So, recently there was an argument (although not many arguments were made, quite frankly) regarding the fairness of a ruleset for a tournament meant to test the competitive viability of a stadium. The drama all starts here:

https://imgur.com/OTPsGqR

Relatively inoffensive, right? A suggested change in ruling, because this user believed that using a different ruleset from what is normally used with the Takara Tomy standard stadium would lead to fairer testing results, and the existence of a second set of testing with those more common rules in place would instead depend on the results of testing with different rules.

However, this is not how the OP, the tournament host, saw it:

https://imgur.com/4N1nq02

Instead, they cherrypicked a portion of the post, and delivered the legendary line “Ideally this is the last thing I read from you ever again”, claiming the other user broke a rule, without explaining what said rule break was. They then proceeded to confirm that they would be keeping watch on whether or not pocket wall bounces were happening. On most other forums, this is when you would expect a moderator to step in for a blatant rule-break from the OP, breaking rule 1 on the forum: Treat other members well. However, this was not the case. The first commenter proceeded to thank the OP for letting them know that the wall bounces would be tracked, and asked what rule they broke. After this, the OP responded with a lengthy rant:

https://imgur.com/bXk29qc

To start with, they explained what they saw as a violation of the rules – calling the decisions inferior or skewed. In the context of a tournament, this would be the case, but seeing as this tournament was meant for testing first – testing (and thus fairness) first, personal jurisdiction second – it was more comparable to someone informing a tester that they had made a mistake and their tests could not be used – which is done quite commonly without the tester breaking any rules. Following this, the OP went in with a few more insults, stating that “no future communication” was even possible, and stating their belief of the commenter being an alt troll account. At this point, you would think that surely, a moderator would have to have stepped in and told the tournament host to knock it off with their rudeness. As of now, however, nothing has happened.

But why, I hear you asking? Why did the mods let the OP go so far? Well, there’s only one answer I've found – the user in question is an ex-staff member. This shouldn’t even be a problem – the rules explicitly forbid current staff from breaking the rules, for crying out loud - https://imgur.com/AmO11mT - but this ex-staff member clearly breaks the mold here.

So far, I am quite let down by what I have seen of the moderation team and ask them to do better. I implore all of you who have seen similar incidents occur to speak up on this thread about it.

Lastly - before any moderators think about removing this post, I would like to point out that this thread censors all names, and no rules have been broken. There is no direct insult here besides maybe pointing out violations of the rules (which would be quite amusing if doing so counted as breaking the rules, given the ex-staff member tried to do so themself), and rather than being a personal attack on the staff and moderators for doing their jobs, this is a general attack on them for not doing their jobs.

I’d also like to include this little gem from a previous set of posts:
https://imgur.com/6QgCnOz
Where a user calls out the ex-staff member for rudeness, and they claim to know the “actual” rules - which seem to include some sort of clause allowing them to break said rules, evidently. Also, the other user pointing out that the forums would be a mess without the ex-staff member micromodding is not a positive indicator towards the effectiveness of the moderation team.

I'm going to try to keep this short (although I'll probably ramble a fair bit) since I wasn't involved in the incident.
These are simply my opinions on the matter, and I don't intend to pick a side, as I feel that both parties involved are at least partially at fault.
That being said, I am not a staff member, so it is ultimately up to them to decide where to go from here.


I don't think you should have posted this, for several reasons. First, whether intentional or not, the way the post is worded implies that you were not directly involved, that you were an outsider concerned with how things were handled. The fact of the matter is, you were involved, you were one of the two major parties that the incident consisted of.

Additionally, at the time of posting, the dispute was effectively over. A mod showed up, and no further interactions occurred. If you felt that the matter should be pressed further, you should have reached out to a staff member via DM, whether on the WBO site or the WBO discord server. Either way, this should not have continued to be a public event.

That being said, I found the thread this occurred in and reviewed it myself, and I do feel that the initial reaction to your post, and subsequent interactions, were unwarranted and somewhat out of character. While it could have been worded better, you made a valid point, and I don't feel that it deserved that kind of response.


CitrusNinja3 Apologies for the ping, but I thought this should be brought to your attention.

atleast the moderation here is better than roblox's moderation

---

I will forever make Top Gun references

I'm going to try to keep this short (although I'll probably ramble a fair bit) since I wasn't involved in the incident.
These are simply my opinions on the matter, and I don't intend to pick a side, as I feel that both parties involved are at least partially at fault.
That being said, I am not a staff member, so it is ultimately up to them to decide where to go from here.

