A posting suspension simply means that you can not post for a certain number of days. To avoid this just follow the rules and guidelines laid out by the staff to make the forum a better place. Is a rule vague or unclear to you, then just drop a mod or admin a PM and they will be more than happy to help.
"Just close your eyes, we're here to tell you what to see. We're here to tell you what to hear. We're here to lead you by the hand, we're here to tell you what to feel. We're here to tell you right and wrong, we're here to hamstring and leave you to bleed out in the woods when our whimsical arbitrary judgments deem it correct."
Law rarely exists to benefit the community as a whole. It serves private interest, and the good of the few. Those on top choose their subordinates well, and the cycle continues. A cycle full of dead, hollow eyes and empty words. It is not universally enforced in a uniform way. Bias induced by frame of reference can never be stripped away, and sometimes to attempt such a thing introduces bias of its own.
I used to post on other gaming board's off topic sections, and some were particularly strict. I got in trouble more than once on the Blizzard forums many years ago for taking part in discussions in their off topic forum that they didn't like (I believe topics like politics, economics, and religion were banned). Be thankful these forums are not nearly so draconian, even if you think the language stuff might be.
Many rules are backed only by ego, fear, or just base dogmatic thinking. Usually the latter-most.
They're backed mostly by profit motive, generally. Take that for what you will. It's nothing so sinister as ego, fear, or dogma for most cases. For these forums, and most gaming forums, the profit motive is clear. Minecraft (rather unintentionally) became a family game, it's used as a educational tool for several hundred thousand students, and its fanbase is actually incredibly young. Being a business, the Minecraft forums have to be age appropriate to that audience to keep that audience from being restricted by angry parents.
That's not all of it, but it's something to consider.
Law rarely exists to benefit the community as a whole. It serves private interest, and the good of the few. Those on top choose their subordinates well, and the cycle continues. A cycle full of dead, hollow eyes and empty words. It is not universally enforced in a uniform way. Bias induced by frame of reference can never be stripped away, and sometimes to attempt such a thing introduces bias of its own.
Am I, and the other mods, really a dead, hollow person with empty words?
Honestly, this point of view doesn't become you. It's kind of juvenile, actually. Feel free to talk to us if you have concerns. I don't think any of the staff are mindless zombies enforcing arbitrary rules. I'm sure that, if you talk to any of us, we'll happily give you our thoughts on the subject.
I used to post on other gaming board's off topic sections, and some were particularly strict. I got in trouble more than once on the Blizzard forums many years ago for taking part in discussions in their off topic forum that they didn't like (I believe topics like politics, economics, and religion were banned). Be thankful these forums are not nearly so draconian, even if you think the language stuff might be.
I am quite fond of the openness of this forum. Why else would I bother to criticize it.
I don't believe in pursuits of perfection, but I do believe in working to refine things in a way that's positive for everyone involved. By extension, I also believe in a system's loose ability to self regulate when provided with a framework, and a balance between positive and negative feedback loops. This place in particular is beginning to move in a way I see as negative. What I do as a result, is simply my basic appreciation.
They're backed mostly by profit motive, generally. Take that for what you will. It's nothing so sinister as ego, fear, or dogma for most cases. For these forums, and most gaming forums, the profit motive is clear.
Curious enough that I was just bringing this angle up a bit ago, in another thread.
Both directly, and by extrapolation, I do believe dogma, ego, and fear are intimately tied in. Though in this small microcosm, I couldn't rightly say it's anything as malevolent and polarized as those particular adjectives tend to give the feeling of.
Minecraft (rather unintentionally) became a family game, it's used as a educational tool for several hundred thousand students, and its fanbase is actually incredibly young. Being a business, the Minecraft forums have to be age appropriate to that audience to keep that audience from being restricted by angry parents.]
That's not all of it, but it's something to consider.
While I might not agree with it, the language filter is understandable. I can see where they're coming from.
Other forms of regulation, are far less necessary, and worse, heavily open to interpretation. Some are outright faulty. That which does no harm, should not be harmed. Personal motivation comes into play. So on and so forth.
"Underneath the lofty guise of objectivity, simply lies, but a man."
Am I, and the other mods, really a dead, hollow person with empty words?
That wasn't the intent of the statement, but in retrospect, I can see how it could be interpreted that way.
Despite the implications induced by frame of reference, and although patterns invariably arise, it's still a world composed of dynamic individuals. Every macromachine can be considered to be composed of micromachines in some respect. (Though oddly the micro then becomes the macro.)
