Response

[Joker]

This shit flinging needs to stop, now.

MOG, quit antagonizing and lashing out at members when they start pissing you off. If it starts getting heated and you know you're at your wits end. Just stop replying and let someone else handle it. There's no need to get worked up and shit over this.

Everyone else, quit the MOG gangbang. The GF thread was obviously a stab at him, and anyone with eyes can see that. Him responding that way in kind wasn't right, but it was clearly there to provoke him.

The shit flinging is getting old and ridiculous. Just stop.

I'll tell you right now.

All I want is for the guy to acknowledge his mistake. Just "that was rude of me, sorry". Is that so much to ask?

That's all.

 

[CK]

inb4close

 

[Ⓐaron]

I just want some acknowledgement that he's in trouble for his actions, since I've been directly flamed and am rather insulted. Like, if he does anything like that again he gets removed from staff no questions asked. Since, as I seem to recall, he's already been given several ultimata like that already.

The suggestion that it's "trolling" strikes me as absurd, since I've been the target of much worse from people I wasn't on good terms with (Carlos for example), and nothing was done.

 

[CK]

I vote that I replace him. y/n?

 

[Ⓐaron]

incidentally,

The reasons why activity has been going down is speculation on your part and little more.

Not when people have explicitly told me that one reason they're posting less is due to observed hypocrisy on the part of staff. I'd give names, but I don't feel like exposing people who don't want to be exposed, but I know of several people who used to be extremely active and are now almost completely absent due to their impressions of this place's staff.

 

[Ryushikaze]

I vote that I replace him. y/n?

No. And do not bring it up again.

Aaron- 'people have told me' is worthless heresay, especially with names. MOG is right when he says if people wish to voice their criticisms, they ought to do so TO US.

I say this to those people telling you things, that they ought to contact an Admin instead if they think a mod is being hypocritical.

 

[Dashell]

In all honesty I don't think anyone should be given special treatment regardless of their rank or how long they've been here. But I also believe it's up to staff to make those kinds of decisions...

 

[Ⓐaron]

What if the person they think is being hypocritical is an admin? Not that I know this to be the case necessarily, since I've just heard complaints about the staff generally.

One other complaint I heard people raise is that they felt there was a certain amount of "groupthink" on staff - that is, staff would stick up for one another just because they're friends and want to look out for each other. I don't know if these complaints have any bearing in reality, but people's perception of such would go a certain amount of the way to why people might not bother raising their complaints. I also know that people have used the endless back and forth that often needs to be endured before a complaint will even be considered (as evidenced by, for example, this thread) as a reason for not raising a complaint; many people simply don't have time to argue persistently enough for their complaint to be taken seriously, and will instead opt simply to stop posting at a board that doesn't please them.

Obviously you have no obligation to respond to complaints of people who do not raise those complaints themselves, but if you are aware that complaints exist, and do not attempt to address them, then it is substantially likely that activity will drop, or at least will not rise as steadily as it would if said complaints were addressed. As a result it's been a goal of mine as a forum administrator to attempt to address the complaints even of people who aren't posting, simply because I have observed that doing so will sometimes end their silence. Obviously it's not a failproof method, but it's a good reason a message board staff should try to go out of their way to gauge the mood of their member base, as often times complaints aren't stated directly and can only come out after a sizeable amount of prodding.

and with that said I'm gonna head off to bed.

 

[Ryushikaze]

What if the person they think is being hypocritical is an admin? Not that I know this to be the case necessarily, since I've just heard complaints about the staff generally.

Then tell another admin or moderator.

One other complaint I heard people raise is that they felt there was a certain amount of "groupthink" on staff - that is, staff would stick up for one another just because they're friends and want to look out for each other. I don't know if these complaints have any bearing in reality, but people's perception of such would go a certain amount of the way to why people might not bother raising their complaints. I also know that people have used the endless back and forth that often needs to be endured before a complaint will even be considered (as evidenced by, for example, this thread) as a reason for not raising a complaint; many people simply don't have time, and will instead opt to stop posting at a board that doesn't please them.

