Tyler's feedback thread

[Sj]

That was a troll report, I made bad feedback about it here as well as veng pm me telling me planbuk admitted it was a fake report

Still, why should it get priority over other threads if it isn't a valid report if people wanted to keep posting they would probably get infracted.

Just looks like Tyler looked at it as it was an easy close and didn't bother seeing if there were any other reports to look at and just browsed the forums like normal.

Not trying to be hostile it happens with most mods where they deal with some reports and leave others

 

[Tyler]

Still, why should it get priority over other threads if it isn't a valid report if people wanted to keep posting they would probably get infracted.

Just looks like Tyler looked at it as it was an easy close and didn't bother seeing if there were any other reports to look at and just browsed the forums like normal.

Not trying to be hostile it happens with most mods where they deal with some reports and leave others

Hi it seems you are under a misconception; that all moderators all created equal and we all do the exact same tasks and know the exact same jobs.

While there is sort of a "how to: moderate" guide in the SL each moderator is their own person; with their own experiences and judgments. This is the exact reason why @Dunworry was the best person to deal with name trade disputes, or why @Wortel handles a large amount of the IP based disputes/bans. @Killswitch does not deal with alot of reports, but I would never be able to stack up with him with reported posts.

There are a large amount of moderators who simply don't want to waste time dealing with people like planbuk, bumbum ect. The exact reason they don't do/want to do that is because of the nature of these individuals and the "backlash" of what happens afterwards. Now I'm a stickler for adhering to policy and making sure policies are followed. There are other moderators who are more passive (not saying this is a bad thing by any means) but they also simply do not want to deal with these individuals therefore when situations like these arise, I just take the report because I know and am privy to how its going to play out in the end.

I've been handed scam reports or reported posts simply because somebody does not want to deal with the message they know they are going to get from bus after the report has been handled. Even have been private messaged things like:

bus 369 False or Misleading Advertising

nicely dealt-with report. bus is a prick, so kudos for handling him for the rest of us

If you believe those reports should be handled in a better/quicker fashion please direct your feedback here: Whole of Staff Feedback or post feedback on every moderator who is online, therefore you are not biased.

 

[Sj]

Hi it seems you are under a misconception; that all moderators all created equal and we all do the exact same tasks and know the exact same jobs.

While there is sort of a "how to: moderate" guide in the SL each moderator is their own person; with their own experiences and judgments. This is the exact reason why @Dunworry was the best person to deal with name trade disputes, or why @Wortel handles a large amount of the IP based disputes/bans. @Killswitch does not deal with alot of reports, but I would never be able to stack up with him with reported posts.

There are a large amount of moderators who simply don't want to waste time dealing with people like planbuk, bumbum ect. The exact reason they don't do/want to do that is because of the nature of these individuals and the "backlash" of what happens afterwards. Now I'm a stickler for adhering to policy and making sure policies are followed. There are other moderators who are more passive (not saying this is a bad thing by any means) but they also simply do not want to deal with these individuals therefore when situations like these arise, I just take the report because I know and am privy to how its going to play out in the end.

I've been handed scam reports or reported posts simply because somebody does not want to deal with the message they know they are going to get from bus after the report has been handled. Even have been private messaged things like:




If you believe those reports should be handled in a better/quicker fashion please direct your feedback here: Whole of Staff Feedback or post feedback on every moderator who is online, therefore you are not biased.

My post was never about how other moderators deal with other things or who does what better.

It was about me seeing you reply and close a thread (which you were obviously right to do and gave bans) and then me seeing scam reports made previously that I feel as if you could have looked at. This is why I chose to give it as individual feedback.

I just feel as like if you are a moderator and you choose to be involved in a thread in that section you should look to see if there are other reports to reply to. I can see that other moderators stepped up and worked towards dealing with them now though.

Remember it is just feedback and I know what I can say can be seen as wrong to others.

My post was really just me wanting to know why you would deal with one report but leave the others, was nothing about other moderators.

 

Hello, Seraphic again popping by to leave some feedback for Tyler.

I originally made a thread in the Feedback section. After a while the thread got locked + a FEW HOURS LATER I got an infraction for it.

Usually I'd flame out the staff member however I saw that it is the "infraction king" who had given me this big bad infraction. I thought how do I resolve issues with the infraction king, well, I responded to his original infraction message and even wrote him a letter but what'd you know. Absolutely NO response. In my opinion, I think this is despicable. If an infraction is given you should be able to contact the Moderator in order to find out why the infraction was given. But rather than being given an explanation, I was just ignored.

This is not looking very good from a Moderator point of view, should I have been explained HOW what I wrote is spam then I would know how to avoid it myself. Instead, I'm offered no help, ignored and targeted based on a biased view. Moderators are not meant to be biased in the first place however due to the fact that I personally doubt him, I am targeted by this one individual at every possible circumstance.

One thing that this Moderator needs to work on is member encouragement. Rather than discouraging people and handing out infractions, take a step back and actually think about what you're doing. Do you plan on explaining why the user in question received an infraction? Is it infraction worthy? Are you complying with the rules or just doing it to meet your own targets?

