New forum for member feedback

[Rumpelstiltskin]

And I also think that if you're trying to stay out of forum drama, you're definitely in the wrong thread and talking to the wrong person (Scott) in order to do it.

Sup broheim!

 

[Joker]

Sorry, Scott, but you are trouble with a capital T.

s'pose I'm not so different though, really

 

[Ⓐaron]

My point is more that this happened before and was mentioned to staff - that constitutes enough of a history for this sort of thing, imo. A second time for something as serious as harassment would, in theory, be dealt with more seriously than some guy flaming again, even if it's the harasser.

Well yeah, agreed, but Scott had way more offences than two, and had been banned multiple times for flaming already. And had already been given a warning that he would be banned if he persisted. Kobato had not been given a warning that she could be banned if she persisted, and the staff felt that the circumstances had not made it obvious to her that what she did would be construed a banworthy offence. It's not just that staff hadn't made it clear to her that she was in danger of being banned, either, but I'm not sure if I would be permitted to reveal what staff felt were the mitigating circumstances.

At any rate, Kobato was indeed informed at this point that another offence of the kind, no matter how small, would result in a permaban, no questions asked. In other words, she was dealt with more severely at this point than Scott was, since Scott was only told he would be suspended for "as long as necessary". The only reason she is not permabanned while Scott was suspended is that she did not persist in her actions after this point.

And I also think that if you're trying to stay out of forum drama, you're definitely in the wrong thread and talking to the wrong person (Scott) in order to do it. (and probably the staff section, where dealing with all of this stuff takes place) Take a break from the forum, come back when you're capable of dealing, or, pardon the expression, nut up and be the admin TLS deserves. Nobody is saying that having rl shit to deal with isn't an issue, but as was said at some point in the past, being on staff is not a paid position - it's volunteer work, and I would still expect the same level of commitment to something that someone volunteers to do of their own volition. Same with Yop, really - stop not being arsed and work with your subjects, O [insert Cthulhu reference here and idk if I even spelled it right].

You're probably right, but if I disappeared from the forum entirely I would get hopelessly bored, which wouldn't do wonders for my mental state either. I've been mostly taking a break from moderation and focusing on technical issues, though, precisely because of my doubt in my own issues.

 

[Rumpelstiltskin]

I've been mostly taking a break from moderation and focusing on technical issues, though, precisely because of my doubt in my own issues.
__________________

Aint that why you got modded in the first place?

 

[Ⓐaron]

That was why I was adminned the first time, but not the second.

 

[Rumpelstiltskin]

There was a second time?

....
..
.



REALLY!







































































































































































































COME ON!

 

[Madame Mayor]

I've been mostly taking a break from moderation and focusing on technical issues, though, precisely because of my doubt in my own issues.

I respect you for this decision because it's hard to be the responsible person and admit that you aren't able to properly deal with something at the moment. That said, I hope things get better for you and glad to see you'll keep up the technical end that I think we can all agree is well done.

Also now I'm mad all this other stuff was brought up and bumped my good idea/thing we should discuss back a page. *angryfaceatL*

 

[Makoeyes987]

....Okay, when did this become the Epic Showdown of Ultimate Destiny between Scott and Aaron?

This thread is to discuss the implementation, usage, and opinions of the new Member Feedback Forum, not "Discussing old as shit warnings Scott has gotten for flaming."

This is completely irrelevant and derailing the thread. If you still have some sort of misunderstanding or problem about the suspension you got, take it with Road or Aaron via PM (or try out our shiny new forum ). But this thread is not your personal soap box to complain about an infraction or suspension you got from Aaron. This has gone on far enough. Both of you need to quit it.

 

[Rumpelstiltskin]

Wondered how long it would take the lapdog to arrive.

 

[Makoeyes987]

Again Scott, either stick to the topic and not flame or you'll have to be suspended from the thread. It's not that hard to do, tbh.

 

[Rumpelstiltskin]

Do I consider this my super final warning?
Like do I have to take this warning as the final word?
Like forever?
And ever?
To be used against me at any given point in the future?

Because that would be super!


And for the record, I was sticking to the thread.
Road posted about the fact that he didn't know of any instance to which staff deleted/removed posts that would make them look bad.
I responded mentioning aaron's little spat on ffof and now were here.
Last I checked, that's sticking to the point of the thread.

 

[Ryushikaze]

Okay so.

I like the idea of allowing members to speak with multiple members of staff directly and privately about issues that concern them.

I understand that a private section of staff may be needed for sensitive situations, such as bullying of one member to another.



HOWEVER

I think that stuff doesn't need to be private the majority of the time. I think that staff can keep a private section but that they need to use it only when necessary. If it's a reported post, and there's nothing sensitive that needs to be discussed, then talk among us about the situation. I don't even mind if it's posts after a thread has been closed so member posts don't clog up staff discussion (or temp close threads for staff discussion and re-open when a decision has been made?). OR, that staff decide which staff threads are viewable or not based on the content. Like, they still have threads only they are allowed to post in, but are visible to everyone. Does this make sense? Cause I hope it does.

