Updated TOS Rumors

lyndausvi · May 2015

Jells gave me a warning for a TOS violation on April 27, 2015 based on a report a newbie made.

redoryx · May 2015

lyndausvi said:

Jells gave me a warning for a TOS violation on April 27, 2015 based on a report a newbie made.

Okay, thanks. It feels weird saying that's good to know since it sucks when people get warnings, but that's good to know.

lyndausvi · May 2015

redoryx said:

lyndausvi said:

Jells gave me a warning for a TOS violation on April 27, 2015 based on a report a newbie made.

Okay, thanks. It feels weird saying that's good to know since it sucks when people get warnings, but that's good to know.

Not a lot of reports are on mods, but when they happened they are taking seriously.

FYI - All mods/admins have access to all reported posts.

Even though in my case, the reported post was on my then-own board, there was no way for me hide or delete the complaint. Also when you flag a post it takes a snap shot of the complaint right then. So I would not have been able to go back and delete or edit my reply claiming I really didn't say what they said I did. Not that I would do such a thing anyway. Just letting you know there are safe guards.

I understand the uproar for clarification, but honestly we do not warn people as often as you think. One person's banning does not mean it starts a mass banning. I can't even remember the last non-vendor to be banned (beside what happened over the weekend).

And just because you do not know of a warning, doesn't mean it did happen. Some people are just more vocal over warnings then others.

PrettyGirlLost · May 2015

emmaaa said:
I have a few points I wanted to make. I want to try to make this as clear as possible but forgive me if it get ramble-y.

1. Some mods discussed posting a polar gif in certain situations. Basically, in some "eye-roll" worthy threads or replies or in the same instances puppy gifs and kitten gifs would be posted. Again, these posts were in response to situations, not any specific individual as some people like to believe.
2. Like others have stated, mods are human. We are members. Most of us have been part of this community for a while now and have developed personal opinions and relationships with other posters, as have many regs here. When we were asked to be mods, we were told that we could still participate as usual but also had a board we each moderated to watch for TOS violations. Each and every person we warn or ban is seen and reviewed by the KGs so that our personal biases don't get in the way.
3. In case you don't remember, Chit Chat was taken over by the KGs to be modded because the heavy activity and influx of warnings is a lot for someone who is not getting paid and volunteering their time (btw, we were told we needed to logged on at least 3 hours per week, that's all).
4. Ashley's banning was handled solely by KnotHolly and KnotRiley since that was their board they were modding. Since it was their board, we are not required to answer any TOS questions (especially since we didn't handle the warnings and bannings last weekend).

Except that puppy and kitten gifs are meant to de-escalate a thread that's going off the rails. . .

I don't think any actual reason was given for why CC was de-modded, other than Beethery quit and Lynda was getting transfered. No one ever said the KGs were taking over policing CC because it was getting too nasty. . .but some suspected as much since the same basic thing happened on TB.

Thanks for the confirmation.

emmaaa · May 2015

pinkrevenge said:

emmaaa said:

pinkrevenge said:

I don't think I asked you to, not sure about others, but honestly? This is not helping.

I said "we" as in the mods. Someone above posted that they wished mods would answer more questions and be more transparent. I also didn't tag you in the post so I'm not sure why you assumed I thought you asked? Nope.

Honestly, I don't care if you think it was helpful or not.

Okkkkaaaaaaaaaaaaay, no need to get such an attitude. You wanted to mod, the admins are leaving you in the dirt to catch their flack (which is what should really make you upset), and you're going to act this way?

I honestly think you're getting way more heated about this than you should be. Maybe you should walk away and cool off for a bit. Not insulting, it really sounds like you're getting super-upset about this. We often tell newbies that being in a discussion forum mean anyone can respond, remember?

I'm not "heated" at all. I gave a very clear response to some questions and assertions many people had throughout the thread. You responded to me with an attitude and I responded back, with an attitude. I think it is really funny that out of everything that has been posted on this thread, my post is what seems to have an attitude and being over-upset. That is comical.

I totally get people can reply to anything they want to, as can I. Nothing new.

VulgarGirl · May 2015

I for one think it's real shitty that @KnotRiley started this thread but her and @KnotHolly peaced the fuck out and let the mods fight their battle for them.

That is fucking shitty ass shit. And we know they won't be back.

