I believe that the mods are overpowered in their ability to delete posts. Genuine criticism gets stifled and it's unfair that the poster who went to the trouble of making the post, gets his work removed. Now I can understand why you would want to delete raid posts or ones that contain illegal content, but recently seeing a bunch of perfectly acceptable posts disappear because the mods didn't agree with them is just abuse of their powers. There has been drama in the past over deleted threads and it's annoying I know but this is a discussion we need to have.
>>12977 I believe you're making shit up in a bid to spread disquiet. Maybe this is something you're concious of or you're a bit of a nutter. I also believe that you're going to have to try a lot harder if you want anyone to take you seriously.
Fun fact: I'll complain about the moderators sometimes just because I think it's vaguely amusing. See, we're all delusional sometimes.
>>12985 If you mention anything about the deleted posts, it gets deleted. You can see evidence of this in the /shed/ thread about yellow cards. You see, if a topic comes up that annoys the political stances of the modteam, they hush it up or just delete the thread altogether and claim it's a boring thread.
>>12992 No, I can not see evidence of your claims in that thread. That person had his posts deleted because he was flaunting his ban evasion. He started doing so after being banned temporarily only from shed.
>>12992 It's a bit silly to point to a screenshot a mod or admin posted and then claim it demonstrates them suppressing its contents. Like I said, you must try harder.
>>12994 Well I can't show you other examples but I have definitely seen threads pop up and then disappear. Perhaps the OP changed his mind about posting it but these threads were usually on the subjects of race or gender which the mods seem dedicated to crack down on even though they lead to good discussions.
>>12999 Well, I can see what gets deleted by moderators. I'm sure it's fairly normal for an entire week to pass without a thread getting deleted. Let me check. Over the past month, four threads were deleted. Excluding the one in /test/, they had a single reply between them. Run along now.
>>13001 Oh right, I suppose I'm just going to have to take your word on it. This place is already slow enough as it is without the mods pruning out topics that their student union wouldn't allow.
Out of the hundreds of race and/or gender threads I've seen here over the last 6 years exactly one of them was constructive and it was because it was in /emo/. A lad who was ignorant about trans people asked a question, a post similar to the one in the Jenner thread was made, more questions were asked and they were quite reticent when prompted what they thought. They admitted they thought trannys were mentalists, but had changed their mind, then a lad came in and started a cunt off about it and the thread got locked.
I suspect you are annoyed that you cant troll this site by posting a thread under false pretenses, and replying to it yourself with immflamatory garbage. You really should just admit that and stop this.
>>13003 If >>13001 is, as I suspect, his purpleness then yes, you do have to take his word for it. It's his bloody site, and he's earned a certain level of trust from us over the years.
>>13017 I'll say this one last more time. I'm not purple. To repeat a user's description of me, I am Riker to his Picard. Only my facial hair isn't nearly as good.
It was me you "called out" and I'm not a mod, so go figure. Maybe you just have a bannable face, although who am I to get in the way of your tinfoilhattery. Carry on.
So mods deleting three threads in the space of a few hours is totally allright?
More mods than users around this place I reckon. No wonder why it isn't funny anymore like it used to be in the old days. All of the 'cool' users, the ones who weren't arselicking mod groupies have all left, so they can't regale us with their interesting tales.
>>13049 A thread was removed from /news/ for not being news, then there was this from the same poster. There was also a thread in /test/ that was deleted by its OP.
I think Britain's slide into boozeless, tepid mediocrity has more to do with that. The batshit tales I've heard from before I was born confirm a general downward trend in zany shenanigans.
But... But... But... If you don't let us have the same debate about UKIP, Pakis and immigration ad nauseum then you're fascists who hate free speech and want to kill off this place.
>>13056 There was a slightly nationalistic post about Russian conservatism in the thread so I assume this is what upset modlad/lass. If this isn't some sort of policy against a certain kind of politics, I don't know what is. Someone do something about the out of control mods.
Yeah...I've been lurking and occasionally posting recently after a very long absence. Reading these complaints, it seems the mods are still up to the same old shit they've always been up to, and that just reminds me why I left. The final straw for me was when we started seeing bans for any sexist jokes, stereotyping of women etc...it was very obvious the mods had added a woman to their number but they reveled in denying it - claiming a very feminist ladmod was behind it. Yeah, sure.
