So long, and thanks for all the fish

[Cthulhu]

To reiterate / explain the sudden-ness, this was mainly due to the fact that one, he had the access levels and knowledge to delete the site within about ten seconds, and two, we simply could not predict how he would respond / how he would take it; I should've explained that better in the announcement, I'm sorry about that.

Re: the secret staff concerns, I've always pushed towards full transparency and no secret staff business at all; the female modvote thread originally started in the staff section and I strongly opposed it being there, if I didn't there'd probably be a sudden "oh btw here's a new mod" thread popping up. We founded TLS as being Different from ACF; staff transparency and accountability was and is a point I will continue to strive towards.

The only exception to full transparency are, as far as I'm concerned, report threads and discussions about members' behaviour, because putting those in public has the potential to exacerbate situations. A problem though is that an important part of our decision here took place in those report threads. I can provide full records from what occurred over there though, if given permission to publish it from the person that reported it, the person reported, and the staff members participating in the discussion - if there's anyone that doesn't believe our decision had grounds or trust us. Naming who reported threads and who was reported for what reason and all the discussion in there is probably not a good idea, though.


@Telcontar, I'm sorry you feel that way, but I'm sure you can see there's a difference between someone's personal opinions and an objective judgment about behaviour and whatnot vs our goals with the site and community.

I for one feel like I've had to betray one of the people I've known for the longest online, who has had the biggest influence on my musical tastes, who's partially responsible for the ideals I have when it comes to running a forum, who I've 'fought' alongside with against how ACF was run, etcetera; I've been interacting with him almost daily over at least three forums, two of which I worked alongside with him with (I forgot if he was on staff at FFR, where I was introduced to GoT and Moonsorrow and such by him). But at the same time, I took on / was encouraged to take responsibilities when I started TLS and the TLS forums, and in this case, had to put said responsibilities before my personal associations with Aaron. It wasn't wholly my decision and I made sure everyone else on staff was on board with it, but I was the only one that could take his access, and the one that was supposed to announce it and take the full responsibility for it.

What I'm saying is, there's a difference between one's personal opinions and one's responsibilities.

As for alliances, you're technically not wrong given that we've discussed Aaron's behaviour and how we should deal with it for months before taking this step. Those discussions led to attempts at improving his behaviour in the staff section and such, but ultimately we decided that there was nothing left we could do. Again, this wasn't a decision made lightly, it has been the most hard decision me and everyone else on staff has had to do in the seven years TLS has existed, and that includes the case where a third of our members left and whatnot.

If you're purposely trying to stir up shit though, you can fuck right off.

Note that this post is intended in the hopes that everyone can understand this whole thing better; it's not intended to start a debate. I'd like to thank everyone for being understanding.

 

[Ⓐaron]

this was mainly due to the fact that one, he had the access levels and knowledge to delete the site within about ten seconds,

The former of which could easily have been revoked without kicking me off staff entirely.

and two, we simply could not predict how he would respond / how he would take it;

You've known me for roughly a decade. Have I ever, at any time, given the impression that, no matter how angry I was, I would delete an entire site? My own site was deleted twelve years ago and I still haven't forgiven the people who did it. The implication that I would destroy so many people's hard work like that is incredibly insulting.

Those discussions led to attempts at improving his behaviour in the staff section and such

Which apparently, if they were made, I completely missed. I was aware there were problems with my behaviour outside the staff section, and took steps to improve it. Indeed, from the feedback I had received over the past couple of months, I was under the distinct impression that I had been doing so to the other staff members' satisfaction. I was unaware there were any remaining problems until the day before I was fired, and even then wasn't exactly clear on what they were, so I'm not exactly sure what else I could have been expected to do.

 

[Elessar]

So, what's the real story? Of course, this lies in the secret-ish staff section which I will never have access to. I've been asked by both parties to believe their side of the story when neither can really produce any proof. So, what how am I to feel about that?

What is this? North Korea? Can we get transparency?

What to Aaron was simply being blunt and straightforward, to them was hostility.

Telcontar here at TLS you're free to share your opinion if you disagree with a staff decision. However trolling or trying to stir shit up is not acceptable, knock it off or the next time it happens you'll receive an infraction.