[Deleted User] · May 2015

You're reading a tone I'm not using. We've also discussed that.

hellosweetie1015 · May 2015

MagicInk said:
I for one think it's real shitty that @KnotRiley started this thread but her and @KnotHolly peaced the fuck out and let the mods fight their battle for them.

That is fucking shitty ass shit. And we know they won't be back.

Seconded.

esstee33 · May 2015

emmaaa said:

I have a few points I wanted to make. I want to try to make this as clear as possible but forgive me if it get ramble-y.

1. Some mods discussed posting a polar gif in certain situations. Basically, in some "eye-roll" worthy threads or replies or in the same instances puppy gifs and kitten gifs would be posted. Again, these posts were in response to situations, not any specific individual as some people like to believe.
2. Like others have stated, mods are human. We are members. Most of us have been part of this community for a while now and have developed personal opinions and relationships with other posters, as have many regs here. When we were asked to be mods, we were told that we could still participate as usual but also had a board we each moderated to watch for TOS violations. Each and every person we warn or ban is seen and reviewed by the KGs so that our personal biases don't get in the way.
3. In case you don't remember, Chit Chat was taken over by the KGs to be modded because the heavy activity and influx of warnings is a lot for someone who is not getting paid and volunteering their time (btw, we were told we needed to logged on at least 3 hours per week, that's all).
4. Ashley's banning was handled solely by KnotHolly and KnotRiley since that was their board they were modding. Since it was their board, we are not required to answer any TOS questions (especially since we didn't handle the warnings and bannings last weekend).

************

But here's the thing (or, anyway, the things): whether your intent was to post them in regards to situations rather than specific people, in actuality you did only post them in response to one person. I'm sure it's entirely possible that maybe you guys just didn't get any further opportunities to troll other threads with them (because it's absolutely trolling, regardless of what / who it's aimed at), but the sole time you've used them, it was in response to Ashley. Whatever your intent, keep in mind what it looks like for people who don't have access to the mod board to see what your logic was.

But I also think you're lying through your teeth about the "situation" vs "specific person" delineation, so there's that.

But ALSO you keep saying it's no different than Ashley posting pictures of hydrogen peroxide, at which point I have to ask why mods thought it would be intelligent to mimic the actions of someone supposedly getting warned left and right for trolling and other TOS violations.

photokitty · May 2015

I really wish that admins and mods were allowed to refute things that people say that are either outright lies or twisted versions of the truth.

But we can't, bc admins and mods are not allowed to say Knottie#s was warned bc she said this...

Or Knottie#s was warned for trolling another user for following her around from thread to thread to harass her about the same thing which is not relevant to the discussion...

Or here are screen shots showing the 5 warnings before Knottie#s was banned...

We can't do that, it is calling people out. And it's nobody's business if you get a warning.

This is a loop hole that is causing a large part of the problem we have here. People are claiming they have or will be warned, when no warning was issued. People claim the rules weren't followed, when they were. People are claiming the rules are enforced equally, they are. We can't post the proof and should not be expected to do so as it is a private matter. There are always two sides to every story. Despite what people claim to know for a fact, no one here is omniscient.

Someone used an example of questioning things at their work. Similar to your job, you are free to ask questions, but like your boss, TK is not required to answer all of your questions. Your boss is not obligated to show you the personnel files of your co-workers (warnings issued) or allow you to sit in on meeting that she doesn't want you to attend (discussion about whether or not a report is valid and should result in a warning or banning). Your options are to stay or quit your job, you can't stomp your foot and expect to be ushered into the HR file room. IMHO, TK is giving you the answers it can or is willing to give - you can stay or leave.

We're not curing cancer or vying for a noble peace prize here - it's a wedding website.

Cookie Pusher · May 2015

photokitty said:

Someone used an example of questioning things at their work. Similar to your job, you are free to ask questions, but like your boss, TK is not required to answer all of your questions. Your boss is not obligated to show you the personnel files of your co-workers (warnings issued) or allow you to sit in on meeting that she doesn't want you to attend (discussion about whether or not a report is valid and should result in a warning or banning). Your options are to stay or quit your job, you can't stomp your foot and expect to be ushered into the HR file room. IMHO, TK is giving you the answers it can or is willing to give - you can stay or leave.

We're not curing cancer or vying for a noble peace prize here - it's a wedding website.

