BuzzerBeater Forums

If you do post about it you should be ready to see your post being deleted right away as it clearly goes against the rules in the forums.

My point is not that it isn't against the rules but that it should not be. As I said I should be allowed to talk about it, I did not say that I would talk about it.

What a view you have of the moderation...

Nice of you to bold one part and leave pale the part where I say I don't think they're all over the edge. I could show you the threads I'm referring to, but you'd have to change the rules to allow me to do that.

Perhaps though you remember recently replying to me despite going on to say you hadn't bothered to read my post? I can discuss that one since it was not a matter of discipline. Since you bolded where I said "I think they consistently read single posts out of context and act accordingly" I'll rephrase it slightly.

I know for a fact GMs sometimes read single posts out of context and act accordingly because one, I have seen it, and two, I have been the victim of an onslaught from a bunch of GMs supporting their colleague. Or fellow volunteer if you prefer.

In the past when I had issue with the GMs I said like this-

WHy do BBs not spend money for better staff.

To attack staff direclty is BS to me. They are volunteers.

I admire your new found love for the BB-staff, I would like to share it to a certain degree, as the involvement of Ryan has been really a huge win-win for both users and the owners.

If something is critique-worthy, I still will adress it though. To me there is no difference between paid staff and volunteers. I have elaborated on this in the past, so talking about it again is useless imo.

Completely agree.

...as it clearly goes against the rules in the forums.

Heh heh, it would be interesting to try to find such a "rule." Then everyone could see how vague and subjective it is.

But just so you know, even if you just discuss the process and not any decision, they may delete your post. No talking about specifics allowed in the open forums.

If you have interest in learning the rules of the game:
(http://www.buzzerbeater.com/community/rules.aspx?nav=Foru...)
(http://www.buzzerbeater.com/community/rules.aspx?nav=Rule...)
(http://www.buzzerbeater.com/termsOfService.aspx)

If you merely want to know the specific rule about staff discussions, from the forum rules, in the section of posts not permitted:

- Discussing staff decisions (BBs/GMs/Mods). Please e-mail appeals@buzzerbeater.com with your complaint.

If you merely want to know how far or how many times you can cross the line, we can't help you with that.

[edit: And now that I've read perpete's post, I agree. I don't see any reason for me to post in this thread further either].

Last edited by GM-hrudey at 4/18/2016 10:05:18 AM

Well, as the officials storm off, rather chidlishly slamming the door on discussion, quoting the rules as they go, I have this to say.

When someone is telling you that in their opinion, (which is still allowed here), that a rule is wrong, there is absolutely no point in quoting them the rule that they think, in their opinion, is wrong.

Obviously I'm stating that for the popcorn eaters, since officialdom has left the stage.

PS:
Yes, it's forbidden to discuss about GM decisions on the forum, because 1) regarding moderation decision, that would just be threads lasting for weeks like this one with diverging opinions, 2) regarding cheating, the less information cheaters can get, the more chance we have to catch them.

Except I'm not talking about cheating, nor does a process whereby people can talk about decisions need to be one that goes on for weeks. Though I agree its very difficult to get a response from a GM that actually involves them answering more than one point at a time because they like to cherry pick the part they can answer sarcastically or wittily and ignore anything that involves some thought. Or perish the thought, further discussion.

Spot on, Gully. Too bad I can only give your post one basketball.

Well, as the officials storm off, rather chidlishly slamming the door on discussion, quoting the rules as they go, I have this to say.

When someone is telling you that in their opinion, (which is still allowed here), that a rule is wrong, there is absolutely no point in quoting them the rule that they think, in their opinion, is wrong.

If that was what happened, I'd be inclined to agree. What I responded to was:

Heh heh, it would be interesting to try to find such a "rule." Then everyone could see how vague and subjective it is.

