ZK - clarification on rules regarding the men's and women's community and user records

Nica said:Discussion regarding ZK... Please, if you feel like you still need to talk about this, just start a separate thread—it doesn't make much sense to let all those thoughts get lost in here. This specific topic should really just be for the smaller questions that only need a quick answer...

electricjackal55 The user said:First of all—good grief—what on earth are you doing with those instructions?...

Just some quick stats—off the top of my head—for the group that actually showed up to collect the cardboard...

The group of people supporting the movement includes stormyraven14, Morticia Addams, coppermarlin13, Tick, Beta Female, Diana something (sorry, I can't recall her handle), steelskipper5, jpk, Skate, Sadie, Jamie Davis17, and silvertiger11...
There might be more out there—honestly, I’m just typing this from memory...

Anti-Lyla, anti-Xena, and you—plus that other person with the mouse in their username, I can't quite remember the exact handle...

So, you actually went ahead and banned both steelskipper5 and Djepika—though I honestly can't wrap my head around why... Just tell me one thing: how do you people who claim to be against the gay community justify acting like such absolute clowns? 🍿

As for me, I’m strictly against that initiative—and honestly, I’m pretty much against anything being too gender-friendly... Please bring back the smileys... 🙂

And another thing—does anyone actually know what the new rules for the women's corner are now?...
If it were actually allowed... Go jump in a lake, honestly. Just get lost already. Between the insults, the mindless name-calling, and the constant ad hominem attacks... it’s just non-stop trolling everywhere you look...

Since when...?
I mean, have you actually read the wrap-up report, or are you just guessing about how those cards played out...?

Morticia Addams The user said:Why did Xena get banned?
I can get where they're coming from regarding Lyla—she definitely gave her all and played it fair—but as for Xena? I don't know... 🤔
Aside from her telling me to go screw myself—which, honestly, was pretty hilarious—it’s just not enough to warrant a ban... 😳😁

Kevin Mitchell20 The user said:What I was pointing out refers to the women's corner in general—where the kind of language I bolded can actually pass without getting flagged...

Morticia Addams said:Isn't it basically defined that the women's corner is almost entirely unmoderated?
I mean, isn't that what we fought for? 😬
And velvettrucker52 clearly stated at one point that things had spiraled out of control on this thread and that moderation would be tightened from that moment on.

It's honestly laughable... every few months we end up tripping over the same thing and it always ends the same way. I don't see anything special about this situation. 🤷

Kevin Mitchell20 said:Yeah, exactly—that's why I don't get the surprise, since that kind of language is perfectly legitimate in the women's corner. 😁

Well, yeah... freedom for everyone... always... everywhere... 😬

stormyraven14 said:Administration, please work with the women's corner mods and join forces to ban Xena.
True, more of "us" have received warnings than "them," but that's only because there were more of us and everyone jumped on Xena because she was the only one holding the line and trying to actually maintain a discussion. It isn't fair to punish her just because she spent practically half a day alone against everyone—every single person was provoking her simply because she was the only representative of "their" side, and she eventually cracked because she responded using language that was much more polite than "ours."

It’s not fair; you really have to consider the circumstances. I'll offer this: just give me her last warning instead, because one of my posts probably should have been labeled as an insult rather than trolling anyway, so I'd end up banned regardless. I'm not great at math, at least...

Anyway, Xena handled herself beautifully, she wasn't being insulting, and it feels like she just "fell" so that everything would look fair.

Please review the decision and rescind her warning.

thanks.

Kevin Mitchell20 said:What I was referring to is the women's corner in general, where the specific vocabulary I highlighted can usually slide by without anyone getting banned.

velvettrucker52 said:In the women's corner, a massive amount of stuff is allowed to pass through without any consequences.
And it absolutely does.

However, when the mods step in and tell you to tighten things up because a thread is about to face stricter moderation—which isn't something we issue every single day—it would be reasonable for you to take that to heart.
We typically drop those warnings when people start hurling nasty insults, or when participants or even just lurkers begin reporting posts for being offensive, blatant trolling, or simply being aggravating in other ways.

