[NikNakFlak] oranges - deleting my post in their ban request

[oranges]

https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=4365

I posted under the anon3 amendment, and the post was initially allowed to stand, but after niknak got angry at the response I made to their comments they deleted all the posts.

I do not appreciate trying to contribute and then having an admin stomp on my work because they do not like the result.

[NikNakFlak]

Saying a rule should be changed in an appeal does ABSOLUTELY nothing except muddle the appeal up because appeals of a random player who didn't bother to read the rules, is not the place to discuss if a rule sucks or not.
It's also not the place to say that who cares if the rules aren't read and that you yourself didn't read them. I initially left the comments because I expected you to not be childish and not continue posting about something that is policy discussion when instead you just posted more. So I nuked them.

[Falamazeer]

https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic ... ak#p103999
Remember that time I pointed out that you use your moderator powers to "win" in your feedback thread?
this is another example of that, even with the thin layer of an excuse with it.

And it's pretty thin, because arguing the merit of a policy is a completely valid inclusion in a ban req/appeal, and nobody seems to have given a fuck the numerous times it's been done in the past.

But I'm prepared to see this go silently unresolved forever just like my last thread about overmoderation on jordie, and the feedback for vekter which he said he'd fix but never actually did. Overmoderation in the forums, it'll go on until someone gives enough of a fuck to solve it.

Edit: oh, and be prepared to get jerked around, my thread got deleted by horny granny, then told to move it to a 6 month old necro post, and there it remained, You moderators aren't even trying to pretend to not be a tumor.

[NikNakFlak]

You claim over-moderation no matter what happens, the fact of the matter is:

This does NOT include:
"This happened to me once and I didn't get banned for it" or the reverse "This happened to me once and I got banned for it."
"My opinion is…" or "I feel like…"

This WOULD cover:
"Rule 3 says…"
"These admins have always allowed…"
"Actually in the logs it says…

Oranges has an opinion that metacomms bans should not be zero tolerance. He is not pointing out a specific rule, he is not pointing out previous admin action and is not pointing out any kind of log and is offering his opinion over a rule which belongs in policy discussion, not in a ban appeal where I followed the normal standard of zero tolerance. I don't care what you think of a rule at the time, if you disagree with it, an appeal is not the place to shitpost about it, make a policy thread.

That being said, oranges's post also included a point about how not reading the rules is no big deal and that he himself didn't even bother to read the rules when he first joined either. He also (ironically or not) tells people to evade bans on a regular basis. If this isn't bullshit than I don't know what to tell you wootanon, you probably just want full anarchy in appeals like the old days.

I also will continue to laugh at you for bringing up the only points of my feedback thread were 2 year old examples in situations that were resolved through Private messages

[Falamazeer]

If this isn't bullshit than I don't know what to tell you wootanon, you probably just want full anarchy in appeals like the old days.

Better than having a mutant corgi control the dialogue to suit his opinions.

I also will continue to laugh at you for bringing up the only points of my feedback thread were 2 year old examples in situations that were resolved through Private messages

Laugh all you want, It's relevant when you continue to do it, https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=4321

Wherin you wordlessly muted someone, then refused to touch the complaint, and even sticky said it was pretty uncool to not even say anything to him. though to be fair, he was being a twat.

[NikNakFlak]

You ignored most of my previous points in my post.
I don't appreciate being called a mutant corgi.
The dialogue is controlled by the fact that someone appealing their ban for a rule is no place to discuss the merit of the rule itself. An entire forum for that exists. An ENTIRE forum.

Forum moderation has no correlation to that admin complaint, I dont know why you brought it up. I resolve all of my admin complaints in adminbus regardless of if I "touch" them or not. I also told sticky in the exchange we had my exact reasons for that but if you want to ignore that and state that I didn't say anything to him then again, ???

[Hibbles]

It seems clear there's a personal edge to this, and I'm not a hundred percent happy with that. Nik, to be frank I see you often assume a malice behind orange's actions that I just don't see.

This post sponsored by orange's Support HBL campaign, as disclosed under the Campaign Finance Act of 2552.

But that was straight up 'let's discuss whether the rule is valid at all' which we normally are not interested in during a ban appeal.

The issue I have is I think 'go easy on the new guy' is a perfectly legit opinion to have and I want that able to be expressed, but as with so many things it's an example of the slippery slope. The fact is the old anarchy was really, really bad. Not just for admins or players in general, but for the person trying to appeal. When random threads would just devolve into ten pages of text walls that were the equivalent of a cartoon dustball fight.

