Fixing the drama problem

[AfterMidnightMoon]

This is exactly what the suggestion entails.

dropping a nuke on a town just cause a few douchebags happen to live there.

How are those "Toxic Little Shits" related to the recent drama? I thought it was due to a couple of provocative credit pages (correct me if I'm wrong). I don't see how giving power to scanlator groups to ban users will prevent the same things from ever happening again.

 

[SGR]

@DbHuntzz
Thanks - that was kind-of what I was going for. But GenuineSounds' suggestion seems even better.

@GenuineSounds
I like your idea more than I like mine. This achieves my goal of scanlator empowerment and drops the most controversial talking points that have been going around in this thread. I would love to replace my suggestion with yours tbh, but that wouldn't be fair to the discussion. I linked your concept in the OP.

@CrysisWar1234
Bans are tools of achieving social cohesion. Having ban privileges empowers. Your issue is that this empowerment may fall into the hands of people who shouldn't be empowered, cause they lack character. It's what I said to LowSanity - I believe that scanlators are better than this. You seem to not believe that is the case.

@Teddy [ul][li]Chapter removal is a non-option (or a nuke if you prefer) cause it resets you right back to square one.[/li][li]Delays do not protect scanlators. It takes 5 seconds of thought to treat delayed chapters as if they were not there at all - because bypassing the delay works only once. Once you bypass it - you're stuck with either waiting even longer for the next one or sticking to a potentially inferior website.[/li][/ul]And yeah - a view ban seems bad in hindsight (even if it weren't considered dumb - the community is not ready for this kind of shock therapy at all) - GenuineSounds does have a better idea. I originally postulated to have the no-view option, because the power to silence is inferior to the power to actually punish - and the latter is what it seems the scanlators would want to have (judging by some of them using the shakespearean "All are punished." nuke approach)

@Valkynaz
Sprinkle your face with water vs. the Chinese Water Torture. It's all about the quantity and consistency of the negativity. Being mature doesn't help at all if you feel helpless everyday and sometimes on a bad day - it just gets to you in a way you would never anticipate.

@crazybars
Yes - scanlators can too be toxic little shits. You are pointing out the group feuds as being a problem and I agree - they are a problem but that problem can't easily be fixed by Mangadex. Because a group's investment in the site is small enough to be able to drop it on a whim, these things will happen. Allowing the groups to have more power over something will increase the investment. And I am taking a specific pro-creator stance without engaging the separate topic of equal creators having a slapfight.
...But yeah... the image that caused it all... getting worked up over this is like bringing a gun to philosophy class, cause they like Kant, and you like Schopenhauer.

@LowSanity
What Bethesda did was not a community-focused decision, but a purely marketing (money-influenced) one. In that regard, while an example of extreme abuse of mod power, it doesn't fit the free-for-all economy we have here. I think that scanlators wouldn't do the same cause they have no monetary stakes in a slapfight with the commenters. And - as you agreed - having a limited-use power does largely dissuade from abusing it over petty shit. I sympathize with creators cause it's them that get pounced on daily - the sheer number of pounce can make you lose the ability to discern legitimate, sympathetic criticism from callous entitlement and just flaming bullshit. And I agree the concept of shadowban is just evil.

@AfterMidnightMoon
From what I know there are several drama's going on. The one you're referring to is the one crazybars mentioned. This seems to be a separate thing from what I am reacting to. As I said - drama between groups is not something that MD is qualified nor willing to do in this stage of its existence. Curbing the drama between groups and readers by empowering groups is what I am postulating.

