Re: rogue mods again
 

in before rogue

Re: rogue mods again
 

[ QUOTE ]
in before rogue

[/ QUOTE ]

in after

Re: rogue mods again
 

[ QUOTE ]
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/ad....php?uid=92812

This dude lost two stars that he really, really earned. No notes.

[/ QUOTE ]

thanks dids. i banned him. good luck reversing that you cockjousters.

Re: rogue mods again
 

cit,

I was thinking more along the lines of gilds titles being erased.

Re: rogue mods again
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/ad....php?uid=92812

This dude lost two stars that he really, really earned. No notes.

[/ QUOTE ]

thanks dids. i banned him. good luck reversing that you cockjousters.

[/ QUOTE ]

Everything about this post, and mostly the word "cockjousters" makes me very happy.

Also

In before world filter

Re: rogue mods again
 

For the record, I consider myself more of a cad as opposed to a rogue.

Re: rogue mods again
 

I love the name rogue but it is not me. I have never given a title or taken a title away.

Re: rogue mods again
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
that really sucks. bellagio player posts almost exclusively in:

b4l, golf, sporting events, bbv, oot.

i'm gonna go out on a limb and say that it isn't gild, adanthar, ryan, or mat, and i'm going to guess that it is someone who is a mod of one of those other forums, though obviously that's not a necessity.

let's go with lynch green because wtf, why does that account even still exist.

[/ QUOTE ]

We actually have a lot of unworking mods that still exist such as JBB, and Commodus - perhaps its time for a non-active mod trimming as a safety measure?

[/ QUOTE ]

i personally guarantee you that Commodus is not removing *s without telling anyone

[/ QUOTE ]

I never claimed Commodus is... but i do think its time to trim down the moderator field to remove the inactive ones. The positive effect is that the smaller field makes it easier to determine who might be the rouge. I am not insinuating that the inactive mods are the leak, but it does make management easier by removing them.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with TT. I think it's time for a cleanup of inactive mods.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please to be saving jman220.

Re: rogue mods again
 

cit,

I changed a couple of titles after the Daryn/db discussion in the *-removal thread.

However, I added the following note:
ED: Title changed from "xxx" to default, no mod notes.

I figured it might be the only time I ever agree w/ db about anything related to 2+2.

Re: rogue mods again
 

lolol which one of this is you

pm:

[ QUOTE ]
From: JohnnyWadd
My account was blocked today, only thing the screen said was, "Your account was taken over/banned by Rogue Mods."

Why did this happen, and how can I get it back to normal?

I created this one so I could converse, ect...

Help!

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: rogue mods again
 

[ QUOTE ]
lolol which one of this is you

pm:

[ QUOTE ]
From: JohnnyWadd
My account was blocked today, only thing the screen said was, "Your account was taken over/banned by Rogue Mods."

Why did this happen, and how can I get it back to normal?

I created this one so I could converse, ect...

Help!

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

Send Ryan a PM with the guys real screen name, there are logs that he can trace to find the Rogue when a ban occurs.

Re: rogue mods again
 

Dids:
[ QUOTE ]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/ad....php?uid=92812

This dude lost two stars that he really, really earned. No notes.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[/ QUOTE ]

NT:

[ QUOTE ]
thanks dids. i banned him. good luck reversing that you cockjousters.

[/ QUOTE ]

Gildwulf:
[ QUOTE ]
lolol which one of this is you

pm:


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: JohnnyWadd
My account was blocked today, only thing the screen said was, "Your account was taken over/banned by Rogue Mods."

Why did this happen, and how can I get it back to normal?

I created this one so I could converse, ect...

Help!

[/ QUOTE ]

HMMMMMMMM.

Re: rogue mods again
 

yeah i posted that i banned him. which i did. and if anyone unbans him, i will ban him again. (unless that person is a red of course).

Re: rogue mods again
 

gild,

i don't know who that new account is (perhaps i'm just not catching whatever nick is?) but whomever it is sucks horribly. 14 posts, 5 original posts, 2 of which are him crossposting a video link.

i also don't know who his original account was, but chances are it sucks too.

Re: rogue mods again
 

Johnny Wadd (per Google).

