How to Use Our Comments, and Not Get Banned

[alextheblue]

[citation][nom]porksmuggler[/nom]DON'T: Sanctimonious rants vindicating rage bans.DO: Explain the moderator policy without terms like douchebag, *sshole, and quoting personal attacks.Does this count as constructive? Any wonder the comments are so lively, when you (Tuan) insist on presenting material in such an emotional, patronizing manner?[/citation]Precisely.

 

[bebangs]

"But can it play Crysis?"

i laught when i read the "do's and dont's".

thanks for not banning the awkward/funny momments.

 

[ibew112]

you mention betting banned by complete idiocy ? like using plactics as a heatsink material ? maybe we are correct and it is just your opinion of what we are saying that is the problem.

 

[michael from nj]

Am I the only one seeing the unfortunate irony in a article that says Stay civil. Don't be a douchebag". The article goes on with name calling refer to potential posters as *ssholes, jerks etc...It feels as though this article was written in a pique of frustration and then posted without editing or review.

An article that seeks to exhort appropriate behavior should in itself reflect the highest possible standards. Instead, as written, it diminishes both the author and the readers of this site.

It's a shame, because I think "Tom's Hardware" is better than this.

 

[Josea]

Would this not be a good reason to ban someone:
http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/57127-35-ghost-software-recover-back
I mean admitting to using pirated software? Are you kidding me? I welcome the changes to this forum wholeheartedly. The NBR forum seems to be a good source of information also, but I get tired of the dirty words and inside jokes.

 

[randomizer]

[citation][nom]ibew112[/nom]you mention betting banned by complete idiocy ? [/citation]
Nothing in the article says you will be banned for being an idiot.

 

[porksmuggler]

[citation][nom]tuannguyen[/nom]The article isn't targetted at people with respectable character, such as yourself. It's targetting at another group of commenters who hide behind their anonymity.[/citation]

Well, again thanks for the compliment, I wouldn't go as far as respectable Being a moderator requires drawing the line, I've done it, but it's very important to avoid appearing inclined to abuse the power. Just a suggestion, not my place to be too hard on any of the staff.

 

[randomizer]

Strictly speaking it is impossible for the staff to abuse their power, only to exercise it. As per the Terms of Use: "BOM is the final arbiter of what IS and IS NOT allowed on our site."

 

[Guest]

I swear that I breathed such a sigh of relief to have the crysis thing finally stopped. It hasn't been funny for literally years.

 

[Mousemonkey]

would it be possible to have your moderators with a [TOM] in front of their username or change their user name text color to be a different color?

Those who frequent the forums will be aware of who some of the mods are, those that don't may end up finding out in a slightly more one to one fashion.

 

[porksmuggler]

[citation][nom]randomizer[/nom]Strictly speaking it is impossible for the staff to abuse their power, only to exercise it. As per the Terms of Use: "BOM is the final arbiter of what IS and IS NOT allowed on our site."[/citation]

Strictly speaking you don't understand the concept of impression management. BOM is a for profit company, and the forums/comment section can be very valuable for traffic if handled properly. This requires even handed moderation. A poor moderator can be as detrimental as a forum full of trolls, regardless of any edict set by the TOS.

 

[Mousemonkey]

Strictly speaking you don't understand the concept of impression management. BOM is a for profit company, and the forums/comment section can be very valuable for traffic if handled properly. This requires even handed moderation. A poor moderator can be as detrimental as a forum full of trolls, regardless of any edict set by the TOS.

The moderators are there to enforce the terms of service, the interpretation of which has just been narrowed down by the Administrators. So what is your idea of a poor moderator?

 

[randomizer]

Strictly speaking you don't understand the concept of impression management. BOM is a for profit company, and the forums/comment section can be very valuable for traffic if handled properly. This requires even handed moderation. A poor moderator can be as detrimental as a forum full of trolls, regardless of any edict set by the TOS.

