7 day bans seem kind of excessive

Author: Lunatic

Posts

Total: 62
Topic's author
#1
Lunatic
Lunatic's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 8,952
3
3
6
Lunatic's avatar
Lunatic
3
3
6
Title says it all. I'm not complaining about the moderators btw. I know they are just doing their jobs. Just curious as to who decided punishment lengths and maybe trying to understand the logic behind them a bit more?

For example supadudz being gone 7 days for a violation of a restraining order seems a bit long, especially when the harm in context of the violation seemed minimal. He's also one of the more active mafia players so the community will miss out on a much needed player slot for the next week.

Also I don't know TheRealNihilist well but i know i've seen him post a bit and know his absence effects the activity around the forums a bit. Max commonly temp banned people but I don't often recall that lengthy of bans unless it was a very serious offense or if it was a repeat offence.

Dont y'all think 1 or 2 days is good?
Again I don't know the context so forgive me if I am mistaken about these just went through the mod log and saw all these lengthy bans and was curious how that rule about long ban times was implemented

#2
Zaradi
Zaradi's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 705
2
3
7
Zaradi's avatar
Zaradi
2
3
7
Excessive may be the wrong word, but 7 does seem long. 
Topic's author
#3
Lunatic
Lunatic's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 8,952
3
3
6
Lunatic's avatar
Lunatic
3
3
6
-->
@Zaradi
What's the right word?
#4
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
The problem is not their strictness or looseness in terms of their moderation style. It really is their incompetence.  You have incompetent people who merely got the position because they have feigned maturity long enough to get idiots to believe their facade. 

They also make decisions not based on merit but on stupid shit like. "We could really use a black moderator" or "you know what we need, a female moderator" or "having a conservative moderator sure would be useful".

It is this feigned maturity and a large amount of incompetence that will continue to keep them disliked. Let's not forget the site has like 20 active people and yet what like 6 mods. I can not wait until I get elected president again and clean this shit up

#5
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
The real nihilist is a toxic member, honestly there needs to be enough competence by the mods to know they need to be heavy handed with him and soft on supa, and yet they take the reverse approach.  
#6
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,673
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
The real nihilist is a toxic member, honestly there needs to be enough competence by the mods to know they need to be heavy handed with him and soft on supa, and yet they take the reverse approach.  
+1

#7
Speedrace
Speedrace's avatar
Debates: 63
Posts: 6,283
4
9
11
Speedrace's avatar
Speedrace
4
9
11
-->
@Lunatic
I don't see how it's excessive, as the whole point is to deter future behavior. I know I wouldn't miss 1 or 2 days, but 7 actually makes a difference. Besides that, some users receiving 7 days may or may not have received warnings in the past, which influences the consequences
#8
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
Not only have the mods been prompt and correct on their recent bans, they have been fair. And that is what was missing.

Supa is a great guy, and TRN is caustic, but no one is above the law and no one gets preferential treatment.

When it comes to modding the board, mods should have no friends OR enemies.

TO THE MODS:
There is always lag between good moderation and symptoms of it on the site. Give yourself time, don't become discouraged. Remember good work is its own reward.

Good job.
#9
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
I am not a fan of Ragnar but there is jo point debying that thia team is far better than Bsh1 and Virtuoso, who were far better than Airmax1227.

Airmax was seen as an idol even though he's one if the worst mods on the Internet. He was prone to do exactly what Lunatic suggested; to be lenient based on how bad a mafia game desired one's presence or harah baaed on how few wanted the user around. That's corruption and Airmax saw it as a good thing.

I am with Ethang on this. Good job mods.
#10
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Speedrace
Ignore Lunatic. He comes from a corrupt DDO and is still nostalgic over how corruot it would moderate based on user popularity.
#11
Speedrace
Speedrace's avatar
Debates: 63
Posts: 6,283
4
9
11
Speedrace's avatar
Speedrace
4
9
11
-->
@ethang5
@RationalMadman
Well thanks lol
#12
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
The fact that Supa was banned is annoying but it was avoidable by simply following the rules and though I know nothing about the context of his RO violation I am sure that when he returns he will have the maturity to acknowledge this, possibly make some thread on it.

