This Game Doesn't Coddle Me

[kq76]

Originally Posted by HRBaker

It would be easy and likely justified for the "upstairs office" to delete the post, but I think allowing it to stand with the responses from the faithful is a better testament to transparency.

I've been critical of many things over the years, but reactions and conversation go far to clarify justified criticism and "whining". Better to let the discussion find its own level of importance.

I agree, but just to play devil's advocate, how many of us often just read the titles of articles, videos, or whatever and base our judgement off them alone? I mean I'm tempted to close the thread and just say, "what needs to be said about the OP's post has already been said, no need to give it anymore visibility". Anybody who bothers to read the thread will get to see there's nothing there, but anybody who doesn't might get the wrong impression that maybe there is.

[Rain King]

Could the title of the thread be edited?

[kq76]

Originally Posted by Rain King

Could the title of the thread be edited?

It can. Give me a minute...

EDIT: For those who come to this thread late, it used to be titled, "This game sucks".

[Rain King]

Originally Posted by kq76

it can. Give me a minute...

[twins_34]

Originally Posted by kq76

It can. Give me a minute...
.

[jksander]

Originally Posted by kq76

It can. Give me a minute...

EDIT: For those who come to this thread late, it used to be titled, "This game sucks".

Great name change ... I came here to thank whoever did it

[Edward ohare]

I clicked on this thread thinking it was a new one. Then I found out it's an old one where I already read the opening posts and would have not clicked on again had had the name not been changed.


Further reading indicates a moderator changed the thread title and chose a new title that mocked the OP. This is not appropriate for a moderator. A moderator has power and must wield it fairly and without bias. A moderator showing support or contempt for ANY poster makes all of his actions questionable and subject to reasonable accusations of bias. It damages his moral authority as a moderator.


I have noticed other moderators also exhibit some bias punishing the second person in an argument and leaving the first untouched. The attitude with this is the party who starts it is innocent and the party who escalates it bears all the blame.


I've never seen this type of improper moderation on any product support board except this one. This type of moderation is generally reserved for wingnut political boards.


There are rules for the posters. There need to be rules for the moderators too.

[Baby Ruth]

Originally Posted by Edward ohare

I clicked on this thread thinking it was a new one. Then I found out it's an old one where I already read the opening posts and would have not clicked on again had had the name not been changed.


Further reading indicates a moderator changed the thread title and chose a new title that mocked the OP. This is not appropriate for a moderator. A moderator has power and must wield it fairly and without bias. A moderator showing support or contempt for ANY poster makes all of his actions questionable and subject to reasonable accusations of bias. It damages his moral authority as a moderator.


I have noticed other moderators also exhibit some bias punishing the second person in an argument and leaving the first untouched. The attitude with this is the party who starts it is innocent and the party who escalates it bears all the blame.


I've never seen this type of improper moderation on any product support board except this one. This type of moderation is generally reserved for wingnut political boards.


There are rules for the posters. There need to be rules for the moderators too.

I agree with everything you said, but I don't see it limited to just this forum. Steam forums are especially notorious for this, though I can't say I've seen a moderator there outright mock a poster. However, it's quite common there for someone to intentionally attack someone and bait them, only for the person defending themself by retaliating to get the hammer. Of course, they could just ignore it and take the high road, but that doesn't excuse the original behavior being allowed to stand while punishing the second person.

[OutS|der]

Originally Posted by Edward ohare

I clicked on this thread thinking it was a new one. Then I found out it's an old one where I already read the opening posts and would have not clicked on again had had the name not been changed.


Further reading indicates a moderator changed the thread title and chose a new title that mocked the OP. This is not appropriate for a moderator. A moderator has power and must wield it fairly and without bias. A moderator showing support or contempt for ANY poster makes all of his actions questionable and subject to reasonable accusations of bias. It damages his moral authority as a moderator.


I have noticed other moderators also exhibit some bias punishing the second person in an argument and leaving the first untouched. The attitude with this is the party who starts it is innocent and the party who escalates it bears all the blame.