We're asking for clarification on the rules and parameters we have to follow in order to participate here, not to see the mods' secret files on users. I'm not asking for any more information than "why is this okay and this is not". I don't know about anybody else, but I've never been warned or banned on any message board I've ever been on, and I don't intend to start now. So I'd like to know what is and isn't acceptable. If we don't know what we can get warned/banned for, it's hypothetically possible to get 5 warnings/banned without meaning to.

FiancB · May 2015

emmaaa said:

Fair point, but again look at my TH reference. Newbs don't understand the puppy and kitten gifs so is it unfair to them for us to post them.
I doubt the KGs answer anymore tonight since they are usually off work at 5 EST, but they may!

Except newbies can lurk and search through old threads and figure it out. I was a newb once. It didn't take a very long time to figure out that's just something people do here. TH is also open for all to see. I also wasn't around for the peroxide joke but asked around and figured that out as well. All pretty transparent.

The mod board is secret and is for a small, exclusive group of people that wield a little bit of power over everyone else. Big difference.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: this doesn't really have all that much to do with mods nearly as much as it does with admin being totally unresponsive to any questions or requests. Though it is interesting the mods seem to be an extremely cohesive group lately.

southernbelle0915 · May 2015

Just so y'all know, KnotRiley and knotholly aren't logged into the forums 24/7. They're paid employees who work a regular schedule. So they likely won't be back until tomorrow.

photokitty · May 2015

Cookie Pusher said:

photokitty said:

Someone used an example of questioning things at their work. Similar to your job, you are free to ask questions, but like your boss, TK is not required to answer all of your questions. Your boss is not obligated to show you the personnel files of your co-workers (warnings issued) or allow you to sit in on meeting that she doesn't want you to attend (discussion about whether or not a report is valid and should result in a warning or banning). Your options are to stay or quit your job, you can't stomp your foot and expect to be ushered into the HR file room. IMHO, TK is giving you the answers it can or is willing to give - you can stay or leave.

We're not curing cancer or vying for a noble peace prize here - it's a wedding website.

We're asking for clarification on the rules and parameters we have to follow in order to participate here, not to see the mods' secret files on users. I'm not asking for any more information than "why is this okay and this is not". I don't know about anybody else, but I've never been warned or banned on any message board I've ever been on, and I don't intend to start now. So I'd like to know what is and isn't acceptable. If we don't know what we can get warned/banned for, it's hypothetically possible to get 5 warnings/banned without meaning to.

I can appreciate that. At the same time, I'm not sure what parameters you are looking for. Personally, when I read the TOS it seems pretty clear. Perhaps that's bc I err on a more restrictive stance for my personal posts, and a more liberal stance when moderating others posts.

I can see a clear difference between the statements "fuck that" and "fuck off" or "fuck you." I can tell the difference between "that's a stupid idea" and "you are stupid."

Rarely is someone warned and they argue that they should not be. For example - As Addie told everyone, she was warned, she understands why she was warned, but she stands by what she said. She knows she made a personal attack after the poster attacked her and her sister (FWIW, I would have gladly taken a warning to defend myself and my sister). She knew when she posted it that it was a violation.

I can only think of three occasions when someone was warned (two of them were the same person) for a personal attack violation that they tried to justify that what they did should not be an offense. Of course, there may be others who appealed their warnings that I am unaware of. I did not warn them, but had I been asked by the user I could have offered a clear explanation as to why they were warned and how it violated TOS - they weren't even iffy to me.

Almost all the violations given that are met with - "I didn't know that was a violation" - are spam or vendor related. A bride posts about her etsy account or links to her blog. We actually spend time looking at their post history to decide if they are a spammer or bride who just didn't realize she can't promote her cupcake business. We take the time to reach out to these users and give them a warning and explain how the forums work and the rules they need to adhere to if they want to stay. We removed all TOS violations from their posts and try to keep the boards spam free.

I feel like as adults we all can look at the TOS and have a pretty solid understanding of what it means. I think we all know that telling someone to "go fuck yourself" whether in text, image or gif is a TOS violation.

Do you want a comprehensive list? I think we all know that's not possible.
Do you have any examples or things in particular?
I'm not sure how late I can stay up (big day at work tomorrow) but I'm willing to offer my opinion and try to move forward.

