Warnings on Doomworld. (now suspensions)

[EvelisH]

1 minute ago, Nine Inch Heels said:

I literally explained what the warning system is there for. It's an administrative tool for moderators to make users aware that they've pushed too hard. That's what a warning point means to the letter. If you get a warning point it says why the warning was issued, that's how you know what went wrong. I don't understand how that's such a complicated mechanic to grasp.

 

That has nothing to do with warning points and moderation, I've seen what happened and where it happened, and at no point in the discussion I'm pointing towards have you been pressured by a moderator as far as I can tell. That's 100% a difference of opinion with another forum member, and it had nothing to do with a code of conduct, or a lack thereof. And if for some reason you think that registering to a forum just to make a point on a very controversial topic, which your husband already made for you, doesn't come across at least as suspicious, then sorry, but that is something you should have expected at the time.

But you pointed out the the warning system means nothing and then contradict it by saying it does mean something is confusing me. Yes it should mean something, but many warnings might not happen in the first place if people knew the rules better.  Im just stating that the rules are vague which can mean more rule breaks.  Also about that first post I was involved with why was my opinion deleted to begin with?  If it didnt break any rules it shouldnt have been deleted to begin with. Yes the conversation was going way off topic from the original post, but perhaps it should have just been locked right then and there. Instead comments that the mods thought were ''unfavorable'' had been deleted and the ones that fit their narrative remained before being locked.  Also what is suspicious about me joining a forum for a specific topic I felt strongly about?  Do you think im actually my husband posing as his wife?  I mean I can prove who I am I have no shame in self advertising myself if need be. Trust me if you see the type of crap my husband posts and see what I post, its obvious we are two different people.

[Major Arlene]

18 minutes ago, EvelisH said:

But you pointed out the the warning system means nothing and then contradict it by saying it does mean something is confusing me. Yes it should mean something, but many warnings might not happen in the first place if people knew the rules better.  Im just stating that the rules are vague which can mean more rule breaks.  Also about that first post I was involved with why was my opinion deleted to begin with?  If it didnt break any rules it shouldnt have been deleted to begin with. Yes the conversation was going way off topic from the original post, but perhaps it should have just been locked right then and there. Instead comments that the mods thought were ''unfavorable'' had been deleted and the ones that fit their narrative remained before being locked.  Also what is suspicious about me joining a forum for a specific topic I felt strongly about?  Do you think im actually my husband posing as his wife?  I mean I can prove who I am I have no shame in self advertising myself if need be. Trust me if you see the type of crap my husband posts and see what I post, its obvious we are two different people.

Basically that entire conversation got deleted so dont think it was just your opinions. But yes, you had pointed out the only reason you'd registered is to make a point on a very controversial topic, so don't say "oh, I came here to make friends."

 

I've seen what your husband posts. You aren't proving to be much different so far. 

 

Arguing about things like basic human decency in WAD content is a good way to get warned, as an example. I won't go bringing the subject up again to derail further but you get the point. 

 

Basically just use common sense- if it's controversial know that its very possible you can get warned if you're being rude about it.

[Redneckerz]

35 minutes ago, EvelisH said:

Thing is I dont want to get to the point of even receiving a warning in the first place.  Perhaps it might not mean anything to you but it might mean more to others.

To whom? The vast majority on DW knows what the warning system is for, namely, a warning whose only weight is to serve as a reminder for you to not do certain things. That's the consequence. The actual consequence (as in, a penalty) is not done.

If you want to avoid that, then just post decently. Completely avoiding even the chance of getting a warning is not a healthy thing to do - You are worrying about something that carries no serious consequence, and only a relative reminder.

 

10 minutes ago, EvelisH said:

Yes it should mean something, but many warnings might not happen in the first place if people knew the rules better.  Im just stating that the rules are vague which can mean more rule breaks. 

Have you DMed the staff at this point already? Because i feel this discussion is going in circles. Multiple people have explained what the warning system entails, ive tried above to explain the weight they have, which is both without any serious consequence, but there is a relative consequence.

