"PVP" and "Cyrodiil" Gets you Banned on Twitch

spartaxoxo

Lumenn wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Lumenn wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Hostility is something that has a chilling effect on speech. One of the reasons some people post here that they would not capture on some place like Reddit, is that it helps them capture a wider audience. It makes no sense to even have this forum if it's not going to have different standards. Don't pay a staff at all and just stick to Reddit. If what you want is to listen to your customer's speech, it makes no sense to have rules that discourage it.

I agree completely. One of the reasons this post was created was because people perceived hostility from over moderation and don't feel safe posting due to inconsistent moding and bans from the forum mods.

Yes. But your proposal takes it too far into the other direction. You say yourself, "maybe I'll just leave the topic if it's not being discussed seriously." Well, that's precisely the problem. They don't want the topic filled with someone calling people doo Doo heads. They want to know your opinion on pvp or whatever the topic is.

Name calling and harassment chills speech.

Don't leave the topic, just don't feed the troll. Continue the discussion with others who are all openly discussing the topic and being civilized. Why respond to the troll? And if Zos (or any company) wants true opinions hyper moderation on anything negative opinions wouldn't be so heavily censored (which is what started this thread) let your customers express constructive criticism in a civilized manor if you're interested in their opinion.

A civilized manner doesn't include name calling. You'd leave the thread because you're being harassed and you don't want to deal with it. This is a very well known human phenomenon. Neither hyper moderation or openly hostile debate rules allows for civilized debate from a wide variety of people.

Lumenn

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Lumenn wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Lumenn wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Hostility is something that has a chilling effect on speech. One of the reasons some people post here that they would not capture on some place like Reddit, is that it helps them capture a wider audience. It makes no sense to even have this forum if it's not going to have different standards. Don't pay a staff at all and just stick to Reddit. If what you want is to listen to your customer's speech, it makes no sense to have rules that discourage it.

I agree completely. One of the reasons this post was created was because people perceived hostility from over moderation and don't feel safe posting due to inconsistent moding and bans from the forum mods.

Yes. But your proposal takes it too far into the other direction. You say yourself, "maybe I'll just leave the topic if it's not being discussed seriously." Well, that's precisely the problem. They don't want the topic filled with someone calling people doo Doo heads. They want to know your opinion on pvp or whatever the topic is.

Name calling and harassment chills speech.

Don't leave the topic, just don't feed the troll. Continue the discussion with others who are all openly discussing the topic and being civilized. Why respond to the troll? And if Zos (or any company) wants true opinions hyper moderation on anything negative opinions wouldn't be so heavily censored (which is what started this thread) let your customers express constructive criticism in a civilized manor if you're interested in their opinion.

A civilized manner doesn't include name calling. You'd leave the thread because you're being harassed and you don't want to deal with it. This is a very well known human phenomenon. Neither hyper moderation or openly hostile debate rules allows for civilized debate from a wide variety of people.

You're right it is "a" human response. There are many others. Some would actually feed the troll. Some would ignore them. There are others. You might possibly leave the thread. I would simply ignore the name caller. If the harassment continues it changes from game related to a personal vendetta (one name is a rude person, 5-10 posts tagging someone and calling them a name isn't game related, which was one of my listed terms (keep it game related)in every. single. post. I made on this, and gets mod attention.

I have alluded to the fact that some people react more severely for a variety of reasons to things that I personally wouldn't in a video game forum many times. From a business point of view though I would pay mods to cover the legal issues on an adult forum and to keep it game related, not the nightmare of keeping an ever changing and growing (and subjective) list of what's offensive out. As I also said before I'm not advocating for a "wide open" forum. Just less moderation over adults with simple rules(again hate speech, gender/racial slurs etc) and keep it game related that would cut down on judgement calls from mods.

Elsonso

Lumenn wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Name calling and harassment chills speech.

Don't leave the topic, just don't feed the troll. Continue the discussion with others who are all openly discussing the topic and being civilized. Why respond to the troll?

The optimist in me thinks that could work. The realist knows that what happens is that not everyone does it. People snip at each other, name calling and back and forth happen, and things escalate. The thread gets locked, or moderators trim anything remotely tangential to the trolling, or both. Everyone leaves unhappy.

I usually step back from a thread when I see the potential for the moderators to swoop in and clean house. I have tried to go on and discuss the topic while ignoring the trolling, and more often, the back and forth, but it is usually just wasted effort. Besides, there is only so much to be said before repetition takes over.

spartaxoxo

Lumenn wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Lumenn wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Lumenn wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Hostility is something that has a chilling effect on speech. One of the reasons some people post here that they would not capture on some place like Reddit, is that it helps them capture a wider audience. It makes no sense to even have this forum if it's not going to have different standards. Don't pay a staff at all and just stick to Reddit. If what you want is to listen to your customer's speech, it makes no sense to have rules that discourage it.

I agree completely. One of the reasons this post was created was because people perceived hostility from over moderation and don't feel safe posting due to inconsistent moding and bans from the forum mods.

Yes. But your proposal takes it too far into the other direction. You say yourself, "maybe I'll just leave the topic if it's not being discussed seriously." Well, that's precisely the problem. They don't want the topic filled with someone calling people doo Doo heads. They want to know your opinion on pvp or whatever the topic is.

Name calling and harassment chills speech.

Don't leave the topic, just don't feed the troll. Continue the discussion with others who are all openly discussing the topic and being civilized. Why respond to the troll? And if Zos (or any company) wants true opinions hyper moderation on anything negative opinions wouldn't be so heavily censored (which is what started this thread) let your customers express constructive criticism in a civilized manor if you're interested in their opinion.

A civilized manner doesn't include name calling. You'd leave the thread because you're being harassed and you don't want to deal with it. This is a very well known human phenomenon. Neither hyper moderation or openly hostile debate rules allows for civilized debate from a wide variety of people.

You're right it is "a" human response. There are many others. Some would actually feed the troll. Some would ignore them. There are others. You might possibly leave the thread. I would simply ignore the name caller. If the harassment continues it changes from game related to a personal vendetta (one name is a rude person, 5-10 posts tagging someone and calling them a name isn't game related, which was one of my listed terms (keep it game related)in every. single. post. I made on this, and gets mod attention.

