Are WP rules too vague/open to interpretation?

Post Reply New Topic

Because like you have said, the mods' decisions stand "at the end of the day".

I'd like the mods to explain their reasoning. "You see it on the Discovery Channel" is hardly an explanation, is it?

This is really the last time I can say this. There are no rules against nudity. The rule is against "graphic images". The moderation team did not feel that was a graphic image, and using our judgement on these issues is what we are here for.

Titties are graphic, and in my opinion, the mods' judgement, in this case, is flawed.

BTW, don't get me wrong here, I'm not insulting MONKEY for having the avatar, and hey, I like titties. But I also think that, as the thread title says, the forum rules are far too vague and are therefore not meeting their purpose of making the site family friendly.

@Asp-Z: Here is another case where the actual *principles* of all of this can be seen ...

Some folks had once joined here for the purpose of addressing 'keet and some things he had said, and I believe two of those people were eventually banned for "impersonation" after using some of 'keet's own pics as their avatars. In reality, however, those people were not impersonating anyone ... yet their uses of 'keet's pics for their own avatars was certainly distasteful and offensive ...

... but then after all of that had been addressed, yet another member was still using a public-domain picture of a parakeet for *exactly* the same reason ... and my quiet request PMed directly to that member proved sufficient for having that changed. All in all, then, the same opportunity should have first been offered to the two members that had been banned. So, bottom line?

At the end of the day, the mods' calls stand.

And we certainly do not expect all 46,000 members of this site to agree with every one of the moderation calls. If that were the case we wouldn't need moderators as the site would self-regulate. But, we do want you to feel as though your disagreement has been listened to.

With all due respect here ...

This site is *completely* self-regulated within the constraints of Alex' TOS and subject to Alex' own decisions whenever he deems them necessary. Mods here are nothing more or less than regular members who just happen to have a few extra buttons, and mods get replaced whenever the membership complains too loudly for Alex to bear or when they get frustrated or too busy elsewhere and quit on their own.

Last edited by leejosepho on 22 Mar 2011, 3:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Just to clarify, those members were not banned. Two of them chose to stop posting of their own accord once their "fun" was over and the other two are still fairly active. A fifth member was banned but for an unrelated reason.

Not true, but that is irrelevant here.

I appreciate how you are able to respond to these posts.

Oh the quote system messed up and don't know how to do it so my responses are in bold.

The problem with this is people might think someone is a troll and call them out on it when they aren't even a troll. And the word is often misused here it has gotten annoying. I do agree if no one is allowed to call people a troll even if someone is one because you never know. Even Babycenter has that rule too.




So long as you aren't graphic.



It is okay to have multiple accounts so long as you are only using one and you have had it cleared with the moderation staff in advance.



This is a contentious issue that I wish we had a better answer for at the moment. The rules state that swearing is not allowed but the enforcement takes into account the context and location.[/quote]

I find this part confusing. What is the difference between cursing and swearing? I always thought they mean the same thing but different wording. I got told by sal here that just as long as it's not a censored word it's okay and just as long as I don't call others it.



I think that several of your examples are referring to previous moderation staff members. I personally don't moderate any other boards and do not feel it is in my mandate to enforce WP rules outside of WP.[/quote]

This was exactly the problem and was happy they got fired. If anything has changed after that, the rules, I would be glad to know.



My own definition of trolling is attacking other members, intentionally derailing conversations, trying to sell something, spamming multiple forums, impersonating other members, inciting prejudice, etc. People can talk about whatever silliness they want to so long as they do so where it is appropriate. In the middle of another thread is not appropriate. In the Haven is not appropriate. In Random is appropriate. Who am I to judge you for believing toys come to life or whatever else you believe or want to discuss.



If you are being supportive and not derogatory or aggressive or creepy I doubt anyone will give you any trouble over that, unless the individual the post was about felt offended or uncomfortable and then it would need to come down.



I don't interpret that rule to say that you can't ever mention the name of a banned member, I interpret it to state that public discussion and debate about the reasons for the ban is not allowed.[/quote]

I had it interpreted as asking why they are banned or what actions they did that got them banned but then I later learned it's talking about them nonetheless rather it's positive or negative or neutral but this was with the old staff.



