I know the moderators have a lot of work to do with little time to do it but there should be a better way of handling things. Just deleting the offending posts and banning the poster is a good start. As it is now, even those of us who can follow the rules are shut down.
This is mostly a venting post so don't take it too seriously. I just wanted to get that off my chest. With my favorite threads being locked (I like the controversial ones), I'm starting to feel like this place isn't the same as I remember (I know it is, it's just my favorites are now problem areas).
One of the biggest frustrations is that there are people disagreeing with each other in the threads in question, but they do it in a manner that does not break the CoC. In point of fact, I disagree with Bob Loblaw on some issues, but what we've seen recently is uncalled for.
Normally, I would never suggest this as it, but is there a reason this person's I.P. address just hasn't been locked out?
Failing that, are the mods just flat-out restricted from telling this person directly via email, "Stop it. We don't want your anti-social behavior around here."
So, how about it mods. Are you allowed to contact disruptive posters (via email) and tell them to leave and never come back? Or are you restricted by corporate policy?
I also want to add that a lot of this person's vitriol looks a lot like harassment of one particular member (who has kept his account without banning for nearly 8 years.) I behavior of this sort not actually harassment because it's on an internet message board?
I'm sorry for any frustration closing the thread caused, but there were a lot of posts I had to remove, and it was important that no further posts were added while I was cleaning up the mess.
That's just one of the threads we're talking about. Actually the latest in a string of threads that he has done this to.
We appreciate that you pruned that thread and reopened it.
The big question now really becomes, what is his new account name going to be when he repeats this anti-social behavior? He's certainly proven that banning accounts does nothing to stop him. I'm sure I speak for more than just myself when I say that we feel it's not a question of when or of how. It's only a matter of account name used.
ORCs aren't really allowed to discuss policy or individual accounts. However, if you have concerns about a particular user, or a "set" of users that you are convinced are the same person, you should contact Customer Service about it here:
http://www.wizards.com/customerservice
Click the "email us" tab, then for topic choose "Wizards.com" then "Wizards.com community" then " report conduct" then fill out the rest of the fields as indicated. For the subject line, make it something clear like "Problems with baduser123" or perhaps "baduser123 is also Baduserxyz".
In the body of your message, you should include any links to additional posts that you feel support your position. It's best just to explain how a particular user is bad for the community rather than demand specific actions. These emails do get read and considered, even if the results aren't always exactly what was requested.
The other thing to do is, of course, keep reporting anything that you think violates the Code of Conduct or is disruptive, and don't respond in threads to disruptive posts. Don't *say* that you are ignoring anything, simply pretend those posts don't exist (after you have reported them, of course). Just keep up the constructive conversations in defiance of the attempts of others to be disruptive.
I hope that helps some.
I'd like a "tag system" or what not that let you read in the "burnt margins."
Kinda like on youtube where you can flag/ban as a user. Then the age limit kicks in. I know its possible, that was the kinda thing I was expecting out of gleemax - just more interactivity - more smilies ... I like reading them - they like peanut gallery comments. If you read it in thread mode or block people you can avoid it too. :fight!:
I really am sorry you folks are having problems with particular users.
ORCs aren't really allowed to discuss policy or individual accounts. However, if you have concerns about a particular user, or a "set" of users that you are convinced are the same person, you should contact Customer Service about it here:
http://www.wizards.com/customerservice
Click the "email us" tab, then for topic choose "Wizards.com" then "Wizards.com community" then " report conduct" then fill out the rest of the fields as indicated. For the subject line, make it something clear like "Problems with baduser123" or perhaps "baduser123 is also Baduserxyz".
In the body of your message, you should include any links to additional posts that you feel support your position. It's best just to explain how a particular user is bad for the community rather than demand specific actions. These emails do get read and considered, even if the results aren't always exactly what was requested.
The other thing to do is, of course, keep reporting anything that you think violates the Code of Conduct or is disruptive, and don't respond in threads to disruptive posts. Don't *say* that you are ignoring anything, simply pretend those posts don't exist (after you have reported them, of course). Just keep up the constructive conversations in defiance of the attempts of others to be disruptive.
I hope that helps some.
Understandable that you cannot discuss policy. To be honest, that link has never actually done anything for me in the past. I've always had to resort to directly emailing custserv, which is what I'll do in this case.
One of the frustrations is that I have been reporting instances of that behavior. A lot. Overall the mods have done well after posts have been deleted. Even to the point of the disruptive person taking pains to copy his post's text and then repost it after a mod has deleted the offending post. (That's when you know the mods are on top of fixing the problem after it happens.)
So, yes, that does help somewhat.