Sure, you said make it game-related. But you also very clearly excluded name-calling. I also didn't think you agreed with the idea that someone reporting multiple posts in the same thread because of persistent name-calling was not abuse of the system. There are other posters in this thread that feels if someone sent 10 legitimate reports, it's still a problem with the person sending the reports. I don't agree. So, apologies if I mixed those two conversations together. I actually don't think you appreciate just how drastically wide open it gets if the only speech policed is hate speech and literally illegal. It gets extremely wide open, especially in the US. I'm not sure if you're from this country, but there isn't a whole lot that isn't allowed under those terms.

edit:
It's also not just "a" human response, it is the well-documented to be the predominant human response. People just don't engage, and then the place in question becomes an echo chamber.

eta2:
In fact this echo chambering is a significant factor increasing polarization of views in society, but I'm not going to get into that as it's not appropriate for here. Regardless, what you end up having is people tend to instead of putting up with a lot hostility, they will go to places where they can express their views without it being a battle. This tends to lead them to places where most people more or less agree with them, thus making them less likely to see challenging views over which to argue in the first place.

Lumenn

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Lumenn wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Lumenn wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Lumenn wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Hostility is something that has a chilling effect on speech. One of the reasons some people post here that they would not capture on some place like Reddit, is that it helps them capture a wider audience. It makes no sense to even have this forum if it's not going to have different standards. Don't pay a staff at all and just stick to Reddit. If what you want is to listen to your customer's speech, it makes no sense to have rules that discourage it.

I agree completely. One of the reasons this post was created was because people perceived hostility from over moderation and don't feel safe posting due to inconsistent moding and bans from the forum mods.

Yes. But your proposal takes it too far into the other direction. You say yourself, "maybe I'll just leave the topic if it's not being discussed seriously." Well, that's precisely the problem. They don't want the topic filled with someone calling people doo Doo heads. They want to know your opinion on pvp or whatever the topic is.

Name calling and harassment chills speech.

Don't leave the topic, just don't feed the troll. Continue the discussion with others who are all openly discussing the topic and being civilized. Why respond to the troll? And if Zos (or any company) wants true opinions hyper moderation on anything negative opinions wouldn't be so heavily censored (which is what started this thread) let your customers express constructive criticism in a civilized manor if you're interested in their opinion.

A civilized manner doesn't include name calling. You'd leave the thread because you're being harassed and you don't want to deal with it. This is a very well known human phenomenon. Neither hyper moderation or openly hostile debate rules allows for civilized debate from a wide variety of people.

You're right it is "a" human response. There are many others. Some would actually feed the troll. Some would ignore them. There are others. You might possibly leave the thread. I would simply ignore the name caller. If the harassment continues it changes from game related to a personal vendetta (one name is a rude person, 5-10 posts tagging someone and calling them a name isn't game related, which was one of my listed terms (keep it game related)in every. single. post. I made on this, and gets mod attention.

Sure, you said make it game-related. But you also very clearly excluded name-calling. I also didn't think you agreed with the idea that someone reporting multiple posts in the same thread because of persistent name-calling was not abuse of the system. There are other posters in this thread that feels if someone sent 10 legitimate reports, it's still a problem with the person sending the reports. I don't agree. So, apologies if I mixed those two conversations together. I actually don't think you appreciate just how drastically wide open it gets if the only speech policed is hate speech and literally illegal. It gets extremely wide open, especially in the US. I'm not sure if you're from this country, but there isn't a whole lot that isn't allowed under those terms.

edit:
It's also not just "a" human response, it is the well-documented to be the predominant human response. People just don't engage, and then the place in question becomes an echo chamber.

I am from the U.S. and a very large military family, everyone has joined, fought, and some died with the idea(no matter what top brass real reasons were, but that's a huge topic not fit for ESO forums) that they might not AGREE with what one says, but they have the right to say it. Having come from a family of Marines (my father being a D.I. ) I ALSO realize and have admitted that I probably would not be upset over what others do.

Fight or flight is subjective on who's study you use and what conditions they're in. Having a fondness for psychology and taken extra college courses above my degree just out of a life long interest, there are more fight than you'd think(at least there used to be. I'll admit to being years out of the loop and that my whole world growing up was surrounded by fighters may have skewed my views) but I made my living off of manipulation and planning. It's ugly but it's true.

As to multiple reports I'd like to stop wasting mods time on every little thing. Although I personally don't think a majority of the over moderation is from the community, and that IS my personal opinion, I believe they still get a lot. As I said with simpler rules, mods wouldn't have to jump like an army of spiders making judgement calls. One name call is just a rude individual who can't control their attitude to have a civilized discussion or a troll trying to bait an adult into an argument. Be an adult and don't respond. Repeated name calling is just ridiculous and should be modded as it's spamming a thread with non game related content. If someone is targeting a user by reporting everything I'd hope a less taxed mod with fewer rules could make a fair judgement call. My opinion on it though is that it doesn't have to be one person doing it. My management teams were always tight. Guilds can be the same. A person who never posts in a thread can easily have a guild attack/spam report someone. It still warrants a mods attention but less rules might help them sort things out for/against. I'm not sure if I helped clear anything up or muddied the waters again. Basically calling someone a jerk just means they aren't well and should be ignored. Calling someone a jerk repeatedly borders on harassment (possible legal issue along with slurs and possible threat) and isn't game related, both of which I think should be modded. I'm for less moderation, not no moderation. It's the degree that we all disagree on.

Lumenn

Elsonso wrote: »

Lumenn wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Name calling and harassment chills speech.

Don't leave the topic, just don't feed the troll. Continue the discussion with others who are all openly discussing the topic and being civilized. Why respond to the troll?

The optimist in me thinks that could work. The realist knows that what happens is that not everyone does it. People snip at each other, name calling and back and forth happen, and things escalate. The thread gets locked, or moderators trim anything remotely tangential to the trolling, or both. Everyone leaves unhappy.

I usually step back from a thread when I see the potential for the moderators to swoop in and clean house. I have tried to go on and discuss the topic while ignoring the trolling, and more often, the back and forth, but it is usually just wasted effort. Besides, there is only so much to be said before repetition takes over.

