Register Forum Rules Recent Forum Posts View Members Advanced Search
October 22nd, 2013
#11
He was more talking about the signature.

tomatos or tomatoes.

I tend to call anything image based on forums avatars lol.
October 22nd, 2013
#12
I'm just going to say one thing right now. This rule was just created so it didn't apply to past situations. Also, it's a temporary rule to prevent chaos while the mods are working on creating a better solution. We might be mods but we're only human. The only reason you think we're these all powerful beings is because you're saying we are in your own posts. We're not. We can get permanent infractions that demote us and ban us as well. We're not invincible. We're also not here to just give out infractions. If you get an infraction it's because we seriously think you're doing something wrong. If you think it's not justified there's a line in the infraction message that tells you that tells you how you can fight it. Looking at your profile Jocer I see a total of 7 reversed infractions. We do try our hardest to keep justice.

As for what threaad is joking and which one is serious, we don't know. We discussed that as well. We do have multiple discussions going on between the mods right now and we needed a temporary solution. The mods aren't being lazy either. We're just trying to create a little order. In Jaxil's resignation thread there is at least a full page of deleted comments and a few infractions that have active discussions in them right now seeing if they are justified or not.

Also, I agree, we do have quite a bit of issues with the rules right now. They're extremely flexible and there's way too many cases where a mod can "pick and choose" which post is breaking the rules or not. I've been trying to change this whenever I can and so have a lot of the other mods. It's not the easiest thing in the world to create rules that don't have any loopholes in them.

Last edited on October 22nd, 2013 at 09:48 PM.
October 22nd, 2013
#13
It actually reminds me of how, a while back on this forum, there was a poster who called himself Pein. Pein was a troll, through and through. He worked his way up to a permanent ban over time pretty easily. That said, he did contribute a lot to this forum and was helpful at times. He just posted two pieces of shit for every helpful, meaningful post he gave. Hell, even though I was a mod at the time and deleted his posts and gave him infractions, we were still friends outside of it all. I enjoyed his sense of humor at times, but it went outside of what's considered acceptable forum conduct. His name was used in the same sort of context.

Now, by no means is Jocer like that. He's much more consistent about being helpful than Pein ever was, but he does admittedly give us moderators a hard time on occasion. I'm neutral toward him -- I wouldn't consider him a friend outside of my site duties and it wouldn't make a difference if I did -- but you have to understand that moderators who've pruned his posts do have reason view him in a negative light.

That all said and done, it doesn't excuse Jak's conduct when talking to darkkingdom. At all. To be honest, I've largely been abrasive toward the forum is run now with regards to infractions and how it treats a lot of posts. The moderators discussed off-topic posting at length earlier today -- myself included -- and it was agreed upon that there needed to be change about how it was treated. My personal suggestion was to only penalize off-topic discussion that was banter, spam, or people going into a random thread and posting something that's not even remotely related. I don't agree with the new rule as it stands and I think it needs to be revised to better suit those sorts of criteria. Subjectivity and opinions are things that rules should try to avoid -- they should be as concrete as possible to avoid interpretations no one intended. I think the way most treat off-topic posts these days is like that, as it originally pertained mainly to things that were seriously off-topic.

I've been behind the scenes here for a good while. I know why we're at the point we're at now and I've certainly noticed its steady evolution (and the reasons behind said evolution) into what the way we treat infraction and rule-breaking nowadays. I've even mentioned my observations before to the other moderators and was promptly brushed off with others saying that things were fine the way they were. If I can't convince others come to a consensus, then I have no real authority. I don't control how this board is run and I don't think the way things are now is the answer. However, I don't think Jocer's suggestions about democracy are the answer either. The issue, at its crux, is with the wishy-washy interpretation of the rules and how easy it is to deliver consequences.

What this lady said.

Is what I wanted to say except my english is shit compared to hers. Thanks for expressing whats in my head into words.
October 22nd, 2013
#14
Hmm. I actualy read the whole thing... Can't belive I'm saying this, but you do have some points.

