Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Morwen Lagann]

"urdoinitrong" has never been acceptable posting behavior on this forum.

When two people in the thread post and explicitly call out the OP for being in poor form and "urdoinitrong", and I have a subsequent conversation with someone ingame that goes like this...

Them: "Mod-person, I'm about to go report a thread on Backstage"
Mod-person: "I/We already saw it, don't bother."
Them: "[Poster's thread]?"
Mod-person: "Yes."

... it should be pretty self-explanatory why it gets thrown in the catacombs as a result. You yourself say you went back and looked at the thread and could see what you did wrong. So why are you asking for an explanation when you already know that it was a combination of being excessively aggressive and confrontational in tone coupled with an unhealthy helping of urdoinitrong?

In any case, neither I nor any other member of the moderation staff should have to go through any post thrown into the catacombs and annotate each sentence with which rule(s) it breaks and how. It's a waste of our time, and frankly, more insulting to a poster's intelligence to do so, because they should be perfectly capable of understanding what the rules are and what they mean - they have to agree to them in order to post here in the first place, after all.

[...] Had it indeed been in reply to her moderator action, it would be unreasonable to get angry.

You seem rather annoyed by the moderator action to begin with, given you went and made this thread in response to it despite having an explanation in the post that you linked to and only partially quoted:

Urdoinitrong is not acceptable here. If you can't post without it at least looking like you tried to avoid urdoinitrong, don't post at all.

I shouldn't have needed to respond to your request for clarification at all, because you shouldn't have needed to make it in the first place - and not just because I'd given you a clarification already in the thread in the catacombs. You've ended up on the wrong side of the rules several times; you should know what the rules are, and what is and what isn't acceptable posting behavior by now without us needing to spell it out.

As an aside, Lallara has picked up on another issue that I didn't feel needed mentioning yet because it isn't a particularly widespread issue yet, but I might as well at this point: this is an OOC forum (for the moment, as we haven't added any IC sections yet*), not an IC one, and we are definitely not going to be tolerating forum-fu games based around posting IC or semi-IC or what have you. So, attacking someone's character "semi-IC" in the fashion done in the post that started this all is still against the rules and will still face moderator action.

* I can think of several reasons doing so would be a bad idea here or on any other forum hosted and run by players and not CCP or an uninvolved third party, not the least of which is "alts". Forum software always includes account and IP tracking, and not everyone is OK with people knowing who their alts are. No matter who the administration and moderation staff are, there's always going to be at least one person who doesn't want someone on the mod staff aware of who their alts are.

[Lyn Farel]

Bloodbird post was probabably of very bad form, aggressively turned, and all, and he seems to understands it and acknowledged it above.

However Morwen, I must concur with Jin, your own answer (thr first one) is arrogant, condescending, and totally out of place. You may have been right that it was obvious (or not, whatever, not the point here), but you are mod and enticed to behave a bit more professionally, I think.

You should actually take the time to explain in a calm fashion instead of answering with a flamepost. That only makes your answer sound highly hypocritical to me since you do not even bother to comply to what you preach (avoiding aggressive posts).

Also, stating things like "It was self explanatory", even by emphasizing the "was", does not make it self explanatory, since apparently someone does not understand. He may be just playing the idiot, or may not be, but what if he genuinely does not understand ?

[BloodBird]

Morwen, you seem to missunderstand.

First, I made a tread in a sub-par manner and it got cata'ed.

Then, I re-made the tread in a better fasion while at the same time made this tread here in the mod discussion area, and seconds after posting the new and improved tread, linked it to this mod discussion tread.

I then read the first post in this tread that Kat made and WHILE WAITING FORE MORE REPLIES I re-read the original, cata'ed tread and pretty much realized how I fucked up. (again)

Then you came along with your hypocritical post and reinforced that it was supposedly so simple to understand, ignoring the fact that I made this tread because I clearly did not understand how the original tread was a violation of the rules, even if I did understand the issue a couple hours after making the tread to begin with.