I don't think you should have posted this, for several reasons. First, whether intentional or not, the way the post is worded implies that you were not directly involved, that you were an outsider concerned with how things were handled. The fact of the matter is, you were involved, you were one of the two major parties that the incident consisted of.

Well, the problem is that regardless of whether or not I was involved, it was better to avoid directing anyone to either of the threads I took screenshots from, in much the same way you don't see news outlets posting the name, age, and address of criminals when incidents are reported. Also, I see no real way in which this matters - the context of the screenshots is taken as neutrally as possible, and I saw no reason to start a witch hunt on another user. As for both parties being at fault - I would have to disagree, a child taking a pencil is not responsible for the other child who wanted said pencil throwing a tantrum.

Additionally, at the time of posting, the dispute was effectively over. A mod showed up, and no further interactions occurred. If you felt that the matter should be pressed further, you should have reached out to a staff member via DM, whether on the WBO site or the WBO discord server. Either way, this should not have continued to be a public event.

And that is exactly the problem. A mod showed up, and no further interactions occured, particularly nothing being done regarding the rules broken, and this is not a standalone incident. I have reached out to staff on the WBO discord server several times, and the response I have received has been lackluster, to say the least.

Lastly - I see no reason this should not have been a public event. This was meant to point out an issue with the moderation, not an issue on a specific post as you are painting it. Names were censored for a good reason (which you conveniently ignored, whether intentional or not) and it is exactly where it should be - in the forum for questions and comments about the World Beyblade Organization. In my case, I am making a comment on the effectiveness of the moderation team of the WBO.

I can’t speak for other staff, and I am also not on the moderation team.  I can say that I did reach out, but  couldn’t provide a solution because moderation is not my area.  I did explain WBO is a volunteer based organization and sometimes things can take time when volunteers are busy, even with things like moderation.  I did explain the matter at hand is something that has been discussed within moderation.  I think the above sums up the lackluster response so far.  I am only posting to made clear what has been done so far on the matter by my hands.

Forgot to ask.  What would be a spirited response? I think the title of the thread would suggest we are here to discuss how things could be less ineffective.  Let’s not stop the discussion at pointing out the ineffective, because that isn’t the most helpful.  What would be effective moderation?  Is it just faster we are looking for?

Forgot to ask.  What would be a spirited response? I think the title of the thread would suggest we are here to discuss how things could be less ineffective.  Let’s not stop the discussion at pointing out the ineffective, because that isn’t the most helpful.  What would be effective moderation?  Is it just faster we are looking for?

Well, to start, having a faster, more streamlined response would also be an improvement - one moderator on their own should be enough to handle a situation they have reported to them within a reasonable timeframe of them getting online and seeing the report (probably something like 5 minutes per incident, plenty of time to identify a rule break and an appropriate response). This would involve making sure moderators are aware of the rules and their contents/what constitutes a broken rule, a clearer guideline on the response to broken rules (while moderator personal jurisdiction can work, I think having clearly defined rules would be better for the current setup), and having the moderators more incentivized to do their jobs (which you have told me is a problem.)

Also, making sure nobody is above the rules - I am shocked about how many people think that by hosting events, you can earn a "by" for breaking rules.

Well, the problem is that regardless of whether or not I was involved, it was better to avoid directing anyone to either of the threads I took screenshots from, in much the same way you don't see news outlets posting the name, age, and address of criminals when incidents are reported

Giving my two cents on this, as I was once a moderator from one of Fandom’s most active wikis (its hectic and I completely get what the world of reporting can be like, sometimes)

I think theres this universal problem that regardless of who people are when something happens, they feel the need to make it public. Which is something I do not advise at all. Regardless of whether you are involved or not, the best course of action is to tell the moderation team privately. That way, they can clear things up privately and answer any concerns you have without the public monitoring you

The problem with society nowadays is that everyone feels the need to publicize things. But big news outlets to small internet circles. And when some people publicize things, they might have bias or get some of the facts wrong. And that misleads plenty of people, sometimes even humiliating the person who made the issue public. That is why it is better to report things quietly to avoid unfortunate circumstances 