No matter how annoying a person(s) is on the forums, a mod is suposed to treat all members the same and act objectively to all their actions.

If this is the case with one of the mods, they should be reprimanded accordingly.

As for the Simmmy situation. Thats a no-brainer. He has a picture of a visable part of a males gentailer, so his going to be banned. Thats idiotic (though funny) on his half..

Keigo's on the other hand is diffrent. His avatar is more suggestive if anything else. Younger members may night understand it or see it in the context it's been shown. (still a creepy avatar though)


-Edit-

I was actualy going to use the Kizya and Pein situation as an example.. (beat me to it.)

That is how a mod is suposed to act towards a memeber who isn't acting correctly on a forum.

So...Showing female genitalia and ass that is age ranged from 10-14 isnt the samething. Isn't that considered hentai?

It actually reminds me of how, a while back on this forum, there was a poster who called himself Pein. Pein was a troll, through and through. He worked his way up to a permanent ban over time pretty easily. That said, he did contribute a lot to this forum and was helpful at times. He just posted two pieces of shit for every helpful, meaningful post he gave. Hell, even though I was a mod at the time and deleted his posts and gave him infractions, we were still friends outside of it all. I enjoyed his sense of humor at times, but it went outside of what's considered acceptable forum conduct. His name was used in the same sort of context.

Now, by no means is Jocer like that. He's much more consistent about being helpful than Pein ever was, but he does admittedly give us moderators a hard time on occasion. I'm neutral toward him -- I wouldn't consider him a friend outside of my site duties and it wouldn't make a difference if I did -- but you have to understand that moderators who've pruned his posts do have reason view him in a negative light.

That all said and done, it doesn't excuse Jak's conduct when talking to darkkingdom. At all. To be honest, I've largely been abrasive toward the forum is run now with regards to infractions and how it treats a lot of posts. The moderators discussed off-topic posting at length earlier today -- myself included -- and it was agreed upon that there needed to be change about how it was treated. My personal suggestion was to only penalize off-topic discussion that was banter, spam, or people going into a random thread and posting something that's not even remotely related. I don't agree with the new rule as it stands and I think it needs to be revised to better suit those sorts of criteria. Subjectivity and opinions are things that rules should try to avoid -- they should be as concrete as possible to avoid interpretations no one intended. I think the way most treat off-topic posts these days is like that, as it originally pertained mainly to things that were seriously off-topic.

I've been behind the scenes here for a good while. I know why we're at the point we're at now and I've certainly noticed its steady evolution (and the reasons behind said evolution) into what the way we treat infraction and rule-breaking nowadays. I've even mentioned my observations before to the other moderators and was promptly brushed off with others saying that things were fine the way they were. If I can't convince others come to a consensus, then I have no real authority. I don't control how this board is run and I don't think the way things are now is the answer. However, I don't think Jocer's suggestions about democracy are the answer either. The issue, at its crux, is with the wishy-washy interpretation of the rules and how easy it is to deliver consequences.

Thank you. I value your opinion and glad you see where im getting at.

Last edited on October 22nd, 2013 at 09:43 PM. Reason: Double Post
October 22nd, 2013
#15
So...Showing female genitalia and ass that is age ranged from 10-14 isnt the samething. Isn't that considered hentai?

I know what you mean but who ever made the rules don't feel anime/hentai that isn't exposing a lot of skin is bad as real life genital.

If someone posted hentai exposing tits it would be remove. Though his sig isn't exposing "Skin"

example of a real life pic

Even though she is doing something very sexual it isn't revealing her "no no areas" so it's aight.

Same thing with the sig.
October 22nd, 2013
#16
In Jaxil's resignation thread there is at least a full page of deleted comments and a few infractions that have active discussions in them right now seeing if they are justified or not.

Where he was reported, and only warned. Why does a a ex-mod need to be warned about the Rules?

