Question Why So Restrictive?

[Saber]

Tell me, what exactly is preventing you or any other member of staff from removing a post of mine because it contains an image of a dog breed they don't like, or because their friend personally doesn't like my RTs? From what I can see, nothing. You can't pin the reason to another rule, so you simply say "it was removed at our discretion", and I have absolutely no way of fighting back, because rule 2 states "discretion", not even requiring a reason or evidence for the reason to be given.

What prevents staff from doing whatever we want is having other staff members deliberate the issue. We have several staff members to keep things in check. What's laughable to me is that staff allowed the original post to stay up because it technically wasn't causing any harm until you commented in the way that you did. So in a way, you did this to yourself and to the original poster. Your comparison of a dog breed or Request Thread isn't correct in the slightest. You are literally comparing apples to rocks.

 

[Revelations]

There is no safeguarding against it. It could start tomorrow.

I would like you to list some examples of bullshit moderation you've seen, please. Let's cut the 'It'll start tomorrow' stuff, because lightning could strike me, or you, tomorrow, too.

 

[Saber]

For the fifth time (I'm counting), I'm not talking about my post specifically. This became about something I noticed with the site allowing arbitrary moderation if an actual rule wasn't broken; a staff member could just use "our discretion" and that's that. No defense, no evidence.

Again, you refuse to accept that the issue was explained clearly and openly with you and the issue it could cause in the future for you.

 

[tsukasa]

What prevents staff from doing whatever we want is having other staff members deliberate the issue. We have several staff members to keep things in check. What's laughable to me is that staff allowed the original post to stay up because it technically wasn't causing any harm until you commented in the way that you did. So in a way, you did this to yourself and to the original poster. Your comparison of a dog breed or Request Thread isn't correct in the slightest. You are literally comparing apples to rocks.

And how do we see what staff are debating? There is no public debate about it, it's done behind closed doors. Can you prove you actually discuss it?

 

[Saber]

And how do we see what staff are debating? There is no public debate about it, it's done behind closed doors. Can you prove you actually discuss it?

I mean...this is pretty public and sorry to say you're losing the debate, friend.

 

[tsukasa]

I mean...this is pretty public and sorry to say you're losing the debate, friend.

This isn't a debate about it being an RP or not, and there is nowhere in the rules which states the debating is public. I haven't lost anything, just stating facts. If "public debate against possible staff corruption" is in the rules, do show.

 

[ƒeral]

For the fifth time (I'm counting), I'm not talking about my post specifically. This became about something I noticed with the site allowing arbitrary moderation if an actual rule wasn't broken; a staff member could just use "our discretion" and that's that. No defense, no evidence.

And for the fifth time, "discretion" = / = "arbitrary"

Conflating the English language and assuming the worst intention of staff is not cute.

Since you are so obsessed with evidence, where is your evidence that staff is abusing their discretion?

Where is your evidence that the current rules lead to the sloppy slope you prophesied?

That's right. Nada.

Some of us have actually been on BMR for years, interacted with staff in abundance, and seen how staff behave. A/k/a politely, amicably, helpfully.

Really cute to attack people with zero evidence, bro.

 

[Kosmik_Khaos]

My guy, remove the blinders. You are WRONG. You got proven you were wrong in a public place because you wanted to stir the pot, and instead you made yourself look pretty idiotic doing it.

 

[Saber]

This isn't a debate about it being an RP or not, and there is nowhere in the rules which states the debating is public. I haven't lost anything, just stating facts. If "public debate against possible staff corruption" is in the rules, do show.

Your facts are your opinion. Again, perhaps you should post in this thread what was said with context and you can let the other members decide if it was a roleplay action or not. You got away with a warning and got mad about it. It's honestly surprising to me that you can't accept that a warning was staff being extremely lenient.

 

[ΛVΛ]

There have been 35,990 posts discussing the issues that arise on this site. Yes, we debate how to handle things.

 

[tsukasa]

And for the fifth time, "discretion" = / = "arbitrary"

Conflating the English language and assuming the worst intention of staff is not cute.

Since you are so obsessed with evidence, where is your evidence that staff is abusing their discretion?

Where is your evidence that the current rules lead to the sloppy slope you prophesied?

That's right. Nada.

Some of us have actually been on BMR for years, interacted with staff in abundance, and seen how staff behave. A/k/a politely, amicably, helpfully.

Really cute to attack people with zero evidence, bro.

I didn't say it happened to me, I'm saying it can, because it can. It's clearly written in the rules as "at staff discretion", which effectively means "if there isn't actually a reason and we just want to, we can under that disguise".

 

[ƒeral]

I didn't say it happened to me, I'm saying it can, because it can. It's clearly written in the rules as "at staff discretion", which effectively means "if there isn't actually a reason and we just want to, we can under that disguise".

a meteor can hit earth tomorrow and destroy civilization as we know it.

So we should plan our entire existence around that can, yeah?

Try again without a logical fallacy.

 

[Kosmik_Khaos]

Also, as a user, I know for a fact if staff starts to abuse their power you can repot them as well. I was on a sister site that got shut down and when the staff started to abuse their power I went to the other staff, when it didn't stop. I messaged Vek. He investigated and found that the claim was true and that member was removed from the staff. There are ways to keep everyone in check.

 

[Maki]

And how do we see what staff are debating? There is no public debate about it, it's done behind closed doors. Can you prove you actually discuss it?

What makes you think you're even ENTITLED to seeing that debate. This is a private forum, we all inhabit it at staff discretion, if they wanted to kick us off tomorrow for no reason they could.

