
I know.
Maybe I misunderstood; Is your point that mod notes are flawed without discussion about the mod notes, or flawed without discussion in the thread the mod not is put on? I just said for the former you can always use the Website Feedback forum.
|
No.
I meant that before a mod puts up a mod note, it should be checked by another mod through internal discussion before being put up, otherwise it may constrict discussion and/or result in silly warnings and bans, in addition to justified warnings and bans.
|
trying to inject bureaucracy into moderation by saying that any single moderators judgement is questionable
boo hiss
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
