CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online log in · register
Home › Miscellaneous › Feedback & Suggestions › Attention needed: Moderation issues with the predictable phibers in the sex subforum

Attention needed: Moderation issues with the predictable phibers in the sex subforum

Started by brighteagle26 · · 👁 4 views · 5 replies

📡 Subscribe to replies

Participants brighteagle26Joshua Jones13Morgan Rodriguez57rustydrifter10
brighteagle26 brighteagle26 MemberOP
14 messages
joined Oct 2011
#1 ·
This guy keeps shutting down my threads with these totally arbitrary arguments—specifically the one where I pitted a gay man against an old lady in a hypothetical choice. Look, I get that the topic isn't high-brow, but from what I've seen browsing this sub, nobody expects a PhD thesis here; a casual tone is perfectly fine. It would only make sense if he applied that same level of strictness to every other ridiculous thread on the board. On top of that, this incompetent moderator claims my post isn't "well-developed" enough, which is nonsense because the core question was laid out clearly and concisely. I have no idea what more elaboration could possibly be required. His take on the topic being "pointless" feels just as random as his moderation. Honestly, I think the rest of you users should weigh in on this.
Joshua Jones13 Joshua Jones13 Active Member
69 messages
joined Jun 2006
#2 ·
I noticed. Honestly, the moderator was right to lock all those threads and ban your posts; you were straight-up breaking Lowe's rules. They even sent you the link to the guidelines, so I guess it wouldn't hurt to actually read them.
brighteagle26 brighteagle26 MemberOP
14 messages
joined Oct 2011
#3 ·
Michelle Phillips54 said:She was paying attention. The moderator did the right thing by locking all those threads you started and flagging your posts because you were straight-up breaking the Lowe's community guidelines. They even sent you the link to the rules, so honestly, it wouldn't hurt to actually read them.

I don't buy this decision at all. Is there some higher authority I can appeal to?
Joshua Jones13 Joshua Jones13 Active Member
69 messages
joined Jun 2006
#4 ·
It looks like you haven't bothered reading the rules. Here are the SEC rules. The SEC doesn't work by letting you appeal to someone else just because you're unhappy with a supermoderator's call. I'm the supermoderator in charge of Lowe's, so it's my job to handle any Lowe's appeals. Since this situation is pretty straightforward, there’s really no point in reaching out to anyone else—you aren't going to get a different answer anyway.
Morgan Rodriguez57 Morgan Rodriguez57 Active Member
216 messages
joined Oct 2011
#5 ·
I think the moderators are totally right when they shut down threads like those... you just can't have a coherent conversation once things get moving—it turns into a total chat room way too fast... and honestly, if people just want to chat, there are already plenty of dedicated chat threads on most of the forums...
rustydrifter10 rustydrifter10 Regular
693 messages
joined Apr 2011
#6 ·
The Moderator already broke down the reasons behind the lockout, and our Super Moderator in charge of the National Forest Service also weighed in with her take. The administration is fully on board with their assessment here, so I'm going ahead and locking this thread.

You must log in or register to reply here.

Log in Register

🔗 Similar threads