@Aereus
Wow this'll be a bitch to unpack all the load.
[ul][li]The roots are long gone. signed: Horriblesubs[/li][li]Monetization: anyone should have the right to monetize their work. Redraw, typeset, clean, translate - this is all work. It is not wrong to earn money from your hobby to make that hobby self-sustainable and potentially even profitable. Your investment calculation doesn't take in account the time you devote - which I find odd to be honest.[/li][li]You seem to be convinced that what I proposed requires not only a lot of development work, but also a lot of community work. I'm postulating, that self-moderating sections would actually lessen the community work necessary. Pointing out the effort already put into the site is, to be honest, detrimental to this discussion. The site IS. Now let's make sure that it WILL BE in the future. And with groups dropping out - it may turn out that all the past work would be for naught.[/li][li]The fact that Immature Tween Twats™ exist everywhere does not disqualify the need for empowering people to combat the twattitude. Moot point.[/li][/ul]Your whole argument centers around the notion, that scanlators are shit people just like everyone else on the internet and thus should not be empowered within a community they willingly provide a service to. I disagree, as from my POV the system should recognize their role in sculpting the community. Lack of empowerment, from my POV, will ultimately lead to no one willing to contribute to the community and as a result will dissolve it. And I've many times seen internet twats lose their twatiness the moment they actually got power - cause it cultivated a sense of responsibility for that power and was a strong incentive to behave better, so as the power doesn't get taken away.

Dropping the mic at the end of a rant is a gesture of considering one's opponent "owned". Without presenting any core argument beyond "people are shit - just deal with it", it is quite presumptuous of you to drop it so soon.

 

[Zephyrus]

There's a lot to address in this thread, but I'd like to note that on a personal level, I somewhat like the idea. *If* the idea was officially considered, I doubt it would be anywhere near as comprehensive as what has been laid out here.

I will say that this has generated some interesting discussion among staff.

 

[Teasday]

To be clear, this would be my current stance on a possible implementation, but I am currently not advocating for it, much less describing our plans.

- Group Leaders (and only GLs) would be afforded the power to ban a user from posting in the comment section of the Group page as well as any (non-joint?) chapters belonging to the Group. This restriction would not apply to anywhere else at all, such as the comment section of a manga that the group has posted a chapter on (as this would be obviously abusable by posting a single chapter and going on a banning spree in the general comments).
- MangaDex would neither interfere with whoever GLs decide to ban nor, and we would have to very explicit about this, would we take any sort of responsibility for anything that happens as a result of GLs using this power. To be excessively clear, I would describe this power as giving Groups rope to hang themselves with. If a Group decides to ban someone for simple disagreements etc. that users would very likely take issue with, it's the Group that would have to pay the social consequences, whatever they may be.
- That said, MangaDex would continue to moderate whatever it sees fit as per its rules as it has done. That would not change in any way. Chapter comment moderation would not be left up to the groups alone, and groups could perfectly well ignore using this power and let MangaDex take all the blame for moderation. In fact, that's exactly what we would prefer.

No viewing restriction, no three strikes systems, no changes to the global moderation rules. If a user gets "group banned", the staff would ignore any complaints. If a group manages to permanently fuck up their reputation by misusing this power, the staff would ignore any complaints.

Pros: Groups would be given an option to "take revenge" as @SGR puts it. Staff gets to wash its hands from a specific kind of third party drama.
Cons: Comment sections would become even more polarizing than they already are, and the rules on what kinds of comments are permissible would in practice cease to be uniform and predictable. The likelyhood of readers leaving the site would increase, which would have an adverse effect on other groups as well. Staff would get blamed anyway.

 

[kaf]

banned until proven innocent by the administrative team.

noooooo

 

[Valkynaz]

@SGR "Sprinkle your face with water vs. the Chinese Water Torture. It's all about the quantity and consistency of the negativity. Being mature doesn't help at all if you feel helpless everyday and sometimes on a bad day - it just gets to you in a way you would never anticipate."

Actually, being mature and responding like an adult would help massively in this case, you'd not get your panties in a bunch because someone acted like a big ol' meanie, and if you're having a bad day? Walk away, do something to calm down (Play video games, watch movies, JO, whatever makes you feel happier) and come back when you're feeling better so it won't effect you, and "if you feel helpless everyday" get help, because if you're in that bad of a place mentally then it'll catch up to you eventually, and no amount of sanitised forums will do anything to help that.

