Print

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

[BloodBird]

As you wish. This topic-liner is a quote from Morwen, regarding a recently modded post.

This was an honest question from my part considering something Ava stated that seemed to contradict actions made IC and IG previously. It confused me, thus I asked.

When it got catacomb'ed I looked it over and saw that it was taken as "obvious" flame-bait. Okay, fair enough - I did see how my phrasing of the question was needlessly aggressive and in an accusing manner, so I decided to answer with this and make 3 things clear;

1. I intended to make an honest question with no strings attached - it was taken as flame-bait and cata'ed for it.
2. I intended to - and did - apologize for stating my question in such a manner as to be confusing and gettign if cata'ed in the first place, and
3. I noted that Kala and Ava had answered my question pretty well.

End of story, end of tale. I believed.

Now the clarification/apology for messing up in the first place is a discussion of Moderation. My reaction to that was pretty much along the lines of "wha...?"

I appreciate that flames/needless drama/personal accusation/crap/and other unwanted stuff gets modded, but now I'm beginning to feel like I'm walking a large library where any manner of noise gets me gunned down by the librarian and dumped in the trash outside.

How did you reach the conclusion that the second post was  discussing moderation? Should I avoid commenting on anything at all that have been modded or would I be better of keeping my mouth shut in any tread where anything I've said/done has been modded?

*EDIT* Clarification.

[Silver Night]

Commenting on moderation is fine - and there is a proper place for discussing moderation: the Moderation Discussion forum. You can post in a thread where you've been moderated, but if the subject of that post is about having been moderated, it will probably be considered off topic.

Edit for clarification: The first sentence of that second post was a direct reference to the actual moderation. SThe second part was a reference to the posts that had been removed - if it's still not clear, I'll need a little more on why you don't see it as being a post that was discussing moderation, and so off-topic.

[Morwen Lagann]

I'm a bit busy at work, so this will be brief, but I feel obligated to respond, so:

Both of your posts were reported as trolling and/or flamebait. A judgement call was made in both cases that moderation was necessary.

I also took recent posts of yours into account when deciding to go ahead and act on the second report this morning, particularly the several hostile posts you've directed at Ava and TRA. Even if it weren't for that, that post would have been shitcanned for the same reason anyway: if you get modded in a thread, you don't talk about it there if you have something to say about it, you bring it up here in this forum, as the rules say.

Beyond that: It's okay to be a bittervet. Most here are bittervets of varying degrees of irreverence and seriousness. It is not, however, okay to use being a bittervet as an excuse to troll and flame others on these forums for their actions ingame. And when you're not even playing the game, it makes you look pretty silly.

To that end, I suggest following your own advice from a previously shitcanned thread (shortened for context and emphasis on the point):

Keep in mind whenever you feel like flapping your gums [...] sending off useless crap [...] that the only one looking like a moron is yourself, everyone else groans and hope they never look as stupid. Occasionally they do regardless, but none wants that.

[...] keeping one's inner dumb-ass under wraps is a useful skill, you might avoid ruining your reputation.

tl;dr - Change your attitude and tone when posting, and you won't run into problems.

[BloodBird]

First off, I will apologize for being a horribly unskilled internet-communicator. I'm sorry. Honestly.

That is not even a joke; it is a provable fact. In context of apparently being horrible at this I will endeavor to be completely tongue-in-check and make separate, independent points to avoid ANY confusion or misunderstanding of intent, so kindly bear with me as I'll be far more matter-of-fact than I am. Anything I write here means exactly what it says.

First off, Silver Night.

Commenting on moderation is fine - and there is a proper place for discussing moderation: the Moderation Discussion forum. You can post in a thread where you've been moderated, but if the subject of that post is about having been moderated, it will probably be considered off topic.

The subject-header was a quote from Morwen as I could not think of a more fitting header for this topic. After I edited the OP I added that line after "As you wish" to be clear. I'll just repeat the intended message here - I know where I can and can't discuss moderation, Thus I never intentionally discuss moderation anywhere else. At least according to me memory.

