Backstage - OOC Forums

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Did you know:

That Julianus Soter first stated his intention to liberate Federation space on December 4th, Year 111? See the announcement here

Pages: 1 [2] 3

Author Topic: Break a leg.  (Read 2583 times)

Iwan Terpalen

  • Clonejack
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24
Re: Break a leg.
« Reply #15 on: 05 Dec 2015, 07:16 »

:popcorn:

Quote
It's not the first time i'm invited to leave. It only reinforces my willingness not to because it would serve your charade.
I'm not really sure what your end game is, here, and it's maybe time to stop and think about what you want to achieve in the long run, rather than what you want to do right now.

I mean, where's this going to end? You're going to be the lone, brave hero shouting the mod team into submission until they give up and crown you King of Backstage?

(The crown's a dunce cap, anyway, and the scepter a well-used shit shovel.)
Logged

Sofia Roseburn

  • Does this look like the face of mercy?
  • Egger
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 209
Re: Break a leg.
« Reply #16 on: 05 Dec 2015, 07:32 »

Regardless of how individuals feel about other posters, if they have a point let them make it. Feel free to counter, but let's no descend into name calling. Keep on topic, namely the discussion about moderation on this board, and not the validity of other poster's content/post counts unless it's related to the subject.

Considering how many times this has been "discussed" already I'd say that everyone's opinions on the matter are particularly clear. Further discussion seems rather pointless, really.
Logged

Utari Onzo

  • The Mods
  • Omelette
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 418
  • Dank Meme Consumer
Re: Break a leg.
« Reply #17 on: 05 Dec 2015, 07:36 »

Regardless of how individuals feel about other posters, if they have a point let them make it. Feel free to counter, but let's no descend into name calling. Keep on topic, namely the discussion about moderation on this board, and not the validity of other poster's content/post counts unless it's related to the subject.

Considering how many times this has been "discussed" already I'd say that everyone's opinions on the matter are particularly clear. Further discussion seems rather pointless, really.

Then don't reply?

Baiting out/personal attacks is going to achieve just as much as not posting in the discussion. Namely, nothing.
Logged
"Face the enemy as a solid wall
For faith is your armor
And through it, the enemy will find no breach
Wrap your arms around the enemy
For faith is your fire
And with it, burn away his evil"


PTB is recruiting

The Rook

  • Watcher in the Void
  • Egger
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 110
    • FalconNET
Re: Break a leg.
« Reply #18 on: 05 Dec 2015, 08:38 »

How does discussing lore, roleplaying, characters and stories here gets negatively impacted by moderation here?
Logged

Havohej

  • Friendly Neighborhood Forum Admin
  • Veteran
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1624
  • Ex-convict
    • Insurmountable Logic
Re: Break a leg.
« Reply #19 on: 05 Dec 2015, 11:30 »

Quote
Administrator Comment Quotes modded content - Silver
I honestly laughed IRL on this one.  How many times have I moderated Miz?  Lots.  And between Silver and MorLag Bal, I've been moderated several times myself.

Quote
Administrator Comment Quotes moderated content - Silver
Who?  Pour insults onto who?  Are we talking about that IGS personality that doesn't pvp in any way meaningful enough for me to interact with it?  Is it insulting to have one's lack of pvp pointed out?  Then don't pick battles with pvpers via IGS I guess.

Quote
Quotes moderated content - Silver
Same player/poster.  Multiple accounts.  We're quite aware of that.

Those three, like all of the other things in your post, Lyn, are irrelevant.  Literally all of them.  In almost every single case, it's an example of someone who didn't get their way on a given disagreement whining about it.  What's more, they are single quotes taken out of their original context and re-posted here in support of your logical fallacy (Appeal to Popularity).  Guess what, Lyn?  It's still a logical fallacy.

Now I'm extremely tempted to act on your posting of private correspondence here, which is quite in violation of Backstage's  Rule 7, because despite all the [Redacteds] you're not fooling anyone, it's crystal clear who most of those writers are.  But I'm going to relax.  I'm going to consider all the factors.  And I'm going to post a thread in the Team board.

