Yep, it is mostly the popular members that gets less slack for their action. I agree with a lot of things said in this thread
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
ResetEra Appeals Panel
- Thread starter Squarehard
- Start date
- Status
so.............. mods.....................
the idea is more about being a jury, isn't it? they constantly have to "onboard" people for jury duty and that seems to have worked out okay for our actual justice system just fine
I agree. There is nothing wrong with a long standing board. The main point is they should be separate from mods. A separation of powers for checks and balances so to speak
the only way this would work is if the "panel" were anonymous from each other and the mods so there are no blocks or collusion. cases should rotate based on randomization instead of by tenure, i guess you could say like a dating service (left swipe, right swipe), so the entire pool is actively involved throughout.
in other words, to make it perfect it would be too complex.
It doesn't need to be nearly this complicated, and there's very few appeals that need to be actually taken seriously. If you want some sort of open appeal process, there needs to be a very high treshold for an appeal to actually be taken seriously or considered by staff simply to cut through a lot of the generic, 'I was banned for bigotry even tho I'm right unban me' nonsense. There's tech solutions for Xenforo that could be looked into that would largely handle a lot of the pain of the process.
Seems easier to first start with a forum detailing every ban that happens and another forum for users to discuss bans in general as a start. That way, it gives the community a chance to communicate whether it was or wasn't acceptable without polluting thread discussions that end up getting shut down (when really, threads should rarely be shut unless it's an obvious troll thread, I personally dislike the " This thread has run it's course" reason if the thread had remained civil and the rigidity in threads is another issue)which shouldn't be and also ensure that that ban reasons have to be very specific and shouldn't change like we saw last night as it becomes more publicly viewed. Seems like a lot of effort into jumping straight away into a jury system that's going to solve very little at all that could be focused elsewhere and really, unless you involve the whole community for jury (Not everyone's going to want to do it, not everyone is active, and we have no idea whether the people on jury can even follow the situations on whether it was justified or not) it's pointless. You shouldn't really need this in a forum and the focus should primarily be on policies and the current systems in place which led to the unjustified bans not focusing on post solutions that account for so little.
With so many users from different backgrounds, different places within the world at different timezones and so many different different topics, it would be more effective to literally have more moderators in general than this suggested system. Increases the response time to reporting, more moderators able to judge the situations at hand as well for more nuanced situations.
A system which moderators can flag specific threads that they are watching it in a particular thread that is starting to derail so that users don't get frustrated that no one is watching but the nuance involved likely requires discussion between moderators and the users before handling a particular judgement would be something as well. I've seen this many times.
With so many users from different backgrounds, different places within the world at different timezones and so many different different topics, it would be more effective to literally have more moderators in general than this suggested system. Increases the response time to reporting, more moderators able to judge the situations at hand as well for more nuanced situations.
A system which moderators can flag specific threads that they are watching it in a particular thread that is starting to derail so that users don't get frustrated that no one is watching but the nuance involved likely requires discussion between moderators and the users before handling a particular judgement would be something as well. I've seen this many times.
No, they are not moderators. They are only determining if a ban is warranted. They take no part in thread locks, user warning, etc.
Additionally, your point about it being jury duty and how that has worked out for us is absolute trash. This isn't jury duty because it isn't court.
Once again, for the people in the cheap seats: The problem is not that moderation is too strict. The problem is that moderation is too lenient on certain issues.
If you think the moderation here is too strict, you are free to go literally anywhere else. For marginalized groups, ERA is essentially the only large, mainstream internet community to discuss games, entertainment, politics, and culture without (in theory) being constantly spoken over by dipshits. Every thread about moderation concerns regarding marginalized groups is instantly hijacked by every Tom, Dick, and Harry who thinks their ban for bigotry or whatever nonsense is some kind of affront to humanity.
The vast majority of bans issued on this forum are entirely reasonable.
If you think the moderation here is too strict, you are free to go literally anywhere else. For marginalized groups, ERA is essentially the only large, mainstream internet community to discuss games, entertainment, politics, and culture without (in theory) being constantly spoken over by dipshits. Every thread about moderation concerns regarding marginalized groups is instantly hijacked by every Tom, Dick, and Harry who thinks their ban for bigotry or whatever nonsense is some kind of affront to humanity.
The vast majority of bans issued on this forum are entirely reasonable.
This would be nice. Sometimes you say something stupid in the heat of the moment that is uncharacteristic of your usual behaviour and before you know it you're perma'd. Speaking from experience here.
Basically I want to be Red from Shawshank in his parole hearing.
Basically I want to be Red from Shawshank in his parole hearing.