And you're right. That's why I also said keep it game related. One person having a bad day, likes to bait, whatever the reason calling someone a name, just ignore them and let the adults keep talking. Should they continue and spam the thread with personal attacks instead of game related topic give em a time out. If the other party decides to feed the troll and they both spam a thread with non game related issues they both get a time out and the adults can continue to discuss. This thread is actually proof of it. Many here disagree and have responded in a civilized manor. Some have been outright rude in my opinion but others didn't take the bait. And (as far as I know) this is the least modded "touchy" thread I've seen in quite some time. But again, it's just my thoughts.

VaranisArano

Ilsabet wrote: »

(plz don't report me I made it just for you)

Haha, I love it!

VaranisArano

SilverBride wrote: »

Lumenn wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Lumenn wrote: »

I don't need to run to a mod because someone (hypothetical example here mods, don't nail me please) calls me a stupid doo Doo head. Mods shouldn't have to waste their time on adults dealing with that.

It doesn't matter if the name is what some consider mild or if it's hate speech, it still is not appropriate to call someone names in a forum discussion. Besides being inappropriate it lends absolutely nothing constructive to the conversation.

If one can't be civilized, they aren't taking the topic seriously and are not worth my time. Now hate speech I mentioned due to legal liabilities zos may have to cover. You are absolutely right that a forum of adults should have open and civilized discussions. I also don't think we need an army of mods snipping and editing for every word that one person or another may find offensive today at any given time. One way is a personal nightmare for Zos and constant work, second guessing, and judgement calls. Just worrying about the legal stuff slims it down, narrows what has to be acted upon, and maybe frees up resources for Zos. But again this is just a personal opinion.

The person tossing insults is ultimately the one who is wasting the mod's time by posting inappropriate content in the first place. This is something I believe a mod would address even if no one reported it. Otherwise it may continue and could escalate into something worse.

Indeed, even though I don't report it, I do often find that a mod has snipped the insult later.

SilverBride

VaranisArano wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

The person tossing insults is ultimately the one who is wasting the mod's time by posting inappropriate content in the first place. This is something I believe a mod would address even if no one reported it. Otherwise it may continue and could escalate into something worse.

Indeed, even though I don't report it, I do often find that a mod has snipped the insult later.

This brings up a point I'd like to reinforce. The poster being baited isn't necessarily the one who reported the post, yet it is often assumed that they are.

starkerealm

SilverBride wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

The person tossing insults is ultimately the one who is wasting the mod's time by posting inappropriate content in the first place. This is something I believe a mod would address even if no one reported it. Otherwise it may continue and could escalate into something worse.

Indeed, even though I don't report it, I do often find that a mod has snipped the insult later.

This brings up a point I'd like to reinforce. The poster being baited isn't necessarily the one who reported the post, yet it is often assumed that they are.

Which somewhat supports the idea that someone is fishing for things they can pin on a user. (More realistically, "...some people are fishing..." but you get the meaning.) Now, it could be someone unrelated was offended, or has a compulsive need to report bad behavior when they see it. But, what I've seen with this leaves me suspicious. At least in some cases.

spartaxoxo

starkerealm wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

The person tossing insults is ultimately the one who is wasting the mod's time by posting inappropriate content in the first place. This is something I believe a mod would address even if no one reported it. Otherwise it may continue and could escalate into something worse.

Indeed, even though I don't report it, I do often find that a mod has snipped the insult later.

This brings up a point I'd like to reinforce. The poster being baited isn't necessarily the one who reported the post, yet it is often assumed that they are.

Which somewhat supports the idea that someone is fishing for things they can pin on a user. (More realistically, "...some people are fishing..." but you get the meaning.) Now, it could be someone unrelated was offended, or has a compulsive need to report bad behavior when they see it. But, what I've seen with this leaves me suspicious. At least in some cases.

I'm gonna be honest, I don't think your specific situation is a typical one. And I would absolutely submit a ticket or send a private message to Kevin about it. I think you in particular are being harassed by someone out there, but the vast majority of reports in any forum are just from users reading a thread.

spartaxoxo

Lumenn wrote: »

Fight or flight is subjective on who's study you use and what conditions they're in. Having a fondness for psychology and taken extra college courses above my degree just out of a life long interest, there are more fight than you'd think(at least there used to be. I'll admit to being years out of the loop and that my whole world growing up was surrounded by fighters may have skewed my views) but I made my living off of manipulation and planning. It's ugly but it's true.

I'm not really referring to flight or fight, but rather studies about human communication especially online. I won't get into them here, because we're getting a bit off-topic. But it's generally consistently shown that people by and large simply leave discussions and places where they encounter a lot of hostile speech. And instead seek out places that reaffirm their existing beliefs. This is resulting in increased echo chambering online, and deepening polarization of views.

I don't think you're for literally no moderation, but what is illegal for users to speak on an online forum is very little. Even a lot of hate speech that would not fly at a workplace can be said without care online. The US does not have laws against hate speech on private property, and companies are not responsible for users personal comments to that effect.

You're basically talking about limiting to stuff like credible threats of violence when you only get rid of what is illegal. The US gives some of the largest amount of leeways to these companies. I know you wanted hate speech added to that.

VaranisArano

SilverBride wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

The person tossing insults is ultimately the one who is wasting the mod's time by posting inappropriate content in the first place. This is something I believe a mod would address even if no one reported it. Otherwise it may continue and could escalate into something worse.

Indeed, even though I don't report it, I do often find that a mod has snipped the insult later.

This brings up a point I'd like to reinforce. The poster being baited isn't necessarily the one who reported the post, yet it is often assumed that they are.

Correct. I have no way of knowing if the snipped post was reported by someone else or even if it was reported to a mod at all. Those tend to be rather combative threads in general, so it's entirely possible the mods were already keeping an eye on proceedings or swept through because of an unrelated report.

FeedbackOnly

spartaxoxo wrote: »

starkerealm wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

The person tossing insults is ultimately the one who is wasting the mod's time by posting inappropriate content in the first place. This is something I believe a mod would address even if no one reported it. Otherwise it may continue and could escalate into something worse.

Indeed, even though I don't report it, I do often find that a mod has snipped the insult later.

This brings up a point I'd like to reinforce. The poster being baited isn't necessarily the one who reported the post, yet it is often assumed that they are.