As long as people aren't actively harassing people, any moderator effort spent to try and make people not be mean to each other is effort that would of been better spent elsewhere, at most letting people block individual users so you can't see their comments, and put it in the rules that trying to bypasses blocks is a punishable offence (Not sure how the mods could enforce that rule specifically, but you can file this under "Deal with it like an adult" point)

"Allowing the groups to have more power over something will increase the investment" The only investment that will prevent someone pulling out like -insert sexual joke here- will be a monetary investment, them being able to ban people isn't going to be the kind of investment you seem to think it will be, and since the main thing that kicked off the current drama I'm aware of was a credits page... which giving groups the ability to ban people from viewing their chapters (and only their chapters) will do nothing to prevent something like this again, so there WILL be some rule change needed to stop that (Although I still think that's a waste of effort)

"Monetization: anyone should have the right to monetize their work" Actually, when you're translating someone else's work unlicensed you wave your "right" to monetise your work, letting people donate to your group? That's fine, but asking people for money for translating someone else's work without authorisation? A lot of people would disagree and while they will be in their right to ask, others would be in their right to call it out, regardless if it's done in a constructive or "mean" manner, and this loops back to my "Deal with it like an adult" point.

Also, giving power out to more people increases the chance someone will abuse it, best solution will be to only give power where it's needed and as little as possible to achieve results.

At the end of the day, groups who are competing in the same area will sometimes beef, and there will always be mean comments left by internet know-it-alls, if you can't take a joke then you'd probably be better off not on the internet or at least not reading the comment sections, and when it comes to adding new rules or system in place you have to ask yourself "What could possibly go wrong", and honestly? A LOT can go wrong from trying to solve a issue that ultimately stems from immaturity by expecting people who can't take a joke or mean comments to handle any real amount of power.

TL;DR If someone says something you dislike, don't agree with, or feel offended by - ignore it and move on with your life because petty drama isn't worth it "sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me" sorry for the wall of text.

 

[SGR]

@Zephyrus
To be honest - sparking a discussion among the staff is way more than I would ever anticipate from this thread alone. Thanks for leaving an encouraging post - staff engagement in the debate - even if behind the scenes - will ultimately result in changes that will benefit MD. And even if it doesn't go my way - it's progress nonetheless.

@kaf
Yeh, we kinda dropped it somewhere in the discussion as too controversial. Current proposal is no administrative process at all, but bans working only for chapter comments.

@Teasday
You are very much against the whole thing from the get go and your proposal feels, honestly, antagonistic in nature. GenuineSounds' three strike system would take literally 3 hours to build on top of what you propose (probably less if it were in the design from the start) and it would alleviate much of the controversy that giving powers to creators is causing - but you categorically reject it without giving any reason. Please reconsider this from an objective point of view. When, as you put it, "giving Groups rope to hang themselves with" - isn't it better to give them a bit less of that rope just to make them actively TRY HARD if they aim to do enough damage to hang themselves? And is it really a good idea to ignore any and all complaints?

Your post comes from a dark place where a developer's hart descends whenever someone asks them to estimate something they are vehemently against. At least that's how it sounds. And while I sympathize with your plight (I really do) - I think that pushing such a categorical stance as you did is not an attempt to move the discussion forward, but rather to curb-stomp it to the ground. For a regular user it would be entirely dismissible, but your developer clout does give it more power. It's not my place to police your tone, approach and opinion - I merely ask you to try to consider it from an objective view point.

@Valkynaz
This is a long one with a variety of topics to address, so I left it for last.

Being an adult.
Social dynamics dictate, that no response is a good response for an entitled brat, who doesn't consider anyone's well-being but their own. Being an adult is catering to them and is a lost cause, as all explanations just go right past them as if they were a light breeze. I've seen people saying "if your job prevents you for doing more free stuff, then quit your job, you whining pussy" - and those were clearly not jovial quips - these people actually meant exactly what it says verbatim. On the other hand ignoring them will just make them bitch more and may cause other readers to start viewing you as an elitist. And I won't even bother to mention giving in and lashing out - that leaves a taste of dog food in the mouths of all who even brush against it. But having the power to slap the entitled brat once or twice against the wrists goes a long way in terms of both education of the brat and the well-being of the slapper. Even if that power remains unused.