I completely agree with you, and of course nobody here is going to be heavy-handed (although this is subjective). That doesn't make what I said before any less true. The people going about about freedom of speech revolutions and stuff need to have a reality check.

 

[cscott_it]

[citation][nom]randomizer[/nom]I completely agree with you, and of course nobody here is going to be heavy-handed (although this is subjective). That doesn't make what I said before any less true. The people going about about freedom of speech revolutions and stuff need to have a reality check.[/citation]

If I don't see someone go mad with power, I'm going to be upset.

Just sayin.

 

[Mousemonkey]

If I don't see someone go mad with power, I'm going to be upset.

Just sayin.

Any chance you could elaborate on that a little?

 

[cscott_it]

[citation][nom]mousemonkey[/nom]Any chance you could elaborate on that a little?[/citation]

It was a light-hearted bit of 'Ha-ha', no secret meaning, no harm intended. I know you and Randomizer are mods, I just felt like I had a worthless comment to interject. With all of this serious discussion and suddenly everyone worrying that the forum mods won't use the same common sense already in place (in the forums). I was just wanting to make someone crack a smile.

Not even a smirk?

 

[randomizer]

If I don't see someone go mad with power, I'm going to be upset.

Just sayin.

That does seem a little backwards. So you'd prefer someone going mad with power?

 

[randomizer]

...suddenly everyone worrying that the forum mods won't use the same common sense already in place (in the forums)...

I'd wager that many of the people here who feel violated by this article have never been in the forums, and merely visit the main site. As the comments are a part of the forum, moderation will be essentially identical.

 

[cscott_it]

[citation][nom]randomizer[/nom]I'd wager that many of the people here who feel violated by this article have never been in the forums, and merely visit the main site. As the comments are a part of the forum, moderation will be essentially identical.[/citation]

Oh yeah, I had no doubt about that.
Again, just trying to get a smirk out of one of you guys, because let's face it, it's all down hill from here.
You have to deal with ALL of the wacko's now, not just the dedicated ones like me.

 

[porksmuggler]

[citation][nom]mousemonkey[/nom]The moderators are there to enforce the terms of service, the interpretation of which has just been narrowed down by the Administrators. So what is your idea of a poor moderator?[/citation]

Knowing you're both moderators, this isn't directed specifically at either of you, but a poor moderator is one with a penchant for antagonization. To rage ban then hide behind the TOS isn't good form regardless of your mandate...

 

[Mousemonkey]

It was a light-hearted bit of 'Ha-ha', no secret meaning, no harm intended. I know you and Randomizer are mods, I just felt like I had a worthless comment to interject. With all of this serious discussion and suddenly everyone worrying that the forum mods won't use the same common sense already in place (in the forums). I was just wanting to make someone crack a smile.

Not even a smirk?

*Grins like a demented Cheshire cat as I stroke my ban stick* Define smirk.

Knowing you're both moderators, this isn't directed specifically at either of you, but a poor moderator is one with a penchant for antagonization. To rage ban then hide behind the TOS isn't good form regardless of your mandate...

Fair 'nuff, but I think it's been a long time since that's happened (****-ups aside [:mousemonkey] ) and if that were to happen then there is always the option to contact the administrators and appeal.

 

[porksmuggler]

[citation][nom]mousemonkey[/nom]*Grins like a demented Cheshire cat as I stroke my ban stick* Define smirk.[/citation]

ok, that's just plain funny. I laughed out loud, nervously, but out loud all the same.

 

[mindspring]

woohooo... finally... some policing on the forums.

Thank you, Tuan.

 

[Mousemonkey]

ok, that's just plain funny. I laughed out loud, nervously, but out loud all the same.

 

[croc]

Tuan, I consider the use of 'douche bag' just as offensive as the terms 'retard, moron, idiot'... Unless you are actually referring to a feminine hygiene product, and not the posters (no matter how irritating they are) of this (or any other) comment section. Please warn your self about a possible banning for using such a term.