Are there double standards on this forum

[clarance]

I don't think there's a deliberate double standard applied, just a reaction from mods to reports.

For instance, I suspect The Laird has a macro set up to report any instance of anything ever that doesn't explicitly agree with his view at any given time. Unfortunately, this means mods have to react to that and act appropriately.

On the other hand, as Clarance has said, he doesn't report stuff, so hence you get things like The Beans' aggressive posts going untouched, since Clarance hasn't indicated he's upset or offended by them, he just posts a response in the thread if he feels like it and moves on.

So, not so much a double standard from the mods, more just different people being different and acting/reacting differently.

So it seems then, that to get a ban, you would more than likely have to have your posts reported before anything is done? However, if you blatantly break the AUP, no-one complains, you're more than likely to get off? That there is, at the least an unfair inconsistency.

And just for the record, I don't want The Beans given a ban, or anyone else for that matter. I happen to think bans are, for the most part, petty and pointless (Isn't DRIP still posting under an different name now?) Merely pointing out inconsistencies that leads to people (me!) getting peed-off.

[koopa42]

I remember Clarance and Greyfox got threatened with bans for mentioning 'Steve Davis snooker' and I'm sure Koops got a week ban (or warned with a ban)for mentioning Steve Davis in another thread.. A good friend of mine was also threatened with a ban for correcting a couple of articles in Retro Gamer with evidence including a reply from Jeff Minter on Twitter... Koops smarmy shock molesting pedant thread was the funniest thing ever, but he seems to be getting warned all the time about his posts being ban/warning material but they've only been in response to another posters who made far risque and wayward posts but isn't wasn't warned And when Koops made a post complaining about another users bullying it was deleted.. But I can where Koops is coming from with his post

New users do seem to be made unwelcome as when they post a thread its either ignored or told to use the search function...

There's only two people on RG I don't like that kid who thinks he's the Forums Del Trotter who kept sending me PM's saying"That I like to pork fat chicks" whatever the hell that means... And Detective Dipshit with his "Sonic the Hedgehog he's really fast" and other stating the obvious posts like "RG is a retro gamer forum" No way Sherlock I never knew that!!!

In defense of the Mods when I was reported two of the moderators where exceptionally fair to me and I can't fault them..

I'd like to point out that I have never been warned about Steve Davis, ever. It is concerning seeing as I like real snooker AND gaming snooker?

[gman72]

erm... what am i missing... what the heck is the problem with name checking Steve Davis... i'm utterly confused...

[koopa42]

erm... what am i missing... what the heck is the problem with name checking Steve Davis... i'm utterly confused...

I'd suggest leave it, reading between the lines (risky as that is) I feel someone (or ones) are trying to dig something up which will inevitably end the threads. It's what has stopped me asking outright about it.

If anyone wants to know please start their own thread away from mine, I'd do it myself but I see that the 2 threads I have started are being misconstrued as a 'dig' so Gman, feel free.

[clarance]

erm... what am i missing... what the heck is the problem with name checking Steve Davis... i'm utterly confused...

It's the elephant in the room that must never ever be mentioned

I'm scared just posting this

[koopa42]

erm... what am i missing... what the heck is the problem with name checking Steve Davis... i'm utterly confused...

I'd suggest leave it, reading between the lines (risky as that is) I feel someone (or ones) are trying to dig something up which will inevitably end the threads. It's what has stopped me asking outright about it.

If anyone wants to know please start their own thread away from mine, I'd do it myself but I see that the 2 threads I have started are being misconstrued as a 'dig' so Gman, feel free.

Please do it in a new thread far away from mine.

[koopa42]

I'm finished for the evening (I actually play games and enjoy it) but I would appreciate it if you could at least try and not get my threads stopped, they are serious (to me anyway). Cheers

[gman72]

dude, i'm not trying to get your threads stopped, mine was a genuine question and now im even more confused. I will just assume that Steve Davis is one of the sacred names and never mention it again.

[Antiriad2097]

erm... what am i missing... what the heck is the problem with name checking Steve Davis... i'm utterly confused...

It's the elephant in the room that must never ever be mentioned

I'm scared just posting this

Steve Davis is fine.

