Is spamming in sandbox games against the rules? I was given a vio for spamming in a sandbox game which I'm not too fussed about. But what I am fussed about is the inconsistency with which this rule is applied.
What irks me is that, while providing evidence of this rule not being applied elsewhere, my second appeal was sustained without any reasoning given or any mention of the other report.
Report against yoyo for the exact same thing:
https://epicmafia.com/report/176513 - No vio given because "The site rule for spamming in game doesn't apply to unranked sandbox games"
There was a previous thread made on the topic by Vilden which was deleted for I don't know what reason
[img]
Mods, I want to know once and for all. Is spamming in a sandbox game an offence.
deletedabout 8 years
You do realize most of the time appeals of appeals are redundant, correct? If it was an original appeal, yes, I'd comment. Appeal of an appeal? No.
i don't think it was in active discussion until this thread, even though it should've somewhat been mentioned when you did your second appeal with a game showing spamming getting no vio
btw, as clearly mentioned by everyone in this thread, the behavior that mods usually react to complaint threads is so poor.
IN GENERAL, IF A PERSON IS MAKING A SECOND APPEAL (and that means they care enough to even bother), YOUR RESPONSE TO THAT APPEAL SHOULD PROBABLY BE SOMETHING BETTER THAN "SUSTAINED" OTHERWISE YOU GET A THREAD LIKE THIS FUELED BY HIS ANGER.
"SUSTAINED, SPAMMING IN SANDBOX IS A VIOLATION". he might've been pissed that yoyo didn't get a vio then, but then he can appeal that report if he wants to
I just can't deal with the attitude of some mods, and it's a recurring problem in this website. There's this defensive, "I don't feel like dealing with your trolling bs" attitude that reeks off antikrist's posts. "You PRETEND I haven't brought this up, as if I couldn't do my job! Why are you questioning how GOOD of a mod I am!? I know what I'm doing, YOU don't! So shut up!". The other expected reply from a mod is usually a lowercase, sarcastic, brief reply that always seems to imply that you are beneath them, as if everything you brought up was a waste of time (see: Hibiki in the first appeal).
Maybe you folks are really good at filing reports, but your community management skills are embarrassingly bad. I mean, lol at antikrist mentioning like three times that they have ALWAYS proceeded a certain way -- as if this was somehow justification to how the rules don't reflect the rule they're enforcing. It's not even the topic at hand. Read what the user is actually requesting.
Because obviously non-mods know what's going on in the mod chat. Get your head out of your a**.
"In extreme cases, if someone has received ample warning, and gameplay is disrupted across several games, a violation may be given in unranked Main Lobby"
Until you change this, you have absolutely no basis for ever giving warnings or violations for spam in unranked Sandbox games. You can't expect users to sift through reports to see if there is precedent for something. Just because you have always given vios for it doesn't mean that your actions were or are justified and you certainly can't expect that the average player gives enough of a sh** about you to know if you give vios for something that isn't even a vio on the public rules page.
I'd like to present this case as a prime example of lolmodz.
- Mod opens discussion by speaking from an individual perspective, saying *they* are consistent and that this information has been repeatedly communicated. Haven't you read? How stupid can you be? It's been said REPEATEDLY. - When shown that this information has not in fact been communicated, repeatedly or otherwise, mod replies "read ur appeal, hibiki told you already (eyeroll)" which basically disregards the entire point of the user bringing it up in the first place. - Mod then justifies themselves by reassuring user *they* are a good mod and that whatever the other mod did in the report brought up by the user is their responsibility. Rest assured, however, this mod would NEVER do something like that. - Mod finally concedes this has been brought up in mod chat for discussion because user has been right all along, which both contradicts earlier statements and is what should have been done from the start.
You could have opened with "this is an active discussion in the mod chat right now". That would have gone down much better.
Transparency is always better than acting like you know all the facts. Everyone makes mistakes. We just want to clarity to the situation. So what's the current consensus in mod chat? It simply cannot be the case where some people think it is a vio and others think it isn't. That is not a rule.
deletedabout 8 years
I believe there is confusion because it is not properly updated on the Rules Page.
I think you guys need to update it officially so that people cannot argue. It is fine to moderate it as a community violation if you actually change the rule, in my opinion, but it is currently stated in the rules that it is not moderated.
From what I can remember, any moderator can update the rules page. I don't know if that's changed or not now, but if that is how you guys want to moderate it, just change the rule page; it's not that much of a hassle.
WHOOP THERE IT IS WHOOP THERE IT IS WHOOP THERE IT IS WHOOP THERE IT IS WHOOP THERE IT IS WHOOP THERE IT IS WHOOP THERE IT IS WHOOP THERE IT IS WHOOP THERE IT IS WHOOP THERE IT IS WHOOP THERE IT IS WHOOP THERE IT IS WHOOP THERE IT IS WHOOP THERE IT IS WHOOP THERE IT IS WHOOP THERE IT IS WHOOP THERE IT IS WHOOP THERE IT IS WHOOP THERE IT IS WHOOP THERE IT IS WHOOP THERE IT IS WHOOP THERE IT IS WHOOP THERE IT IS WHOOP THERE IT IS WHOOP THERE IT IS WHOOP THERE IT IS WHOOP THERE IT IS WHOOP THERE IT IS WHOOP THERE IT IS WHOOP THERE IT IS WHOOP THERE IT IS WHOOP THERE IT IS WHOOP THERE IT IS WHOOP THERE IT IS WHOOP THERE IT IS WHOOP THERE IT IS WHOOP THERE IT IS WHOOP THERE IT IS WHOOP THERE IT IS WHOOP THERE IT IS WHOOP THERE IT IS WHOOP THERE IT IS
deletedabout 8 years
^anti here is literal proof that the way mods are currently moderating reports is going directly against what the rule page says. And if mods can't respect what the rule pages says, why should we?
deletedabout 8 years
You act as if this isn't an active discussion in the mod chat right now. I've always given vios across the board to anyone spamming in excess.
The rules are not being followed by the mods and they are doing it at their own discretion. If some mods THINK it is a vio and others THINK it isn't, this is not a solidified rule and needs clarification. I will take you on this basis that all future spamming in sandbox games is reportable and I will report every such instance.
Can you comment on why the rule wasn't applied to the report against yoyo then. This is all I'm asking. Why isn't there consistency and why is it not stated in the rules.
If this is the case, that's fine. But it is not mentioned anywhere in the rules, nor an announcement so I'm not sure where it has been "repetitively" stated.
It is clearly not known to all mods so all I'm asking for is consistency.
deletedabout 8 years
Has repetitively been stated that it is a violation. I didn't think it needed to be repeated yet again. I always give violations for spamming in excess regardless.
Spamming in sandbox games