10 minutes ago, EvelisH said:

Instead comments that the mods thought were ''unfavorable'' had been deleted and the ones that fit their narrative remained before being locked.

I'd politely advise you to keep the meta-complaints reserved for the staff themselves. Which is why i am asking if you have DMed them already.

10 minutes ago, EvelisH said:

Also what is suspicious about me joining a forum for a specific topic I felt strongly about?  Do you think im actually my husband posing as his wife?  I mean I can prove who I am I have no shame in self advertising myself if need be. Trust me if you see the type of crap my husband posts and see what I post, its obvious we are two different people.

You geniunely don't find the timing in which it occurred strange, especially when its a new account? For all anyone would know, you could be a duplicate account. This is why the modus operandi is that of being suspicious given this context.

[dr_st]

@EvelisH

Consider the system on Doomworld as application of the Lazy evaluation principle to the forum rules. The rules are not explained, until the first time you break them, at which point they are communicated to you through the warning message. Since there are no immediate or permanent repercussions, it's a reasonable system. How many first-time users start by reading forum rules anyways?

[Nine Inch Heels]

1 minute ago, EvelisH said:

But you pointed out the the warning system means nothing and then contradict it by saying it does mean something is confusing me.

Warning points mean nothing with regards to whether or not a ban will be issued.

 

Warning points do mean that you've crossed a line, and you're being told why.

 

2 minutes ago, EvelisH said:

many warnings might not happen in the first place if people knew the rules better.

Look, we can keep arguing this up and down, but having spent a couple years on the internet I've already learned that a code of conduct means fuckall to the people who would end up reeling in warning points in rapid fire fashion anyway. When was the last time you actually read any EULA in its entirety instead of just clicking "I agree with the terms and conditions"? See why calling for a stone tablet carved on Mount Sinai doesn't really help?

 

7 minutes ago, EvelisH said:

Also about that first post I was involved with why was my opinion deleted to begin with?  If it didnt break any rules it shouldnt have been deleted to begin with. Yes the conversation was going way off topic from the original post, but perhaps it should have just been locked right then and there.

It seems you already have your answer. And besides, I don't think you got a warning point on that occasion. How do I know? Many of my posts have been removed as well, because I'm pretty quick to get into arguments with people who have a tendency to create dumpsterfires, so when said people's posts get removed, mine get ousted as well because I quote people a lot, and that has nothing to do with breaking any rules, it's merely done to keep the threads readable. Also it strikes me as nonsensical to ask for threads to be locked immediately, which in turn kills the discussion for everybody else, when instead removing unnecessary fluff is a much more forthcoming method overall.

 

12 minutes ago, EvelisH said:

Instead comments that the mods thought were ''unfavorable'' had been deleted and the ones that fit their narrative remained before being locked.

Ah, finally we get to the meat of the discussion... What you're actually saying here is that you want explicit rules, because otherwise forum moderation will abuse their power and infringe on your "free speech". That's what this is really about. It's not about you being concerned about the eventuality of receiving a digital stain on your digital white vest, you have a problem with the idea that the host of this private party can make decisions you can't argue by way of saying "I did nothing wrong" while pointing at a code of conduct that you interpret how you see fit.

 

18 minutes ago, EvelisH said:

Also what is suspicious about me joining a forum for a specific topic I felt strongly about?  Do you think im actually my husband posing as his wife?

Do you think that idea is particularly far fetched? I don't think it is.

[EvelisH]

So ill just answer everyone with this one post after reading everything I see.  Yes my original reason I came here was to defend my husbands point, but that doesnt mean after the fact I dont want to get to know the community better.  I do believe in free speech, but I can also accept if a place has a foundation of rules that can limit what I say to avoid hostility.  I just dont want to be put under the impression that I can say whatever I can and then be punished for it.  Last thing I want to get into is politics at this point and seeing as im being attacked at all sides from various people because I have an opinion that people have issue with. I dont feel very welcomed here at this point, but perhaps I came in with the wrong mindset so ill take some blame on that.    Ive visited this website for a long time without becoming a member and since I am a member now, I ought as well take advantage of it and start talking.  In the future I will just keep more to myself and about the rules here I will be messaging a moderator about it.  At the end of the day I just dont want to break rules and it seems ive already given people a bad taste because I just want more transparency.  I dont think theres anything wrong with having a post with specific rules.  We can all agree to dissagree at this point.  I do hope I can get to know all of you better and that perhaps we can get along in the future.  I am not my husband I am my own person with my own thoughts and differing opinions.