If you want to stick around here for any length of time, always remember: The Mods Lie
They *will* delete topics/posts and claim they haven't
They *will* let their own views/sense of humour determine what content stays or goes regardless of the users and if the posting has merit
They will* blanket ban any meme the userbase have generated and are perpetuating, no matter how popular, if they don't find it funny (in the past they have done this and justified it by claiming a single user was responsible for forcing the meme, so they don't come across as cunts); similarly, the mods will come up with memes and, if the users instantly find it annoying, force it for months
*Contradict themselves, usually deliberately, occasionally by accident (when Nepal Lad was forcing the Pie Master meme and the userbase were sick of it, one mod claimed that there was more than one person in Nepal - despite a different mod having confirmed in shed that there was only one user in Nepal and that user alone was forcing the meme)
*the IRC 'clique' will arrange stuff there, to troll the users here
This site exists only to amuse the handful of mods. There is practically zero concern for the users. Always remember this.
>>13048 >All of the 'cool' users, the ones who weren't arselicking mod groupies have all left, so they can't regale us with their interesting tales.
I was never cool, but I do have a lot of great stories. But that would be "bringing up old drama" and the mods would get pissy. We were never really 'cool', but we were definitely characters. That's something you'll never see again here - again, the mods get pissy. It's fun, and harmless, but they don't like it. If I can use an analogy, the mods attitude to content here is like how Steve Jobs was about Apple devices having Adobe product like Flash - HE had a personal beef with them, therefore his customers did not need or want to use Adobe products. Except they did.
Mods don't delete stuff because they don't agree with it. Ever. You might get a ban for stuff but I've seen 'political' bans overturned quite often.
It's worth noting that overzealous modding is definitely something that is dealt with. I don't know how specific I can be, but mods get into trouble for overmoderating.
>This site exists only to amuse the handful of mods.
The mods are mods because they're heavy users. You get modship for being here all the time and 'getting' the site. If the site is entertaining to the mods, it's almost certainly entertaining to the users, as they're one and the same.
I got banned, which is fair enough because I was being a cunt, but then the ban message was in reference to something I had said in a different post from a few hours (or a day) before. I found it awkward because it seems like I'm not really anonymous if all my posts are visible to mods, and they can build some sort of profile on me. I felt naked.
I suppose this website is meant to be a middle ground between anonymous imageboards like 4chan and semi anonymous websites like Reddit.
>>13241 We promise we don't because we don't. We're just not interested in snooping and we believe in anonymity as much as most of you do. Another thing we sometimes do is post screenshots of sentry, which in mod mode can list all posts submitted from the same IP address over the last three calendar days. When you're selected for a ban the quality of your very recent post history influences the ban length. I'll usually spend less than 10 seconds assessing it.
The ban reason was "We'll see who's lenient." You can work out which post that references because it's in this thread. I thought I was making a friendly joke with someone who well understood the dynamics of this site and the relationship between mod and user. Clearly, it doesn't take much for us to be seen as the bad guys.
>>13242 I have been persecuted by the mods before for saying things they decided wasn't politically convenient. My IP was the same but after bans had finished, I'd get other ones and they too would make fun out of my previous posts. It's the usual case of your lot lying and just flat out getting rid of things you don't like. Missing threads have become more common and there are more than the usual number of whiners. Let's face it, .gs has jumped the shark and has mismanaged it's user base. The number of high quality posts have dropped drastically and the mods have just drove away posters who just get bored of their unfunny antics.
>>13243 Off you pop then. We don't keep records of expired bans and so the only way what you describe is possible is if you were so exceptionally persistent in your shit posting that we just came to memorise your hostname or IP address by accident because we saw it so often.
I'm struggling to believe that all these similar-sounding complaints are emanating from so many different people. Explaining why I might think that is tricky. Suffice to say that people will make stuff up because it entertains them.
>>13242 To be fair, the idea that you were making a friendly joke with someone as you banned them makes my head hurt a bit. Maybe I don't understand 'the dynamics' but I've never really been banned in good humour - if I've ever found a ban message amusing that mood quickly sours when I note the length of my banishment.
Then again he did say he deserved his ban, and I rarely feel that way.
>>13247 Sometimes you have to realise you are being a cunt by sitting on the naughty step. After I have a good think about it, I realise I was being a cunt.
>>13246 No worries. It does occasionally frustrate me to read these accusations from disaffected individuals looking to stir up trouble. It seems like most of you can see through it or at least retain perspective, so it's not so bad. It's actually amusing how backwards this narrative is - how it contrasts with the evolution of the mod team in reality. I'll save the look behind the curtain for another day. We prefer to be left to oppress you in peace.
>>13250 I pretty much always think a whole day is excessive. I mean, let's say you banned >>13249 for an hour for his cunt-offs. If, as you say, you have that system where you can see the last few posts someone has made, then you'll be able to tell if he's persisting in cunting off once unbanned, which would then necessitate a longer ban. Y'know, like sentencing guidelines. But when I'm banned for something like a whole day out of the blue, it really fucks me off because I usually forget about what I was banned for long before that.