Oh yeah baby. She's Furious-a. Looks like I'm next.

---

If I ask for transparency (again) in the matter, which I already kinda did in my previous post but never got a reply to, will I get banned?

If so, can I ask for transparency?
If not, can I ask for transparency?

If this is my last post... Actually you know what?

http://thelifestream.net/forums/showthread.php?p=653332

EDIT: Just saw Yop's post. You're a cool dude, but sorry. See you on PSN or something.

 

[Ⓐaron]

Just out of curiosity, did Mage get a warning for calling me a cunt and comparing me to a dictator who killed twenty million people? 'Cause if not then this is some serious bullshit.

 

[Mage]

Doesn't that come under the realm of confidentiality? Also I don't believe I called you a cunt directly, I believe I told you to stop behaving like one.

EDIT: I correct myself - no, I wrote learn to stop being a cunt. Obviously implying that you presently are being a cunt. Still not quite the same as calling you a cunt directly, but ah, semantics.
Asides, who's to say that Stalin didn't think he was in the wrong either?

Anyway, from what I've seen so far and know already insofar as your situation goes, removing access is a standard thing in the workplace where a possible security breach is concerned (distinctly recalling an anecdote here from the ex, about a company he previously worked for having someone physically removed from the server room at head office). Having a similar policy in place here doesn't seem unreasonable to me.

You seem to be expecting some sort of special treatment because of how long you've known Yop; that's hardly fair. How was anyone to know how you'd react? You know how awful it is to have a site deleted, for all anyone knows you'd be happy to dole out that same feeling to someone else if you were hurt enough. You've known Yop online for roughly a decade, yeah, but you don't know each other at all really. Putting trust in someone else online is a huge deal but when that person is clearly in a difficult place emotionally, having that trust becomes much much harder.

You seem to be labouring under the impression that this is all a shock to you. If it really is, then perhaps you should re-read some old threads after a little hiatus and honestly ask yourself whether your attitude seemed in the right place. If the answer is still yes, then nothing that is said in this thread is going to change anything since you believe that the problem was rectified.

 

[Ⓐaron]

Doesn't that come under the realm of confidentiality?

As far as I know staff policy has generally been that people who report a post are to be told if something has been done in response to it, or if it is being disregarded. Unless this has changed in the past few days I believe I have a right to know how it has been handled.

Also I don't believe I called you a cunt directly, I believe I told you to stop behaving like one.

EDIT: I correct myself - no, I wrote learn to stop being a cunt. Obviously implying that you presently are being a cunt. Still not quite the same as calling you a cunt directly, but ah, semantics.

As far as I'm concerned this is a distinction without a difference. "You are being a cunt" and "You are a cunt" have the same essential meaning.

Asides, who's to say that Stalin didn't think he was in the wrong either?

I don't really give a shit what he thought. There's a big fucking difference between making some harsh posts on a message board and murdering twenty million people. Godwin's Law certainly applies here.

Anyway, from what I've seen so far and know already insofar as your situation goes, removing access is a standard thing in the workplace where a possible security breach is concerned (distinctly recalling an anecdote here from the ex, about a company he previously worked for having someone physically removed from the server room at head office). Having a similar policy in place here doesn't seem unreasonable to me.

Which is why I would have been perfectly able to understand if my access to delete the entire site had been removed, if people really distrusted me that much (which is still insulting). There's a substantial difference between removing some access, though, and removing a person's entire staff position.

You seem to be expecting some sort of special treatment because of how long you've known Yop; that's hardly fair. How was anyone to know how you'd react? You know how awful it is to have a site deleted, for all anyone knows you'd be happy to dole out that same feeling to someone else if you were hurt enough. You've known Yop online for roughly a decade, yeah, but you don't know each other at all really. Putting trust in someone else online is a huge deal but when that person is clearly in a difficult place emotionally, having that trust becomes much much harder.

Ah, yes, I'm depressed, therefore I'm liable to delete someone's entire site because, well, you haven't really explained that. I suppose with that attitude you think the mentally ill are more likely to kill people too.

The simple fact is I thought several of these people were my friends, and apparently they thought so little of me that they were afraid I'd delete their site. You really can't understand why this is insulting?