Edit for clarification: The first sentence of that second post was a direct reference to the actual moderation. SThe second part was a reference to the posts that had been removed - if it's still not clear, I'll need a little more on why you don't see it as being a post that was discussing moderation, and so off-topic.

Yes, the first line was directly in reference to the previously removed post. "Seems some people's honest questions are other people's flamebait. I apologize." My intention was this; "I can see why the previous post was considered flame-bait even if my honest intention was asking an un-loaded question. I'm sorry." [for making a post unclear enough to be taken as flame-bait.]

WHY it was taken as flame-bait became considerably more clear to me after reading the context from Morwen in this tread. More on that a little further down.*1

At the time I realized that the way I phrased the first post's question could be seen as a OOC-stab at Ava, and assumed that this was the reason it was considered flame-bait. The second post was meant to explain and apologize for that, but I did not realize the full extent of why it was taken as such - I did not recall the previous exchange in the catacombed tread about the local-logs and my heated dumb-ass behavior there.

Now, for Morwen.

I'm a bit busy at work, so this will be brief, but I feel obligated to respond, so:

I'm glad you did, for several reasons now.

Your actions confused me and I wanted clarification, I've realized a greater extent of why Ava and/or whoever reported my post felt I was flaming or targeting them, and I've come to a conclusion about personal communication skills and their needs for improvement. While I long suspected, I could not put my finger on anything solid and say "this is a clear indication that my com skills needs work."

You provided that, if only by accident and not design, so thanks.

Both of your posts were reported as trolling and/or flamebait. A judgement call was made in both cases that moderation was necessary.

Looking back now, it's easy to see where this idea came from - my posts were reported as flame-bait and trolling. I try to avoid intentionally doing either. (I have a theory that part of this issue lie with another more broad problem I've experienced before and hoped never to get again, and I'll elaborate in this later.*2) For now, while I were originally bewildered about why my posts were considered to be either flame-bait or trolling, this confusion is now cleared up. Were I a mod I'd cata them both as well, from the point-of-view presented here.

I also took recent posts of yours into account when deciding to go ahead and act on the second report this morning, particularly the several hostile posts you've directed at Ava and TRA.

When I first read this part of the post and not further down I stopped for a moment and said to myself "Wait, what hostile posts? I don't have any hostile intentions..."

And then I read on and there was this annoying little epiphany, this revelation. "Congrats, Alex, you messed up. Again."

1* And suddenly, the reasoning for the feelings of flaming and trolling made so much more sense. I've posted in several tread that somehow involved Ava and/or corp now and in light of this feeling of "He's out to get us" I can easily see where that view-point come from.

Even the first post in the corporate tread about Skadi's Call that was meant as a slight tease, a joke in good faith, could be miss-understood when viewed in this light.

"Congrats Ava, A winner is you.

Just be careful or the violenced boats will be yours"

[spoiler][/spoiler]

Intention: "Nice corp, good luck and watch out for the Imperials"
Possible view: "Your going to get owned, hepra darpa"

I would like to clear this up right here.

I do not intentionally target people for harassment or hard-line attacks through either flaming topics, trolling or any other means. I can RP with you, blow you up in space, disagree with IC and OOC opinions, I can argue, I can even bitch and complain, but I won't go and intentionally target anyone. Not Ava, not any IC political enemies, or pirates (REGARDLESS of how annoyed I am with piracy from an OOC point-of-view, I will never intentionally target another PLAYER over their play-style.) or anyone. This too build on another issue I will deal with further down. *2

In short, In light of how Ava and/or anyone else who felt offended or targeted by my actions might feel about this, it's easy to see where the feelings of being attacked came from. Again; I'm honestly sorry.

Even if it weren't for that, that post would have been shitcanned for the same reason anyway: if you get modded in a thread, you don't talk about it there if you have something to say about it, you bring it up here in this forum, as the rules say.

This is likely nothing more than nit-picking, but this is what I intended my second post to say; "I can see why the previous post was considered flame-bait even if my honest intention was asking an un-loaded question. I'm sorry." [for making a post unclear enough to be taken as flame-bait.]