I've never seen this type of improper moderation on any product support board except this one. This type of moderation is generally reserved for wingnut political boards.


There are rules for the posters. There need to be rules for the moderators too.

This isn't even close to mocking. No rules were broken

[mytreds]

Originally Posted by OutS|der

This isn't even close to mocking. No rules were broken

It’s certainly patronizing. He should’ve just locked the thread.

[kq76]

Originally Posted by Edward ohare

I clicked on this thread thinking it was a new one. Then I found out it's an old one where I already read the opening posts and would have not clicked on again had had the name not been changed.


Further reading indicates a moderator changed the thread title and chose a new title that mocked the OP. This is not appropriate for a moderator. A moderator has power and must wield it fairly and without bias. A moderator showing support or contempt for ANY poster makes all of his actions questionable and subject to reasonable accusations of bias. It damages his moral authority as a moderator.


I have noticed other moderators also exhibit some bias punishing the second person in an argument and leaving the first untouched. The attitude with this is the party who starts it is innocent and the party who escalates it bears all the blame.


I've never seen this type of improper moderation on any product support board except this one. This type of moderation is generally reserved for wingnut political boards.


There are rules for the posters. There need to be rules for the moderators too.

Hi new account with interestings IPs.

My intention was not to mock the OP. Someone made a suggestion, I thought it was a good idea, I re-read the OP, asked myself what it was expressing, that's what came to mind, and I changed it. That some people thought it was funny was not my intention. People who have read enough of my posts will know being funny is not one of my skills. If this was, that's just blind luck, good or bad. It was merely something I thought anyone who had posted the OP could have titled their thread.

A lot of people lately are claiming a lot of people are trolling. Sure, people have been complaining about trolling since the beginning of the internet, but I definitely think it (the complaining of trolling) has gotten worse within the last year or two. People can judge for themselves of course, but I don't troll. Even when something troll-like pops into my head, I stop myself. In hindsight, would simply closing the thread or doing nothing have been best? Sure, maybe, but that's 20/20.

[Baby Ruth]

Originally Posted by kq76

Hi new account with interestings IPs.

That comment by itself is patronizing and below the level of a 'global moderator.' If you have something like that to say about a user, maybe you should consider your technique that you use when you consider 'trolling', i.e. stop right there.

[Bagpipes5]

Originally Posted by kq76

Hi new account with interestings IPs.

[Edward ohare]

Originally Posted by Baby Ruth

That comment by itself is patronizing and below the level of a 'global moderator.' If you have something like that to say about a user, maybe you should consider your technique that you use when you consider 'trolling', i.e. stop right there.

Thank you for your post. There must be a new rule that posts involving interesting IPs aren't worth much.

[Edward ohare]

Originally Posted by jksander

Great name change ... I came here to thank whoever did it

Think about principle. Some day he may do that to a post/poster that you like.

[Edward ohare]

Originally Posted by OutS|der

This isn't even close to mocking. No rules were broken

No rules were broken by the OP. That is the real point. The moderator should have stayed out. No reason to do anything.



Its likely there were no rules broken by the moderator as it's unlikely they have any rules. There are best practices of moderation on the internet. Engaging in spats with disliked posters is not on the list.

[Sweed]

Do I care that a moderator changed the name? Not really.
Do I think there was any bad intent on kq76's part? No.
Would I have renamed the thread? No, and here is why.

At the end of the day a thread that has the original title this thread did, and is followed up with an "I can't win" so the game sucks post pretty much speaks for itself on the quality of the thread itself. IMHO folks would open the thread, see the first post, and think "well ok then", laugh and move on.

[OutS|der]

Originally Posted by Edward ohare

Think about principle. Some day he may do that to a post/poster that you like.

Oh no!! The horror. A post I made might have the topic changed. How would I ever cope?

Really he needs to be permabanned for what he's done. It's unacceptable. Won't someone think of the children!!!!!

[Reed]

This thread should end.

[OutS|der]

Originally Posted by Reed

This thread should end.

Really should of closed with the name change