Re: rogue mods again
 

Actually, Mike, he listed that in his profile.

Re: rogue mods again
 

[ QUOTE ]
yeah i posted that i banned him. which i did. and if anyone unbans him, i will ban him again. (unless that person is a red of course).

[/ QUOTE ]

what are your feelings on him having a new account though?

Re: rogue mods again
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
yeah i posted that i banned him. which i did. and if anyone unbans him, i will ban him again. (unless that person is a red of course).

[/ QUOTE ]

what are your feelings on him having a new account though?

[/ QUOTE ]

that's not something we can usually do much about, is it? if he posts something dumb in OOT obv he is on a very short leash

Re: rogue mods again
 

That seems pretty unfair, NT.

Re: rogue mods again
 

[ QUOTE ]
That seems pretty unfair, NT.

[/ QUOTE ]

what about this is unfair to you

Re: rogue mods again
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That seems pretty unfair, NT.

[/ QUOTE ]

what about this is unfair to you

[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps I'm being stupid. I'm good at that.

Did you not ban him just for having his 2 *s removed by another mod? That's not the member's problem. You can't blame him for it.

Re: rogue mods again
 

I strongly suspect that the members who are having their *s removed are alternate accounts of certain mods, or acting in concert with them to troll OOT. I'm not going to state in this forum all the reasons why I think this but I do. In every circumstance, the *s are being removed from bad, trollish posters who often appear to be multi-accounting. They subsequently resurface in OOT and continue to make lousy threads (which is why we notice them again).

In other words, the *s are removed from accounts with the apparent purpose of allowing them to continue trolling OOT, whether they are doing so on the explicit directions of the person removing the *, or if they simply returned to doing it because they were no longer under the threat of a ban. Banning those accounts prevents this from happening and costs the forum nothing.

I wouldn't be banning this guy if he was just some strat poster who wandered into OOT and made a mistake, then got his * removed.

Re: rogue mods again
 

i banned his new account because he went right back to linktarding OOT.

Re: rogue mods again
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That seems pretty unfair, NT.

[/ QUOTE ]

what about this is unfair to you

[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps I'm being stupid. I'm good at that.

Did you not ban him just for having his 2 *s removed by another mod? That's not the member's problem. You can't blame him for it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ryan,

I can promise you that this guy deserved a ban anyway. He was horrible. If people wanted to, they could find 3 star worhty posts pretty easily.

Re: rogue mods again
 

[ QUOTE ]
I strongly suspect that the members who are having their *s removed are alternate accounts of certain mods, or acting in concert with them to troll OOT. I'm not going to state in this forum all the reasons why I think this but I do. In every circumstance, the *s are being removed from bad, trollish posters who often appear to be multi-accounting. They subsequently resurface in OOT and continue to make lousy threads (which is why we notice them again).

In other words, the *s are removed from accounts with the apparent purpose of allowing them to continue trolling OOT, whether they are doing so on the explicit directions of the person removing the *, or if they simply returned to doing it because they were no longer under the threat of a ban. Banning those accounts prevents this from happening and costs the forum nothing.

I wouldn't be banning this guy if he was just some strat poster who wandered into OOT and made a mistake, then got his * removed.

[/ QUOTE ]


I'm not wanting to start a fight, but this sounds a little paranoid.

I'm sure Ryan can ip check a troll and see if any mods have the same ip if you really think that.

Re: rogue mods again
 

I'm sure he's doing just that, otherwise he probably would have said something by now. But there are plenty of tech-savvy people here who can cover their tracks.

Re: rogue mods again
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm sure he's doing just that, otherwise he probably would have said something by now. But there are plenty of tech-savvy people here who can cover their tracks.

[/ QUOTE ]

fire us all.

start from scratch.

anyone who is rogue is a total f'ing a$$hole.

Re: rogue mods again
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm sure he's doing just that, otherwise he probably would have said something by now. But there are plenty of tech-savvy people here who can cover their tracks.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, that sounds way less paranoid.

Re: rogue mods again
 

[ QUOTE ]
Actually, Mike, he listed that in his profile.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is it in white?

Re: rogue mods again
 

Granny,

"fire us all.

start from scratch."