It's exactly the same as what I told Silver above. It is likely that the second post would be removed even if I phrased it like this, but I do not like the idea that people might think that I was bitching about being modded in the tread I was modded from when I meant to apologize for my lacking clarity and the disturbance that it caused.

--------------------------------Major subject change--------------------------------------------------

Beyond that: It's okay to be a bittervet. Most here are bittervets of varying degrees of irreverence and seriousness. It is not, however, okay to use being a bittervet as an excuse to troll and flame others on these forums for their actions ingame. And when you're not even playing the game, it makes you look pretty silly.

To me, "Bittervet" is a bit of a joke. Partially as a self-pat on the back for the fact I've spent 6 years + in this game and have pretty much seen it all, even if I've only been active for about 5 of those, and partially because I've been around so long that I recall all the "good old times" that basically makes the EVE of today better, and worse, than it was 4, 3, 2 even 1 year ago. It's not an exploitable "status" or mark of rank or anything that I can "use" in any regard beyond making light-hearted jokes, mostly in the introduction section. "Beware for the bittervets are hungry and might bite." *noms*

It's a joke. Made in good spirit to make people laugh. It is not a tool or enabler to do jack-shit, and if you will forgive the crude language, I find the mere IDEA that you think I'll use it as a tool or excuse to flame or troll for whatever reason to be an insult of very high caliber. I do not fuck around Morwen. I take very great care not to drop into the idiotic mentality of many so-called "veterans" of lording my longer play-time, experience and/or isk, assets, etc. in anyone's face. because they had the mis-fortune to start playing at a later time than me. Annoying elitist tards, are just that. And that is my opinion.

If you intended to insult, then you did good work. If not, and I'm quite confident you did not, then don't repeat. I'm a bitter' ol vet only so far that I can utilize it as a cute old joke, and the fact I enjoy passing along advice and help to younger players when asked for.

-----Minor topic change-------

As a slight aside, I am "not playing the game anymore" only by my own standard. Technically I still pay for all my accounts, I log in, change skills, mine, mission and do the occasional roam/hunt for FW targets. (with my FW toon, ofc.) By most standards, I am still active. By my own, I might as well stop paying for EVE and concede that my toons will stop being skilled to new, high standards because frankly, I play so little so sporadically and do so little that I might as well stop. Nevertheless, my opinions on different matters are still valid because I still run into them. This brings me to the topic you provided last...

------------------------------------Major topic change--------------------------------------------------

To that end, I suggest following your own advice from a previously shitcanned thread (shortened for context and emphasis on the point):

Keep in mind whenever you feel like flapping your gums [...] sending off useless crap [...] that the only one looking like a moron is yourself, everyone else groans and hope they never look as stupid. Occasionally they do regardless, but none wants that.

[...] keeping one's inner dumb-ass under wraps is a useful skill, you might avoid ruining your reputation.

1* The contents of that tread was a horribly messed-up mistake of mine consisting of a topic I should honestly not over-react so badly to, and my horribly dumb over-reaction to it. Ava apologized twice, and I underlined my utter dis-taste for local smacking shit three times, two more than needed and three more than asked for.

The simple bottom-line is that this was never really directed at Ava in any special way. Ava simply happened to be the local target for the dumb reaction to actions made in local. I see that kind of stupidity in local on a steady basis when roaming so to see others do it grates on me. Nevertheless the aim of the topic was mostly to bitch about local-smack in general and again, not Ava in particular.

In context to that tread however (I had temporarily forgotten it) the feeling that I targeted Ava these last few days seems clear and once again, I'll state that I understand how that impression came about. And from the feeling of being targeted, nearly anything I've posted recently that somehow regards Ava and/or the new Skadi's Call corp could be taken as a flame/troll, as pointed out above. Again, this has never been an intention of mine, and this recent example plays in only as an unfortunate coincidence.