You seem to be labouring under the impression that this is all a shock to you. If it really is, then perhaps you should re-read some old threads after a little hiatus and honestly ask yourself whether your attitude seemed in the right place. If the answer is still yes, then nothing that is said in this thread is going to change anything since you believe that the problem was rectified.

I'm well aware (and indeed have stated repeatedly both publicly and privately) that my attitude in old public threads had been unacceptable, which is why I asked for advice on how to change it, and followed that advice to the best of my ability. I was labouring under the distinct impression that I had improved my conduct, because feedback from other staff members had suggested exactly that. I was unaware, however, that my conduct in the staff section had been an issue; if anyone gave me feedback to that extent, it was too oblique for me to comprehend it as such. There had been a couple of flame wars, yes, but they had been months back, no one said much to me at the time about them, and I wasn't the only person in either of them who flamed anyone. Indeed, I am quite certain that I had been flamed in the staff section several months more recently than I had flamed anyone in it. So yes, this came as a shock, and I don't think I'm unjustified in seeing it that way.

 

[Starling]

Doesn't that come under the realm of confidentiality? Also I don't believe I called you a cunt directly, I believe I told you to stop behaving like one.

EDIT: I correct myself - no, I wrote learn to stop being a cunt. Obviously implying that you presently are being a cunt. Still not quite the same as calling you a cunt directly, but ah, semantics.
Asides, who's to say that Stalin didn't think he was in the wrong either?

Anyway, from what I've seen so far and know already insofar as your situation goes, removing access is a standard thing in the workplace where a possible security breach is concerned (distinctly recalling an anecdote here from the ex, about a company he previously worked for having someone physically removed from the server room at head office). Having a similar policy in place here doesn't seem unreasonable to me.

You seem to be expecting some sort of special treatment because of how long you've known Yop; that's hardly fair. How was anyone to know how you'd react? You know how awful it is to have a site deleted, for all anyone knows you'd be happy to dole out that same feeling to someone else if you were hurt enough. You've known Yop online for roughly a decade, yeah, but you don't know each other at all really. Putting trust in someone else online is a huge deal but when that person is clearly in a difficult place emotionally, having that trust becomes much much harder.

You seem to be labouring under the impression that this is all a shock to you. If it really is, then perhaps you should re-read some old threads after a little hiatus and honestly ask yourself whether your attitude seemed in the right place. If the answer is still yes, then nothing that is said in this thread is going to change anything since you believe that the problem was rectified.

Generally, when someone knows the pain something can cause, they're more likely to go the "I wouldn't wish it on even my enemies" route than get all vindictive with that, especially when dealing with a friend. If I were in Aaron's situation, even if I wasn't longtime friends with the people involved I'd likely be upset about lack of clarification. Dismissing someone's feelings about this kind of thing isn't really the way to respond, even if you think the person was properly warned. There are nicer way to voice that kind of opinion that would be more appropriate, especially in written form where no one has the benefit of intonation to go with what you're saying.

Like I said, everyone involved should go over the past discussions on this subject, not just Aaron. Proper communication requires that everyone be on the same page and you can't really do that if only one person revises what's been said. Fine where the communication issues occurred and think about how fix them, as well as how to avoid them in the future. Talk about how you felt when certain things were said and why. Try to see things from perspectives other than your own when going over the issue. Be understanding of how the others feel when you think about how you're going to respond.

 

[Mage]

@ Starling, no, the post from Yop clearly requested no more dragging over the coals on this. That includes revising past discussions, that time has now passed and was done in the staff section where we can't see it, hence the outcome in this thread. Clearly this whole shitstorm came about from a lack of communication.

Okay Aaron I'll bite but then I'm going to bed because I have shit to do commencing in about five hours.

No, I haven't been warned. Take it up with the staff, I'm sure they'd be on it like a tramp on chips if there was valid warning capital. I don't mind a delay; we do have differing timezones after all. However, I have a policy of not sugar-coating anything, my profane language included, this you know and have known for a bloody long time.