Which somewhat supports the idea that someone is fishing for things they can pin on a user. (More realistically, "...some people are fishing..." but you get the meaning.) Now, it could be someone unrelated was offended, or has a compulsive need to report bad behavior when they see it. But, what I've seen with this leaves me suspicious. At least in some cases.

I'm gonna be honest, I don't think your specific situation is a typical one. And I would absolutely submit a ticket or send a private message to Kevin about it. I think you in particular are being harassed by someone out there, but the vast majority of reports in any forum are just from users reading a thread.

It's not as rare as you think it is. People do abuse report system. It can't be just the mods that were the problem. It was the players too

spartaxoxo

FeedbackOnly wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

starkerealm wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

The person tossing insults is ultimately the one who is wasting the mod's time by posting inappropriate content in the first place. This is something I believe a mod would address even if no one reported it. Otherwise it may continue and could escalate into something worse.

Indeed, even though I don't report it, I do often find that a mod has snipped the insult later.

This brings up a point I'd like to reinforce. The poster being baited isn't necessarily the one who reported the post, yet it is often assumed that they are.

Which somewhat supports the idea that someone is fishing for things they can pin on a user. (More realistically, "...some people are fishing..." but you get the meaning.) Now, it could be someone unrelated was offended, or has a compulsive need to report bad behavior when they see it. But, what I've seen with this leaves me suspicious. At least in some cases.

I'm gonna be honest, I don't think your specific situation is a typical one. And I would absolutely submit a ticket or send a private message to Kevin about it. I think you in particular are being harassed by someone out there, but the vast majority of reports in any forum are just from users reading a thread.

It's not as rare as you think it is. People do abuse report system. It can't be just the mods that were the problem. It was the players too

I don't think it's at all typical for users to be getting reported for years old posts. Although it's a simple fix, they can just not take negative action against an account for comments that are over a year old.

FeedbackOnly

Lumenn wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Lumenn wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Lumenn wrote: »

I don't need to run to a mod because someone (hypothetical example here mods, don't nail me please) calls me a stupid doo Doo head. Mods shouldn't have to waste their time on adults dealing with that.

It doesn't matter if the name is what some consider mild or if it's hate speech, it still is not appropriate to call someone names in a forum discussion. Besides being inappropriate it lends absolutely nothing constructive to the conversation.

If one can't be civilized, they aren't taking the topic seriously and are not worth my time. Now hate speech I mentioned due to legal liabilities zos may have to cover. You are absolutely right that a forum of adults should have open and civilized discussions. I also don't think we need an army of mods snipping and editing for every word that one person or another may find offensive today at any given time. One way is a personal nightmare for Zos and constant work, second guessing, and judgement calls. Just worrying about the legal stuff slims it down, narrows what has to be acted upon, and maybe frees up resources for Zos. But again this is just a personal opinion.

The person tossing insults is ultimately the one who is wasting the mod's time by posting inappropriate content in the first place. This is something I believe a mod would address even if no one reported it. Otherwise it may continue and could escalate into something worse.

I've agreed with you on MANY of your comments on other posts but on how a video game forum should be policed we'll simply have to agree to disagree. Still respect ya though! 😉

I agree with. I missed a lot of things. Some things shouldn't be policed. The rules weren't like this 2 years ago.

@Lumenn

starkerealm

spartaxoxo wrote: »

FeedbackOnly wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

starkerealm wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

The person tossing insults is ultimately the one who is wasting the mod's time by posting inappropriate content in the first place. This is something I believe a mod would address even if no one reported it. Otherwise it may continue and could escalate into something worse.

Indeed, even though I don't report it, I do often find that a mod has snipped the insult later.

This brings up a point I'd like to reinforce. The poster being baited isn't necessarily the one who reported the post, yet it is often assumed that they are.

Which somewhat supports the idea that someone is fishing for things they can pin on a user. (More realistically, "...some people are fishing..." but you get the meaning.) Now, it could be someone unrelated was offended, or has a compulsive need to report bad behavior when they see it. But, what I've seen with this leaves me suspicious. At least in some cases.

I'm gonna be honest, I don't think your specific situation is a typical one. And I would absolutely submit a ticket or send a private message to Kevin about it. I think you in particular are being harassed by someone out there, but the vast majority of reports in any forum are just from users reading a thread.

It's not as rare as you think it is. People do abuse report system. It can't be just the mods that were the problem. It was the players too

I don't think it's at all typical for users to be getting reported for years old posts. Although it's a simple fix, they can just not take negative action against an account for comments that are over a year old.

And, that's not normal for me either. When that happened, it seriously caught my attention. What was more significant, but less obvious, was when my posts were getting consistently reported within minutes of being published. Sure, it could be legitimate, and and I didn't face any serious blowback from that (I know that it happened from the frequent ZOS edits that were occurring.) But it doesn't stand out as much, and could, in theory, be the product of legitimate reports. However, when someone was digging into old posts, that's where I was able to say, "this was an intentional misuse of the system."

SilverBride

How does anyone know that a particular poster is abusing the system? We can't see who reported what and don't even know if a post had been reported. I imagine the mods keep a close eye on controversial threads and catch many of these infractions themselves.

spartaxoxo

SilverBride wrote: »

How does anyone know that a particular poster is abusing the system? We can't see who reported what and don't even know if a post had been reported. I imagine the mods keep a close eye on controversial threads and catch many of these infractions themselves.

Yes. A lot of times that is indeed the case, back when I did modding people didn't think I was actually reading threads. But I was.

That said, I think it's pretty obvious what's happening if you get a reports surrounding odd dates. Most users don't leave the first page, and then a large chunk falls even further after pages 2-3.

So if you're suddenly getting actioned for stuff that isn't in that timeframe, and it's multiple reports hitting you at once, someone has probably targeted you in particular. It's extremely rare but it does happen.

Most of the time when you get multiple reports it will be in a heated thread. And those could come from anywhere and anyone, and often don't require a report at all.

Lumenn

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Lumenn wrote: »

Fight or flight is subjective on who's study you use and what conditions they're in. Having a fondness for psychology and taken extra college courses above my degree just out of a life long interest, there are more fight than you'd think(at least there used to be. I'll admit to being years out of the loop and that my whole world growing up was surrounded by fighters may have skewed my views) but I made my living off of manipulation and planning. It's ugly but it's true.

