Super Mario Bros. X Forums

First of all, I'd like to clarify that this is not in ANY WAY intended to insult the staff, or tell them how to do their job. Also, it'd be quite ironic if I receive a board warning for this considering this thread is mainly about that.

To start, I don't see what is people's beef with DarkMatt. He can be unfair at times in your opinion, but he's doing his job. Even if he is a bit strict, stop being butthurt over whether or not you received a board warning or ban from him and stop PMing me about it. Yes, I've received some PMs - not saying who - complaining to me about how DarkMatt unfairly 'did this to me'. What do you want me to do about it? I'm not someone you should trust, nor look up to, and I'm not a staff member, either. If you really want to go complain about a staff member, ditch me, and go to Joey or Valtteri, and quit thinking I can handle everything, please, because I can't, even if I tell you I can. I only tell you I can just so I can get more information out of you to possibly report it to the staff later. Enough about me, though. Let's get into stuff.

Okay, so what happened to the verbal warnings? How come users - a good instance would be DMS - got an instant warning merely because he said this?:

DimitrisPowerSeven wrote:This is amazing boss battle i play it over 5 time and i still play it (even now)

I would see why a verbal warning would come in place there, but an instant board warning? Unfair. I would bring up other instances as well but I won't. I'll just say: Board warnings aren't the only source of punishment, and instantly getting one for something as tiny as "cool" or "I liked this level" and ESPECIALLY receiving one for not giving any criticism is dumb. Even though criticism is good to give and encouraged, you shouldn't receive any source of punishment for not giving any and posting for the simple purpose of praising one's creation. It's ridiculous in my opinion.

And here's where this quote will come into good use:

krazykat wrote:I also don't like how, even though the idea isn't fully implemented yet, the punishment system is, and that users have even gotten board warnings for saying that they liked a level. The system feels really power-hungry, strict, and just overall bad to be honest. I'd also like to say that the staff has been abusing me over my opinions on this forum update, and I'm sick and tired of it. Disagreeing with someone doesn't warrant punishment; The staff would like to say otherwise. I feel like this idea is ultimately going to fail, and that's just my opinion. I've explained my reasoning, so don't go downrepping/warning/banning me for this, because that would be a prime example of bad/incompetent/power-hungry/selfish staff. If an opinion is punishable, you need to rethink this update, and by extension, the rules in general. I feel like I have to reiterate the fact that this is only an opinion and opinions just aren't to be punished.

I feel like the staff needs to have a little history lesson on what was worked and what hasn't in this community, because overstrict rules and staff have never led anywhere good, and that's exactly where I feel we're headed right now.

To be honest, everything said up here are the problems with staff.

Another thing I'd like to bring up:

DarkMatt wrote:

Radishl wrote:The boss was preety amazing. I loved the concept and I havn't quite seen it before. I also loved the Wario land reference at the end when Mario has to pick up the hand and throw it at Rudy. It brings back old memories.

Very good, this level deserves to be moved to the best.

What was bad about this level?

Are you kidding me? Radishl made a rather constructive post explaining why he liked it and made it quite clear he didn't think there was anything bad about it, but in return, he gets a reply asking 'what's bad about it'? Is there anything wrong with liking a fucking level and expressing that?

By the way, Matt, it might look like I'm throwing an egg at you and you only, but you're not the staff member I've seen do something like this, so if I were you, I wouldn't feel attacked or hated or anything (not that I think you would feel that way anyways).

The last instance I'll bring up here:

auto2112 wrote:

Quill wrote: No.

It looks like Valtteri insta-warned auto2112 for this, even though auto2112 hasn't ever done anything wrong in the past, so his warning was, if anything, unjustified and too quick, especially on a newish user.

In conclusion, giving me a punishment for this thread's existence will just prove how ridiculous the staff can be at times by giving people punishments for stating their opinion. What's so wrong with an opinion? What's wrong with saying a staff member is awful as long as you give justification? What's wrong with saying a level is "good"? What's wrong with arguing with somebody as long as it doesn't turn into a flamewar? What's wrong with disagreeing with the staff's actions? None of these are hurting anybody, but apparently to the staff, all of these are worthy of a punishment. This just proves how the staff here is strict as hell - and is barely open to opinions from the userbase.

You know that in the Level Section that there is a new Rule placed in that everything should be taken seriously around it and it also visually clears up that you can easily recieve warnings if you are not keeping up to the Rules. I know that giving up an Board Warning just for a simple mistake is kind of too much but if someone is not looking up to the rules all that much that is their fault but that is just my opinion overall.

The level criticism rules are way to strict, and so are the punishments for not following them. This may be part of the problem, but the staff here is kinda strict plz don wrn meh.

bossedit8 wrote:You know that in the Level Section that there is a new Rule placed in that everything should be taken seriously around it and it also visually clears up that you can easily recieve warnings if you are not keeping up to the Rules. I know that giving up an Board Warning just for a simple mistake is kind of too much but if someone is not looking up to the rules all that much that is their fault but that is just my opinion overall.

I actually knew about that new rule, but still, it's WAY too strict and unnecessary. Earning a board warning for saying that you simply liked a level is unfair, especially towards those who just suck at making long posts or giving criticism.

Magna wrote:The level criticism rules are way to strict, and so are the punishments for not following them. This may be part of the problem, but the staff here is kinda strict plz don wrn meh.