Please do yourself a favour and think about what you are going to write before you write it. I'm not interested in having some half-thought out response to this feedback.

Thanks.

Bear in mind, I'm not accusing Tyler of LOCKING MY THREAD. I'm just here enquiring about the infraction related issue(s).

 

[Tyler]

I originally made a thread in the Feedback section. After a while the thread got locked + a FEW HOURS LATER I got an infraction for it.

Yes that's because somebody reported your post a few hours later When somebody reports your post its my job as the moderator of that section to review the reported post and make judgement of whether or not it is rule breaking.

Usually I'd flame out the staff member

Of course you would.

well, I responded to his original infraction message and even wrote him a letter but what'd you know. Absolutely NO response. In my opinion, I think this is despicable. If an infraction is given you should be able to contact the Moderator in order to find out why the infraction was given. But rather than being given an explanation, I was just ignored.

I usually do respond to people when they have inquiries about why they were infracted, You on the other hand PM'd me my personal information (last name) and I'm not willing to play nice. You can go to a global+ to review your infraction and hope you don't get banned for 6 months for disclosing my personal information.

Moderators are not meant to be biased in the first place however due to the fact that I personally doubt him, I am targeted by this one individual at every possible circumstance.

I dealt with your post through a report, not biased. If you have any proof to back up your claims please do so, but I know you wont.

 

Yes that's because somebody reported your post a few hours later When somebody reports your post its my job as the moderator of that section to review the reported post and make judgement of whether or not it is rule breaking.

Of course you would.

I usually do respond to people when they have inquiries about why they were infracted, You on the other hand PM'd me my personal information (last name) and I'm not willing to play nice. You can go to a global+ to review your infraction and hope you don't get banned for 6 months for disclosing my personal information.

I dealt with your post through a report, not biased. If you have any proof to back up your claims please do so, but I know you wont.

1) Unhappy with an infraction you received? Read me!

2) I tried to solve the situation as civil as possible and yet received no 'helpful' response

3)

First off, no personal information was disclosed. I'll prove it. The personal information that you so called "claimed" was personal was posted in a report. In fact a report against you...?

Ban Evader = runescape07god


So no there's no "personal" information being released here especially if its on Sythe.org forums. I have proof to back up my claims.

Also, I have never heard of another Tyler but you meaning I assumed you were the person James was talking about.

4) Then if you dealt with it through a report why didn't you go back to point 1) and actually be reasonable. If you'd been reasonable I'd have left you alone, no hard feelings at all.

 

[Tyler]

I've edited your post to take that information out as it is still my person information. I did not post that on Sythe. Do it again and you'll enjoy a ban @Seraphic


Users will be banned for 6 months for the following:

• Disclosure of Personal Information of a Staff Member or Acquaintance of a Staff Member: This includes, but is not limited to, full names, private emails, Skype/Facebook, addresses, phone numbers, private photos, etc
  • There will be a 6 month Spam Forum ban on top of this
  • A second offence from the same user will result in a permanent ban
  • This rule does not apply to information/photos that the staff have posted publicly on Sythe about themselves (or reposting of the same provided the original thread still exists)
  • For the sake of clarity, an acquaintance of a staff member is a family member or close friend who is only associated with Sythe through a staff member, if at all

 

I've edited your post to take that information out as it is still my person information. I did not post that on Sythe. Do it again and you'll enjoy a ban @Seraphic


Users will be banned for 6 months for the following:

• Disclosure of Personal Information of a Staff Member or Acquaintance of a Staff Member: This includes, but is not limited to, full names, private emails, Skype/Facebook, addresses, phone numbers, private photos, etc
  • There will be a 6 month Spam Forum ban on top of this
  • A second offence from the same user will result in a permanent ban
  • This rule does not apply to information/photos that the staff have posted publicly on Sythe about themselves (or reposting of the same provided the original thread still exists)
  • For the sake of clarity, an acquaintance of a staff member is a family member or close friend who is only associated with Sythe through a staff member, if at all

Oh also, you tried to quote the rules, isn't it funny.

You also missed this out:

Disclosure of Personal Information of a Staff Member or Acquaintance of a Staff Member: This includes, but is not limited to, full names, private emails, Skype/Facebook, addresses, phone numbers, private photos, etc

• There will be a 6 month Spam Forum ban on top of this
• A second offence from the same user will result in a permanent ban
• This rule does not apply to information/photos that the staff have posted publicly on Sythe about themselves (or reposting of the same provided the original thread still exists)
• For the sake of clarity, an acquaintance of a staff member is a family member or close friend who is only associated with Sythe through a staff member, if at all

Seems I was just reposting the same information that I found on the Sythe forums. I wouldn't even bother posting something that I couldn't find on the Sythe forums. I'm just trying to oblige by the rules here. If I didn't find the information ON HERE then I wouldn't have posted it on the forum.

 

[Tyler]

Oh also, you tried to quote the rules, isn't it funny.