I wasn't meaning to say the moderation staff is universally a dehumanized mechanical being devoid of thought or soul. The wording was meant to (briefly) strip away the artificially abstracted delineation drawn between a person's sense self and place, and others within different groups.
The phrasing is admittedly sloppy. Short version being, the "cycle" is composed of both parties. The adjectives and imagery used, very easily applies to both as well. It's too often a relationship of either opposition, or submission. It doesn't need to be that way. A person can't rightly define where a circle starts without defining where it ends as well. I only mean to say, the negative experiences of both parties feeds on one another. Independent of stature, time, or place, in most senses we're all just on the same rafts, in the same oceans.
Honestly, this point of view doesn't become you. It's kind of juvenile, actually.
Misinterpretations aside, I've always been a firm believer in that everything requires a form of equilibrium. The variance lies in the effect drawn by different ratios, different factors, how those factors effect each other, and other things externally, which are themselves composed of a balance.
Some part of everything feels juvenile. Even if it isn't something I would feel comfort in, or strive for.
Feel free to talk to us if you have concerns. I don't think any of the staff are mindless zombies enforcing arbitrary rules. I'm sure that, if you talk to any of us, we'll happily give you our thoughts on the subject.
This is where we diverge in experience and subsequent opinion. The staff is quite human, and that's partly why I have the respect for them to question and ask for explanation of their actions. Judgement, thoughts on matters.
The volition driving any given choice or action is what I draw issue with, it's difficult to see a blossoming flower and not look to where it has taken root. Some people never respond. Some adhere to what they've come to interpret the rules as so rigidly, they seem to gain a sort of tunnel vision.
Hence where dogma plays in. Individualism, and individually derived conclusions on the contrast experienced in the world, always needs to play in when considering your judgement. The abstract world of law needs to be met with the direct and material world of human experience. Otherwise the unavoidable bias of perception is likely to strip all positive outcomes away entirely.
In any case. It's been too many days ,with nowhere near enough rest. I apologize for my irritability ridden, poorly worded post(s) (as this one itself doesn't feel very coherent). If anyone felt directly assaulted, it certainly wasn't the intent. We're all human individuals, and we should have the respect for one another to act as such. That's essentially the sum of the original post.
They're backed mostly by profit motive, generally. Take that for what you will. It's nothing so sinister as ego, fear, or dogma for most cases. For these forums, and most gaming forums, the profit motive is clear. Minecraft (rather unintentionally) became a family game, it's used as a educational tool for several hundred thousand students, and its fanbase is actually incredibly young. Being a business, the Minecraft forums have to be age appropriate to that audience to keep that audience from being restricted by angry parents.
There's also plenty of rules that exist for practical purposes. Things like the "no image posts", "no video posts" and "no one-word posts" rules arose to fix problems with pointless, spammy topics. There was a time when 1/3rd to 1/2 of the posts in off-topic were just links to pictures or videos, and the average response to them was "lol", and thus they'd clutter up the front page with useless garbage. Rules like those make for more healthy forums.
And yeah, people shouldn't be saying that the admins are mindless zombies. Each case receives individual attention and is thoughtfully considered before action is taken. There are certain guidelines that mods must adhere to when acting in official capacity, but they're not so rigid as to disallow thoughtful application of the rules to individual cases.
The main reason I stopped being a mod is because I didn't have time to put that sort of consideration and effort into every report (the forums were also broken and even moderator actions didn't make it through more than 50% of the time).
For those interested, from my time being a mod for minecraft discussion (Minecraft General back then), I found the breakdown of reports to be the following:
30% - Discussions of piracy or linking to illegal downloads
30% - Topic needs to be moved
10% - This person hurt my feelings, please ban them
10% - Verbal assaults, insults, inappropriate behavior
9% - bumping or spamming
1% - Someone is posting pornographic images on the forums (this actually happened, but on a forum I didn't have power over, so I couldn't delete the thread or edit the posts. I banned the offender and then used strong words in large text to get people to stop bumping the thread until another mod logged on).
They're backed mostly by profit motive, generally. Take that for what you will. It's nothing so sinister as ego, fear, or dogma for most cases. For these forums, and most gaming forums, the profit motive is clear. Minecraft (rather unintentionally) became a family game, it's used as a educational tool for several hundred thousand students, and its fanbase is actually incredibly young. Being a business, the Minecraft forums have to be age appropriate to that audience to keep that audience from being restricted by angry parents.