RM and etan are right - the most important thing is to not have favorites.
#13
Barney
Barney's avatar
Debates: 53
Posts: 3,463
5
9
10
Barney's avatar
Barney
5
9
10
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
I know nothing about the context of his RO violation I am sure that when he returns he will have the maturity to acknowledge this, possibly make some thread on it.
Him making a thread about an RO violation, would until the end of the RO, in itself be an RO violation.


So standard RO's here look like this:
When that starts, you must not refer to, talk about, talk with, mention, PM, or communicate with [USER] on the DART or Discord domains. Doing so well result in a harsher punishment. [USER] will be held to the same standard regarding you.

To me the general intent of the RO is to force some time apart, and get the users in question to stop thinking about each other so much. I've had a couple in my day, and disliked when moderators did nothing about wanton violations.

Not every RO violation is equal. Someone under an RO can of course still say 'I don't like some users,' but if they go deep into describing a certain user, clearly they're thinking about them too much. As an example, let's say Franklin and I have an RO, I could still say 'I hate forum spam' or even 'I hate users who make forum spam,' but a violation of the RO would be 'I hate users who start First Post threads in forums I just finished emptying for their deletion.' The first two statements imply no general target of thought, Franklin would be acting very sensitive if he made that connection to him; whereas the third statement describing what he did today, would be clearly crossing the line.
#14
Zaradi
Zaradi's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 705
2
3
7
Zaradi's avatar
Zaradi
2
3
7
-->
@Barney
Fan of the low-key call out. 
Topic's author
#15
Lunatic
Lunatic's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 8,952
3
3
6
Lunatic's avatar
Lunatic
3
3
6
-->
@RationalMadman
Ignore Lunatic. He comes from a corrupt DDO and is still nostalgic over how corruot it would moderate based on user popularity.
"Corrupt" it's a debate site man, we all know you have a bias against airmax, but to make him out to be some evil genius twisting a mustache because you got banned a few times is a little whacky aint it? 

All I want to know is who comes up with the ban length decisions, and if there is any discretion used, or if theirs just some rulebook with ban lengths and they follow them to a tee here without context.

Topic's author
#16
Lunatic
Lunatic's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 8,952
3
3
6
Lunatic's avatar
Lunatic
3
3
6
-->
@Barney
Him making a thread about an RO violation, would until the end of the RO, in itself be an RO violation.
That is ridiculous,

Not every RO violation is equal. Someone under an RO can of course still say 'I don't like some users,' but if they go deep into describing a certain user, clearly they're thinking about them too much. As an example, let's say Franklin and I have an RO, I could still say 'I hate forum spam' or even 'I hate users who make forum spam,' but a violation of the RO would be 'I hate users who start First Post threads in forums I just finished emptying for their deletion.' The first two statements imply no general target of thought, Franklin would be acting very sensitive if he made that connection to him; whereas the third statement describing what he did today, would be clearly crossing the line.
Who implemented this dumb crap, and where can I petition against this? Why is debateart some large safe space? I am totally understanding why this site is dead now lol. 
Topic's author
#17
Lunatic
Lunatic's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 8,952
3
3
6
Lunatic's avatar
Lunatic
3
3
6
I don't see how it's excessive, as the whole point is to deter future behavior. I know I wouldn't miss 1 or 2 days, but 7 actually makes a difference. Besides that, some users receiving 7 days may or may not have received warnings in the past, which influences the consequences
It is excessive. This site could be more active, but when half of the actual population are moderators and arbitrarily banning members for whole weeks at a time you are actually killing the sites activity unnecessarily. The owner of the site is desperately asking for donations to keep the site going and the moderators are banning people for weeks at a time because someone mentioned or replied to someone they had a safe space restraining order from?