Everyone. I Reported Jaxill's post when he was flaming me. there was no question about it, Most mods agreed about it. HE WAS WARNED. As a ex-mod he should know the rules and should know how to act in the forums. Why does he need to be warned? Is it not biased for his ex-staff?
October 22nd, 2013
#17
So...Showing female genitalia and ass that is age ranged from 10-14 isnt the samething. Isn't that considered hentai?

Showing genitalia on this site is wrong full stop. What I'm saying is. There is a big difference between flat out showing genitalia and a suggestive picture.. And thats why Simmmy's picture violates forum rules.

Provocative anime pictures is always going to be a touchy subject any anime related forum you go on to. Purely because It's always a visual vs ethical argument... I personaly don't like them. But it's not for me to decied if it right or wrong to have it on.

I can only imagine the picture was allowed since there is no actual nudity and the said person in picture visably looks of age.

Last edited on October 22nd, 2013 at 09:52 PM.
October 22nd, 2013
#18
All i see it as, some mods are more prone to moderating with their emotions, Rage/Hatred/Favoritism etc then any other.

Which is, of course, a problem. Human beings are all fallible, but that doesn't mean it's a good thing when someone who's noticeably prone to being driven by any of those factors when delivering judgment. We'll never be able to eliminate those factors completely, but it doesn't mean that they need to have a noticeably large effect.

So...Showing female genitalia and ass that is age ranged from 10-14 isnt the samething. Isn't that considered hentai?

You see, it's kind of funny how things like this work, and I don't fully agree with society's preconceptions on it either. There's a nude man my signature. He's also riding a flying surfboard. None of that is against the rules because it's not considered lewd by the collective. If it was, he would have never been approved by the Comics Code Authority.

Meanwhile, the picture of May is suggestive. It shows the outline of female genitalia, but in the same way we consider it socially acceptable to have nipples showing slightly through women's clothes, this is also generally not considered pornographic.

The aforementioned avatar isn't pornographic. It's nudity, it shows a part of male genitalia, but it's not porn. Nudity is not automatically porn and porn doesn't always have to involve nudity either. It is, however, generally considered unacceptable -- at least in America, anyway. This site is based in America. We have a rule about 13+ content in particular due to our hosting. This is considered unacceptable material. I don't agree with the logic behind it, but that seems to be most people's skewed trains of thought.

Even though she is doing something very sexual it isn't revealing her "no no areas" so it's aight.

But every area of her body is a "no-no area".
October 22nd, 2013
#19
Jocers avatar and simmy's avatar scare me
October 22nd, 2013
#20
seems like Jaklt is a bias mod. I like all the points you proven. But, seems like that moderator is out to get you jocer. All fairness.. Jaklt if you're going to be bias against a member and use his name as an example in a negative way in your sentences. you should be revoked from your mod privileges. Im just being serious. Idk where our friendship stands. but, one way or another i have to be a realist right now

I used to have it out for Jocer and Simmy in the sense I was waiting for them to give me the chance to ban them, but around the time of the shutdown announcement I made the decision to leave the past in the past. At first Jocer seemed to be in silent agreement, perhaps he took a few infractions personally and changed his mind, or maybe he never agreed in the first place, I really can't say. Simmy on the other hand did not and I had to block him. Since then I've not been attacking them even verbally, and even before then I had defended both of them against wrongful infractions.

All moderators have some bias, because all humans have bias. It's a universal trait. There's a difference between having a bias and abusing your power. I have flamed both of them in the past but have not once abused my authority against anybody.

By the way, what Jocer seems to have left out is that the first image is from June 9th.


As for you Jocer, I've told you before if you want to make a case for the mod team being corrupt you have to show more evidence than just the actions of one moderator outside of the moderator board. The only thing you have proven is that I'm an asshole, which is common knowledge and I have even said so myself multiple times. I am doing my best to correct some of my behaviors and move on, but it's rather hard to do so if you and Simmy keep bringing this up.

Last edited on October 22nd, 2013 at 10:32 PM.