Obviously you have no obligation to respond to complaints of people who do not raise those complaints themselves, but if you are aware that complaints exist, -snip-

Which comes back to the issue that people need to OPENLY VOICE THEIR OPINION so we can get a proper headcount. 'People I won't say the names of' tells us NOTHING.

 

[Cthulhu]

But that's because a lot of people have complained in my presence about the way things are run.

Yeah, and as long as they complain to you about whatever, we won't hear it (until later), and we can't do shit about it. If someone has a complaint about how things are run here, I'm not hearing it, except from you - and you're a minority of one in this case.

However, I do have a number of people I'm in repeated contact with who agree with me that the conduct I've called out is unprofessional.

See above. I can't fix shit if I can't hear it's broken.

In any case, my complaints, as they always have been, revolve around double standards. It seems rather apparent that you don't care about those, which is why you would dismiss them as "whining about nothing."

It's either double standards, or nazi staff, or staff that does nothing - which do you prefer? Take your pick.

I've got to get to a meeting now and I can't be arsed to respond to all of this while at work, but really now, get your act together.

 

[Ⓐaron]

@Ryu: I agree, but as I stated, they can't be arsed because it takes so fucking long to get anyone to even acknowledge the complaint is valid.

Obviously I didn't go to bed:

Oy, don't whine when you troll someone or call someone out, you'll get butthurt. Shut the fuck up, seriously.

As stated before, I've seen much worse trolling that wasn't warned in the slightest. This is pretty weak as a "troll" and I'm pretty sure if it weren't targeted at a staff member it wouldn't even be called as such. Search for posts by Carlos including my name if you want examples of worse posts that haven't been responded to; I'm sure there are others as well which I've simply forgotten.

Aaron, the main reason why you're not getting your position back is because you haven't done shit tech adminny for the last few months while you were in staff (except a few name changes perhaps),

No one made me aware during my entire time on staff that this was a problem, and I even stated after I left that I realised how lazy I'd been in my last few months and that I'd step up the pace if reinstated.

and have constantly been interfering yourself with how this board is run, how moderators do their job, bitch, moan, and complain. And now you're still doing it.

I was unaware that I wasn't allowed an opinion.

What I see is a staffer responding to a troll in a jokingly matter to eat dicks. I'm pretty sure he didn't expect a fucking Spanish Inquisition when he responded to whoever called him out here (cue macro).

Then perhaps he should have read the forum rules, which explicitly forbid such behaviour, especially since he's gotten in trouble for extremely similar conduct in the past.

Aaron, I've said this before, but I'll repeat myself for the record: Quit talking like you're the only one that knows how to run a forum. If you know it so well, start your own awesome and epic forum and get the fuck outta here.

To start up a truly epic forum would require me to be motivated enough to develop content large enough to receive respectable search engine results. That motivation would also require a pre-existing base of members large enough that the community could sustain itself. I'm actually trying to develop such a base as we speak, but it's proving difficult.

But I know you're not that type. You prefer to complain without actually trying to do a better job, whether it concerns something trivial as forums, or something large as the government and shit. If you want to change something, do it yourself, run for president or whatever the fuck you're on about.

How exactly do I not "try to do a better job"? I've consistently held myself to a much higher standard than regular members whenever I've been on staff. After all this time I would have thought that would be quite apparent.

Regarding politics, there's not much I can do from Sarasota, which is why I'm planning on a move to D.C.

I'm not blind - I can see that Mog's reaction was perhaps uncalled for, but both Jecht and Omega are calling him out for a frivolous post, you respond going 'lol I'm better than you and I know better than you'. What are you expecting of him now exactly? What would you do?

Simple: I would apologise for being a dick, acknowledge that my conduct was in violation of the rules, and note that I would attempt to avoid repeating such mistakes in the future.

Here, let me call you out in turn: Interfering in what is obviously an internal staff affair is also generally not regarded as a desirable trait in a member .

The difference is that there's a rule forbidding M.O.G.'s conduct, and there's no rule forbidding mine.