I like that there is a name for this [Godwin's Law]. The fact that it has a name and it applies to TL;DR discussions should clearly indicate that the discussion has gone on for far far too long. The comment I made about your attitude being Stalinesque was months ago and I don't even remember the specific wording. If you want me warned for something I said a long time ago, go search for the comment. It'll be in the debate section, where you were behaving like a cunt.

FWIW, you're a name on the internet I can put a face to. I don't trust you at all. I don't trust anyone at all. I tend to base what I think other people think on what I myself think. The point is, even with mod access you had the potential to cause a lot of damage were you so inclined.

Also you know perfectly well that I have my own mental health issues so I'm not even going to dignify that baiting comment with an answer.

It's not an insult though, you've chosen to take it as an insult. Look at it from the staff POV. They're protecting their efforts here. That is going to include risk assessment and precautionary measures, hence your removal from staff for the reason I mentioned above - even a mod can cause a lot of damage that will take valuable time to clear up. It wouldn't be a position of responsibility if that weren't the case.

Your last paragraph could easily have been curtailed if you had simply made a thread asking for feedback since you were aware that your behaviour had been an issue previously. The fact that you didn't is typical of your attitude - expecting/wanting something to be done for you. No-one else is responsible for how you behave and trying to place that on someone else's shoulders is bloody unfair.

Also however vague, you are now starting to disclose staff confidentiality.

 

[X-SOLDIER]

In case anyone else's REALLY interested in discussing what happened - you can message someone on staff about it. Dawn got around to doing so, and it's clarity that's much easier to provide on an individual basis depending on what your questions are, so that we don't drag shit out in the open that we aren't allowed to, and we're still allowed to be as transparent as possible about it.

because I'm 100% done dragging this shit all around and regressing anything we've done insofar as diffusing the situation in this thread - no more passive-aggression or direct insulting here. Period.

I'm taking to warning folks who don't or are just stirring the shit, 'cause I'm REALLY done with this thread meandering back into a pool of negativity and I don't want the drama. I'm here, and so is the rest of the staff for your questions and concerns and if there's anything you'd like us to clear up publicly, let us know, and we'll find an appropriate place for it that isn't this thread.




X

 

[Ⓐaron]

Clearly this whole shitstorm came about from a lack of communication.

Yes, and I'm not really very pleased with any of this, because a lot of that lack of communication has been directly at my expense.

No, I haven't been warned. Take it up with the staff, I'm sure they'd be on it like a tramp on chips if there was valid warning capital. I don't mind a delay; we do have differing timezones after all. However, I have a policy of not sugar-coating anything, my profane language included, this you know and have known for a bloody long time.

So apparently calling someone a cunt isn't valid warning capital then, but calling staff dicks is. Good to know.

I like that there is a name for this [Godwin's Law]. The fact that it has a name and it applies to TL;DR discussions should clearly indicate that the discussion has gone on for far far too long. The comment I made about your attitude being Stalinesque was months ago and I don't even remember the specific wording. If you want me warned for something I said a long time ago, go search for the comment. It'll be in the debate section, where you were behaving like a cunt.

You called me Stalinesque in your first post in this very thread.

FWIW, you're a name on the internet I can put a face to. I don't trust you at all. I don't trust anyone at all. I tend to base what I think other people think on what I myself think. The point is, even with mod access you had the potential to cause a lot of damage were you so inclined.

No, I really didn't. About a year or two ago I specifically removed the ability of every single staff member except Yop to hard delete any content from the site, unless they had MySQL access and knew what they were doing with it. I did this precisely so that if someone's account were hacked or someone lost their head the damage would be limited, and I announced that I was doing so and precisely the reason why. The damage that could occur from such a freak-out would thus be limited, and easily undoable.

The only other thing someone could do is edit, move, or soft-delete a lot of posts, which can easily be restored (and since there's a mod log, it's possible to see every single post that has been edited, moved (and from where), or deleted). It is very difficult to conceive of anything a mod could do on this site that could not be repaired within minutes. The only thing I can think of with the current board setup is edit posts from the last five minutes, which is a very specific and limited kind of damage, and even that potential could be destroyed by altering the amount of time before an edit message displays to zero seconds.

Finally, it's common fucking sense that if I did anything like that I'd be fired immediately and never be given a chance to recover my position so even if I did feel any impulses in that direction (which I wouldn't have, for reasons I've already outlined), I would have every reason to suppress them.