What we have here is an individual poster who, time and time again, seeks to stir up as much drama as possible, manufacturing outrages where none exist and clamoring as loudly as their keyboard can clamor - not across the great, wide internet!  No! - but right here, on Backstage, and ingame in chat channels with whoever else has recently been "wronged" or "maltreated" (i.e.: Moderated) and has a bone to pick.  This IS the negative element.
« Last Edit: 09 Dec 2015, 00:07 by Silver Night »
Logged

Twitter
This is a forum on steroids tbh. The rate at which content worth reading is being generated could get you pregnant.

Nicoletta Mithra

  • Veteran
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1049
Re: Break a leg.
« Reply #20 on: 05 Dec 2015, 12:40 »

While I don't have much of a personal stake in this discussion, I feel like chiming in for several reasons.

The first is simply this: Yes, I personally feel that moderators can and should be refraining from insults and abusive language when they are dealing with someone infringing on forum rules - even if this someone does so in an obnoxious way. There definitely is room for improvement in that regard on this forums.

The second reason is how Lyn is dealt with here, especially by you, Havohej.

At first you claim that he's speaking only his own opinion, and that you won't change anything for one person alone. That's basically challenging him to give evidence that it's not just his opinion: Once he does so you are ready to charge him with violation of Backstage's  Rule 7.

Given that he prior to that mentioned private convos in which he had been told just that, I can't see what he should've done: Either you dismiss his point because you never saw those convos - or you call him out for a rule violation. One can only be sorry for Lyn that he fell for your bait, there.

The second thing is your misuse of the fallacy of 'appeal to popularity'. The Argumentum ad populum is only a fallacy if the belief of the people doesn't figure into the truth of the matter. Whether the earth is round or rather an oblate spheroid doesn't depend on popular opinion: To say the earth is a sphere because most people would answer this if asked for the earth's shape doesn't make it true. But this is about whether people are comfortable with how moderation is done on the these forums: And here the opinion of people plays quite the role - after all if they are of the opinion that they are not comfy with aspects of the moderation we have every reason to believe that they are not comfy with those aspects of moderation.

So, no, in this case it is not a logical fallacy, because the conditions for it to be a fallacy are not fulfilled.

Third, your claim that Lyn is "an individual poster who, time and time again, seeks to stir up as much drama as possible, manufacturing outrages where none exist and clamoring as loudly as their keyboard can clamor". Well, yes, Lyn might be someone who is uncomfortable to you, because he is, time and again, brining this same point up: That moderators are sometimes not held to the standards, by which everyone on this froums is supposed be measured. You even admitted as much. He has a valid point and just because you tire of being reminded of it and having to justify your behaviour there time and again, doesn't at all mean that Lyn is a poster that tried to stir up as much drama as possible.

Lyn has, basically, one specific point of critique - one that's as I already said not without reason - and he speaks up whenever there is an instance of it occuring. If you feel that he's trying to raise trouble all the time, than that's probably because you quite often "don't loose sleep over a Mod saying something 'indelicate' in the course of moderating".

If you still don't see reason to change how you handle those matters, I can live with that. It's not what I'd prefer as a solution, though. And you will have to live with people who don't like it. You can ban them or live with them challenging you to change that behaviour. Unless you make a rule that's aginst criticising the moderators, I'd suggest the latter.

I really hope that the cooler and even-handed heads in the moderation team prevail on these issues.
« Last Edit: 05 Dec 2015, 12:44 by Nicoletta Mithra »
Logged

Lyn Farel

  • Guest
Re: Break a leg.
« Reply #21 on: 05 Dec 2015, 13:27 »

:popcorn:

Quote
It's not the first time i'm invited to leave. It only reinforces my willingness not to because it would serve your charade.
I'm not really sure what your end game is, here, and it's maybe time to stop and think about what you want to achieve in the long run, rather than what you want to do right now.

I mean, where's this going to end? You're going to be the lone, brave hero shouting the mod team into submission until they give up and crown you King of Backstage?

