Feedback Would like to request it be possible to see which moderators issue warnings or thread bans

[GethN7]

In the event of getting a mod message of warnings, threadbans, deleted posts, and so on, I would like for alerts sent to user to include the name of the staff member responsible for the following reasons.

1. Reasons given are occasionally laconic or unclear, and even if the staff member refuses to change their mind, it should be possible to privately and politely contact them and ask for more information behind the decision.

2. It can be the genesis for more halal threads if the user instead abuses this new change to throw a tantrum or other be immature to the admin in question instead of being civil.

3. As a firm transparency advocate, unless a mod decision is done to hide things like illegal content or for legal reasons, there should be accountability for decisions such as these, and if it later comes out either the user was unfairly punished, the moderator made a decision based on faulty or misinterpreted information, or there is some other form of miscommunication and/or wrongdoing on one or both sides of a dispute, then both parties should be aware of the other so they can resolve things without undue confusion.

 

[Null]

No.

We do not allow staff to isolate users in PM chains without at least two other staff members, and we do not want regular users isolating single staff members to bitch. Make a talk to staff thread.

There is no transparency on this site, aside from the Canary. Mods exercise a great deal of liberty in curating content and punishing them for doing their job is against the interests of the site.

 

[GethN7]

No.

We do not allow staff to isolate users in PM chains without at least two other staff members, and we do not want regular users isolating single staff members to bitch. Make a talk to staff thread.

There is no transparency on this site, aside from the Canary. Mods exercise a great deal of liberty in curating content and punishing them for doing their job is against the interests of the site.

Thank you for that, I will take this into advisement for the future.

That said, I'm torn. I want to abide by rules here, which say, don't pozload my negholep.

On the other hand, I want to abide by rules there, which say to report people starting shit. In fact, that's a rule here too, and and I was trying to follow it for BOTH communities.

A user on Wikia named "LolcowPointer" (who I am damned sure is a member here, they keep showing up in threads like this and starting shit) was starting shit there way before I got wind of things, and I generally agree poop touching is asinine, and they were egging the lolcow of the Brian Martin thread on to keep generating content (they shown up on Wikia cow threads too), yet I find it curious I'm cursed for noticing it, reporting it, and promising to keep people updated if they keep going, which these types of lolcows invariably do, so I admit I find it hard to believe I'm drying up self-refilling wells.

Basically, I'm stuck in a moral quandary here and would like some definitive advice for the future what I should do, given I'm trying to do right by two communities and I just keep pissing one off even I'm sure I'm actually doing right by both, unless I'm missing a vital logic gap here.

In any event, I just want some definitive orders what to do from this point on, because it is tiring to be cursed for trying to follow rules (if i'm a sperg for that, guilty as charged, I don't apologize) wherever I go and I'm still considered a rule breaker and would like to know what I need to do specifically to prevent it happening again.

 

[Null]

That said, I'm torn. I want to abide by rules here, which say, don't pozload my neghole.

On the other hand, I want to abide by rules there, which say to report people starting shit. In fact, that's a rule here too, and and I was trying to follow it for BOTH communities.

This is a deliberate misrepresentation of what has happened. No one can control your behavior off-site, but if you're going to report someone's social media accounts and take up the entire first page of a brand new thread to talk about why you chose to do that is fucking gay.

This conversation is also a brilliant example of why we hide staff users's actions.

This:
1. zed deletes something
2. you make a tts thread
3. it is discussed
4. i know there is a problem

Alternate:
1. zed deletes something
2. snippy, shitty pm
3. zed handles customer service like a DMV clerk on their last day and would properly tell you to get bent in under 4 letters, then never respond again ignoring your follow-up 3 walls of text
4. months later it is revealed to me that you two don't like each other and no one knows why.

 

[GethN7]

This is a deliberate misrepresentation of what has happened. No one can control your behavior off-site, but if you're going to report someone's social media accounts and take up the entire first page of a brand new thread to talk about why you chose to do that is fucking gay.

The logic behind why staff actions are not made public I find rather compelling and logical, on that I concede I'm in error in that regard, thanks for explaining my error.

 

[LazarusOwenhart]

@GethN7 don't move to a dictatorship if you don't like being dictated to.

 

[GethN7]

@GethN7 don't move to a dictatorship if you don't like being dictated to.

Now that I'm fully aware of that fact, being reminded of such is superfluous, but the reminder is still appreciated.

In any event, Null is the boss, and his word is law, no questions asked.