I've been doxxed, argued with, been in flame wars with many many people on debate.org, and had just as many friendly interactions with them later on. If I tattled on them every time I got my feelings hurt, I wouldn't be furthering myself in any regard by dis-allowing myself to think from a perspective other than my own. I'm not saying that everyone else should have as thick of skin as me, but that mods should maybe ban a little less aggressively.
Topic's author
#18
Lunatic
Lunatic's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 8,952
3
3
6
Lunatic's avatar
Lunatic
3
3
6
-->
@Speedrace

But your okay with these threads because they are directed at you? How does this restraining order thing work?
#19
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Lunatic
No, it's not a bit wacky at all. Airmax is and was a corrupt two-faced [expletives] and I do not give a damn what you say about him, it's the truth. He never earned his position, never moderated well enough to keep it and was a huge reason why DDO went down the pan, since he banned any eccentric member who debated from very outlandish views (except for the racist pedo debater Wylted) and kept only the ones that were socially adept enough to keep off of his radar.

Airmax is not sound in judgement at all, in fact to temp ban Bench 8-9 times while permanently banning users who were far less toxic is inexcusable. This guy was corruption embodied in a mod, the only reason he's not the worst of them all is he never abused his ability to dox and investigate people to too severe of a degree (he did use it though, and would intimidate you with it in private while acting so respectful of privacy otherwise)
#20
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Lunatic
I've been doxxed, argued with, been in flame wars with many many people on debate.org
And I have no doubt that Airmax congratulated you on forgiving and forgetting such behaviour if the user who did it was remotely popular.
Topic's author
#21
Lunatic
Lunatic's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 8,952
3
3
6
Lunatic's avatar
Lunatic
3
3
6
-->
@RationalMadman
No, it's not a bit wacky at all. Airmax is and was a corrupt two-faced [expletives] and I do not give a damn what you say about him, it's the truth
Seriously this is how you think of another human being? Where has airmax ever talked to you about this way? The things you are saying are appearing to be more true about you than he.

He never earned his position, 

This suggests it was a paid or wanted position. There is literally nothing to be gained from being a moderator except for if your a narcissist to like to control others, or you generally want to help. His lack of banning people as frequently demonstrates that he had little interest in exerting control.

never moderated well enough to keep it and was a huge reason why DDO went down the pan,

Hugely dis-agree. It was clearly brought down by the spam. The site continued for years even with max as mod lol. It died because 1 man (airmax) was the only one with abilities to delete the spam, and it eventually became a second unpaid job for him to upkeep it. Juggle is the reason the site is dead.

since he banned any eccentric member who debated from very outlandish views (except for the racist pedo debater Wylted) and kept only the ones that were socially adept enough to keep off of his radar.

This is just an outright lie. Find me where he banned anyone for having an "outlandish view". He was a huge advocate for freedom of speech. ADOL never got banned, and that dude loved sexing animals. lol.
Topic's author
#22
Lunatic
Lunatic's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 8,952
3
3
6
Lunatic's avatar
Lunatic
3
3
6
And I have no doubt that Airmax congratulated you on forgiving and forgetting such behaviour if the user who did it was remotely popular.
Nah, I just wasn't a snowflake enough to report someone for hurting my feelings. 

#23
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Lunatic
Seriously this is how you think of another human being? Where has airmax ever talked to you about this way? The things you are saying are appearing to be more true about you than he.
It's easy to speak respectfully of someone you permanently banned and then blackmailed to stay away with doxxed info. Don't think for a single second he is a better person than me. Airmax would sell you out and laugh while doing it if he thought his public image would improve for it.
#24
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Lunatic
This suggests it was a paid or wanted position. There is literally nothing to be gained from being a moderator except for if your a narcissist to like to control others, or you generally want to help. His lack of banning people as frequently demonstrates that he had little interest in exerting control.
He did ban frequently, you just didn't hear about it as he'd prey on members who weren't popular, usually in the polls and opinions section. He'd tend to just take PetersSmith's word for it and ban anyone she said was causing too much hassle.