(The crown's a dunce cap, anyway, and the scepter a well-used shit shovel.)

Uh.. okay.. I guess? Not sure to see what is your point? Is that an appeal to ridicule?

Ah well, at least we are progressing on some things though. A lot of admissions from the mod team in the past few days, which comfort my opinions in a lot of ways. Eventually, since it's solving slightly even if in a stupid direction... As Sofia said above: it has become pretty clear-cut.
« Last Edit: 05 Dec 2015, 13:51 by Lyn Farel »
Logged

Lyn Farel

  • Guest
Re: Break a leg.
« Reply #22 on: 05 Dec 2015, 13:38 »

Quote
Administrator Comment Modded content - Silver

Well, I am certainly not going to play your bait game into guessing who is who. I can only say that you are pretty bad at guessing. Some of them, yes, some others, not really no. You are actually the one here trying to tie people with those and I find it a bit insane, considering that it's attributing quotes more or less blindly at random people. I would even say that the ones you picked up were really the less relevant and easiest ones. The low hanging fruit, if you will.

I consider those points relevant, like all the others, and was exactly expecting no less of you to start picking up on every one of those like you did. You can certainly dismiss some of the things that are told in there, like on that IP thing, and it might also indicate that some of them didn't get their way, indeed (although I deliberately pruned all the ones that were purely made out of that). The fact remains that most of them are indicative of many things: that, either most people are morons that don't get their way and throw tantrums, or that there is a problem. Pick the one that has the most appeal to you I guess.

You can also invoke rule 7, I know of it, and I was half expecting to see it catacombed when coming back. I don't mind. We kept being told that it's the opinion of a lone disgruntled wolf, or a vocal minority as a way to dismiss any further inquiry. If I show proof that it is not, you dismiss it anyway because you say what everyone says here - meaning people disagreeing with you or pointing embarrassing opinions - is bullshit. It was expected, and I am not surprised in any way or form.

However, I think we will have to disagree on who is the negative element here. Your main argument has always been that people are imagining things, making up claims, where as a moderator you might have been called to actually listen to what people tell you. But you only do that with your clique.

I don't mind either, I am used to it. It's the main leitmotiv of the mod team when they don't want to admit something. We get it served for basically everything.

NB: and uh no, this is not the same poster. RL photos tend to disagree with your statement, as I recall it.


NB : also Nico, I didn't fell for the bait, really. Trust me, I didn't. I know how the rules work. Some have even called me on rule lawyering. It is the only leverage I got against people that hold more power than me. It's sad but well.

I prefer rule violation that being called out a liar or outright dismissed.
« Last Edit: 09 Dec 2015, 00:08 by Silver Night »
Logged

Havohej

  • Friendly Neighborhood Forum Admin
  • Veteran
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1624
  • Ex-convict
    • Insurmountable Logic
Re: Break a leg.
« Reply #23 on: 05 Dec 2015, 19:14 »

While I don't have much of a personal stake in this discussion, I feel like chiming in for several reasons.

The first is simply this: Yes, I personally feel that moderators can and should be refraining from insults and abusive language when they are dealing with someone infringing on forum rules - even if this someone does so in an obnoxious way. There definitely is room for improvement in that regard on this forums.
No one has ever said otherwise.  What has been said is that, in the instances it has taken place, it has not been so egregious that action need be taken.  That has been the opinion of the team in every such instance that Lyn has "gone to forum war" about so far.  I, however, have had several of my own posts moderated with no reports having been generated whatsoever.  So one cannot even say that nobody on the Mod Team ever gets moderated.

Quote
The second reason is how Lyn is dealt with here, especially by you, Havohej.
I'll be the spokesperson, sure.

Quote
At first you claim that he's speaking only his own opinion, and that you won't change anything for one person alone. That's basically challenging him to give evidence that it's not just his opinion: Once he does so you are ready to charge him with violation of Backstage's  Rule 7.
It is a violation of Rule 7.  One that I refrained from moderating.  Never let it be said that Caesar is without mercy.

