Answered Administration's view on Spam Rule

Hey guys,

Currently Rule 5 of the forums states this:

However, there seems to be some confusion on when warnings are given out.

For example, this post here is off topic. https://www.seriousgmod.com/threads/python-programming-language-users.49989/#post-526180 I checked with an admin who confirmed that despite Xpro's report, no warning was given. Texas' comment, like nearly all of his, is a shitpost that contributes nothing to the thread.

While I understand that forum punishments are very discretionary, what gives? If a warning isn't going to be given, why not delete the post at the very least?

Rhetorical questions, here's what I'm wondering:

What is the administration's view on Rule Number 5? Although forum warnings generally aren't public, it feels like posts that break this rule are largely ignored and given a pass by the staff team. Why is this?

 

A shitpost is something that is against rule 5, so if you agree that it should be called that, it should be removed.

Obviously, that shouldn't mean humorous occasional shitpost in off topic should never be allowed. In this context, however, it's adding nothing and clearly not the type of help Xpro is asking for.

 

we handle it on a case by case basis. Generally, we have been pretty relaxed as far as shitposts are concerned, mostly just because they usually don't cause a great deal of harm (and they get spammed with dumb ratings as it is) so we generally don't really get involved if we don't have to. To say that we aren't warning people or that we aren't taking action is a bit of an exaggeration, we are actually punishing repeat offenders, we just do it outside of the public eye as to spare the dramatics. How we deal with them is different each time but usually follows these:

-Informal warnings
-Deletion of threads/posts
-Formal Warnings
-Revoking of forum privileges to post

If ya got an issue with someone spamming, give it the ole report. We'll take it from there. Thanks.

 

As I figured, it takes too much for someone to actually get warned. Which is why we should have a [serious] tag for threads that people don't want derailed.

 

That's alright but I think there's clearly some issues going on when someone like Texas still isn't being punished despite being 1) reported and 2) having a history like his. This is a person who has checked every mark on what you've listed. Less than a week ago, he had his thread creation rights revoked. This is just one example, but it's silly to say you're punishing repeat offenders, then you don't punish probably the largest repeat offender of off-topic post. I know that's generalizing, but there's at least one staff member who needs to review what you said here.

On another note, why not just delete the off topic post? Why go with an informal warning, but leave something up that could derail a thread? While banning every user for off topic responses is extreme, there's nothing wrong with simply deleting an off topic post right away. There's really no reason to leave it up.

 

I was kind of in a bad mood when I made my last post, so I figured i'd go ahead and clarify. We don't normally delete posts because keeping them up doesn't do that much harm. Besides, it can be a bitch when it comes to archival. If we delete stuff, it can be very hard to find it in the future if we need it, and especially when we are dealing with a rule that requires repeated abuse, it just isn't logical to take those things down. However, when it comes to threads, we delete a lot more than it seems. I will say that (and this is just me personally) have felt as if we are too easy on shitposts, and I will try to be harder on them going forwards.

I want to make myself very clear here so you understand for the future: the QNA subforum is not a forum for people to voice concerns about things, it is simply a forum in which users can ask questions and get answers from staff members or any other person who has the right answer. Posts that do not answer the questions are deleted, and thus any meaningful discussion about our current protocols would be impossible to have on here. In the future, if you wish to do a thread like this, please consider a different subforum. What this thread seems like to me is an attempt to throw shade at us because we didn't handle a situation the way you wanted us to, and I hope i'm wrong about that.

Cheers