You also missed this out:

Disclosure of Personal Information of a Staff Member or Acquaintance of a Staff Member: This includes, but is not limited to, full names, private emails, Skype/Facebook, addresses, phone numbers, private photos, etc

• There will be a 6 month Spam Forum ban on top of this
• A second offence from the same user will result in a permanent ban
• This rule does not apply to information/photos that the staff have posted publicly on Sythe about themselves (or reposting of the same provided the original thread still exists)
• For the sake of clarity, an acquaintance of a staff member is a family member or close friend who is only associated with Sythe through a staff member, if at all

Seems I was just reposting the same information that I found on the Sythe forums. I wouldn't even bother posting something that I couldn't find on the Sythe forums. I'm just trying to oblige by the rules here. If I didn't find the information ON HERE then I wouldn't have posted it on the forum.

Ok dispute it with a global + bye for now.

 

Ok dispute it with a global + bye for now.

you're doing the lord's work

 

Absolutely phenomenal staff member, removed one of God's failed creations, much applause for your excellent termination of seraphic, you rock!

 

[Mootrucks]

he is a woke staff member

 

[Carbon]

Good mod. I used to hate you, but we aight. Banned Seraphic = good person in my books

 

Too trigger happy , just like that incident with @Oakdice where you went all in and instantly regreted it. You're being / doing too much. Listen to what @Seraphic is telling you. It will only help in the long run.

 

[mumble]

All praise to the most high. Thank you for your contributions to the sythe community and keeping it clean and full of only outstanding members.

 

Pathogen V2 Refusing to dice

Way to handle this quickly and, imo, correctly. Bit tricky and you did well

 

[divinetaco121]

constantly harassing me and giving infractions when no rules have been violated

 

[John Devola]

So there are two categories, active staff members, and inactive staff members.

Tyler belongs in a third category, the anal category. This category is for the mods who are somewhat active, but it would be best if they were inactive. There are so many moderators who do good for this site, and those that dont just dont do anything. Stick to one of those please.

 

Ok about this lock:
Simple suggestion

First point:
You said:

"Moderators have always been able to deal with issues like these in our own private forum and been able to ban on that informations provided we have enough evidence, nobody is required to follow up unless the user disputes it, in which case there is the dispute forum."

Ok fair enough, I don't mind that , that's fair I guess even though the whole point of suggestion is to attempt to change system but you locked it basically because its always been same system and it can be disputed, despite me disagree with it always being system, the whole point of suggestion was to change but the second point is fair, still disagree as it was a good suggestion,

I'm not going to argue it as dispute forum I'm happy enough with that.

Let's move on to part which triggers me,
You said:

"This does not work that way. If people have an issue with a ruling on a scam report they are to go to a higher up. Ie. if you have an issue with my ruling you go to a global +, then admin ect. There is no reason to continually create scam reports for something that has been handled just because you don't agree with the ruling.

In the situation of your report, there was no scamming happening, Maybe you should use the appropriate forums and have a look at rules before reporting somebody for something, Vlad was not clearing Chloe of rule-breaking. He was pointing out that what she was doing is not against the rules.

Denied."

Ok let's break this down.

This does not work that way. If people have an issue with a ruling on a scam report they are to go to a higher up. Ie. if you have an issue with my ruling you go to a global +, then admin ect.

.
Why should people have too? why not just get the higher up to handle it? Does it make more common sense? if I was in military and I was third highest rank and a recruit was complaining about me would another recruit deal with it?

There is no reason to continually create scam reports for something that has been handled just because you don't agree with the ruling.

.
This has nothing to do with the report on Chloe, this is the fact that secontals are taking the opportunity of dealing with the report of people who are higher up than them and can use the opportunity to kiss ass.

In the situation of your report, there was no scamming happening, Maybe you should use the appropriate forums and have a look at rules before reporting somebody for something,

Yours still attempting to turn it on me while my suggestion has another report which wasn't done by me, you're clearly locking the suggestion so another mod can protect your ass in case you get promoted.

Vlad was not clearing Chloe of rule-breaking. He was pointing out that what she was doing is not against the rules.

Even though this report is about the fact that report,
I argued this point with Vlad and he stated that there was "unwritten rule about" were the logic of that when my report has proof of the rule being written?

anyway, this is not the point of this argument the suggestion was not based on the fact of that single report, I noticed a lot of lower staff dealing with a report of people higher up than them, as I stated before the army example, the whole point you locked that thread is because your power hungry, you didn't give logical reason for locking second a part from fact of report I made on chloe which was an example of were this suggest is being used, you didn't give any actual reason for locking the suggestion besides that which was just example, you locked it for no reason other than the fact you didn't like the suggestion,

 

[John Devola]

Reporting Hattez - recovered account which I paid $1200 for

Back from work. Gonna make sure to discuss in detail with the staff team before making any sort of ruling as I dont believe we have had a situation like this before.

Very simple report, have had ones like this before.

OO owes hattez purchase price (what acc was originally bought for) -> hattez owes person who was scammed purchase price (1200)

For someone who has been on and off the staff team this long, it really shows incompetence that he couldnt apply the rules to a simple clear cut case.