I did not realize my error and THEN make this tread asking for clarification despite knowing the answer, that would have been redundant, and a waste of time.

I don't need you, or any other mod, to spell the rules out to me - I can read them myself. I did not make this tread to complain that another tread of mine was modded, I kno whyit was modded, you said so clearly. I made this tread because I didn not realize at the time exactly HOW the modded tread was a breach of the rules. I do now, and I realized this a couple hours after making this tread.

Again, this tread has served it's purpose, and while I feel it was completely needless of you to be so arrogant in your reply, the answer and clarification I was looking for was delivered.

End of story, as far as I'm concerned.

[Morwen Lagann]

I'm not misunderstanding at all. I did what you asked in your OP and gave you an explanation that shouldn't have needed to be asked for in the first place. Check the timestamps and post orders: you did not post to say you'd gone back and figured it out before I posted until after I had done so, so complaining that I came and did what you asked is just a little silly.

Was my first response aggressive? Sure. Not going to deny that. But it was also intentional. The aggression (and resulting hypocrisy) was the point, because it's how your original topic came across. It's also why I wrote a second, more calm post later on.

It's a bit of a contradiction of terms to say "I don't need the rules spelled out to me" in the same breath as saying that you originally made this thread to ask how your previous post broke the rules. The two aren't identical but they go hand in hand - if I'm going to explain to you how something breaks the rules, you bet I'm going also to go over the rule itself just to make sure the why is clear too.

[BloodBird]

I'm not misunderstanding at all. I did what you asked in your OP and gave you an explanation that shouldn't have needed to be asked for in the first place. Check the timestamps and post orders: you did not post to say you'd gone back and figured it out before I posted until after I had done so, so complaining that I came and did what you asked is just a little silly.

I was not complaining that you replied, because that's what I wanted you to do. I was complaining to you about the manner you replied in. Again, in the OP I asked for clarification for how my previous post violated the rules because at the time I may have realised why it was cata'ed (YDIW and needless aggressive attitude) but not exactly how it was YDIW and overtly aggressive. However, a couple hours after posting the OP I did, helped by reading Katrina's first reply to this tread. I could have responded then that I got it, but decided to wait for more replies. Then you replied.

Was my first response aggressive? Sure. Not going to deny that. But it was also intentional. The aggression (and resulting hypocrisy) was the point, because it's how your original topic came across. It's also why I wrote a second, more calm post later on.

Wait a second, you were intentionally aggressive with me because I had originally been aggressive and got my first post cata'ed? How is that supposed to help at all? Why did you even need to do the very thing I got modded for in the first place? Could you not have simply omited that part of your post and left the constructive bits be?

It's a bit of a contradiction of terms to say "I don't need the rules spelled out to me" in the same breath as saying that you originally made this thread to ask how your previous post broke the rules. The two aren't identical but they go hand in hand - if I'm going to explain to you how something breaks the rules, you bet I'm going also to go over the rule itself just to make sure the why is clear too.

Morwen, I can apprecaite that you re-state the rules, but I knew then and know now what the rules say, and in case I don't, or don't recall I know where to go look for a refresher. This is why I don't need the rules spelled out to me, especially not in such a condensating tone. When you said in your moderator comment that the tread was cata'ed due (among other things) YDIW attitudes, I took that at face value. Okay, so it was cata'ed due to that. But how was it that it came to that? How was it YDIW? What part was so aggressive?

I did not understand at the time so I made this tread and re-posted the original tread in a tone that I hoped was neutral and matter-of-factly, in order to get my intended request across without any fuss. Then I waited for a responce that would tell me how a post with no intentions of being aggressive and absolutely no intention of being blatantly YDIW was cata'ed as such. Couple hours later I had that answer and considered replying, but decided to  await more than one responce. The idea was that if a few people told me how they interpited it and how it was bad the reason would be properly underlined to me, not just a possible revelation on my part and one single person's opinion.

