|
|
xerox
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
|
posted August 08, 2012 04:18 PM |
|
Edited by xerox at 17:01, 08 Aug 2012.
|
I would like my unfair penalty reverted or recompensated from this thread:
http://heroescommunity.com/viewthread.php3?TID=31934&pagenumber=3
It was completly unjustified. I got penalized for making a point that related to the original topic. Afaik, angelito (who didn't even warn me or explain WHY he made the penalty) is no longer active.
Reasons for reverting or recompensating the penalty.
- It did not break the CoC.
- "Spam" is highly subjective and yet I received neither an explaination nor a warning. I intended my post to be related to the OP, which was the "lack of original thought". If my post was worthy of a penalty, then I can think of a dozen posts in the OSM right now that are to worthy of such a penalty.
- The penalty is a serious stance against free speech.
- The HC member consensus was that it was unjustified.
- Angelito didn't bother to argue for the penalty.
____________
Over himself, over his own
body and
mind, the individual is
sovereign.
- John Stuart Mill
|
|
angelito
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
proud father of a princess
|
|
posted August 08, 2012 11:00 PM |
|
Edited by angelito at 23:01, 08 Aug 2012.
|
- I am still active 
- I do not argue over every penalty
- spamming outside the VW is against the rules 
- you are a few days late for your complaint 
Life is hard...I know 
____________
Better judged by 12 than carried by 6.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted August 08, 2012 11:04 PM |
|
|
|
It was still a ridiculous penalty.
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted August 09, 2012 12:27 AM |
|
|
Question: why my signature link displays here but not in other forums, as WoG or library? I am confused.
____________
Era II mods and utilities
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted August 09, 2012 07:07 AM |
|
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted August 10, 2012 12:31 AM |
|
|
It also happened 3 years ago. Get over it.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
master_learn
Legendary Hero
walking to the library
|
|
posted August 20, 2012 04:45 PM |
|
|
I propose a QP for smithey for his 4th(overall 11th)post in his thread corporations.
____________
"I heard the latest HD version disables playing Heroes. Please reconsider."-Salamandre
|
|
OhforfSake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted August 20, 2012 05:24 PM |
|
|
Reason for penalty:
Quote:
- spamming outside the VW is against the rules
Spam according to the CoC:
Quote:
Spam is creating several replies that contain one or two sentences in a short amount of time.
The post in question:
Quote:
Well, my book idea is very original.
Here is how it is;
The land of Mythotopia had always been peaceful and filled with harmony. Untill evil itself manifested on Mythotopia.
Evil manifested itself as the Shadow Overlord Saremort.
The young boy Keldan lived with his mother within the Greenmist Forest. Then the Shadow Overlords forces attacked.
Keldans mother died and he was forced to flee untill a lone Hunter named Barkagos found him. Barkagos protects Keldan and together they flee to the realm of the Elves.
The Forest Elves of Fairlon had always been a people that had isolated themself from the rest of the world. They were servants of the Divine Light. But that had change now as Saremorts forces had entered Mythotopia. The Forest Elves and their Tricorns welcomed them to their capital city of Skogensugeruss, which was located high abvoe the trees.
With the help of the Elven Priestes Anabalahbelhora or Ana, they decided to destroy Saremort. Saremort lived in the darkened lands of Detarkalt, which was located in the South pole.
The Elves didnt go to war, because they are descending to the Heavens of Light.
In a long and epic journey they finally Saremorts palace on the south pole. Isslot is the name of his castle.
They climb down the stairs of the Crystal Spire to reach him. They fight him and then Ana sacrifices himself and Saremort is weakened by the explosion of Light. But Saremort is not defeated.
He fights on and the Hunter and Keldan are forced to flee.
At the deepest abyss of the south pole, Saremort awaits and is about to unleash his forces of darkness and cataclysm upon the world.
And that is the end of the first book.
PS: The hunter MIGHT turn evil and be his father and he MIGHT be forced to kill the elf.
