TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Site Suggestions
-- Appeals Forum (idea nicked from chillout)
Pages (2): [1] 2 »

Appeals Forum (idea nicked from chillout)

Ok so when i first saw this in chillout I thought it was a stupid idea, but the more I think about it, the more it makes a sense of sorts, so wondering what the chances were that say sum1 is suspended for questionable motives, or when people want to know why their mate was banned or something.

Rules would have to be as such...

topic name = name of member suspended
limited to one thread per user
the area used so mods can explain a bit more to the people who're appealing it, and as such maybe bring a bit of better relations about
The mods final answer is always correct, although on ones they feel they may have been harsh on they can also accept to review the situation

Prob sounds a lot of work, but wondering if it might bring better mod-user relations, as Neo etc get bullshit of random people for no reason and this would keep thebs out of cor etc ?

I think that any 'appeal' type threads could just be put in this forum. I can't see the need for an entire forum devoted to the topic.

I do however think that some bans need to be explained better, because most people still have no clue why Joe was banned, and vivid appears to have been banned for likening someone to a cake in a joking manner.

The thing is, nobody seems to explain why someone was banned when people get annoyed and try and get their mates unbanned, which only adds fuel to the fire, making it seem like it's some big cover up on the mods part. If they were simply explained and clarified, I think that none of this would happen.

quote:

Originally posted by arctic I think that any 'appeal' type threads could just be put in this forum. I can't see the need for an entire forum devoted to the topic. I do however think that some bans need to be explained better, because most people still have no clue why Joe was banned, and vivid appears to have been banned for likening someone to a cake in a joking manner. The thing is, nobody seems to explain why someone was banned when people get annoyed and try and get their mates unbanned, which only adds fuel to the fire, making it seem like it's some big cover up on the mods part. If they were simply explained and clarified, I think that none of this would happen.

Again I think that's slightly better than my explaination

Eric i know winds ppl up the wrong way, esp neo (who didnt ban him to my knowledge) but I think that should the mods reply to any1 on here and give reasons, people can't complain and again bring a better mod-user relationship

to be honest, why should you all know why sum1 was banned?

you should ask the person themselves they should get a from regarding their banning from whoever banned them.


if they dont get that then it doesnt mean there has to be a forum just coz of that.

at the end of the day only the ban-ee needs to knwo why he was banned

I see what you're saying, but the cases in which people complain about someone being banned usually involve a member who isn't universally hated, and people are usually confused as to why they were banned.

When a long term member gets banned, it does effect the community. For instance, when METRON was banned, nobody cared, because the guy was an abusive spammer, and an idiot. However, when someone like Joe gets banned, and the mod who banned him can't say why/justify it because it involves a second person who won't let any details/reasons be released, then it starts to look suspicious.

Joe was a long term member, not some troll who just went around spamming and making a plethora of one word posts.

I did feel a bit sorry for Neo right through the whole saga, because he had a lot of crap served up to him, even after he confirmed that there was another mod/member involved, and that they were preventing him from giving a reason/explanation for the banning.

Now for vivid.

Yes, he did play around a lot and make jokes at other peoples expense, but everyone knew he wasn't serious.

The commonly held view is that he was banned for likening redeye to a cake. If that is the case (Once again, we don't know, because nothing has been explained), then that, quite frankly, is a disgrace. That's just plain vindictive, it's banning someone for personal reason, essentially because the mod 'disliked' the user.

Then again, it might not have been that, because we simply haven't been told anything.

In short, all I want is to see a little more transparency, if a banning is justified, then it either should be obvious why the user was banned, or there (usually) should be no problem explaining why the action was taken.

A little more honesty/clarification is all that's required.

Other than that, some of the mods (The ones that actually post) do a top job, Neo & TTA in particular.

no offense ian but i aint up for it. more than enough peoples input goes into the suspension process and people are only banned in fair conditions. swamper doesnt hesitate to overule is if he doesnt agree. aslong with ste, we spend enough of our time modding without spending even more justifiing every single little thing that wants to be argued, twisted and changed. its not like they dont know why they get banned, the reason is always obvious and spending more time on such matters is a waste of time.

quote:

Originally posted by Coup no offense ian but i aint up for it. more than enough peoples input goes into the suspension process and people are only banned in fair conditions. swamper doesnt hesitate to overule is if he doesnt agree. aslong with ste, we spend enough of our time modding without spending even more justifiing every single little thing that wants to be argued, twisted and changed. its not like they dont know why they get banned, the reason is always obvious and spending more time on such matters is a waste of time.

