Current Events > How do you feel about "so and so is WARNED" topics being BANNED?

(+) Yeah! (+)

I (Butters) have been calling for such topics to be BANNED for a while now. People who make those topics are annoying.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

hey nice gimmick

They were fun to post in

this is truly fires of rubicon. bald gate can fuck off

Mike_Stanton posted...

hey nice gimmick

Nah, your gimmick has always been shit.

Mike_Stanton posted...

hey nice gimmick

Better than your shitty gimmick.

The astroturfing of this site is alarming to say the least.

They were a nice reminder that the mods actually do their jobs from time to time.

Admin not so much. But the mods at least.

It's the right thing to do. They're toxic and contradict the whole concept of moderation.

Is there a list somewhere where you can see who's banned? Are the topics reserved for the bad apples only. I always wondered if one was made for me when I got suspended about a year or two ago. It might have been longer than that though. I only check gamefaqs on my phone so I didn't log in from another device to check.

thank god

those were flooding this dead board

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/7/5/1/AAb05zAAE0iH.jpg

I wont lose sleep over them but its telling that most of the people saying good riddance happen to have questionable posting histories.

Just like when 261 shut down.

Was fun while it lasted. And hey, weve always got discord

Where/when was this announced?

Euripides posted...

Where/when was this announced?

It wasnt announced, it was hidden on a random board

I found it odd since CE was the only board that did it so frequently.

Tig posted...

Better than your shitty gimmick.

We all know that I (Butters) am no gimmick user. But let's talk about this Conflict guy's gimmick. I mean, his username is "Conflict" and he makes posts to start blatant conflicts with other users. Genius!

Euripides posted...

Where/when was this announced?

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/6-
gamefaqs-announcements/80556771

It seems like bullying and harassment.

Euripides posted...

Where/when was this announced?

On the front page of the boards. Are you blind?

Crazyman93 posted...

On the front page of the boards. Are you blind?

There's a front page? I just bookmark the boards I use

Crazyman93 posted...

On the front page of the boards. Are you blind?

Front page of the boards - is this a troll

Fandom's efforts to grind the GameFAQs Message Boards into such inactivity that they have an excuse to close them entirely continues with DToast as their loyal and unquestioning collaborator.

I hope he's at least getting paid well for his work.

Crazyman93 posted...

On the front page of the boards. Are you blind?

On the mobile site, I dont think you can navigate to the Announcements board from your home page.

Without the banned user around to even see them I don't really see the point. More so because most never knew the user nor will remember to remind them of said topics if the warned ones return.

So their just pointless filler.

Prismsblade posted...

Without the banned user around to even see them I don't really see the point.

Well it was the main way I found out 261ers I hated got warned/suspended/banned. Now I have to check my tagged list every now and then, like I'm some sort of fucking peasant or something.

Also they were a source of mild amusement, which I think is the main reason they were banned. Fandom can't allow us to have fun. We might get rowdy or something.

I liked them.

:/

Don't really care

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

Once again, great gimmick.

The truth is I do not remember everything I read and I rarely recall who posted it.

Posters here had fun with those topics so maybe a little sorry their fun was taken away.

Conflict never struck me as someone who regularly antagonises people. Can I get a second opinion on that? Am I wrong?

It's a stupid call.

Topics are usually made in the wake of some monumental fuck-up on behalf of the warned, suspended or banned user. It gives people who experienced the fuck-up something to comment on and joke around, it gives outside users an unexpected burst of entertainment, and in a purely business sense it drives user engagement.

People have made warned/suspended threads about me at times, and it's fine. I fuck up, sometimes because I cross a line I was toeing a bit too hard. If people get a laugh and a goof at my expense, so be it. It comes with the territory.

Regardless of whether these threads are banned or not, some of those monumental fuck-ups go on to define a user anyway. We had a user named Caution who claimed to be a moderate leftist, but when someone busted him for a discord server where he freely used racial slurs and encouraged his friends to do the same, the dude fucking snapped and became a right-wing shitposter. Same with catboy, I thought he was a fairly neutral poster until comments about him taunting black co-workers by imitating a monkey at them came up. Thread or no thread, word travels.

The people who I've seen the most consternation from about this practice are users like darkprince45 and a group of posters who seem to flood into his topics to drown out whatever criticism his trolling is attracting. When it's dp or some crony who gets modded, the same tactic of swamping the "warned/suspended" topic happens and there's complaints about how rude and unfair it was. Like if VioletMassacre makes a barely veiled allusion to finding 15 year old girls attractive, that's something that gets dunked on. He doesn't get a pass because "everyone's being mean to me and I find it distasteful that so many people would take the low road" when he gets moderated for that comment.

Is it rude? Sure. It often only takes off and reaches a head when someone says or does something incredibly fucked up, and the thread lets other people know whatever monumentally fucked up thing some user did to get warned or suspended. Or shit, if someone says something genuinely innocuous and somehow gets moderated for it, a thread like that attracts positive attention for them.