ETA - Going to bed. Busy day tomorrow. Didn't want to appear to ignore anyone if they replied later.

redoryx · May 2015

Cookie Pusher said:

photokitty said:

Someone used an example of questioning things at their work. Similar to your job, you are free to ask questions, but like your boss, TK is not required to answer all of your questions. Your boss is not obligated to show you the personnel files of your co-workers (warnings issued) or allow you to sit in on meeting that she doesn't want you to attend (discussion about whether or not a report is valid and should result in a warning or banning). Your options are to stay or quit your job, you can't stomp your foot and expect to be ushered into the HR file room. IMHO, TK is giving you the answers it can or is willing to give - you can stay or leave.

We're not curing cancer or vying for a noble peace prize here - it's a wedding website.

We're asking for clarification on the rules and parameters we have to follow in order to participate here, not to see the mods' secret files on users. I'm not asking for any more information than "why is this okay and this is not". I don't know about anybody else, but I've never been warned or banned on any message board I've ever been on, and I don't intend to start now. So I'd like to know what is and isn't acceptable. If we don't know what we can get warned/banned for, it's hypothetically possible to get 5 warnings/banned without meaning to.

This. There are ways to do this without breaking privacy

And no, we're not curing cancer or vying for a Nobel Peace Prize. Which is why it's ridiculous that the mods are acting like clarification of the TOS is akin to asking for state secrets.

FiancB · May 2015

photokitty said:

Do you want a comprehensive list? I think we all know that's not possible.
Do you have any examples or things in particular?
I'm not sure how late I can stay up (big day at work tomorrow) but I'm willing to offer my opinion and try to move forward.

ETA - Going to bed. Busy day tomorrow. Didn't want to appear to ignore anyone if they replied later.

Yeah I'll play. I'd still like some answers as to why one very similar GIF is okay but another is not. Similarly, profanity is okay but profane videos don't seem to be, same goes for photos. Also wouldn't mind hearing more about this polar bear GIF inside joke if it's so innocent. Finally, would like to know what is considered to be a reasonable amount of time between warning and banning.

I get a list isn't very realistic because of context and such but these are pretty good examples if I do say so myself where both context and content are pretty comparable. I also get that these are mainly questions for KGs but I think mods can answer the polar bear thing.

Blergbot · May 2015

lyndausvi said:

redoryx said:

lyndausvi said:

Jells gave me a warning for a TOS violation on April 27, 2015 based on a report a newbie made.

Okay, thanks. It feels weird saying that's good to know since it sucks when people get warnings, but that's good to know.

Not a lot of reports are on mods, but when they happened they are taking seriously.

FYI - All mods/admins have access to all reported posts.

Even though in my case, the reported post was on my then-own board, there was no way for me hide or delete the complaint. Also when you flag a post it takes a snap shot of the complaint right then. So I would not have been able to go back and delete or edit my reply claiming I really didn't say what they said I did. Not that I would do such a thing anyway. Just letting you know there are safe guards.

I understand the uproar for clarification, but honestly we do not warn people as often as you think. One person's banning does not mean it starts a mass banning. I can't even remember the last non-vendor to be banned (beside what happened over the weekend).

And just because you do not know of a warning, doesn't mean it did happen. Some people are just more vocal over warnings then others.

Here's the deal, though. I was over on The Bump when all that shit went down. People were being banned left and right. Even people who stuck around and tried to be "nice"--actually they were perfectly nice--were banned months later. It was on going and it completely decimated the community. I held out for a long time, but eventually just stopped posting because I did't recognize anyone posting, the boards were moving at a snails pace with no new content for hours at a time, and those who were posting were drive bys whose posts were riddled with misspellings and grammar atrocities so bad that you couldn't understand what they were asking in order to give them advice.

Why shouldn't we expect the same kind of mass bannings over here? People are just trying to clarify what is a bannable offense, and given what went down on TB, that seems totally resonable to me.

AddieCake · May 2015

Why does anyone ever think asking for clarification or discussion on this will work? Because it's worked so well for us in the past? HahaHaha! A former reg was even once on the phone with an admin, smoke got blown as per usual, nothing changed except Stage and Linger were banned, which we were promised would not be happening. We had days where all the regs just deliberately disappeared to stop traffic on the boards. Nobody cared. So I place no faith in them clarifying anything or giving a shit what we think or want. Every time it comes up, we just spin our wheels.

climbingsingle · May 2015

photokitty said:

I really wish that admins and mods were allowed to refute things that people say that are either outright lies or twisted versions of the truth.

But we can't, bc admins and mods are not allowed to say Knottie#s was warned bc she said this...
Or Knottie#s was warned for trolling another user for following her around from thread to thread to harass her about the same thing which is not relevant to the discussion...
Or here are screen shots showing the 5 warnings before Knottie#s was banned...