I actually think that would be a pretty sweet idea.

Start w/ one OOT mod, one BBV mod, and one strat mod.

See how things go.

Add mods as needed based on performance and contributions to site.

Re: rogue mods again
 

[ QUOTE ]
Granny,

"fire us all.

start from scratch."

I actually think that would be a pretty sweet idea.

Start w/ one OOT mod, one BBV mod

[/ QUOTE ]

not it

Re: rogue mods again
 

lawls.

Re: rogue mods again
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm sure he's doing just that, otherwise he probably would have said something by now. But there are plenty of tech-savvy people here who can cover their tracks.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, that sounds way less paranoid.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is it really paranoid to believe that users can converse over AIM and use a proxy IP address? I mean, I am one of the least tech-savvy mods on this site and I'm pretty sure I could figure it out in about 15 minutes. The system doesn't log things like title changes and notes deletions, so if the mod's account and the user's account don't share an IP, how would it be hard to cover up?

Or are you just spouting off about something you don't understand as usual?

Re: rogue mods again
 

This is actually going to be seriously considered.

I'll be discussing it with Ryan. I welcome pms on the subject.

Re: rogue mods again
 

Are you just having fun with the old "I may be paranoid but that doesn't mean they're not out to get me" joke? Or do you really think a mod is deleting *s on his own (but well hidden) other accounts to bring down OOT or something?

Please tell me what could possibly be gained by this possible conspiracy you seem to be concerned about.

Re: rogue mods again
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm sure he's doing just that, otherwise he probably would have said something by now. But there are plenty of tech-savvy people here who can cover their tracks.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, that sounds way less paranoid.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is it really paranoid to believe that users can converse over AIM and use a proxy IP address? I mean, I am one of the least tech-savvy mods on this site and I'm pretty sure I could figure it out in about 15 minutes. The system doesn't log things like title changes and notes deletions, so if the mod's account and the user's account don't share an IP, how would it be hard to cover up?

Or are you just spouting off about something you don't understand as usual?

[/ QUOTE ]


Sigh. I told you I didn't want to start a fight on this.

Okay, your conspiracy theory is obv superior to the simpler and more obvious 'some poster asked a mod to change his title, and the mod doesn't really care or know about the oot 'standards''.

Go with yours, that's cool with me.



FWIW, I also think at least some of this disappearing/altered stuff is the software, but the changed titles etc (where they aren't changed to defaults) is obv mod intervention.

Re: rogue mods again
 

There are two possibilities:

1. Software error

2. Mod action.

If it's a software error, why do user notes get deleted as well? And why have examples of disappearing user notes / title changes never cropped up before? What has been changed in the software?

If it's the action of an indifferent mod, then why are user notes being deleted? In the one where deacsoft did it, the user notes were untouched. In other cases (Courtesy Flush, Bellagio Player, etc) they have been deleted along with the title.

I'm not saying it's a vast, far-reaching conspiracy. The simplest explanation is usually correct. It's probably one or two people going around deleting *s and custom titles, probably because they don't like the way off-topic forums are moderated. (since it's all BBV and OOT posters losing titles).

The odds of the software problem being localized to just a few forums seem low, which makes me think it's someone doing it on purpose.

Please explain to me why this is a crazy idea. Based on logical deduction (and having no access to software / mod IP info / etc) the most likely explanation seems to be that a mod is deleting the titles and covering their tracks, for whatever reason.

[ QUOTE ]
Okay, your conspiracy theory is obv superior to the simpler and more obvious 'some poster asked a mod to change his title, and the mod doesn't really care or know about the oot 'standards''.

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem with this brilliant rebuttal is that it doesn't explain why user notes are also deleted the majority of the time.

Re: rogue mods again
 

[ QUOTE ]


The problem with this brilliant rebuttal is that it doesn't explain why user notes are also deleted the majority of the time.

[/ QUOTE ]


if the whole thing is disappearing, software glitch is still possible. Is it that, or just the latest stuff (which may also be a glitch, actually).

I'm not trying to downplay this - it's starting to come across like that - there does seem something fishy afoot, and it's wise it be raised. I'm just suggesting there are alternative explanations to SOME of the stuff happening.

