First off, is there an āexpiration dateā on warnings? I was suspended at the beginning of this week because I had been warned āmultiple timesā about uploading āirrelevantā images to galleries (namely, of course, the Gamergate entry). However, looking back through my email notifications, the only warnings I find were from November 15 and October 21. Given that ārelevancyā is a pretty subjective thing to begin with, it seems a little frustrating that those warnings can build up over such a long period of time and result in a suspension.
Warnings aren't necessarily given each time you did something wrong. So just because there was so much time inbetween your warnings and the suspension, doesn't necessarily mean you didn't do anything wrong during that period.
Of course old warnings and suspensions can become 'outdated', but when this is varies per offense. A month isn't really long enough to make an old warning irrelevant. And besides, in cases with old warnings over fairly minor offenses we normally only suspend for a few days. A few days don't really hurt a person that much.
Second, I was wondering about why tweets seem to be disallowed in the Gamergate image gallery. Even significant ones relating to important events/people in the hashtag go 404, on multiple occasions. Given that the Gamergate entry is about the meme, and I would imagine a big part of that to be the Twitter hashtag from which a lot of the memeās spread occurs, wouldnāt tweets be relevant? Plenty of other entries on this website have tweets in their image galleries.
Because various Tweets don't always make it clear that they're about GamerGate. A random tweet making fun of SJWs isn't about Gamergate, but they get uploaded to there anyways (we have a Social Justice entry). If the upload itself is blurry in how much itās related, explain what it shows through the entry notes. The whos and whats can save uploads that at first glance seem unrelated but at further research are not.
And if a tweet got removed, just bring it up here. Explain why it's related, and if your reasons are solid we'll see if we can find it back and will reactivate it.
That includes the actions of people involved in the ethics debate, correct? Journalists, devs, consumers. What they say in regards to the debate, including their social media posts, I believe, count in this.
Yes, they do. But those people still have a life alongside GamerGate, and what they do outside of GamerGate is unimportant. So any random social media post, or piece aimed to slander the person, doesn't necessarily have to be related to Gamergate. If their actions are indirectly related to something that happened in Gamergate, it's related. But like I said before, if this is vague make use of the notes to avoid unnecessary image removals.
The other would be video gaming, I understand that Vivian has her own entry, but thereās still a bit of overlap there (and I recall reading somewhere that images are allowed in multiple galleries if they are accurate to both).
Pretty much. If it's just Vivian, then yeah just keep it in the Vivian entry. If the image is dominantly about Gamergate (so with for example Vivian being just a small part of a bigger image), then the Gamergate entry is smarter. With equal attention you can use both galleries.
why so much micromanagement on this particular entry? The image gallery for GG is already extremely small given the activity of the entry. Itās not like the GG gallery is getting flooded with crap or anything, itās pretty mellow. Just maybe 10 images a day at most, usually barely half that. Compare that to many of the other āfandomā entries like FNaF, Korra, MLP, those things are filled with random stuff all day.
As Gamergate started to see KYM as useful, we were unwillingly somewhat dragged into this 'war' and dubbed an ally. This hurts your credibility as a neutral source, and we don't want to be on any side. So we kinda want to avoid becoming a GG Personal Agenda / Evidence Pool.
Also Fandom entries don't require much to have an image related. If it uses the characters of the show, it's pretty much related. People don't often fall out of line there and irrelevant images barely get uploaded, making the images we do remove mostly unnoticeable. Gamergate on the other hand has been having this issue constantly, and pro-GG has a more common tendency to disagree with removed images (and making a scene out of it), so you easily notice it.
I feel that currently the moderating team is being very restrictive of it for vague reasons.
Perhaps, which is why we're creating threads like this, to try and remove that grey area.