We can't do that, it is calling people out. And it's nobody's business if you get a warning.

This is a loop hole that is causing a large part of the problem we have here. People are claiming they have or will be warned, when no warning was issued. People claim the rules weren't followed, when they were. People are claiming the rules are enforced equally, they are. We can't post the proof and should not be expected to do so as it is a private matter. There are always two sides to every story. Despite what people claim to know for a fact, no one here is omniscient.

Someone used an example of questioning things at their work. Similar to your job, you are free to ask questions, but like your boss, TK is not required to answer all of your questions. Your boss is not obligated to show you the personnel files of your co-workers (warnings issued) or allow you to sit in on meeting that she doesn't want you to attend (discussion about whether or not a report is valid and should result in a warning or banning). Your options are to stay or quit your job, you can't stomp your foot and expect to be ushered into the HR file room. IMHO, TK is giving you the answers it can or is willing to give - you can stay or leave.

We're not curing cancer or vying for a noble peace prize here - it's a wedding website.

See, this crap - I don't care about. I don't care about who has been warned or what goes on on your super secret mod board. What I do care about is when mods use their super secret board to create an inside joke (polar bear gifs) meant to slyly poke fun at other users. You mods have more power than us - you can warn and put people in jail and even delete your own posts when you get embarrassed. We can't do that. So using your super secret mod board to come up with private jokes at our expense is not the fucking same thing as users posting puppy and kitty gifs. I don't see how that can't be more clear. It's fucking shitty, and it's bullshit that you mods are allowed to get away with that kind of nonsense.

FiancB · May 2015

scribe95 said:

I would be happy to see some wording for TOS that people think would be more clear. It's a very difficult balance to write a policy. You can't anticipate every thing. So if anyone has precise language suggestions that would be great. Perhaps if our users participate in writing the policy and taking it to TK then they will feel they have more ownership in the site.

This should pretty much cover it in a very honest and transparent way, at least as it stands

But seriously, I get that not everything can be anticipated. As photokitty said, the TOS should ultimately come down to common sense. Don't be shitty to other people for no reason, k? But the issue here is that one day from one user things are acceptable, then they aren't, then they are.

For example, not too long ago I posted a GIF of the kid from superbad drawing some masterfully rendered penises. Oodles of dicks. That was okay. Apparently, posting a pic of a dessert that looks phallic is not. Profanity is okay, but posting a video of a Louis CK video that has lots of profanity (but overall a pretty damn positive message if you ask me) is not. Middle finger GIFs are okay in one thread but not another, even when context is the same.

redoryx · May 2015

FiancB said:

scribe95 said:

I would be happy to see some wording for TOS that people think would be more clear. It's a very difficult balance to write a policy. You can't anticipate every thing. So if anyone has precise language suggestions that would be great. Perhaps if our users participate in writing the policy and taking it to TK then they will feel they have more ownership in the site.

This should pretty much cover it in a very honest and transparent way, at least as it stands

But seriously, I get that not everything can be anticipated. As photokitty said, the TOS should ultimately come down to common sense. Don't be shitty to other people for no reason, k? But the issue here is that one day from one user things are acceptable, then they aren't, then they are.

For example, not too long ago I posted a GIF of the kid from superbad drawing some masterfully rendered penises. Oodles of dicks. That was okay. Apparently, posting a pic of a dessert that looks phallic is not. Profanity is okay, but posting a video of a Louis CK video that has lots of profanity (but overall a pretty damn positive message if you ask me) is not. Middle finger GIFs are okay in one thread but not another, even when context is the same.

This. This is the real crux of the issue that I feel like perhaps the mods aren't understanding because they keep saying they are consistent in how they administer warnings but that is clearly not the case. I know we all want to believe we're fair and objective but obviously that's not the case. Some personal bias is happening here, whether intentional or unintentional. But either way, please don't stand there saying "No, no, we are always fair and consistent" when history shows that's not correct and then get defensive when we ask for clarification on what is or is not okay because we honestly don't know.

FiancB · May 2015

Oh, and in case anyone's doubting whether I really got a warning, here's a screenshot (not of a PM, just the notification). The blacked out notification above is that someone sent me a PM. Did that just in case that's not okay to share.

