OMGAKITTY Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 Stating that you'll ban/warn anyone who posts after you do in a section where you have no jurisdiction isn't harsh' date=' it's incompetent. [b']This is perfectly justifiable. As a moderator you are expected to maintain control of a situation when neccessary.[/b] As a moderator, you are expected to maintain control of your section. "Spiritual Locking" is nothing more than mini-modding power abuse. No. It isn't. As a moderator, even outside of your section you still have the capabilities to warn and ban. You are expected to be a moderator, even if you cant close a topic or delete posts. Mini-modding is like that, except you can't do a single thing about it. fix'd it just for you Hunter. i lol'd Power abuse eh? Nah. I disagree, a job is a job, it'd be better if you got paid for banning people. =/ YCMaker should start sending out pay check for the Mods, and good members. And saying that a Mod should stay in his/her section is like saying YCMaker can't go look into one of the forums; it's stupid. Mods can and will go where ever they please. Hi, I'm the governor of New York. Hey California, you don't mind if I just step in here and raise your taxes do you? kthnxbai. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~ P O L A R I S ~ Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 Stating that you'll ban/warn anyone who posts after you do in a section where you have no jurisdiction isn't harsh' date=' it's incompetent. [b']This is perfectly justifiable. As a moderator you are expected to maintain control of a situation when neccessary.[/b] As a moderator, you are expected to maintain control of your section. "Spiritual Locking" is nothing more than mini-modding power abuse. No. It isn't. As a moderator, even outside of your section you still have the capabilities to warn and ban. You are expected to be a moderator, even if you cant close a topic or delete posts. Mini-modding is like that, except you can't do a single thing about it. fix'd it just for you Hunter. i lol'd Power abuse eh? Nah. I disagree, a job is a job, it'd be better if you got paid for banning people. =/ YCMaker should start sending out pay check for the Mods, and good members. And saying that a Mod should stay in his/her section is like saying YCMaker can't go look into one of the forums; it's stupid. Mods can and will go where ever they please. Sure, but that doesn't mean they should be able to Moderate wherever they please. That just totally defeats the purpose of being assigned to a certain section yet. If you aren't a Super Mod, you don't have the right to pretend you are just because you have a way of threatening people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitty Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 Stating that you'll ban/warn anyone who posts after you do in a section where you have no jurisdiction isn't harsh' date=' it's incompetent. [b']This is perfectly justifiable. As a moderator you are expected to maintain control of a situation when neccessary.[/b] As a moderator, you are expected to maintain control of your section. "Spiritual Locking" is nothing more than mini-modding power abuse. No. It isn't. As a moderator, even outside of your section you still have the capabilities to warn and ban. You are expected to be a moderator, even if you cant close a topic or delete posts. Mini-modding is like that, except you can't do a single thing about it. fix'd it just for you Hunter. i lol'd Power abuse eh? Nah. I disagree, a job is a job, it'd be better if you got paid for banning people. =/ YCMaker should start sending out pay check for the Mods, and good members. And saying that a Mod should stay in his/her section is like saying YCMaker can't go look into one of the forums; it's stupid. Mods can and will go where ever they please. Sure, but that doesn't mean they should be able to Moderate wherever they please. That just totally defeats the purpose of being assigned to a certain section yet. If you aren't a Super Mod, you don't have the right to pretend you are just because you have a way of threatening people. Well if they didn't all the troll, flammers, and spammers would take over this site more than they already have. Being assigned to a area is a neat nice organization plan. And all Mods Super or not Should be treated the same way. And they threaten people to keep from bannign them. =/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OMGAKITTY Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 Stating that you'll ban/warn anyone who posts after you do in a section where you have no jurisdiction isn't harsh' date=' it's incompetent. [b']This is perfectly justifiable. As a moderator you are expected to maintain control of a situation when neccessary.