-------Minor topic change-----------

Having said that, my advice - needlessly aggressive though it may have been - was for local-smackers in general. While I could and should have been more civil about it I meant what I said and stand by it. In fact, the very reality that am now in need of making this post means I've failed to "contain my inner dumb-ass". Had I done a better job, combined with "had I been a better speaker" I might have avoided this. A bit more empathy might help too, but I've always been lacking in that department.

And so I find myself in my current predicament, up to my knees in issues in need of resolving.

tl;dr - Change your attitude and tone when posting, and you won't run into problems.

Thank you.

I will.

-----------------Major subject change----------------------------

2* For years now, I've been reminded of how cowardly people can be. People occasionally develop an issue with or around me, be they minor or major, imagined or actual. Let me give you some examples.

A few months after I left the military, I got a call from one of my fellow soldiers. As far as I could recall the two of us had had no issue with one another, no problems, beyond the fact we rarely spoke and did not socialize much. This was not unheard of actually, I am relatively introverted and don't socialize with others easily, keeping to myself if able. I assumed there was no problem with anyone - none were reported to me directly and I tried hard to be as effective as able in my role while not intrusive or a problem to anyone. Essentially, don't rock the boat.

However when this guy called me, he told me his reason for not socializing with me was because I put him "off" or scared him, in a way. To this day, I have not the faintest idea what exactly he meant and that bothers me. I didn't know. He never told me when he could. He ignored the problem, ignored me as much as he could, and pretty much spent his time with a hands-off approach. But according to him, it had been a major issue and he was happy to be gone and happy he would never see me again.

How the hell is that supposed to make me feel? I was essentially told that "You do this thing that puts people off, and I'm glad it's not my problem anymore." So what the hell was it, and why did he not tell me that directly? I can't fix a problem I can't find or don't know about.

About... 6 months? A year ago? Some time ago I was told by my dad that he has called, by my neighbor from next door. Said neighbor has an issue with how I treated my cat, it was apparently sub-optimal treatment according to him, and if I did not improve, I'd get the law on my neck for mistreatment. Tread about this is likely on Backstage somewhere. Long story short his claims were not backed by... well, anything. but he never spoke to ME about this at all. Not directly, not by phone, mail or anything. He called my dad. He could have walked out the door, taken 15 steps, knocked on my door, explained.

There have been other cases. I'd hear from some class-mates that other class-mates had this issue with me or other, and what that was all about. I would be pretty much "What issue?" and in need to be the one to seek them out to work stuff out. Mostly misunderstandings. Sometimes other problems that were more legitimate. But rare was the person who went to me, and dealt with the problem directly. One kid held a grudge for near 2 years over a misunderstanding before we cleared it up. I heard from a 3rd party.

Basically, This is what I'm getting at. I am tired of being expected to read minds. I'm tired of everyone expecting me to know how they feel.

I don't. I am not a telepath. I know for a fact I am not very good with empathy. I have to work hard and really think to "put myself in another's shoes" because I have problems understanding how others really feel.

Just like now. I did not know, I did not realize that people considered me to be targeting them especially or flaming/trolling when my posts had considerably different purposes. I recall sending Ava a mail on Backstage after the issue with the previously mentioned local-smack tread and apologizing for my needless bullshit, I don't know if that mail got through even. (can't find my out-box, if one even exists.)

In short, if you feel there is an issue with me, if you have beef with me, you would be far better served dealing with me. Mail me, tell me, yell at me, whatever you have to to get your issue across, and if I don't deal with it and fix it, it will be my problem. Until you do, the ball is in your court, as they say. I don't think it's to much to ask that people who have problems with me, talk to me about it.

---

Tired, going to bed. I'll look forward to reading any replies here tomorrow. I hope I did not miss anything. Oh well, new day tomorrow if I did.

[kalaratiri]

I took your moderated post as: Stupidly worded, but not actually malicious.

Having read through your replies here, I'm glad to see I was right and didn't react badly to it. Thanks for the apology.

[Silver Night]

I appreciate that you took the time to go through things from your perspective on this, Bloodbird.