Quote
Given that he prior to that mentioned private convos in which he had been told just that, I can't see what he should've done: Either you dismiss his point because you never saw those convos - or you call him out for a rule violation. One can only be sorry for Lyn that he fell for your bait, there.
His point, such as it is, is dismissed anyway.  Firstly, because it's a dead bloody horse that he's beaten a many several time and gotten a singular response each time.  Secondly, because what he should do is urge these poor put-upon souls to step forth about how they were oh-so-mistreated by Big Bad Mr. Havo and his Gang of Big Bad Moderation Thugs.  Which, judging by the examples of complaints that he put forth, not a one has a valid argument against any Moderation Action which took place on this Forum - which probably explains why the mob with torches and pitchforks has pretty much been a Mob of One.

Quote
And here the opinion of people plays quite the role - after all if they are of the opinion that they are not comfy with aspects of the moderation we have every reason to believe that they are not comfy with those aspects of moderation.

So, no, in this case it is not a logical fallacy, because the conditions for it to be a fallacy are not fulfilled.
I'm well aware of how the fallacy works, actually, and you are incorrect.  Yes, the opinion of the people does play quite the role - it was the opinion of the people early on that settled out how things should or shouldn't be done here.  However, if you aim to suggest that this fractious community and its popular opinion can be represented by one self-appointed hero and that this Batman of Backstage's word should be taken as the Gospel Truth as regards All Things Community Opinion...  Well, I cannot complete that sentence without committing an abuse, now can I?

Further, we cannot see any such lack of comfort displayed in the use of the forum or lack thereof.  In the threads where the actual story and roleplay of EVE are being discussed, things are as they should be.  The decrease in traffic has in numerous other threads been attributed to the growing number of avenues for this discussion, most notably Slack.

Quote
Third, your claim that Lyn is "an individual poster who, time and time again, seeks to stir up as much drama as possible, manufacturing outrages where none exist and clamoring as loudly as their keyboard can clamor". Well, yes, Lyn might be someone who is uncomfortable to you, because he is, time and again, brining this same point up: That moderators are sometimes not held to the standards, by which everyone on this froums is supposed be measured. You even admitted as much. He has a valid point and just because you tire of being reminded of it and having to justify your behaviour there time and again, doesn't at all mean that Lyn is a poster that tried to stir up as much drama as possible.
Here you have made a very, very big misunderstanding.  Allow me to clarify:

Quote
That moderators are sometimes not held to the standards, by which everyone on this froums is supposed be measured. You even admitted as much.
I have never said, nor meant to imply, that.  What I have said is that sometimes Moderators aren't very nice.  I have said that in the instances these things have been reported, we have looked at the not nice thing that was said and decided whether or not it was actionable.  In most of these situations (including every one Lyn has made himself a nuisance over), we have decided that it was not actionable.  In the situations where it was actionable, the post(s) were Moderated.

What I have said, is that if a Moderator correctly handles a situation, especially one in which that same Mod has been under personal attack by the person being Moderated, and that Mod says something 'not nice', then I'm not going to lose sleep over it.  Silver said as much recently as well.  And given the leeway that we give some of the posters on this board at times, I daresay this IS the same standard we hold everyone else to.

Quote
Lyn has, basically, one specific point of critique - one that's as I already said not without reason - and he speaks up whenever there is an instance of it occuring. If you feel that he's trying to raise trouble all the time, than that's probably because you quite often "don't loose sleep over a Mod saying something 'indelicate' in the course of moderating".
This is accurate.  It's a dead horse.  It's dead because it was beaten to death the first time Lyn brought it into the corral.  Lyn continues bringing the same dead horse into the same corral.  We're tired of beating it.  It isn't going to change.  At this point, it approaches intentionally disruptive behavior.

Quote
If you still don't see reason to change how you handle those matters, I can live with that. It's not what I'd prefer as a solution, though. And you will have to live with people who don't like it. You can ban them or live with them challenging you to change that behaviour. Unless you make a rule that's aginst criticising the moderators, I'd suggest the latter.

