Posting restrictions. When does a site lose the fun because of them?

[Mongo Skruddgemire]

Since this could quickly threadjack the OP's thread here...

There's a herd mentality in 'failing to see the suck'. It's a cultural drift. Every so often we have to clamp down on every post being subjected to absolute scrutiny and the poster being told that it wasn't that much of an issue.

The place is there for people to vent and support each other. We do slacken it off every so often, but we don't announce it. Every so often we have to reign it in.

Fair enough, Mongo - where would you draw the line? Would you allow people to chase each other off the site? That's what happens without restrictions.

Rapscallion

Where would I draw the line?

As HYHYBT put it, there are a number of posts that are not sucky stories at all. Many of them start off with "This isn't really sucky but...". This leaves a thread starter that with the "Failure to see the suck" rule, leaves you with a thread that is very hard to participate in thanks to it.

Keeping with the whole concept behind CS, perhaps these posts should be moved to a different section than the Sucky Customers area. An area that allows for not only that sort of posting but for people to make open (yet still within the ToS agreement) comments regarding the thread. But that's just me.

As for failing to see the suck. What Raps said. You would get a mob mentality developing from time to time that ruins the fun for everyone and drives people away.

Fair enough, but from my point it can get very frustrating posting of late. I've changed little in my style of posting since I joined this site back in the previous iteration before the current one. For years my style of posts and comments raised nary an eyebrow and now all of a sudden I'm given an infraction for calling children "spawn" or other names that up until that point were used by others as well as myself. Since This current iteration of the site has come up I've had little to no moderator complaints towards my style of posting for many many years. All of a sudden I've attracted the "Naughty Boy finger of doom" several times in the past few months.

And to further the confusion even more, I started editing myself. I removed a few posts that fell under the FTSTS rule to prevent further ire. Damnedest thing was that someone put them back! Here we have a warranted crack down on what the moderators see as a problem, I try to remove some of my offending posts to comply and they are put back. Why is one FTSTS bad and another OK?

The confusion and the uncertainty is what has kept me from posting any new stories of late. I've taken to venting my stories on my blog where there is no ambiguity, no confusion. Just my moral and ethical subroutines which dictate my actions.

Mongo

[Jack]

Is FTSTS ever OK? I posted what I thought was a harmless one, being unaware of the FTSTS rule anyway as I post on so many forums I forget who has what rules sometimes. Someone posted a very bare, factual story on CS. It was a simple report of events posted in the Sucky Customers section and I couldn't find any suckiness. Customer tried to cash payroll check with passport. Customer was told passport is not valid ID for payroll check cashing. Customer said someone had taken it at that store before. Customer was told that shouldn't have happened. Customer left. There was no elaboration on why this was sucky on anyone's part. I posted, saying that I couldn't seem to find the suck. There was no "flaming" or whatnot as ranted against in the site rules at CS. I never got an explanation from the OP, presumably because some mod removed my post. http://www.customerssuck.com/board/s...ad.php?t=64980 First couple of replies are speculations in reply to my later-removed post. I don't see this as failure to see the issue as described in Rapscallion's post -- it seems more like no issue posted at all. I would expect the same response if I posted a description of routine events at my workplace: So what?

I guess we aren't allowed to be confused anymore. Next time I'll remember to play along and say something about what a horrible person that guy is for trying to cash a check, clarifying the situation, and leaving without making a scene.

[Greenday]

...You REALLY got in trouble for calling children "spawn"? What else are children (besides parasites)?

I've for the most part stopped posting at CS. A lot more freedom to voice my opinion here. CS isn't too friendly to those who have an opposing opinion to the majority.

[Lace Neil Singer]

I can understand barring the use of the term "crotch fruit" for example, to describe a child, but what's wrong with "spawn"? Also, barring the word "brat" when you are describing a badly behaved child, seems a bit over the top. True, it's the parents' fault they are misbehaving, but I don't think it's a terrible word to use.