There is a historical issue with the game,with a forum member making untrue claims about their involvement with development of a version of it. A fuss was caused, complaints made, it all got a bit out of hand.

It is history, best left there.

[The Laird]

.

[Antiriad2097]

I don't think there's a deliberate double standard applied, just a reaction from mods to reports.

For instance, I suspect The Laird has a macro set up to report any instance of anything ever that doesn't explicitly agree with his view at any given time. Unfortunately, this means mods have to react to that and act appropriately.

On the other hand, as Clarance has said, he doesn't report stuff, so hence you get things like The Beans' aggressive posts going untouched, since Clarance hasn't indicated he's upset or offended by them, he just posts a response in the thread if he feels like it and moves on.

So, not so much a double standard from the mods, more just different people being different and acting/reacting differently.

So it seems then, that to get a ban, you would more than likely have to have your posts reported before anything is done? However, if you blatantly break the AUP, no-one complains, you're more than likely to get off? That there is, at the least an unfair inconsistency.

And just for the record, I don't want The Beans given a ban, or anyone else for that matter. I happen to think bans are, for the most part, petty and pointless (Isn't DRIP still posting under an different name now?) Merely pointing out inconsistencies that leads to people (me!) getting peed-off.

That pretty much sums it up regarding perceived inconsistency. Whether it is fair is debatable. Since you are prepared ttolerate AUP breaking posts, is it fair to start modding those unnecessarily?

Whilesome of us may behave like children,we're all adults. Let's use the AUP as a guide rather than something inflexible. If we had to always stick to the rules, we'd only be emulating Speccy and Vectrex games and the mag would be half empty. Sometimes the rules are an ideal, not reflected by the reality.

[clarance]

That pretty much sums it up regarding perceived inconsistency. Whether it is fair is debatable. Since you are prepared ttolerate AUP breaking posts, is it fair to start modding those unnecessarily?

While of course you are right, it does pee me off that one can get the rough end of the stick simply because one is more tolerant/easy going, and the very people that seem to be able to vent their childish intolerances with the report button are the ones that could be seen to be getting away with it because of their very nature

I'll get over it though.

[RodimusPrime]

YES, massive double standards, but in terms of the way mods dealing with different members, Not so much.

The real double standards are from every single one of us, ,me included. people will complain about someone acting a certain way, but then do that exact same thing in another thread.

People will tell people to get a thicker skin, but then proceed to get deeply offended by the littlest thing. People create a thread about a certain system and call someone a troll if they post that that system is crap, then got to another thread about a system and then happily call that system crap.

People will cry nothings getting done when that sort of thing is directed at them, then play victim and cry they are being unfairly treated if they are warned about the same behaviour.

So, yes, massive double standards.

Oh, and as everyone else has said, the report button should be for extremely offensive things only. I have never needed it before and it would take something bad for me to consider using it. though I did report myself once.

[Nemesis]

YES, massive double standards, but in terms of the way mods dealing with different members, Not so much.

The real double standards are from every single one of us, ,me included. people will complain about someone acting a certain way, but then do that exact same thing in another thread.

yes, I'm sure I've been there, done that at some point. Mood can be a determinant sometimes.

[markopoloman]

I'd love it if no one ever got banned or warned. Double standards on the forum - yes there is. As pointed out by RodimusPrime, much of the double standards are by the members of the forum as opposed to the mods. I must admit that it is very hard to get it right when dealing with individual issues - the context of the post/thread maybe different to another thread/comment.
I know many of the guys on here personally or have known them for a long time on here - but that doesn't sway how I deal with them. I just don't want to ban people for having a heated debate... Threads and posts do get deleted by me, although I will usually (99%) of the time put my name to the edits so people know I've done it.
Koopa42 has every right to start this and the other thread - and I'm glad he did. I really hope that it stays a peaceful thread without any name calling bun fights.

Reporting posts - it happens very often. Some of the reports are necessary, some are not. But I DO NOT read every thread, every post on the forum so will not see loads of stuff that goes on - so I suppose when something is reported, I get a one sided view. Others PM me with issues - that's also sometimes necessary and again sometimes not. One thing that is obvious - some of you give the impression that you want people banned and more of you state that you don't want people banned... We are also only talking about 6 or so people out of the whole forum membership.