The problem I have is not your quote and screenshotting actions. The problem is that you chose to make your concern highlighting recent conflict a public matter. And from what I am getting, it seems as if youre being ambiguous about your level of involvement. Yes, Ive read the thread. Yes, I think something is being a little dishonest here. Which is essentially why I said to report privately, as people could be skewing the facts as a play for the public

---

Call me either Sands/Suns! That one female Beyblade fan

Pfp: Cedric from Arcaea by Nataslyn on Discord

[Status: Lurking]

Forgot to ask.  What would be a spirited response? I think the title of the thread would suggest we are here to discuss how things could be less ineffective.  Let’s not stop the discussion at pointing out the ineffective, because that isn’t the most helpful.  What would be effective moderation?  Is it just faster we are looking for?

Well, to start, having a faster, more streamlined response would also be an improvement - one moderator on their own should be enough to handle a situation they have reported to them within a reasonable timeframe of them getting online and seeing the report (probably something like 5 minutes per incident, plenty of time to identify a rule break and an appropriate response). This would involve making sure moderators are aware of the rules and their contents/what constitutes a broken rule, a clearer guideline on the response to broken rules (while moderator personal jurisdiction can work, I think having clearly defined rules would be better for the current setup), and having the moderators more incentivized to do their jobs (which you have told me is a problem.)

Also, making sure nobody is above the rules - I am shocked about how many people think that by hosting events, you can earn a "by" for breaking rules.

Yes I did say mods can be busy dealing with other issues such as credit card drops and etc.  I also did say adding mods won’t necessarily solve the manpower issue because there are people who would want to be on staff to primarily change the color of their handle and not much else.  This is not hard to believe I don’t think.  This is a problem with all volunteer situations.  When I volunteered in high school, I really just needed the credit on my college application.  It was hard to incentivize me to work furiously hard at filing in all honesty.  I did my job properly still, but I wasn’t terribly fast.  I think the moderation team does their job.  They are rather careful and methodical but I guess not terribly fast. I am saying this as a member and not staff.  I am not moderation staff, so this is outside looking in. 

What could be used to incentivize people to do their volunteer jobs around the clock and in 5 mins?  Also, besides faster, what else.  If there are more than the “faster, more streamlined” to start, we might as well discuss it now.

Well, the problem is that regardless of whether or not I was involved, it was better to avoid directing anyone to either of the threads I took screenshots from, in much the same way you don't see news outlets posting the name, age, and address of criminals when incidents are reported

Giving my two cents on this, as I was once a moderator from one of Fandom’s most active wikis (its hectic and I completely get what the world of reporting can be like, sometimes)

I think theres this universal problem that regardless of who people are when something happens, they feel the need to make it public. Which is something I do not advise at all. Regardless of whether you are involved or not, the best course of action is to tell the moderation team privately. That way, they can clear things up privately and answer any concerns you have without the public monitoring you

The problem with society nowadays is that everyone feels the need to publicize things. But big news outlets to small internet circles. And when some people publicize things, they might have bias or get some of the facts wrong. And that misleads plenty of people, sometimes even humiliating the person who made the issue public. That is why it is better to report things quietly to avoid unfortunate circumstances 

The problem I have is not your quote and screenshotting actions. The problem is that you chose to make your concern highlighting recent conflict a public matter. And from what I am getting, it seems as if youre being ambiguous about your level of involvement. Yes, Ive read the thread. Yes, I think something is being a little dishonest here. Which is essentially why I said to report privately, as people could be skewing the facts as a play for the public

Please reread the post three above yours for the answers to all your complaints here, namely these three paragraphs:

"Well, the problem is that regardless of whether or not I was involved, it was better to avoid directing anyone to either of the threads I took screenshots from, in much the same way you don't see news outlets posting the name, age, and address of criminals when incidents are reported. Also, I see no real way in which this matters - the context of the screenshots is taken as neutrally as possible, and I saw no reason to start a witch hunt on another user."

"And that is exactly the problem. A mod showed up, and no further interactions occured, particularly nothing being done regarding the rules broken, and this is not a standalone incident. I have reached out to staff on the WBO discord server several times, and the response I have received has been lackluster, to say the least."