He would never notify you when he banned, so how do you know he didn't? After Qopel his style changed and he learned to ban quietly.
#25
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Lunatic
Hugely dis-agree. It was clearly brought down by the spam. The site continued for years even with max as mod lol. It died because 1 man (airmax) was the only one with abilities to delete the spam, and it eventually became a second unpaid job for him to upkeep it. Juggle is the reason the site is dead.

No. That was not what took it down. There was spam for many years and he refused to even let anyone help him delete it because he is a megalomaniac who thinks he is the only means to justice (he honestly thinks this, I talked to him and got to know him in ways you other users didn't). He sees a system as either something he should give no shits about the justice of or otherwise one he should entirely control the justice of. I do not care what you say to defend or deflect, the site was already dead before the spam and everyone fucking knew it. People were already using the site less and less, Hangouts had died out. The only reason spam even could take the site down was BECAUSE the entire community around the website had split up pretty much into tiny factions (Bossy and Seventh, REF and Wylted etc etc)
Topic's author
#26
Lunatic
Lunatic's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 8,952
3
3
6
Lunatic's avatar
Lunatic
3
3
6
It's easy to speak respectfully of someone you permanently banned and then blackmailed to stay away with doxxed info.
Lol proof of these allegations? Also if I recall, you had made like a million accounts and kept coming back after being banned. If by doxxing you mean him telling you something like he would report your IP to the police, that isn't doxxing.

Don't think for a single second he is a better person than me.
Your the one putting yourself on a pedestal. 

Airmax would sell you out and laugh while doing it if he thought his public image would improve for it.
He has very little interest in his public image. He could have probably been a mod here if he wanted to. Many members were asking about him when DART first sprouted, he was done with it. It was an unthankful position, as evidenced by members like yourself.
#27
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Lunatic
This is just an outright lie. Find me where he banned anyone for having an "outlandish view". He was a huge advocate for freedom of speech. ADOL never got banned, and that dude loved sexing animals. lol.
You don't get it. He would never say that is why. Qopel, me and so many others. You didn't even pay attention to the website outside of the forums section so you didn't NOTICE how many he wrongly banned as you never got to know them. I watched and got sick of what I was seeing.

Topic's author
#28
Lunatic
Lunatic's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 8,952
3
3
6
Lunatic's avatar
Lunatic
3
3
6
He did ban frequently, you just didn't hear about it as he'd prey on members who weren't popular, usually in the polls and opinions section. He'd tend to just take PetersSmith's word for it and ban anyone she said was causing too much hassle.

I am sure he banned members as needed, but I am doubtful about your claim that he would take someone's word for it without investigating it. Also his bans were not very lengthy unless they were repeat repeat repeat offenders. 7 days was like an imabench style ban. 

He would never notify you when he banned, so how do you know he didn't? After Qopel his style changed and he learned to ban quietly.




This is also a lie but okay.

#29
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Lunatic
Dude, you are simply trying to turn me attacking Airmax into you going 'but you're worse, who are you to talk?' or 'where's your proof?'. I do not care what you say, everyone who knows me on here knows I do not fucking lie about important statements on matters ever. You can run around with your mafia mindset and lie to everyone like it's a game, this is not some playground bullshit but as it's an online forum you're free to pretend it is one, just leave the serious chat to people who know who to trust.

I wonder why Airmax isn't coming here and defending himself, can you ask him to when you talk about your saber music battle? He will end up slipping up in ways you can't slip up on his behalf. I will make him admit things and say sorry, you just haven't understood him yet. You don't even know how manipulative he was behind the scenes so you can't talk on the matter and you're demanding proof on another account's PMs on DDO or on a Hangouts chat here or there. I don't care what you think you know about him, you were nowhere near close enough to him as a person to know him well. Even if you met him IRL, you didn't know him. He wears a carefully constructed mask and very few see through, but I do.
#30
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Lunatic
I am saying he never notified the community when he banned a random debater. You don't know 90+% of the people he banned.