Insufficient moderation on Steam: Discussing the current state of the Community

[Caramel]

I'm very sure that the regulars of the Steam forum have seen by now the plenty of discussions that surrounds moderation and moderators, a lot of people who preach a lot on freedom of speech and of moderation. Supposed report abuse, cliques that run the forum, etc.

Users that are angry about getting banned and also angry when they was told they should simply follow the rules. Well, today I wanted to offer a discussion from a different perspective, and here is mine. In fact, I'm actually quite curious and I'm open to a discussion. I will open now by saying I won't report anyone for expressing a different opinion here. First let me ask a question to anyone who says they feel current moderation is too strict and abusive: how long have you used the Steam forums for?

I ask this because quite honest I think the Steam forums and moderation in general is actually the most relaxed and lenient it ever was been. During the days of the volunteer moderators, they actually participated in the community and became familiar with the users posting. That meant they were also familiar with troublemakers and trolls, and they were able to ban them. And they gave appropriate bans and would also escalate them to permanent bans when they deemed necessary. Some users are critical of the volunteer moderators, feel they were nepotistic and that people who were friends with them were spared bans. Well even if that's true, at least they were quick to respond and it seemed that they gave escalating bans.

This is a different story now. Paid moderators do not interact with the community, do not really take notice of users who are repeat offenders. Do not escalate bans. If you break the rules, compared to volunteer mods, it's now a slap on the wrist most of the time. A few days, a week maybe at most. If you are blatantly insulting users or doing something like being racist, you may get a month. It's definitely not compared to what it used to be. I used to frequently post on the Off-Topic forum although I deleted nearly all of my oldest posts some time ago. Back then, you would see people receive permanent bans. Nowadays, I have not seen anyone receive a permanent one. Even if you think paid moderators are not good either, it seems that objectively speaking, the punishments are lighter now.

This isn't my only problem with the new moderators though. They are very slow to act, they cannot identify obvious flamebait, they only lock threads after they have received hundreds of replies with tons of mudslinging. This isn't conducive to having genuine discussions or civil conduct. I believe in free speech, but the anonymity of the internet and the fact that you can post on the forums without even spending money means there are a lot of bad actors and free speech means very little when trolls appear very often in threads to derail them. This is where I disagree with most "free speech" advocates on this forum, they are almost always absolutist. Well, I'm here to tell you, that moderation is not the only way free speech can be suppressed. Bad faith actors flooding and drowning out actual discussion is also a tool to suppress speech, and a lot of trolls and bot accounts do just that. If you want a forum with no moderation whatsoever, that means you're also opening the gates to propaganda and astroturfing, sorry to say...

I'm getting a bit off track though. Here's my last issue. Besides their slowness to act, it seems that enforcement of rules is overall random. I'm going to use the Off-Topic forum as my example here, because it's the most egregious example of how the new moderators are faltering. I used to be a regular on that forum, years ago back when there were volunteer mods. That place has seriously degenerated, it's practically 4chan-lite. It's rife with political flamebait and discriminatory content that's sometimes left up for days before a moderator locks it. Trans people are targeted very often by that forum, and any time there is a thread about women there are a lot of sexist comments that make me feel like I've opened up an incel forum. There are burner accounts that harass specific users and quite frankly there are a lot of people there who genuinely seem mentally disturbed. It almost feels like a containment board much like VAC Discussions is for cheaters who want to complain about VAC and say they haven't actually cheated.

This extends to profiles and groups to a lesser extent. As an example, I have seen a profile that states in its description: "There are two sexualities: Straight, and wrong." I don't need to explain the problem with this, right? I've reported it at least two months ago and to this day that description still remains. Don't tell me this doesn't break the community guidelines, I'm quite sure that it does. Valve just refuses to act on it, or have for some reason investigated it and decided that there is nothing wrong with it even though it's discriminatory content.

And speaking of reporting, please, no comments that say "You are advised to report and move on." I'm aware of what you are supposed to do with rule-breaking content and I don't need you to tell me. If I want a copy-paste response, I can just open up a Steam support ticket. Besides, it's not the point of the discussion. This is meant to be just that...a discussion about the current state of moderation on Steam and how it reflects in the community.

Please try to be respectful and civil in the responses. Thank you. If you think this is too long to read, then let me summarize for you: I think the current moderation we have now is insufficient and the paid moderators aren't doing a good enough job of curbing trolls.

[Caramel]

Escrito originalmente por AmsterdamHeavy:

Escrito originalmente por Caramel:

It is not true that a user can modify their profile how they like, the rules apply there too. If you used porn/nudity for your avatar, that can be removed if it gets reported and Steam support/a moderator decides that it violates the rules for a profile picture. Just the same, if you set your profile name to a racial slur that almost definitely is going to get removed as soon as Support/moderators see a report of it.

Your profile is under the same rules as the rest of the website.

Well, I guess all we have then is that you reported an innocuous comment, thinking it was "discriminatory". It was reviewed and found not to be that.