"Lastly - I see no reason this should not have been a public event. This was meant to point out an issue with the moderation, not an issue on a specific post as you are painting it. Names were censored for a good reason (which you conveniently ignored, whether intentional or not) and it is exactly where it should be - in the forum for questions and comments about the World Beyblade Organization. In my case, I am making a comment on the effectiveness of the moderation team of the WBO."

Think of these in relation to your own points, being that it is dishonest to avoid starting a witch hunt, and that nothing should be done besides telling the moderation team regardless of how long an incident takes to resolve, and tell me that you can genuinely stand behind them with a cogent flow in your arguments. Also, if you think I have presented the situations in the posts in a biased manner - stop tiptoing around and just say it. I will very happily tear apart the "arguments" of someone who thinks "Ideally this is the last thing I read from you ever again" and an accusation of a rulebreak was a justified response, or anyone who thinks that "It might be worth keeping track of footage and seeing how balanced it would be if the wall bounce rule were in place" is in any way provocative.

I think the “inferior ruling” may have been the provocative part. I don’t think it was meant to be and probably should not have been taking as provocative, but I am capable reading it that way myself. Since the “inferior ruling” is the manufacturer’s ruling and how the entire WBBA plays, the use of the term “inferior” can probably be provocative to a good number of people who play beyblade in the world.

What could be used to incentivize people to do their volunteer jobs around the clock and in 5 mins?  Also, besides faster, what else.

Well, that's the tricky part, isn't it? You've just got to find the right people who, whenever they have a few moments in their day, get on the WBO and do their job. Also - it isn't around the clock and in 5 minutes - it's 5 minutes from whenever that particular moderator happens to get online, and 5 minutes per incident - which I think is hardly unreasonable for most cases, if for example you see a tournament host screaming about how they never want to read something from a commenter again. Besides faster, I don't think there's that much past making sure that moderation is applied effectively and equally indirectly via making the rules clearer and making the moderators more aware of them.

---

I think the “inferior ruling” may have been the provocative part.  I don’t think it was meant to be and probably should not have been taking as provocative, but I am capable reading it that way myself.  Since the “inferior ruling” is the manufacturer’s ruling and how the entire WBBA plays, the use of the term “inferior” can probably be provocative to a good number of people who play beyblade in the world.

See, the inferior ruling part is, however, not provocative in the context of the WBO, where the tournament was hosted. It is a rule that is in place for the majority of burst standard tournaments, and given that the tournament was meant for testing, it made no sense to try to alter the rules, and then proceed to go back on the decision to record wall bounces: 

"Given that there are now 4 Pockets on Haspro, of a potentially shallow depth, having to continuously check for possible pocket wall bounces on video for an entire unranked tournament where they seem potentially more likely for a KO situation that literally cannot happen by design is overkill."

I haven't heard of accepting tests where entirely different beyblades were used to test the one and labelled as the same result, and I also haven't heard of being allowed to break rules when someone is told their test was conducted wrong.

What could be used to incentivize people to do their volunteer jobs around the clock and in 5 mins?  Also, besides faster, what else.

Well, that's the tricky part, isn't it? You've just got to find the right people who, whenever they have a few moments in their day, get on the WBO and do their job. Also - it isn't around the clock and in 5 minutes - it's 5 minutes from whenever that particular moderator happens to get online, and 5 minutes per incident - which I think is hardly unreasonable for most cases, if for example you see a tournament host screaming about how they never want to read something from a commenter again. Besides faster, I don't think there's that much past making sure that moderation is applied effectively and equally indirectly via making the rules clearer and making the moderators more aware of them.

Got it, it read like 5 mins around the clock but I can see that it doesn’t, because that would be an unrealistic level of customer service to expect from an volunteer organization like the WBO.  And yes, I think finding the right people is tricky in all walks of life.  I do feel like the staff on moderation are actually all “right people” currently, maybe we just need more. Since it is tricky, I guess that isn’t easy and might take time.  

As I understand it now, speed of moderation is the chief complaint.  Just not fast enough, right?

Well, that's the tricky part, isn't it? You've just got to find the right people who, whenever they have a few moments in their day, get on the WBO and do their job. Also - it isn't around the clock and in 5 minutes - it's 5 minutes from whenever that particular moderator happens to get online, and 5 minutes per incident - which I think is hardly unreasonable for most cases, if for example you see a tournament host screaming about how they never want to read something from a commenter again. Besides faster, I don't think there's that much past making sure that moderation is applied effectively and equally indirectly via making the rules clearer and making the moderators more aware of them.