Group investment in MD
I oppose the notion that the only investment that glues a creator to Mangadex is a financial one. There are multiple ways to make pulling out not the first recourse, but the very last one (I can think of a couple off the top of my head). And one of the best is having a community you interacted with and invested time in nurturing. If MD is just a secondary upload dump - then pulling from it is cheap as fuck. If it's a community you engaged with - then it means something more. It's just human nature.
And as I previously stated when answering someone else "Drama between groups is not something that MD is qualified nor willing to do in this stage of its existence. Curbing the drama between groups and readers by empowering groups is what I am postulating."

Monetization
Yeah, I agree I didn't make myself clear there. I of course meant either passive monetization (ads) or voluntary active monetization (donations). I agree that obligatory active monetization of scanlation would be both morally and legally wrong. Thus we seem to be on the same side in this argument.
Scanlation sits somewhere on the fringe of moral behavior and somewhere just one step beyond the border of legality. I personally hold the view that if no one would translate the work, I wouldn't be able to see it, so if the group contributed some money to the author (by buying his stuff in the first place) than it's one massively diluted purchase vs no additional purchase - which is objectively better (though not by much).

Power and abuse
Again, quoting myself, "I've many times seen internet twats lose their twatiness the moment they actually got power - cause it cultivated a sense of responsibility for that power and was a strong incentive to behave better, so as the power doesn't get taken away." I stand by this statement. I believe that when the power is given - the simple fact of having it will automatically put groups at much more ease and will disincentivize them from dropping nukes.

Buy you're asking me to consider "what can go wrong" and my answer is pretty much what Teasday predicts: "a group manages to permanently fuck up their reputation" - that is the worst outcome. But to whom? Who would carry the brunt of the aftermath of such a cataclysm? The ones who abused power - that's who. And thus the system contains a mechanism, that allows it to auto-correct itself. People stop engaging with you, you lose readers and clout, you get sniped by someone more likable and engaged in the community - and suddenly everyone is on their side, not yours. Is that not fair punishment? And organic to boot.

Because, you see, the more of a nobody you are on the internet, the more power you have over other people. Once you're out there on the pedestal and people in droves start seeing and judging your actions - then reputation kicks in and reputation is what changes a simple game of "prisoner's dilemma" into a social ecosystem.

 

[Teasday]

@SGR I categorically reject it without giving any reason? I wrote a post detailing a system that I think could possibly work. I don't know if you read my post, but I didn't reject a single damn thing in it, not even implicitly much less categorically. If I reject something categorically, I'm not going to mince words saying it. In my proposal, I gave the pros and cons that I could see, but if you disagreed with those, you didn't bother to elaborate. I have no idea what part of my proposal was antagonistic, even less so who it was supposed to be antagonistic towards.

That all said, I'll now try to elaborate on my reasons for being skeptical about the end result of this suggestion.

Please reconsider this from an objective point of view.

I'm considering this from the point of view of what's beneficial for MangaDex and scanlators as a whole. After talking to group leaders in our discord chat about this subject, everybody who responded said giving GLs any kind of moderating powers at all was a bad idea. Frankly, I was a little surprised myself, because I assumed they would've wanted this some kind of control.

When, as you put it, "giving Groups rope to hang themselves with" - isn't it better to give them a bit less of that rope just to make them actively TRY HARD if they aim to do enough damage to hang themselves? And is it really a good idea to ignore any and all complaints?

The idea was that we, MangaDex, do not want to take responsibility for the moderation actions of people we didn't recruit as moderators in the first place. The reason should be obvious: we have no real control over what these third parties decide to do, and the whole purpose of giving them moderation powers is to allow them to moderate as they see fit, within the powers they were given. We do not want to babysit moderation-induced fights we didn't start. As for the strike system, I don't believe the reaction of the target of group moderation would be in any significant way different regardless of how long the timeout was: a person looking to get offended is going to get offended even if it's just an hour. In a three strikes system, there's nothing practical in place that would prevent the groups from issuing those strikes three times in a row.