Now you cant let it go and we have this. If it ISNT DISCRIMINATORY THEN THERE IS NOTHING TO ACT UPON. There is no broken rule, except for your hyperactive sensibilities.

Yet we have this thread, because you are so "certain" in your moral position, despite the lack of action.

And no, the same rules do not apply to the forums as to Steam. People are given more leeway on their profiles than in forum posts.

This is almost the same as last week's post about things "vaguely nazi-ish" being reported and no action taken and wondering WWWHHHHYYYYYYYYYYYYY? "Its offensive! If you dont think its offensive then youre a nazi!"

The guy reported someone using in game imagery and avatars from a Warhammer game. Your report sounds much the same. You are "CERTAIN" and so was he.

You were both wrong.

Your vague "discriminatory" position falls into the same category. Is it that you cannot accept that someone else sees it differently? I dont see what convinces you to your core that that statement is offensive? I mean, I could just apply the context of "reproduction" and it becomes not even controversial, its a statement of fact at that point. But I maintain that even without additional context, there is nothing "discriminatory" in the statement and it is as valid as most other opinions...Valve apparently agrees after 2 months.

So, your premise is flawed. Thinking of forum posts and profile comments as :"the same" is incorrect. Yes, there are rules but they are not the same rules and not enforced the same as the forums are and that IS a fact. Not letting go of a 2 month old report is also an issue, obviously. You think that statement is such an issue that you need to check up on it months later. I think your reasonable act is just that, an act. Youre not reasonable or you would be holding this adamant position and still checking that comment 2 months later. People "just reporting" things they see dont follow up for months. You have an agenda and a viewpoint and you want to force it by stifling any other comment that is contradictory to your worldview, even just random profile comments.

...and if you dont? Why are you checking on that innocuous comment 2 months later? You think thats "normal"?

Report and move on. Thats what normal people do. People without some kind of vested interest. Not you.

At this point, I feel like there's little I can tell you. You are working on so many assumptions about me, and keep telling me to let go of something that wasn't even the focus of my post. It was just a single small part of my post. It wasn't the catalyst for me making this. If you read the rest of my post you'll find that I talked a lot more about the forum moderation, not that single profile comment.

You seem to perceive it as an obsession, but it's as simple as me never having received a notification that the report was acted on, so it must still be there.

[Caramel]

Look, if you think that was too demanding, then sure. Fair enough point, I'll remove that line from the thread because you're right, it's not necessary to mention if I want people to discuss it. Unless you think it's disingenuous to do so. That's a genuine ask of your opinion.

[Thermal Lance]

Damn I miss the VMods. This garbage fire would probably already be under control by now.

[Nx Machina]

Escrito originalmente por Caramel:

I deleted them to "cover my tracks" after all I defined trolls in 2016? So because I defined trolls in 2016, I must be one myself? That's quite a leap in logic.

You can never prove you weren't and there is zero reason to delete old posts unless you ARE covering your tracks.

Secondly the whole point of this thread and that lengthy opening posts boils down to:

Escrito originalmente por Caramel:

and the paid moderators aren't doing a good enough job of curbing trolls.

In other words they are not curbing those YOU define as trolls.

[Orion Invictus]

Escrito originalmente por Nx Machina:

Escrito originalmente por Caramel:

I deleted them to "cover my tracks" after all I defined trolls in 2016? So because I defined trolls in 2016, I must be one myself? That's quite a leap in logic.

You can never prove you weren't and there is zero reason to delete old posts unless you ARE covering your tracks.

Secondly the whole point of this thread and that lengthy opening posts boils down to:

Escrito originalmente por Caramel:

and the paid moderators aren't doing a good enough job of curbing trolls.

In other words they are not curbing those YOU define as trolls.

Deleting personal information is a good reason to delete old posts, I think. And no, you can't prove a negative, it's why people are presumed innocent until proven otherwise. Do you ascribe to the opposite view, that any accused is automatically guilty?

[Caramel]

Well there is no way for me to convince you otherwise, all I can really say is if you really think I'm just making a troll post, report my thread.

[Nx Machina]

Escrito originalmente por Orion Invictus:

Deleting personal information is a good reason to delete old posts, I think. And no, you can't prove a negative, it's why people are presumed innocent until proven otherwise. Do you ascribe to the opposite view, that any accused is automatically guilty?

Except they cannot prove it was personal information.

Secondly other posters do post and ask anyone to remove personal information so they could edit their posts to remove it.

And finally posts containing personal information are reported and the moderator will either edit the post or remove it.

[Caramel]

Escrito originalmente por Nx Machina:

Escrito originalmente por Orion Invictus:

Deleting personal information is a good reason to delete old posts, I think. And no, you can't prove a negative, it's why people are presumed innocent until proven otherwise. Do you ascribe to the opposite view, that any accused is automatically guilty?

Except they cannot prove it was personal information.

Secondly other posters do post and ask anyone to remove personal information so they could edit their post to remove it.

And finally posts containing personal information are reported and the moderator will either edit the post or remove it.