The women's corner is loosely moderated, but it can't be completely lawless. It just can't. Not if Anderlon has anything to say about it. Absolutely not.
You can get away with a lot more in the women's corner than in any other sub-forum on this site, but even there, you need to know when to pull back once you've been warned. I'm not suggesting you should tuck your tails between your legs and start writing like choirboys and choir girls, but the nasty insults and the trolling? That needs to stop.

To put it simply: for threads where we announce stricter moderation, we expect you to behave with the same decorum you’d use in any other part of the forum. The relaxed nature of the women's corner covers the banter, the occasional troll, the heated debates, and the general nonsense, but certain things are unacceptable even here. When a thread catches fire and everyone starts losing their minds, the moderators have to put down the drinks and step in. 😁

Jamie Davis17 said:Oh, please.
I mean, I guess this is probably the first time in months where we haven't been spiraling through endless debates about urban decay, swapping out bras every five minutes, or deep dives into eating habits, haircuts, weight, childbirth, breasts, or cellulite—you know, those threads where nobody ends up in a fistfight just because someone claimed an angel descended from heaven, sliced their breasts off live on camera, and showed off their cellulite while wearing a bra for two days straight.
The reason we aren't issuing warnings about stricter moderation for those topics is simply because there's never a thread where people get *this* worked up over, say, whether a dining room looks more chic or basic, or which big-box retailer we prefer shopping at.
Everything got so heated because, after what feels like forever, a massive wave of people decided to jump in. The view count is absolutely insane—we're sitting at 35,611 views right now—and suddenly, everything is intense and high-stakes.

So, how exactly are we supposed to calm down when the pressure valve has basically been shut off? And honestly, people need this outlet. Seriously, I've been reading posts from people I had almost forgotten even existed; folks from other subreddits have been popping in just to join the fray. Because it matters to them. And yeah, we don't agree, and most people actually had solid points to make.

There hasn't really been any extreme drama or whatever, so I'd say it was just spirited. Everything came out in the open, sure, but why shut the whole thing down? People are writing, a huge crowd is reading, the owner is happy, and the revenue is flowing in.

Jamie Davis17 said:Oh, please.
I mean, I guess this is probably the first time in months where we haven't been spiraling through endless debates about urban decay, swapping out bras every five minutes, or deep dives into eating habits, haircuts, weight, childbirth, breasts, or cellulite—you know, those threads where nobody ends up in a fistfight just because someone claimed an angel descended from heaven, sliced their breasts off live on camera, and showed off their cellulite while wearing a bra for two days straight.
The reason we aren't issuing warnings about stricter moderation for those topics is simply because there's never a thread where people get *this* worked up over, say, whether a dining room looks more chic or basic, or which big-box retailer we prefer shopping at.
Everything got so heated because, after what feels like forever, a massive wave of people decided to jump in. The view count is absolutely insane—we're sitting at 35,611 views right now—and suddenly, everything is intense and high-stakes.

So, how exactly are we supposed to calm down when the pressure valve has basically been shut off? And honestly, people need this outlet. Seriously, I've been reading posts from people I had almost forgotten even existed; folks from other subreddits have been popping in just to join the fray. Because it matters to them. And yeah, we don't agree, and most people actually had solid points to make.

There hasn't really been any extreme drama or whatever, so I'd say it was just spirited. Everything came out in the open, sure, but why shut the whole thing down? People are writing, a huge crowd is reading, the owner is happy, and the revenue is flowing in.

velvettrucker52 said:Look, I’m sorry, but this forum isn't really intended to be used for that. At least, not in this particular way.
If you're just looking for a place to vent and lash out at everyone, go find another hobby. If your only goal is to pick fights and turn every discussion into a forum brawl, then stop wasting our time.
The sheer number of reports coming out of this thread makes one thing crystal clear: most people involved in that outburst didn't find it nearly as entertaining as they thought they would.