[BlaqueKatt]

There was no elaboration on why this was sucky on anyone's part. I posted, saying that I couldn't seem to find the suck. There was no "flaming" or whatnot as ranted against in the site rules at CS. .

I'd say due to the number of posters on CS not all of them are as eloquent in their writing styles as say Lupo or recovering kinkoid. Maybe the customer copped an attitude but the OP doesn't quite know how to express that-there are a few posters at CS that post like that-rather than "failing to see the suck" I just don't comment as I wasn't there-I will not "armchair quarterback" someone else's job. Would you fail to see the suck if someone posted:

Man, I just got a pay cut, I used to make a million dollars a year and have 6 months paid vacation a year. Now I only make 900,000.00 and only have 5 months vacation.

Maybe that wouldn't suck to you but it would to them. I've seen posters rant about how "unfair" their attendance policies are at their jobs, when they happen to have less draconian ones than I do(like 50x less draconian), so to me that wouldn't suck at all-it's subjective. All in all my job is pretty good, but I've had some really horrible ones and parts of my job do suck worse than dealing with customers-ones that I'm pretty sure I could "fail to see the suck" in 90% of the posts on CS, so I give the benefit of the doubt and say to myself "well that wouldn't be so bad for me to go through, but this person isn't me, so I can't judge them by my standards."

awww you got yelled at-I just got second degree burns on my foot, I deal with chemicals/pathogens DAILY that could put me in the hospital for months or kill me if mishandled(I handle Kcl daily-potassium chloride-stuff used for lethal injections, as well as Hcl or hydrochloric acid, e-coli H:0157, Clostridium botulinum(Botulism) , I've had a full bottle of pure Salmonella Typhii(bacteria that causes typhoid) spilled on me*). I have a lattice of burn scars on my arms from the past two years-average is about 4 burns a week-2-3 inches in length-ever burn yourself on an oven rack? Yeah that's pretty much a daily thing for me, part of the job. I really don't even notice it anymore.

Aww your AC went out, I spend 8-10 hours in a room with 95% humidity at 100 degrees F(38C) loading and unloading 3 liter bottles and racks of test tubes filled with liquid that has a MINIMUM temperature of 240 degrees F(115C).

It's not a pissing contest.

...You REALLY got in trouble for calling children "spawn"? What else are children (besides parasites)?

Did you really just call children parasites and think it's ok,(a parasite is a detriment to the host, I know people that would be dead if not for their children-myself included) some people actually love and cherish their children-and do not consider them equal to (as the dictionary defines the word) the eggs of water animals such as fish, amphibians, and mollusks, or offspring produced in large numbers.


*that was fun, bleach myself down and wait out the incubation period hoping I don't develop symptoms.

[Ree]

There are other threads for discussing the correctness of calling children spawn, so I hope this thread doesn't go down that road and off topic.
(For the record, though, Greenday, a "spawn" is not necessarily a parasite, and while it actually refers to the method of creation and birth, that word does have some rather negative connotations when it refers to children. So, yes, there is a rule against that particular term, because if we didn't clamp down on the borderline shit, the next thing we know, we have references to crotch droppings and vagina nuggets. I personally find that disgusting, as did others who reported those posts, hence the rule! Lace, I believe we didn't have any objection to the word "brat".)

On topic, though, we have no issue with someone politely asking for more details.

In the thread you linked to, Jack, if you had simply said, "I'm a bit confused and really don't quite understand what happened here. Could you fill in a few more details? How did the customer react? Were they shouting or rude, or anything?" I think that would have been seen as OK.

What you said, however was:

I can't seem to find the suck.

See the difference?

I know I can.

[Jack]

BlaqueKatt: I see what you mean there. That is a legitimate problem, lack of perspective. As I saw it, though, it wasn't that the situation couldn't be considered a Sucky Customer situation by my standards, but that I couldn't understand how it was a Sucky Customer situation from anyone's perspective. I did reply probably too briefly as Ree quotes and I can see how a mod could take this as less well-meaning than it really was. I meant it to have no implications -- saying nothing more than what Ree suggested I say, in less words. But I guess it's my job to communicate clearly.