That's not all of it, but it's something to consider.
This has been discussed a lot over time, but would a more mature section work out? A section where the rules are a bit more lax and profanity isn't censored? I do not like having to hold my tongue all the time for the sake of the younger demographic on the forums.
wait you CAN PM i didnt cuz on most sites you cant
Why would the function be there if we didn't want you to use it?
Infractions are sent through PM so we can talk to you privately and all staff are quite happy to answer your questions via Pm.
I've never been banned or had a posting suspension on this forum, but I have on another forum I went on before I came here.
But the mods on that forum were hiveminded idiots who couldn't take a joke, didn't accept creativity or individuality, and were all around no fun, so it didn't really count.
on may sites ive been banned at you can no longer pm
We don't do that if you get suspended from posting in case it's a bad warning. Cuz we would need to know about that. We take warnings being legitimate very seriously. It's your right to appeal a warning if you feel it is unfair.
Just like a friend of mine got banned back in december for posting one thing critical of the swear filter, he was viewed as "detrimental" to the community, so tell me, how the HELL is saying something crticial about a rule, detrimental, that ban was just downright unjust.
Many rules are backed only by ego, fear, or just base dogmatic thinking. Usually the latter-most.
I don't mind the staff here as individuals, but when it comes down to it, actions speak louder. And I don't much care for their actions at all.
Maybe they get worse, maybe I change, maybe I just perceive them as worse as time passes.
Maybe I'm just tired of people once again.
One is a gag, the other is cutting out your tongue. The main interest lies in the other party and the volition backing them.
"Just close your eyes, we're here to tell you what to see. We're here to tell you what to hear. We're here to lead you by the hand, we're here to tell you what to feel. We're here to tell you right and wrong, we're here to hamstring and leave you to bleed out in the woods when our whimsical arbitrary judgments deem it correct."
Law rarely exists to benefit the community as a whole. It serves private interest, and the good of the few. Those on top choose their subordinates well, and the cycle continues. A cycle full of dead, hollow eyes and empty words. It is not universally enforced in a uniform way. Bias induced by frame of reference can never be stripped away, and sometimes to attempt such a thing introduces bias of its own.
Where does a circle begin.
- Steve Martin
They're backed mostly by profit motive, generally. Take that for what you will. It's nothing so sinister as ego, fear, or dogma for most cases. For these forums, and most gaming forums, the profit motive is clear. Minecraft (rather unintentionally) became a family game, it's used as a educational tool for several hundred thousand students, and its fanbase is actually incredibly young. Being a business, the Minecraft forums have to be age appropriate to that audience to keep that audience from being restricted by angry parents.
That's not all of it, but it's something to consider.
Am I, and the other mods, really a dead, hollow person with empty words?
Honestly, this point of view doesn't become you. It's kind of juvenile, actually. Feel free to talk to us if you have concerns. I don't think any of the staff are mindless zombies enforcing arbitrary rules. I'm sure that, if you talk to any of us, we'll happily give you our thoughts on the subject.
I am quite fond of the openness of this forum. Why else would I bother to criticize it.
I don't believe in pursuits of perfection, but I do believe in working to refine things in a way that's positive for everyone involved. By extension, I also believe in a system's loose ability to self regulate when provided with a framework, and a balance between positive and negative feedback loops. This place in particular is beginning to move in a way I see as negative. What I do as a result, is simply my basic appreciation.
Curious enough that I was just bringing this angle up a bit ago, in another thread.
Both directly, and by extrapolation, I do believe dogma, ego, and fear are intimately tied in. Though in this small microcosm, I couldn't rightly say it's anything as malevolent and polarized as those particular adjectives tend to give the feeling of.
While I might not agree with it, the language filter is understandable. I can see where they're coming from.
Other forms of regulation, are far less necessary, and worse, heavily open to interpretation. Some are outright faulty. That which does no harm, should not be harmed. Personal motivation comes into play. So on and so forth.
"Underneath the lofty guise of objectivity, simply lies, but a man."
That wasn't the intent of the statement, but in retrospect, I can see how it could be interpreted that way.
Despite the implications induced by frame of reference, and although patterns invariably arise, it's still a world composed of dynamic individuals. Every macromachine can be considered to be composed of micromachines in some respect. (Though oddly the micro then becomes the macro.)
