Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


eueuq last won the day on April 14 2019

eueuq had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

184 Bronze 2

About eueuq

  • Rank
    Loli Molester
  • Birthday 07/09/1999

Personal Information

  • Location
    Loli chamber

Recent Profile Visitors

959 profile views
  1. 3x3's are a good way of showing off your favorite things and spark discussion. I originally made ones for my favorite anime, but the idea can be applied to anything. I will post all of mine as an example: Here is a template if you would like to make one yourself:
  2. I have not played Tera in a very long time. I stopped playing around the time Blade & Soul came out and played that for a bit. Eventually, I got into Black Desert, but have not played that in a while either. All three were a fun time, but I do not have the time or patience for MMORPGs these days. If you get a good amount of people from GFL to form a guild, I would consider reinstalling for nostogia's sake.
  3. I agree that this should be a feature added to the forums for now. In the long term, I believe a better solution would be to get rid of member applications entirely, making it so signing up for the forums automatically grants you member status. This would remove the need for member accepters entirely and greatly simplify the process for players. We practically give member to everyone anyways so it would not be much different aside from it being fully automated.
  4. This is all a conversation for another day/within PMs. As much as I would like to go back and forth on this, I do not want to derail this thread any further. However, if you want my response, here (if you plan on responding back, do it elsewhere please): I do not think rule 1 would apply at all, but it could fall under rule 0 technically. However, rule 0 is not (and should not be) enforced by moderators due to it being self-enforcing by nature. This is the problem within this situation since I assume a vast majority of the user base would want people who spoil media to be punished in some fashion. I do not have an issue with it being a rule and enforced compared to rule 0 simply because it is pretty clean-cut as to what the scope of it is if the rule is written correctly (I will mention this below). I was giving my opinion on one aspect of moderation, specifically who should be doing the moderating. While semi-off-topic, it still pertains to the conversation to some degree. As I said above, though, I am trying to move the conversation elsewhere for the sake of keeping this thread from derailing any further. This suggestion is in relation to all communication platforms, not just Discord. While you could technically make a channels of communication for spoilers like a spoiler channel, I do not think this is the best approach, especially when we already have built in spoiler features on Discord and the forums that could be utilized to hide actual spoilers (with warnings alongside it, of course). I also do not think those channels would ever be used. Most people going around spouting spoilers are not doing it with good intentions in mind to begin with and would just say them wherever they please (AKA not exactly solving the problem). One thing I want to bring up is this: What exactly would be the scope of this new rule? For example, if three months from now, I send spoilers for the new Avengers movie, would that be punished? How about if I spoil some movie that came out 20 years ago? With this rule, I believe there needs to be some form of "statute of limitations" established since discussion about any form of media could be considered spoiling for those who have not observed it, regardless of how old it may be. I personally believe it should be three months from the time that it comes out for most people, but I would like that to be discussed more.
  5. I would have no issue with this, but I have seen way too many situations involving non-mods with moderation powers (i.e. DLs, TAs, etc.) where they did not follow guidelines and went unquestioned (you should know at least of one of those situations involving a certain TA and the shoutbox). If they want to moderate, they can take the time to apply and get trained properly just as everyone else has to. Yes, because that is how everyone else has to deal with it. Your job is to handle your division as a DL, not moderate. Just because you have moderation powers, it does not mean you should use them, especially while untrained (i.e. enforcing rules that do not exist). If you believe mods are inactive/do not do their job correctly, then you would apply. I also have no idea what loli pictures have to do with this conversation. The mod TL acts after-the-fact (if at all) while rules are a constant effect. Also, I would like to see a TL try to manage a moderation team without any ruleset in place. I am sure enforcement would be very consistent and the team itself would be very stable. I do not dictate any of this and my opinion does not matter to anyone so it means next to nothing. It is just how I think it should be done and is semi-off-topic. If you want to moderate poorly, go ahead since no one will stop you.
  6. A majority of our rule set is made up of things that should be "common sense". Do they not have value in the form of a rule and can be removed just because it is "common sense"? Keep in mind we have rules and punishment guidelines for a reason. If you start making exceptions and enforce rules that are not within the public realm, then moderators lose their credibility and the whole system collapses. Rules are put in place to restrict moderators from acting outside of their scope (i.e. what you described). It informs users of what they can and cannot do, even if it is "common sense". Anything outside of this is not a "good practice" and will continue to be a problem if moderators are allowed to moderate in this manner. I will also take this time to remind you that you are DL. I personally do not think DLs (or any rank outside of the explicit moderation team) should be doing moderation work aside from their own division's boundaries since that is not their job.
  7. On occasion, people have decided to post spoilers for a movie or show within our communication platforms. More recently, it is with the new Avengers movie. While I do not care at all about the new Avengers movie nor do I believe any spoilers someone could send would be something I care for, it is clearly something most people have a problem with. Moderators are semi-moderating these instances which should not be the case since it is not in the rules nor is it in the punishment guidelines. Solution: Add an additional rule. This additional rule would be applied to Teamspeak and Discord as well. It would be punished in the same way that inappropriate content is (supposed to be) punished. If someone can come up with a modification of the Inappropriate Content rule that would include spoiling media, that would also be a solution. However, I could not think of a way to word it correctly alongside the already existing criteria.
  8. I am making this because I have asked countless times to remove the CallAdmin from shoutbox. Nothing has been done. It does nothing but spam the shoutbox with messages, primarily with useless messages from TTT. I have seen nothing but people complaining about its existence. Most servers have moved their own CallAdmin to Discord (TTT may even have this too, but I do not know). As far as GFLBot itself goes, I believe it can be repurposed in some way that is much less spammy and makes it actually useful to have around. It spamming admin calls wastes its potential in my opinion. Please save us from this nightmare.