And I even reported to Steam Support that I had a post which contains personal information in a locked thread, and they acknowledged that it was in fact personal information and removed it upon my request.

[Sondardo]

My 2 cents here. Regardless of who's right or wrong here in this thread, I do agree that moderation became a lot slower since the volunteer mods left.

Were they perfect? Nope. But at least they were a lot quicker, and since they were involved in the community, they often were able to diffuse situations or calm people when they got too heated, without always having to ban people. So more proactive. And when they needed to for people that needed bans, they were much quicker than the paid mods.

I'm more of a lurker here, I very rarely post, but yeah, moderation today is a lot more slow and reactive than a few years ago, for good or for ill.

[Start_Running]

Escrito originalmente por Orion Invictus:

I wholeheartedly agree. Those complaints about having been "unfairly banned" almost always come from people acting in bad faith, when they actually face consequences for what they've done. It's characteristic of places with insufficient moderation, in my experience.

There's an old saying that those who complain about being unfairly moderated will in short order justify the moderation they received.

The VMods in general were a net good. Were they nepotistic etc? Well Here's something. The same people who were saying that, are the same sort now complaining about unfair moderation, secret cabals and so forth. So the cklaims shoyuld be taken with a enough salt to deice a 100 miles of road.

The Vmods generally worked to try and de-escalate matters and to steer discussions back into productivity and civility. That no longer happens. Rather than a vmod trying to steer someone away from the lkine, the current mods just smack with the bann hammer. Though even there I do think they are too lenient with verified repeat offenders.

I'm not saying perma bans. Just saying once siomeone's wrapped up 3 or more bans in the space of a month those ban durations should start at a month.

[Weimu]

Escrito originalmente por Sondardo:

My 2 cents here. Regardless of who's right or wrong here in this thread, I do agree that moderation became a lot slower since the volunteer mods left.

Were they perfect? Nope. But at least they were a lot quicker, and since they were involved in the community, they often were able to diffuse situations or calm people when they got too heated, without always having to ban people. So more proactive. And when they needed to for people that needed bans, they were much quicker than the paid mods.

I'm more of a lurker here, I very rarely post, but yeah, moderation today is a lot more slow and reactive than a few years ago, for good or for ill.

totally agreed. there was recently a user here who went on a mentally unhinged rampage on a long ongoing thread on Off Topic (called Your Current Status, it's essentially an unofficial hangout/chat thread where people talk about literally anything). they repeatedly called users apes and degenerates over and over, so many times they (according to them) hit the daily post limit. which is apparently 200 posts, btw. that's a lot of posts calling people apes.

it took way too long for mods to get off their asses and ban that guy. and i guarantee you he will be back soon, because as the OP said the paid mods seemingly no longer hand out permanent bans, and you have to be severely breaking the rules to get a one month ban. there's another user in off topic who openly admits to ban evasion by making alts, and brags about spending money on his new alts to un-restrict their community feature access. he uses the same names and avatars too, so it's very obvious when it's one of his accounts. i feel like if volunteer mods were still around they would just keep banning his new accounts for ban evasion

i feel like this kind of thing was the main point of this thread but some triggered snowflake immediately derailed it by going off on a huge tangent over OP saying like moderators are not evenly enforcing the rules because they left a homophobic profile description. and i'm sorry to say to him, if he reads this - it is homophobia, plain and simply. saying any sexuality that isn't straight is wrong, is in fact discriminatory. wonder why you took so much offense to it? really sounds like it struck a nerve. it's quite ironic that you talk about indoctrination while beating the OP over the head over and over with this "it's not discriminatory content" with angry paragraphs-long rants, gaslighting them and trying to accuse them of being indoctrinated. almost like you are trying to indoctrinate the OP into your own views. you should follow your own advice next time and let it go. by the way, to the triggered snowflake - if you do read this and respond, just know that you are wasting your time if you do reply. because i'm not going to read it and i'm not going to respond back. i'm not gonna waste my time arguing with a snowflake

[Volfogg]

It's definitely not strict enough. People are getting way too comfortable here. I worry that nothing can be done about this though. Best to avoid socializing on the internet whatsoever. It's unhealthy habit anyway.

[The Presence]

I do feel it'd be beneficial if there was a three strikes, you're out-style of system in place.

Not three specifically; maybe five. Could be any number.

[Brian9824]

Escrito originalmente por The Presence:

I do feel it'd be beneficial if there was a three strikes, you're out-style of system in place.

Not three specifically; maybe five. Could be any number.

Heh i had a thread on that where I suggested that a certain number of bans in a calendar year triggered a mandatory extended ban to give users a timeout and a chance to cool down.

[The Presence]

Escrito originalmente por brian9824:

Escrito originalmente por The Presence:

I do feel it'd be beneficial if there was a three strikes, you're out-style of system in place.

Not three specifically; maybe five. Could be any number.

Heh i had a thread on that where I suggested that a certain number of bans in a calendar year triggered a mandatory extended ban to give users a timeout and a chance to cool down.

Oh, yeah. I remember now.

It was and still is a good idea.