You're basically talking about limiting to stuff like credible threats of violence when you only get rid of what is illegal. The US gives some of the largest amount of leeways to these companies. I know you wanted hate speech added to that.

That's because many of us especially older generation, civil rights generation, and military still believe in free speech, even if they just prove to everyone they're a window licker. 😂
I also wanted to keep things game related. It'll cut down insult-spam.

FeedbackOnly

Lumenn wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Lumenn wrote: »

Fight or flight is subjective on who's study you use and what conditions they're in. Having a fondness for psychology and taken extra college courses above my degree just out of a life long interest, there are more fight than you'd think(at least there used to be. I'll admit to being years out of the loop and that my whole world growing up was surrounded by fighters may have skewed my views) but I made my living off of manipulation and planning. It's ugly but it's true.

You're basically talking about limiting to stuff like credible threats of violence when you only get rid of what is illegal. The US gives some of the largest amount of leeways to these companies. I know you wanted hate speech added to that.

That's because many of us especially older generation, civil rights generation, and military still believe in free speech, even if they just prove to everyone they're a window licker. 😂
I also wanted to keep things game related. It'll cut down insult-spam.

Yeah part of problem goes back to being afraid to chat at all

Dragonnord

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

@SimonThesis Just to close the loop on this, we also addressed the first thread closing internally and made adjustments there as well. It's also why we wanted to make sure to respond in this thread.

And to put emphasis on this, these adjustments in moderation will be an ongoing conversation. Adjustments can always be made to make the experience better and we understand that.

@ZOS_Kevin Since you mention "...to make the experience better...", could you please respond in this thread (link below) in my comment #2469 and so make our experience better?

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/7595908/#Comment_7595908

Thanks in advance.
 

starkerealm

SilverBride wrote: »

How does anyone know that a particular poster is abusing the system?

We don't. Seeing that someone is abusing the system isn't easy in the first place. Definitively identifying them is basically impossible.

That's part of what makes it so useful as a tool of harassment, it is completely anonymous (on the user end, and I assume the moderators are obliged to withhold that information.)

So, there's no, "that guy over there is reporting me." At least, not beyond stray suspicions. Who have I offended recently? Is someone trying to take revenge for some perceived slight? Is someone just trying to remove me from the board so they can get the last word in some random dispute?

The ineffectiveness of their efforts amuses me somewhat, but it's a real problem for the community.

spartaxoxo

Lumenn wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Lumenn wrote: »

Fight or flight is subjective on who's study you use and what conditions they're in. Having a fondness for psychology and taken extra college courses above my degree just out of a life long interest, there are more fight than you'd think(at least there used to be. I'll admit to being years out of the loop and that my whole world growing up was surrounded by fighters may have skewed my views) but I made my living off of manipulation and planning. It's ugly but it's true.

You're basically talking about limiting to stuff like credible threats of violence when you only get rid of what is illegal. The US gives some of the largest amount of leeways to these companies. I know you wanted hate speech added to that.

That's because many of us especially older generation, civil rights generation, and military still believe in free speech, even if they just prove to everyone they're a window licker. 😂
I also wanted to keep things game related. It'll cut down insult-spam.

I mean, I believe in free speech too. But, free speech doesn't mean that private people or businesses can't have their own limits on what they host. I think you understand that as well, since you acknowledge that limiting it to In-game topics only is a reasonable limitation they are placing on speech that wouldn't make sense elsewhere. If they had to allow pretty much everything that is legal, then there should be an off-topic discussion section and politics should absolutely be allowed to be discussed. Alongside all manner of other topics that have nothing to do with the Elder Scrolls. But I don't think that is reasonable to demand of the Elder Scrolls forums, this is not a public square. It's a private website with a specific purpose. It's got little resemblance to a site like Twitter.

So I wonder then why you think "name calling" should be an exception to keeping it on the topic of the game (Spartaxoxo is a cootie queen and a lint licker is not a statement related to the game) but something less malicious like bringing outside politics into the discussion shouldn't be? I find that a little contradictory.

Also would a discussion like "They should add a Rainbow Memento for gay rights on Pride Month?" Be acceptable under your ideal paradigm?

As it currently stands, I would personally think that name calling goes against the express purpose of the forums. It hinders civil debate, and your opinion of another poster is not Elder Scrolls related. Personally I think their current stance of it's not Elder Scrolls related it don't belong is pretty simple to enforce. If you're talking politics, you're not talking about the Elder Scrolls. If you're talking mostly about another user, that is not about the Elder Scrolls. If you're talking religion or about some other game etc, that is not about the Elder Scrolls. And therefore It doesn't belong.

Lumenn

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Lumenn wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Lumenn wrote: »

Fight or flight is subjective on who's study you use and what conditions they're in. Having a fondness for psychology and taken extra college courses above my degree just out of a life long interest, there are more fight than you'd think(at least there used to be. I'll admit to being years out of the loop and that my whole world growing up was surrounded by fighters may have skewed my views) but I made my living off of manipulation and planning. It's ugly but it's true.

You're basically talking about limiting to stuff like credible threats of violence when you only get rid of what is illegal. The US gives some of the largest amount of leeways to these companies. I know you wanted hate speech added to that.

That's because many of us especially older generation, civil rights generation, and military still believe in free speech, even if they just prove to everyone they're a window licker. 😂
I also wanted to keep things game related. It'll cut down insult-spam.

I mean, I believe in free speech too. But, free speech doesn't mean that private people or businesses can't have their own limits on what they host. I think you understand that as well, since you acknowledge that limiting it to In-game topics only is a reasonable limitation they are placing on speech that wouldn't make sense elsewhere. If they had to allow pretty much everything that is legal, then there should be an off-topic discussion section and politics should absolutely be allowed to be discussed. Alongside all manner of other topics that have nothing to do with the Elder Scrolls. But I don't think that is reasonable to demand of the Elder Scrolls forums, this is not a public square. It's a private website with a specific purpose. It's got little resemblance to a site like Twitter.

So I wonder then why you think "name calling" should be an exception to keeping it on the topic of the game (Spartaxoxo is a cootie queen and a lint licker is not a statement related to the game) but something less malicious like bringing outside politics into the discussion shouldn't be? I find that a little contradictory.

Also would a discussion like "They should add a Rainbow Memento for gay rights on Pride Month?" Be acceptable under your ideal paradigm?