As for dealing with complaints: We could start monitoring the groups on how they're handing out these bans. We could override the groups' decisions and remove the bans if users request them. We could do any manners of oversight. However, if we're constantly breathing down the groups' necks, that completely defeats the purpose of giving them this power in the first place. How would this power benefit them, if they constantly have to worry that we are going to punish them for using it? If we have to constantly review the group bans to make sure they were fair, why wouldn't we just do the moderation in-staff instead? What's the practical difference? Wouldn't it be easier and safer for the groups to just report the offenders, like normal users do?

This is what I meant with the rope. I don't see any real purpose in giving groups this or any similar kind of tool unless we allow them complete freedom over using it, and if that's the case then they should (in theory) take responsibility for their own actions instead of offloading it to the staff who had no input in the matter. We're perfectly willing to own up to our own moderation mistakes, but I don't see it as fair towards any of the parties if we're supposed to also shoulder the mistakes of non-staff users.

We're not going to stop our normal moderation duties no matter what tools we give groups, so the only practical scenario in which I see this tool getting used is explicitly in cases where we wouldn't normally moderate the supposed offender. It would essentially be used by the groups as a retaliatory measure only, and people getting banned (even partially) as revenge is not going to fly over well. Moderation if it's perceived as fair for the most part is one thing (see the recent announcement thread), but way, way more people are going to become angry than placated as a result of this unfair-by-design tool being used. Ultimately, as I'm sure people would (perhaps rightly) argue, the blame gets placed on MangaDex staff for creating this feature in the first place, and no amount of distancing ourselves from the actions of a third party group is going to be enough for some people.

If there's still something you believe I failed to address, let me know.

Your post comes from a dark place where a developer's hart descends whenever someone asks them to estimate something they are vehemently against.

jesus christ

 

[crazybars]

@Teasday

I got nothing Teasday. After I found out what really happened behind the chapter pulling drama , I don't think making your rules being more or less restrictive would have helped. I was extremely unimpressed by how childish Hatigarm and Meraki were, I don't think there was anything you could do to prevent them from pulling chapters.


However, you guys might want to be more clear on your rules for Manga and Chapter comment discussions and allow some sort of Credit's page report function.


Either way, listening to the Group Leaders is a good idea. Them being against Group Leader moderation tells me they must be afraid of having to fight other groups on moderating chapter comments which would likely be a hideous cancer of a problem and cause even more drama since they would now have Moderator powers.

 

[SGR]

@Teasday
Yes - the clarity that you've now presented was lacking in the previous post (likely it was due to the fact that you left out the bits obvious to you, but I'm a simpleton, so I didn't recognize them as such), which made it sound ... well I called it antagonistic but I guess the word got misused ... antagonizing maybe? Regardless, that point is now moot.

I'll first go to the main part of my contention with your solution - the strike system.

As for the strike system, I don't believe the reaction of the target of group moderation would be in any significant way different regardless of how long the timeout was: a person looking to get offended is going to get offended even if it's just an hour. In a three strikes system, there's nothing practical in place that would prevent the groups from issuing those strikes three times in a row.