  9. @Korowa Nothing Maybe I am lying, maybe I am not, the world may never know
  10. I am currently writing up the "Moderation Manifesto" dictating just about everything there is to moderation. Whenever I finish it, I will post it on the forums under the moderation suggestions. It will be addressing the issue that this thread is about along with every other issue the moderation team is currently facing. However, I will respond accordingly for the time being: As you know @Liloz01, I am against the proposed changes based on the precedent it sets for the future. Direct censorship of speech is a slippery slope. This time it is slurs and insults. Next time it will be swearing. The time after that it will be anything deemed offensive. This is the pattern that has shown up time and time again at most instances of censorship. This rule would likely not even affect me very much, but others I often talk to and a large portion of the community would be affected. Regardless, this is a matter of principal. However, I do not think nothing should be done about this problem. Being more specific on current rules (like Private Matters as you did) is perfectly fine. I disagree with the proposed wording, but I will think about coming up with an amended version of the rule myself, or at least explain how it should be enforced (it will be in my Moderation Manifesto at least). As a side note, I believe GFL needs a Community Guidelines page. This would be globally recognized rules for all of GFL related servers and platforms. It would essentially act as a master rule encompassing all basic rules (such as the ones in our Discord). For example, if such a page existed, nearly all the rules in Discord could be reduced down to one rule: It would improve consistency across the "sub-communities" of GFL and establish GFL's core values. Rules on top of that should not conflict with said values. While this is potentially scary for me since something like the proposal this thread is based upon could be applied across all of GFL, not just Discord, but it is a risk I am willing to take for the sake of consistency. EDIT: I have been informed about this page (completely forgot it existed). This is outdated, buried away, and is not referenced anywhere to my knowledge. However, this is pretty much what I had in mind. This is a discussion that I believe needs to occur between Directors, DLs, TLs, SMs, and the community: What rules should be in the community guidelines? How harshly should they be enforced across all servers? Who would write said guidelines?
  11. Problems with Purge (in no particular order): The biggest problem with the Purge server that killed it from my perspective is launching it in the bugged, lagging state that was. It was practically unplayable for me because of this. I know this was a result of the server's CPU (or something along those lines; I do not remember at this point), but this honestly should have known or expected before release, meaning the release should have been pushed back until this problem was resolved. I still do not know if it has been solved since I do not exactly follow Purge news these days. Another problem I had was the rules. Part of the rules looked copy and pasted from 2016 while some of it looked new. Many rules contradicted each other. Some were repeated several times or just flat out unnecessary. Some were overly strict for no apparent reasoning behind them. The rules are not easily digestible (not a "new" Purge problem, but still one that remains after all these years, even after many people have suggested solutions). All around, the rules are just poorly written and inconsistent. One thing I tried solving with the DarkRP server back in the day was the economy. I tried doing this because the old Purge economy was massively broken and unbalanced. The same goes for this server. If you play for eight hours and know what you are doing, you practically gained all the money you will ever need aside from over-priced cosmetics or cars. A full analysis of each money source should have been completed before launch on how much money is gained, the costs of production, etc. and balanced in according to each other and the costs of all other items in the game including cars, cosmetics, and guns. On top of all of this was the wait time for the server. It was known well ahead of time that Purge was re-releasing which allowed the "hype" around it from Purge fan-boys to die down almost entirely. The server did surprisingly well in terms of population at first, better than I expected (I assume it was mostly nostalgia). However, this is how 95% of new GFL servers go; they are popular for a week and then no one cares. Sometimes it is the server's fault, other times it is just uncontrollable. I think we all know who is to blame this time around. Before launch, there should have been a legitimate staff team ready to go. The "beta" period should have went on longer since clearly there were still plenty of issues. The AAA model of releasing an incomplete/broken game, or server in this case, and then fixing over the next month or two after launch does not work in anyone's favor. It seems like others have covered most of the other problems with the server so I will not comment on those unless asked. Either way, this is a GFL management problem in general of letting stuff die out and then putting in the work after the fact when it is already dead and too late to turn around. I have seen this happen with way too many servers over time and I do not expect it to change any time soon. I have been actively trying to lower the requirements and standards for promoting server managers, but these situations make it hard for me to argue for this type of change. However, this is still a problem of DLs too, which did not help the situation with this server.
  12. What do you mean by this? If you mean adding rules to ban certain words from being said or whatever is deemed "toxic behavior", I strongly disagree. The type of precedent it would set is very dangerous and honestly will cause more problems than there are currently. We have already seen what that future entails with the actions of certain individuals and the introduction of certain bots. These already existing rules cover a lot of the problem, but are rarely enforced properly. It is a lack of enforcement problem, not a rule problem. I know since I wrote the rules essentially and gave all the tools the moderators would need in order to effectively do their job.
  13. Badges

    Made these approximately 2.5 years ago and no one wanted to use them apparently.
  14. I do not think the merge was the cause of nothing getting done. As you pointed out yourself when you resigned, you could not get stuff done because Directors were incompetent. It also does not help that the PR TL has been swapped out several times over the past couple months (Major Push -> You -> Quack (who is supposedly on break)). I do not know too much what PR did before this change, but I figured I would give a different perspective. Either way, probably for the best regardless just for the naming alone since the team was referred to as "PR/media" ever since the merge in my experience (was not supposed to be like this, but whatever).
  • Create New...