Too diligent mods?
...
| |
Anonymous comments allowed.
201 comments displayed.
#4
-
miscarriage (10/29/2013) [+] (120 replies)
All the mods got assigned different time periods to go through and flag **** images.
Example: "you're assigned August 2011."
stickied by drulludanni
Example: "you're assigned August 2011."
#7
-
I Am Monkey (10/30/2013) [-] We're supposed to go through old posts and flag them. Nobody gets banned for flagging posts before September 2013. Admin wants us to clean up old posts too. We're assigned different months to sort through. (e.g; I have April 2011) It's an extraordinarily painstakingly process. We have to literally go through every single post and comment made. Another way to police old posts is to just search something like "boobs" and flag the thousands of soft-core porn pics posted by thumb whores long ago. You'd really be surprised how many front page posts there used to be consisting of only "here's boobs, thumbs for more".
#11 to #7
-
evilanakie (10/30/2013) [-] what about stuff on peoples profiles
i dont want the little thing i have going on to stop any time
i dont want the little thing i have going on to stop any time
#169 to #11
-
newforomador (10/30/2013) [-] It's dumb, and from what I've heard from the mods I know, they don't agree with it, but the stuff posted on your profile can get flagged and get the commenter a 1 hour ban.
#104 to #7
-
livinglegacy (10/30/2013) [-]
Just search for "enjoy your ban" and "thumbwhore" and you'll get your job done in no time.
#12
-
anon (10/30/2013) [-] about an year ago i posted a **** picture to see what would happen.
I just checked and it's still there. It has tits, pussy and all.
don't ask me where I ain't telling no one. Come at me fag mods.
I just checked and it's still there. It has tits, pussy and all.
don't ask me where I ain't telling no one. Come at me fag mods.
#247 to #12
-
therealsuperderpy (10/30/2013) [-] It's going to get found eventually
We have to go through every single pic ever posted.
We have to go through every single pic ever posted.
#78
-
Faz (10/30/2013) [-] Some of these mods are full on retarded, ive seen stuff not even remotely **** get banned, for example this gif, it was banned by xxangelisxx ( ****** username mate) OH NO A GIRL! A GIRL IN A GIF?? That is a ******* t-shirt wore by women all over the world and the gif is in no way sexual. This site is turning into amishjunk.
#88 to #78
-
xxangelisxx (10/30/2013) [-] Sweetheart, being rude won't help you. I didn't invent the rules, so, here's the list of things that can get flagbanned. I did not invent these rules and all I do is follow them.
This site isn't what it used to be and people should get used to it. Many things that were so-so okay or just okay just won't fly anymore.
If people could simply abide the rules and read before shouting ''injustice'', it would be nice.
Regarding complaints about new rules - address admin himself, not the mods. We are not responsible for the new rules, we simply try to keep the site in order.
This site isn't what it used to be and people should get used to it. Many things that were so-so okay or just okay just won't fly anymore.
If people could simply abide the rules and read before shouting ''injustice'', it would be nice.
Regarding complaints about new rules - address admin himself, not the mods. We are not responsible for the new rules, we simply try to keep the site in order.
#93 to #91
-
xxangelisxx (10/30/2013) [-] Trust me, some of the new rules seem ridiculous even to the mods and people have been banned for less.
Please do try to understand our side as well. I understand that these sudden, new rules are really frustrating and cause a lot of chaos and misunderstanding.
This certain gif was unflagged though, BUT, I've seen other moderators [higher level than my feeble self] flag genitals drawn in Paint, I'm not kidding. Those comments were not unflagged and users served the 1 hour ban.
What I'm trying to say is, the new rules currently are pretty vague and it is hard to understand the extent of them from both sides.
![Trust me, some of the new rules seem ridiculous even to the mods and people have been banned for less.
Please do try to understand our side as well. I understand that these sudden, new rules are really frustrating and cause a lot of chaos and misunderstanding.
This certain gif was unflagged though, BUT, I've seen other moderators [higher level than my feeble self] flag genitals drawn in Paint, I'm not kidding. Those comments were not unflagged and users served the 1 hour ban.