Look, I don't want to go on and on at you about how you mod, I'm just saying I disagree on a few points. I'm not accusing you of being vindictive.
It is a special kind of person who does their online banking whilst listening to Marron 5, jerking off to an extreme pussy train and educating themselves on religious festivals...
See this is typical mod behaviour - making out that only one or two people are responsible for something they're not happy about, after having just in the sa.e post reminded us all that they can see that its not just one or two culprits.
Contradictions and Lies. Translate that into Latin and you have the mods motto
>>13252 So you're asking us to keep a closer eye on users to monitor them for repeat offences? The funny thing is I expect you're entirely sincere.
If you feel like you can't do without gs for a single day then maybe a ban is precisely what you need. Even bookies will deny problematic gamblers. Alternatively you could evade the ban so long as you don't flaunt what you're doing.
I wonder whether purple had the right idea in ignoring all this.
>>13243 >The number of high quality posts have dropped drastically
Yeah, that guy who would pop in to every thread to remind us all that wanting to fuck 14 year olds is normal really added to the quality of this place.
>>13259 >If you feel like you can't do without gs for a single day then maybe a ban is precisely what you need.
To be frank that is pretty condescending. 'How dare you use our website regularly, that is unacceptable behaviour?'
>>13265 Well, I think most people who contribute to the site make it better, and therefore when they post some banworthy bollocks should be given lenient reprimands. I do find it hard to believe you have a difficult time identifying repeat troublemakers, but OK, I'll take your word for it.
>>13266 Think about how many posts the average person would submit to any given board in a day. None? One? Maybe three? That's what you're protesting about and it really doesn't matter. The site will continue and nobody will notice. This is precisely the attitude I refer to when I suggest some people have lost perspective.
>>13266 I'm already paranoid enough, why do you want the mods to keep folders of posts we made, neatly categorized by IP addresses, indefinitely? Fuck off to Reddit or something. It beats the purpose of anonymity. I doubt all the lads posting everywhere would relish the idea that all the /emo/ posts they made can be linked to them.
>>13268 >why do you want the mods to keep folders of posts we made
Ugh, I'm not fucking suggesting that. You don't have to spy on people to notice patterns of behaviour. Anyway I'm not changing anyone's mind so I'll stop posting about this.
>>13270 I would much rather prefer a free for all, but then the savages would wreck this place, so we need the mods. But keeping a list of our posts to "find out who is being a cunt by reading out all their posts one by one?" Count me the fuck out. Cancerous bastards like you is what is wrong with this country. Forever offended and trying to ban someone somewhere.
Look, we do care about the quality of the board, and the users experience. The stuff 49c0b3 gives as evidence of lying, I read as us not being telepathically connected and not agreeing on our interpretations of the same data. Not even the same data; we're not omniscient. Yes, there have been female mods but I can tell you for a fact they're not the ones who have banned people for being egregiously sexist. Maybe because they're smart enough not to do that. Generally, if someone has posted something potentially banworthy that has offended me personally, I wait and let another mod deal with it, because I don't want to be unreasonable.
Of course we fucking contradict ourselves sometimes, we're human beings.
This thread is complaining both that we spy too much on you and simultaneously don't spy enough. That's absurd, but whatever course of action we take, someone is going to bitch about it. I have better things to do than spy on you; for example, picking my nose. Masturbating. Watching paint dry. The list goes on.
Simultaneously, if I didn't believe in the value of anonymity, I wouldn't be involved in running an anonymous imageboard. For those reasons, ban lengths are fairly arbitrary and mostly hinge on how much I want to get back on with whatever I'm doing at the time. I might flick through what you've posted recently to try and determine if you're just permanently trolling and then I may make some reference to something you've posted in the ban reason. If you think there's some sort of IRC clique going on then you're outdated as fuck regarding what goes on in there. Feel free to join and see for yourself.
Yes, reporting something to individual mods in IRC will get a faster response simply because when we get IRC notifications, we'll see them as soon as we sit down at our computers and before we get around to checking the reports page. I check the reports page occasionally, but IRC makes shit flash on my desktop so I look at that right away.
If you've been acting consistently like a twat then your ban reason will reflect that, but we probably won't publicise the fact to the general userbase. Unless you're a really *massive* twat in which case we'll probably make fun of you.
Incidentally, the number of active mods has dwindled recently so if you're confident you're not a massive knob and have something positive to contribute, get on the IRC and get involved.