As for 'this rule shouldn't be so strict', yeah. Open a policy discussion thread, that's pretty straightforward.

[Falamazeer]

You ignored most of my previous points in my post.

Fine, we'll address the meat of the problem, oh wait, already did that. but you apparently want a line by line dezzmont quote-off, I'm down.

because arguing the merit of a policy is a completely valid inclusion in a ban req/appeal, and nobody seems to have given a fuck the numerous times it's been done in the past.

Doesn't matter if it's in your quoted rules, Most any significant ban appeal/request devolves into a policy debate.
Not every question in those threads is "this is how it is" but is most often "this is how it should/'nt be In My Opinion"

I don't appreciate being called a mutant corgi.

In the thread I linked, it was decided by sticky according to saegrimr anyone can call anyone anything apparently and whatnot. shit cunt bucket was the example. So I guess you'll have to live with it.

An ENTIRE forum.

That's actually a fair point, but a little policy does not ruin an appeal. It's everywhere, and it's selectively contained.
https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=35&t=4356
This is slathered with opinion pieces. and it's typical. So is the one where robustin blew up the gulag, so is the one where RDGHT spaced a griefer. and the one just the other day where another execution was questioned. I'd even say over half of the reqs and appeals that make it over five posts have some sort of dialogue on what should be policy.
This one is shaping up into one of those too.

Forum moderation has no correlation to that admin complaint, I dont know why you brought it up. I resolve all of my admin complaints in adminbus regardless of if I "touch" them or not. I also told sticky in the exchange we had my exact reasons for that but if you want to ignore that and state that I didn't say anything to him then again, ???

I brought it up because it's the same thing, a mute button is a mute button. and you press it to suit your needs.
by what was said in that thread refused to touch the appeal, whether you said anything to sticky is null to my point, How am I supposed to know that?

Nobody wants the forums to devolve into the shitflinging it once was, not entirely, but if a comment is on topic, is discussing the relevant policy, and doesn't drag on to the point of needing it's own thread (circling itself) then it really shouldn't be bothered. but that's an opinion, more to the point, it often isn't bothered, but this time it was, and I believe that's because you like to settle your conflict with a magic win button. and that's really why I didn't go over that debate in my first comments, because it's less about shoulds and shouldn'ts and more about bad moderation. which is why this is in complaints and not policy.

[Saegrimr]

Theres also context behind bans that people commenting on "go easy on the new guy" don't understand. This is why ~opinions~ aren't really needed.

Someone trying to teach his friend, his friend bashes his own skull in with his shoes while the first pulls him to medbay. Whatever, probably a stern warning about metacomms.
Three dudes ganging up to attack someone? Nah, get out.

[NikNakFlak]

Except oranges was weighing in on a metacomm ban, not some "execution" that turned out to be valid because some admin forgot to check logs. There is NOTHING subjective about metacommunications AND both oranges and stan who posted there didn't even know the full story behind the ban and were basing litterly, everything on the guy's broken english explanation. Of course you guys don't know the full situation unless an admin explains it but a better solution would be to not start throwing around what should and shoudn't happen with a rule when you don't even know the full story behind the ban.

Even HBL agrees that his posts were complete policy discussion. I don't care that "policy discussion is everywhere", it doesn't need to be in that thread about a clear cut, metacommunication ban.

As for the thing where you didn't know I actually did talk to sticky, making wrong claims and claiming conspiracy when you don't know the full story applies here again.

As for this magic "win" button, I don't even know where you get that from. I deleted oranges posts in the appeal. There isn't anything stopping him from posting in policy but yet he chooses not to do so. He can go to town in policy just not in an appeal.

[Stickymayhem]

Technically those posts are kind of annoying and pointless in FNR threads. Plenty of other people start policy threads related to specific bans and that's totally fine.

If you really care about a thing you can do that but it really doesn't help ban discussions.

That said, NikNak you've gotten a reputation for being that kind of unapologetic asshole recently and so you deserve the result: every time you do anything everyone's going to assume the worst, just like any greytiding shitter. You can change or you can deal with these threads popping up every five minutes but you can't have the best of both worlds.

[oranges]

I made this thread while angry and now it just feels silly

[Stickymayhem]

It was pretty silly yeah

[peoplearestrange]

Lets end this sillyness and have group lock in.