To be honest, they're not really "kinda" strict. They're just plain strict. A few staff members combined could equal two Kyasarins here which is saying a lot. Basically, this thread's purpose was to try to stop staff from giving automatic board warnings for simply stupid reasons like lack of criticism, and they also need to stop giving board warnings for opinions.

You don't know Kyasarin. Don't compare him to people here.

Users are given board warnings because they don't follow the rules. That's what warnings are for.

Joey wrote:You don't know Kyasarin. Don't compare him to people here.

The Wayback Machine says alot imo.

Joey wrote:Users are given board warnings because they don't follow the rules. That's what warnings are for.

What are verbal warnings then? Only for respected veteran community members who the staff likes?

Verbal warnings are arbitrary. And quit it with the "veterans that the staff likes" thing.

Joey wrote:Verbal warnings are arbitrary.

ar·bi·trar·y
ˈärbəˌtrerē/

based on random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system.


Wrong answer!
You have just shown that you are way too strict and don't care for the welfare of the forum. This was the issue with the original forums. Verbal warnings are a necessary part of keeping a userbase. Going straight to board warnings just shows that a moderator cares more about themself being popular for being an active mod than they do about the userbase's welfare.

Joey wrote:And quit it with the "veterans that the staff likes" thing.

You guys just aren't open to criticism, are you? inb4 board warning for criticizing the staff

5. Mathematics. undetermined; not assigned a specific value

That's the definition I was using for the word "arbitrary", but the definition you provided kinda works too.

Verbal warnings are arbitrary. The notion that we would need to enforce a secondary level of warnings is ridiculous.

Stop telling me how to do my job.

I usually just give a verbal warning for those "really easy to break" rules because see above. If I were enforcing the rules to the letter, I'd be getting a lot more complaints about why they got warned and having to spell it out to them. I like giving benefit of the doubt anyway, and most people tend to straighten up on their first verbal warning.

But this is how I do things. How everyone else does it is up to them, honestly.

Joey wrote:Stop telling me how to do my job.

And here we see a wild Joey stalking his prey- Oh! He has snapped out at the grazing KoolKat! This is typical in the wilderness of an SMBX Forums, as the wild Joey has just gotten a snack.

DarkMatt wrote:But this is how I do things. How everyone else does it is up to them, honestly.

So what you're saying is that the actions of the staff are each their own and there is no set system on how warnings should be dealt out? Now that's interesting.

I would say the opposite, but really, I would not openly assume that's the case. It's no secret that our staff handles things differently. We don't do it for EVERYTHING, though, we get together for the serious stuff.

I need to give a real response so sssh

DarkMatt wrote:I would say the opposite, but really, I would not openly assume that's the case. It's no secret that our staff handles things differently. We don't do it for EVERYTHING, though, we get together for the serious stuff.

What do you handle differently, aside from the serious/large discussion things that you would group together in a board room to talk about?

Do you punish users based on your reputation with them (e.g. I don't care for user X therefor I shall punish him to my liking), or do you have some sort of chart of severity for punishment handling (bigger the offence = bigger the punishment)? If you make these things known it might make some people less likely to commit offences because nobody wants to be punished if it's let known what the consequences of their actions might be. If I knew I would get severely punished for something ahead of time, maybe I wouldn't have done it.

Who knows. \_(._.)_/

I will apologize for the warnings and points brought up in the OP. I really had no reason to start doing that on my own, what happened was I was frustrated with how slow the levels forum update was going. I'm generally taking a backseat for the time being until all of us find more time to get this update rolling along. (To provide context: I gave a warning for that post because I look down and there's another post in another thread doing the same thing. I should've just sent the verbal warning but two wrongs made a right in my head back then.)

As for punishing for giving an opinion, you might have noticed it's the serious levels forum. Part of that update is getting people to adhere to a standard of feedback. It's part of our road plan to start tightening that up, but rest assured, we should and probably will only give verbal warnings for that scenario.

It's a fumble on my part and I will take responsibility.

Opinions shouldn't have warnings handed out at all since they're opinions. I mean, I know opinions are exiled from the Internet, but they can actually be helpful in having things changed if you want to adhere to the specifications of some people so you can please everyone.

Unless the opinion is flat-out dickish and has no actual personal input, warn on.

Except that's not the problem at all. We would allow any opinion, so long as it's articulate and constructive. If it's not, then it's not allowed.

Have you even read the rules sitting around in the levels forum? Because it addresses this.

Fair enough.

Also, I quite honestly have not read the rules in the levels forum as my activity there is only once in a blue moon, so I have no reason to read them, but maybe I'll take a look sometime.

Y'know, Darkmatt has done worse than give people bullshit warnings (At least he apologized), he also Demoted an LJ by the name of "Krazykat" for somes reasons that I bet are flaming a mod because of his own opinions on a new sub-forum, and also Darkmatt really shouldn't be calling people Immature, I've seen him rudely insult people like supermario7 because Darkmatt hates his level design, which he keep saying over and over again, which a mod shouldn't even be doing, He should be breaking up fights instead of making them. I'll try to give Darkmatt a second chance, but one more fuck up like that can cost him his reputation, I get that being a mod can be hard, but Giving shit warnings and demoting others isn't the right thing to do.

When did this thread turn into a Staff Critism thread? Oh wait, that's what the thread is about. Never mind then.

Superiorstar wrote:

DarkMatt actually demoted KoolKat because he snooped through the MCP and did absolutely nothing as a level judge, if I remember correctly, nothing to do with actual personal quarrels or anything of the sort.