Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Lillith Blackheart]

Ok.

Look. I said this to a mod in a PM, but I am going to say this again and publicly where people can see it.

While I completely understand what it is you people are trying to get away from and the reason behind the separation from Chatsubo -- and trust me, I do completely understand, I have moderated many a forum in my day, and am well aware of what happened there -- you people need to take a deep breath and relax.

First of all, getting a PM asking you to not use harsh language (and I am not going to get in specifics because I am not questioning moderation on a specific instance but as a general whole) because instead of saying "I disagree with X" you said "I think X is incorrect", which means exactly the same damn thing to a T is nonsense.

Secondly, you're locking a thread on and off at random times when the thread isn't even heated. It is a simple, calm discussion about a topic which may be sensitive, but both sides of the discussion were very calm and neither was being nasty. They were simply offering their opinions and substantiating them.

Listen to me here, because I have moderated many forums and administrated many forums, and I currently am an admin (the primary one lately) on a forum that is designed for "family friendly fun" and therefore is far more strict than most...

You are going to kill off your userbase.

There is a point where you go from trying your hardest to limit sniping and pissing matches to be crushing any effective discussion because the slightest remark that could be viewed as inflammatory, whether it was viewed as inflammatory by the posters themselves, garnered a kneejerk response from one of the moderators and they shut it down.

At the same time I am certain you are going to quote the FAQ from me, I am going to pre-empt that by posting from it myself.

Here you go:

Q: Doesn't being polite to people I disagree with make me a hypocrite?
A: No. It makes you a grown-up.

Does this apply only in the aspect of people having to be all butterflies and honey with people or does it also not apply to people being able to have a grown-up discussion about a topic that may be a bit sensitive?

You can politely disagree about a sensitive topic, and the Amarr Bloc thread has been doing that fairly well.

I politely disagreed with someone in a thread and was told to not be as aggressive.

I'm sorry, but I think that perchance we might need to form some consensus on what "polite" is, because I think some people think "polite" is being calm and rational and not rude, and some people apparently think "polite" means gumdrops and lollipops.

So how about you span out a bit more what that is in the FAQ instead of just saying "It's subjective, deal with it." Because you say people should be grown-ups, but then turn around and take away their lollis like they're three year olds.

If you want people to be grown-ups, treat them as though they are.

Editted by indirect request.

[Casiella]

Dunno about specifics because apparently I missed it, but I would say that this particular post strikes me as very angry and hostile and not the sort of thing this site wants to promote.

[Lillith Blackheart]

It is written bluntly strictly to make the point more evident, but I assure you it is neither angry nor hostile. I am very calm as I don't have any sort of emotional or psychological stake in the forum as a whole.

Action me if you feel so motivated.

[Casiella]

Hey, I'm just saying. While I didn't have you in mind at all, this does sort of point up the issue that Cia and I had brought up in the thread about the possible new "trolling" rule.

[Lillith Blackheart]

The subject can be editted.

I don't really care. If it would make people happier I'll gladly do it. I can even take the entire two F-bombs out of the post, too. They were more habit in speaking than anything.

Edit: And done.

[Laerise [PIE]]

Its a bit annoying to have active threads locked every now and again, agreed.

But it ain't this bad, ain't it?

The above link might be considered NSFW.

[Lillith Blackheart]

Its a bit annoying to have active threads locked every now and again, agreed.

But it ain't this bad, ain't it?

It's more than just the locked threads, Laerise. It's the mentality behind the locked threads when nothing bad is going on and the resultant stimmying of conversation that will inevitably come out of it, not-withstanding the amount of work it will cause the Moderators.

More importantly it's the fact that if a conversation like the one in the Amarr Bloc thread was something that was necessary to action, then there is an over-arching display from the moderators that we are small children incapable of having a reasoned discussion without immediately falling to yelling at each other with the slightest provocation.

It's a bad precedent.

[Laerise [PIE]]

Come on, cut them some lack, this forum is a learning process for everyone involved.

Only contructive and level headed criticism will mold(sp?) it into something that everyone can enjoy.

[Lillith Blackheart]

...that would be exactly what was given here.

[Silver Night]

I don't believe you were warned, nor was there any other punitive action taken? Just a reminder that labeling someone else's play as 'incorrect' might not be the best way to go about having a polite discussion?

I think it was noted in the PM that it wasn't a warning, and that the mod involved didn't believe you were being intentionally insulting, but that it might be better to phrase things in a way that wouldn't seem insulting?

The Amarr Bloc thread is a separate matter. It is being moderated here and there precisely because we don't want it to turn ugly. It is early days yet, and we want to make sure that it is clear from the start how this forum should be. If that makes some of the moderation seem harsh or over-sensitive, it is probably just a natural and unavoidable consequence of that.