That is not one or two sentences.
____________
Living time backwards
|
|
william
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
LummoxLewis
|
|
posted August 20, 2012 08:03 PM |
|
|
It's not one or two sentences but that's not all spam is. Spam is off topic in serious threads. Just saying...
____________
~Ticking away the moments that
make up a dull day, Fritter and
waste the hours in an off-hand
way~
|
|
Tsar-Ivor
Promising
Legendary Hero
Scourge of God
|
|
posted August 20, 2012 08:11 PM |
|
|
Quote:
That is not one or two sentences.
Makes it all the worse.
____________
"No laughs were had. There is only shame and sadness." Jenny
|
|
Adrius
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Stand and fight!
|
|
posted August 20, 2012 08:20 PM |
|
Edited by Adrius at 20:20, 20 Aug 2012.
|
You need to remember the context to see why that penalty was justified.
That post was kinda like the drop that made the glass overflow.
____________
|
|
OhforfSake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted August 20, 2012 09:29 PM |
|
|
It's Val who ultimately decides the rules here.
In the rules, Val wrote what spam is. I quoted it from the CoC. We can't change that.
If Xerox post should be penalized, it's obviously not for the kind of spam described in the rules. As such it's been penalized for violating a rule it did not.
Since the post did not violate the rule it was penalized for violating, the penalty should be removed, as it was not given in a way according to the rules.
Quote:
You need to remember the context to see why that penalty was justified.
I would like to say that the context is irrelevant, because in the ultimate case the post itself has to violate some rule to recieve a penalty, otherwise it's not the right post to penalize. Likewise I'd like to say I shouldn't really respond to any of this, because this isn't a discussion thread, as such anything here should be handled between a moderator and a member and not between members.
However now you mention it, and please forgive me if I'm wrong, but it does seem like you were pursuing a penalty for Xerox at the time, which is actually highly relevant for at least 50% of the complaint against the post in question.
Looking back, you seemed very rude towards Xerox in this period. My guess is it is because he aparantly annoyed you. Yet if you look through the topic in question, you're actually the one who initialised the penalty. Only you and Elvin showed the least bit of annoyance in said topic.
Which means despite you not even being a part of said thread up until or even after your "input", you still took the time to "contribute" to the thread, by telling another member off.
In my opinion, your post in said thread was more worthy of a penalty, because it had nothing to do with the topic at all and was hostile towards another member. If you want context, then it was not the first time you were hostile towards Xerox in said period.
Finally it was a matter which you obviously could have resolved through hcm or by hcm'ing a mod, in stead of what to me looks like a failed attempt to steal away the topic of the discussion.
In any case, what does it even matter to any of you? Apparently it matters to Xerox since he brings it up again, the penalty was indeed questionable, the post is not much different from what he usual posts and he is in no way a member who causes trouble with his behaviour.
As I see it, he would most likely not have even gotten a penalty if you, Adrius, had not barged into the thread, ignoring whatever the discussion was about and started to rant about Xerox' attempt to contribute.
____________
Living time backwards
|
|
Tsar-Ivor
Promising
Legendary Hero
Scourge of God
|
|
posted August 20, 2012 09:36 PM |
|
|
What Ad was trying to say Forfy, is that the post alone would never get a penalty, the penalty was the result of consecutive transgressions. (guessing Xerox was on some kind of spamming spree through the OSM)
For future reference just edit your posts to avoid aggravating anyone seeing how Angie has no interest in (might not be such a good idea since yours are rather long, an easy read and makes sense, but might be daunting for most people)
Quote:
That penalty did not come out of the blue. Xerox has a long troll history, often disrupts threads or tries to provoke reactions for his amusement.
I believe that any spam in the OSM made by the person in question was erased as it is the norm. (the penalty post was not for obvious reasons)
And forfy, you know better than anyone that this isn't a democracy. For good or ill. I wasn't talking about Val. 