For example, we've had 'unbannings' happen before, cos mods thought they'd banned when they didn't.

Peace, NT, okay?

(though you got to admit 'In other words, the *s are removed from accounts with the apparent purpose of allowing them to continue trolling OOT' is a little way out)

Re: rogue mods again
 

mat,

i went out a bought myself a ring of power and everything. let's roll!

just kidding.

i have a lot of thoughts about moderation, free moderation, what's going right and great for 2p2, what's going seemingly very poorly, our population, and the assured crappitude of the upcoming sit-and-go book, but unfortunately i also have a 24 hour take home final exam =( so i will spout off on these subjects when i have a bit more time to congeal my thoughts. overall though, mat, a quick summary would look like this:

1) please don't do anything rash or off-the-cuff

2) a lot more is going well than going poorly

3) in reality, even though it obviously sucks that someone is doing "rogue" stuff, it doesn't actually hurt anyone in any serious manner when a star is removed, or a custom title is altered. at worst it is a minor inconvenience to someone. i know that oot specifically takes its moderation very seriously but to quote a great tv show "come on!" srs biz or whatever.

(note, i've long had a problem with the fact that the wills of the oot mods seem to be more heavily considered and regarded than the sum total of all other mods, and don't really like the way oot moderation (not the moderating itself, but the penalty system) is handled at all. that's just my full disclosure.)

4) with a bit of work (you might have to legitimately throw some money at durron if you want this fixed by him, or promptly by him, or whatever) these are fixable problems that likely are only being done by a small handful of mods, if that many. obviously it sucks, but scrapping a system that is good, but for a handful of people who you can, and will, most likely catch, seems going too far.

5) lots of emphasis on #2, in case you don't think i mean it. while there's a lot of minor headaches for the mods of almost every forum with any traffic at all, everything really is going quite well.

a quick look at sniper's much maligned, and rightfully so, but also somewhat useful, post count numbers:

Top 10 - 23 days into May - posts/day...

BBV4L - 1182 -> didn't exist like a year ago. now most popular forum on site. causes problems, none of them are usually that bad. the "worst" problems are that sometimes some moron takes that fun of bbv4l to other forums, and only occasionally is that a strat forum. the horrors!

OOT - 1156 -> the mainstay of non poker discussion on this site. still living large, even though many topics are banned from discussion, and many of the highest volume posters and readers of the site swear they will never venture in. the "worst problems" (and i should note i'm not talking about trainwrecking, i'm talking about problems for the mod community) are that sometimes some guy's star gets moved.

BBV - 1103 -> didn't exist a year ago, and got cut in half even more recently. biggest problems: i really see none.

SSNL - 1066 -> obv.

POG - 809 -> another relatively new forum. no one has ever had a problem with anything there, another oot offshoot, and a paradise of silly puzzle and game fun. this forum nicely self selects for fairly mature, friendly people, unlike basically all of the other other topic forums.

uNL - 757 -> new, but obv good, and thriving.

SE - 638 -> another oot offshoot. no one ever complains about it, and it's got impressive numbers.

MSNL - 517 -> turns out no one actually posts about high stakes NL. not that i want to rub in the face of everyone who always wants to split forums in to high and low stakes and mid stakes and have 2/4 forums and 3/6 forums and etc, but i gotta say, you don't see high stakes limit or high stakes nl in this list for a reason. player pools are small and the players who actually play them and have questions that wouldn't get moved to ms forums are quite good and infrequently need to post to figure out a hand. even when they can't figure something out immediately by themselves, they have a long list of aim contacts who generally obsolete their forums.

STT - 509 -> obviously the best forum on the site.

IG - 388 -> granny's one true home. it's almost exactly as i remember it, which is useful, but not someplace i'd like to run, or be forced to read through every day. then again, even though it's filled with morons, you don't exactly see complaints about mike's moderation, or mike complaining in here.

(representing 62.0% of 2+2 posts)

anyway, like i said, i'll have more time later. don't let one or two or whatever morons spoil you on the whole crowd of us. we in general do a good job i think, and work together well.

citanul

Re: rogue mods again
 

I for one would be slightly annoyed if the thanks we get for helping out is some mass demodding because somebody was dicking around.