[EvelisH]

33 minutes ago, dr_st said:

@EvelisH

Consider the system on Doomworld as application of the Lazy evaluation principle to the forum rules. The rules are not explained, until the first time you break them, at which point they are communicated to you through the warning message. Since there are no immediate or permanent repercussions, it's a reasonable system. How many first-time users start by reading forum rules anyways?

I mean I like reading the rules of whatever place I join,  I had alot of trouble finding it on this website until someone linked it to me.  It would be nice if it was located somewhere people can easily see.

Heck I even read the privacy policy xD

[P41R47]

The conversation here brings to my mind that old Billy Joel's song: We didn't start the fire.

But we tried to fight it...

 

@EvelisH let me have your atention for a sec. Please, just a sec.

Well, i went to a public school when i was a child. And nobody ever gave me a code of conduct, or rules or anything. When somobody made something bad, teacher just calls out and made warning. If things goes on, a suspension comes, and just after a good amount of warnings the teachers banned the problematic one.

The other students, the vast majority, just learned from the errors others made, and a few times, a warning come to them, too.

 

What i'm trying to said is that most of us here, you, me, NIH, Redneckers, we are all adults here. We already know what is true life and how to behave on it. And what the consequences of our missbehaviour is.

The only rule i recall that my parents ever told me is don't do to others what you don't want they do to you.

That is be respectful.

Nothing more, but nothing less.

 

What happened yesterday was an special case, it doesn't happend all the days, and it was just really unfortunate to you for that being one of your first experiences here.

I can't give you an apology in name of all, but if anything that happened yesterday made you feel unconfortable, know for sure that it wasn't the intention and it was also unconfortable for us, too, well, at least to me.

 

I only hope you can have a nice stay here, and after not long you will start to know each other, know our manners and our humorous ways for joking around.

[Misty]

I have few personal rules I apply on myself when I'm online on public places:

1. I try to not be rude or whatever in more harsher terms. I don't know who's behind the screen and not everyone is on the same level as me, it saves me from misunderstandings and other troubles it might cause. 
2. I think before posting, because in long term those old responses can cause regrets or cringe. I happens for me when I look at history of my postings, heh.

3. If I don't have anything useful to say in threads, I keep silence and move on. In long term, it proves useful, especially if thread turns into shitshow or provocations. 

[P41R47]

8 minutes ago, Misty said:

2. I think before posting, because in long term those old responses can cause regrets or cringe. I happens for me when I look at history of my postings, heh.

I can quite relate to it, too.

I spend more than an hour writing my previous message, and after that, i still think it can put some on fire!

hahahah

oh billy joel, oh billy!

Heck i want to sing now.

[Redneckerz]

31 minutes ago, EvelisH said:

So ill just answer everyone with this one post after reading everything I see.  Yes my original reason I came here was to defend my husbands point, but that doesnt mean after the fact I dont want to get to know the community better.  I do believe in free speech, but I can also accept if a place has a foundation of rules that can limit what I say to avoid hostility.  I just dont want to be put under the impression that I can say whatever I can and then be punished for it.

Okay, i hear you loud and clear.

 

My counter question: Have you DMed the staff?

• If yes: Wait for their comment and forfeit commenting in this thread as the main issue has been recognized.
• If not: DM the staff and wait for their comment.

Anything else at this point does not help solve your issue.

31 minutes ago, EvelisH said:

 Last thing I want to get into is politics at this point and seeing as im being attacked at all sides from various people because I have an opinion that people have issue with.

People aren't attacking you, they are addressing your point and giving advice on what you should do next. Instead of doing that (Atleast i can't see that you are actively posting on DM's, except perhaps earlier in the thread?) you keep on repeating the same argument over and over, as if me or others do not understand what you want. That is not the case, however.