I have yet to note an instance where a mod's decision is reversed due to member feedback/opinion{s}, on the contrary any questioning of a mod's decision in my experience has been met with an iron fist. I admire the fact that you labor yourself in search of justice, but do so without aggravating the overlords more than you need to was my point.
____________
"No laughs were had. There is only shame and sadness." Jenny
|
|
OhforfSake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted August 20, 2012 10:00 PM |
|
|
Quote:
What Ad was trying to say Forfy, is that the post alone would never get a penalty, the penalty was the result of consecutive transgressions. (guessing Xerox was on some kind of spamming spree through the OSM)
Curse you for making me look up on that.
I don't think he was, here's his posts from around 12/13-2009:
http://heroescommunity.com/member.php3?action=viewprofile&l=proposts&UserName=Xerox&start=1970
As can be seen, he only posted twice in the OSM on the given day. His second post was him showing confusion regarding the penalty and as such can't be part of the cause for the penalty.
It can also be seen that he posted 11 times during the month in question, before recieving his penalty. That is 11 posts over 13 days of which he at most posted either 2 or 3 posts on the same day, however this was not up to the day of the penalty. Finally, to me, his posts looks like serious attempts to contribute. Not all equally serious of course and not every post equally detailed, but the one-liners aren't the typical ones among his posts in said period of time and it always has something to do with the topic in question.
All in all, none of these observations are any different from the common members who often have an average of 1-2 posts pr. day and who'll often post a couple of posts one day and then none for a couple of days.
If his posts were to fail under the category of spam, I'd say that his posts are much too detailed, seems too serious and on-topic and finally the time distance between posts and at most 3 posts on any single day (I could only find 2 posts on 2 occasions), means that if he were at fault of spamming as described in the CoC, it'd have to had happened at least one month before. Since Xerox didn't show any of this tendency during the month in question, I find it rather unfair he got a penalty so long afterwards, and if he should have one, it should at least be for a post, which actually did violate the CoC, choosing a such detailed post seems like, in my opinion, to be poor judgement.
Edit - as response to the edit of the previous post:
Thank you, Tsar.
Since I doubt anyone can remember for sure, if Xerox spammed the osm at that point in time, I suppose the only point to make is that it's not part of the behaviour he's known for, nor in the non-deleted posts in the osm in the two weeks up to the penalty.
Edit 2 - as a response to the edit of the previous post:
Quote:
And forfy, you know better than anyone that this isn't a democracy. For good or ill.
Yes, I'm not demanding anything, calling upon the majority or anything similar here. Val ultimately decides how this place should be operated, because it's his property and he does so through the moderators. However due to his own inactivity, you could say in principle it's the moderators who decide and all we've left of Val is what he wrote in the CoC, but at least the mods do listen to the opinion of the members here. I wouldn't be surprised, however, if these posts will be completely ignored by every moderator.
Edit 3 - as a response to the edit of the previous post:
First of all, thank you for seperating your edits and for saying you admire me, though I'm not searching for injustice, I just noticed the post didn't seem to qualify as spam. I'm not attempting to aggrevating anyone, the first post I made was supposed to have been standing alone, yet I find myself responding to responses. Should I rather just not respond, when someone puts up what I think are relevant points?
Quote:
I have yet to note an instance where a mod's decision is reversed on the contrary any question of a mods decision in my experience has been met with an iron fist.
I can remember a few occassions, but I don't expect my posts alone to have any impact. If Xerox really wants something to happen, he probaby has to persistently press the issue himself, but only as long as his questions stand unanswered.
I do follow Angelito does not want to justify every single penalty, but in cases where several other members show doubt regarding the decision and where there might have been post deletion, a proper justification odd to be in order.
____________
Living time backwards
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted August 21, 2012 02:53 AM |
|
|
Guys - and particularly OFFS, our resident mud-stirrer - the penalty happened years ago. Angelito isn't going to take it back, and I'm not going to trump him. It's been too long to know the context under which the penalty was given; all you're doing now is playing Tuesday morning QB.
