Discussion on the new moderation policy can be had here

This.

A broken clock is right twice a day, doesn't mean you keep it in case it'll read the correct time at some point.

The community lost a lot more than it gained from keeping the problematic users.

 

Problematic users must think they are getting a free pass... because it seems they are getting it a lot. Maybe not, but the public perception says they do. And thus continue instead of having to choose between reform or not be allowed to post.

The mental image of the forums is like a sports game in which something looks like a foul, sometimes a full multiplayer brawl; yet referees stay mute, no info of what and who, just funny face glances at best. Next maybe someone disappears from the field, but nobody really knows. Maybe the player just went to get the equipment replaced, maybe it was an expulsion. The brawls keep on happening every now and then, it seems to be part of the sport now. /MontyPython

Following with sports and as they do in in martial arts: "lack of initiative by @psychoticstorm, free point for the uncivil". In other cases (who more is supposed to be a moderator? wasn't this a company that engaged with customers?), more like "combatant absent, match for the uncivil". Maybe the federation lacked resources and had to fire all other referees. *shrug*I should mention who the uncivil are to be fair with what I propose and not just blame mod staff, I just ignore the brawls (as in jump to the next useful message, not hide users, thus no list and still capable of seeing those rare gems when they appear). I am not mod, so I do not waste time in those situations. It's a easy NBQ suit to handle toxicity.

Oh, also, maybe separating mod / news / rules accounts (ie, faceless accounts) from personal ones could make things more clear. It would even help the staff (not just the other posters) realize when they are just passing around data and enforcing forum rules vs giving opinions or discussing ideas. Like uniform while on duty, plain clothes when not: it should also affect wearer.

 

I do not believe for one second that there are people who “cannot help themselves”. Forum behavioral disability is not a thing, it’s just people abusing what can be abused at too little a cost.

 

Public moderation is not about punishing someone, it’s about showing everyone “this behavior is unacceptable and this is the sanction”. Moderation is not the same as the law, there aren’t long convoluted texts to cover all situations, understanding what the rules are is done by example.

That is not to say that some moderation should not be done privately. But then, as someone who recently pushed the boundaries in a post knowing full well I was doing so, I can tell you I received no PM whatsoever…

By the way, I pushed the envelop because I was tired of feeling punished by moderation. Because that is how it feels when threads I’m interested in get derailed (always, always by the same people), moderation does nothing until things get so bad the thread is closed. Heck, I even see moderation participating in the derailing discussion - at which point it loses any legitimacy to get things back on track.

On other fora, people get warned, posts that are not part of the discussion get deleted, and things can move on. And users who do that too often get banned, so everybody understands what is what. But at least those people who did nothing wrong GET TO CONTINUE THEIR DISCUSSION.

The policy here, as far as I can tell, is to punish everyone else so a few people might somehow give some valuable feedback among a mountain of crap…

 

Just a reminder that there is no consensus among the community on what is acceptable and what is toxic as is to be expected from an international forum, a recent example from the thread that spawned this thread would be Vaul’s joke, was it toxic as it was reported and I should ban him regardless of his contributions to the community? is it a bad joke? or a clever wordplay?


If I ban everybody that gets reported because somebody thinks they are way over the line, then this forum would be a ghost town.

 

I’m sorry but that’s F’ing weird.

People who sign up for this forum have accepted the terms & services made BY CORVUS BELLI and no one else.

You sound like you are attempting to moderate by pleasing literally every one but end up pleasing no one because you have no tangible moderating policy.
Sure, you can claim that the standards for what constitutes sexism is dependent on different countries and cultures and I even agree with that premise, it’s just that you seem to have no definition nor any standards of what violates these forum’s rules.

I mean look at this example (and this is not to single out anyone).
https://forum.corvusbelli.com/threa...m-if-given-the-opportunity.40819/#post-426664

Like.. do you understand that by having seemingly no policy on moderation the discourse on this forum has degenerated into this norm.

Food for thought Psychoticstorm, I think you have well intentions but you’re severely misguided and the forums and to some extend, Corvus Belli, is suffering because of this.

 

I do not believe the issue is about Vaulsc's comment. If someone is going around the forum dropping "fuck you" and "fuck off" targeted at people they literally @, then maybe they should take a break from the forums to cool down a bit. Wouldn't you agree?