I really hope that the cooler and even-handed heads in the moderation team prevail on these issues.
That's fine.  I would have no problem with different people, people who were new around here, raising the topic.  What becomes burdensome and annoying is the same person asking the same question as if there's going to be a different answer this time.  The answer has not been ambiguous.  It has been definitive.  It continues to be so.

Find something better to be outraged over.  People in the real world are dying, be outraged about that.  Don't be outraged over us not removing a Mod from the team because they said a bad fucking word.  We let you all cuss all the time, and I don't see anyone losing sleep over that, either.  And the idea of a profanity-free Backstage has already been discussed and rejected, so don't even start.

Get over it.  Return to posting about Eve and its RP, or whatever you all post about in the Off-Topic area.
Logged

Twitter
This is a forum on steroids tbh. The rate at which content worth reading is being generated could get you pregnant.

Havohej

  • Friendly Neighborhood Forum Admin
  • Veteran
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1624
  • Ex-convict
    • Insurmountable Logic
Re: Break a leg.
« Reply #24 on: 05 Dec 2015, 19:51 »

Your main argument has always been that people are imagining things, making up claims, where as a moderator you might have been called to actually listen to what people tell you. But you only do that with your clique.
First, let me point out that I don't have a clique.  Nobody likes me.  Nobody really knows me.  I can think of three people on this entire forum who really know me, and none of them are on the Mod Team.  Difficult, then, not to say "Lyn's imagining things" or "making up claims" when you come out with that sort of rubbish.

Second, that has not been our main argument.  Our main argument has been, "we have looked at the incident and it is our opinion that no further action is warranted."  Your counterpoint has been, "but I want action!"  To which we've said, "No."  To which you reply, "Well, yes, because everyone else wants action too!"

To which we've said, as we are saying this time, "No."
Logged

Twitter
This is a forum on steroids tbh. The rate at which content worth reading is being generated could get you pregnant.

Nicoletta Mithra

  • Veteran
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1049
Re: Break a leg.
« Reply #25 on: 05 Dec 2015, 21:37 »

I'm well aware of how the fallacy works, actually, and you are incorrect.  Yes, the opinion of the people does play quite the role - it was the opinion of the people early on that settled out how things should or shouldn't be done here.

Are you really going to say that whether people feel comfy or not with how moderation is handled is something that has been decided by "the people early on that settled out how things should or shouldn't be done here"? Really?

Because Lyn isn't saying that how moderation is handled is opposed to how the people decided how they should be handled when they started this forum. Nor is he claiming that it's opposed to how the moderation team decides to handle things. You are aware of that, yes?

Just to be sure: He claims that some aspects of moderation lead to some people being uncomfortable with parts of moderation and that therefore some people leave. And that some of those aspects are things that people are reasonably uncomfy with, rather then them just being butthurt for being moderated.

Whatever anyone originally has decided initially within the circle of founders or later on amongst the moderators has no impact on that, I hope you see that. To claim otherwise is fallacious - and I'm sure as a fan of those fancy fallacy names you'll be able to figure out which.

Honestly, I don't feel the necessity to answer your post point by point. Suffice to say: If you're right and Lyn is the only one taking issues here, then you'd have no reason to respond at all. Just let his threads die quietly. No reason to beat a dead horse - if you do so it's your fault, not Lyn's.

Ofc. that I as well say that I'm not quite comfy with this (while I don't see much reason to try to change it, not least because the moderators have demonstrated time and again unwillingness to change in those respects), is dismissed as well. Rather Lyn is mischaracterised as a "Mob of One". Lyn is certainly not a mob - but rather a critical voice - for one and silence doesn't equal approval for the other.

