Super Mario Bros. X Forums

GhostHawk wrote: Which I can do? You weren't offending me you were backseat moderating, and telling me who I should and shouldn't ban.

...And all those other silly users don't count, right guys?

GhostHawk wrote: Yes, it's better to have a legitimate user connection rather than take a gamble that "maybe this proxy user" won't spam like the last few dozen today.

I thought you said you would be happier not having to prove every single new user is a spammer.

GhostHawk wrote: You can, I'm not making you stay here. If you don't agree with how the staff are handling something and not everyone is supporting you, maybe leaving is a good idea instead of telling people what to do and complaining in a chat and now on a forum.

You're basically shoving your fingers in your ears real tight and going "NANANANA I CAN'T HEAR YOU". It's an actual problem and it can't just be shoved to the side just because.

Ghosthawk wrote:You're still implying I banned you for simply disagreeing, when instead you continued to ignore what I said and just question my motives and backseat moderate as I mentioned before.

First off, I'm not backseat moderating, I'm saying that your moderation was baseless.

Ghosthawk wrote:Except the same people every time, which is what I said in the chat.

*cough sleepy erikmouse alphabetsoup Nexia BTB Luigifan cough*

Ghosthawk wrote:Yes, especially when you're telling me who I should and shouldn't ban and why.

Okay. You gonna ban everyone else too?

Ghosthawk wrote:If you quit crying wolf every time you had a disagreement with the staff, then this wouldn't be the case.

I disagree with the staff so I say I disagree with the staff and that's bad??? So you're saying you're... running moderation perfectly and any attempts to say you're not will have me banned?

Pixels wrote:You have been kicked. (broke a nonexistent rule)

http://pastebin.com/JCRQNhkt

Ghosthawk wrote: <ErikMouse> Well, Sundowner (~webchat@149.210.131.21) <--> YourUsingAWebProxy (~webchat@149.210.131.21) does appear to be the exact same IP.

But then again that would contradict your defense of someone who just lied to staff about how they were connecting, and that they used this IP to create two accounts here.

So a webproxy and a VPN can't be ran on the same server and a VPN can't be used by anyone else but this one person? I'll keep that in mind.

michel wrote:

GhostHawk wrote:

Pixels wrote:Guilty until proven innocent.

I forgot when we added the court system.

this is
um
what

Not everything is worthy of a comment, my friend. But to elaborate anyway, saying "Guilty until proven innocent" is irrelevant because the staff can make decisions without proving them to be guilty, instead the most important thing is to see if a user is breaking the rules and what the most appropriate action would be. Criticism is welcome, however when you're telling people how to do their job then that's different.

GhostHawk wrote:instead the most important thing is to see if a user is breaking the rules

Oh yes. The ban the user immediately if they try to use any anonymizing device that was used by someone else with worse intentions rule. I forgot about that one.

GhostHawk wrote:Criticism is welcome, however when you're telling people how to do their job then that's different.

But I am criticizing you. When you make so many mistakes that the person complaining appears to be telling you how to do your job, you have a problem.
As I said in another channel:

<`_`> put a complaint in the complaint box
<`_`> YOU PUT A COMPLAINT IN THE COMPLAINT BOX TOO MANY TIMES GET OUT OF OUR STORE

GhostHawk wrote: Not everything is worthy of a comment, my friend. But to elaborate anyway, saying "Guilty until proven innocent" is irrelevant because the staff can make decisions without proving them to be guilty, instead the most important thing is to see if a user is breaking the rules and what the most appropriate action would be. Criticism is welcome, however when you're telling people how to do their job then that's different.

This is by far the worst thing you've ever said

michel wrote:

GhostHawk wrote: Not everything is worthy of a comment, my friend. But to elaborate anyway, saying "Guilty until proven innocent" is irrelevant because the staff can make decisions without proving them to be guilty, instead the most important thing is to see if a user is breaking the rules and what the most appropriate action would be. Criticism is welcome, however when you're telling people how to do their job then that's different.