If you disagree with someone's behavior, and I'm sure I've said this before a while back, you should send us a formal complaint, not start your own inquisition like you think that'll help. I would've expected that you would've learned that after being on various internet forums for years now.

Funny thing, we tried formal complaint after formal complaint on ACF. It never worked. What you describe as "inquisition tactics" were precisely what did work; and incidentally, what's being done here is quite light compared to what was done on ACF.

Now, I'll spill some staff info now. Mog has seriously contemplated leaving staff (and I'm sure he's repeated that desire), not because he can't do his job anymore, but because every time he makes a public statement, there's almost half a dozen people jumping on his neck about it, and often for frivolous reasons. In fact, I'm pretty sure that you're all just trying to start drama over bullshit because you're bored.

I don't think it's frivolous to hold staff to the same standards as members. If a member had responded to "trolling" (which I consider to have been really light) with flames like that, they would've been warned. That constitutes the entirety of the complaints I've had tonight.

 

[Ⓐaron]

It's either double standards, or nazi staff, or staff that does nothing - which do you prefer? Take your pick.

This strikes me as a bit of a false dilemma. If you want me to stop complaining and give constructive criticism of how I think a staff can avoid having to be any of those three things, I can do it (though it'll probably take a few days before I have the time to write it out in detail), but it'd basically be exactly like ACF was run for the past several months of its existence, minus the not giving tech access to people who are willing and able to work on the place, and also minus Sinfinity.

Ok this time I really am going to bed.

 

[CK]

No. And do not bring it up again.

Don't tell me what I can and can't do tyvm.

 

[Bex]

I think the problem is that the staff can't make up their minds about what they want to do. They gave us a concession with GF and everything, but they still are throwing about warnings and infractions like shit slinging monkeys.

There is obvious bias for and against some members, and when you're trying to enforce a set of 'rules' it just won't do. They say no spam is allowed, but come on - look at shit like the chit-chat thread, that is bare spam!

TL;DR you guys have no idea when it comes to rule enforcement or being able to gauge what is warnable and what isn't, and how you can't just base who to warn on a person.

 

[Ⓐaron]

To be fair, chit chat is supposed to be an exception to the no spam rule, but there are still plenty of examples of threads that aren't supposed to be exceptions that nonetheless are. Whether a thread gets closed for spam seems to be rather haphazard and dependent mostly upon the moderator's preferences. Though admittedly I haven't been paying close attention lately, so this may not be the case as much as it used to be.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Someone summarize this shit for me please.

 

[Cthulhu]

Do you really expect people to type out "I agree with Aaron" now? Seems like a waste of a post.

Yes, or at the very least they should press that shiny 'thank you' button, to at least indicate they agree with you, or that they like what you've written. The fact that there's only two under the post I'm quoting this from (and others) doesn't make me think there's really not that much people that agree with you or that have major problems with. There's only two or three people I'm seeing in this thread right now that agree with you. Sure, two or three is also 'a number', but not nearly as much as you want to make us believe.

And everyone knows that if they have a serious problem with something, they can contact us about it. In the year that TLS's been online, the amount of people that came to me personally with serious issues can be counted on one hand, and all of their problems were handled quickly without problems. And the same can be said about problems that were put out in public, or those that developed in public - such as this one. I have to admit that not all of those problems were dealt with as professionally by the staff as I would've wanted them to, and for that, I apologise. But really, it's not only the staff that's supposed to act professional all the time. We expect our average member to be mature, and to be able to deal with problems maturely - and also accept it if it's not handled in a way they'd like to see.

No, I have this thing going on that everyone should listen to what I say because lots of people generally agree with what I say and have explicitly told me they rely on me to express their opinions.

Will everyone that generally agrees with Aaron and explicitly told him they rely on him to express their opinions please give me a confirmation on that? Thank you. And if you're afraid of repercussions, first I'll say that there won't be any, and second, if you want to remain anonymous over something that concerns all of you and how you may act on here, then it's obviously not important enough for you.

The fact that I border on anarchism is supposed to come as a shock to you? Er, did you ever bother reading any of my posts before?