There is often much lamentation that staff responses are "sarcastic" or "not constructive", as if we are coming into these discussions and ruining these earnest points with off-hand obnoxiousness. There's much complaint that certain users are being treated differently or targeted by staff. And yet when someone says pretty much flat out that they don't feel that a rule even exists or is vague, and it would be interesting to try to find such a "rule" (with the quotation marks further casting into doubt its' existence), what would you have me do? I showed where the rules could be found, quoted the specific one relevant to the question being asked. And then I said that if the goal was to find out how far over the line one could go (my response to the whole 100, 110, 130 discussion earlier), we couldn't help.

And so getting back to your words:
"When someone is telling you that in their opinion, (which is still allowed here), that a rule is wrong, there is absolutely no point in quoting them the rule that they think, in their opinion, is wrong."

If you think that's what's happening here, at least on my part, you're factually wrong. Mike Franks in the last three days has posted six different times in this thread his complaint about the "line", going so far as to say:
"Of course, I'm smart enough to know it is purely imaginary. It is whatever a boss feels like on that day. If he had a fight with his wife, look out everybody! If he got laid, anything goes."

But none of that, of course, is what prompted my post. I didn't feel like there was anything constructive that could be said to counter that, because it's all just a case of one man's opinion being thrust upon us over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over. The fact that I don't find any of that constructive or trying to elevate discussion is my personal opinion, but as Mike and others have made abundantly clear, they have the right to their opinion, and I as well have the right to THEIR opinion. Anything else is killing discussion, so rather than bother, I let it go.

But when the assertion is made that the rule doesn't even exist? Yes, that is absolutely the time to quote the rule.

Obviously I'm stating that for the popcorn eaters, since officialdom has left the stage.

Not yet, after all.

PS:
Yes, it's forbidden to discuss about GM decisions on the forum, because 1) regarding moderation decision, that would just be threads lasting for weeks like this one with diverging opinions, 2) regarding cheating, the less information cheaters can get, the more chance we have to catch them.

Except I'm not talking about cheating, nor does a process whereby people can talk about decisions need to be one that goes on for weeks. Though I agree its very difficult to get a response from a GM that actually involves them answering more than one point at a time because they like to cherry pick the part they can answer sarcastically or wittily and ignore anything that involves some thought. Or perish the thought, further discussion.

There are two parts to his response. If you're not cheating, it doesn't mean you can discuss moderation, just like if it's not a moderation discussion, it doesn't make talking about cheating okay.

I respect your opinion. I felt like you deserved an answer. There it is. I sincerely hope not to participate in this t

I respect your opinion. I felt like you deserved an answer. There it is. I sincerely hope not to participate in this t

Sorry to make you run out of letters, but thanks anyway. I respect yours. Indeed I'm not lacking disrespect for Perpete either though he might be surprised to see that. Or Manon who took the time to bbmail me today.

Perpete, and to a lesser extent you, perhaps take the brunt of the criticism simply because no one else seems interested. I know I have singled out Perpete earlier in the thread, and perhaps that seems to imply that I might have something personal against him, but that is not the case.

There are two parts to his response. If you're not cheating, it doesn't mean you can discuss moderation, just like if it's not a moderation discussion, it doesn't make talking about cheating okay.

Not only am I not cheating, I'm not talking about cheating. Though again, I'd like to see a change to the manual so that it is clear that even people who have been banned for cheating get a reply telling them their appeal has been rejected.

But when the assertion is made that the rule doesn't even exist? Yes, that is absolutely the time to quote the rule.

Agreed, and I apologise. I should have worded my response (which deliberately wasn't a reply to you) to make it clear that the above was a general reference and not meant as a reply to you.

If you merely want to know the specific rule about staff discussions, from the forum rules, in the section of posts not permitted:

- Discussing staff decisions (BBs/GMs/Mods). Please e-mail appeals@buzzerbeater.com with your complaint.

There you are. That is exactly what I'm talking about. That is used by staff to apply to anything and everything they don't like. That is unquestionably far too vague. If you followed that rule to the letter most of the forums would disappear. (Well, maybe not "most," but a huge chunk. Thank you for posting that, it confirms my point.