[/b] As a moderator, you are expected to maintain control of your section. "Spiritual Locking" is nothing more than mini-modding power abuse. No. It isn't. As a moderator, even outside of your section you still have the capabilities to warn and ban. You are expected to be a moderator, even if you cant close a topic or delete posts. Mini-modding is like that, except you can't do a single thing about it. fix'd it just for you Hunter. i lol'd Power abuse eh? Nah. I disagree, a job is a job, it'd be better if you got paid for banning people. =/ YCMaker should start sending out pay check for the Mods, and good members. And saying that a Mod should stay in his/her section is like saying YCMaker can't go look into one of the forums; it's stupid. Mods can and will go where ever they please. Sure, but that doesn't mean they should be able to Moderate wherever they please. That just totally defeats the purpose of being assigned to a certain section yet. If you aren't a Super Mod, you don't have the right to pretend you are just because you have a way of threatening people. Well if they didn't all the troll, flammers, and spammers would take over this site more than they already have. Being assigned to a area is a neat nice organization plan. And all Mods Super or not Should be treated the same way. And they threaten people to keep from bannign them. =/ Frankly, modding someone else's section is an insult. Its implying that the assigned mod can't do his job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harhar Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 Stating that you'll ban/warn anyone who posts after you do in a section where you have no jurisdiction isn't harsh' date=' it's incompetent. [b']This is perfectly justifiable. As a moderator you are expected to maintain control of a situation when neccessary.[/b] As a moderator, you are expected to maintain control of your section. "Spiritual Locking" is nothing more than mini-modding power abuse. No. It isn't. As a moderator, even outside of your section you still have the capabilities to warn and ban. You are expected to be a moderator, even if you cant close a topic or delete posts. Mini-modding is like that, except you can't do a single thing about it. fix'd it just for you Hunter. i lol'd Power abuse eh? Nah. I disagree, a job is a job, it'd be better if you got paid for banning people. =/ YCMaker should start sending out pay check for the Mods, and good members. And saying that a Mod should stay in his/her section is like saying YCMaker can't go look into one of the forums; it's stupid. Mods can and will go where ever they please. Sure, but that doesn't mean they should be able to Moderate wherever they please. That just totally defeats the purpose of being assigned to a certain section yet. If you aren't a Super Mod, you don't have the right to pretend you are just because you have a way of threatening people. Well if they didn't all the troll, flammers, and spammers would take over this site more than they already have. Being assigned to a area is a neat nice organization plan. And all Mods Super or not Should be treated the same way. And they threaten people to keep from bannign them. =/ Frankly, modding someone else's section is an insult. Its implying that the assigned mod can't do his job. Like for instance, I dunno the General section mod(s) perhaps? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitty Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 Stating that you'll ban/warn anyone who posts after you do in a section where you have no jurisdiction isn't harsh' date=' it's incompetent. [b']This is perfectly justifiable. As a moderator you are expected to maintain control of a situation when neccessary.[/b] As a moderator, you are expected to maintain control of your section. "Spiritual Locking" is nothing more than mini-modding power abuse. No. It isn't. As a moderator, even outside of your section you still have the capabilities to warn and ban. You are expected to be a moderator, even if you cant close a topic or delete posts. Mini-modding is like that, except you can't do a single thing about it. fix'd it just for you Hunter. i lol'd Power abuse eh? Nah. I disagree, a job is a job, it'd be better if you got paid for banning people. =/ YCMaker should start sending out pay check for the Mods, and good members. And saying that a Mod should stay in his/her section is like saying YCMaker can't go look into one of the forums; it's stupid. Mods can and will go where ever they please. Sure, but that doesn't mean they should be able to Moderate wherever they please. That just totally defeats the purpose of being assigned to a certain section yet. If you aren't a Super Mod, you don't have the right to pretend you are just because you have a way of threatening people. Well if they didn't all the troll, flammers, and spammers would take over this site more than they already have. Being assigned to a area is a neat nice organization plan. And all Mods Super or not Should be treated the same way. And they threaten people to keep from bannign them. =/ Frankly, modding someone else's section is an insult. Its implying that the assigned mod can't do his job. Like for instance, I dunno the General section mod(s) perhaps? Princey and Flame Dragon are the Generals i think Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Altαir Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 Please. It's their job. You don't question jobs. They're there for a reason. Spiritual Locking is like saying: "Okay, I'm gonna fill in for so-and-so because he's out/not doing his job. If this didn't happen, then the occupation these jobs filled will be lacking, which ain't good for the economy. Meh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~ P O L A R I S ~ Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 Actually, to be fair to Icy, back when Icy was spiritually locking we didn't really have an active General Mod. Hunter was just CC and Flame Dragon was just VGs. Frunk hadn't quite been reinstated yet, but he was shortly after. Still, all those bans were a problem, so the real problem at the time was the Admins not being able. A hell of a lot of people got banned as a result of spiritual locks though, and even if it might be for what you think is right, it's still power abuse. Unfortunately, Icy's retained his quickness to ban people even now that we have better Mod distribution and certain Mods like J-Max've taken to spiritual locking, even where it wasn't necessary whatsoever. Please. It's their job. You don't question jobs. They're there for a reason. Spiritual Locking is like saying: "Okay' date=' I'm gonna fill in for so-and-so because he's out/not doing his job. If this didn't happen, then the occupation these jobs filled will be lacking, which ain't good for the economy. Meh.