Got it, it read like 5 mins around the clock but I can see that it doesn’t, because that would be an unrealistic level of customer service to expect from an volunteer organization like the WBO.  And yes, I think finding the right people is tricky in all walks of life.  I do feel like the staff on moderation are actually all “right people” currently, maybe we just need more. Since it is tricky, I guess that isn’t easy and might take time.  

As I understand it now, speed of moderation is the chief complaint.  Just not fast enough, right?

Yeah, also fair moderation.

What could be used to incentivize people to do their volunteer jobs around the clock and in 5 mins?  Also, besides faster, what else.

Well, that's the tricky part, isn't it? You've just got to find the right people who, whenever they have a few moments in their day, get on the WBO and do their job. Also - it isn't around the clock and in 5 minutes - it's 5 minutes from whenever that particular moderator happens to get online, and 5 minutes per incident - which I think is hardly unreasonable for most cases, if for example you see a tournament host screaming about how they never want to read something from a commenter again. Besides faster, I don't think there's that much past making sure that moderation is applied effectively and equally indirectly via making the rules clearer and making the moderators more aware of them.

---

I think the “inferior ruling” may have been the provocative part.  I don’t think it was meant to be and probably should not have been taking as provocative, but I am capable reading it that way myself.  Since the “inferior ruling” is the manufacturer’s ruling and how the entire WBBA plays, the use of the term “inferior” can probably be provocative to a good number of people who play beyblade in the world.

See, the inferior ruling part is, however, not provocative in the context of the WBO, where the tournament was hosted. It is a rule that is in place for the majority of burst standard tournaments, and given that the tournament was meant for testing, it made no sense to try to alter the rules, and then proceed to go back on the decision to record wall bounces: 

"Given that there are now 4 Pockets on Haspro, of a potentially shallow depth, having to continuously check for possible pocket wall bounces on video for an entire unranked tournament where they seem potentially more likely for a KO situation that literally cannot happen by design is overkill."

I haven't heard of accepting tests where entirely different beyblades were used to test the one and labelled as the same result, and I also haven't heard of being allowed to break rules when someone is told their test was conducted wrong.

The wall bounce rules has been heavily debated. Here are some threads:

https://worldbeyblade.org/Thread-Conside...-Knockouts

https://worldbeyblade.org/Thread-Should-...r-feedback

I can see it as provocative.  There has been other unranked events to test the removal of this rule.  You can also find plenty of staff, organizers, and member support for its removal.  Again, I don’t think it was meant to provoke, but I can see that it might have.

The wall bounce rules has been heavily debated. Here are some threads:

https://worldbeyblade.org/Thread-Conside...-Knockouts

https://worldbeyblade.org/Thread-Should-...r-feedback

 Hmm, I see that the wall bounce rule is still a contended topic. However, I still do not think "Ideally this is the last thing I have to read from you ever again" is an appropriate response to someone telling me it might be worth doing something because of their opinion.

The wall bounce rules has been heavily debated. Here are some threads:

https://worldbeyblade.org/Thread-Conside...-Knockouts

https://worldbeyblade.org/Thread-Should-...r-feedback

 Hmm, I see. However, I still do not think "Ideally this is the last thing I have to read from you ever again" is an appropriate response to someone telling me it might be worth doing something because of their opinion.

This is not something I have argued, but I guess it just depends on how they took “inferior”

Actually, in all honesty, I don’t enjoy the removing the the wall bounce rule being called “inferior” myself.  Most of the people who play without the wall bounce rule live close to where I come from and look like me.  I think they also understand how to make the game fun, and do not play an objectively inferior version of this game.  This will be very clear if you read the above threads. I do believe “inferior” wasn’t meant to provoke or insult myself tho.

To give my own two cents, it's really not always as simple as 5 minutes and boom, done. Sometimes, something needs to be looked at more thoroughly and discussed with other members of staff to give their input on it, which in itself can take time due to everyone's lives affecting their schedule and response time. Even if something seems more obvious, we want to be sure of any factors that may have played a part of a situation. I do understand that this doesn't necessarily apply to this situation, I just wanted to bring that out there.