Basically the tldr version is that staff section should be visible, just not postable in, unless it's a sensitive matter in which privacy is necessary for a portion of the discussion. This will make the member base feel like there aren't as many decisions being made behind closed doors, which is the common complaint right now.

If you make a decision, we just want to see the thought process and the reasons brought up as to why.

The only problem there is that most discussion does tend to be regarding sensitive matters, and even explaining some of our decisions fully can risk exposing sensitive details about those matters.

Ironically, the only way we can make the decision about what to reveal and what not to is going to have to be very cloak and dagger so that we do not expose what people want us to keep secret.

 

[Makoeyes987]

Do I consider this my super final warning?
Like do I have to take this warning as the final word?
Like forever?
And ever?
To be used against me at any given point in the future?

Because that would be super!

Read the text in this post as clearly as possible. To avoid any further misunderstanding or confusion on your end I will say clearly that this will be the last word I say on the subject of your behavior in this thread. Following this post, any noncompliance from your end will result in immediate enforcement of said consequence.

If you continue to derail the thread, or flame in this thread, you will then be temporarily suspended from this thread and its discussion. From that point on, the consequence will escalate dependent on the severity of each subsequent offense. This is for the entire duration of this thread here.

Again, this is the last I'll say on the subject. Move on and discuss the topic at hand. If you have any other issues or concerns regarding your past infractions or suspensions, take them up with Road or Aaron via PM, or..the actual new section. Thank you.

 

[Rumpelstiltskin]

Re-read^


Also isn'tit rather contrived to walk into a thread talking about the possibility of airing grievences with staff in an open enviroment and stating "take it to pm"

 

[Joker]

Mako's two posts

And then that gives you and your group of friends the stigma of being dramawhores and stirrers of shit. XD

Idk. From what I've observed in my time here, particularly the last...ehhhh, maybe 15 months?...my faith in the moderation team is at an all-time low, tbh. I mean, to further the point - here we are having this discussion, and, what, 4 people on staff have poked their noses in with something to say (Aaron, Road, Ryu, Tennyo)? Wait, Adri makes five. Meanwhile, the other *three* admins and uh...(Force, Hito...) two (?) smods have bupkis to share on the subject? That's half the team, and MOST of it is all Ryu and Road doing the talking. =/

?

ed: three posts, my mistake

 

[Geostigma]

@staff :I often feel like I'm on the outside looking in on this forum. Like I cant easily relate to most of the members here and often have trouble seeing why they debate over the issues that are most often brought up and what not.

But I get it now.
I find the current state of the forum interesting, mainly due to who is on staff and what they are doing.
I know all of you hate when I bring up ACF but im going to have to do it again.

Some of you on staff are the very same people back on the ACF days who were involved in all of the drama regarding Staff transparency and the member base/spammers having more of a say so in the on goings of the forum.

Do you recall how much it sucked to have all of our efforts trumped and 1 upped every single time? Every time we made progress they just made another hidden section of staff, or make a new admin to push "our" admin around, ect.
Im not saying TLS is there, Im not saying TLS will get there but I find it amusing that some of you guys who fought the good fight are now on the side that is refusing to work with the members.

Despite some people asking to see the staff section, what there really asking for is for staff and members to work as a team. Lets read between the lines, its obvious they want to be more involved.

100% transparency is not a good thing, but neither is no transparency. And honestly
we are not at that sweet spot yet and we should really work to get there.

Look at omegas post, hes not asking for much hes just asking for more staff to say there piece. Is that so hard to do? I get that some of you are busy today but as he said hes been asking for this for a long time.

Is it so hard to give the members what they like?
Back in the ACF days I was always of the opinion that we should atleast try something out, lets just put the tip in (o.O) and see how it feels. If it doesnt work we can always back out


@Members :
God knows I get you guys, And honestly I would try to help out more often but honestly Im just lazy and IRL always trumps my net time but lets say if staff is willing to be a bit more transparent what will you guys do?
No one here is without fault, and while I agree with the you guys more (omega, ayla, alex, ect) I think it would be more cathartic for the community if each side of this long standing issue tries to compromise.

Its obvious theres a sore spot and you are stung but sometimes I feel like you'r that girlfriend or boyfriend who always brings up past arguments that have already been forgiven in an argument.
Octo suggested we start with a clean state, I know thats pretty much impossible but how about we just give it a shot? I know staff hasnt done much renew your faith in them but perhaps moving forward we just pretend like its day 1 of TLS and everyone is barely getting to know each other.

 

[Masamune]

What harebrained scheme will you come up with next? Member Reps?

Just kidding. Actually, I'm not. That was a terrible, terrible idea.

For what's it worth, re: transparency, I believe that Staff have every justification for keeping discussions behind closed doors. In some instances, staff will be called on to handle sensitive information which might in turn see them expressing a critical opinion of certain members or their content. If you allow the member base to be privy to the full range of opinions regarding that member (either for or against), you run the risk of creating a condition of precedent whereby every future post by that member will be subject to preemptive scrutiny by those not qualified to pass judgement. Notwithstanding, there is also the possibility of the site succumbing to "mob rule" on one hand and anarchy on the other, where members will start debating the nuances of one decision over another.

