Jump to content
Server time (UTC): 2020-10-28, 01:52
Sign in to follow this  
beer mmmmmmm

Define shitposting

Recommended Posts

This is mostly directed to @Rolle because my appeal was closed without giving me a response. I want people to reply, and provide a third-person perspective.

The main goal of this whole thread is to gain the definition of shitposting. 

If we use the rule-section the most I could find regarding shitposting is:

95811e76b4323733bf192457aa29ff1b.png

Regarding the appeal, this is in reference to a non-appealble ban on status updates where I was 'punished' for posting two memes in the off-topic section of the forums, where as clearly stated by 1.4. "Off-topic forums and status updates are the only areas on the website exempt from this rule." I clearly remember the posts being in the off-topic section, and also following rule 1.4 I posted the memes to be met with:

ae7fcfb46183eae62d03759d4dd91bd7.png

This is a general question of what defines a shitpost or not, whether you find something unfunny and define it as a 'shit meme' or if the community rules need updating so that only memes that rolle finds funny are allowed to be posted.

 

-

 

Now to give myself the actual ability to respond to your conclusion on the report:

dbf09a14abe940d39a1f3a529b69b356.png

I understand that staff need to be harsh in order to prevent rule-breakages, and that you need to punish people who've broken the rules. What rule-breakage are you punishing me for rather than the fact that you found my memes shit? You state that those who abuse status updates get them revoked, which I understand - except I hadn't posted a single status update that would seem to be abusing them, you then state that those that: behave badly or edgy in general, which again is up to the digression of those applying the punishment, if something abides by the community standards, follows the rules regarding posting in the specific thread and isn't targeting members of the community, how can it be classed as behaving badly or edgy? You say that the punishment fits perfectly for a punishment for someone shitposting, but again - what defines shitposting? It's not stated in the rules that I cannot post memes that other people wouldn't find funny, so long as it is relevant to the thread at hand, doesn't insult and or indirectly attack members of the community and is in general suitable for work. 

I have another question, specifically directed at @Rolle, it feels like there is certainly some sort of resentfulness directed towards me. I tried communicating with you, but instead the PM was ignored. If there is something wrong, It'd be better if you send me a PM to me regarding your issue and we can sort it out properly instead of finding rulebreakages and flaws to break down one-another. 

Share this post


Link to post

There is a saying in my country that translates roughly like this: ,,Whose bread you eat, his song you should sing."

I mean, we don't have to agree with Rolle, but in the end, he's the ultimate power here, on HIS project. I really don't get why so many people think this is a democracy. And as far as I'm concerned, this would be a real mess if it was ? He gave us real useful ways to voice our opinion, but his word is a rule and I'm a supporter of that. I've seen enough drama here to know we're not mature enough to be our own rulers. So... that's all I can say, really.

Edited by pijkaCZ

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, pijkaCZ said:

There is a saying in my country that translates roughly like this: ,,Whose bread you eat, his song you should sing."

I mean, we don't have to agree with Rolle, but in the end, he's the ultimate power here, on HIS project. So... that's all I can say, really.

That is true, but for a things to flourish and for it to seem less like a dictatorship than a community it's important to take into consideration the communities input.

Off-topic, but here are a few things where the community have overwhelmingly disagreed with Rolle, and I seriously believe it's going to turn into an issue if the community aren't treated fairly. And that isn't a threat, it's a concern. I want to be here as much as everyone else, but it doesn't feel like the community is in control. Suggestions are being shut-down to stick to old norms, things have changed in-game and if you don't change things to follow the community, and player quo, then people won't want to play.

 

Share this post


Link to post

Mate, you joined in March. This has been a totalitarian dictatorship since July 2012. Either way, here are the definitions you requested in topic title:

Shitpost (verb)

  1. To make a worthless post on a messageboard, newsgroup, or other online discussion platform.
  2. A range of user misbehaviors and rhetoric on forums and message boards that are intended to derail a conversation off-topic, including thread jacking, circlejerking and non-commercial spamming.

Shitpost (noun)

  1. Content on discussion boards containing a mildly amusing but usually unfunny memes, videos or other pictures that are completely random or unrelated to any discussions.

 

I hope these three definitions are enough. Your case is specifically related to the noun definition. Your case was handled by me with rule 4, therefore the rule 1.4 which you linked does not apply, even though it has a content quality exception for status updates and off topic forums (for the purpose of more relaxed conversations in status updates and actually allowing off topic forums to be off topic). This exception in rule 1.4 is most definitely no there to allow mindless spamming or shitposting and it is usually dealt with by administrators with rule 4, like the 3 gentlemen who were permabanned for spamming shitty minion memes just a few weeks ago.

I hope this helps.