 

20 minutes ago, EvelisH said:

It would be nice if it was located somewhere people can easily see.

Heck I even read the privacy policy xD

Tell the staff about this. They are the only ones that can actively change that anyway, so putting it here won't get you the change that you want to have.

[EvelisH]

16 minutes ago, Redneckerz said:

Okay, i hear you loud and clear.

 

My counter question: Have you DMed the staff?

• If yes: Wait for their comment and forfeit commenting in this thread as the main issue has been recognized.
• If not: DM the staff and wait for their comment.

 

Yeah I did. I just wanted to take some time so I could write everything I felt was important to mention.  Sometimes I type like an idiot with a million ideas that come out like rubbish so I had to collect my thoughts first.

[P41R47]

oh don't worry, @EvelisH we all do that sometimes.

Then we all cry on the corner :P hahahah

 

Not everyone, but there are some memembers that have a custom title under their avatar, that mean that user is a years long member, and usually that title describe that respective user... or tries to.

 

Custom titles are given by administrators on special ocassions or when a member made something that truly deserves it.

 

For example, if one day i receive a custom title it would be something along the lines of "voluntary firefighter...most the time firestarter".

:P

[EvelisH]

2 minutes ago, P41R47 said:

oh don't worry, @EvelisH we all do that sometimes.

Then we all cry on the corner :P hahahah

 

Not everyone, but there are some memembers that have a custom title under their avatar, that mean that user is a years long member, and usually that title describe that respective user... or tries to.

 

Custom titles are given by administrators on special ocassions or when a member made something that truly deserves it.

 

For example, if one day i receive a custom title it would be something along the lines of "voluntary firefighter...most the time firestarter".

:P

Hehe at this rate my title will become Karen. xD  I wouldnt mind it I like to complain. 

[Redneckerz]

5 minutes ago, EvelisH said:

Hehe at this rate my title will become Karen. xD  I wouldnt mind it I like to complain. 

EvelisH

''Let me speak to your manager''

 

or

 

EvelisH

''Forum Karen''

[starfruit]

me when i get warned for making a shitpost wad and sharing it, mean while nuts.wad and mock 2 get to stay up

[Chip]

I'm glad that everyone at the end of that conversationed agreed on Karen! It's awesome being in a community with all you guys and gals! You're the best! thank you all for the comments so far. they make everybody reading them a better user on Doomworld!

[Redneckerz]

1 hour ago, starfruit said:

me when i get warned for making a shitpost wad and sharing it, mean while nuts.wad and mock 2 get to stay up

 

But for a more serious answer:

• Nuts.wad is more of a benchmark than a jokewad.
• Mock 2 is a good example of a proper jokewad, which is rather hard to achieve. There is thought put behind the jokes on display.

If you share what you call a shitpost wad and its not funny like Mock2, nor can it be used as a universal benchmark like nuts.wad, then yeah, what's the use?

 

Proper jokewads are a rarity because their humor should transcend the time of recording. Universal humor is hard to achieve. Hence why a Terrywad is never considered a jokewad on the basis of its (lack of) quality.

[Nine Inch Heels]

36 minutes ago, Redneckerz said:

If you share what you call a shitpost wad and its not funny like Mock2, nor can it be used as a universal benchmark like nuts.wad, then yeah, what's the use?

So I'm gonna cut in here real quick and point out what actually happened, and then I'll go over why your line of thinking doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

 

The WAD in question was advertised as a deliberately non-serious effort. The OP was properly structured, screenshots were provided, and the map made good on its promise, regardless of whether or not you may find said promise inviting.

 

What happened then was DynamiteKaytorn showed up, a user who I've seen making pretty harsh statements about particular kinds of maps repeatedly in the past, in particular when it comes to mappers who are new around the block. They said that the map in question was "one of the dumbest things" they've ever seen, and also argued that said map couldn't even be finished successfully when played.

