I think we all should make an effort to bring this metaconversation on specific people/posts that need to be moderated, especially those made in this thread, to an end. We should refocus on the topic/theme of this thread: ISD moderation policies and the ability/extent to which we can openly discuss moderation in general (not just in this or other “discussion-of-moderation” threads).
I had previously asked Barstorlode if ISD-CCP ever got around to re-evaluating the “discussion of moderation” policy 7 days ago and he said they haven’t gotten there yet due to other projects being worked on. I think if we poke him every couple of weeks he might have some updates for us. (Hear me, Barstylody? I’m coming after you in another week!) Having said that, he is obviously rather flexible on the subject matter, but at the same time if there’s nothing to contribute to the subject, there’s no need to post further on this thread.
In which case there is an issue with moderation as that was a direct personal attack. Perhaps ISD Buldath saw it for what it really was, I can only hope.
I just don’t believe you, because I did some homework on your prior exchanges and posts you have made about him. But I can live with that, and I am pretty sure that you can.
When a post is removed, the author (sometimes) gets a removal reason notice via PM. It is entirely possible that Jonah’s PM says ‘off topic’ - which means that is the criteria under which the mods removed it. Further, given Buldath’s post above highlighting only Off Topic as a removal reason (see bolded selection) and not both off-topic and personal attacks, I would be inclined to believe Jonah’s assertion to this effect.
Edited to clarify that PM is not always sent to author of removed posts.
The question about whether it was removed as off topic or due to being a personal insult is neither here or there, it would be good if it was removed because it was a personal insult, but I think it is more likely to have been removed as a job lot and just tagged as off topic.
I believe that this forum would be a better place if it had got removed as being a personal attack.
But he is telling me it was not a personal attack and I am telling him that I just don’t believe him having gone back over a significant number of his past posts and for seeing the exchange develop. Anyway done dusted and finished. But a good case study.
They hit this thread too hard this time around. I wasn’t around for the last 6 hours or so, but anything before that didn’t seem so far out of the ordinary.
You would, wouldn’t you?
I wonder how many posts you’d ask to be removed for personal attacks in which one of us gets called a “retard,” or a “dumbfeck,” or a “f■■■■t,” or whatever (all of which have happened in the last 3 days). I’m willing to bet literally thousands of dollars that you’d justify those away as “desperate responses of aggrieved posters driven to the brink of tolerance by trolls with their proven strategies of making good posters completely break down emotionally” or whatever other drivel you can come up with to justify your partisanship.
Good thing they don’t let the forums be moderated by carebear sockpuppets.
Indeed. My first time posting in IGS I was not aware that subforum had special rules and I had a post removed and was not notified of the removal - I only realized it after I reread the thread I posted in that I saw the mod say “posts were removed for not following IGS rules”, and noticed my post was gone. So perhaps all removed posts should have such a notice of some kind… if not necessarily a reason (would be nice!), just an indication that it was removed.
While I can be blunt and abrasive I have rarely had posts moderated for personal attacks; when my posts are moderated it’s generally for being offtopic or just plain shitposting.
I’m not saying that I haven’t posted personal attacks in the past, because that would be a lie, I’m saying that in this instance no personal attack was made. Others familiar with my posting will tell you that when I do go all out on someone it’s not a pretty sight, although it’s often hilarious for the audience.
^this makes me worry about this thread being closed
Hmmm… can someone explain to me why bickering leads to closing a thread? It’s just not useful, not dangerous… If something is an insult, mark it as an insult and hide it for whoever is more tolerant to insults to open. If a post is not useful in a sense why cannot it be hidden but must be destroyed? If maintaining a PEGI rating is all that is needed, why cannot we maintain the PEGI rating in some parts and leave it in others? Many children use Reddit, which has NSFW tags and stuff like that…
Notice the difference between post and thread. Threads shouldn’t really be hidden because they contain useful information as well as not useful ones. Posts should be hidden not destroyed for transparency and curiosity, and some people might help some posts by translating them into a less insulting version.