I want to note, though, that while your previous posts related to Ava and her corp were noted when moderating your posts, both posts would have been moderated without that previous history.

I understand it may not have been your intent, but when you have a question structured as 'Is Jim a lying hypocrite, or are there reasons for [things that mean they are a hypocrite]?' it is very nearly the definition of flame bait. It was moderated for exactly the reason you guessed at - which is basically that it looked like an OOC jab. Like I said, that is any other context aside.

I'm not sure what else I can say to clarify. I don't think the problem is that you aren't a mind reader - but it may be that there are problems making clear for you what is and is not acceptable posting, and why.

Similarly, the second post was moderated for discussing a moderated post. There isn't really any further I can clarify that, because it is basically as far as it can be reduced: the things you wrote were about a moderated post and moderation, so it was moved for being about a moderated post and moderation.

If you feel like you need to explain something about a moderated post, the thread that that post was removed from isn't the place for it. It derails, and it causes further problems.

I don't think anyone here expects you to be a mind reader. Blaming everyone else for expecting you to be a mind reader is, therefore, unlikely to ultimately be productive.

There is a difference between that and having poor communication skills. Having read quite a few of your posts, and moderated some of them, I think you do have some trouble communicating clearly what your intent and tone are - often a challenge on the internet. I'm not a mind reader either, though. So we can only deal with what we see here in front of us.

Anyway, if you have questions about any of this, feel free to ask. And in the future, if you aren't sure that something you want to post will come across the way you intent, you can always PM me and I'll tell you what I get from whatever you've written and you can see if our perspectives on it match.

[BloodBird]

I appreciate that you took the time to go through things from your perspective on this, Bloodbird.

(Your welcome.)

I want to note, though, that while your previous posts related to Ava and her corp were noted when moderating your posts, both posts would have been moderated without that previous history.

(I realized that after Morwen made her reply, even if I originally made this topic due to not realizing why the second one was removed. The first one though was rather obvious, there were any number of ways I could have asked in a less offensive manner. My only intention in the previous post was noting the original intention with them.)

I understand it may not have been your intent, but when you have a question structured as 'Is Jim a lying hypocrite, or are there reasons for [things that mean they are a hypocrite]?' it is very nearly the definition of flame bait. It was moderated for exactly the reason you guessed at - which is basically that it looked like an OOC jab. Like I said, that is any other context aside.

(Any manner of ways other than the one used could have had a different outcome. It was stupid, but it was a lesson, nonetheless.)

I'm not sure what else I can say to clarify. I don't think the problem is that you aren't a mind reader - but it may be that there are problems making clear for you what is and is not acceptable posting, and why.

(You don't need to clarify anything more. The comment about mind reading skills was in relation to the issue of people ignoring me when the problem between me and them can be fixed by talking to me about it, instead of "expecting me to read their minds" and know what the problem is about. I don't think the issue is knowing what is and is not acceptable posting, but for me to figure out when a post meant to be acceptable turns out not to be, and preventing that from happening.)

Similarly, the second post was moderated for discussing a moderated post. There isn't really any further I can clarify that, because it is basically as far as it can be reduced: the things you wrote were about a moderated post and moderation, so it was moved for being about a moderated post and moderation.

(There is no need for any further clarification - I understand, and did so when making my previous post. My only concern in my big  post above was underlying what the original intention was and pointing out why it failed. Ergo - I realized that even apologizing for making a post poorly enough that it got removed as a flame was technically talking about/discussing a moderated post, ergo it would be moderated as well. end of story.)

If you feel like you need to explain something about a moderated post, the thread that that post was removed from isn't the place for it. It derails, and it causes further problems.

(I kind of realized that. To late, but I did. I will endeavor not to repeat and keep any comment or responses in regards to them to the moderation forum. My original mistake in regards to the second post was not realizing that talking about a modded post was... still talking about it, regardless of what was said in it.)

I don't think anyone here expects you to be a mind reader. Blaming everyone else for expecting you to be a mind reader is, therefore, unlikely to ultimately be productive.