In addition to what Wyvern suggested, I'm going to throw out another option. The VCL for an area (in this case, Webster) has a lot of say in what threads are closed and what threads remain open. As such, I recommend you drop him a PM. Explain the problem, and ask what can be done to clean up these threads and leave them open, rather than kowtowing to a troublemaker and closing the threads.
One of the bigger problems we've run into is that there is actually good discussion happening in the threads. If the thread ends up closed or just pruned, it doesn't stop the activity from happening either in the new thread that gets started by those people that can disagree respectfully or reoccurring in the thread that got pruned.
Hence, the title of this thread and its very existence.
Hopefully something can be resolved through the other methods Wyvern pointed out.
edit: I've also just noticed that some of the people that have been breaking the CoC are now targetting ORC_Tao for having the audacity to prune CoC-breaking posts. I guess telling the powers-that-be that there are those of us who feel he's taking appropriate action in the threads in question.
The moderation has gapping holes in it for quite a few reasons. We complained and ranted about it for quite some time and it ended with the threads discussing this being locked and the being told that if you have a suggestion for improving the moderation that you e-mail Customer Service. The same goes for repeated problem posters.
Of course do to the non-transparency it will be hard to tell if anything is done.
It might help if you read the following post: [post=17282274]Guide To Dealing With Problematic Posters[/post]
In addition to what Wyvern suggested, I'm going to throw out another option. The VCL for an area (in this case, Webster) has a lot of say in what threads are closed and what threads remain open. As such, I recommend you drop him a PM. Explain the problem, and ask what can be done to clean up these threads and leave them open, rather than kowtowing to a troublemaker and closing the threads.
Yes, and a few times I've re-opened some closed threads with cleanups.
Hi. If you are talking about the thread titled "The Fighter -- What are its flaws?", the thread was only closed temporarily to stop the spam attack. I had posted to that effect in the thread when I closed it, but you might have missed it if you were trying to post in the thread just as I had closed it and posted. It is now open again.
I'm sorry for any frustration closing the thread caused, but there were a lot of posts I had to remove, and it was important that no further posts were added while I was cleaning up the mess.
That's only one thread and I was posting this as you were cleaning. Thank you for cleaning it up rather than locking it down. I was mostly venting but I do still think that the particular poster should be banned anyway. He is intentionally disruptive. I know and do not expect you to tell me what actions are taken. I also don't believe he intentionally posted the same thing dozens of times. I do believe he was intentionally spamming and trolling but I leave that to you to decide.
Just like there is no spoon.
The entire notion that we can not discuss some things without being restrained is condescending, to say the least.
The moderation is a joke. It doesn't take into account unintentional circumstances nor reality.
I present myself as testament: I get temp-banned for two reasons 1.) "Hate Speech" (in discussing etymology) and 2.) Masking (when all I did was create a typo, which apparently masked the "hate speech").
I get a 72 hour ban. No big deal.
I broke CoC, fair enough, but adding in the second reason of masking is just gratuitous. That and I did not infer the "Hate Speech" towards anyone, except maybe an imaginary person to emphasize my point of the irrelevancy of human perspective in the grand scheme of things.
What irritates me is that I was banned instead of censored. Big difference.
Kind of annoying to be able to say I've been banned for such things when the intent was the opposite.
But then again, what do I know? I'm one person in the grand scheme, worthless and ignorable. To understand why and how means much less than appearance and conformity.
For the topic: It doesn't surprise me that moderation is so flagrant and obnoxious that it gets in the way more than it helps. Maybe the moderators should take a page from the Tao Teh Ching and realize that government, or in this case, moderation, is better unseen and unrealized, all while being effective.
The problem is that the moderators are not. Completely conspicuous and reprehensible. It requires much manpower, but then again, when should it not? If you don't have enough people, your mandate is less to restrain and more to conform to the lack of restraint.
If you don't have manpower, then what is your governing body doing governing at all? The savagery of animals is better suited than monkeys aping the movements of man.
The problem I was referring to was more intense than your situation. You are correct that there is no consistency but with the size of this community and the size of the moderating force I am not really looking for consistency on the scale that others may be. I am looking for action to be taken against a single individual who is going out of his way to make this place less enjoyable. I am tired of having to put another alt on ignore. I am tired of having to scroll past his drivel. For the life of me I can't figure out why some people go out of their way to be a problem.
It looks like the mods are taking some sort of action. If they are I appreciate it. If not, well then I am happy this person has not been a problem yet today in the threads I am active.
If people would just respect each other this wouldn't be a problem. I disagree with many people around here. It makes for fun discussions. Many of us go out of our way to avoid insulting each other. Sometimes it slips through but a quick apology and we're back to the discussion at hand. It's how adults should handle the problem. In a perfect internet, we wouldn't need moderators. We can at least strive for that even if it's not an achievable goal. We don't have to go out of our way to be disruptive.