As far as what went on, I do agree that the response was rather disproportionate and aggressive, and it's a discussion we're currently having, but we're also trying to look at both sides of things, due to them feeling genuinely offended by the "Inferior ruling" response, we have to try and see it through their perspective too, and what they interpreted the response as. Believe it or not, it's still something the team are discussing, and will be looked into further. The concerns of all members do get looked into from behind the scenes.

I also never remembered getting a direct DM regarding the situation. My point is that, I really would also encourage DM'ing at least a good amount of staff members, as it gets the concerns out further.

---

My Cho-Z Reaper Deathscyther .12.Cr concept render, click below to see!

Spoiler (Click to View)

No I don't plan on doing more yet.

I should probably go back to making fan custom Zero G beyblade concepts again

Yes, I understand. It is frustrating to not go anywhere after DMing a mod privately. We all have different experiences with mods and I cannot speak for all; despite this, I do think that privately negotiating is still the best course of action. Some mods simply do not have the time to provide a much better response, others are still trying to come up with a mod team consensus. Others are simply stubborn, but enough time can change their views. Circumstances are different and are frustrating to deal with, I know

Although Ive been here for a fair amount of years, what doesnt change is that people should give others the benefit of the doubt. Reports being ignored is frustrating, and so is trying to handle things as a mod. Thats why we all should keep trying to understand each other through rivate negotiations

Witch hunt or not, I think making a public post does not help as much. Some users do not know what is happening and as I reiterated, sometimes people join in on issues that they might not fully aware about. We are regular users and we cannot speak for anyone’s mind. We can only do the same thing: DMing a mod if theres a problem. I sure have done that before

As well as that, and going a little personal here (forgive me): I am not possibly “tiptoing” in any way. Those who have known me very well throughout my 3-ish years here (as well as found my posts about my problem) know that I have a hard time wording my phrases and can be overwhelmed by my thoughts. In no way am I trying to be malicious by hiding my supposed assumption of you being dishonest. If you want a clearer answer: Im just saying something feels off to me, but it isnt you — it just unsettles me on how much should I trust a public criticism of the mods, looping back to my idea on why these shouldnt be public at all

And that loops back to the second paragraph: We all need the benefit of the doubt. As we can see, Ive been made an assumption of tiptoing/dodging by someone whom I never seen before. I think its in humanity to jump to conclusions about others and not see things from other perspectives, hence why this isnt the first time we users criticized WBO mods and have been so critical. Being a mod is hard, and so is being a user trying to report things. We need understanding and seeing why things occurred, not what-ifs and fundamental attribution error

---

Call me either Sands/Suns! That one female Beyblade fan

Pfp: Cedric from Arcaea by Nataslyn on Discord

[Status: Lurking]

Yes, I understand. It is frustrating to not go anywhere after DMing a mod privately. We all have different experiences with mods and I cannot speak for all; despite this, I do think that privately negotiating is still the best course of action. Some mods simply do not have the time to provide a much better response, others are still trying to come up with a mod team consensus. Others are simply stubborn, but enough time can change their views. Circumstances are different and are frustrating to deal with, I know

Although Ive been here for a fair amount of years, what doesnt change is that people should give others the benefit of the doubt. Reports being ignored is frustrating, and so is trying to handle things as a mod. Thats why we all should keep trying to understand each other through rivate negotiations

Witch hunt or not, I think making a public post does not help as much. Some users do not know what is happening and as I reiterated, sometimes people join in on issues that they might not fully aware about. We are regular users and we cannot speak for anyone’s mind. We can only do the same thing: DMing a mod if theres a problem. I sure have done that before

As well as that, and going a little personal here (forgive me): I am not possibly “tiptoing” in any way. Those who have known me very well throughout my 3-ish years here (as well as found my posts about my problem) know that I have a hard time wording my phrases and can be overwhelmed by my thoughts. In no way am I trying to be malicious by hiding my supposed assumption of you being dishonest. If you want a clearer answer: Im just saying something feels off to me, but it isnt you — it just unsettles me on how much should I trust a public criticism of the mods, looping back to my idea on why these shouldnt be public at all

And that loops back to the second paragraph: We all need the benefit of the doubt. As we can see, Ive been made an assumption of tiptoing/dodging by someone whom I never seen before. I think its in humanity to jump to conclusions about others and not see things from other perspectives, hence why this isnt the first time we users criticized WBO mods and have been so critical. Being a mod is hard, and so is being a user trying to report things. We need understanding and seeing why things occurred, not what-ifs and fundamental attribution error

