General Discussion > Moderation Discussion

Re: Khanid Kingdom and Blooders and controversy, oh my!

<< < (2/3) > >>

Samira Kernher:
Quite frankly in agreement. The 'You're doing it wrong' rule has always been the worst rule on Backstage, and a rule I for one intend to never mod against (or most things... most discussions will resolve themselves without any outside tampering necessary). Criticism is necessary. Being able to challenge ideas to try and help people and roleplay grow is a good thing. The thread got a little warm, sure, but quite tame by past standards and there was nothing there that wasn't good for the discussion being had. There was nothing there that needed modding.

Backstage has always been accused of overzealous modding, and that modding style is as much a cause of its own dwindling activity as the general dwindling of RP in EVE. Backstage has driven off many good posters over the years because it is so eager to play the mod police. Half the reason I agreed to join the mod team was to provide the forum with a mod who isn't going to stomp all over good discussions just because they get a little heated. I mean, jeez, this forum has finally started to get active again, and yet every single time a thread dares to attract attention, it gets modded. That is not conducive to good discussion.

kalaratiri:
Moderation would be less necessary if people were capable of offering their opinion in a polite manner.

Samira Kernher:
It's not necessary. Regardless of how polite or not a comment is, if the points it makes are valid, then it is a valid contribution to the discussion. Debates can and will get heated, but that's not a sign of a bad debate. Only when a post contributes nothing but personal attacks should it be removed.

MakotoPriano:
"When you have to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite."

In that very thread, we already had people say they felt actively under attack because 'they were doing it wrong' according to elite RP police. While on one hand we should always be aware that we are all prone to being overly sensitive about perceived attacks, on the other hand there is a point where debate and discussion does indeed become attack.

Is asking people to try to maintain a basic level of civility to try and preserve an open community actually a problem?

Mizhara:
Yes.

What was offered in that thread was well within any reasonable interpretation of civility, especially given the severity of the situation in question and given how concerns were consistently ignored rather than responded to. Instead, the responses were invoking conspiracy theories about "RP Elite Inner Circles", claims of bullying and so on. With that level of dishonest discourse, having a rougher tone is hardly lacking in civility in comparison.

If 'civil' is to be dishonest and accusatory while avoiding harsh tones, then being civil is very much a problem for any community that wants to be open rather than some self-victimizing "bully victim" echo chamber. I challenge you to find a place in that discussion where 'debate and discussion becomes an attack'. I can quote quite a few direct accusations of fairly severe personal kinds though, which are conveniently ignored when cries of 'civility' come along.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page