I wasn't meaning to say the moderation staff is universally a dehumanized mechanical being devoid of thought or soul. The wording was meant to (briefly) strip away the artificially abstracted delineation drawn between a person's sense self and place, and others within different groups.
The phrasing is admittedly sloppy. Short version being, the "cycle" is composed of both parties. The adjectives and imagery used, very easily applies to both as well. It's too often a relationship of either opposition, or submission. It doesn't need to be that way. A person can't rightly define where a circle starts without defining where it ends as well. I only mean to say, the negative experiences of both parties feeds on one another. Independent of stature, time, or place, in most senses we're all just on the same rafts, in the same oceans.
Misinterpretations aside, I've always been a firm believer in that everything requires a form of equilibrium. The variance lies in the effect drawn by different ratios, different factors, how those factors effect each other, and other things externally, which are themselves composed of a balance.
Some part of everything feels juvenile. Even if it isn't something I would feel comfort in, or strive for.
This is where we diverge in experience and subsequent opinion. The staff is quite human, and that's partly why I have the respect for them to question and ask for explanation of their actions. Judgement, thoughts on matters.
The volition driving any given choice or action is what I draw issue with, it's difficult to see a blossoming flower and not look to where it has taken root. Some people never respond. Some adhere to what they've come to interpret the rules as so rigidly, they seem to gain a sort of tunnel vision.
Hence where dogma plays in. Individualism, and individually derived conclusions on the contrast experienced in the world, always needs to play in when considering your judgement. The abstract world of law needs to be met with the direct and material world of human experience. Otherwise the unavoidable bias of perception is likely to strip all positive outcomes away entirely.
In any case. It's been too many days ,with nowhere near enough rest. I apologize for my irritability ridden, poorly worded post(s) (as this one itself doesn't feel very coherent). If anyone felt directly assaulted, it certainly wasn't the intent. We're all human individuals, and we should have the respect for one another to act as such. That's essentially the sum of the original post.
There's also plenty of rules that exist for practical purposes. Things like the "no image posts", "no video posts" and "no one-word posts" rules arose to fix problems with pointless, spammy topics. There was a time when 1/3rd to 1/2 of the posts in off-topic were just links to pictures or videos, and the average response to them was "lol", and thus they'd clutter up the front page with useless garbage. Rules like those make for more healthy forums.
And yeah, people shouldn't be saying that the admins are mindless zombies. Each case receives individual attention and is thoughtfully considered before action is taken. There are certain guidelines that mods must adhere to when acting in official capacity, but they're not so rigid as to disallow thoughtful application of the rules to individual cases.
The main reason I stopped being a mod is because I didn't have time to put that sort of consideration and effort into every report (the forums were also broken and even moderator actions didn't make it through more than 50% of the time).
For those interested, from my time being a mod for minecraft discussion (Minecraft General back then), I found the breakdown of reports to be the following:
30% - Discussions of piracy or linking to illegal downloads
30% - Topic needs to be moved
10% - This person hurt my feelings, please ban them
10% - Verbal assaults, insults, inappropriate behavior
9% - bumping or spamming
1% - Someone is posting pornographic images on the forums (this actually happened, but on a forum I didn't have power over, so I couldn't delete the thread or edit the posts. I banned the offender and then used strong words in large text to get people to stop bumping the thread until another mod logged on).
What is this rule?
Why would the function be there if we didn't want you to use it?
Infractions are sent through PM so we can talk to you privately and all staff are quite happy to answer your questions via Pm.
Where you begin to draw it.
We have no such rule. >_> I'd like to know where you got that idea/quasi-factoid/conclusion from.
Venit, quessit, induravit.
But the mods on that forum were hiveminded idiots who couldn't take a joke, didn't accept creativity or individuality, and were all around no fun, so it didn't really count.
Objection!
fun stuff
And I believe you can still PM people even with a posting suspension, but if you abuse the PM system, the privilege may be taken away.
My Github ด้้้้้็็็็็้้้้้็็็็็้้้้้็็็็็้้้้้็็็็็้้้้้็็็็็้้้้้็็็็็้้้้้็็็็็้้้้้дด็็็็็้้้้้็็็็้้้้้็็็็็้้้้้็็็็็้้้้้็็็็็้้้้้
We don't do that if you get suspended from posting in case it's a bad warning. Cuz we would need to know about that. We take warnings being legitimate very seriously. It's your right to appeal a warning if you feel it is unfair.
Venit, quessit, induravit.