The idea that they owe you any explanation is childish enough by itself, but now you're also questioning why they made a ruling that is clear enough to the rest of us, and protesting authority that we all see as entirely too reasonable to maintain this forum working as functionally as it does now.

Staff has no need nor any obligation to prove anything to you, if you do not trust them to run this forum in good faith, LEAVE for a forum with staff you CAN TRUST.

 

[tsukasa]

a meteor can hit earth tomorrow and destroy civilization as we know it.

So we should plan our entire existence around that can, yeah?

Try again without a logical fallacy.

How is a meteor or my inevitable demise related to an RP site? As Saber said above, you're comparing apples to rocks. It has no relation whatsoever. Complaining to a supermarket about the price of apples doesn't mean they need to start talking about the pollution gasoline makes.

 

[ƒeral]

How is a meteor or my inevitable demise related to an RP site? As Saber said above, you're comparing apples to rocks. It has no relation whatsoever. Complaining to a supermarket about the price of apples doesn't mean they need to start talking about the pollution gasoline makes.

because that's what you are doing bro. It's a 1:1 logical comparison. That you fail to grasp it...says a lot.

 

[tsukasa]

because that's what you are doing bro. It's a 1:1 logical comparison. That you fail to grasp it...says a lot.

Rule 2: "at staff's discretion".

Let's see what that really means: If there isn't a reason, staff can simply say it's due to their discretion. No evidence required, not even a reason at all. I haven't said an alien invasion can't happen in 10 minutes from now, nor did this thread ever deviate to that. You're going off course because you know what I'm saying is really how it is.

 

[Kosmik_Khaos]

How is a meteor or my inevitable demise related to an RP site? As Saber said above, you're comparing apples to rocks. It has no relation whatsoever. Complaining to a supermarket about the price of apples doesn't mean they need to start talking about the pollution gasoline makes.

Actually it does. She is pointing out your logical fallacy. It's a good comparison too. Oh and here, in case you don't know what a logic fallacy is, here's a Link

 

[Kosmik_Khaos]

Rule 2: "at staff's discretion".

Let's see what that really means: If there isn't a reason, staff can simply say it's due to their discretion. No evidence required, not even a reason at all. I haven't said an alien invasion can't happen in 10 minutes from now, nor did this thread ever deviate to that. You're going off course because you know what I'm saying is really how it is.

You are taking 3 words from the rule that is a fucking PARAGRAPH LONG!

 

[ΛVΛ]

You consented to staff discretion upon joining the site.

 

[Saber]

I didn't say it happened to me, I'm saying it can, because it can. It's clearly written in the rules as "at staff discretion", which effectively means "if there isn't actually a reason and we just want to, we can under that disguise".

Let's take that and roll with it. Members of this site report things they think are breaking the rules or are not appropriate and staff deliberate on whether or not it's an actual infraction of the rules. Sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't. Yours was borderline and that's why you got off with a warning and an explanation of how it could lead to a rule violation. You should honestly start acknowledging what was said in the message instead of deflecting so hard.

 

[Maki]

Rule 2: "at staff's discretion".

Let's see what that really means: If there isn't a reason, staff can simply say it's due to their discretion. No evidence required, not even a reason at all. I haven't said an alien invasion can't happen in 10 minutes from now, nor did this thread ever deviate to that. You're going off course because you know what I'm saying is really how it is.

It boils down to this. You either trust staff to run this forum in good faith, and with the best of intentions or you don't. That's what any and all public internet forums boil down to at the end. If you cannot trust the staff, then find a site with staff you CAN trust.

 

[Kosmik_Khaos]

We use discretion all the time. Do you accept every request you get for a story or do you think about what they are bringing to you and decided if you want to do it or not? If you take time to decided then you are using your discretion.

 

[tsukasa]

Actually it does. She is pointing out your logical fallacy. It's a good comparison too. Oh and here, in case you don't know what a logic fallacy is, here's a Link

I'm well aware of what it means. I'm often called "Logic" by people outside of here, which is why I'm literally trying not to laugh as I type this. The coincidence is unreal.

Is it a fallacy that staff can just say "my discretion" despite there being an actual rule list, rendering all other rules useless because of that disguise they can use? No.

You're simply trying to compare it to something else. What you should be comparing it to is whether or not someone can prove the meteor will or won't hit, rather than making an arbitrary list of can but can also be disguised as it can't. Not the same.

 

[ƒeral]

Rule 2: "at staff's discretion".

Let's see what that really means: If there isn't a reason, staff can simply say it's due to their discretion. No evidence required, not even a reason at all. I haven't said an alien invasion can't happen in 10 minutes from now, nor did this thread ever deviate to that. You're going off course because you know what I'm saying is really how it is.

alright. let's break this conversation down, shall we?

1. fact - you have introduced zero evidence of staff wrongdoing. you have deflected on this topic every time by saying 'it didn't happen to you'
2. fact - you admit that your post in question violate a rule
3. fact - your entire rant is that staff can abuse their discretion because discretion exist
4. fact - you have introduced zero evidence to support any reason to believe that staff would abuse their direction
5. fact - staff has come in and stated they have systems set in place to try to prevent said occurence

now let's look at your sentence.

"If there isn't a reason, staff can simply say it's due to their discretion."
Really? How did you get there, bro? Where in rule 2 does it say that if there isn't a reason, staff can make it up? Where is your evidence this happens, is likely to happen?

Let me guess, you are going to turn around and say, wait feral, but this can happen.

Yeah, it can happen. Like how meteor hitting the earth can happen. Oh look, I spelled it out for you. You get it now?

Unless you can prove something actually happened or at a minimum, is LIKELY to happen, then your argument falls squarely into logical fallacy territory.