Printable View
Yams: *whew*, finally, someone willing to face up with it.
But it's not consistent. You guys don't communicate. The person who banned Pete probably didn't even KNOW someone had recently been let off a similar offence with a warning. That lack of communication isn't consistency; it's blindness.
How can staff be consistent if most of the mods do their own thing and rarely communicate? I'm sure it may have been brought up, but the staff is rarely divided over anything nowadays. I never really liked the auto-ban for pics not exactly porn, but in some cases, yes, it may be necessary. But you shouldn't be banning a good member just for posting an inappropriate picture, while some can get away with more destructive things, like flaming someone, or saying the f-word by avoiding the censor.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yamaneko
Sure, if the picture was really intended, the ban can be justified. However most people banned for posting an picture on the line of inappropriateness, I find that a little wrong. Why not warn them if someone who can get away with saying the f-word avoiding the censor gets a warning?
Maybe we should all step down and let you guys run the place. I guess we're a pretty crappy staff. This is one of the biggest holes on the internet, I guess. I'm ashamed be be a part of it. I also deeply ask for your fogivness, and from this point on, I promise to consult you guys on every decision I make.
In my eyes everyone here has the same chance to get banned. There are no "good members".
The F-word is not as profain as a porn picture. The majority can agree on this.
We communicate.
I'm not asking for you all to resign, just to reconsider the porn policy and maybe tweak it a bit so that you ban those who actually intended to post the picture in the first place and warn those who didn't mean to.
Like that one time someone registered and posted a picture, "Hey look, it's my wienie" and a picture is posted, or when someone registered to spam with a picture of that goatse image, those bans are justified. The others, sure they may be justified, but give the poster a chance to make it up, instead of just banning them straight out. Give them a tougher warn then you would usually give to those who do other offenses, something similar along the line of if the person got through the censor.
RSL: it's easy to say that to criticism.
I'm not remotely suggesting that EoFF staff is troutty. I think EoFF staff is made up of some of the finest individual staffers I can remember. However, I think in that individual strength EoFF has lost sight of one key thing:
A STAFF IS A GROUP AND A GROUP COMMUNICATES.
If you guys had communicated in the first place, and gotten your policies straight, this never would have happened. Period.
And I don't see why that's so unreasonable.
EDIT:
ere1055: I think it's ridiculous that they've banned him. Power trips, if you ask me.
ere1055: If anything, the other guy should've been banned. He meant to post the "porn". The first guy didn't even mean to. And it was a snowpenis for christ's sake! boo freaking hoo.
Again, we made a mistake. We'll try hard not to let it happen again, if you can stop riding on one instance where the policy failed.
If you don't like the pics, remove them and warn the poster. Unless the picture was really intended, then the ban can be fully justified.
Who is ere1055 and why should I care what he/she thinks?
Also, who is to say that Bert didn't accidentally post his picture? You see what I'm getting at? This accidental argument is ridiculous. There's no way to prove that you did it on accident. It's too likely of an excuse.
As for not banning Bert, I honestly don't remember this incident. (UH OH! The staff didn't contact me on my pager, where is the communication!). However, from the sounds of it, a mistake was made. Yamaneko said it best. We'll try our best not to let it happen again.
That's all we can do, really.
There's more than that "one instance," though. Anybody remember Ferenan? Unne banned him, and then when someone asked about it later, half the staff thought it was for having a second account!
No communication doesn't work. How is that so hard to understand?
EDIT: RSL, I'm not arguing Bert should be banned. I'm just saying that you guys should TALK so that these kind of things are treated FAIRLY in the future, instead of the right-hand doing one thing, and the left-hand doing the other.
RSL: ere1055 is Emerald Aeris.
[qq=raistlin]"EDIT: RSL, I'm not arguing Bert should be banned. I'm just saying that you guys should TALK so that these kind of things are treated FAIRLY in the future, instead of the right-hand doing one thing, and the left-hand doing the other."[/qq]
Noted.
AND it's obvious a mistake was made here, and it should just be spelled-out(thank you, Yams), instead of staff members trying to tap-dance around that fact.
In summary I think everybody will agree with me that in the future this can all be avoided if the banned member just gets a second account. :smash:
AND I love Hooters. :love: