So now we're banning users who didn't break any rules (gaming)

submitted ago by Laurentius_the_pyro

The fact that @puttitout banned aged based purely on a brigaded request thread by people who themselves are spammers (and unlike aged their 'spam' wasn't even relevant to the subverse).

Like it's very hard to feel sympathy for someone like /u/aged, but this uneven enforcement is ridiculous, why is /u/theoldones not banned when he spammed /v/gaming constantly with self posts reqursting /u/aged to be banned? Are these relevant to gaming but lewd fanart of adult female game characters is not?

If puttitout can give an explanation of which rule was broken I'd be ok with it, but as it stands "im a dictator lmao" is not an excuse to ban a user.

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

PuttItOut ago

I'm glad you made this post now. Because we do need to work to define a new rule about people who disrupt things on purpose.

They abuse the mere fact that we don't typically ban and then shit on everything. Think about the v/aww thing a few months back. That was complete BS.

So how do we phrase this rule?

Laurentius_the_pyro ago

So how do we phrase this rule?

Maybe an announcement or stick post would be a good idea to get the communities input on this?

PuttItOut ago

No Noids. Lol, since nulls are... Well... null, the term noid sounds funny. It's something I could hear a first year com science student call a null.

Noid: Repetitive, low value, low effort submissions that do not get much interaction.

But aren't we back at Spam now?

White_pride_cis ago

Noid: Repetitive, low value, low effort submissions that do not get much interaction.

Yeah, I have to agree with OP on this one. But, there needs to be a clear definition of what spam is. Go to QRV, and the whole place is literally verbal diarrhea, caps lock, and non-weaponized autism. It fits your definition to a “T”, so are you going to ban that whole sub?

Laurentius_the_pyro ago

maybe... but at the same time aren't 'noids' the kind of thing that would be handled via downvoats in a system sub? (as some/many of aged's posts were, while others were popular).

PuttItOut ago

Aged is a mild example of this, v/aww was the extreme side of it.

Even heavily down voted content is a nuiciance, especially on subs people often sort by new.

AR47 ago

Then here is a real idea.

Make each sub have a threshold limit of downvotes before a user is extremely limited to submit content. Sure they can comment, but ain’t that the freedom of speech aspect?

This way you can also see who is brigading posts as well from your admin side somehow? I don’t know how your technical shit works or even the terminology really, but I do know people, and they will use this feature to eventually try to get specific users from posting within their subverses.

Honestly it is a good way that allows the subverse to decide who gets what.

Obrez ago

I'm not sure I'm up to speed with what happened over at v/aww, (gore spam getting banned/removed for unrelated?) anyway I think it sucks but case by case is how such rules against low effort content aught to go and "low effort" should be defined somewhere in detail for each sub, I'd be wary of banning "subversive" content though as tempting as that is it could back fire easily.

I don't think it's going to cause a real stink if users doing some fucky shit, like aged exploiting the lax rules of v/gaming, for whatever ends, require implementation of new, reasonable rules designed to prevent their fuckery, but even still there is some satisfaction in seeing aged getting downvoated for his narrowly related smut.

You do a fine job at all of this, us niggers are just jumpy like battered wives.

Schreiber ago

Those aww faggots like gabara and co were forum sliding and using gore as an excuse.

The whole aww subverse should just be made private. It's a retarded circle jerk garbage that is exact same shit as reddit version and has no purpose whatsoever but for fags to farm votes by reposting aww shit from other place.

Laurentius_the_pyro ago

I'd argue that aged posts and the /v/aww situation aren't really that similar, otherthan "lots of posts people don't like".

In the /v/aww situation the posts were antithetical to the purpose of the sub, nobody thinks a severed head is "cute".

While in aged's case the posts were technically on-topic as they were of video game characters and the sidebar/rules didn't say anything to exempt this from being on topic.

Even heavily down voted content is a nuiciance, especially on subs people often sort by new.

Fair point. I was initially thinking of auto minimizing posts below below a certain amount of SCP like how comments work but with how little space any specific post takes up on a page already It probably wouldn't make a big difference to just ignoring posts you don't like.

Perhaps if there was the optional (opt-in on the users part?) to completely hide posts below a certain amount of SCP, possibly with a button on the page to reveal all the hidden posts? maybe it's worthy of putting up for discussion so the community can look for any flaws in the idea I may have missed?

TheUltimateQuakerII ago

Aged posts belong in v/TheAnimeReich not here. Loli shit isn't "gaming".

theoldones ago

Perhaps if there was the optional (opt-in on the users part?) to completely hide posts below a certain amount of SCP

i can think of about ten ways to abuse that rule for shilling against a target, immediately.

UsedToBeCujoQuarrel ago

I'd like to point out that one of the big abusers of this board is the idiot GhostSkin and his alts. He goes in fits shitting all over the place with spam. Then he changes his user name.

Would banning his IP work?

Laurentius_the_pyro ago

IP bans are a meme, anyone over the age of 9 can evade one.

UsedToBeCujoQuarrel ago

Yeah. But GhostSkin appears to be so stupid he might not be able.

Itty-bitty_Tity-trap ago

IP bans don't work.

UsedToBeCujoQuarrel ago

Ninja Assassins then