After reading all the responses at a later time, including yours, I was sure that I fully grasped the core of the issue without error. However I was also, at that time rather perplexed by you; why was a mod being this aggressive and condensating towards a request to clarify exactly how I'd screwed up? At this point the whole thing was more about my lack of understanding for you aggression, because the original purpose (figuring out exactly how I messed up) had been satisfied.

And here we are. For the 3rd time, the original intention of this tread is over. Now I only wonder about your responses, and while I can guess, I can't know until I'm told the reasons. You are the only one who can do that.

[Lyn Farel]

Wait... now mods can behave aggressively and hypocritical as long as it is intentionnal and makes the point across ? 

[JinOtsi]

Wait... now mods can behave aggressively and hypocritical as long as it is intentionnal and makes the point across ? 

Of course. Mods get to do pretty much whatever the fuck they want, rules or no rules. Nothing new under the sun.

[Desiderya]

Us <-> Them

Always works.

[Silver Night]

Wait... now mods can behave aggressively and hypocritical as long as it is intentionnal and makes the point across ? 

Of course. Mods get to do pretty much whatever the fuck they want, rules or no rules. Nothing new under the sun.

Morwen was a bit more aggressive than I might have been, but given the circumstances, not inappropriately so I think. You are free to disagree, and if you see a mod (or anyone else) breaking the rules, please report it. If you've seen mods 'doing whatever the fuck they want' in contravention of the rules, I've not seen the reports from you regarding it, at least that I recall. Mods have in fact been both moderated, and removed from the moderation team in the past for breaking the rules, though.

If you see actual specific incidents of mods breaking the rules, report them. Otherwise, kindly don't attempt to flamebait the moderation team.

For the topic at hand, given the number of posts you have had moderated in the past, Bloodbird, I'm surprised that you did need clarification. I hope it is more clear now, and that you will let us know if you have further questions. As I think we have mentioned to you in the past, if you are unsure whether a post is going to fall afoul of the rules, you can PM a mod before hand to check. If you really had no idea that this post would be problematic, I'm not sure what other assistance we can offer you in the future to avoid being moderated again.

I will be asking the mod team to make sure and spell out a little more clearly what moderation is for in the future. We generally try, but sometimes what seems obvious to one person isn't to another. 

[Sakura Nihil]

Ah, Chatsubo Backstage drama.

[Silver Night]

Not quite that much drama, I hope.

[Lyn Farel]

Fair enough, but I have however noticed a high probability for legit reports about moderators posts to be ignored over time.

[BloodBird]

For the topic at hand, given the number of posts you have had moderated in the past, Bloodbird, I'm surprised that you did need clarification.

That was just it. Improvement is made when you are concious of what get's burned and what get to stay. When you mess that up and get modded,  and are not 100% clear on how you did it (leading to the post's creation in a bad way to begin with) clarification is useful for your understanding and improvement.

Also, Morwen's reply was "not inappropriatly aggressive given the circumstances" and there are times when a mod can be aggressive towards those modded for needless aggression? Doesn't that just set a bad double-standard when a mod get's to do what they mod others for?

I don't see how. No matter how much I may or may not have messed up in past or how much I did now, how is it a free ticket to act like the one you are supposed to be modding for that very same behaviour?

[Safai]

Dear lord.

Silver, Morwen, and the rest of the admin/mod team; all I can say is I hope you are able enjoy it, because I sure wouldn't be able to handle dealing with this.

[Silver Night]

You weren't modded for needless aggression (though I would suggest that your post was substantially more aggressive than Morwen's). Although the aggression didn't help, you were modded for calling another member a liar, YDIW, etc.

Lallara basically has the right of it (though the specific intent wasn't stepping on it hard here in particular, just that we are aware that 'IC' can be used as a trolling tool.)

And Lyn: Given you are not privy to the reports we get, you may not be aware exactly how high a proportion of all reports have no action taken. A report is not the same as mod action being taken.