Look, if you ignore the warnings and the polite requests to stay on track, locking a thread is a far superior option than handing out yellow cards or jumping straight to a ban. We’ve gone three days now without any interesting contributors because of this approach. Locking a topic for a few hours gives people a chance to cool off and reset; it ensures that by tomorrow morning, we're dealing with people who are seeing blue instead of seeing red.
Personally, I find this much more appealing than what we're currently stuck with.

Let me say this one more time: ZK cannot function without full moderation. It simply can't. Period. Neither the owner nor the admins would ever allow it to operate that way. We’ve tried to soften his stance as much as possible, but we’ve hit a wall—there isn't much more we can do. At the end of the day, this forum is private property, and the owner wants it moderated.

I’m honestly at a loss for what else to say about this topic. I mean it. We feel like we’ve hashed out every single possible angle over the last few months, but the idea of the women's corner acting as little more than an emotional pressure valve is a concept that remains incredibly difficult to swallow.
I’ll leave it to the mods and admins to weigh in. At this point, I really have nothing left to say.

coppermarlin13 said:Can someone please tell me how much longer the women's corner is going to allow people to insult, mock, and troll Catholics and the Catholic faith?

Why is this kind of communication being permitted in discussions? Do you plan on putting an end to this little "party" in the women's corner, just like you did with the political threads? Why are political topics treated as more important than the constant insults and trolling directed at religion?

If you don't intend to stop it, why not?

Furthermore, I reported this post yesterday: I had a feeling it would go unpunished (even though the author herself was ready to face sanctions), so I’m curious—why wasn't it? Why is that allowed while much more benign posts, such as these, get sanctioned instead?

Next, on that specific thread, volunteers and supporters of the marriage referendum petition are being called all sorts of derogatory names, like "Catholic fanatics," "idiots," and so on. And it just passes. Can we flip the script for once and see what happens if we start calling those against the petition similar names without getting banned?

And finally, despite being provided with links to rulings from the European Court of Human Rights which clearly state that gay marriage does not fall under those specific human rights protections, some users continue to push their own versions of fiction. Do you think you will ever put an end to this? Here are two examples: click and click.

Thanks,

silvertiger11 said:The other users gave you a perfectly clear answer. I personally corrected an inaccurate quote three separate times, yet you managed to ignore me completely.

It is true that the European Court of Human Rights interpreted the ruling to mean that gay marriage isn't guaranteed by the charter. That part is factual, because the legal definition of marriage is ultimately left to each individual signatory nation.

However, the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights explicitly states that marriage is a human right! Nowhere does it make a distinction regarding the genders involved. Marriage is equally accessible to all men and women.

If anyone deserves a penalty for trolling, it’s you and your crowd for constantly throwing out half-baked definitions just to bolster your own arguments. It’s the exact same thing with bringing up minority-majority status or political affiliations in every single thread.
What is the actual point of doing that? Those aren't valid arguments, and they shouldn't be repeated on every single page!

velvettrucker52 said:Look, I’m sorry, but this forum isn't really intended to be used for that. At least, not in this particular way.
If you're just looking for a place to vent and lash out at everyone, go find another hobby. If your only goal is to pick fights and turn every discussion into a forum brawl, then stop wasting our time.
The sheer number of reports coming out of this thread makes one thing crystal clear: most people involved in that outburst didn't find it nearly as entertaining as they thought they would.

Look, if you ignore the warnings and the polite requests to stay on track, locking a thread is a far superior option than handing out yellow cards or jumping straight to a ban. We’ve gone three days now without any interesting contributors because of this approach. Locking a topic for a few hours gives people a chance to cool off and reset; it ensures that by tomorrow morning, we're dealing with people who are seeing blue instead of seeing red.
Personally, I find this much more appealing than what we're currently stuck with.

Let me say this one more time: ZK cannot function without full moderation. It simply can't. Period. Neither the owner nor the admins would ever allow it to operate that way. We’ve tried to soften his stance as much as possible, but we’ve hit a wall—there isn't much more we can do. At the end of the day, this forum is private property, and the owner wants it moderated.