This is by far the worst thing you've ever said

I think an example of this is my 2 minute ban. To be honest Valtteri resolved it quickly and I commend him for that but it still shouldn't have happened. I posted in a spammer's thread joking around with them (not causing a disruption, just having a jolly time) when the user who posted the thread is deleted. Since my post was the next post down, I became the OP and was essentially framed. I do know not to post in those threads anymore but I don't think I should have been banned before being given the chance to explain myself as soon as I realized what had just happened.

michel wrote:

GhostHawk wrote: Not everything is worthy of a comment, my friend. But to elaborate anyway, saying "Guilty until proven innocent" is irrelevant because the staff can make decisions without proving them to be guilty, instead the most important thing is to see if a user is breaking the rules and what the most appropriate action would be. Criticism is welcome, however when you're telling people how to do their job then that's different.

This is by far the worst thing you've ever said

I can play the font game too.

michel wrote:

GhostHawk wrote: Not everything is worthy of a comment, my friend. But to elaborate anyway, saying "Guilty until proven innocent" is irrelevant because the staff can make decisions without proving them to be guilty, instead the most important thing is to see if a user is breaking the rules and what the most appropriate action would be. Criticism is welcome, however when you're telling people how to do their job then that's different.

This is by far the worst thing you've ever said

The staff aren't legally binded to prove if you're guilty or innocent, they just need to see if a user is breaking the rules and make a decision on an appropriate action which would keep the forum orderly. Y'know, moderating.

GhostHawk wrote: "Guilty until proven innocent" is irrelevant because the staff can make decisions without proving them to be guilty, instead the most important thing is to see if a user is breaking the rules and what the most appropriate action would be.

Way to beg the question by the way

"We do not need proof to say someone is guilty
Instead, the most import thing is to see if someone is breaking the rules and take action"

You'll say the user is breaking the rules without any proof?


Listen up GhostHawk.

Nobody is saying your decisions are wrong.
Rather, the way you reach your decisions are wrong.

Please don't confuse the two.

GhostHawk wrote: The staff aren't legally binded to prove if you're guilty or innocent, they just need to see if a user is breaking the rules and make a decision on an appropriate action which would keep the forum orderly.

The problem with this is once a moderator starts handing out punishments that either are far worse that what it should be or if a user gets banned for doing something that is not against the rules shit goes to hell.

michel wrote:

GhostHawk wrote: "Guilty until proven innocent" is irrelevant because the staff can make decisions without proving them to be guilty, instead the most important thing is to see if a user is breaking the rules and what the most appropriate action would be.

Way to beg the question by the way

"We do not need proof to say someone is guilty
Instead, the most import thing is to see if someone is breaking the rules and take action"

You'll say the user is breaking the rules without any proof?

No, because I like my job. I keep evidence that a user is breaking the rules, and warn/ban them if they get out of hand. When it comes to spammers, I keep a record of the IPs they use and check for patterns and similarities each time so no legit users are banned. Of course mistakes could be made, and I do my best to find them whenever they may occur. Again, I'm just saying that it isn't required of us to prove anything, that doesn't mean I, nor anyone else does.

You ignored the second half of my post.

Quick thing: I started writing this post after Ghosthawk's initial reply to pixel's post, so I missed most of the argument above this.

First of all, I think we need to stop the mockery and accusations against staff because that won't get anything solved.

Second of all, I think we as staff need to take nearly any idea into consideration, no matter how silly it may seem at first. Any topic is worth discussing and we don't just shut out certain users or ideas, even if one person is proposing it (yes Joey, I'm indirectly implying my trash forum idea that you have taken little to no consideration in at all or have discussed with anybody but you, me and m4sterbr0s). We need to listen to every single person no matter how active they are, no matter what they have said in the past, no matter how troublesome they have been. Everyone deserves to be listened to at least once. To Staff: Don't ask for proof where you've done that or deny, just take the advice.

Third of all, certain users are feeling like they aren't popular enough or since they have had a somewhat iffy past in the community (may or may not have said they don't care) automatically don't have a say in what they want to do or propose to help make the community better. I'm sure if you know who I'm talking about that this has shown, even in this very thread.