 

Add a few more non-content one-liners along the lines of "thanks, I hate it", as well as a commentary saying "that's been done before, and it wasn't good back then", and you end up with a post of mine, containing a recorded blind attempt at said map that makes it to the exit successfully in just about 2 minutes worth of time without even dying once, meaning any and all sentiments regarding the feasibility of said map were proven wrong right then and there.

 

Now here's where moderation came in, and evidently decided that the thread was a dumpster fire, which for the record is not something you could blame the OP for, which then led to the removal of the thread in its entirety, rather than weeding out the non-content posts and the vitriol.

 

 

So what's the use? Why does a map need to have any "use" at all? If I were to go full sea lion-mode here, I could just lean back and ask you to show me examples of maps that do something that hasn't been done before in some way shape or form, and you'd be damn hard pressed to find a megaWAD's worth of maps that do something so unique that you could irrefutably make the case that it's "entirely new and original". The fact of the matter is that the vast majority of maps out there do stuff that has already been done in the IWADs, except the respective modern maps are doing it "better" or "worse", or are "nuanced" in some capacity. So when you're trying to make a point based on the "purpose" of a map, you might as well ask why people make any new maps at all. In fact, we could just pack it up, lean back, and let the game rot as it were, because chances are that nobody's gonna come up with something so unique that it would have a "use" any time soon, as per your logic.

Edited June 30, 2020 by Nine Inch Heels

[Redneckerz]

13 minutes ago, Nine Inch Heels said:

So I'm gonna cut in here real quick and point out what actually happened, and then I'll go over why your line of thinking doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

 

The WAD in question was advertised as a deliberately non-serious effort. The OP was properly structured, screenshots were provided, and the map made good on its promise, regardless of whether or not you may find said promise inviting.

I provided a generic explanation on the user's shitpost wad. If there are any particularities to it (And they are as noted by your response) then please consider it as such.

 

With that said its good that you point out the specifics here.

 

13 minutes ago, Nine Inch Heels said:

So what's the use? Why does a map need to have any "use" at all?

What i mean by that is that if a WAD is clearly intended as a shitpost, just done so it looks legit, the use case is to piss someone else off. The specific user then points to Mock 2 and NUTS.wad as comparable assets, both of which have recieved their strides one way or another. So i don't feel the comparison point sticks, as both Mock 2 and NUTS served a purpose.

 

A shitpost wad in the broadest sense of the word (Again, using a generic explanation here) has no particular shining purpose. This is what i mean't with ''What's the use?''

 

In no way am i suggesting that every map should have something unique, just that both Mock 2 and NUTS have recieved their strides for their own specific reasons.

[Nine Inch Heels]

3 minutes ago, Redneckerz said:

What i mean by that is that if a WAD is clearly intended as a shitpost, just done so it looks legit, the use case is to piss someone else off.

That's fine and all, but the OP wasn't made such that it would fool people into downloading anything they were not made aware of in advance. The OP was 100% transparent with regards to what people were about to get into, and I'd sing an entirely different song if it were any different.

 

Furthermore, I see no reason whatsoever to dismiss comparisons to other "joke WADs" based solely on the grounds that some of them might be more (in)famous than others, or based on the notion that NUTS comes with the (unintended) use-case as a benchmark or "diagnostics" WAD. These are arbitrary standards you could use to just bludgeon any new joke map out there into oblivion, because any new WAD is gonna be less (in)famous right out the gate, and that should tell you something about the problem I have with your way of reasoning here.

[Redneckerz]

10 minutes ago, Nine Inch Heels said:

That's fine and all, but the OP wasn't made such that it would fool people into downloading anything they were not made aware of in advance. The OP was 100% transparent with regards to what people were about to get into, and I'd sing an entirely different song if it were any different.

For the sake of transparency ive looked at the original thread (in Cache) from Starfruit (Eyesore.wad) to get a better understanding of the specifics here.

And yeah, that is pretty self-explainatory. It is indeed a low quality WAD, with the sole intent of being, well, an eyesore.

 

Too many HOM's.
 