Centralised power doesn't always lead to abuse. Unfortunately, the way it's being exercised here does strike me as innately abusive, which likely has occurred because there is no system in place to keep staff accountable to members. I have suggested a couple of systems which could help to reduce that in the past, but staff didn't seem particularly open to the ideas at the time so I didn't bother making much more of it.

Yeah, and exactly how many countries do you know that have no government and are based on anarchy? Lessee, one, two... Oh wait, nothing. Because anarchy does not work as a form of government, only as a transition to something else. Let's hypothesize here. Let's say we go 'Okay, everyone can do whatever the fuck they want, everyone's admin, here you go, enjoy'. Day one, and someone will go 'OH LULZ' and delete posts, members, and everything. And even if that's not the case, and it remains stable for a while - then still there will be a number of people that believe they have more of a say about what goes and doesn't go on the forum (in the form of posts that are considered funny, threads that are or aren't allowed, that kinda thing). What's that then? Oh right, aristocracy, where those that believe they're better than others in, say, the area of knowing how to run a forum decide what is and isn't considered good or funny or appropriate on the forum.

Anarchy doesn't work in real life or on forums, simple as. Anyways, topic.

Yop was pretty adamant that they not be changed.

In the basis. No, we're not going to allow flaming, posting porn, spamming. Yes, we can consider allowing posting spoilers, if there's enough people that aren't bothered by it.

To be honest if I had absolute control over this board I'd remove all flaming rules from Fuckery, and outright spam to be allowed, but that's obviously not going to happen and probably wouldn't be particularly popular with a fair segment of the member base, so I'll just settle for having the rules consistently enforced.

Yeah, and what would you get then? Segragation. You'd get ACF's spam section part 2, a section where only a certain group or type of person is allowed, and the rest is pestered out. I won't have that here, simple as. If you want your own enclave where everything goes, fine, but do it somewhere else. Oh wait, you tried that, but it failed, and not once, but time and time and time again. Must be harder to achieve that than you believe.

I'd just like to say MOG that I could be a better moderator on this forum than you can be. And that's not a good thing.

Thank you, and I agree that his behavior has not been as professional as I'd like to see from a staff member. His opinion on how the site is run also does not correspond with what the rest of staff believes, so we're in a bit of a dispute on that matter at the moment.

See? That's not hard, is it? No talks of omg anarchy, previous incidents, general disagreement with general staff, just a note on one particular subject. The rest has been said by someone else, in this case.

Uh, no. That's not how it works. "Just because you don't find it offensive doesn't mean that someone else won't". I'd quote the actual rules/ToS here, but I can't find the buggers.

http://thelifestream.net/forums/showthread.php?t=1905, and good point, they need to be somewhere easier to find.

If people are too lazy to speak up for themselves than why should anyone consider what they have to say? I mean seriously. That's how it is in real life too.

This. A democracy doesn't work if there's one person for a whole town saying 'I got multiple people saying they'd vote for X, so I'm gonna vote X for them'. Do note that this forum isn't a complete democracy, seeing there's boundaries we've set to keep the quality of this site up to a minimum level.

So I can post whatever I want in General Fuckery and not get in trouble?

No, obviously, the majority of the rules still apply there.

At any rate, if you're going to dismiss the complaints of quite a few members as "whining," then it's your loss and it's no wonder the forums' traffic has dwindled so much.

Baseless comment, the forum's traffic in terms of visits and pageviews has only gradually slowed down in the last four months by about 20-30%, which is directly related with the amount of new and interesting content we've been getting on the frontpage - also seeing that those figures have diminished in parallel. So your assumed relation between staff behavior and traffic is based purely on what you're able to see - and you can only see new posts. The diminishing of posts can easily be explained by the fact that ACC's discussions have worn out and the new bout of silence surrounding the compilation, which results in less posts overall. Because really, there's only a minority that's actually bothered by how staff acts, and that coincidentally is also the minority that comes into frequent contact with staff (directly or indirectly), usually in the negative sense.

now it's rare for the place to get 300.