CE is a stupid, fucked up place with stupid, fucked up people. I'm one of them. The threads are amusing and can serve a broader purpose to the community. If you really wanted to kill this shit for good, you might as well make it okay for warned/suspended generals to replace the individual threads, and then ban the practice outright when the shitty little clique who ends up dominating the general eats itself alive in the end. At least you could say "good riddance" to that dumpster fire.

Its a really weird rule

i feel like they werent doing any harm. Seems very arbitrary

It's a stupid decision that only benefits trolls and bigots. And mods, maybe.

Mallard out here with the manifesto

It was annoying.
The thought I saw something in the ToS that you aren't supposed to start topics about another board member.

MrResetti posted...

Mallard out here with the manifesto

mans out here posting that MrMallardesto

Thermador446 posted...

It was annoying.
The thought I saw something in the ToS that you aren't supposed to start topics about another board member.

I think I vaguely remember something like that too

MrMallard posted...

It's a stupid call.

Topics are usually made in the wake of some monumental fuck-up on behalf of the warned, suspended or banned user. It gives people who experienced the fuck-up something to comment on and joke around, it gives outside users an unexpected burst of entertainment, and in a purely business sense it drives user engagement.

People have made warned/suspended threads about me at times, and it's fine. I fuck up, sometimes because I cross a line I was toeing a bit too hard. If people get a laugh and a goof at my expense, so be it. It comes with the territory.

Regardless of whether these threads are banned or not, some of those monumental fuck-ups go on to define a user anyway. We had a user named Caution who claimed to be a moderate leftist, but when someone busted him for a discord server where he freely used racial slurs and encouraged his friends to do the same, the dude fucking snapped and became a right-wing shitposter. Same with catboy, I thought he was a fairly neutral poster until comments about him taunting black co-workers by imitating a monkey at them came up. Thread or no thread, word travels.

The people who I've seen the most consternation from about this practice are users like darkprince45 and a group of posters who seem to flood into his topics to drown out whatever criticism his trolling is attracting. When it's dp or some crony who gets modded, the same tactic of swamping the "warned/suspended" topic happens and there's complaints about how rude and unfair it was. Like if VioletMassacre makes a barely veiled allusion to finding 15 year old girls attractive, that's something that gets dunked on. He doesn't get a pass because "everyone's being mean to me and I find it distasteful that so many people would take the low road" when he gets moderated for that comment.

Is it rude? Sure. It often only takes off and reaches a head when someone says or does something incredibly fucked up, and the thread lets other people know whatever monumentally fucked up thing some user did to get warned or suspended. Or shit, if someone says something genuinely innocuous and somehow gets moderated for it, a thread like that attracts positive attention for them.

CE is a stupid, fucked up place with stupid, fucked up people. I'm one of them. The threads are amusing and can serve a broader purpose to the community. If you really wanted to kill this shit for good, you might as well make it okay for warned/suspended generals to replace the individual threads, and then ban the practice outright when the shitty little clique who ends up dominating the general eats itself alive in the end. At least you could say "good riddance" to that dumpster fire.

What a long-winded essay on why you hate not being able to make topics about people being BANNED/WARNED.

you know how i really feel? did any other board do this? think about that

Mike_Stanton posted...

What a long-winded essay on why you hate not being able to make topics about people being BANNED/WARNED.

Hey brotato chip, watch your frickin mouth.

Thats Mr Mallard and his novels are a CE staple

Prismsblade posted...

Without the banned user around to even see them I don't really see the point.

All topics about twitter checkies and pitbull attacks should be banned too by that logic. The pitbulls don't read CE (unless they're working the queue)

It's fine, they were mildly helpful to know who was not gonna be around for a bit but that's really it. I don't care enough to look at profiles and whatnot.

I was actually proud of my Warned topic and said topic was mostly a congratulation for dunking on a lame and unfunny gimmick. I was actually disappointed when I didn't get a suspend topic after dunking on and exposing a mod pet with a rather colored history on 261 they were sorely embarrassed by

Lillymon posted...

Fandom's efforts to grind the GameFAQs Message Boards into such inactivity that they have an excuse to close them entirely continues with DToast as their loyal and unquestioning collaborator.

I hope he's at least getting paid well for his work.

To be fair, if topics talking about suspended/banned users are a relevant part of CE activity, the problem of CE activity is already there.

flussence posted...

All topics about twitter checkies and pitbull attacks should be banned too by that logic. The pitbulls don't read CE (unless they're working the queue)

I mean, that the mainpoint of these pitbull topics is to provoke a reaction is something that I would agree with. But if you ignore Mew, most of them are gone anyways.

At least most Twitter topics can have the topic of the Tweet as a discussion, but the pitbull topics are always going the same way.

But when it comes to a topic about pit bulls, or police misconduct, or a Republican getting caught doing something shitty, where do you draw the line between the topic being made to provoke a reaction and pointing out an ongoing problem?

Pit bull attacks are a legitimate thing to talk about. Just like police misconduct.