As it currently stands, I would personally think that name calling goes against the express purpose of the forums. It hinders civil debate, and your opinion of another poster is not Elder Scrolls related. Personally I think their current stance of it's not Elder Scrolls related it don't belong is pretty simple to enforce. If you're talking politics, you're not talking about the Elder Scrolls. If you're talking mostly about another user, that is not about the Elder Scrolls. If you're talking religion or about some other game etc, that is not about the Elder Scrolls. And therefore It doesn't belong.

? Not sure where the disconnect is but I never said there should be no limits. In fact I've said many times that I do not believe in a free for all. From a business view do I think mods should be called for every single infraction? Nope. Do I think every little name caller, or even someone who loses their cool for a moment, needs banned? Again nope. But if it gets to spamming a thread then yeah, take some time off. Not only is it flooding the thread with out of game topics but repeat attacks can be considered harassment. Fairly certain I've said that as well. As for politics or religion being less malicious than a grown adult calling another adult a cootie...well, we'll just say that's a matter of opinion and agree to disagree. My whole point is mods shouldn't be called for every little thing in an adult forum. If someone calls me a cootie on a video game forum, they aren't worth my time. If someone spams threads with it, then mods clean it up.

We keep circling with the same things here. And we're probably not going to agree.


We both believe in moderation. The level of control is entirely up to zos. Some would like to see less, and some would like to see more. We'll just agree to disagree on what level we (who have no say in it) think is appropriate in our own, personal, opinion.

As for the memento/flag, that's an interesting question. Having a sibling that's Bi, I asked them. (As we all are being civilized and not baiting or trolling I'll spare you their response.) Where would YOU personally draw the line? Would a BLM flag be good for you? Alot of people still support it. Alot are upset with it as well. You good with black history month? My own children hate that term and find it offensive, yet my stepfather marched Selma and was in the riots in Alabama. Should we include white Jesus on Easter? I'm sure that would go over well. Maybe just leave real world topics out of Zos's little playhouse yah? And in game/forum politics I see argonians needing some love.

spartaxoxo

Lumenn wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Lumenn wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Lumenn wrote: »

Fight or flight is subjective on who's study you use and what conditions they're in. Having a fondness for psychology and taken extra college courses above my degree just out of a life long interest, there are more fight than you'd think(at least there used to be. I'll admit to being years out of the loop and that my whole world growing up was surrounded by fighters may have skewed my views) but I made my living off of manipulation and planning. It's ugly but it's true.

You're basically talking about limiting to stuff like credible threats of violence when you only get rid of what is illegal. The US gives some of the largest amount of leeways to these companies. I know you wanted hate speech added to that.

That's because many of us especially older generation, civil rights generation, and military still believe in free speech, even if they just prove to everyone they're a window licker. 😂
I also wanted to keep things game related. It'll cut down insult-spam.

I mean, I believe in free speech too. But, free speech doesn't mean that private people or businesses can't have their own limits on what they host. I think you understand that as well, since you acknowledge that limiting it to In-game topics only is a reasonable limitation they are placing on speech that wouldn't make sense elsewhere. If they had to allow pretty much everything that is legal, then there should be an off-topic discussion section and politics should absolutely be allowed to be discussed. Alongside all manner of other topics that have nothing to do with the Elder Scrolls. But I don't think that is reasonable to demand of the Elder Scrolls forums, this is not a public square. It's a private website with a specific purpose. It's got little resemblance to a site like Twitter.

So I wonder then why you think "name calling" should be an exception to keeping it on the topic of the game (Spartaxoxo is a cootie queen and a lint licker is not a statement related to the game) but something less malicious like bringing outside politics into the discussion shouldn't be? I find that a little contradictory.

Also would a discussion like "They should add a Rainbow Memento for gay rights on Pride Month?" Be acceptable under your ideal paradigm?

As it currently stands, I would personally think that name calling goes against the express purpose of the forums. It hinders civil debate, and your opinion of another poster is not Elder Scrolls related. Personally I think their current stance of it's not Elder Scrolls related it don't belong is pretty simple to enforce. If you're talking politics, you're not talking about the Elder Scrolls. If you're talking mostly about another user, that is not about the Elder Scrolls. If you're talking religion or about some other game etc, that is not about the Elder Scrolls. And therefore It doesn't belong.

? Not sure where the disconnect is but I never said there should be no limits.

Right. But you said within legal limits. But when I talk about what the law actually allows, you say that's not what you want. You tell me you want it to be like limited to game topics, but then also say users should be allowed to make each other the topic of conversation so long as it's not spammed constantly.

So I'm trying to determine where you actually think it should be, because for me it seems a bit contradictory and hard to pin down.

No, I think a BLM flag would be inappropriate because it's got nothing to do with Tamriel. It's also about an explicit out of world political movement, unlike a rainbow. There are LGBT people in Tamriel and also rainbows in Tamriel, so it would be entirely possible for them to make such an item within the confines of the lore.

https://en.uesp.net/wiki/Online:Prismatic_Banner_Ribbon

And in fact we already have such an emote a player could use that way if they chose. It's not explicitly connected to pride, people can use however they wish. I've seen some people to use it like "The More Your Know" instead.

Lumenn

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Lumenn wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Lumenn wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Lumenn wrote: »

Fight or flight is subjective on who's study you use and what conditions they're in. Having a fondness for psychology and taken extra college courses above my degree just out of a life long interest, there are more fight than you'd think(at least there used to be. I'll admit to being years out of the loop and that my whole world growing up was surrounded by fighters may have skewed my views) but I made my living off of manipulation and planning. It's ugly but it's true.

You're basically talking about limiting to stuff like credible threats of violence when you only get rid of what is illegal. The US gives some of the largest amount of leeways to these companies. I know you wanted hate speech added to that.

That's because many of us especially older generation, civil rights generation, and military still believe in free speech, even if they just prove to everyone they're a window licker. 😂
I also wanted to keep things game related. It'll cut down insult-spam.