Well, the problem isn't that things haven't gone anywhere in that one incident. It's a systematic issue, and the fact that the mod team is so slow is exactly what this post is meant to point out. I agree that we should give others the benefit of the doubt - the problem is that this is a large issue that has occurred several times, not just a single issue where the mods don't step in, going well beyond any reasonable doubt that this might be a couple moderators missing something once or twice. You assume that it's just frustration from reports not going anywhere, but please read my posts again - I'm trying to point out a larger set of issues with the way the moderation team works.

In addition, I agree that we should avoid assuming things whenever possible.

Lastly, if you have a hard time wording your phrases, I would suggest you don't post that particular bit next time. Don't worry, I didn't think you were being malicious - sorry if I made you assume that, or assume that I thought you were tiptoing around thinking I was dishonest by censoring the names to avoid a witch hunt.

This has certainly blown up more than expected, haha. There is certainly action to be taken in some form or other, and is something we've discussed within the Moderation team too. But I don't think the details of the situation really need to be super publicised; we do a large number of our Moderation actions without needing to draw attention to them (there are some exceptions at times, but no-nonsence low-key moderation is usually the better option), including issuing formal warnings and punishments privately, and I don't believe this incident is one where we need to start being public either.

Ultimately, just because you cannot see something happening does not mean that there is no movement, and I wouldn't really say that we're "slow"; just sometimes taking our time to correctly assess a situation and address it appropriately, as we have learned in the past to do when appropriate. This specific incident is on my metaphorical desk now as it was escalated, and is something I'm due to review and finalise shortly. I believe Shindog has informed you already that I would follow up with you when he spoke with you, though I do also welcome you to discuss this specific situation and any concerns you have directly with me via my PMs or Discord DMs if preferred. I keep these open for everyone and try to get around to as many as possible (though I do admittedly miss a few at times!).

With regards to the remarks towards the Moderation team; we are woefully aware that Moderation is lacking in some areas, and is something we've discussed at length and are resolving internally, with a Moderation update due to come soon too. We've been open and honest about our struggles in the past (undersized team, influx of activity, unclear guidelines at times etc) and is something we're working on over time and slowly implementing changes to help with these, even if you can't directly see it. But it's certainly an uphill battle at times!

But I wouldn't want to undermine the efforts of the existing Moderation team either. It is a very thankless job with a lot of menial reviewing of reports, addressing spambots before anyone sees them, being a first point of contact for many enquiries etc. I will always be grateful for the team of volunteers that we have who give their time to do this, and I don't think it's a role that should be underestimated.

I will say as well that I don't think it's fair to imply that the team's struggles are a sign of corruption that we give former staff members a hall pass to ignore the rules however they like. All issues reported to us are taken and discussed seriously, and we don't discriminate either. We take actions that people don't necessarily need to see all the time and, in circumstances where we don't (as not every action someone takes necessarily warrants a formal warning), we take notes for reference going forward instead where applicable. If further transparency in how we moderate on our platforms is something people would be interested in, I think we can probably give a bit of insight into how we assess things? But I don't think it would present anything crazy and new that our Community Rules don't already suggest, haha.

In short though; we are looking at the incident and it's with me to finalise. My DMs are open if you want to discuss privately and always have been, but I will follow up with you regarding this anyway soon. If you have any wider feedback you'd like to provide, I'd love to hear it too so please do send it my way!

---

Hoshi-no-Yume FS | Wiki Profile | Twitter | Burst Collection | Osu! | MyAnimeList

Add me on your Switch!
3008-5546-8702

“It’s not what you say, it’s how you say it.” I’ve said that quite a bit in my young life. I feel that this ex-staff member does mean well, but I think he has been a bit over the top in some discussions. I think a word must be said to him, as he has been a bit aggressive before.

In the discussion of staff, I believe we have amazing staff members on the WBO. They DO step in when it’s needed, as this is a generally positive community, and not much moderation is always needed. This is a volunteer-run organization, and our staff did not have to volunteer their time for our community. There is always room to improve, and we’re all humans here so we are not perfect and will make mistakes sometimes. Thank you for your time and effort, staff team.