I don't want to be on either side because either side is in the right. The staff is showing to not be very welcoming to new ideas and the other side is showing to not handle that fact in a very civil manner by mocking and arguing with the staff. Honestly, get your shit together guys.

Staff: listen to what your members have to say. your duty is to keep the forum in a stable manner and to be a nice place to come to and hang around, and that doesn't mean just punishing misbehaving users and dealing with topics (whether it be locking, merging, etc), it also means listening to the users and taking in ideas to make the forum an in general happier place to go to.
Other Users (no names): Respect whoever is in a moderating or administrative position, no matter how much their actions are pissing you off. For starters, show it in a more cival manner instead of creating multiple public topics about (seriously, that makes you look like a whining bastard who doesn't respect the leaders' decisions, good or bad) whatever the issue is because you aren't making yourself look smarter.

Now to address the post above:

Pixels wrote:I'm offended by your posts. I shall take your speech.

Which I can do? You weren't offending me you were backseat moderating, and telling me who I should and shouldn't ban.[/quote]

GhostHawk wrote:

Pixels wrote:Absolutely no deviation from the norm. If you attempt to step out of line, you shall be banned.

Quit trying to be a victim please.

This is proving something I said above. One is accusing the other of making a false ban, the other is accusing of acting innocent. Accusations lead to heated arguments which will lead to nothing good.

GhostHawk wrote:

Pixels wrote:It is your fault that someone else with an IP you use spams on somewhere unrelated and you shall be banned for it.

Yes, it's better to have a legitimate user connection rather than take a gamble that "maybe this proxy user" won't spam like the last few dozen today.

Although, Ghosthawk, I did read through the pastebin, and that ban was pretty damn unjustified. Pixels, it's not Ghosthawk's fault you decided to take the risk of using a proxy since the spammers are using one too to keep coming back.

GhostHawk wrote:

Pixels wrote:Want to remain anonymous?

<GhostHawk> you
<GhostHawk> can
<GhostHawk> leave

You can, I'm not making you stay here. If you don't agree with how the staff are handling something and not everyone is supporting you, maybe leaving is a good idea instead of telling people what to do and complaining in a chat and now on a forum.

Asking someone to leave because they disagree with what you did? Are you fucking kidding me? Try to be a little more open minded and see that someone isn't happy with the way you're modding and change what you're doing as well as your attitude. Honestly, in this quote, Pixels is by far in the right.

GhostHawk wrote:

Pixels wrote:Guilty until proven innocent.

I forgot when we added the court system.

[/sarcasm][/mockery]

Because those statements from both of you is helping Pixels' likelihood of getting unbanned and Ghosthawk's lowered chances of being a respected mod by the group of members pixels is friends with.

GhostHawk wrote:

Pixels wrote:What's the problem guys? Nobody is complaining!

Except the same people every time, which is what I said in the chat.

Ghosthawk: Complaining means someone is unhappy with what you or another staff member or another regular member is going. Instead of disregarding it because you're annoyed by it isn't exactly the greatest way of gaining your reputation as a caring moderator who isn't trigger happy with bans.

GhostHawk wrote:

Pixels wrote:Those people who actually agree with you and jump in to agree do not count.

Yes, especially when you're telling me who I should and shouldn't ban and why.

Are you implying that if more people joined in on getting someone banned, that it will work? Are you implying that if not enough respectable members join in on lowering the locked topics count that it will be ignored? That's exactly what I got from this post, Ghosthawk.

GhostHawk wrote:

Pixels wrote:Because you and this other person are the main complainers, you and everyone else's complaints are invalid.

If you quit crying wolf every time you had a disagreement with the staff, then this wouldn't be the case.

He may be crying wolf, but there is a real wolf. Don't actually repeat "The Boy who Cried Wolf" fable and actually listen to him, even if you have to multiple times. It will show that you're a tolerant and compassionate moderator.