Taking that into consideration, could it just be a policy that if a user asks a mod in pm or something about it, that the mod tells them the reasons cos like with joeh's 'banning' or other ones, as i do think there is a danger of no regular-joe (pardon the pun) respect for mods at times, u with the point im trying to make ?

quote:

Originally posted by Coup its not like they dont know why they get banned, the reason is always obvious

That's the thing though, the reason isn't obvious, and that's why so much fuss is made over some of the bans.

The common view of vivid's banning still seems to be that it was because he likened redeye to a cake. I just think that if a banning of a long term member takes place, it should be clarified if it isn't immediatley obvious as to why he was banned. That way, this wouldn't even be an issue.

vivid was not banned just because he did the cake joke. no offense, but the reason is always obvious. vivid's shit goes back years, although i find his shit funny, others dont.

sometimes u may only see one thread where the suspended user is being made out to be the vicitm, but being mods, we see the larger picture, not just the one or two posts or comments.

quote:

Originally posted by Coup vivid was not banned just because he did the cake joke. no offense, but the reason is always obvious. vivid's shit goes back years, although i find his shit funny, others dont. sometimes u may only see one thread where the suspended user is being made out to be the vicitm, but being mods, we see the larger picture, not just the one or two posts or comments.

To you it may be obvious, but to the vast majority of people, it isn't. I too find vivid funny, but that's beside the point.

What you said in the second paragraph confirms my point. As mods, you see the larger picture, but others do not.

That is why all these 'appeal' things come up, because people often have no idea why someone was banned. TA is such a huge site, that it's very easy to miss a particular thread/joke/insult that may have got someone banned or contributed to it.

In short, that's why I think that if things were simply clarified better, none of this would happen (Note that i'm not someone who creates all these appeal threads, I've merely observed the effects of a lack of information).

btw, *cough* vengaboys *cough*

joe was a long term member yes but in that time he constantly did things which would probably get a newbie banned straight off. why do you think he never got a suspention so soon? because he was a long term member and peopel wernt willing to do anything until it built up to a serious level or he did something really bad.

so at the end of the day you must not know the score if your posting about it, im a friend of joe's but im not gonna deny he hasnt done enough to earn that suspension even tho it was rediculously long


if people make moan threads and moan coz sum1 dont knwo the full picture thats their problem coz it has nothing to do with them, so they can just go and eat cake or whatever...



same goes for bannings with arj101 and vivid, theyre given more lenience because they have proved in the past they can be valued members...

quote:

Originally posted by Ste joe was a long term member yes but in that time he constantly did things which would probably get a newbie banned straight off. why do you think he never got a suspention so soon? because he was a long term member and peopel wernt willing to do anything until it built up to a serious level or he did something really bad. so at the end of the day you must not know the score if your posting about it, im a friend of joe's but im not gonna deny he hasnt done enough to earn that suspension even tho it was rediculously long if people make moan threads and moan coz sum1 dont knwo the full picture thats their problem coz it has nothing to do with them, so they can just go and eat cake or whatever... same goes for bannings with arj101 and vivid, theyre given more lenience because they have proved in the past they can be valued members...

I've seen some of the stuff Joe did, and i've talked to him about it, so I personally do know some of the score. I agreed with arj's suspension, all he did was post whore, and to be honest it got extremely annoying. Vivid I don't know well enough to judge, although I did find the stuff that I saw from him funny.

All that is beside the point though, i'm against an appeals forum, all I want is for bannings to be explained if someone asks. If that was done, then none of this would have happened, in my opinion.

The fact is that with a lack of info, people will just assume the worst and think that the mods are abusing power/banning for personal reasons. Accusations like that are then made, and mod - user relations just get worse and worse.
If the people who made those endless 'unban joeh' (Again, not me) threads were just told why he was suspended, then I don't think it would have gone as far.

Once again, i'm not protesting at the bans here, i'm just mentioning that if they were simply clarified, then none of this appeal stuff would have even been brought up.

arctic they are always clear to the person getting banned, and to the people who directly following their shit in all area's. they always try thro many means to try and muddy these facts, twist things, say they didnt do this, someone else did that, evidence gets deleted or moved all in aid to try and bring doubt upon the suspension, thus grounds for an appeal.

quote:

Originally posted by arctic I've seen some of the stuff Joe did, and i've talked to him about it, so I personally do know some of the score. I agreed with arj's suspension, all he did was post whore, and to be honest it got extremely annoying. Vivid I don't know well enough to judge, although I did find the stuff that I saw from him funny. All that is beside the point though, i'm against an appeals forum, all I want is for bannings to be explained if someone asks. If that was done, then none of this would have happened, in my opinion. The fact is that with a lack of info, people will just assume the worst and think that the mods are abusing power/banning for personal reasons. Accusations like that are then made, and mod - user relations just get worse and worse. If the people who made those endless 'unban joeh' (Again, not me) threads were just told why he was suspended, then I don't think it would have gone as far. Once again, i'm not protesting at the bans here, i'm just mentioning that if they were simply clarified, then none of this appeal stuff would have even been brought up.