What I'm trying to say is, the new rules currently are pretty vague and it is hard to understand the extent of them from both sides.](http://static1.fjcdn.com/comments/Trust+me+some+of+the+new+rules+seem+ridiculous+even+_10c1c53284968069452180063b1973f1.jpg)
Please do try to understand our side as well. I understand that these sudden, new rules are really frustrating and cause a lot of chaos and misunderstanding.
This certain gif was unflagged though, BUT, I've seen other moderators [higher level than my feeble self] flag genitals drawn in Paint, I'm not kidding. Those comments were not unflagged and users served the 1 hour ban.
What I'm trying to say is, the new rules currently are pretty vague and it is hard to understand the extent of them from both sides.
#98 to #93
-
Faz (10/30/2013) [-] Thank you for being reasonable, its just these new rules are stupid enough without them having to be followed to a ridiculous extent, the amount of movie/tv show "gore" that ive seen flagged is beyond stupid, the scene from Indiana Jones, raiders of the lost arc where the nazi guys face melts off got flagged....its bloody wax!
#101 to #98
-
xxangelisxx (10/30/2013) [-] No problem.
Well, a large part of the moderators are new and I believe you about some stuff being flagged wrong. Don't worry, they get their share of scolding and lessons.
Well, a large part of the moderators are new and I believe you about some stuff being flagged wrong. Don't worry, they get their share of scolding and lessons.
#106 to #101
-
Faz (10/30/2013) [-] I've seen level 3 moderators and higher flag totally sfw stuff, the problem with most of the mods is that they are power mad, they have been given this ability to flag images and now go out of their way to flag images that are sfw almost as if there is some sort of flag quota all mods have to meet...there isn't one is there?
#108 to #106
-
xxangelisxx (10/30/2013) [-] No, there is no certain amount.
Ehhh, flagging is up to every mod himself/herself, we can't really control what others do, even less if the other mod is a higher level than we are.
Ehhh, flagging is up to every mod himself/herself, we can't really control what others do, even less if the other mod is a higher level than we are.
#110 to #108
-
Faz (10/30/2013) [-] Like the post a couple of days ago said, we need mods for the mods, or a system where when an image is flagged by one mod it goes to a holding page where other mods will see it and then flag it as **** or pass it as fine, the current system is messed up and will continue to be if random people over the internet are given the ability to do this stuff.
#111 to #110
-
xxangelisxx (10/30/2013) [-] Higher level mods currently try to do the unflagging stuff if something is flagged seriously wrong. Maybe the system just needs time.
#197 to #111
-
masterofanon (10/30/2013) [-]
is one mod able to unflag what a different mod wrongly flagged? Like is there a system of checks and balances?
#198 to #197
-
xxangelisxx (10/30/2013) [-] Yes, other mod can unflag something flagged by another mod. The ban in that case is reversed and the image/gif is visible again.
#141 to #140
-
xxangelisxx (10/30/2013) [-] I wasn't a part of the mods back then either, so. I can't really be blamed for the current rules existing.
#142 to #141
-
gwenisghey (10/30/2013) [-] they were nazi-tier before me and some others came in and convinced phan to appeal to addy about certain rules. that was all us
#145 to #143
-
gwenisghey (10/30/2013) [-] also youre in the wrong on this one. just cos she has cleavage doesnt make it **** , if thats not the focus or main point of the image
#146 to #145
-
xxangelisxx (10/30/2013) [-] I already admit that it was wrongly flagged and the gif was unflagged by another moderator. The rules are so vague and I have seen people get banned for less.
#151 to #146
-
gwenisghey (10/30/2013) [-] so have i. thats why we have to take **** into our own hands
#107 to #88
-
iceholder (10/30/2013) [-] While I agree that he was quite rude there, I can see where he's coming from.
Having mods is nothing new, and, yes, mods are there to interpret, follow, and reinforce the rules. However, I've noticed on Funnyjunk that, while the majority of images flagged and banned are usually well within the guidelines of pictures to ban, some seem to have been chosen simply because they fit only part of one of the guidelines. To be fair, more often than not they're pictures that include bikinis and/or cleavage so it's really only the first two rules there that I feel get abused. The rest make absolute sense, though I do believe a lot of morbid channel stuff has been getting flagged for gore, and, well, what good's the channel then, eh?