GhostHawk wrote:quote="Pixels"]You have been kicked. (broke a nonexistent rule)

http://pastebin.com/JCRQNhkt

Spoiler: show

I think you should have added this with your red squares:
<ErikMouse> Well, Sundowner (~webchat@149.210.131.21) <--> YourUsingAWebProxy (~webchat@149.210.131.21) does appear to be the exact same IP.

But then again that would contradict your defense of someone who just lied to staff about how they were connecting, and that they used this IP to create two accounts here.[/quote]

Pixels: It wasn't exactly a good idea to try and come back into the IRC illegally and try to petition your case, whether you were banned for a decent reason or not. By bypassing the ban not once but twice, you're minimalizing your chance of getting unbanned in the first place.

Ghosthawk: The minute you should have known it was pixels, you should have asked him to query you, since that would have been the best way to communicate, since he wouldn't be ban evading and you wouldn't be wasting your time banning his evading IPs. Less tedious actions for both of you.

Like I said not everything is worth a response, but if you really need one: I need better reasoning than "preserving anonymity," and "the agreement of other users," to change the way I moderate. The reason why I'm talking to you and not pixels after my initial post is that you're not trying to backseat moderate. Now, if you could point out exactly how in checking spammer IPs and comparing them to their other ones is a poor way of reasoning in making a decision then please let me know so I can better protect the forums. Otherwise it looks (to me at least not sure about anyone else) that you're making excuses against me and the way I moderate.

A user was banned for something he didn't do, and you promptly banned the person who complained about it instead of listening. Need I say more?
If you take anything from this, please let it be this:
Stop being so closeminded to others opinions just because they disagree with yours.

GhostHawk, you are by far the worst moderator I have ever seen. This is one of the first cases throughout my entire forum life that I have seen someone ban a person, who did nothing against the rules, only because they were using a web proxy. You see, there are thousands of people out there in the world who use web proxies to bypass censorship, whether it's set by their country, their school and even their parents. Some people want to remain anonymous, and that's a right they have and you can't take it away from them. Please keep in mind that you are only in charge of a tiny corner of the world that is literally insignificant to 99.999% of the world population and that you aren't in such a high rank to take a person's right to choice to remain anonymous. Proxies can be used to spam, ban evade, but that's not their fault, because as a moderator, it's your job to ensure that members who break the rules will be punished; your job is not to take action against someone just because you guessed they might or might not spam. Just because of the recent spamming incidents that have happened here, it doesn't give you a reason to play roulette and guess who the spammer is. You banned lots of innocent people and I saw it all, and you gave no attention back to them, which is a total lack of consideration from your part. A lot of people are turning against you, and it's all your fault. All this could have been avoided if you would just fucking listen to the people and change accordingly. Remember that you were just promoted because you're a veteran member, not because the community chose you. You did a terrible job fighting off the spammers. It could have been done a LOT better if you didn't ban innocent people and invaded their privacy with pointless questioning. Do you think you do not need to provide proof in order to take action against someone? That's the most inconsiderate thing I've heard in my life. Do you think you do not need to give a rational explanation and tell us the logical path that you took in order to reach that conclusion, because our opinion doesn't matter; or did you ban them just because your gut told you so? Nobody is telling you to do your job, we did that a long time ago. Now we're telling you to give up; please leave your moderator post.

We are the victims here, GhostHawk. I'm only in this community because I have friends here who cannot be found anywhere else; and if it weren't for that, I'd be gone. You're a manchild, please go away. I have never seen someone this immature.

If you have nothing to hide, you probably shouldn't be using a proxy.

(that's all I really want to add to this; I'll say what I said before, if anyone besides Michel/Pixels wants to step up and say something, please do)

Didn't I hear he was using a proxy because his IP was banned, which was another banned user other than him?

Joey wrote:If you have nothing to hide, you probably shouldn't be using a proxy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nothing_to_hide_argument

Joey wrote:If you have nothing to hide, you probably shouldn't be using a proxy.

People have the right to combat against violation of privacy by using VPNs and proxies to prevent snooping from their ISP, government and eavesdroppers and to bypass censorship set by their school, parents and country. It is not your right to question a person why they are using a proxy/VPN, because it's their personal choice and it affects only them and nobody else. If it's an issue that the administration is having trouble distinguishing spammers from legitimate users, that's an issue on the moderation's end and not the user's and they shouldn't be punished for the moderators' incompetence.

