@integral

Sorry for being late in answering your question - it's been busy days.

I liked the way Jurgen has been working as a mod for years. Collecting accusations, forgetting about the pointless ones (e.g. mine), getting evidence and acting when things have become obvious or as prooven as they get.

I have no problem of removal of obviously pornographic (yohann) or violent avatars or playernames. I think work has been pretty good on this part as well.

I strongly oppose a change in what is porn and what is not after numerous years. Hervs avatar is just an example, but it's been around for years without significant objection to it being porn. And now, all of the sudden, it is.

I strongly oppose a change in what is considered harrassment and what is not. Spamming the chatbox/reviews, stalking and alike is pretty obvious. Receiving or getting threats for the real life of people in a moment of anger has been tolerated for years and now it is not any more.

If you want to have no more real life threats, make it a new rule. I might not like it, but that's not the point. If the boss of the game (Ryan) wants it that way, it is his right to set the rule. It would be my freedom to leave (I don't think I would). Do not change existing rules by re-interpreting them after several years. That's pretty hard to understand.

I hope I made my point clear and understandable.

Crystal. And in very sharp focus.

But I want examples. Okay so, Herv's ava, got that one. And what are all these other alleged atrocious bans? I'm fine diverting this thread to a witch hunt as this horse needs carbon dating at this point. Too many broad points are being made. My email address is [email protected] if you want to address this between you and the mods.

Lines may have been narrowed in the rules a bit, or the wonderful ambiguity in the rules (and the English language) lend themself to interpretation by those enforcing and following them. This is from feedback over some time, over many players. And always with the site's best interests in mind. Even if I disagree with some of it, I'm going to enforce it.

I think the biggest change you are noticing is that there are simply more eyes on the game now. Imagine how many less fouls would be called in basketball if there was just 1 ref. Adding 2 more refs simply allowed the existing rules to be enforced easier.

Losing in an online game doesn't give someone the right to bully and harass other people. Nor does it give them the right to wish death on the person they are playing against.

Honestly, I was banned for 6 years for 'pga' and I didn't complain as much as you guys are because suddenly we're saying people should grow the fuck up and stop using hateful language and acting like children.

It was only 1 guy doing moderation here, so cut him some slack that he didn't find every instance of hate speech coming off kdice, he was more concerned with making sure people didn't cheat. But we've got three people now, hopefully we can make this site more enjoyable for the majority of people that don't use hate speech and pout like children when they lose their game.

But on the flip side, the last thing this site needs is overmoderation at every turn, so expect a balance, and not every damn instance of violations are going to be treated the same.

"Give a title to a moron and suddenly he thinks he is smart". 2008

In other words. Kdice will modded as it always has been; subjectively.

STJ, you would have saved me a lot of time had you posted that earlier. :P

Can't believe I'm agreeing with STJ.
But yeah, and there is no way around it because there can't be clear rules as long as mods still think PGA is a bad thing.

What do you really expect? He is who he is...he can't help it.

@BDK: I'm not going to use email here. Good we got this somehow clarified. As for examples, the part for Int will give some more evidence though I lack "finished" examples atm.

@STJ: Moderation is always subjective. No system can make an objective statement concerning itself and the moderators are part of this system (and human, thus destined to make mistakes). That is not the problem. It is good there are 3 active now that might be able to correct each other in the case of one going out of line a bit (minority report anybody?) ;-)

@Int: So cursing somebody and wishing shit to his real life is not fine after he ruined your game. Again, where is the line? Deaththreats? Threatening health? Praying for unemployment? "Do not harrass people" has been in the rules for ages. We could have an argument that it does not say "verbally harrass" in which case stating that I play like a moron would already do the deed. Real life harrassment is hardly possible since most of us are still playing anonymous to the majority of others. And for stalking and alike - I could log off or use an alt to get rid of the idiot. The worst harrassment I have experienced was by a group of people annoying me with "hey Bro <insert whatever bullshit youlike>" for a while whereever they met me (yes, I like sac_lunch being banned for eternity). Unfortunately I found out about muting only later... A nice, hardly documented feature.

Point is, that there has been insults and verbal violence all the time. It has hardly been considered at any time. The only exception was the discrimination of colored people by accepting "Nigger" as an insult while gook, whitey, yellow pest and alike were not treated the same. Other than that I can't recall bans, discussion or any action caused by verbal insults and threats. The common forum comment to complains was "grow some skin or leave" basically. Now this seems to change and I wonder why and to which extent. "Murder in the heat of the moment", "manslaughter"(the translation might be wrong, IANAL) is not punished in all cases and all societies! There have been times with more mods active and even then this was never a topic. Basically this rule was ignored so far.

So, what I really would like to read and know is, how much hunting will you be doing and how much tolerance will there be. How big will the change be in comparisson to the last 7 years or will it just be a warning to the very hard and bad cases. Taking it to the max, even an unfriendly "FOAD" could be considered verbal harrassment - I doubt anybody wants that, though it does include a deathwish, doesn't it?