Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Arbinire]

well it seems CF is on a fresh banning spree on the steam forums in preparation for their patch.  Just got one:

Ban notification from a forum moderator    — 19 minutes ago
You have been banned from Starbound Discussions
You have been banned from Starbound Discussions by a forum moderator for your post in "Starbound ":
Reporter: corrosivechains
Thread: why can't anyone get along [FORUMPOST:4471358:General:0:617321352121694086:617321352152396670]

Originally posted by Original Post:
Originally posted by Grimcreaper:
Almost all of us get a long decently enough. We have differing opinions and we express them but most of us dont get agitated. Theres only a few here and there that try and start flame wars now and they tend to get banned for trolling or being outright aggressive.

How on earth haven't you been banned yet then!!??

Originally posted by Report:
because he stands for liberal truth, social justice, and the chucklfish way!

Ban Reason:
Abuse or encourage abuse of the Reputation, or Post Reporting Systems

Please review the Discussions Rules and Guidelines.

This is a permanent ban.

note: this was a response I made like 2-3 weeks ago

edit: screenshot of the ban

http://i192.photobucket.com/albums/z120/corrosivechains/banned_zpsf4f72681.jpg

[Sergarr]

What the hell did you even try there?

[Rolan7]

I'm having some trouble parsing that.  The "reporter" was...  You?  And you reported a guy for saying:
"because he stands for liberal truth, social justice, and the chucklfish way!"

And they gave you a permaban?  The whole thing is really confusing to me.

[Arbinire]

yeah, you guys aren't the only ones confused.

edit: also edited the post to include a screenshot of my permaban

[Culise]

At the least, I'm confused because I cannot tell what in the world that post is trying to say with all of the formatting stripped out.  For instance, did Grimcreaper write one paragraph?  Two paragraphs?  Did he copy the whole thing?  Is that "Originally posted by Report" the reason given in the report made to the mod, or actually in the original post that was reported?

EDIT: Ah, and the screenshot clarifies things a little, but not by much.  At the least, it actually contains the formatting, which helps a little.  I suppose the question is what you did before this ban.  Did you report a post for moderation (since it says you're the reporter)?  Did you give a particular reason for the request for moderation, which may or may not the text in the "Originally posted by Report" blip? 

[timferius]

Hmm, if I read that correctly, you got banned for criticizing the moderators banning policy (ban those against, not those with). Yes? I mean, I deffinitly don't think it's a bannable offence, but knowing their heavy handedness you were kinda asking for it.

"But, biting my had off is way over-reacting to me poking him in the nose"
"HE'S A BEAR!"

[Neonivek]

I don't think I'll really miss hunger that much. The new food buff system they're introducing means that food will be a little more meaningful, rather than a "oh I see my bar is low I'd better shove something down my throat" kind of deal. It also makes food more useful for COMBAT, so people I play with will finally appreciate my weird tendency to become the cook/support role in every game ever.

All in all, I'm liking the look of the update. Can't wait for January.

They had food buffs previously. One of the reasons to actually create the more advanced foods was to both satiate your hunger and get a sizable bonus at the same time.

The Hunger system itself wasn't a good onto itself, but it did create a certain feel to the game. Mostly in creating its survivalist edge.

Though I do think it is rather apt that you are referring to MMORPGs all of a sudden.

[Darkmere]

I love that ban logic. Anything referring to bans is bannable. Mentioning reporting someone is bannable. Mentioning not getting along is bannable.

[TheDarkStar]

I love that ban logic. Anything referring to bans is bannable. Mentioning reporting someone is bannable. Mentioning not getting along is bannable.

-Darkmere has been banned for thinking about banning-

[Arbinire]

like I said the whole thing is confusing.  No I didn't report anyone and the comment listed for why I was banned would seem to fit more the post before mine(IE them asking why Grim wasn't banned).  I guess in Soviet Chucklefish...

edit: got some clarification it was for "abusing the report system".  Which I hadn't used in months, except one accidental report that I stated was on accident in the thread it happened in.

[Neonivek]

It is becoming more typical now adays. Either shutting down the forums and comments entirely or censoring anyone who shows any amount of dissent.

Chucklefish are just the people who did it first. In fact Steam might eventually allow companies to selectively delete reviews eventually, it isn't unusual for companies to collectively downvote negative reviews.

[Arbinire]

Apparently a lot of people are getting banned and threads being deleted on their steam forums.  Seems like CF is trying to remove negativity from the steam forums in preperation of the big "Stolen From Our Talented Modders Koala" patch.

[Neonivek]

Apparently a lot of people are getting banned and threads being deleted on their steam forums.  Seems like CF is trying to remove negativity from the steam forums in preperation of the big "Stolen From Our Talented Modders Koala" patch.

But are they downvoting negative reviews?

*Checks*

See nothing too bad.

More companies should follow suit. See how much happier people are without dissent.

[Chiefwaffles]

Apparently a lot of people are getting banned and threads being deleted on their steam forums.  Seems like CF is trying to remove negativity from the steam forums in preperation of the big "Stolen From Our Talented Modders Koala" patch.

I hate to be the supposed "fanboy defender" (Why do I always do this for just about everything ever) but that seems like a bit of a drastic claim. Is there any proof that they A.) Had content from mods in the next patch (They probably do, but this is more of a good thing) and B.) Didn't have permission from the modders? (even then, they don't need permission, though it would be bad if they didn't get it)

[Neonivek]

I think it is more an exaggerated claim that mostly speaks about how a lot of the content from patches come from the modding community, sometimes even dwarfing the Chucklefishes own content.

It would be a fair comment if it wasn't such a hyperbole.