In summary, having a private section for staff affords mods etc. to confer with their colleagues and reach consensus on future actions, whereby the moderator can also prove that he/she is acting responsibly by looking for counterpoints on the subject and not acting out of any personal vendetta. Making this a private section allows staff to produce a response by committee that is fair and intelligent, since some staff members will voice their feelings more articulately than others on the same issue. Every member has a right to know WHY. They don't necessarily need to know the steps that led up to that result.

 

[Ryushikaze]

@staff :I often feel like I'm on the outside looking in on this forum. Like I cant easily relate to most of the members here and often have trouble seeing why they debate over the issues that are most often brought up and what not.

But I get it now.
I find the current state of the forum interesting, mainly due to who is on staff and what they are doing.
I know all of you hate when I bring up ACF but im going to have to do it again.

Some of you on staff are the very same people back on the ACF days who were involved in all of the drama regarding Staff transparency and the member base/spammers having more of a say so in the on goings of the forum.

Do you recall how much it sucked to have all of our efforts trumped and 1 upped every single time? Every time we made progress they just made another hidden section of staff, or make a new admin to push "our" admin around, ect.
Im not saying TLS is there, Im not saying TLS will get there but I find it amusing that some of you guys who fought the good fight are now on the side that is refusing to work with the members.

Can I just say that STAFF had no idea what staff was doing most of the time on ACF? Entire swaths of the mod staff were left entirely out of the loop, especially during the end of it all.

Despite some people asking to see the staff section, what there really asking for is for staff and members to work as a team. Lets read between the lines, its obvious they want to be more involved.

100% transparency is not a good thing, but neither is no transparency. And honestly
we are not at that sweet spot yet and we should really work to get there.

It's the tightrope we must walk between confidentiality and transparency. And if we tip in either direction, we fall.
Also there is a spike pit below the rope. Full of snakes. And badgers. I have no idea what any of that part of the metaphor means. Just the tightrope and the unpleasantness if we fail.

 

[Geostigma]

Can I just say that STAFF had no idea what staff was doing most of the time on ACF? Entire swaths of the mod staff were left entirely out of the loop, especially during the end of it all.



It's the tightrope we must walk between confidentiality and transparency. And if we tip in either direction, we fall.
Also there is a spike pit below the rope. Full of snakes. And badgers. I have no idea what any of that part of the metaphor means. Just the tightrope and the unpleasantness if we fail.

Well yeah xD Thats why I said TLS isnt there and I dont think it will get there, but its still interesting to see the parallels. Obviously the ACF staff was bad, It was so bad that we proposed systems to evaluate the staff members and potentially get them kicked from staff called "Moderating Moderators" anyone remember that? Doesnt that seem pretty similar to the staff evaluations we have here (admittedly modding mods is the absolute extreme of it).

Theres a reason the members feel like this. The best way to make amends and start with a clean slate is to try out there suggestions. ACF didnt fail because staff did what the members/spammers said, It fell because they failed to address the reason why we were lashing out.

 

[Joker]

I'm going to allow myself one angry post here now:

I see you thanking the posts. Stop fucking thanking them and SAY SOMETHING. (this is directed at Mako)

Aaron: all or nothing; you either need to be all in or not in at all, because not dealing with things, or dealing with them in a limited capacity, doesn't work. Say what you have to say, and fuck the reactions people are going to have, because if it's going to upset them it's going to do it no matter how nicely you phrase it.

@staff as a whole: This is starting to get really, really irritating because you say you want us to speak up, you say you want to have a dialogue, and when the members lay all their cards on the table, you're giving NOTHING BACK. And yet you wonder why the members have trust issues with you, don't like coming to you about issues, don't want to be singled out and prefer to be anonymous, and are just utterly fed up with the status quo?

I would say that I'm sorry for coming off as angry but I've literally had it up to HERE with this. (I am indicating my jaw btw)

Good posts Gabe.

And now I return you to your regularly scheduled discussion.

 

[Celes Chere]

The only reason Kobato was not permabanned on the second offence was that staff felt that the situation was too ambiguous

Kay hold up here. The situation was ambiguous... how?

Just wondering.

 

[Strangelove]

I don't know how viable it is to implement, but when I read the proposal for this I assumed that it would be anonymous. As in, members can post there but their identity wouldn't be revealed. Basically the same thing Road has done before in relaying message anonymously, but without someone in the middle. I don't know if you could make something like that work, given that there would have to be something to identify the original thread starter in order for them to keep posting in the same thread, and having some identification connecting it to you defeats the purpose of anonymity.

 

[Ryushikaze]

Kay hold up here. The situation was ambiguous... how?

Just wondering.

In order to explain that, we're going to have to reveal information on the subject, including about you. Are you alright with that?

 

[Celes Chere]

Yeah, I don't mind at all lol

 

[Alessa Gillespie]

is anyone going to talk about how reports were made public to non-mod members or will people just ignore that and hope it goes away