Staredit Network

Coming back from a long SEN break, I'm pissed off about Serious Discussion. Reading through some topics, I'm finding that even good threads have escalaed into lies, childish namecalling, and violent, senseless aruguing.

Some people, on both sides, are especially unreasonable. i've noticed TheDaddy and Kellimus, to take an isolated example go at each other's throat with a startling immaturity. Threads this have disgusted me. I think that, at least in v5, moderators and amdins should be more agressive in banning people from the Serious Discussion forums. I also think new members should have to accumulate a set ampunt of reputation before they may post in Serous Discussion. The flaming and childishness that have gone on in there, on both sides, is quite disgusting. I think some sort of solution is badly needed.

bouth sides are stubborn. & i agree that admins SHOULD be more agressive. those arguing people are like: "this is not flame, your definition of flame is pathetic". even if that something is not a flame, that is obvious disrespect to another point of view.

I think a new rule should be made called "No back seat modding". In other words if you point out a flame or try defining the word flame when it's unrelated to the topic (Like "What is a flame" thread) then you should get 20% warnign. It's just annoying seeing posts that are all: "NICE FLAME, NICE TROLL, NICE SUCK"

You mean like that?

People need to stop attacking eachother. I see too much of "DON'T POST HERE TILL YOU KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT." and stuff. And a lot of "STFU, YOU'RE WRONG."

I'm not encouraging people to say a bunch of incorrect stuff, but it's not this members job to do stuff like that.

And I always see Kellimus vs Stalingrad, Kellimus vs TheDaddy, Euro vs TheDaddy etc.

And you fail to remember how you were in Serious Discussion when you were active?



Because those are the only people that actually usually post.

Yeah. Every serious discussion argument ends up into an argument with those people.

[not directing this post at anyone.]
I think a lot of it depends on the person that posts with some people. If some random newbie (as in just joined, 8000s/9000s) posted a false statement, he might be bashed by some people, but others can still choose to be nice. Now if Mr. Camo, whom 96.3% of us like posted something wrong, a person would either agree or say "I think you mean blah blah camo "

Also a lot of it depends on the person's attitude. If you're mean with people, then you'll most likely get argued with unless it's your friends. If you have bad grammar, you know the answer . If you have a good attitude, type grammar(not always though), and instead of replying with "you obviously never took Physics" replying with "You're in the right area, but gravity is actually...".

Go on... Gravity is actually what?

A hoax!

Or actually nuclearrabbit.

But...

QUOTE

I also think new members should have to accumulate a set ampunt of reputation before they may post in Serous Discussion.

What if someone sees the discussions and joins because of that? And they would have to wait for awhile to post in the topics there?

Nah...[/NOTRIGHT]

How do we make people post in ways that others want them to post? We have no right whatsoever to make Kellimus, for example, stop posting in his current way. We can warn him, ban him and such, but the only thing we can't do is say: "You have to post in this manner or else." Even though laws are barely held on the Internet, it's still illegal to do so because of the First Amendment, freedom of speech in which the person conducts himself to an according pre-set of rules.

If you are all so angry about this, why don't you just ignore the posts and get over it. We have our rules for definitions of flames and spam. What you are asking for is to have us ban everybody that points a finger at someone else. This discussion has appeared before and we Staff have decided to get more strict, people will still try to go around and then others will complain, but technically, there is no rule breaking.

First it was flaming, we took care of that, then you want us to take care of pointing fingers at deficient posts, then what?

Also, just use the report button. I can assure you that every single reported post is taken into consideration for punishment. You can't really say that we don't read reported posts because quite frankly, we have to tell you, it's between the Moderator and punished person. Check your warn logs, that'll tell you that we have been reading reported posts.

So if you see rule breaking, just report it and ignore it, which are both 2 rules of SeN.

Whoa, I thought the HT forum was bad!

I personally think that the HT forum shouldn't have any effect at all on any members that aren't in it. The people that complain and complain about the HT forum is just jealous about not being in it.

Anyway, Shotgun... We can't control on what people post in the serious discussion... People will always have arguments on what other people say and they will most likely keep complaining about that little subject over in the forum and finally get completley off topic and have to make the staff shut down a perfectly great topic.

I say we break down on the spammers and people that keep complaining over stupid petty crap. We need to bring SeN back on it's feet.

Arguments/conflicts like this will ALWAYS happen in any forum that involves "serious discussion." Because evidentally, it all comes down to your morals/beliefs/political orientation/etc, which to many are very sensitive spots.

ADDITION:
So really, IMO I don't think there is any real solution to our problems. The best we can do is for us moderators to keep very careful eyes over the topics.

