Satire isn't newsworthy. In addition, I think opinion pieces should be in it's own section with a stricter set of requirements.

There are way too many poorly written opinion pieces riddled with grammar mistakes and poorly researched content.

***The point isn't that the mods didn't do their jobs. It's that there doesn't seem to be any course of action taken against people who get caught abusing the system.***

That's because there are no rules that would lead to a restriction for that and mods do not make the rules. Just as a person can submit something with errors every time, but as long as they fix the ones requiring they be fixed when reported, there is nothing we can do. In this case, it's a "unfixable" report and there are no rules specific to requiring a ban or restriction for having such things.

Doesn't really matter now as I've been told to allow anonymous/unsourced rumors now since people complained.

Again, this ties into why you saw the article that the blog writer is talking about at all. If my hands are going to be tied, then I think it's about time the ones making decisions start seeing what the problems with this site really are when I take a break from part of what I do.

I think another issue is when the mods are completely silent about something.

I mean, I've PMed you and been very courteous and professional about stuff, but never get a response. Some things seem like they were dealt with unfairly (according to the N4G rules) and when simply PMing or creating a ticket asking for an explanation, all you get is silence. There's a right way and a wrong way to run a community, and that's the wrong way, dude. How is that supposed to make contributors feel?

I can understand not answering certain PMs and Tickets, especially when they're like "Hey u why u delet my story it was good and u prolly just don't understand it well you suck!!!" See, but that's not what I do. I ask very nicely about the rules/regulations which are violated, primarily so that I can *better understand* what will and won't get reported next time around, and what I should and shouldn't report myself.

Yet my cordial approach is not worth a simple reply. That will eventually contribute to problems within any community =/

@knifefight:

0 PMs from you in the last year to me.

You submitted a ticket 3d ago, Nineball replied to it.

You submitted a ticket 12d ago. You replied and acknowledged the change being made that you requested.

You submitted a ticket 18d ago. Emilio replied to it.

You submitted a ticket 29d ago. Moderator handled the issue you submitted (duplicate request).

You submitted a ticket 33d ago. MOderator handled the issue you submitted (duplicate request).

---

Not sure how we haven't been responding to you when needed. Otherwise, your tickets have all been in addition to usual duplicate reports or the like on submissions. Not something requiring an answer to a query or the like.

In the case of you personally, I sent one 105 days ago. It is titled "Question about a submission".

Oddly, it was about something lumped in with satirical articles -- as it was indeed humorous -- but the point of the article was much smarter than that, a social commentary on games journalism not needing to grasp at every rumor. Yet I never really received any explanation about anything. I theorize that it was almost *too* good, in that the subtle point wasn't noticeable to everyone (including Nineball). That might not be true, but it's the feeling that comes forward. I understand a dislike of 100% pure satire, but when there's an underlying message, that's less satire and more just an opinion piece with humor.

...And if it's not, I would have loved some kind of explanation rather than wasting my time typing all of this to no one. =/

I can paste the entirety of the PM if you want, or I can re-send it. Or take a screenshot of it.

Later, I created a ticket 67 days ago for a story that had been mistakenly failed.

http://n4g.com/news/1277043...

Here's the text of the ticket:

Was mistakenly failed as a "compilation of news."

There are two mistakes with this:
1) This is a monthly blog. It's not just news. There are interest pieces like the Tales survey, the personal story of finding out about Remember Me's skipping of Japan, and the commentary within the news bits.

2) Even the parts that are news, most of those stories are not on N4G. The headliner is not, for example. The Japanese game release schedule is not on N4G. The images and commentary on the Japan-only games are not on N4G. The Tales rankings are not on N4G.
If these pieces were split up Valay-style into separate stories, they would pass as separate submissions, so this reason for cancelation is a mistake, I think.

This was not filed under "News" because it's not all news. If it were placed in a periodical, some parts would be in news and some would be elsewhere.

Thank you.

----------------
^ I don't feel that I'm being rude or being a pest here. These are legitimate questions being asked very cordially. I explain my reasons intelligently and professionally. It's disheartening as a member of 4 years to basically be blown off sometimes. =/

Again, I'm not angry, but wanting to know what the heck it is about certain things that was the problem. Everyone makes mistakes. Everyone. I found these two submissions to be mistakenly failed. Heck, if I were a mod, I would undoubtedly also fail some stories that I shouldn't once in a while. As a contributor, I make mistakes, and I don't expect the mod team to be free of them either. And so we arrive at this discussion ^_^

No clue about the 105 day ago PM you sent (I don't have one from you) and no clue what it is referencing. So, I can't speak towards it.