Anyways, that picture he posted, for instance, contains cleavage, so I can see where it would break the second rule there. However, the full rule states that the focus should be or mostly be on the cleavage, which is not the case with the image - instead, the focus is on what the girl is doing, and her reaction to it.
I am glad to see the mods are following and enforcing the rules, I get that there are more flags and offensive content than even the current mods can handle, and I understand that not everyone is perfect - nor should they be - but some times the pictures that get flagged just don't make sense, or seem like someone gut-banned rather than thought the ban through.
At the rate we're going, **** is simply going to be the 'mature' part, rather than the 'porn' part. Which wouldn't be too bad, but it would need renaming.
Having mods is nothing new, and, yes, mods are there to interpret, follow, and reinforce the rules. However, I've noticed on Funnyjunk that, while the majority of images flagged and banned are usually well within the guidelines of pictures to ban, some seem to have been chosen simply because they fit only part of one of the guidelines. To be fair, more often than not they're pictures that include bikinis and/or cleavage so it's really only the first two rules there that I feel get abused. The rest make absolute sense, though I do believe a lot of morbid channel stuff has been getting flagged for gore, and, well, what good's the channel then, eh?
Anyways, that picture he posted, for instance, contains cleavage, so I can see where it would break the second rule there. However, the full rule states that the focus should be or mostly be on the cleavage, which is not the case with the image - instead, the focus is on what the girl is doing, and her reaction to it.
I am glad to see the mods are following and enforcing the rules, I get that there are more flags and offensive content than even the current mods can handle, and I understand that not everyone is perfect - nor should they be - but some times the pictures that get flagged just don't make sense, or seem like someone gut-banned rather than thought the ban through.
At the rate we're going, **** is simply going to be the 'mature' part, rather than the 'porn' part. Which wouldn't be too bad, but it would need renaming.
#112 to #107
-
xxangelisxx (10/30/2013) [-] As I may repeat myself once again, I did not make the rules and they still are pretty vague for both mods and the users. A mod can't control the rules, we only try to get rid of things that do not suit the new rules. If I'm not mistaken, this gif was posted before September 2013 [pictures/gifs/content before September 2013 if flagged, WON'T get the user banned] and his user account was not banned.
For further explanations you should contact phanact or admin themselves.
![As I may repeat myself once again, I did not make the rules and they still are pretty vague for both mods and the users. A mod can't control the rules, we only try to get rid of things that do not suit the new rules. If I'm not mistaken, this gif was posted before September 2013 [pictures/gifs/content before September 2013 if flagged, WON'T get the user banned] and his user account was not banned.
For further explanations you should contact phanact or admin themselves.](http://static2.fjcdn.com/comments/As+i+may+repeat+myself+once+again+i+did+not+_133fd3eedd83cf7d7bcae2aa1fa666db.jpg)
For further explanations you should contact phanact or admin themselves.
#119 to #112
-
iceholder (10/30/2013) [-] Apologies for making you repeat yourself, walked away for a couple minutes before writing that, hit post and *bam* several replies before mine. AUGH.
Yes, I understand that you do not make the rules, which is why I said you guys merely follow and reinforce them. Honestly, I think the only vague ones are the Bikini and Cleavage ones. The rest seem pretty well defined, aside from possibly the whole gore thing as I mentioned.
I do see that the image was posted before the Sept 2013 mark, and I understand that he would not have gotten banned for it, nor does it seem to have stayed flagged (or flaggable, not sure if the image itself is flagged or if just that instance of it is) due to it presently being there. I do find it silly, though, that it could have possibly gotten him banned had it been posted afterward.
As you said, though, it's a matter to take up with the Admin. I just felt that you should hear the argument from someone that didn't simply go full retard with their comment, though, in hindsight, you probably already have plenty of times.
Yes, I understand that you do not make the rules, which is why I said you guys merely follow and reinforce them. Honestly, I think the only vague ones are the Bikini and Cleavage ones. The rest seem pretty well defined, aside from possibly the whole gore thing as I mentioned.