I mean, I believe in free speech too. But, free speech doesn't mean that private people or businesses can't have their own limits on what they host. I think you understand that as well, since you acknowledge that limiting it to In-game topics only is a reasonable limitation they are placing on speech that wouldn't make sense elsewhere. If they had to allow pretty much everything that is legal, then there should be an off-topic discussion section and politics should absolutely be allowed to be discussed. Alongside all manner of other topics that have nothing to do with the Elder Scrolls. But I don't think that is reasonable to demand of the Elder Scrolls forums, this is not a public square. It's a private website with a specific purpose. It's got little resemblance to a site like Twitter.

So I wonder then why you think "name calling" should be an exception to keeping it on the topic of the game (Spartaxoxo is a cootie queen and a lint licker is not a statement related to the game) but something less malicious like bringing outside politics into the discussion shouldn't be? I find that a little contradictory.

Also would a discussion like "They should add a Rainbow Memento for gay rights on Pride Month?" Be acceptable under your ideal paradigm?

As it currently stands, I would personally think that name calling goes against the express purpose of the forums. It hinders civil debate, and your opinion of another poster is not Elder Scrolls related. Personally I think their current stance of it's not Elder Scrolls related it don't belong is pretty simple to enforce. If you're talking politics, you're not talking about the Elder Scrolls. If you're talking mostly about another user, that is not about the Elder Scrolls. If you're talking religion or about some other game etc, that is not about the Elder Scrolls. And therefore It doesn't belong.

? Not sure where the disconnect is but I never said there should be no limits.

Right. But you said within legal limits. But when I talk about what the law actually allows, you say that's not what you want. You tell me you want it to be like limited to game topics, but then also say users should be allowed to make each other the topic of conversation so long as it's not spammed constantly.

So I'm trying to determine where you actually think it should be, because for me it seems a bit contradictory and hard to pin down.

No, I think a BLM flag would be inappropriate because it's got nothing to do with Tamriel. It's also about an explicit out of world political movement, unlike a rainbow. There are LGBT people in Tamriel and also rainbows in Tamriel, so it would be entirely possible for them to make such an item within the confines of the lore.

https://en.uesp.net/wiki/Online:Prismatic_Banner_Ribbon

And in fact we already have such an emote a player could use that way if they chose. It's not explicitly connected to pride, people can use however they wish. I've seen some people to use it like "The More Your Know" instead.

Actually what I said from the start was threats, hate speech, any of the "isms"(no racial slurs, gender slurs, etc) and to keep it game related. When I said "legal stuff" later, after again repeating myself, does not only include criminal as you assumed(such as certain types of ***, threats) We do have civil as well, something a business would have to watch for. While we here in the U.S. have the first amendment we also have areas that are "diminished protection" or not protected by the first(such as fraud, some copyright, false currency, advertising, even inciting lawless behavior just for a few.) I'm not typing everything out and will just say legal stuff. If you are REALLY interested you can certainly do some research on supreme court cases just in the last 50 years. And that's just the U.S. if you've got a few years check out lawsuits for places like Walmart, Target, Costco, restaurant etc as well. But again, you'll forgive me if I don't write every case down and just say legal stuff.

Looks like I owe my sibling some $. As you said, LGBT(you're missing a few letters my friend. You should include everyone)people exist yes. The movement doesn't. In fact so far they seem quite accepted compared to our real world. Racism however, runs rampant.

I really think I'm finished repeating myself to you. I have given examples, repeated, and have said agree to disagree often enough. Legal apparently only means criminal, you conveniently left out my statement on harassment, and ignore examples I've given to "clarify" Yet here you are again. Obviously I can't explain it in a way you personally can understand (and I'll take the L and claim it's my own communication skills that are limited rather than your ability to comprehend or that you're no longer discussing in good faith) on that note I'll say we part ways in a civil manner and I at least have finished the discussion with you.

Agree. To. Disagree.

And as always have a wonderful day.

Elsonso

The intersection of "real world" and "game world" is a touchy one when it comes to politically and socially charged topics, and this is not a problem just in the forum, but in the studios that make the games. This goes way beyond the game, or even a request or discussion in a game forum. Game studios voluntarily join, or are under pressure to join, these real world events. The studio may or may not express this in the game, and when they do, it is probably going to spill over into the game forum, if such discussions are allowed.

I'd rather not see that sort of thing in the forum, even if it is some item/trinket/doodad that could be added, or removed, from the game. My view is that nothing good comes from these discussions and the game I am playing is rarely a mirror of the real world. Not everyone will be able to ignore baiting, or agree-to-disagree, on these subjects. These topics are too charged for that.

Here, I expect the studios to hold the line and make sure that in-game features, lore additions, and forum discussions, follow the game, not what is a hot topic in the real world because it is a hot topic in the real world.

To that end, my suggestion for moderation is that they close down real world discussions not tied to the game immediately. They close down game requests for real world events if it appears that the conversation is turning ugly.

I would like to tie this in with improved communication, as well. Frequently, the forum is allowed to debate features, requests, bugs, and stuff so long that camps are formed and sniping happens between the camps. My feeling is that there is nothing more that anyone has to contribute, but they don't want ZOS to do what the other camps wants. My thought is that ZOS can close this with a simple statement about whether it is something they will consider, or something they are not planning to do, at the time of the statement.

For all debated requests, especially charged real world topic, ZOS should include a statement on the subject that closes the topic, not just a moderator action for ToS/CoC violations. This would be repeated each time a similar thread is closed.

Speech over.

spartaxoxo

Lumenn wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Lumenn wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Lumenn wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Lumenn wrote: »

Fight or flight is subjective on who's study you use and what conditions they're in. Having a fondness for psychology and taken extra college courses above my degree just out of a life long interest, there are more fight than you'd think(at least there used to be. I'll admit to being years out of the loop and that my whole world growing up was surrounded by fighters may have skewed my views) but I made my living off of manipulation and planning. It's ugly but it's true.

You're basically talking about limiting to stuff like credible threats of violence when you only get rid of what is illegal. The US gives some of the largest amount of leeways to these companies. I know you wanted hate speech added to that.

That's because many of us especially older generation, civil rights generation, and military still believe in free speech, even if they just prove to everyone they're a window licker. 😂
I also wanted to keep things game related. It'll cut down insult-spam.