It shouldn't show anyone. Just the amount of members. and whomever gets selected should also have one extra person on there to basically back up them if they don't respond after lets say 3 days it goes to another person to review and vote on. But all anonymous, with no traces back to the jury.
I volunteer to serve on the appeals board. As an attorney, I require all appeals to be in writing, no longer than 10 pages. Citation to the appropriate rules and terms and conditions concerning ResetEra will be expected as well as citations to precedents handed down in such infamous rulings as "Era member that doesn't wear deodorant" and "Era member who quit job on first day because they had nothing to do."
Considering there are tons of people out there who have a bone to pick with this forum and would love nothing more than to waste the time of moderators with bullshit ban appeals for barely veiled trolling and bigotry, and that they can effectively sign up en masses to mess with the appeals process, this seems like a horrible idea.
They are not mutually exclusive, along with those issues though is the fact that there is a lack of transparency and accountability.
I don't really dispute the bans I've received on Era, but I do wonder what discussion went into them. I know why I was banned and how long I was banned but not really what the discussion/process/debate was regarding them.
It wouldn't be that difficult to find people who are positive members of the community and not some shitty trolls. I could probably list off 30+ names right now.
In theory I like the idea of a jury simply because I feel the mods are too quick with the ban hammer and have certainly used it in instances when they did not understand the full context. I have also noticed occassions when mods would casually let a number of other users break forum rules and zero in on one specific user.
I am not sure if a jury system could feasibly be implemented though. I would be happy if the mods would simply issue a warning if a user is getting out of line and then ban if they continue to break the rules.
I am not sure if a jury system could feasibly be implemented though. I would be happy if the mods would simply issue a warning if a user is getting out of line and then ban if they continue to break the rules.
"we need an appeals process for selecting the distinguished members"
moderators can only do those things because admins allow them to.
mods can easily not be allowed to do anything but banning people if the admins wanted to.
in what way are you referring to it being a trash comparison, exactly?
the idea is you are selecting from a pool of random people who have no stake or knowledge of the people involved in the matter at hand.
"it isn't court" -- only because it has no legal standing? It is as much of a "court proceeding" as any panel of people deciding someone's fate is.
maybe we should have also have representatives of the banned member so they can argue why they shouldn't be banned. that'll make it really like court then.
i'll start my own Banned Member Advocate Defense Firm. Only 150 dollars an hour, any takers?
yep, agreed
Same. The increased productivity I experienced that day has caused me great distress.
I don't think this is feasible for a forum of this size, and you'd basically be giving mods a second team to keep track of to make sure appeals are consistent with the site rules and that the appeal panel is operating in good faith without bias or outside influence.
I really don't know how to feel. Although I have been banned, I also used the contact us feature, explained my position and was unbanned early. A jury system could work, could.
Also. I now have the urge to watch Black Snake Moan.
Also. I now have the urge to watch Black Snake Moan.
That's already in place tbh
some users get away with a looooooooot more shit than others
EDIT: btw I realize this wont happen but in the one in a million chance it does it should be limited to permabans.
don't waste time with one day bans etc
Last edited:
I think just having more mods is the answer. Correct me if I'm wrong on this, because I was totally ignorant of the problems Trans Era were experiencing, but I think the vast majority of moderators have solid ethical compasses, and the general moderating philosophy is great.
The problems I've personally noticed seem to be the result of an overworked, under-staffed team who often whip out the pruning shears (for thread closures and bans) more often than many Era users would like, in order to head off trouble that will cause them massive headaches before it truly starts. Due to the Trans Era threads, I'm now aware that there's an issue with under-modding as well. Again, I think the issue is the workload versus the number of staff members.
More staff means more eyes on each issue, which is another thing we absolutely need. I trust the team to augment itself with good people, and to keep itself in check, but it can't do that if it's spread too thin.
Everyone deserves some kind of considerate reply when they send mail to the Contact Us address, too. When you're banned, if you're not a Discord user, you're totally cut off. That Contact Us email is all you have.
Edited for greater specificity.
The problems I've personally noticed seem to be the result of an overworked, under-staffed team who often whip out the pruning shears (for thread closures and bans) more often than many Era users would like, in order to head off trouble that will cause them massive headaches before it truly starts. Due to the Trans Era threads, I'm now aware that there's an issue with under-modding as well. Again, I think the issue is the workload versus the number of staff members.
More staff means more eyes on each issue, which is another thing we absolutely need. I trust the team to augment itself with good people, and to keep itself in check, but it can't do that if it's spread too thin.
Everyone deserves some kind of considerate reply when they send mail to the Contact Us address, too. When you're banned, if you're not a Discord user, you're totally cut off. That Contact Us email is all you have.
Edited for greater specificity.
Last edited:
- Status