Recent actions on XPOFF

[Anonymous12]

If people don't want to be treated like children, they should probably not act like them.

does this go for u too? coz who can make u behave if u act like a child?

 

[Bestworld]

Every person that has been punished, has broken this rule.

"likely to offend" is very vague though. Some people get offended over the smallest things, truly. So that's all about interpretation.

 

[Blackberryy]

Just prepare for me to be demoted or banned. This “no talking about moderation” is being abused as a rule to quench any provocations or questions toward the current state of the sites moderation and lack of rules.

 

[Zemmix]

does this go for u too? coz who can make u behave if u act like a child?

I'd fully expect all staff to be held to the same standard and be demodded if they were flaming people with derogatory terms, and posting constant spam.

Just prepare for me to be demoted or banned. This “no talking about moderation” is being abused as a rule to quench any provocations or questions toward the current state of the sites moderation and lack of rules.

I'd hate to see that. =/

 

[Rankonemoderator]

If people don't want to be treated like children, they should probably not act like them.

So now the interpretation of the non-existent rules is up to your digression, as well as who is acting like a child?

Like I said in my first post here: the mods following through on Conq's changes should be ashamed. Enforce rules, sure.. but make sure there are actually rules to enforce first.

P.s. @Goesid I never thought abt it like that.. deff am the user w longest ban us/eu/worlde.

 

[Zemmix]

So now the interpretation of the non-existent rules is up to your digression, as well as who is acting like a child?

Like I said in my first post here: the mods following through on Conq's changes should be ashamed. Enforce rules, sure.. but make sure there are actually rules to enforce first.

P.s. @Goesid I never thought abt it like that.. deff am the user w longest ban us/eu/worlde.

I'm not arguing at all that there should be a defined set of rules. I absolutely believe that's the case.

 

[Rankonemoderator]

I'm not arguing at all that there should be a defined set of rules. I absolutely believe that's the case.

Ok well in that case 0 bans/deletes should have been handed out until those rules are put in place. But that would make sense and who wants that rlly???

 

[Zemmix]

Ok well in that case 0 bans/deletes should have been handed out until those rules are put in place. But that would make sense and who wants that rlly???

People calling others derogatory terms, attacking staff/members, and making obvious spam posts are deserving of a ban. No matter how you cut it. Are you implying you think it's okay to just call people derogatory terms and attack them with no consequence?

Saying 0 bans should be done until these clear cut rules are in place would mean anyone could just post whatever with no consequences. That'd just be silly.

 

[Druiddroid]

Ok well in that case 0 bans/deletes should have been handed out until those rules are put in place. But that would make sense and who wants that rlly???

Sanit we got your point dawg I love you and please see that Celax is listening and is a good person

 

[Arkantx]

People calling others derogatory terms, attacking staff/members, and making obvious spam posts are deserving of a ban. No matter how you cut it. Are you implying you think it's okay to just call people derogatory terms and attack them with no consequence?

Saying 0 bans should be done until these clear cut rules are in place would mean anyone could just post whatever with no consequences. That'd just be silly.

May I ask which of those offences I commited to get shadowbanned without warning?

 

[Devm]

"likely to offend" is very vague though. Some people get offended over the smallest things, truly. So that's all about interpretation.

You just completely skipped the most important three: defamatory, abusive and hateful. There's no way around it, they've broken this rule and were dealt with accordingly.

 

[Zemmix]

Sanit we got your point dawg I love you and please see that Celax is listening and is a good person

<3

Thanks.

I'm genuinely interested in seeing what's best for this site, and would love some sort of happy medium. I don't want to see everyone leave or banned, but I also don't want to see people constantly attacking others and making posts that are very obviously going to drive folks away.

Certainly, there has to be some way to make this all work out for the best.

 

[The Saint]

Sorry guys... It's clear from reading more informed people's posts that's there's a problem here.

I agree with most bans, but @Dramatized as never been toxic in all honesty. Im no fan but a spade is a spade.

 

[Chainzz]

People calling others derogatory terms, attacking staff/members, and making obvious spam posts are deserving of a ban. No matter how you cut it. Are you implying you think it's okay to just call people derogatory terms and attack them with no consequence?

Saying 0 bans should be done until these clear cut rules are in place would mean anyone could just post whatever with no consequences. That'd just be silly.

Gonna keep asking again and again until I get an answer. Can I get the exact sentence that got me that "discourage" ban?

 

[Zeiren]

You're supposed to enforce the current rules in place until you have made desired changes to them, not just entirely remove them and allow the staff to act at their own discretion. Doing so just causes backlash. Pitiful.

 

[Druiddroid]

<3

Thanks.

I'm genuinely interested in seeing what's best for this site, and would love some sort of happy medium. I don't want to see everyone leave or banned, but I also don't want to see people constantly attacking others and making posts that are very obviously going to drive folks away.

Certainly, there has to be some way to make this all work out for the best.

Yes indeed and you have your hands full at the moment. It’s going to take some time for you to reach the appropriate conclusion. I’m rooting for you.

 

[Zemmix]

That being said, I think I've put in enough input here. I'd love to see other staffs input, other than just me and Blackberry. (Whom I might add, is doing a fantastic job as administrator, and I would hate to see that change.)

I very much agree with a large direction of this sites changes, and am happy to be in a position to hopefully help with that.

It's my hope that things smooth out, and this site can thrive and also not have such issues with toxicity.

I think this kind of discussion, when kept respectful, is important.

At the end of the day, we all just want to have a community here of twinks and share what we know/play with fellow twinks/and have fun.

 

[Goesid]

Sorry guys... It's clear from reading more informed people's posts that's there's a problem here.

I agree with most bans, but @Dramatized as never been toxic in all honesty. Im no fan but a spade is a spade.

Saint defending Drama. Well Conq said things were gonna change and if this isn't proof.

 

[Kaløyan]

Make me a "Moderator". I think Im the right person for this position. Im just and fair. I have a good judgement and I`ll ban the right ppl. Vote for me!

 

[Devm]

You're supposed to enforce the current rules in place until you have made desired changes to them, not just entirely remove them and allow the staff to act at their own discretion. Doing so just causes backlash. Pitiful.

They're right here bro XD