Ofcourse, we recently saw a person go and make explicit that one reason was that they were uncomfy with aspects of moderation. But yah, opinion is that "The decrease in traffic has in numerous other threads been attributed to the growing number of avenues for this discussion, most notably Slack." Well, first, I think that migration of people rarely has one cause only. Even so, if people prefer an alternative, then the question is still "Why?". It doesn't rule out that some people are doing so because of issues with moderation. Not to say that opinion doesn't equate truth and here we don't even have the opinions of those that left, but rather those that stayed. Just sayin' you're quite fast to call fallacy in one case and then put up another where the call might even be more justified.

To me it seems you're taking this as an attack on you personally, rather than as criticism. You really shouldn't. And if you do take it as criticism you should be able to deal with it much more relaxed than you do, apparently.

Also, yes, as I see it Lyn is the one left constantly raising his voice in those cases. There were more - some just fell more or less silent - as I did, though not due to approval of how it's handled - some left. I personally would see it as Lyn still believing in your ability to re-evaluate the decisions the moderation team made (Without that, you can in fact close the 'Moderation Discussion' subforum.) in this matter. Just because you made the decision once doesn't mean it should never be re-evaluated. And thus I don't see why someone shouldn't be able to call for a re-evaluation of it, especially if a case of it comes up. You're still free to answer: "You know our policy, we won't re-evaluate it.", if you feel no need to do so. No need for further answers from mods, then.

The idea that Lyn is "intentionally disruptive" (Of what, by the way? Isn't this sub-forum there for discussing moderation? I didn't see him being any more disruptive in threads outside this than the average poster.) is ludicrous to me. This doesn't even come up more than about once a year. I can't see Lyn's behaviour as disruptive, unless one thinks that having someone ask to re-evaluate ones 'rules' (and merely one of them, at that!) once a year is somehow "disruptive".

As Utari said: "Regardless of how individuals feel about other posters, if they have a point let them make it." -  If as you say Lyn's point has nothing to it, it hurts even less to let him make it once in a while.
« Last Edit: 05 Dec 2015, 21:42 by Nicoletta Mithra »
Logged

Havohej

  • Friendly Neighborhood Forum Admin
  • Veteran
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1624
  • Ex-convict
    • Insurmountable Logic
Re: Break a leg.
« Reply #26 on: 05 Dec 2015, 21:43 »

I'm well aware of how the fallacy works, actually, and you are incorrect.  Yes, the opinion of the people does play quite the role - it was the opinion of the people early on that settled out how things should or shouldn't be done here.

Are you really going to say that whether people feel comfy or not with how moderation is handled is something that has been decided by "the people early on that settled out how things should or shouldn't be done here"? Really?
You've either missed the point or ignored it.  Assuming that the rest of the post follows on from the premise stated here, I'm not going to bother reading it as it does not address anything that I actually said.
Logged

Twitter
This is a forum on steroids tbh. The rate at which content worth reading is being generated could get you pregnant.

Nicoletta Mithra

  • Veteran
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1049
Re: Break a leg.
« Reply #27 on: 05 Dec 2015, 21:49 »

The premise you start from either doesn't adress Lyn's point (in which case it might be OK but besides the point) or it is fallacious. If it is beside the point, I indeed ignored it.

P.S.: If you feel that it's neither beside the point, nor fallacious, I'm sure you can explain why and and make me aware of how it is valid (and sound).
« Last Edit: 05 Dec 2015, 21:51 by Nicoletta Mithra »
Logged

Havohej

  • Friendly Neighborhood Forum Admin
  • Veteran
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1624
  • Ex-convict
    • Insurmountable Logic
Re: Break a leg.
« Reply #28 on: 05 Dec 2015, 21:50 »

Why would I respond to your post by addressing Lyn's point?

That doesn't make sense.
Logged

Twitter
This is a forum on steroids tbh. The rate at which content worth reading is being generated could get you pregnant.

Nicoletta Mithra

  • Veteran
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1049
Re: Break a leg.
« Reply #29 on: 05 Dec 2015, 21:53 »

Because in my post I argue for the validity of Lyn's point. You claimed it's a fallacy: I argued it's not. You claimed that it's none the less a fallacy: I argued that your claim is either beside the point (Lyn's point) or fallacious.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3