On average it's well above that, kthx. Besides, what's more important, poastcount or quality? I was under the impression that I had molded this forum into something that doesn't care about postcount. I'd rather have a hundred good posts than a thousand 'eat a dick' posts, wouldn't you agree?

but even then staff can't absolve themselves of all responsibility.

Yeah, there's been a small handful of people that were banned or that decided to pack up and leave because they disagreed with staff, but then what? Should we bend and rewrite everything for a handful that doesn't like the site in the first place? Really now - list me the people that have left because they didn't agree with how the site was run, and I'll return you the amount of activity they've cost us.

It's never flown before, and the rules of Fuckery make it perfectly clear that flaming is not acceptable.

Really now, you want us to stop being lenient on GF? We'll hand out warnings and suspensions for all of the flames and insults that were thrown around there, even in jest, as well as the other points we've put as conditions for the section there. I'm quite sure there's enough in there if we look back to shut the section down, as we've put as the conditions for the section back when we started it. Are you sure now?

too much effort cba etc etc.

Then obviously, you don't actually give a damn. And that's fine, but don't complain then.

By the rules of TLS, which I apparently know better than you do, it doesn't matter whether the exchange is "juvenile" or whether your response is "in jest." What matters is whether the post is a direct flame and whether the target is offended by the response. Both criteria were satisfied by both of your responses. There was nothing in the original post of that thread, or in Omega's or my posts, that was in violation of any rules. You responded to each of us by insulting us directly, which is in violation of rules. I fail to see what is so difficult to grasp about this.

Ah, finally. What's so difficult to grasp about this, is that it apparently took hours for you and whoever else agrees with you to actually formulate this complaint, and even then you don't direct it at those that are supposed to take care of it (i.e. the staff outside of MOG himself), but at the person himself. Really now, is it so hard to respond 'Hey guy, that ain't cool, read the rules here. I take offense, and I'd like you to apologize please'. If he fails to do that, then you file a formal complaint, we take care of it, sorted, done, and there'd be no need for me to spend the bigger part of my evening trying to argue with you and whoever else. Except I don't think you trust in us enough to actually take care of it. Which is more your problem than ours, imo.

I just want some acknowledgement that he's in trouble for his actions, since I've been directly flamed and am rather insulted.

Noted, acknowledged, he's in trouble, we're sorry. If this ever happens again, copy / paste this quote of yours and send it over, and it'll be taken care of. It really is that simple.

The suggestion that it's "trolling" strikes me as absurd, since I've been the target of much worse from people I wasn't on good terms with (Carlos for example), and nothing was done.

Did you report it properly?

One other complaint I heard people raise is that they felt there was a certain amount of "groupthink" on staff - that is, staff would stick up for one another just because they're friends and want to look out for each other.

This is true, actually. Our current staff is often on equal terms or agreeing when it concerns, for example, the acceptability of the behavior of certain members, the enforcement of the rules (or lack thereof at times), and on how this forum should be run.

Recently, Mog expressed his disagreement on how this place is run. He opted for a less lenient, less bullshit-taking staff that hands out warnings and suspensions more often.

And for quite a while now, there's been a certain group of people that would rather like to see him go. This can have two reasons from my current point of view: #1 They don't want staff to become more strict, and prefer the double standards they have now or the earlier mentioned anarchy (which'll bring this site to complete shit, I'll have you know), or #2, they don't like how there's someone with a different opinion than others in staff. Which one is it now?

While on the subject, I do believe it's time we add one or two people to staff - we've had some that left or that have expressed a desire to leave, without actually replacing them. I'm going to bring that subject up again once this current problem has been solved.

(I'd also like to note that our staff has been very stable since day one, and that we've received relatively few complaints about their behavior and such)

No one made me aware during my entire time on staff that this was a problem, and I even stated after I left that I realised how lazy I'd been in my last few months and that I'd step up the pace if reinstated.

That's because we didn't notice at the time, only after you left did we realize that you've spent the majority of your time discussing matters (and in particular matters on moderation and such) in the staff section. Which is fine, but see further.

I was unaware that I wasn't allowed an opinion.