aye im not saying ur protesting the bannings.

i jsut meant the reasons arnt first obvious coz it isnt one single bad event getting them a supenstion or whatever.

however none of the mods have to tell you the proper reason.

although if you pmed me asking why i would tell you why. im jsut saying its up to a mod if he wants to tell you or not coz it aint a rule

simple answer, you only get banned for what you do, so if people aren't cockheads they won't get banned

quote:

Originally posted by Luke Terry so if people aren't cockheads they won't get banned

Eh?

You're still posting aren't you?

Ste, yeah i realize that. I'm not saying this for me, I just think it might stop all these 'appeal' threads that seem to flood chillout after a ban.

quote:

Originally posted by arctic Eh? You're still posting aren't you? Ste, yeah i realize that. I'm not saying this for me, I just think it might stop all these 'appeal' threads that seem to flood chillout after a ban.

wouldn't it just be fun to suspend u now

quote:

Originally posted by arctic Eh? You're still posting aren't you? Ste, yeah i realize that. I'm not saying this for me, I just think it might stop all these 'appeal' threads that seem to flood chillout after a ban.

maybe if i had mod powers in there i could ust extremite them all, hehehehe

quote:

Originally posted by Luke Terry wouldn't it just be fun to suspend u now

Actually, I think it would be more amusing if you yourself were banned.


Ste, why not just campaign for art's mod status to be removed in chillout and me put in his place.

That way, I could delete all BTG's posts, annoy the Americans, post piss takes involving art, make a thread to post large pictures of Kangaroos without Neo closing it, and delete everything Luke posts.

I don't know what you think, but it sounds pretty damn good to me!

quote:

Originally posted by arctic art's mod status to be removed

hehe....

Just got one thing to say really
involving the incident between joeh and myself.
He was suspended for valid reasons, a history of bad posts / comments and the decison was not taken lightly, but he was getting to the point where he was thinking, i know a lot of the UK mods and i can get away with anything.
Sorry but that does not wash with the mods.

i tried to explain my reasons in PM to him about his suspensions and also to a friend of his st_andrew.
everything i explained to him was mis-quoted in threads in COR.
we tried to talk it over in IRC too again in PM and yet again my posts were quoted incorrectly so i then refused to deal with him in private.
We had a long convo in public in the UKTA chatroom and funnily enough nothing from that was quoted.
I refuse to have any dealings now with JOEH unless there are others to witness what has been said so that i can not be mis-quoted again.

I full realise that not a lot of the members of the forums like me, but wether i am liked or not, i will always try to sort any situation with an impartial veiw.

as for appeals, suspended members can still PM ppl, mods and swamper and have every chance to get thier suspension revoked.

joeh has given a new meaning to the term "Chinese Whispers".

quote:

Originally posted by Coup joeh has given a new meaning to the term "Chinese Whispers".

he's not chinese silly

quote:

Originally posted by Wicked Neo Just got one thing to say really involving the incident between joeh and myself. He was suspended for valid reasons, a history of bad posts / comments and the decison was not taken lightly, but he was getting to the point where he was thinking, i know a lot of the UK mods and i can get away with anything. Sorry but that does not wash with the mods. i tried to explain my reasons in PM to him about his suspensions and also to a friend of his st_andrew. everything i explained to him was mis-quoted in threads in COR. we tried to talk it over in IRC too again in PM and yet again my posts were quoted incorrectly so i then refused to deal with him in private. We had a long convo in public in the UKTA chatroom and funnily enough nothing from that was quoted. I refuse to have any dealings now with JOEH unless there are others to witness what has been said so that i can not be mis-quoted again. I full realise that not a lot of the members of the forums like me, but wether i am liked or not, i will always try to sort any situation with an impartial veiw. as for appeals, suspended members can still PM ppl, mods and swamper and have every chance to get thier suspension revoked.

Thankyou for finally clarifying it, hopefully it means that the endless 'why was joeh banned?' threads will stop.

Now, about making me a mod to cause havoc and destruction...

quote:

Originally posted by arctic Thankyou for finally clarifying it, hopefully it means that the endless 'why was joeh banned?' threads will stop. Now, about making me a mod to cause havoc and destruction...

we already have Arturo for that

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.