Connection ErrorBad RequestThis page went staleSession ExpiredSign in requiredForbiddenNot FoundToo Many RequestsServer ErrorBad GatewayService UnavailableGateway TimeoutHTTP Version Not Supported
Session Expired
Your session has expired. Please log in to continue.
Sign in required
You need an account to do that. Sign in or create one — it only takes a minute.
This page went stale
Your security token was rejected, usually because the page sat open too long or you signed in elsewhere. Nothing was saved. Reload the page and try again.
Request Failed
We encountered an issue while processing your request.
Please check your internet connection and try again.
Error Details:
Share Link
Posts from Regarding the Violation System.Auto-translated
Secondly, the last message certainly doesn't mean they haven't visited the forum for that long. Not writing doesn't equal not reading or not being present.
And thirdly, impartiality only increases objectivity. Do judges in court live with the defendant's family for six months to better understand their life and how they ended up in this situation? They gather data, review it, and make a decision. That's it.
But these are already completely absurd arguments, seriously :) First. It's quite obvious that none of the people mentioned above have been reading the forum (unless they occasionally glanced at it, maybe once a month or so; five years without a single message, and they "were reading and present"? Don't make me laugh). Second. The court example is incorrect. After all, judges in court are not acquainted with either side, are they? But on a forum, it's like a small town, everyone knows each other to some extent.
Well, these are some completely absurd arguments, seriously :) First. It's quite obvious that none of the people mentioned above actually read the forum (at best, they glanced at it occasionally, maybe once a month or so; five years and not a single post, and yet they "read it and were involved"? Don't make me laugh).
Just because you don't do it doesn't mean others don't. I've personally seen at least one moderator who visits the forum daily and hasn't posted anything in months. This is a real example, not just speculation about "how it couldn't happen."Naver Leengard
Second. The example with the court is incorrect. After all, judges in court are not acquainted with either of the parties, are they? But on a forum, it's like a small town; everyone knows each other to some extent.
So, do they know each other or not? :D You just argued that the judges "didn't know anything about what was happening," and now suddenly everyone knows each other?
If they know each other, that's great; they voted with a deep understanding of the issue. If they don't know each other, that's also great; they voted objectively and impartially.
This is a real example, not just speculation about how things "couldn't possibly be."
The real fact is that three moderators who participated in the vote haven't written a single message in a very long time. The speculation is that they "were just reading the forum all this time without posting." :)
So, do they know or don't they? You just appealed to the fact that the judges "know nothing about what's going on," and now suddenly they all know each other?
Why twist other people's words? Awareness of events and connections with people are completely different things. But if this is so difficult to understand, I'll explain. The point was that a lack of activity on the forum doesn't prevent a user from maintaining contact with certain people in instant messaging programs, Skype, and so on.
Naver Leengard, I suggest we end this here. We've already gone completely off-topic. Besides, arguing between ourselves won't lead to the truth, so what's the point of acting like two rams from a well-known fable?
I often check the list of moderators, and it shows the date of their last visit to the forum. Not long ago, the red list was larger than the green one. If someone logs in and reads but doesn't post, it's usually just one person. However, we could remember who logged in and check the list again after some time. Alternatively, we could simply look at their moderation activity over a specific period.
Am I the only one who thinks that those who don't show any activity on the forum and are probably not even aware of what's going on shouldn't be deciding the fate of other users?
I completely agree. I wasn't aware of the latest appeal at all, so I wanted to abstain from voting, but I had to vote because three coordinator votes were required. I had to sit down, read what was being written, and make a decision. As it turned out, we made the wrong decision (although it's possible that another person simply wanted to take the blame), but in any case, the decision should have been made by someone who was in the know.
Perhaps it would be better to discuss the problem of the system of violations and injustices within it?
I hope no one will object if I express my humble opinion regarding the points mentioned. Dubrovin Pavel
4.1. - (For having more than 15% and less than 30% of irrelevant content in a message) 4.2. - (For having more than 15% and less than 30% of off-topic content in a message) 4.3. - (For having more than 30% of irrelevant content in a message) 4.4. - (For having more than 30% of off-topic content in a message) 4.5. - (For creating a repetitive topic on the forum) 4.6. - (For a message containing flame) 4.7. - (For a message containing trolling) 4.9. - (For any direct or indirect insults to users, third parties, or organizations) 4.15. - (For addressing other users using nicknames different from their original ones, if the user does not like this type of address) 4.22. - (For publicly discussing the actions of moderators, coordinators, or administrators) 4.23. - (For a false appeal) 4.24. - (For violating the appeal format (any extra messages in the appeal topic that contradict its format as described in the rules))
Off-topic content, trolling, and irrelevant content – these are things that definitely don't need points assigned to them, because, frankly, if you look hard enough, you can find trolling and a hidden meaning everywhere. Off-topic content and irrelevant content can simply be deleted if they are too annoying. Moreover, these points largely create inequality among users, since some already have 30 points for these violations, while others, who are just as much trolls/spammers, have nothing. In the end, the system is somewhat flawed, for understandable reasons.
4.22. - In some cases, such untouchability is not a good thing; moderators can also make mistakes or act based on their own emotions.
4.23. - The first and only appeal was not very successful. It turned out that the vote was attended by those who, due to inactivity, could have been removed from their moderator positions long ago. And some of the voters were actually violating the portal's rules. It's just...
First, the appeal system should be restructured to work properly, and then the points can be discussed/assigned
Что такое осень - это небо Плачущее небо под ногами
4.22. - In some cases, such untouchability is not a good thing; moderators can also make mistakes or act based on their own emotions.
Of course, talking to moderators, pointing out their mistakes, and so on is useful and will definitely contribute to the forum's development, but only under one condition: such a discussion should not be an empty argument, especially in a topic that has nothing to do with moderation. Otherwise, it will turn into a messy argument with potentially negative consequences. Discussing moderation issues in private messages or in a special topic (like this one) is not prohibited in any case, so the point is reasonable. Theoretically, you could lower the score for it or equate it to off-topic (because it essentially is off-topic), but that's a matter of nuance.
kcfgogbfalgfl
Слоныш