@psychoticstorm, mate - Not that I want to put myself in the spotlight that much, would rather keep a low profile, but we're talking about important "transformative" stuff here and as someone who actually got "permabanned" from the forum I hope I might add some value to the topic.

I got permabanned for something done outside of the forum. Even though I have pushed the forum boundaries many times before the time of the ban, during the time I was nothing but polite and calm here, literally defending myself from personal attacks, in the most polite and passive, calm manner possible, addressing arguments, not people. Got permabanned for my youtube activity of all things, not forum related behavior. To my knowledge none of the people attacking me personally in the forum got banned as a result.

At that time some of my buds got banned as well. One for a personal attack against a CB employee, one for taking blame for the issue that resulted in entire covfefe, lastly another asked to get banned as a sign of solidarity.

All this provides some perspective and I bring it up to show few things:

1) People actually get banned, although rarely,
2) There is a way to redeem oneself when supposedly "permabanned", so permaban does not have to be permanent,
3) Not all are treaded equally, especially when emotions take over,
4) Being banned lets oneself think about why and how to adjust to avoid being banned in the future, like picking right battles to get involved in and emotional about,
5) Of all the things people should get banned for, extensive and vulgar personal attacks are sadly not one of them. This shouldn't be the case as it clearly contradicts the forum rules of conduct,

I sincerely do believe the majority of users would not expect you to ban anyone who's post have been reported. People report for many reasons, not all justified or fair. Still if there are problematic individuals who constantly stir the pot till shit falls out, or derail every important topic, or are vulgar and abusive towards other forum members - maybe give them some time to cool off? Short break from the forum might help them reconsider their ways. If they're really hooked up on the game this shouldn't push them out of Infinity. People would REALLY be better of learning how to move on if they see some silly shit. Pick the right battle to die in before going nuclear.
Right now we are living in a forum reality, where time and time again whenever an important topic shows up it is soon closed for further discussion because of some tit for tat from the very same culprits. Why should really invested fans of the game even bother voicing their opinions in such topics? What's the point, when they gonna be either bombed or closed anyway? What signal does this put out? Is catering to problematic behavior in hope of finding diamonds really good for the community and company's visage in the long run? Isn't it better to just set straight rules, adjust them to better reflect CB's values, and then just uphold them?

I don't know man. I don't want to see people banned for minor silly stuff. Am pretty chill and tolerant towards stuff like this. Still there should be at least a minimum of punishment for constant derailing and dragging down the forum. Constant abuse. Thorough trouble making.

 

The most moderation I've ever seen was my post about moderation being moved to another thread.

Ok lets address some of these points:

Ok lets start here. The "community" is not required to have a consensus on what is acceptable and what is toxic. The Moderation team is. This is your playground, you set the rules. We don't all get a vote.

Your current stance seems to be very "hands off" leaving some questionable behaviour unchallenged. That's your choice. But that also means you will get backlash from that. Unchallenged behaviour means the limits of what is acceptable get pushed and pushed and issues escalate, and the forums become an ever less inviting place to come and discuss issues. But don't shrug and suggest, because not everyone agrees what is toxic, that you have no power over the situation.

Again this looks like avoidance of responsibility. If you as a moderation team decide what's acceptable then that's what people have to stick with. Just saying "well, not everyone speaks the same language" as a reason to not moderate abuse seems very poor practice. CB isn't unique in having an international forum.

If someone is abusive to others then a ban should be considered REGARDLESS of their contribution to the community. I almost can't believe I have to say that.

Of course each case has to be considered case by case, and a ban might not be appropriate, but how much they have contributed shouldn't be a factor. Otherwise you get a forum where a chosen few can get away with bullying others because they have met some sort of benchmark by the company. And...if I'm honest...that feels like the forum you have here. That's not a good look.

Well if you're getting that many reports of abuse then...maybe there is a lot of abuse...

 

Just remember that getting to this point (stating and promising to enact a moderation policy in the rules forum) required IJW to say that he would quit again if the unmoderated behavior continued.

The rest of the users that left due to a lack of moderation didn't leave goodbye notes.

