Can users have a permanent warning on em? So when you see em post in other threads you'll know it's probably a hot take?
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
How will Banning work on ResetEra? (Up: Mod Edit)
- Thread starter BarryAllen
- Start date
- Status
Ideally that will be how it works. I cannot promise it has worked that way for each of the few bannings we've had so far, as we're still working out the kinks and trying to get on the same page, but that's what we want to do. There will also be some times when a user is banned for reasons other than a post, so we will not be able to warn as to why that happened, though for the few times it has happened, I would like to think that the reason has been obvious. E.g., the person who registered an account with the name Evilore.
It's always the red bar, but if it's a warning it says "user was warned for this post". There's an example somewhere.
That's too much like some behaving with the receipts.gif elsewhere. Evidence staying on previous posts is the best kind of transparency. If someone's account is still active, even if you don't personally like them, mods have decided they are allowed to carry on posting. That's when you're best to use ignore lists. Remember people can make mistakes or screw up every now and then, and the wanting to quote something said 4 years ago to muddy up a current day argument can sometimes be a bit unfair.
That is just my feelings though, maybe your prior warn/ban list can be accessed by clicking your profile. I don't think visual icons or something is all that great an idea. Then that glamorizes getting bans so your account stands out xD From all angles it's best not to glamorize banning/ban culture, as that definitely happened elsewhere at times. Occasional jokes and some fun aside, as being completely sterile can be all work no play.
If we get one of those "Can I clean my ass with my toothbrush?" topics then yeah, I'm probably going to expect a WTF lock message... Some of the stuff you see posted on forums makes you weep for humanity.
Last edited:
Come on, that'd be garbage. If they were warned or banned at some point but allowed to continue posting after that, they shouldn't have to wear a scarlet letter. Anybody deserving of something like that would just get perma'd I'd imagine.
That red bar for the next couple days is going to be hilarious. Oh oh he's going on a tangent? He gets a red bar in the top of his post as a warning. Josh378 going off on a user because they had said the wrong thing to him. Give him a red bar. I think the red bar is going to be compared to the changing of a user's title underneath their Avatar like that other site. Fun days!
Absolutely reprehensible. My ban message similarly felt personal but didn't go that far.
I am gonna try and not get a ban as it wouldn't look good on me.
That's good as I once got a ban at the other place and the comment I got wasn't helpful which left me confused as if I did something stupid I want to know what exactly I did wrong so I can learn from it.
Saying something snarky isn't helpful at all.
But I don't wanna go back and work at the dental practice, they were mean to me. ;_;
That's good as I once got a ban at the other place and the comment I got wasn't helpful which left me confused as if I did something stupid I want to know what exactly I did wrong so I can learn from it.
Saying something snarky isn't helpful at all.
But I don't wanna go back and work at the dental practice, they were mean to me. ;_;
The system here reminds me of how it was done on the Escapist forums, I appreciate the transparency and something the old place lacked.
And while they may be funny occasionally, I agree that special ban.gifs shouldn't be a thing, promotes an environment that glorifies bans.
And while they may be funny occasionally, I agree that special ban.gifs shouldn't be a thing, promotes an environment that glorifies bans.
I had an incredibly petty ban message and don't plan on following in those footsteps.
What in the goddamn hell is that. That's misconduct of the highest fucking order, right there. Christ.
One more reason why anonymous moderation is a bad idea on larger communities. Staff need to be accountable to users, and staff also shouldn't have to hide their accomplishments and work behind anonymity. That breeds mistrust and unpleasantness for everyone involved.
As per our request, we are trying to a clean break. Please refrain from such content in the future.
It's definitely for the best that zero NeoGAF mods are on the staff here. We needed a clean break from that place and their extremely questionable banning practices. I was very skeptical when the original rumors were flying around that Besada and Kagari were on staff, and I'm very grateful that those turned out to be untrue.
Is it possible for the red bar to say which staff member wrote it? It would do great for further transparency. It's still in many ways a shadow mod. I think the name of the staff member should display who did the warning/suspension/ban should be made public, Something Awful style.
Same.
Same.
I think that a modpost is important. Here's how we do it at Sufficientvelocity, generally:
You have a big box, you have the moderator in charge who lets people know, and the post in question is threadmarked (so that people can check and look back on it if its warnings are still relevant).
We don't always use public warnings where we post in the thread, but it'll always be clear that there is some punishment being applied, and what rule it's being applied under.
I genuinely think it's reasonable for a little bit of anonymity still. I'm sure if you PM'd you could find out personally. In the cases where it's outright assholes/trolls, probably best for their send-off not to be with an exact name for who they might go harass publicly. I think mods locking topics with reasoning and it being on their user accounts is the best open name based transparency to expect. Other than you yourself maybe contacting them to ask who banned you.
The balance here is already better, but I think you did ask a fair question. Just giving my thoughts on why some might be reluctant to put a name to EVERY ban message.
That could work too, but as I said above if it's shutting down a clear troll account, I can still see why some wouldn't want to advertise who they are.