Kinda stupid to ban someone for using a webproxy or VPN for the purpose of privacy protection and using as reason "he'll probably spam, it's a too big risk", and then tell someone to get out of the forum for protecting their privacy, and even worse claiming that the staff is allowed to punish members on a completely baseless allegation. Don't get me wrong, GhostHawk, I wouldn't say you are a bad moderator for this action, but if keep throwing in your abrupt argumentation for an extremely irrational action, I'd be utterly disappointed and would lose my respect from you.

Still can't comprehend why Magician didn't do it to the Top 5 in the global moderator election when he had just as much votes as you did, and why he and Natsu still aren't global moderators when they clearly are the best global moderators from the entire SMBX community, but someone like Namyrr is moderator who doesn't do shit.

Anonymity when using the internet is a thing which can be taken for granted in today’s world. When a person surfs the web their computer is given a public IP address. This address can be used to determine much information about a computer which is linked to the internet. Information such as country of origin, state, region and city can be determined from an IP not to mention it can be used to track things such as what sites you may have visited while surfing the web. As a user of the internet you may not want to have such information readily available for anyone in the world to see and for this reason you may want to hide your IP address. You may ask, why would I want to hide my IP address while browsing the internet as I am not up to anything illegal. Many people associate hiding there IP address with hacking or other illicit online activities but the truth is there are a multitude of completely legitimate reasons why you may want to hide your IP.

• You may be connecting to the internet in a public area such as a library, restaurant, hotel or internet cafe and don’t want your surfing to be tracked by others.
• You may not want to take a chance on your private information being exposed so choose to surf anonymously.
• You may not want your surfing habits tracked by companies or online advertisers.
• You may go to a school or work at an emplorer or live in a country where web surfing is greatly restricted or content is highly filtered.
• You may want to access content that is available only to people in certain areas or countries.
• You just may not like the idea of possibly having your every move monitored and tracked.

As you can see there are many reasons why you would want to hide your IP that have nothing at all to do with illegal activity and are simply about protecting your privacy.

I was thinking of using a VPN or something similar when I move to my new house just so I can remain somewhat anonymous, since my IP address is going to be changed obviously, nobody can track me via my previous one. If you are going to ban a user because they were using a VPN and you suspected them of being a spammer right off the bat, that drives me away from being somewhat anonymous, which will in turn drive me away from this place. It makes me lose respect for the staff and their unjustified actions.

GhostHawk, you seem to be evading the questions as to why Sundowner was banned. He seemed like a perfectly fine user, he hasn't committed any offences except the rule you made up on the fly to compensate for the fact that one doesn't exist, which would be that you aren't allowed to use a VPN, and that is a bullshit rule in general, because users should have the right to have some privacy. I don't think you realize it's pretty easy to obtain somebody's IP address.

I thought you were a pretty good moderator, but telling people to leave the community if they want to keep their anonymity? That's outrageous, and you lost some respect from me for saying that. You shouldn't ban a VPN out of fear that it could be a potential spammer, because you have no proof, no solid evidence that they were a spammer, they didn't even spam once. You basically more or less took away their right to remain anonymous, which a lot of people not only do, but want to do, on the Internet.

Banning Sundowner was unjustified.
Banning michel was unjustified.
You could have done a lot better than this.

EDIT:

Joey wrote:If you have nothing to hide, you probably shouldn't be using a proxy.

What is there not to hide? It's pretty simple to say that people don't want their public information thrown out into the vastness that is the Internet, because people can very easily grab onto and pretty much stalk you with it. Proxies are actually the best thing to exist, and it's a lot safer to use one on the Internet than it would be to go without.

Joey wrote:(that's all I really want to add to this; I'll say what I said before, if anyone besides Michel/Pixels wants to step up and say something, please do)

What are you trying to imply? Something baseless, as usual whenever you direct something nasty at michel and/or Pixels? Please stop.