That is my contribution to this conversation, and again, thank you, staff, for the effort you all put into keeping the community positive.

So, recently there was an argument (although not many arguments were made, quite frankly) regarding the fairness of a ruleset for a tournament meant to test the competitive viability of a stadium. The drama all starts here:

https://imgur.com/OTPsGqR

Relatively inoffensive, right? A suggested change in ruling, because this user believed that using a different ruleset from what is normally used with the Takara Tomy standard stadium would lead to fairer testing results, and the existence of a second set of testing with those more common rules in place would instead depend on the results of testing with different rules.

However, this is not how the OP, the tournament host, saw it:

https://imgur.com/4N1nq02

Instead, they cherrypicked a portion of the post, and delivered the legendary line “Ideally this is the last thing I read from you ever again”, claiming the other user broke a rule, without explaining what said rule break was. They then proceeded to confirm that they would be keeping watch on whether or not pocket wall bounces were happening. On most other forums, this is when you would expect a moderator to step in for a blatant rule-break from the OP, breaking rule 1 on the forum: Treat other members well. However, this was not the case. The first commenter proceeded to thank the OP for letting them know that the wall bounces would be tracked, and asked what rule they broke. After this, the OP responded with a lengthy rant:

https://imgur.com/bXk29qc

To start with, they explained what they saw as a violation of the rules – calling the decisions inferior or skewed. In the context of a tournament, this would be the case, but seeing as this tournament was meant for testing first – testing (and thus fairness) first, personal jurisdiction second – it was more comparable to someone informing a tester that they had made a mistake and their tests could not be used – which is done quite commonly without the tester breaking any rules. Following this, the OP went in with a few more insults, stating that “no future communication” was even possible, and stating their belief of the commenter being an alt troll account. At this point, you would think that surely, a moderator would have to have stepped in and told the tournament host to knock it off with their rudeness. As of now, however, nothing has happened.

But why, I hear you asking? Why did the mods let the OP go so far? Well, there’s only one answer I've found – the user in question is an ex-staff member. This shouldn’t even be a problem – the rules explicitly forbid current staff from breaking the rules, for crying out loud - https://imgur.com/AmO11mT - but this ex-staff member clearly breaks the mold here.

So far, I am quite let down by what I have seen of the moderation team and ask them to do better. I implore all of you who have seen similar incidents occur to speak up on this thread about it.

Lastly - before any moderators think about removing this post, I would like to point out that this thread censors all names, and no rules have been broken. There is no direct insult here besides maybe pointing out violations of the rules (which would be quite amusing if doing so counted as breaking the rules, given the ex-staff member tried to do so themself), and rather than being a personal attack on the staff and moderators for doing their jobs, this is a general attack on them for not doing their jobs.

I’d also like to include this little gem from a previous set of posts:
https://imgur.com/6QgCnOz
Where a user calls out the ex-staff member for rudeness, and they claim to know the “actual” rules - which seem to include some sort of clause allowing them to break said rules, evidently. Also, the other user pointing out that the forums would be a mess without the ex-staff member micromodding is not a positive indicator towards the effectiveness of the moderation team.

I  usually stay out of this kind of thing but I can’t, The WBO has good staff members who do volunteer work.
I can’t exactly speak for them but based on my knowledge they step in, for spamming, harassment, inappropriate behavior, etc. and that I don’t know this ex-staff member but may I suggest the staff had other reasons? Perhaps they were busy with their lives. Or another reason I think the staff our fair and they don’t just give a special pass for an ex-member. Also the dispute ceased shortly after a mod showed up and things calmed down, I think you should have contacted a mod on the WBO or the discord. I don’t speak for the staff since I’m not one but I can tell you that there could be a different side like the 2 people went to private messages, I don’t think you should have made this thread if there could be more.

---

                       
   "From this moment on... You shall be know as Darth Vader" - Palpatine probably

I think you should have contacted a mod on the WBO or the discord.

I have reached out to staff on the WBO discord server several times, and the response I have received has been lackluster, to say the least.

I think you should have contacted a mod on the WBO or the discord.

I have reached out to staff on the WBO discord server several times, and the response I have received has been lackluster, to say the least.

Have you tried the actual site? As I’ve said before they have life’s of their own

---

                       
   "From this moment on... You shall be know as Darth Vader" - Palpatine probably