I do see that the image was posted before the Sept 2013 mark, and I understand that he would not have gotten banned for it, nor does it seem to have stayed flagged (or flaggable, not sure if the image itself is flagged or if just that instance of it is) due to it presently being there. I do find it silly, though, that it could have possibly gotten him banned had it been posted afterward.
As you said, though, it's a matter to take up with the Admin. I just felt that you should hear the argument from someone that didn't simply go full retard with their comment, though, in hindsight, you probably already have plenty of times.
#176 to #175
-
xxangelisxx (10/30/2013) [-] I listened to gwen who advised me to try to make people understand this, but, as I see, that was a bad advice.
#233 to #229
-
hillbillypowpow (10/30/2013) [-]
Better yet, a big picture of Blaze in a cop uniform over the frontpage.
#135
-
boxofwonderz (10/30/2013) [-] Vent/Opinion here. DAMNIT DAMNIT DAMNIT WHY CAN’T I GO A SINGLE DAY, A SINGLE GOD DAMN DAY WITHOUT A POST ABOUT ******* MODS! FUNNYJUNK IS MADE FOR THE GODDAMN FUNNY! ITS IN THE NAME ************* . POSTS ABOUT MODS DOING **** IS NOT FUNNY. “Softcore is not porn” ******** JUST POST ON ANOTHER WEBSITE OR **** IF YOU DON’T ******* LIKE IT. No offense intended to OP (except that he/she is a faggot), it is just that another front page "old funnyjunk was better/mods are **** /banbanban" post finally sent me over the edge. If you want funnyjunk to be better, just post something that fits the guidelines and make it funny/cool/random/ ************* . Thank you and have a good day .
#144 to #135
-
drulludanni [OP](10/30/2013) [-] its not that i find the mods stupid or anything its just i thought it was weird that they were going about banning 2 year old pictures that were probably lost forever anyways
#191
-
bluenebula (10/30/2013) [-] About a month ago I was banned for this picture.
www.funnyjunk.com/user/thk/602#602
www.funnyjunk.com/user/thk/602#602
#189
-
yuukoku (10/30/2013) [-] I thought that when a law was enacted, the times in which that law was transgressed prior to when that law was passed were simply disregarded and could not be brought against you in court. Shouldn't the same thing apply here?
Anyway, all the funny .gifs and pics usually have some kind of sexual jokes or mature content in them, so I guess it's time to move to 4chin.
Anyway, all the funny .gifs and pics usually have some kind of sexual jokes or mature content in them, so I guess it's time to move to 4chin.
#181
-
gepetto **User deleted account** (10/30/2013) [-] ones who want to impress each other in amassive circlejerk
#130
-
kingbulbasaur ONLINE (10/30/2013) [-] Isn't phanact like 16 or something? I thought you had to be 18 to have an account
#123
-
warwolfrider ONLINE (10/30/2013) [-] What kind of person goes to 2 year old content to find a flagged image?
#124 to #123
-
drulludanni [OP](10/30/2013) [-] i recieved a notification that my comment had been flagged lel
#115
-
FligFlag (10/30/2013) [-] This site is so **** now. It's the internet, not school, I can't understand why every slight discrepancy is punished, I've see pictures of cartoon bums and trees that look like genitals banned.
It's the internet. What does admin think this site is?
It's the internet. What does admin think this site is?
#95
-
rdnyan (10/30/2013) [-] My image got flagged for posting a cropped picture from the same content.
www.funnyjunk.com/4chans+pony/funny-pictures/4863495/
The content is still there, yet i has been banned, i don't care about the lenght of ban or **** , but do your job good if you're planning on banning on such a ************* stupid reasons.
www.funnyjunk.com/4chans+pony/funny-pictures/4863495/
The content is still there, yet i has been banned, i don't care about the lenght of ban or **** , but do your job good if you're planning on banning on such a ************* stupid reasons.
#90
-
thesoulless (10/30/2013) [-] Admin tells them to do that in order to get rid of unsafe images. You don't get banned for it, so why the **** are you bitching?