- Removed for TOS Violation -

emmaaa · May 2015

scribe95 said:

It's always important to be more consistent and I appreciate some of the examples people are giving.
I think some of this is coming because we have different mods on different boards, and it's hard to be exactly the same. I know I once gave a warning that was reversed, which was cool. Sometimes more info comes to light or someone makes a good argument.
Also, some things are reported and some are not. It's very difficult to be on top of every post in every thread. We are human.

This. Any warnings a mod gives are seen by a KG. If they feel it should not have been a warning, then it will be reversed.

Mods can only warn and ban people on their assigned board. Most of the warnings are very self explanatory, name-calling or vendors. If there is an instance that a mod is unsure of, they usually consult with a KG.

[Deleted User] · May 2015

scribe95 said:

I would be happy to see some wording for TOS that people think would be more clear. It's a very difficult balance to write a policy. You can't anticipate every thing. So if anyone has precise language suggestions that would be great. Perhaps if our users participate in writing the policy and taking it to TK then they will feel they have more ownership in the site.

I'd do that. We could all figure out what questions and suggestions we have and brainstorm how we could make solutions and what wouldn't work. But it would be on admin to implement it. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you mods were asked to look over the current TOS and had suggestions, and nothing really changed?

But if we could open this discussion and help, I'd volunteer. I know nothing we could come up with would be perfect, but I'm willing to try.
And thank you for even putting this out there.

photokitty · May 2015

FiancB said:

photokitty said:

Do you want a comprehensive list? I think we all know that's not possible.
Do you have any examples or things in particular?
I'm not sure how late I can stay up (big day at work tomorrow) but I'm willing to offer my opinion and try to move forward.

ETA - Going to bed. Busy day tomorrow. Didn't want to appear to ignore anyone if they replied later.

Yeah I'll play. I'd still like some answers as to why one very similar GIF is okay but another is not. Similarly, profanity is okay but profane videos don't seem to be, same goes for photos. Also wouldn't mind hearing more about this polar bear GIF inside joke if it's so innocent. Finally, would like to know what is considered to be a reasonable amount of time between warning and banning.

I get a list isn't very realistic because of context and such but these are pretty good examples if I do say so myself where both context and content are pretty comparable. I also get that these are mainly questions for KGs but I think mods can answer the polar bear thing.

I said I'd answer, so here goes.

That's it, there's nothing more to the polar bears. A mod said I love polar bears, we should post polar bears. Three polar bear gifs were posted in a thread that was being hijacked bc the OP referred to herself as fat. Apparently, a person can't use an adjective to describe themselves if someone else thinks it is an insult. Think about, the OP was being shamed for using a term she doesn't find shameful to describe herself. Anyone who tried to defend her was told they were wrong as well. How is that ok? Ashley decided to fly off the handle over the three gifs. She went on an FU tirade - which by now I think we can all agree, we all know that telling someone FU or telling TK to fuck off is a clear violation. She could have stepped away from her computer and regrouped. She wanted to go down in a blaze of glory. She asked to be banned and TK granted her request. She brought this on herself. To suggest Ashley is a good example of how we could all be banned is silly.

As far as moderating consistantly and comparing similar posts -

There's no personal bias, typically it boils down to whether or not something is reported. We can't read every single post. Ain't nobody got time for that. If something is reported by a community member we have to look at it and make a determination. If something similar was posted and not reported it just means it wasn't reported, we didn't see it or weren't asked to make a determination.

We don't go around seeking out violations. The vast majority of warnings are from reports generated by the community, not by the mods moderating. The majority of reported posts are non-violations. If it is not an obvious answer, the mods consult the admins - as TK employees that have final say.

Most mods have this copy and paste response on hand, bc it's a PITA to keep typing it out:

Perceived rudeness is not a violation of the TOS.

Nothing in this post violates the TOS.

-closed-

KnotRiley · May 2015

Hi everyone,

We just wanted you to know we're not trying to ignore this thread. There's a lot of questions that have been asked so we're working on a response to everything right now.

Thanks for your patience!

VulgarGirl · May 2015

photokitty said:
Three polar bear gifs were posted in a thread that was being hijacked bc the OP referred to herself as fat. Apparently, a person can't use an adjective to describe themselves if someone else thinks it is an insult. Think about, the OP was being shamed for using a term she doesn't find shameful to describe herself.