[ul][li]GenuineSounds' idea (which I'm now carrying the banner for) clearly had this: "Groups should not be allowed to issue more than one strike at a time for a user. " which I understood as until the primary effects of a strike subside - the user can't be struck again. That runs counter to how you saw the idea, so it might change something at least.[/li][li]As for the target's (victim's?) reaction - a commenting ban may even go unnoticed and a permaban is always, always perceived worse than a temp-ban. I have been banned a hell of a lot of times, so I've got experience to back up my claim here.[/li][/ul]Level of MD policing over "group mods"
The problem I had there was the categorical "no policing of nothing ever" stance. That always strikes me as a very strange approach to handle a community or a subdivision of that community. The level of intervention would obviously be for MD to decide, but I would think it would be more of a silent watchman position rather than actively responding to complaints. Let's work with an example: two groups run a manga in parallel for a few chapters (basically a botched snipe situation) and suddenly one group starts banning people that post anything positive on their competitor's chapter. Considering the general belief I've come across here, that scanlators can be so much worse than the general population, this would not out of the realm of possibility. From how I understand your POV - you would steer clear of this situation and let it play out by itself. I am of the firm belief that the line is drawn somewhere around this point of absurdity and that this would warrant some reaction from MD. If you felt like I postulated the line being drawn somewhere further into the realm of normalcy - no, that's not it at all.

MD normal moderation exists
MD takes a stance of non-involvement whenever it can - at least that's the way I understand it. Consider the "why are you translating so slow?" comment. MD obviously doesn't moderate those. Yet whenever I saw a group talk about this kind of comment - it is always with a strong aggravation. Obviously many people just don't care. But to those that do, it's a slap to the face no matter how you slice it. Especially for the groups that release daily (allenallenallen333 comes to mind). Having the power to slap the entitled reader right back on the wrists is, from my point of view, beneficial to both the creator and reader side of the community.

"jesus christ"
No affiliation.

After talking to group leaders in our discord chat about this subject, everybody who responded said giving GLs any kind of moderating powers at all was a bad idea.

Regardless of the level of surprise from you and me both - this pretty much closes the topic as a whole.

 

[Teasday]

@SGR Just to clear up a few bits:

As for the target's (victim's?) reaction - a commenting ban may even go unnoticed and a permaban is always, always perceived worse than a temp-ban. I have been banned a hell of a lot of times, so I've got experience to back up my claim here.

That wasn't really my point, so your personal experience isn't applicable in this case. There are people who would, regardless of the length of the ban, fly off the handle if they get banned as a result of something perceived as unfair. Worse yet, that's not limited only to the person receiving the ban, because the people witnessing the situation are going to react to this perceived injustice as well.

The problem I had there was the categorical "no policing of nothing ever" stance.

I wasn't trying to communicate any such stance. In fact, the reason I added the whole "MangaDex would continue to moderate whatever it sees fit as per its rules as it has done" part was as an assurance that we'd keep policing everything exactly as we've policed thus far. Although, if this refers to the group ban thing exclusively, fair enough.

I am of the firm belief that the line is drawn somewhere around this point of absurdity and that this would warrant some reaction from MD.

And that's the problem I was trying to elaborate on. To oversimplify it, if we're going to be interfering with their "moderation" anyway, why give them this tool when we can moderate by ourselves without letting these extra problems occur?

Regardless of the level of surprise from you and me both - this pretty much closes the topic as a whole.

While it was a good discussion to have, I can't say I'm sad to see it go.

 

[Drifter]

Bending to people complaining about internet douchebags being internet douchebags always seems to be a bad direction for communities. This instance could very well be something different but I would have to see these "toxic" posts for myself to know.

 

[TheOneWhoSighs]

@Aereus

Fuck everything about this. This is a HOBBY and the roots of fansubbing/scanlation are in promoting something for love of the series/author/awareness/etc. The authors literally in some cases work themselves to sickness and death drawing it: We have no real claim to the work and it sickens me how "monetized" the scene has become. If your entire group can't afford $6 for a manga volume and "losing ad revenue" is a concern, you aren't in this for the right reasons and you should stop. It's also never been "cheaper" to scanlate: So many series are flat-out serialized online these days, public raws can be found, or you can buy an ebook for a couple dollars.

Uploading to an aggregator for hosting is free. Dumping to imgur or something is free. Wordpress blogs are free. What do people expect money? Where are these "huge expenses" coming from?

I always love when this gets brought up, because in the manga community it's basically Godwin's law.

"This is a hobby, you shouldn't make money from it" - We're all pirates, there's no honor in refusing to make money from the piracy you're already committing.