Of course you're allowed an opinion, but it's a different matter when you take matters in your own hand and, say, unclose threads whose closing you disagreed with, unban members whose bannings you disagreed with, and undid warnings you disagreed with. We've repeatedly reminded you back then that you were not supposed (at first) or allowed (later) to (ab) use the powers that were given to you, yet you chose that your opinion on how a matter was handled was superior to those of the rest of staff, and to disregard the conditions under which you were granted your position and the warnings you were given. At the very least, you could've shown a bit of respect by stating you did not agree with our decision, but leave it at that. Instead, you took matters into your own hand, and abused your powers. You were given several last chances slash ultimatums, just as we're doing and have been doing with Mog now, and we would've done so again that last time, but at the time you had already quit yourself.

Also, I just spilled internal staff affairs, sue me.

Then perhaps he should have read the forum rules, which explicitly forbid such behaviour, especially since he's gotten in trouble for extremely similar conduct in the past.

Yes.

To start up a truly epic forum would require me to be motivated enough to develop content large enough to receive respectable search engine results. That motivation would also require a pre-existing base of members large enough that the community could sustain itself. I'm actually trying to develop such a base as we speak, but it's proving difficult.

A good site attracts its own members automatically. If you've got a forum with good subjects and posts, then you'll get members as well - either through search engines or word of mouth. It's not impossible, but yeah, it does require quite a bit of work and effort.

Regarding politics, there's not much I can do from Sarasota, which is why I'm planning on a move to D.C.

You could just start out small and make a Change (cue nationalist music, stars and stripes) in your own town. Or start a revolution, whichever you prefer.

Simple: I would apologise for being a dick, acknowledge that my conduct was in violation of the rules, and note that I would attempt to avoid repeating such mistakes in the future.

I'm gonna let MOG decide that for himself. If he doesn't, then fine, he's a dick, but there's nothing to be done about it then. If he does, then fine too, but I doubt you'd get off his back for long.

Funny thing, we tried formal complaint after formal complaint on ACF.

Funny thing, this isn't ACF.

What you describe as "inquisition tactics" were precisely what did work;

Did it now? At what cost? Oh right, staff getting kicked out and being replaced with the likes of Sacred Wolf (and her numerous alter egoes), Sinfinity, and fuck knows who else. Most of the subjects there lasted for days on end, and ended up in a compromise because then-staff was simply too tired to keep arguing. There'd be ten people ganging up on one staffer's post, picking it apart piece by piece. That makes someone defensive, and less susceptible for a change in behavior.

I think the problem is that the staff can't make up their minds about what they want to do.

Yes, and we're working on improving that.

There is obvious bias for and against some members,

Yes, we tend to warn and suspend people easier if they send off a vibe of not really wanting to improve their behavior and just being there 'for the lulz'. We're also less likely to warn or suspend people whom we believe doesn't deserve it, who overall provides a good contribution to the site, etc. And we're also less likely to warn or suspend people we believe will throw a giant fit (see this thread) when they do get warned or suspended. This last point in particular is a point of criticism we've had in staff internally.

They say no spam is allowed, but come on - look at shit like the chit-chat thread, that is bare spam!

That's because it is pretty much the spam section - to a degree -. I don't know if you were around at the time, but when GF was started up (and before that, where there were just plain dumb posts made about opening a spam section), we've repeatedly argued that the chit-chat thread was the main place for random and / or short posting.

but there are still plenty of examples of threads that aren't supposed to be exceptions that nonetheless are.

And I've said this before, but if you see a thread and you say 'Hey, isn't this considered spam?', you're never stopped to make a report on that. Our judgment on things is limited, we need more views on certain things than we're getting right now. With some frequency, I'm personally getting approached by mainly Mako and reminded on the fact that a certain thread should be closed under the current rules. I actually consider myself a lot less critical of posts and threads than I should be, even though I've drafted up the rules on them myself at the time. It's either lack of proper judgment, or simply indifference, I'm not sure, but it's probably my largest weak point as the owner of this site, and for that I apologize.

So, let's summarize, I lost count on how long I've been writing this post.