Generally you want the staff member in charge of the ban PMing the user in question and letting them know why, if you aren't doing a public modpost.
I'll be honest and say there's a part of me that wishes I could help out here in some official capacity. But on the other hand I see that troll Mario/Italian Representation thread (?????) and I think to myself 'wow I can ignore this silly thread and not feel guilty about doing so!'
What does being "accountable to users" mean? The only thing a user would need to know the identity of the person banning them for is to harass them. Public ban reasons and warnings without an actor's name attached are different, and things I've always personally supported. If the warned/banned user wants to appeal, there should be tools in place for that. But that's not directly related.
I'm also surprised that people are taking the given account here as gospel considering there was absolutely no way to tell who was banned by whom, and ModBot itself was a regular user with no moderator powers. Every single ban on NeoGAF was anonymous to the user.
I'll say that if the message given to the above poster as stated would be absolutely reprehensible. But it would still have nothing to do with anonymity; it would be a stronger call for committee and consensus as matter of staff policy, discouraging any sort of rogue mod behavior. Accountability comes from the rest of the staff being able to see and review other staff activity.
Banned/suspended...eh, semantics. Both mean you can't post, and both can be given a time limit or made permanent. I'd just like actual discussion(if someone even wants to, I don't really care what you feel), and not the echo chamber that was GAF OT, and for the fear of being banned to be gone for those who don't agree with the majority on some things.
Being banned should be a clear indication of a rule being violated, not someone's feelings being hurt or being unable to cope with a difference of idea/opinion.
Being banned should be a clear indication of a rule being violated, not someone's feelings being hurt or being unable to cope with a difference of idea/opinion.
If a user harasses the staff they can be punished for it, but it's important that responsibility is placed on the member of the staff that actually made the punishment, and the user knows who to contact if they want to discuss the ban. It's a bit difficult for users to dispute something or ask for clarification if they're not getting a message from the person who sent it. Anonymous warnings where the person being warned doesn't know who dunnit isn't a good look, and encourage users to look at the staff as a monolithic, impersonal, and unsympathetic mass.
Of course appeals are a different story and quite valuable for any forum.
There's both horizontal and vertical accountability. There's the staff not carving out fiefdoms and going rogue- that's horizontal, between equal actors. And then there's vertical accountability, with staff actions being transparent and users being able to know who punished them and for what reason. Both are important.
Yeah I can't say I see the purpose in knowing who banned who, particularly in the current internet climate regarding harrassment, doxxing, etc. Public knowledge of ban reasons is great, if nothing else to set clear example, but I don't think it needs to go further than that unless the mod chooses make it known that they were responsible.
I agree with this.
One thing I'd like to see go away are the paragraph long, sarcastic posts. They tend to get over quoted from both people who see (and agree with) the sarcasm, and people who don't pick up on it. Completely derails a thread. This type of post never really adds anything to the conversation.
We'll see what the staff ends up deciding, but I'll just point out that at some point this may become untenable depending on volume, at least for suspensions. Perhaps it'll be fine for perms, though. We'll see.
Every mod action such as bans, warnings, etc. are logged and other mods can see who did what. So it's not strictly necessary for users: worst case, you PMed the wrong mod and they can refer you to the mod you want to talk about.
Establishing a line of contact between the person acted upon and the actor can be done without exposing the actor's identity. "Appeal this ban" sending a message on the backend directly to the person who did the action, and allowing them to respond would get a similar result without also exposing the actor to a massive amount of death/rape threats and doxxing, which is how the members of our community deal with being banned from a video game message board.
There's pie-in-the-sky ideals, and then there's reality. I can't stress enough how immature and insane people are about these things. It just is not safe in a post-gamergate world to paint a target directly on a single person's forehead. Back in 2006, when I first joined GAF, I may have thought differently. People were much less insane back then.
Yeah, it's nbd in the end as long as users are getting the info. I'm aware of doxxing and harassment concerns that are more sensitive on a forum with attention shined its way like this.
None of this is just ideals, I've been doing it for years on a board with 18,000 users :P
But yes, I see the point. Christ, what a world.
This is a cool idea. So you could still reach the mod who performed the ban without knowing who they are.
This was true on paper, not so much in practise.
Guys like x and y were infamous for dropping into threads and bragging about how they couldn't wait to get home so they could run ragged over the thread.
In other threads it was usually pretty obvious who banned who because a red name was seen warning people to chill out earlier in the thread. Or in the case with communities there was specific mods seemingly in charge of them, sometimes to bad results that led to communities being banned entirely for a while like the NBA thread and, uh blackace (?)
Last edited:
To expand on what Aeana said: all moderator actions are logged and visible to other moderators. If there is moderator abuse or routine misbehavior, it will quickly become obvious and will be resolved internally.
Last edited:
There are stickied threads in EtcetEra. This one at least had some focus to it so it's been ok to keep going for now.
Do you have the ability to export conversations staff with users to a conversation archive where other staff can see it (but obviously not users)? It's possible in Xenforo.
- Status