"It's never been cheaper" - To get the raws, yes. But the raws aren't the only cost. The fastest & most high quality groups often end up having to pay translators to translate series. That could be anywhere from $5-$15 per chapter. With some groups that get crapped on for "pulling in over a $1000 on patreon" spending quite a bit more than they receive in donations.

You could suggest that they simply not pay for TLs and that those series never get scanlated.

I'd suggest readers would be crying even worse than they already are because the chapters were pulled from MDex.

I spent a solid 5+ years doing fansubbing and done scanlation off and on now for another 5. The count of times I've been sniped by people doing a shitty job or just to spite me are numerous. The number of ungrateful comments I've read are legion. You have to accept that for whatever reason, some people are just going to be jerks or not have the maturity to realize when they are making selfish statements. You should be doing it because you enjoy it and it makes you personally happy and fulfilled. If you can't do that, or you aren't enjoying it then some introspection is called for.

I actually fully agree with this statement, and it's why I encourage basically every scanlator that starts feeling stressed by it to quit. And then I bring popcorn to the comment sections.

 

[ReimuHakurei]

Actually, it's about ethics in scanlation.

 

[Valcherion]

Oh cool, found the regular at ResetEra.

Interesting how there’s always at least one.

 

[dragon9117]

This is the most idiotic thing I've seen all day. Banning people from not only commenting but reading would be pointless and easily circumvented anyway, especially without any kind of oversight. Your group would just be seen as a laughing stock if you seriously tried to abuse that power too. Ultimately, if you are so offended by one or two paragraphs that you disagree with, that your response is to delete everything then you have bigger issues.

 

[Akarroa]

So...is mangadex on the way out then? Op makes it sound like everyone's just going to leave now because the rules are too harsh to scanlators. Is everyone pulling chapters now? Are there any scanlators we could talk to and see how they feel? I'd be sad to see the site go. I like it a lot, even if the uploads page sometimes disappears. Can't there just be a rule not to make fun of others in your submitted chapters? I remember complaining to batoto because one group made fun of Kirei Cake's mom in their scanlation and I think it went away. I don't want to say what they said but it was real bad.

 

[sterven]

@Akarroa
I doubt the site is going anywhere after all this is centered around the drama surrounding a few groups. Most are just carrying on with their day like normal.

 

[DANDAN_THE_DANDAN]

Sounds like someone's pissed off by Kronix

 

[Kaarme]

@SGR

Consider the "why are you translating so slow?" comment. MD obviously doesn't moderate those. Yet whenever I saw a group talk about this kind of comment - it is always with a strong aggravation. Obviously many people just don't care. But to those that do, it's a slap to the face no matter how you slice it.

Stone Age Hunter: "Ugh ugh, why isn't my bone club ready yet? I already asked you to make me a new one days ago."
Stone Age Bonesmith: "You have no idea how hard work it's to securely fit and attach a stone head to a bone handle, man. Don't be rude and be patient."

Yeah, that "strong aggravation" has been going on for a million years. I have also made free stuff for the net on my free time over the years (like many, many others), and the "when will it be finished/isn't it ready yet" are certainly among the common comments, with the occasional "if you can't finish it in time, you are a bastard who breaks promises". Did I feel aggravated because of it? Give me a break. After a few months you learn to completely ignore them (or reply: "ETA is when finished." Although you also learn not to ask the question yourself. That's why I might ask, sometimes, after a year of no releases if the series has been dropped or if there's some other reason, like the TL being busy with RL stuff or the mangaka having a hiatus, but I never accuse the group of being slow on purpose. The people complaining about slowness are those who have never contributed anything bigger to others for free. There's nothing you can do about them. A wise man/woman chooses their fights and ignores insults from lesser men/women. Like the saying goes: Never argue with an idiot. If a scanlator team member really gets stressed by those specific comments, then, like Aereus said, it might be the time to have a break, for the root cause of their personal problem isn't with the commenters but with something else.