It is possible to make points without being excessively combative. It isn't always as fun and certainly making your point strongly will often not result in conflict, but we are willing to sacrifice a certain amount of rhetorical enthusiasm to keep a tone of discussion rather than argument.

It doesn't take much for someone else to see your intent as entirely other - and likely more hostile - than it really is, and things go downhill from there.

[Casiella]

I suspect the mods are feeling their way forward, and so occasionally might react slightly off from their ideal. It happens.

And, were I one of them, I don't know that I would take the OP as calm and level-headed (though I certainly can see the constructive bits within it).

[Silver Night]

I suspect the mods are feeling their way forward, and so occasionally might react slightly off from their ideal. It happens.

And, were I one of them, I don't know that I would take the OP as calm and level-headed (though I certainly can see the constructive bits within it).

Exactly. I'm sure as a moderation veteran, Lilith, you are familiar with the gaps that can exist between a person's intent and what someone - or sometimes nearly everyone - else sees when they read a post. It's a limit of the medium, and one that hopefully the moderation here will help people be more aware of.

[Silver Night]

I'd like to add that people should feel free to use the Report button. This forum does provide you a field to enter why you are reporting something, so please explain in detail.

Abuse of said button will, of course, also be grounds for moderator action.

[Lillith Blackheart]

I don't believe you were warned, nor was there any other punitive action taken? Just a reminder that labeling someone else's play as 'incorrect' might not be the best way to go about having a polite discussion?

I don't believe that punitive action was stated as being taken. The thing about it is that no one's play was labelled as incorrect. The only thing that was wrong was the word incorrect was used. Even though "incorrect" was the correct word to convey what was being said.

You call it a reminder, I call it being warned. Since a warning is nothing but a reminder that there are rules that you may or may not be close to violating.

What was said in the situation indicated was that I felt they had incorrectly categorized something. I was "reminded" that I should instead have said I disagreed with how they categorized something. Those statements are identical in every aspect save for juxtaposition of "disagree" with "incorrect". The meaning and end result is the same. Saying you think something is incorrect and saying "Your RP is wrong" are two entirely different things, and anyone should be able to see that.

I think it was noted in the PM that it wasn't a warning, and that the mod involved didn't believe you were being intentionally insulting, but that it might be better to phrase things in a way that wouldn't seem insulting?

The point being made is that in no way should that have seemed insulting to begin with. Ghost was obviously not at all hurt by it, and in fact took the statement exactly as it was both intended and worded, and the discussion continued. That's really the nuts of it. There's nothing insulting about the sentence. If I had said "You're wrong about this" that would be one thing, but that wasn't what was said or even hinted at, it was "I think you may have set up your categories incorrectly". That says just what it means "You're on the right track I think, but I think you might have something incorrect in your differentiation as compared to what you're trying to say".

The Amarr Bloc thread is a separate matter. It is being moderated here and there precisely because we don't want it to turn ugly. It is early days yet, and we want to make sure that it is clear from the start how this forum should be. If that makes some of the moderation seem harsh or over-sensitive, it is probably just a natural and unavoidable consequence of that.

I don't agree that it is unavoidable, Silver. I appreciate what you're doing here and I am in no way trying to shit on you guys. I don't want to see the thread turn ugly either, but I saw no signs that it was going to do so. A snip and a tuck here and there I can understand and see no problems with, but the feeling that I am getting in your attempt to make it clear how the forum should be from the start is that you want to not have discussions about sensitive topics at all, even if people are able to remain calm during them.

And the reason I made this post to begin with wasn't to take a dump on your heads, but to point out that that is how it is coming across, even if it is not what you're intending. If it is what you're intending, then that is fine. However I really don't think that you're intending to loom over the userbase like a Catholic Nun with a ruler.

It is possible to make points without being excessively combative. It isn't always as fun and certainly making your point strongly will often not result in conflict, but we are willing to sacrifice a certain amount of rhetorical enthusiasm to keep a tone of discussion rather than argument.

It is possible to make points bluntly without being excessively combative. It is completely possible to have a debate without having an argument. Are you willing to sacrifice a carefully worded, rational debate about a sensitive topic that could improve perspectives and play for all parties involved simply out of concern that there's a small possibility, even if it's going fine now, that it might get out of hand at some unknown point in the future without letting it move forward a bit?

It doesn't take much for someone else to see your intent as entirely other - and likely more hostile - than it really is, and things go downhill from there.

And that is when things should be responded to, when they start to go down the hill. When everyone is still climbing up the hill, I would suggest it does damage to the conversation to stop it out of fear that when they get to the top someone might stumble.

[Silver Night]

What do you mean when you talk about being 'blunt'?