Open Review of FAF Moderation
-
Hello All,
In accordance with the rules while this is discouraged it is not actually against the rules.
This is a forum topic where players can openly and freely discuss the moderation action within FAF.
As long as we keep it civil apparently.
So in accordance with FAF rules as stated https://faforever.com/rules
"Discussing moderation decisions in public is discouraged. Channels exist for appealing processes and raising concerns about moderation."
While discouraged it is not prohibited.
And there is a moderation support channel for one on one discussion but no clear community open discussion.
Also as some Russian players are unable to utilise this function in discord due to their Government this is their channel for discussing such events.
So please keep it civil and user friendly.
-
A reminder (as explained previously in the discord discussion that spawned this thread):
While we welcome suggestions to the FAF rules or feedback on the moderation system in general, we will not allow the discussion of specific reports or moderation cases. If you would like to discuss a specific ban you have a received or report you have filed, you may contact the moderation team through the discord channel, or send an email to moderation*faforever .com. (Replace * with @)If this thread will start to include such discussions, or if it becomes uncivil, we will lock it.
-
As long as they do the pings for CGN when I ask em and don't abuse their power idgaf, hopefully things between mods and players become more civil and transparent.
-
I like how it is basically impossible to post anything when not being able to talk about specific cases
-
The rule about not being able to discuss specific reports is the dumbest rule in the history of faf
-
Well, it's easier to say you're right by shutting the other up than having a debate and risk being wrong
Ideally things should work differently but this is what we have right now. I can't completely blame the moderators, there's not enough staff to deal with all the users that would contest a punshiment. Still in an ideal situation with enough time it's unacceptable to be denied an appeal in which you can defend yourself and contest a decision you don't think right (also as a side note if decisions seemed more "objectively right" rather than being ambiguous i believe less people would complain to mods team
)Also about what weakie said
@TheWeakie said in Open Review of FAF Moderation:
The rule about not being able to discuss specific reports is the dumbest rule in the history of faf
As NOC- wrote at the start, there is no rule that prohibits being able to discuss specific reports, the rule states:
"Discussing moderation decisions in public is discouraged. Channels exist for appealing processes and raising concerns about moderation."
From my understanding this means that:
- Discussing moderation decisions in public is discouraged (not forbidden).
- Channels do indeed exist for appealing processes and raising concerns (but they're not to be intended as the only legal way of doing so by the way this is written, giving the freedom to use whatever method people deem appropriate).
From this i can only derive that banning public discussions is a completely arbitrary decision taken by the moderators, that is NOT backed by any of the current rules and should therefore NOT lead to people being unable to do so or being punished for doing so.
From what i've actually seen happen on the discord tho, the moderators word is absolute and even above the same rules they are to uphold, like in this case. If it wasn't like this, people would be allowed to talk freely since there is no violation of any rule whatsoever, instead their messages and post get locked or removed, signaling that there is clearly no freedom of speech in those matters. Again, not because of rules but because of arbitrary decisions.
Guess whoever is responsible for letting moderation work like this either doesn't know/care, or is satisfied with how it is right now
Can't say the same about non-moderators tho...