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, Rolle said:

Mate, you joined in March. This has been a totalitarian dictatorship since July 2012. Either way, here are the definitions you requested in topic title:

Shitpost (verb)

  1. To make a worthless post on a messageboard, newsgroup, or other online discussion platform.
  2. A range of user misbehaviors and rhetoric on forums and message boards that are intended to derail a conversation off-topic, including thread jacking, circlejerking and non-commercial spamming.

Shitpost (noun)

  1. Content on discussion boards containing a mildly amusing but usually unfunny memes, videos or other pictures that are completely random or unrelated to any discussions.

 

I hope these three definitions are enough. Your case is specifically related to the noun definition. Your case was handled by me with rule 4, therefore the rule 1.4 which you linked does not apply, even though it has a content quality exception for status updates and off topic forums (for the purpose of more relaxed conversations in status updates and actually allowing off topic forums to be off topic). This exception in rule 1.4 is most definitely no there to allow mindless spamming or shitposting and it is usually dealt with by administrators with rule 4, like the 3 gentlemen who were permabanned for spamming shitty minion memes just a few weeks ago.

I hope this helps.

My case still isn't directly related to your noun definition, you define it as '...that are completely random or unrelated to any discussions.' despite the posts being posted within the off-topic section of the forums, and within an allocated meme thread. It's got nothing to do with status updates, as the posts made weren't within the status updates.

You still fail to directly respond to the whole general stigma behind the post, you've removed my status posts, and permanently banned others from the community, with the authority of rule 4 under the terms of 'I didn't find the meme funny.' and or 'it's a shit meme.'  I'm providing criticism as to why using rule 4 to give you justification in banning things and removing players isn't healthy for the community. You imply that things here have been a totalitarian dictatorship since July 2012, that doesn't mean that an authoritarian regime can't be fair.

I want to have a genuine discussion to help clear things up for you, and I'm avoiding snide comments to keep things civil. This whole thing is most likely going to turn into a copy of the 'Are staff being harsh' debate, but issues are resolved from the top, and considering your experience with the community and your position at the top, It's best to directly confront you.

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Stannis said:

I want to have a genuine discussion to help clear things up for you, and I'm avoiding snide comments to keep things civil.

I have noticed and appreciate that a lot. However I am unsure how to answer your question better than I already have in two appeals and this thread here.

It is the essence of the rule 4 that when we administrators use our objective judgement and see something bad happening, and it's not covered by the rules, but is still bad, we use the rule to issue punishments, any kind that we see fit. Yes, the main motivation behind the bans and your revoked status updates is just the "it's a shit meme being spammed in a copy of a thread that was closed by staff just a week ago". I don't see anything wrong with that reasoning or how the punishment is unfair, nor do I see any logical fallacy in justification behind it.

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Roland said:

I have noticed and appreciate that a lot. However I am unsure how to answer your question better than I already have in two appeals and this thread here.

It is the essence of the rule 4 that when we administrators use our objective judgement and see something bad happening, and it's not covered by the rules, but is still bad, we use the rule to issue punishments, any kind that we see fit. Yes, the main motivation behind the bans and your revoked status updates is just the "it's a shit meme being spammed in a copy of a thread that was closed by staff just a week ago". I don't see anything wrong with that reasoning or how the punishment is unfair, nor do I see any logical fallacy in justification behind it.

It's not really a matter of it being completely unpunished, it's just the complete jurisdiction that staff have and the level of harshness that they've provided in the past. It's that so many minor things are being branded as severe enough to be permanently banned and or have rights removed that the regular player doesn't have. 

0d3f912492572b015d8aa4eb4ccc9d7b.png

If anything, I'd put myself, and the others involved in this whole meme posting issue under this area of rule-breakages:

1d2b6fe93432cc84725490348378c5c9.png

I'm really not trying to stir shit, and being in management positions of communities myself in the past, I can understand that people who are opinionated on forums and who question rules and ways that'd been norm for a while are considered as someone who's here to cause problems. I know you didn't directly state this, but I'm getting vibes that this may be the case, and I've certainly thought the same of others. I want to try help be apart of the solution when it comes to dealing with the harshness and capabilities of rule 4. 

I certainly believe the Rule 4 should be a thing, it's quite possibly the handiest thing that could be given to staff at any moment, but it shouldn't have the capability to issue permanent bans and or permanent punishments to members of the community. Especially un-appealable. It gives staff the ability to almost set-aside any formalities regarding bans and exiling members of the community and somewhat use it as a weapon(Or that's what it seems like).

Share this post


Link to post

Well, I think we will need to agree to disagree about that. I need to be able to permanently remove troublemakers and spammers from my community at moments notice and that's what rule 4 is. It is a freedom that I as an owner cannot sacrifice and be forced to issue written warnings to obvious asshollery on my own website before I can take take it further. It would be exploited, most likely with a display with a very bad bad behavior and then a mocking "you can't ban me, you have to warn me first". In general I don't like to have my hands tied through unnecessary bureaucracy and rule 4 is a perfect example of that.