Re: http://n4g.com/news/1277043...

As explained, it's an aggregate of news, that N4G already aggregates. And, when we say this, we mean that the majority, if not all, of the news presented is already on N4G and the site is intending only to re-post old news as a collection of news. That fails based on the fact that it's old news, but also denoting that since N4G already aggregates the news, summaries of various news items are unnecessary and is not a valid reason for posting them.

***Everyone makes mistakes. Everyone. I found these two submissions to be mistakenly failed. ***

The one I responded to was not mistakenly failed. Going in with that attitude might be why you don't receive a response as often as you like. We get this a ton, especially the "you made a mistake, unfail it". People don't like it when their submissions are failed. I deal with 20+ PMs a day on this. Sometimes we make mistakes, but 99.99% of the time, there is no mistake and people just need to realize that no matter how much they want their submission on N4G, it's not appropriate for N4G for one reason or another at that time.

Now, you may disagree. Cool. But, that's why the mods are here. They're not here to be agreeable with people. They're here to do what is needed and deal with the complaints from people who will obviously want their submissions to never be failed.

Thank you for the reply :)
Re: "As explained, it's an aggregate of news, that N4G already aggregates."
^ Well see, that's what I didn't understand, because of how much was in there that was more than news. If the grounds were that there is not enough new news, then I would expect that to be said. But since it was not even filed as a news story to begin with (Article), can't you see why this surprised me.

To you, it might be crystal clear. But obviously to the submitter, it was not clear. Your job here is communication based, and a necessary part of that is seeing someone else's perspective and being able to communicate clearly. Thinking that the one-sentence slap-on within the report was enough shows a mechanical approach to the situation, and if you're handing communication with a person the same way you'd handle communication with a computer, that is where you get the very problems you are describing in your posts. The things that bother you, the things you complain about that people don't get about your job (which is very time consuming and difficult), would likely be helped by better communication.

Re: "Going in with that attitude might be why you don't receive a response as often as you like."

^ My stating that everyone makes mistakes is to let you know that I was not angry about it, the way some people undoubtedly are when they message you. I wasn't "going in with that attitude," I was just saying hey, I make mistakes here, so I'm not mad if you did too.
And if you did NOT, then by all means correct me and my obviously mistaken understanding about what qualifies as an article versus news and the like. That way, I'm not sitting here with 0 confidence as to whether a submission was done correctly, heh ^^;

(More coming, the thing is giving me a character limit error.)

Re: "We get this a ton, especially the "you made a mistake, unfail it". People don't like it when their submissions are failed. I deal with 20+ PMs a day on this."
^ Again, my PMs and tickets are not 'you made a mistake, unfail it," but "I *think* you made a mistake." I was very clearly open to the idea that I could have been mistaken myself. You seem to be lumping me in with a bunch of entitled hotheads that harass you unnecessarily :/
Don't let my screen name fool you ^^;;

Re: "people just need to realize that no matter how much they want their submission on N4G, it's not appropriate for N4G for one reason or another"
and
Re: "...that's why the mods are here. They're not here to be agreeable with people. They're here to do what is needed and deal with the complaints from people who will obviously want their submissions to never be failed."

^ See, again, you're projecting other people onto me here. While I would obviously prefer to see a submission succeed, the better thing for me is future submissions. You seem to think that all of these are a fight with you. They are not. If I've read you wrong, let me know on that point. You've gotta realize that not everyone is looking to pick a fight and not everyone feels like you owe them approvals.

When I created a ticket about the Remember Me post, obviously I wasn't understanding what was different about it. From where I was sitting the unique content and perspective were enough for a story filed under Article that being a "news aggregate" seemed like a mistake.

If you take the approach of, in your words, "But, that's why the mods are here. They're not here to be agreeable with people." then you assume it's always a fight. And if you assume it's always a fight, then don't be surprised when you get your aforementioned 20+ PMs a day and rude, jerky attitudes from people. You don't deserve it, but treating everyone like a complainer isn't gonna solve the problems you describe.