*Lord give me streghth I'm gonna attempt to clip the quote boxes, this might fail*

Actually OP never called herself a "fatgirl". Kmbay84 was the OP. Julieanne912 called herself a "fatgirl guest". Kmbay84 never referred to herself as a fatgirl. Mikenberger, Julieanne912, and hellohkb all used the term. None of them were the OP.

Link to the thread for reference (still not clear if this is or is not a violation of TOS?) http://forums.theknot.com/discussion/1058396/cupcakes/p1

Also I did not bother to tag anyone when I used to usernames cause I didn't want them to feel like they had to come over here and defend themselves. Just saying that in case there was an question about the lack of tagging.

KnotRiley · May 2015

Hi all,

I apologize for our lack of responses last night, we’ve compiled (hopefully) all of your questions and are addressing them below.

To start, if you have a concern about a warning issued, you can respond to it any time after receiving it, whether through PM or email. If the admins were not the ones who have issued it, you can always come to us to refute it, and we’ll look into why you were issued the warning and whether it should be removed. We evaluate the context of all posts and apply the TOS in the same way for all members.

The amount of time between issuing warnings and banning is based on each individual’s behavior. When we issue the final warning, we give it a few minutes to go through, then if we continue to see the person’s activity is clearly not changing we have no choice but to ban.

We take issues like racism and homophobia extremely seriously and work hard to address each instance of this on the boards. In cases where these comments are directed at other users (or “racially, ethnically or otherwise, objectionable language” is used - from our TOS) we absolutely address them. As for the other threads mentioned, we ask that you always flag those comments when you see them so that we can address them.

In regards to posting off-topic gifs, since we have not issued warnings for behavior like this in the past, we handled this case in the same way. Moving forward, we will be more clear about issuing warnings for posts that are meant to disrupt the normal discussion of a thread. We (admins and mods) try to be as consistent as possible with our warnings. If something is toeing the line, but hasn’t been warned for in the past, we will try our best to stay consistent and not warn for it. This is whywe want to create the guidelinesto make everything much clearer on what we will/will not be warning for. I can’t say these will be the only reasons we will have to warn people, but I think it will help to make everything much clearer.

The change in CC moderation occurred because a moderator stepped down and Lynda preferred to be on a different board. CC tends to have the most heated discussions, it’s the most work to monitor and it wasn’t very fair that Lynda would have to put up with that alone, so @KnotHolly and I decided it was best for everyone if we took it over.

I think allowing you all to have a say in these new guidelines and any changes to the TOS is a good start. Please just keep in mind there are things that we cannot remove or change from our TOS for legal reasons, but I think especially having you all help with the guidelines to make all of this more clear would be great.

FiancB · May 2015

Oh hey, now I have a warning for posting a screenshot showing my previous warning. Because apparently that's the same as a screenshot of a PM, even though I was very careful not to show any actual PMs, just the headline that said I'd been warned and the reason why, and the TOS says not to share PMs or personal information but nothing about notifications.

PERFECT example of the TOS being clear as mud. I don't really see how that's any different from me saying that I got a warning for something specific, which has shown to be considered acceptable so far. All I did was show proof, since there were references to "people" "claiming" to get warnings that didn't happen. I even blacked out the conversation that ensued to be on the safe side, since I was only interested in showing that I had a warning, not who has been sending me PMs or that any conversation came of it.

ETA: the whole reason we don't share PMs is so that we don't call people out on stuff that is meant to be kept private. I am calling myself out for me getting a warning for me using a racial slur. Unless we're still saying that the TOS is a person who has the sad feels.

And @photokitty, thank you for your answer. Hopefully you can see how people would perceive it as maybe being malicious. It did look like maybe mods got together and said, haha, wouldn't it be funny if next time ashley does something annoying if we just invade with polar bears? Puppies probably would've gone over better, or just explaining that now you're all about polar bears, but I can accept that.

I don't think anyone is really surprised that ashley got banned. Her last few posts were inflammatory for sure. But it is pretty difficult to not get mad when you get warnings for what seem to be bullshit reasons. And for the hundredth time, other people made similar posts with no repercussions.

justsie · May 2015

Wasn't Ashley's first warning because she changed her signature and a mod got offended thinking it was aimed at her? The current responses are trying to make it sound like it started because Ashley just started randomly spamming middle fingers, but wasn't that the reason? I'm just reading all this agreeing with the regs- clear as mud.....

Updated TOS Rumors

Re: Updated TOS Rumors

Choose Another Board

Search Boards