(Again, my use of the topic of mind-reading was a reference to an issue I run into every now and then, and was separate from most of the topics and issues here. Suffice to say I would appreciate it if anyone with issues with me took it up with me directly to clear things up. Also, I did not intend to blame anyone else by expecting me to read their minds or anything at all, far from it - I pointed out that I can't do that, and thus any issue with me that I apparently don't realize exists, needs to be brought to my attention so it can be dealt with. That was all, really.)

There is a difference between that and having poor communication skills. Having read quite a few of your posts, and moderated some of them, I think you do have some trouble communicating clearly what your intent and tone are - often a challenge on the internet. I'm not a mind reader either, though. So we can only deal with what we see here in front of us.

(I agree with this. While I previously had some... feeling, or sensation that I was not taken as intended - that people miss-understood, perhaps - I had little graspable evidence. That's changed recently and I'll do my best to consider the different ways any message can be interpreted, and not just the one I intend - if a message can be misunderstood easily I'll endeavor to make it clearer and hope for a better outcome.)

Anyway, if you have questions about any of this, feel free to ask. And in the future, if you aren't sure that something you want to post will come across the way you intent, you can always PM me and I'll tell you what I get from whatever you've written and you can see if our perspectives on it match.

(I will try to keep this in mind for the future. Thanks.)

Replies are in your post.

[Ava Starfire]

It is good to know that it is not something personal, I had begun to think it was.

Cleared a lot up for me, no hard feelings at all.

Ava

[Bacchanalian]

Anything remotely argumentative on this forum will eventually be moderated.  Arguing at all, civilly or not, isn't worth bothering with because eventually the thread will be pruned/shut down.  To quote someone on my corp forums who lurks but doesn't post anymore but was once a hardcore RPer:

I rarely post due to shiney-red-ball syndrome.  Plus it's like it's the extreme opposite of Chatsubo, whereas their mods would do nothing, Backstage mods will modhammer you for nearly anything if they think you're being 'argumentative'.

After having like 5 or 6 posts kicked, I kinda went back into lurk mode, since the vast majority of things that get my interest are when people are arguing about 'current events'.

[Mizhara]

No point even mentioning it, Bacch. There'll never be even the slightest acknowledgment from any of the mods or admins that there could ever be anything even slightly wrong with the policies here. It's the inevitable result of how the admin/mod corp got built, really.

[Silver Night]

I think we've been pretty up-front about the policies not being for everyone, and that they are often going to come down on the side of more rather than less moderation.

This was never meant to be a forum that would be everything for everyone. I had, in fact, figured that we would likely have a relatively small membership and most people would still prefer Chatsubo's more free-wheeling style.

Given how many people feel constrained by the moderation here, I'd encourage you, Miz, or anyone else to start up a complimentary forum with a more relaxed (or just alternative)atmosphere. I've been tempted a time or two myself, but I've got my plate full enough with Backstage.

tl:dr - Not working the way you would prefer doesn't mean it isn't working (mostly - no one is perfect) as intended.

[Lyn Farel]

I for one fully support the moderation stance and sometimes even find it too laxist considering how some people tend to behave. Internet anonymity is not an excuse to act aggressively, with condescension, or whatever else makes one look like a jerk. If people can't play by the rules, this is their problem. Some of us still prefer to interact in a sane environnement.

Also, what Bach said is pure caricature for me.

[BloodBird]

Bach, your friend sounds to me like he's very easily offended and unable to tone down his language. I generally spiced up my tone and language with allot of cursing as a matter of course IRL and I've toned down sufficiently on these boards to be able to discuss and argue pretty much anything without constantly being smacked by mods.

If "arguing current events" got him hammered all the time, the easy fix would be self-moderation and perhaps a bit more respect, or less obvious dis-respect.

For the most part I feel the mods here work just fine.

[Bacchanalian]

You're all arguing, I demand moderation.

[Ava Starfire]

You're all arguing, I demand moderation.

* Ava Starfire offers muffins!