Also, a thing to think about is that the rule is not there on the rule page for me or the administrators to be able to do these things, I am in control of all community systems, the server is physically located in my closet - I don't need a paragraph on he rules page to gain authority in order to ban bad people, I already have it as the owner of the server hardware, website, domain, game servers and all system interconnecting them. The rule is there on the page for your information, so that you are aware that bad behavior can be met with swift action from one of the administrators if they choose to do so, and to avoid threads like this where use of such authority would be met with arguments about bias, unfairness, harsh treatment etc.

I agree that sometimes it may seem like use of rule 4 is harsh, but most of the time it's really not and it's usually reserved for really, really annoying or bad behavior. Keep in mind that only 5 or so people in the community can issue these punishments, it's not the entire staff, but a selected few who have reached the admin rank and have often been in the community or staff for years. People who have experience and know how to handle these issues.

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, Roland said:

only 5 or so people in the community can issue these punishments, it's not the entire staff, but a selected few who have reached the admin rank and have often been in the community or staff for years. People who have experience and know how to handle these issues.

This is re-assuring. Again, this all links back to the whole meme thread thing, and I can understand why they were initially banned, but I can only understand why @Spanners was kept permanently removed. You have the authority to do whatever you want on the server, but playerbases won't stick around if you reaaaaally ass-fuck people, I'm talking the level of some $2 server level where they'll ban you for doing minor things because the owner's got an ego. If players hold this "You can't ban me LOL!" attitude like previously mentioned, do us all a favor, ban them. But if players are re-assuring and take responsibility of what they've done, second chances should always be given. I'm a big pusher for second chances, I've been given second chances in the past, cleaned up my act - I've given second chances and seen people completely change. If rule 4 is used, there should at least be a chance to genuinely appeal this, I can understand that calls are made under the heat of the moment, and that grudges can hold and it's less work just to keep people banned. But a second chance is definitely something somebody won't forget.

Share this post


Link to post

Well, at the end of the day, You were shit posting. If you feel like it was wrong you can appeal and hope for the best but if you don't go your way, then don't make it worse then making what was it three threads about it now?. You're pretty much digging a hole for your self. @Roland is the community owner of the server which we are all on. I'm pretty sure Rolle, knows what he's doing because DayZRP has been here for about 5 -6 years and other communities have failed or closed. Things might have happened but it's still standing today. In reality, Rolle has every right to ban, give points, remove things from the community members in his community. You might not like some of the decisions but it's for the good of the community at the end of the day. If one person gets away with what you got points for, shit posting everyone would be doing it or like Rolle said mocking and it could get out of hand overall and he doesn't want that to happen. So as they say The Big man has to make these decisions, so it doesn't out of control.  Now, I'm not going to tell you what to do but, I would get this closed and reflect on everything that was said in the whole thread because I can see you getting in more trouble.

Edited by Elk

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Elk said:

-snip-

 

Look, they're trying to have a civil discussion about how things work and why. Honestly, I can see this being a problem:

3 minutes ago, Elk said:

Now, I'm not going to tell you what to do but, I would get this closed and reflect on everything that was said in the whole thread because I can see you getting in more trouble.

 

Now this is the problem. Having a discussion isn't going to get anyone in trouble. In order for the community to "reflect on everything" there has to be a discussion. If no one talked about things, things would end up boiling over and becoming a big fiasco. For some, including myself, "being the community owner" isn't a reason to shut down discussion, especially threads like this one, and I'm sure @Roland agrees. Talking about things is way better then just shutting in.

Share this post


Link to post

I am a big advicator of having no second chances... you come here with respect and give it your best... but some people like to test the boundaries and should get booted.

That is the only way to maintain quality. You F up... deal with it and get banned!

Harsh words but, when I think back with the attitude I came into this community, it was tip-toeing and trying to be as respectful and nice as possible, not:

"kek lets see what kind of shade and meme I can get away with and earn respect from my fellow lads".

Thats how I see those people who are constantly in trouble,  be a grownup and deal with it... ?

Edited by Shanoby

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, Xavier said:

Look, they're trying to have a civil discussion about how things work and why. Honestly, I can see this being a problem:

Now this is the problem. Having a discussion isn't going to get anyone in trouble. In order for the community to "reflect on everything" there has to be a discussion. If no one talked about things, things would end up boiling over and becoming a big fiasco. For some, including myself, "being the community owner" isn't a reason to shut down discussion, especially threads like this one, and I'm sure @Roland agrees. Talking about things is way better then just shutting in.

The way his coming across, just seems he's looking for something and it's coming across to me like its going to get worse. I agree, talking it is better, but its three threads, at this stage, and it's just going to get worse.

Share this post


Link to post

I have a question, I was given points, and the appeal was denied because it was a bad meme, although on topic to an extent. 
What is the your definition, @Roland of a bad meme. 
Since I saw other cases of members being warned because of a bad meme. 

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...