Asura.Floppyseconds said: »
Bloodrose said: »
The only reporter you need to understand is April O'Neil from Channel 6 News!
Is that you,Fone?
Yep I live in any poster that wants to have fun !
Upcoming P+R Changes
Upcoming P+R changes
What is the point of having rules if they are not enforced(inb4 another debate with Nik on the nature of law). Reporting is a mean to attract the attention of the moderator that might otherwise not pay any.
Taking the stance of "boo hoo you're a spy" is not correct. I live in a place where the code of silence ruined the entire society; denouncing is always the right path.
Taking the stance of "boo hoo you're a spy" is not correct. I live in a place where the code of silence ruined the entire society; denouncing is always the right path.
Valefor.Sehachan said: »
What is the point of having rules if they are not enforced(inb4 another debate with Nik on the nature of law).
You cannot appeal to it because it can be applied to anything. I could say that Kojo is Oklahoman and get perma-banned for breaking the "catch-all" rule.
I don't think anyone has even used the catch all rule yet.
Rooks said: »
Worst case scenario, we get lots of wrong spelling to laugh at.
I can guarantee that'
Rooks said: »
If your topic covers a story over 6 months old (Watergate, Benghazi, 2012 Election, etc.) post it here.
what about stories that occurred initially over 6 months, but its new information that just came out?
Because someone somewhere abuses the system, it is not a good excuse to abolish it entirely.
Abusers are punished just as well.
Abusers are punished just as well.
Ackeron said: »
I don't think anyone has even used the catch all rule yet.
We haven't, and I don't expect to. It's there as a reminder that violating the spirit of the rules while obeying the letter is not a loophole. I think just having it there fulfills all of the need for it.
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
You cannot appeal to it
I'm the route of appeal for any suspension, even the ones I give out (and I've loosened my own judgments before! New evidence/more context can and will change my mind on things). As with a lot of things, it comes down to trust in the staff in general, and ultimately me or Scragg in particular. I try to make sure my behavior, especially regarding my authority, doesn't break that trust, but that's really up to you.
Asura.Floppyseconds said: »
block the person
[+]
Ackeron said: »
I don't think anyone has even used the catch all rule yet.
To help you, it was on the PM string dated 1/20/2016.
[+]
Asura.Floppyseconds said: »
Who is saying to abolish it entirely?
I'll say this here and now:
I am responsible for the things I post.
Quote me on it.
I am responsible for the things I post.
Quote me on it.
[+]
Asura.Floppyseconds said: »
Ackeron said: »
I don't think anyone has even used the catch all rule yet.
Pretty sure it has been used for me :p
It has not.
Your aggravation of the rules is well known and noted, but they're still the rules. Your inability to follow them is not a weakness in the system, and you break plenty of them on your own without any of us having to frame you.
Asura.Floppyseconds said: »
Anyway let's say there was a rule about not being allowed to tell "yo mama" jokes. If someone tells one is it really a big deal? It's just stupid banter that people do. Is it worth reporting?
Reporting means you wish to punish someone pretty much. It has a place, but is abused. By the remarks the mods make it clearly is. Because people are petty. It doesn't matter how abused it gets because mods don't want to have to deal with the same person over and over. So down the road action that wouldn't have been taken gets taken from report pestering.
Reporting means you wish to punish someone pretty much. It has a place, but is abused. By the remarks the mods make it clearly is. Because people are petty. It doesn't matter how abused it gets because mods don't want to have to deal with the same person over and over. So down the road action that wouldn't have been taken gets taken from report pestering.
We take away reporting privileges from people who abuse it, rather than cave, if there's no actual rule being broken. If someone is continually being offensive or skirting rules, then the multiple reports just prove that it's not some one off thing that can be ignored.
[Edit: apparently KN got hit with it? First I've heard of it, but there we go]
It's about 60%-40% and I'm not so sure it's all intentional abuse. I've seen some things reported that weren't offensive or rule-breaking but I could see where they could be easily lost in translation or some reports of two people joking with one-another that gets "It's harassing another user" reported because someone mistakenly took it seriously.
[+]
Bloodrose said: »
I'll say this here and now:
I am responsible for the things I post.
Quote me on it.
I am responsible for the things I post.
Quote me on it.
Odin.Godofgods said: »
what about stories that occurred initially over 6 months, but its new information that just came out?
Case by case, really - if there's enough there to sustain multiple pages? Sure, make a thread.
Asura.Floppyseconds said: »
Let me be entirely clear on what I am calling abusing the report system. Person A doesn't like person B. Person B says something mild like "Person A likes to report people".
Person A can rightfully report as that. If we want a literal example. I got banned for simply calling Jet a report queen sarcastically.
Now lets say person A likes person C. Person C does the same thing, and person A doesn't report it. Now lets expand that. Person A is now along side person B-Z everyday on the boards. Person A really doesn't like person B, overtime person B is selectively picked out for rule breaking posts here and there by A along side person G H E Z and the rest are not reported by person A for similar or the exact same behavior.
Person A can rightfully report as that. If we want a literal example. I got banned for simply calling Jet a report queen sarcastically.
Now lets say person A likes person C. Person C does the same thing, and person A doesn't report it. Now lets expand that. Person A is now along side person B-Z everyday on the boards. Person A really doesn't like person B, overtime person B is selectively picked out for rule breaking posts here and there by A along side person G H E Z and the rest are not reported by person A for similar or the exact same behavior.
Asura.Floppyseconds said: »
Way way out of context. Do you want me to explain?
Found it, you're right. Least I didn't just use that rule, 3 others were there and I just tossed that one on top of it.
Rooks said: »
Odin.Godofgods said: »
what about stories that occurred initially over 6 months, but its new information that just came out?
Case by case, really - if there's enough there to sustain multiple pages? Sure, make a thread.
that can be a pain to determine some times. I know some ppl have complained that i have to many 'negative' threads in the past. Yet the times iv posted positive stories that actually had some substance for discussion, they never make it past a third post. Where as the others can go on forever.
Ackeron said: »
Found it, you're right. Least I didn't just use that rule, 3 others were there and I just tossed that one on top of it.
I'm still the only one that rule was used against, so...go me?
Odin.Godofgods said: »
Rooks said: »
Odin.Godofgods said: »
what about stories that occurred initially over 6 months, but its new information that just came out?
Case by case, really - if there's enough there to sustain multiple pages? Sure, make a thread.
that can be a pain to determine some times. I know some ppl have complained that i have to many 'negative' threads in the past. Yet the times iv posted positive stories that actually had some substance for discussion, they never make it past a third post. Where as the others can go on forever.
I actually enjoyed most of your threads, at least they bring discussion to the table. Unlike somebody else who posts something just to get a negative response to.
[+]
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
Ackeron said: »
Found it, you're right. Least I didn't just use that rule, 3 others were there and I just tossed that one on top of it.
I'm still the only one that rule was used against, so...go me?
Asura.Floppyseconds said: »
Ackeron said: »
Found it, you're right. Least I didn't just use that rule, 3 others were there and I just tossed that one on top of it.
There should always be a direct rule being invoked. A catch all rule is a poor way of preventing loopholes by making them. Thusly that says everything about the dumb catch all.
All FFXI content and images © 2002-2024 SQUARE ENIX CO., LTD. FINAL
FANTASY is a registered trademark of Square Enix Co., Ltd.