I’m honestly at a loss for what else to say about this topic. I mean it. We feel like we’ve hashed out every single possible angle over the last few months, but the idea of the women's corner acting as little more than an emotional pressure valve is a concept that remains incredibly difficult to swallow.
I’ll leave it to the mods and admins to weigh in. At this point, I really have nothing left to say.

electricjackal55 said:coppermarlin13, I already gave you my answer regarding all those complaints—you’re just trolling here just as much as anywhere else and acting like a total drama queen.

So, there isn't much left for me to say, other than silvertiger11 is absolutely right and you shouldn't try to shut him down.

Jamie Davis17 said:The whole point of a forum should be actual discussion.
If I wasn't being clear enough before, let me try to be more precise. I mean real discussions. Real debates, with arguments and actual back-and-forth. I get that mods have to hand out warnings and bans—and yeah, I felt bad when Xena's status changed, but then I read later that she had just accumulated too many points, so okay, fine.
Maybe for you, finding a topic and just venting about your kids or your pets counts as a "discussion," but please, let me suggest that it isn't everyone's idea of high-level debate.

Regarding the moderation itself, I don't really have anything to say. Things are just really heated right now, people are getting emotionally invested and arguing quite fiercely, and at the end of the day, there are less than 10 days left until those petitions wrap up, so this won't stay relevant forever (at least the part about the referendum request). So, I guess I'd just hate to see the whole thing boil over.

Jamie Davis17 said:The whole point of a forum should be actual discussion.
If I wasn't being clear enough before, let me try to be more precise. I mean real discussions. Real debates, with arguments and actual back-and-forth. I get that mods have to hand out warnings and bans—and yeah, I felt bad when Xena's status changed, but then I read later that she had just accumulated too many points, so okay, fine.
Maybe for you, finding a topic and just venting about your kids or your pets counts as a "discussion," but please, let me suggest that it isn't everyone's idea of high-level debate.

Regarding the moderation itself, I don't really have anything to say. Things are just really heated right now, people are getting emotionally invested and arguing quite fiercely, and at the end of the day, there are less than 10 days left until those petitions wrap up, so this won't stay relevant forever (at least the part about the referendum request). So, I guess I'd just hate to see the whole thing boil over.

Jamie Davis17 said:The whole point of a forum should be actual discussion.
If I wasn't being clear enough before, let me try to be more precise. I mean real discussions. Real debates, with arguments and actual back-and-forth. I get that mods have to hand out warnings and bans—and yeah, I felt bad when Xena's status changed, but then I read later that she had just accumulated too many points, so okay, fine.
Maybe for you, finding a topic and just venting about your kids or your pets counts as a "discussion," but please, let me suggest that it isn't everyone's idea of high-level debate.

Regarding the moderation itself, I don't really have anything to say. Things are just really heated right now, people are getting emotionally invested and arguing quite fiercely, and at the end of the day, there are less than 10 days left until those petitions wrap up, so this won't stay relevant forever (at least the part about the referendum request). So, I guess I'd just hate to see the whole thing boil over.

steelskipper5 said:They're missing.

And it isn't just happening in the women's corner—which, let's be honest, usually hosts much better discussions than the other subforums where people actually stay on topic.

The whole forum feels sterilized now.
Everything and anything gets banned—usually under the guise of "trolling."

velvettrucker52, you know exactly how I feel about bans, especially when they're slapped on just for trolling.
People label just about everything as trolling, and over the years, that's slowly killed off most decent discussions. Now, if you satirize someone's opinion, it's "trolling." If you caricature an idea, it's "trolling." And gradually, the conversation just dies.

Then, whenever something actually interesting comes up—when things get a bit intense—the loudest voices get silenced first. And suddenly, a heated, engaging debate becomes dull and uninteresting.

For three days straight, I was reading how one side was lying in one of these threads. But since most people on the other side don't realize it's a lie, it goes totally unchecked. Because lying isn't against the rules; only "trolling" is—whatever that even means.

I don't have much left to say. Not after everything that's happened since I got banned. For what?
The way this forum uses bans has gone way too far. But at this point, it's not even a problem anyone here can, knows how to, or wants to fix.