I do wish that if CS is going to hold such posts to standards as to how far we have to pad the question "How is this sucky?" for it to be polite enough, we should have criteria. :P

[Ree]

I do wish that if CS is going to hold such posts to standards as to how far we have to pad the question "How is this sucky?" for it to be polite enough, we should have criteria. :P

Here's a thought.
Use common sense. Post comments in the manner that you wish others to post to you.

The freakin' CS rules are already a mile long because things needed to be spelled out for people and criteria established.
Do we really need to start spelling out things such as this as well?

[Jack]

What the rules have become is ridiculous already, true. I don't know what else there is to do, though, if we're going to judge each FTSTS post individually. "Common sense" makes sense at first, but what happens when someone thinks that a post is fine because they wouldn't mind someone saying it to them that way, they post it, and someone doesn't like it anyway? When I posted what I did, it didn't seem improper to me. I didn't spend much time at all considering my phrasing and whatnot before posting, though, so I'm sure that didn't help -- it's just that I didn't purposefully mean anything by it.

I think I just have overinflated faith in concise speech and writing, and underestimate the need for such softening of language in society. One of those people skills to work on.

[Ree]

What the rules have become is ridiculous already, true. I don't know what else there is to do, though, if we're going to judge each FTSTS post individually. "Common sense" makes sense at first, but what happens when someone thinks that a post is fine because they wouldn't mind someone saying it to them that way, they post it, and someone doesn't like it anyway?

Once again...that's what the moderators are for.

Just let us do our job and stop taking offense when we step in and interpret the rules when members fail to do it on their own.

Just because we step in and remove a post and call the member on it, stop getting personally affronted and think about what's been said for the next time.

One post removal doesn't mean you're getting banned from the site.
If you are continually receiving PM's and having posts deleted, then I think you have a reason to feel there is a problem.

[Jack]

Sounds good. I hope it doesn't seem like I'm throwing a fit over one little mod action. I don't do like that. I am going on quite a lot for one incident, I know, but that's because it caught me off-guard as I hardly ever imagined there was anything at all wrong with it, and I'm trying to understand to prevent a next time. Thanks for the help.

[blas87]

I think there is nothing fun about a site that is intended for venting, where you come home from a bad day at work, post about it, hoping to at least get some sympathy or someone to read it and understand you and feel for you, but you log back on to see your replies and even if it's just one person nitpicking at your post or playing "Devil's Advocate" or failing to see the suck, it still sucks.

The nitpicking was getting out of control. People were coming up with just about any reason to justify a customer's bad behavior, or nitpicked at things that the OP may have done wrong. That's just upsetting and cruel.

Ree said it best, treat posters the way you want to be treated. I know I haven't been a model poster and I won't pretend to be, but even I have gotten upset at some of the nitpicking and questionings of my threads in the past and recently.

I don't want to steal the thread, but it irks me to no end that people are still giving me the "You should be happy you have a job" (that one isn't so recent, thankfully I haven't heard that one from another member AFAIK in a while) or "Wah wah, you're making extra money, what is your problem?" when I bitch about overtime or our bonuses being shorted or perks being taken away. I have every right to bitch about working too much and not getting the benefits I used to just as much as others can bitch about being laid off or having their hours cut. Can you imagine the flack (not to mention probably infractions or PMs from mods) if I were to stomp into someone's thread about being laid off or cut to part time and said "Wahh wahh you get extra time off, what's your problem?"

I don't see it as being overly restrictive. You can politely ask the OP for clarification if you don't understand the story or you can't personally see where the suck lies. Or an even better idea....if you find yourself rolling your eyes at what a member is venting about, then just stay out of the thread and keep your two cents to yourself if you can't stop yourself from nitpicking at them or splitting hairs with them, unless of course, you are here where debating isn't frowned upon.

Perhaps those who are against the "FTSTS" rules haven't had their posts nitpicked or questioned to death yet.