Anyway man, thank you for responding here, thank you for talking to me about this stuff. I hope things can become gradually easier for you guys on the mod end of things and in turn, us on the contributor end as well.
Cheers.

***The things that bother you, the things you complain about that people don't get about your job (which is very time consuming and difficult), would likely be helped by better communication. ***

No, they wouldn't.

First, it's not my job to communicate as the community desires. My job is to administer the rules of the site as appropriate. I could write five paragraphs explaining why a submission is failed. You know what that turns into 9/10 times? A multiple response, novel-length debate on why I'm wrong.

Look, all of the community aren't annoying people who just want their way. But the majority of people who submit for a site or just want their post through regardless (which is a good number of people who submit to N4G, btw) will take the time to not hear what is being said and try to find some "reason" why their post should be approved even when presented with the how and why of its failings.

Example: This series of comments right here. You are debating the hell out of why I didn't respond to you (one of them I have no clue about) and expecting that because of the lack of response on these 2 items that "I should communicate better" as a whole and that "that would solve many of my issues".

Are you kidding? I spend more time communicating with people on this site than I can explain. I don't have all the time to debate with people on why their submission was failed, why, and why they think it shouldn't have been failed. If I communicated more, I'd do zero moderating. Zero.

You see two issues of yours when I submitted multiple items above where you were responded to and/or otherwise handled without issue. Yet, you want to talk about these two items as if they negate all the communication and otherwise "listening" that is done by the moderators.

No matter what I do on this site, I'm only going to be seen as a good "admin" when there is nothing to complain about. And, that's not my job either. I'm here to administer the site and that's it. People aren't going to like it, people aren't going to understand it (or, in most cases, they do understand it but they don't care and will complain about it anyway), and no matter how much I communicate, no one is going to like the end result at least half the time.

***See, again, you're projecting other people onto me here.***

I'm projecting on a person who has a ton of communication with the moderators but seems to think that two items weren't handled and therefore "we have issues with communicating" in general.

Do you realize that if I took the time to explain every decision I make on this site in detail, it would only serve to waste my time that results in a ton less time moderating and will still have people debating with me for days on why their submissions were failed or why they were restricted or why they lost a bubble and why hasn't X, Y, and Z person also lost a bubble and on and on and on.

I respect your opinion, but you have to understand that coming out and saying "you guys should communicate better" without understanding how much time we have to do what we do and how much we already communicate with people is akin to me telling you how to write the gaming news when you already know what you're doing, there are things you know that I don't, and there are elements I don't understand that you do.

Buddy, look, I know that you do a lot here.
I know that you do more with this site than anyone else (that I know of). And I wanna say that N4G is way better now than it was 2 or 3 years ago, without question. Moderating is a thankless job, but I for one am glad that you do what you do.

Your job sounds like it sucks :(

Re: "No, they wouldn't."
Well then okay, I'm wrong. In communication, in general, people deal with you the way you deal with them. Perhaps N4G is different than anything else and I can not possibly understand it. I was offering sound advice to help you deal with the problems you describe. Most people on N4G don't HAVE the problems that come with moderation and administration, so it's hard for them to fully grasp your position. All I was doing is trying to help you here. It can be hard for anyone to read from someone else' viewpoint, so I offered the POV of a contributor. (Though apparently a different one than is common o_o)

I am not continuing to debate my submissions, as you said, I am telling you why I thought what I thought. They're in the past, but one can learn from the past. I'd never seen anything failed for those reasons before, and I think it's perfectly understandable that someone might need more clarification than one sentence and ignored tickets. I get you now. I see it now. I'm not campaigning for those items, I'm using them as examples.

And that's what most conversation is. Communication is a *part* of every job (that's why most colleges require at least a base level comm course), so I was just trying to lend a hand -- to help you see something you might not see. Wasn't nitpicking or trying to get some belated justice here.

Anyway, brother man, I'm worried that you think my digging up examples from my own past was meant in like, a"HaHA! Look upon your siiiins" or some kind of mockery, but really, that's all I have to go on here. I definitely apologize if I hit a personal chord or if I ended up being too hypothetical about a level of busy that just can't be comprehended without having done it.

It was meant primarily as advice, "To help you help yourself," but if the advice is no good, then it's no good, and at least I've done what I could.

That rhymes, so it's probably true.