 

Was going to say pretty much what Audra says here above. Especially the bit about moderation not being about a consensus among the community but something that is set by the moderators and whoever owns the forum.

Of course, that’s not to say the community does not get a say, if only by staying away. But considering on one hand the complaints about the moderation, and on the other how little people this forum attracts, I think it’s fair to say that whatever consensus there is among moderators now is not working. So maybe time to set new rules and ensure they are enforced?

 

I'd like to throw in my two cents' worth.

We're slinging around the word "ban" like there's no tomorrow, ban here, ban there, but banning someone is like a death penalty, to be applied in rare and hopeless cases. An CB is already notorious for doing nothing (I do not count posted warnings since it's been shown time and again that they don't carry any weight whatsoever) for a long time, then when some situation gets uncomfortable, banning the offenders outright like a 40k commissar doing a summary execution. This is... very far from a feeling of safety and comfort, even to users who don't break forum rules regularly. The guilty feel bad because why are they suddenly banned when everything's allowed, and the innocent feel bad because habitual shitposters are given free rein on the forums.

Perhaps I'm missing/misunderstanding something, but is there any plan for a clearly stated hierarchy of punishments here? Like, first offense - warning by public post or PM, second - 48 hour probation (yes, it's a slap on the wrist, but it shows that it doesn't go unpunished), third - a month's probation, still hasn't improved after that - ban. You need to show that some punishment is in place way before you decide to just cut off someone's head.

And yes, at first there will be outrage, hissing and seething. Just like when a spoiled child encounters someone who actually sets limits and enforces them.

 

THIS, I cannot agree enough.

 

You're the mod, fuck the consensus, you told me once you dont play favorites but nothing changed, I mean shit dude, I called you out and apparently people still talk shit here regardless of me. Just do it. I mean, like, do you really want me to complain to someone else about you, like for real, the last time we talked, I really was terribly fucking close to writing higher ups about this forum. I dont if anyone was watching and spoke to you on their own but you cant not know what's right wrong, and honestly, the thing that you'll be looking for is consistent detailing of discussion or sniping from someone. And you wont have to say anything more than "hi" to let everyone know your attention is now in that thread. So just pull that trigger already, if you wanna pm people instead of say their name out loud, then do that, but you know most the people here have said some inappropriate shit to someone and nobody checked them and over time this place became a jungle, like, just fucking buck up already, do some squats, eat some animal liver and start new zero tolerance policy on monday. The fucks who dont get in line get one warning per thread and it's done. Or in the immoral words of Larry the cable guy "get'er done"

And no I dont think vaul did anything wrong, I responded to him but I see it was a joke in the english way, if someone reports someone, it's your judgement, not the plaintiff

 

The point of the example is not what I think, but what people think of something and how varied the opinions of each forum member can be.

And how for the same thing one can see a great infraction and another see nothing wrong.

 

Moderation has nothing to do with how some member of the community sees something, it's about how CB's sees the interactions on the forum and put a line on what is acceptable or not.

The moderation is not made by the community, it's made by moderation appointed by CB.

It's quite apparent that the consensus of the community is that the moderation is problematic, but it doesn't seem like the current moderation or CB think it is, or care enough to see that it is.

 

Then you talk them about it. And hell if you talk to them and they agree and then still do it again then ban them, you wanna be lenient, make their first ban just a week, then a month, then 3 months, or whatever you like. But get the message across.

 

Sorry, I just had to post this!

 

If we think in baby steps, starting with 1-day bans is a good balance between "doing nothing" and "being too severe". If the same people end up banned over and over, that can be a good hint that maybe their conduct is a larger issue. If someone is hit with a ban and maybe their content was a bit too tame to warrant one, one day is not a major.

Edited for positivity!

 

I think there is a clear proof that the current moderation is to lenient when a cb employee whose job was to interact with the forums, left, solely because the forums were too toxic and he was harassed enough to harm his mental health. As the moderator it is YOUR job to ensure that he has a safe work space and if that envolves removing the toxic people, then that is your job.

If you are concerned about being to strict, just write a locked post explaining how you will go about giving bans out. Being unbiased is a difficult task and writing clear rules that will be followed is an acceptable way to do it.

But the priority is making sure this environment isn't so toxic cb employees don't want to be here.