[Red Panda]

I find it odd that being consise and nondescriptive is okay for the sucky story, but stating that you don't understand requries clarifying that you also love the poster and beliveve he 10000% correct and is wonderful just to avoid hurting feelings. I think if somebody makes a pointless post or a bad post its not up to other posters to spare his feelings. If a story has no suckiness then that should be pointed out. Jack was in no way rude, his responce was completly neutral.

[HYHYBT]

So, yes, there is a rule against that particular term, because if we didn't clamp down on the borderline shit, the next thing we know...

I don't quite understand: how is it less troublesome to remove even borderline cases than it would be to remove only that which is clearly offensive?

As for your example to Jack: you say we're allowed to ask for more details, but it appears we're *not* allowed to ask the one question that's relevant, which is "what makes this behavior sucky?" If I were to post, for example, "A guy came through the Drive-Thru today and ordered a Big Mac meal, and his passenger seat was full of trash" with no more information, as a sucky customer story, would it not be fair to ask what was sucky about that, rather than having to guess at what it might be as you have Jack doing in your example?

I still see no rational way drinking a non-water beverage while excercising could be considered sucky. True, the person doing so isn't getting the full benefit of the excercise, but that's the only effect, and it's only on themselves. They're not being rude or demanding of anyone, they're not damaging the equipment, or anything else. So what's the harm in asking how this is sucky? It's possible, I suppose, that there really WAS a good reason, but we'll never find out now because the OP did not include one and asking for it is not allowed.

Actually, your last post says quite a lot: you first say "use common sense," but then say the reason the rules are a mile long is that "things need to be spelled out for people and criteria established." You cannot spell out common sense, and the attempt to do so is exactly why the rules have grown so long that nobody can really remember them all anymore. You spell out far too much, not too little. What was wrong with mostly stepping in to stop things when they started getting out of hand, rather than adding more and more conversation-squelching rules in a vain attempt to make it impossible for one ever to go that way? Posts (of many different types) which are, in themselves, innocent are barred because they *might* lead to trouble later on... but that only means that the innocent posts are now themselves considered trouble.

(I cannot even *find* the current CS rules, unless the years-old post of them has been edited. Didn't there used to be a link in the button bar across the top, along with "home" and "user CP" and so forth? And it would be very helpful if, when you do change them, you would mark the new parts: something like "added 6-22-10: you cannot type and chew gum at the same time," example chosen because I'm terrible at coming up with good examples)

And yes, this does sound very much like an overreaction to having a single post removed. All I can do is ask that you trust that it's not: that plus the subject being brought up by someone else provided, at about the same time, both the push and the opportunity to speak on things that have been bothering me for years, that's all. For that matter, it has nothing to do with my taking a break from CS for a while again: I *still* cannot read that site without losing too much time, and too much of it puts me in a foul mood. Fratching is different: there are only a handful of new threads a day anyway, and it doesn't (usually) give the impression that the human race is a race to the bottom.

Edited only to add that when I began typing this, Ree's 10:47 post (the one starting off recommending the use of common sense) was the last in the thread.

[blas87]

For the record, I don't expect sunshine and rainbows in all of my posts, but I will admit that it feels nice to know that someone feels for you and someone has your side and your back. Especially when everyone in your day to day life is probably nitpicking and questioning you to the point of wanting to bash your head into a concrete wall, it feels damn good to feel like someone somewhere cares about you.

No one is obligated to agree with me or offer me cookies or booze or puppies (well, puppies maybe). But it's very discouraging to see that certain topics get tons of support, others get nitpicked because it's the opposite of what may be going on in the world.

The failing to see the suck or nitpicking, as I said before, got out of control. It was never said that no one was allowed to ask questions, although it's not polite to say "Where's the suck I don't get it?", you could always say "I don't exactly understand why the customer got so upset" because not everyone is always 100% clear in their posts. A lot of us post right before bed or right when we wake up, or maybe we're so drained we can't even type correctly or explain something thoroughly.