* Mog will be officially called upon his behavior, and will either be set an ultimatum, be removed, or he'll quit - we're not sure yet, and we need to decide on that. Are there people here that say 'I do not accept it that Mog should remain on staff any longer'? Let me know. Are there people that say 'Okay, I'm offended, but if he apologizes he can stay'? Let me know. Are there people that say 'I see his points, and I forgive him, no hard feelings'? Let me know.

If there's other opinions on this particular matter, by all means, let me know. I want opinions, clear statements, and complaints, because it's hard to filter out the actual complaints from the dozens of posts and walls of text that have been made about this particular matter. See the highlighted posts above - I much prefer those than the ones I've made a reply to.

Can we at the very least finish this up tidily? Thanks.


For the record, yes, I was rather pissed off this morning when I posted earlier, .

 

[Alex]

Everybody should just eat a dick and chill the fuck out. This shit is getting tiring.

 

[Dashell]

Mods shouldn't be given special treatment. Whatever you would do to a normal member, do to Mog if you felt he did wrong. That's all you really have to do.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Staff members can't warn other staff members.

Since regular members can't see the Staff section, they don't know we've given him several warnings through posts about his behavior. It's not like he's gotten off scot-free for his past offenses.

 

[Dashell]

I guess I meant don't look at it as "He's a staff member" just look at it like "He's a member" and don't give him special treatment is all

 

[Atticus]

Yes, or at the very least they should press that shiny 'thank you' button, to at least indicate they agree with you, or that they like what you've written. The fact that there's only two under the post I'm quoting this from (and others) doesn't make me think there's really not that much people that agree with you or that have major problems with. There's only two or three people I'm seeing in this thread right now that agree with you. Sure, two or three is also 'a number', but not nearly as much as you want to make us believe.

I'm generally leaning towards Aaron's side actually.

Though a good thing MOG has done has been staying out of GF. I was pretty sure that when GF was opened he would be the first there giving out bans like it was his job, but he hasn't done that. YOPY left modding GF up to others I suppose. In fact... I'm not even sure who's area it is now. Dacon did a pretty good job with it imo. All I remember is when Mako Eyes was mod there... I got banned for posting a picture of a cat.

I think the best way staff can handle these types of situations is to say, 'thank you for your input. we will discuss this among the staff... bounce it back and forth a bit. Get calm collected, and get back to you on that.' Then really get back to us on it. I think that's really all Aaron is asking for.

And I also want to say, good job on handling GF so far. Only half of my threads have been closed. I think that's pretty good.

 

[CK]

I think the best way staff can handle these types of situations is to say, 'thank you for your input. we will discuss this among the staff... bounce it back and forth a bit. Get calm collected, and get back to you on that.' Then really get back to us on it. I think that's really all Aaron is asking for.

Pretty much this.

 

[Joker]

Ah, finally. What's so difficult to grasp about this, is that it apparently took hours for you and whoever else agrees with you to actually formulate this complaint, and even then you don't direct it at those that are supposed to take care of it (i.e. the staff outside of MOG himself), but at the person himself. Really now, is it so hard to respond 'Hey guy, that ain't cool, read the rules here. I take offense, and I'd like you to apologize please'. If he fails to do that, then you file a formal complaint, we take care of it, sorted, done, and there'd be no need for me to spend the bigger part of my evening trying to argue with you and whoever else. Except I don't think you trust in us enough to actually take care of it. Which is more your problem than ours, imo.

I'll tell you right now.

All I want is for the guy to acknowledge his mistake. Just "that was rude of me, sorry". Is that so much to ask?

That's all.

'sall I'm saying.

But thank you for setting a lot of things straight.

 

[Cthulhu]

All I remember is when Mako Eyes was mod there... I got banned for posting a picture of a cat.

A dead one whose decomposing guts were spilled out over the street, just to be clear on that .

All I want is for the guy to acknowledge his mistake. Just "that was rude of me, sorry". Is that so much to ask?

'sall I'm saying.

But thank you for setting a lot of things straight.

You're welcome, and yeah, I agree on you on that account. I've asked him to do just that. I can't make him, of course, but he's at least he's admitted that his behavior was out of line.