[/quote'] Spiritual locking's more like "I'll fill in for a wounded police officer, but instead of doing the job like they did it, I'll shoot everyone on site." Why aren't we to question jobs? We're questioning a lot, so we might as well. Besides, there're a lot of questionable jobs out there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Altαir Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 Actually' date=' to be fair to Icy, back when Icy was spiritually locking we didn't really have an active General Mod. Hunter was just CC and Flame Dragon was just VGs. Frunk hadn't quite been reinstated yet, but he was shortly after. Still, all those bans were a problem, so the real problem at the time was the Admins not being able. A hell of a lot of people got banned as a result of spiritual locks though, and even if it might be for what you think is right, it's still power abuse. Unfortunately, Icy's retained his quickness to ban people even now that we have better Mod distribution and certain Mods like J-Max've taken to spiritual locking, even where it wasn't necessary whatsoever.[/quote'] You make sense there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitty Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 Actually' date=' to be fair to Icy, back when Icy was spiritually locking we didn't really have an active General Mod. Hunter was just CC and Flame Dragon was just VGs. Frunk hadn't quite been reinstated yet, but he was shortly after. Still, all those bans were a problem, so the real problem at the time was the Admins not being able. A hell of a lot of people got banned as a result of spiritual locks though, and even if it might be for what you think is right, it's still power abuse. Unfortunately, [b']Icy's retained his quickness to ban people[/b] even now that we have better Mod distribution and certain Mods like J-Max've taken to spiritual locking, even where it wasn't necessary whatsoever. You make sense there. I do agree when Icy loses it he can get alittle ban happy at times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huntar! Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 As a moderator' date=' you are expected to maintain control of your section. "Spiritual Locking" is nothing more than [s']mini-modding[/s] power abuse. fix'd it just for you Hunter. Power abuse? How the hell is it power abuse? I'm helping out wherever I can. Its called being helpful, I'm sure no other mod has a single problem with me helping them out where I can. Nah. I disagree' date=' a job is a job, it'd be better if you got paid for banning people. =/ YCMaker should start sending out pay check for the Mods, and good members. [/quote'] members? lolno. Mods? maybe but thats iffy as it is. Sure' date=' but that doesn't mean they should be able to Moderate wherever they please. That just totally defeats the purpose of being assigned to a certain section yet. If you aren't a Super Mod, you don't have the right to pretend you are just because you have a way of threatening people.[/quote'] You dont moderate wherever you please. I dont have power outside of CC and General. All I can do is warn and ban and if a topic is out of control outside of my section, I plan on, as a moderator, to take control of said situation any way I can. Frankly' date=' modding someone else's section is an insult. Its implying that the assigned mod can't do his job.[/quote'] Even if they just aren't online at the time? Think before you post. Like for instance' date=' I dunno the General section mod(s) perhaps?[/quote'] Flame Dragon and myself are the two active General mods and technically Frunk and Glasstin if they were to ever return. Mods do our jobs to the best of our abilities and we help eachother out when we can. We're a team, not territorial warlords constantly fighting for supremacy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fenrir Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 Flame Dragon and myself are the two active General mods and technically Frunk and Glasstin if they were to ever return. Mods do our jobs to the best of our abilities and we help eachother out when we can. We're a team' date=' not territorial warlords constantly fighting for supremacy.[/quote'] This quote made me depressed. D: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OMGAKITTY Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 As a moderator' date=' you are expected to maintain control of your section. "Spiritual Locking" is nothing more than [s']mini-modding[/s] power abuse. fix'd it just for you Hunter. Power abuse? How the hell is it power abuse? I'm helping out wherever I can. Its called being helpful, I'm sure no other mod has a single problem with me helping them out where I can. What? Yelling "REPORTED!" and then dishing out a bunch of negs is mini-modding? How the hell is it mini-modding? I'm helping out wherever I can. Its called being helpful, I'm sure no other mod has a single problem with me helping them out where I can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitty Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 @ Princey: And Why not? Member who have good behavior should be rewarded too.... D= Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Altαir Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 @ Princey: And Why not? Member who have good behavior should be rewarded too.... D= lolno Everybody will brag that their good members. Then YCMaker will have to listen, or else a strike. If that happened, YCMaker would be broke. Unless this forum became a Communism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitty Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 @ Princey: And Why not? Member who have good behavior should be rewarded too.... D= lolno Everybody will brag that their good members. Then YCMaker will have to listen' date=' or else a strike. If that happened, YCMaker would be broke. Unless this forum became a Communism.[/quote'] Not if YCMaker only rewarded the members who haven't been warned or banned, and they can be just newbies 5 stars or more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Altαir Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 Yay! That's me! Good idea kitty. (Wait, what if you've been warned twice, but both are gone?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitty Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 Ha I've never had a single warning, because I'ma good kitty girl, and I've never been banned because I'm good I don't flame or troll or anything. I'm tooo nice -.-; Anyway. It's just horus, i think mods are wonderful, some are sexy, people ^^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Altαir Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 I got warned twice for some RP crap. Both 20%. And one disobeyed the Ex Post Facto Law. (I hate Shadius for that.) But I was never banned. The mods think of me as one of them disposable toys. Once you play with them, throw it out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~/Coolio Prime\~ Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 @ Princey: And Why not? Member who have good behavior should be rewarded too.... D= lolno Everybody will brag that their good members. Then YCMaker will have to listen' date=' or else a strike. If that happened, YCMaker would be broke. Unless this forum became a Communism.[/quote'] Not if YCMaker only rewarded the members who haven't been warned or banned, and they can be just newbies 5 stars or more.There's a difference between a good member and someone that wasn't warned. If a mod is totally pissed over being owned by a member in an argument and he warns him for doing so is he no longer a good member? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fenrir Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 It's just horus' date=' i think mods are wonderful, some are [b']sexy, people ^^[/b] Total proof that Kitty has been using her flat chest to sway the mods. Total. Proof. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Altαir Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 It's just horus' date=' i think mods are wonderful, some are [b']sexy, people ^^[/b] Total proof that Kitty has been using her flat chest to sway the mods. Total. Proof. lololol, +1 internetz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dismal Euphony Posted October 8, 2009 Report Share Posted October 8, 2009 Ha I've never had a single warning' date=' because I'ma good kitty girl, and I've never been banned because I'm good I don't flame or troll or anything. I'm tooo nice -.-; Anyway. It's just horus, i think mods are wonderful, some are sexy, people ^^[/quote'] Or maybe it's because you suck up to them. >.> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Infinitus Posted October 8, 2009 Report Share Posted October 8, 2009 Ha I've never had a single warning' date=' because I'ma good kitty girl, and I've never been banned because I'm good I don't flame or troll or anything. I'm tooo nice -.-; Anyway. It's just horus, i think mods are wonderful, some are sexy, people ^^[/quote'] Or maybe it's because you suck up to them. >.> You know, she may not be. I am nice to authority because I respect them for being the authority, because alot of people dislike authority. Then again, I don't think I've called authority "sexy". Regardless, wether it's obvious or not, without solid proof the mods won't believe you. Well, the honest mods that aren't being swayed, provided the whole swaying thing is true. So how about we save this for another thread and get more on topic? Or is this on topic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dismal Euphony Posted October 8, 2009 Report Share Posted October 8, 2009 Ha I've never had a single warning' date=' because I'ma good kitty girl, and I've never been banned because I'm good I don't flame or troll or anything. I'm tooo nice -.-; Anyway. It's just horus, i think mods are wonderful, some are sexy, people ^^[/quote'] Or maybe it's because you suck up to them. >.> You know, she may not be. I am nice to authority because I respect them for being the authority, because alot of people dislike authority. Then again, I don't think I've called authority "sexy". Regardless, wether it's obvious or not, without solid proof the mods won't believe you. Well, the honest mods that aren't being swayed, provided the whole swaying thing is true. So how about we save this for another thread and get more on topic? Or is this on topic? There's a fine line between being nice and sucking up. She has crossed that line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.