1 question - what is a HT topic ?

yes, i agree with beer_keg taht a person has the right to tell his point of view to the others & try to proove himself right/others wrong. but some people just don't do that in a manner way, they don't respect other point of view. people like that:

1.spoil topics & fills them with s**t
2.other people who maybe wish to post do not do that seeing how they fight
3.they get themselves angry & get other peopel angry as well.
4.interesting facts, points of fiew, ideas get ignored

i think you should disobay those rules that "he has the right to post his point of view & there is no crime" & think like this: if you want a good discussion not manner/not tolerant people must be pointed out/warned with words (atleast show them what should they think about & how should they behave).

i didn't see much admins/mods making posts like this: "[nick], instead of saying "you don't know what you're talking about", try to proove him wrong cuz this phrase will not proove anything to him". ok, maybe CaptainWill made a fiew posts like that, but mostly admins are silent... you gotto point out useless sentances, just to remind people that you exist (cuz when you warn them it's too late ro realise that). yes, it seems stupid, cuz it's like saying "children, don't fight, calm down", but face the fact - allmost all of use are children below 20 & we need a "teacher" to controll us somehow.

my idea: do more warning with words, to remind those people that get too emotional sometimes when writing posts.

yes, maybe the topic will be filled with posts like
MOD: guys, don't abuse eachother
ABUSER:i'm not abusing
MOD:i think you are so better don't do taht again

but it wil lbe better than a topic filled with posts like:
A:you don't know waht you're talking about, face it, you're pathetic
B:haha, you go offtopic with every your useless sentance, kiddie
A:i just said what i think & you are offtopic with youre post
B:you are offtopic first!

i understand that admins/mods are not robots that moderate all day, but if it is too much for you & you may (probably) will not have enough time, make 2-5 tolerant people admins to share the work & it will not be so painful for you.

Well then apparently that's rarely reinforced.


It's where a bunch of "elite members" all talk in a fourm about, anything. According to the people who were actually in the fourm it was like null but more intelligent, and not stupid things like "HOW LONG CAN YOU PEE?" I've never actually been there but I did go against it a while ago with a "1337 LEET TOPIC" where everyone spoke stupid.


I thought that's what rules are for? If you're just going to let people post whatever way they want then just delete the rules topic since you guys "have no right" to enforce those rules. Like kellimus for an example. He's openly admitted that he's flamemd so I can use him . I've counted up the number of flames he's done since he got back and he should have around a 240% warn level. But he doesn't (I'm guessing)

You can make people post in ways that obey the rules, you're not doing anything wrong or unjust.

i see. thanks

some discipline should be done if you want to see SEN better.

I find that several users who regularly post in the "Off Topic" forums, have not contributed one bit to any mapping forums.

I don't see how that is a problem.

This is a mapping website, not an "off topic" website. There are more topics being created in "off topic" forums than in mapping forums.

Because it's a broader topic, and it's easy to make topics in that forum.

But yeah, I sort of agree. I should try and map, but I suck too much at it, so I just gave up

I think it will just have to be accepted that a lot of people don't play Starcraft or map anymore and the mapping forums no longer hold any interest for them. If people join the forums with no interest in mapping to begin with, then that's pretty weird, but it still isn't much of a problem in my eyes.

That's what I've been doing...



Well, I think that the reputation thing is a bit prejudice, but it gives grounds on who is able to post where and such, so no "conflict" goes on in SD (Always will be though)



Ah, but then if I should have a 240% for flame, then -________- should have over 1000% for spam



And you only come back to attack me when me and Merrell get into it. And you also have double accounted, when you could easily ask an admin to reset your password.

Why count the amount of warn a person should have when you could actually be reporting posts? Also, you can't say that this person should have X% of warn level or something like that, some punishments are just verbal warnings, and others are warns and suspensions. Leave the punishment for us and just worry about reporting posts.



That's your problem and not mine. You guys see these type of posts and you yourselves get involved in it, making the thread loose it's point. Just ignore the posts and report them and keep acting like if they weren't made. I can punish a flamer and the person who responded to the flame via a post and there's nothing you can do about it, because the rules say so, don't reply to a flame, just report it and ignore it.
You guys are the ones who ignore the interesting ideas and posts by emphazising in stuff that you shouldn't draw your attention too.

In essense, just RFEPORT THESE POSTS AND FORGET ABOUT THEM, DON'T GO REPLYING TO THEM.

But I've heard that some moderators have the attitude that, "Oh, he reports to often, I won't do anything about his reports". Is that really a good way to go about doing things?

The person may get annoying, but they report for a reason.. Maybe if you explained to the individual what a REAL FLAME is (Not any of these half-assed whiner people claiming that it's flame) so they could report more clearly, then it would be better?

I don't know. Just giving my opinion on it.

I do report occasionally. And some times i've warned the same person 12 times in a day. So supposivly since I can confirm the posts were either filled with a flame or a spam they should of at least got suspened. But no, I don't even get a complain from this person online about how they were warned (Which I knew they would do). That's 12 posts all disregarded because I "left the warnings to you". Maybe you should add a side note to the rules that one worded posts or completely useless and meaningless posts are not considered spam.

I've seen a bunch of people just say "Voted", "Yes", and "Lol". I can understand for a first offense you'd give them a verbal warning since they might not know. But they keep doing it anyway and I've yet to see any action taken. And I get the same thought that Kelli has which is if a bunch of warns appear from the same member, and the same person keeps reporting then they'll disregard it since they "have a grudge" or something.