I mean, I believe in free speech too. But, free speech doesn't mean that private people or businesses can't have their own limits on what they host. I think you understand that as well, since you acknowledge that limiting it to In-game topics only is a reasonable limitation they are placing on speech that wouldn't make sense elsewhere. If they had to allow pretty much everything that is legal, then there should be an off-topic discussion section and politics should absolutely be allowed to be discussed. Alongside all manner of other topics that have nothing to do with the Elder Scrolls. But I don't think that is reasonable to demand of the Elder Scrolls forums, this is not a public square. It's a private website with a specific purpose. It's got little resemblance to a site like Twitter.

So I wonder then why you think "name calling" should be an exception to keeping it on the topic of the game (Spartaxoxo is a cootie queen and a lint licker is not a statement related to the game) but something less malicious like bringing outside politics into the discussion shouldn't be? I find that a little contradictory.

Also would a discussion like "They should add a Rainbow Memento for gay rights on Pride Month?" Be acceptable under your ideal paradigm?

As it currently stands, I would personally think that name calling goes against the express purpose of the forums. It hinders civil debate, and your opinion of another poster is not Elder Scrolls related. Personally I think their current stance of it's not Elder Scrolls related it don't belong is pretty simple to enforce. If you're talking politics, you're not talking about the Elder Scrolls. If you're talking mostly about another user, that is not about the Elder Scrolls. If you're talking religion or about some other game etc, that is not about the Elder Scrolls. And therefore It doesn't belong.

? Not sure where the disconnect is but I never said there should be no limits.

Right. But you said within legal limits. But when I talk about what the law actually allows, you say that's not what you want. You tell me you want it to be like limited to game topics, but then also say users should be allowed to make each other the topic of conversation so long as it's not spammed constantly.

So I'm trying to determine where you actually think it should be, because for me it seems a bit contradictory and hard to pin down.

No, I think a BLM flag would be inappropriate because it's got nothing to do with Tamriel. It's also about an explicit out of world political movement, unlike a rainbow. There are LGBT people in Tamriel and also rainbows in Tamriel, so it would be entirely possible for them to make such an item within the confines of the lore.

https://en.uesp.net/wiki/Online:Prismatic_Banner_Ribbon

And in fact we already have such an emote a player could use that way if they chose. It's not explicitly connected to pride, people can use however they wish. I've seen some people to use it like "The More Your Know" instead.

Actually what I said from the start was threats, hate speech, any of the "isms"(no racial slurs, gender slurs, etc) and to keep it game related. When I said "legal stuff" later, after again repeating myself, does not only include criminal as you assumed(such as certain types of ***, threats) We do have civil as well, something a business would have to watch for.

Well, a professional corporate work environment is already the current enforcement level, so that's why I had excluded it from consideration as it seemed you wanted less than what we currently have. And thought you might be discussing about the bare minimum the law allows websites to run by. If you wanted what flies in corporate America, then I understand what you wanted now. You want we have now but with the ability to openly insult people. I thought you wanted something like Reddit. I understand now, a bit late, but better late than never.

Looks like I owe my sibling some $. As you said, LGBT(you're missing a few letters my friend. You should include everyone)people exist yes. The movement doesn't. In fact so far they seem quite accepted compared to our real world. Racism however, runs rampant.

The flag doesn't represent only the movement, but also LGBT+ people as well, which is why it's a pretty safe choice to be able to incorporate without disruption, which is why I suspect that memento was subtly brought back last year during Pride Month. Similar to how they have dye packs that reference some real world holidays without being overtly political or religious. I was trying to understand whether the same kind of vague, Tamriel focused discussion as items like that would be alright to you or if you wanted moreso zero tolerance for it.

And as always have a wonderful day.

You too.

deleted221106-002999

My experience is that the forum moderation is both draconian and Orwellian. Satire of any sort is generally misinterpreted and often mistakenly invites censure.

The appeal system, in my experience, is a farce and seems only to exist to rubber-stamp the original decisions.

In a recent conversation with Terry White, cs manager, zenimax I mentioned specifically my view that the forum moderation was 'Orwellian and draconian' to which he replied, "Yes, it's deliberate and by design." He also stated no software is used, all decisions are human. When I asked Terry White, cs manager, zenimax if 'good' posts were recognised and went into the process of evaluating whether a comment should merit editing or a ban I was met with stony silence; I took this to mean that they were not and that forum moderation proceeds strictly from a negative perspective per account - in short if your forum account is flagged as problematic, expect the perma-ban as an inevitability. I was advised by Terry White, cs manager, zenimax to avoid satire in the forum; this is disgraceful to say the least given how relevant a form of comment - with all its wonderful wit - satire can be. I asked Terry White, cs manager, zenimax to review the terms to avoid invidious wording regarding 'intent' - which only the poster can truly know - to reflect that moderation decisions are stated as based on opinion and not as currently written, false assertion: he agreed to pass this on to their 'legal team'.

Trying to get a moderator to answer a straight question regarding redactions is useless - if you get a reply (very rare) it'll be a stock copy&paste of the terms which does nothing to illuminate what the specific issue was.

I agree with others that the 'report' option is misused; my first temp ban was for calling out a straw man argument which did NOT troll/bait the individual but the false logic of the comment used - this distinction was not recognised nor acknowledged and I'm still unsure to this day if the qualitative distinction between an attack on a person (which is NOT ok) versus an attack/defense on a comment (which is definitely ok) is understood by moderators.

Despite trying very hard to follow the Orwellian requirement to stick to the implicit newspeak required I've found I cannot even laugh at the irony of recent advertisements without facing instant, reactionary censure.

If you [zos] really want to improve the forum ambience and get away from the reality of draconian redaction, then change that 'Orwellian' policy and start to answer legitimate questions sent asking for fuller explanations/expositions of moderator decisions, get a separate team to do the appeals so appeals are not shut-down or ignored and review those decisions and absolutely add in positives when flagging forum accounts. In the latter case, if 90%+ of forum posts are neutral or positive then a user should not be banned unless and until any perceived negativity has been explained to the user and persists to the extent that it offsest neutral/positive contribution.

Also, if you are using some sort of score-card on accounts this should be transparent to us as individual users - if I know [-10 mod pts] means the next time I say something regarded as dodgy means a perma-ban then at least I can make an informed choice whether to rein in my comments or cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war. The consequences under a transparent system are on me, rather than wondering each time I type a comment if some arbitrary moderation decision is going to result in censure.

Thanks to @ZOS_Kevin for permitting this feedback/discussion - that is very much appreciated.