[REPORT] Moderator Flaming

[Barboneia]

Funny how "Nothing can stop me" posts seem to play out badly for the idiots who try them.

*** Three day forumban for puppetmaster and all puppets ***

Emphasis mine.

I understand that the targeted party isn't highly looked upon, but I don't believe that justifies calling them idiots.

[Katganistan]

Really?

Generally, things like players calling each other idiots, dummies, and jerks are ignored as second grade playground-type insults.

Now if he'd called a specific person a fucking idiot, I'd be more inclined to say, "not cool."

[Barboneia]

So basically, by your words, we're allowed to call others idiots with no repercussions? Because I'm fairly certain I've seen before that that was against the rules, and people have been warned for doing so.

[Lockdownn]

There's a reason we request links to the member profile, folks. Once we have that, it doesn't matter how many copies they post. We kill their forum account, and they all disappear in one mouse click.


Except, that is, for the idiots who PERSIST in REPLYING TO ADBOTS. To those of you who think it's cute or helpful, PLEASE STOP.

*** Bad Fris! That's a bad! *whaps nose with rolled up newspaper* ***

Is it not the exact same context?

[Frisbeeteria]

Not a ruling (since we don't allow self-moderation), but a comment:

I should have called the behavior idiotic, which it was. I do tend to get a bit riled up when people use rulebreaker puppets thinking they're isolated from their actions. Calling the player an idiot probably deserves a warning, Kat's ruling nonwithstanding.

[Reploid Productions]

So basically, by your words, we're allowed to call others idiots with no repercussions? Because I'm fairly certain I've seen before that that was against the rules, and people have been warned for doing so.

"Idiot" as a one-off is one thing and generally far too mild to be acted on. Someone making a constant habit of calling people schoolyard insults is another entirely.

[Cogitation]

So basically, by your words, we're allowed to call others idiots with no repercussions?

Not precisely.

To reiterate what Reploid said: calling someone an idiot as an isolated, occasional incident is generally ignored. However, if it turns into a pattern of behavior and it comes to our attention as such, then we lean more heavily on it.

I'll rule on this specific case: as far as I'm aware, this is an isolated incident with Frisbeeteria. If it turns into a pattern of frequent behavior, then bring it back to our attention again. If he's only calling rulebreakers "idiots" every-so-rare-once-in-a-while, then it's not worth reporting. He is one of our most active Moderators, which means that he deals with the worst elements of our playerbase on a more frequent basis, elements that frequently think that they can get away with stuff (when actually they can't). Frisbeeteria is permitted a few slips, here and there.

--The Modified Democratic States of Cogitation
NationStates Game Moderator

[Tab1of2]

This is semi related: http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?p=26192009#p26192009
as a mod his unfounded statement that I'm Bitely's puppet seems like flame baiting.

[Reploid Productions]

This is semi related: http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?p=26192009#p26192009
as a mod his unfounded statement that I'm Bitely's puppet seems like flame baiting.

No, not really. Especially the "unfounded" bit.

[The Military Department of Freedonia]

So basically, by your words, we're allowed to call others idiots with no repercussions? Because I'm fairly certain I've seen before that that was against the rules, and people have been warned for doing so.

Your an idiot for saying that.


(*This is a joke, and an example of situational irony, for those of you in Rio Linda.*)

[The Silver Sentinel]

This is semi related: http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?p=26192009#p26192009
as a mod his unfounded statement that I'm Bitely's puppet seems like flame baiting.

No, not really. Especially the "unfounded" bit.

Sorry to interject here, but is it a new moderation policy to routinely out puppets when they haven't technically broken any rules? I am totally giving Fris the benefit of the doubt here that it was a whoopsie daisy and he didn't actually means to out a puppet for no good reason. You on the other hand defending the action and calling Bitely's statement unfounded is very concerning though. This is a political simulation which is very limited in scope. One of the ways to play politics is to try and hide your identity, which is done through the use of puppets. If those puppets can be outed for no reason whatsoever, then this marks a remarkable shift in gameplay. I would like a second opinion on that if you don't mind?

[Ever-Wandering Souls]

Generally they don't say anything unless you're acting like you're two people on your own thread, and then usually only when you call out yourself.

[The Silver Sentinel]

Generally they don't say anything unless you're acting like you're two people on your own thread, and then usually only when you call out yourself.

Like I said, it was likely a mistake. I am just seeking clarification whether policy may have changed.

[Katganistan]

Sorry, so am I understanding this correctly, let me summarize:

1. Mod says don't use another of your nations to support a puppet
2. Player says make him take that back it's an "unfounded statement"
3. Dictionary says unfounded=not based on facts or truth
4. Mod 2 says, Yeah, no, since it's not unfounded meaning "he told the truth"
5. Uninvolved Player then says Mod 2 called Bitely's statement unfounded......

Um, no, not what happened....

[Axis Nova]

IMO, if y'all want utterly professional behaviour from your internet forum moderators at all times, you can start paying them.

[The Military Department of Freedonia]

Personally, I see no need for forum moderators. Let people go at each other with ideas, insults, etc. If someone is made angry or offended, they can either attack back or just accept stuff and not be so thin-skinned in their worldview. The kind of folks who get easily depressed and kill themselves over internet bullying probably don't need to be using social features that are open to everyone (Maybe they should just talk with family?).

[Farnhamia]

Personally, I see no need for forum moderators. Let people go at each other with ideas, insults, etc. If someone is made angry or offended, they can either attack back or just accept stuff and not be so thin-skinned in their worldview. The kind of folks who get easily depressed and kill themselves over internet bullying probably don't need to be using social features that are open to everyone (Maybe they should just talk with family?).

We beg to differ.

And on that note, goodnight, Mrs. Calabash, wherever you are!

[Reploid Productions]

Personally, I see no need for forum moderators. Let people go at each other with ideas, insults, etc. If someone is made angry or offended, they can either attack back or just accept stuff and not be so thin-skinned in their worldview.

Just to add to Farn's comment:

We tried that. It sucked. Like, a lot. To the tune of "goatse and shock image spam everywhere." Those were not good times, and we will not revert to that system.