There's no reason for further discussion on this topic, so please let it rest.
Just for the record, individual mods can make errors when it comes to issuing penalties or other disciplinary actions. There have been a few instances of penalties being reversed after significant member feedback. These instance are rare though and they ALWAYS happen within days of the penalty being issued. More importantly, you should know that MOST significant negative moderator action (penalties, silences and often even warnings) are discussed among mods before the action is taken. Disciplinary action is therefore almost always the product of a deliberative process to make sure the judgment is deemed fair and warranted by a majority of the moderators.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
OhforfSake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted August 21, 2012 08:35 AM |
|
|
I do not understand the limited time argument. Nothing in the rules says anything about a limited time for reverting a penalty and you write yourself that these actions are discussed. Considering the circumstances this penalty was given under, i.e. it was vague and there was already negative feedback towards the penalty in the given thread, I'm certain it could not have been an obvious penalty as such it was something which ought to have been discussed. Especially considering the penalty was given in an active thread. Should the penalty be due to things happening in other threads, I imagine you usually don't want to disturb a well evolving thread and rather place the penalty in a dormant thread.
Therefore you should either be able to find the context under which the penalty was given in the HQ, or if such thread never existed, realise the penalty was given without the cooperation of other moderators.
If there was no cooperation done when giving this penalty, then given the level of complaint it recieved from the get go and the fact Angelito admitted he ignored Xerox even after Xerox asked for an explanation, it really speaks volume for why the penalty should be reverted, in my opinion. Otherwise it looks a lot like an example of a moderator giving a penalty, ignoring the penalized until so much time has passed that it won't be reverted. We know stuff like this happens, such as the silence Berny-Mac recieved, which fortunately was reversed.
Finally, what does it even matter to any of you? It apparently matters to Xerox and he has not been spamming the osm for the 3 years I've been active here, so obviously the penalty does not fit the target in this case and I see no benefit that comes from keeping it, while removing it apparently will make Xerox happy.
Edit: Please don't call me names. I don't see how it's making trouble to apply the feedback thread the way I think it is meant to be applied.
____________
Living time backwards
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted August 21, 2012 08:56 AM |
|
|
|
People, really, don't you have something better to do?
|
|
angelito
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
proud father of a princess
|
|
posted August 21, 2012 12:05 PM |
|
Edited by angelito at 12:06, 21 Aug 2012.
|
Quote:
Finally, what does it even matter to any of you? It apparently matters to Xerox ...
You should live your words OhforfSake. Stop playing Xerox's advocat, it won't help him.
Corribus and me have stated an opinion about this issue, and the decision is made: The penalty stays.
There is nothing more to say about that. So please live on and don't lose more time on that "actual" issue....
____________
Better judged by 12 than carried by 6.
|
|
OhforfSake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted August 21, 2012 12:21 PM |
|
|
I care for the removal of the penalty, because it seems like Xerox would like it to be removed and I see no reason for why not, since I see no reason for why the penalty was there in the first place. It's not a double-edged sword.
Quote:
The penalty stays.
Which leads to the question, why does it stay?
Because of how long time ago it was (i.e. uncertainty)? Countered.
Because it broke the rule it was penalized for? Countered.
____________
Living time backwards
|
|
master_learn
Legendary Hero
walking to the library
|
|
posted August 21, 2012 12:36 PM |
|
|
OhforfSake,you are trying to flood the feedback thread,I am not qualified to say what extent you succeed in this.
I intend to quote the rules-Quote:
If you wish to discuss something publicly with the moderators, use the Turban Tribunal forum.
There was also some rule(I cant find the exact place its written} about HC members trying to engage moderator in long discussion about some moderator decision and what happens next.
____________
"I heard the latest HD version disables playing Heroes. Please reconsider."-Salamandre
|
| |
|
|
This Popular Thread is pages long: 