We are willing to work with individuals to help them come to an understanding. We are very cognizant of the fact that there is a lot of TOM and executive functioning challenges present on the boards. If you are being malicious it is an attack. If you aren't it might be a mistake. Either way it needs to be corrected when it happens.[/quote]

I believe rules are interpreted differently by each member, AS or not. It happens at other places too.



It is impossible for 3 separate individuals from different countries and cultures and backgrounds to make the exact same call every time, but please believe that we are trying. A warning is not the end of the world, think of it as a learning opportunity. [/quote]

That's how I had it taken as until the final warning because it meant next time I break a rule I am banned and it wouldn't matter if it was unintentional. But doesn't a warning count towards your ban or is it another way of telling you what you are doing and stop? I had always interpreted it as this is your strike. That is how other forums work, if you get certain amount of warnings, you are banned.

If you ever have any questions please feel free to ask before you post, and also know that you needn't stress so much over the details and worry about getting banned. My experiences with you thus far indicate to me that you are unlikely to be banned for your actions unless you radically alter your baseline behavior patterns, but you are likely to need a prod one way or the other on occasion. I haven't seen you act maliciously in the past and as long as you don't begin doing so in the future your membership with WP is pretty secure.[/quote]

I was told there are lot of threads on me in the moderator section about "inappropriate topics" I was posting and other crap he said I was doing. I was never sure if this was true or a way to hurt me. I never bothered asking for two reasons, 1) what if it was true, then I'd be even more upset and about myself and how misunderstood I am by my own kind, 2) I was told mods aren't allowed to tell their members if they have threads about them in the mod section so I saw no point in asking.
I did ask one mod but didn't get a straight answer.

But honestly they acted like I was the worst troll here when I was not and of all members who have been banned from here and deserved it, they did things I didn't even do and this former mod acted like I was worse than them and told me I destroyed this place.

Nudity is graphic. This is just another example of how people interpret what is graphic. So it may cause confusion here what is acceptable.

I always thought naked breasts were graphic.

LG -

All I can say is that there is an entirely new mod staff and things are going to be a little different then they were before. There is really no way around that, and we hope that our new style is as effective as the old one.

As far as "two strikes and you are out" goes, I do believe the time between offenses will certainly play a role. We aren't robots and if a member contributes to the site and does something wrong every few thousand posts we aren't going to dismiss the thousands of positive posts because of the bad ones. Of course it also depends on the severity of the crime, the malicious nature, the members ability to understand that they were wrong, remorse, a willingness to work with us, general attitude, etc.

My error. There were two accounts that were created to impersonate a member here and they were indeed banned. Good memory Lee

Yes, but you did get me to thinking a bit there. As I recall, the two were banned but their offensive "impersonating" avatars were still visible in their posts ... and then you/we/I/somebody removed all their posts from public view because none of us had a button for deleting the avatars in question.

LeagueGirl, I've honestly feel you've grown a lot as a person and in your understanding of how to participate on a site like this one since your conflicts with the "old" moderator team. You've made good use of your latest chance. As have some others. I think you should consider the past to be past and water under the bridge at this point. I realize that each moderation team will make it's own interpretations and the rules, as a result, are always shifting a little, which can be definitely be confusing, but you know how to ask questions and engage in discussion about it, and that makes a big difference.

*BUMP* for this topic's newfound relevance, and I'd like to present two new examples of "vague" WP rules.

This section in the WP rules states:

At one time (when QM etc were mods) this rule was interpreted to mean that you were only allowed to have one WP account period. Got banned? That was it buddy, you weren't allowed to make a new account ever again. Left and changed your password & now wish to return? Too bad buster, you gotta get your password reset on your original account.
Nowadays I see old members coming back time and time again on new accounts. Now the rule seems to be interpreted as you can have one WP account at a time?

And this recent gem from the ToS which has been discussed lately:


When this rule was originally made it meant that mods, admins, or anyone else for that matter were not permitted to access other people's PM inboxes and read the contents. Of course there might have been exceptional circumstances (such as if your surname was Freund).
Now today it seems to mean that you're not permitted to make PM's public or share/copy/paste the PM's to other members?

I dunno if anyone will understand what I am on about. In summary, the WP rules seem to have changed meaning/interpretation over time.