10 minutes ago, Nine Inch Heels said:

Furthermore, I see no reason whatsoever to dismiss comparisons to other "joke WADs" based solely on the grounds that some of them might be more (in)famous than others, or based on the notion that NUTS comes with the (unintended) use-case as a benchmark or "diagnostics" WAD. These are arbitrary standards you could use to just bludgeon any new joke map out there into oblivion, because any new WAD is gonna be less (in)famous right out the gate, and that should tell you something about the problem I have with your way of reasoning here.

Perhaps its the wrong parameter i am applying here, but in the case of Mock 2, its clear why it got its strides. So mentioning that as a vehicle of comparison feels off by default, because Mock 2 does a lot of consideration to arrive at its delivery. Eyesore does not.

 

NUTS is indeed a unintended use case where i can understand where my reasoning may fall off the cliff because of the similarities. Both WADS clearly set out to trigger the user into a negative experience. NUTS's (Saving grace?) is that its negative experience has positive parameters attached to it (The aforementioned benchmark example). Eyesore does not have that.

 

I feel a better comparison could be Lilith and Eyesore, but the same result would apply: In Lilith, the glitches are purposefully intentional and the WAD is actually rather playable besides the avantgarde look of it. Eyesore does not take any of that percieved balancing (For lack of a better word) in account: Its a level consisting almost entirely of HOM. That does not net a playable experience, nor does it has a visible use case (Unless we were to test how many HOM's Vanilla Doom can render before bombing out).

[EvelisH]

9 minutes ago, Redneckerz said:

For the sake of transparency ive looked at the original thread (in Cache) from Starfruit (Eyesore.wad) to get a better understanding of the specifics here.

And yeah, that is pretty self-explainatory. It is indeed a low quality WAD, with the sole intent of being, well, an eyesore.

 

 

Okay I just watched about 30 seconds of someone playing that wad.  It is a literal eyesore,  now I have lost more of my sight.  Thanks @starfruit  :)

[starfruit]

4 minutes ago, EvelisH said:

Okay I just watched about 30 seconds of someone playing that wad.  It is a literal eyesore,  now I have lost more of my sight.  Thanks @starfruit  :)

no prob mate

[Nine Inch Heels]

@Redneckerz Are you aware that you're still inserting what you think makes something "playable", "purposeful", "worthwhile" as arbitrary standards?

 

The map is playable. I beat it first try. That's that point out the window.

 

The map is purposely/intentionally ugly, as per the very title of the respective thread. That's another point gone.

 

Did making the map in question take as much effort as a map in lilith.pk3? Probably not. But that begs the question how much perceived effort constitutes "enough", and you're gonna have a hard time making a case with regards to why your measuring stick isn't just an arbitrary standard you'd like to impose on somebody else.

 

People are well within their rights to upload "low effort" maps, and trying to somehow impose arbitrary standards on newcomers is a sure fire way to alienate mappers while they're still in the cradle. So I'd suggest cutting that out. And to be perfectly clear, not living up to WADs like mock2 most certainly doesn't make for a very good reason to simply oust an entire thread that merely suffered from getting shat up.

[Chip]

LoL! this topic started with me asking about how the warning system works, and now it's about how people are losing their eyesight over a WAD! I'll check it out. I'll write my review to it below.

 

eow tjau wfa yurli amaxinh! i jad son mounch fion wojth i@ 5.5! ghitowat jon #sgarftuit@

[starfruit]

1 minute ago, LiT_gam3r said:

LoL! this topic started with me asking about how the warning system works, and now it's about how people are losing their eyesight over a WAD! I'll check it out. I'll write my review to it below.

 

eow tjau wfa yurli amaxinh! i jad son mounch fion wojth i@ 5.5! ghitowat jon #sgarftuit@

ok

[Chip]

2 minutes ago, starfruit said:

ok

like @fraggle said, responses that are single words don't have to be said. this response could be embellished upon more, or not be said at all. That helps the community grow.  

[Major Arlene]

Can we not derail this thread over a really dumb wad, please and thanks?

[seed]

Got an even better idea: Can we close this, actually?

 

At this point I think the topic's truly outlived its usefulness and going forward will just result only in more circlejerking and repeating the same points ad nauseam.