Also you know perfectly well that I have my own mental health issues so I'm not even going to dignify that baiting comment with an answer.

I honestly didn't even remember that, sorry. We haven't spoken at all in like a year. In any case, you flat-out implied (and are still implying) I was more likely to destroy someone else's hard work on the basis of my mental health issues, and I'm not sure why you think (or don't care) that that's not offensive.

It's not an insult though, you've chosen to take it as an insult.

I'm pretty sure having several people you thought were close friends say they thought there was a possibility you'd delete their site is an insult on any objective level.

Look at it from the staff POV. They're protecting their efforts here. That is going to include risk assessment and precautionary measures, hence your removal from staff for the reason I mentioned above - even a mod can cause a lot of damage that will take valuable time to clear up.

Debunked - see above.

Your last paragraph could easily have been curtailed if you had simply made a thread asking for feedback since you were aware that your behaviour had been an issue previously. The fact that you didn't is typical of your attitude - expecting/wanting something to be done for you. No-one else is responsible for how you behave and trying to place that on someone else's shoulders is bloody unfair.

Yes, well, given the fact that people had flat-out praised my public conduct in recent months, and I'd never been given any apparent reason to suspect my staff conduct was an issue, I didn't have any reason to suspect I'd need it, did I? If I'd had any reason to suspect my position was still in jeopardy, I would have asked what else I could do to improve my conduct, but I didn't, so I didn't.

Also however vague, you are now starting to disclose staff confidentiality.

I don't really see how I've disclosed anything that wasn't already public knowledge.

 

[Lex]

Folks, these speculations and assumptions don't help anybody. I'm going to reiterate what X said and remind everyone that we knew this was going to be a shock to people who do not have direct access to the mod section. Please try not to jump to conclusions when you can't possibly know the extent of this situation or see the evidence that led to this.

We are in an incredibly frustrating position right now where the majority of incidents which led to this decision happened in and as a result of reports, meaning that without explicit permission from a huge number of people we can't post about them. In addition, there are so many instances and this has been the result of so much over such a long period of time that it would be a logistical nightmare.

This all comes down to whether or not you trust what the staff are telling you. If you don't, if you have a real problem with this decision or any other, contact a staff member you trust and speak with them about it. I will remind everyone that this was something all of us deliberated over and tried to prevent for a long period of time. I know it's not nice to be told to believe anything and given zero evidence, but this was a unanimous decision and everyone here will have at least one member of staff they feel comfortable asking about it.

But please, please, stop the useless speculating. All it does is create tension that there's no need for, and there is no point when the people speculating can't possibly have all the facts.

EDIT: Tel's post where he calls us all dicks - that's a perfectly valid opinion and that's fine. The shit stirring part isn't.

 

[Geostigma]

Which is why I would have been perfectly able to understand if my access to delete the entire site had been removed, if people really distrusted me that much (which is still insulting). There's a substantial difference between removing some access, though, and removing a person's entire staff position.

You're missing/forgetting the point that members of the forum beyond the Staff were also uncomfortable with how you were acting in parts of the forum. The issue isn't just "Aaron might delete TLS" it was also that members had a problem with how you represented yourself AND Staff.

Simply removing your ability to B7 the site wasn't the solution to an over all problem that affected the public and private sides of this board.

I don't like being a dick to you when your struggling, especially when you helped me a ton back in the day when I had hit some lows and I cant affect you in the same way you did me. But at the same time man its just a forum. I know you don't like how you were destaffed and I get that but if you think for a second that people as great as Yop , Carlie , etc. Thought low of you and wanted nothing more to do with you then idk what to say to you.

The fact that they had deliberate over this for so long speaks volumes. I know your to hurt to see that and only see it as a two faced situation but we all do care about you.


edit:

So clearly its my fault for spending to long writing this and not hitting refresh before hitting post. But what ever fuck it I'm just gonna pretend like I posted this 20 minutes ago.

And shame on all of you for posting before me. Jeeze.

 

[Ⓐaron]

Which is why I would have been perfectly able to understand if my access to delete the entire site had been removed, if people really distrusted me that much (which is still insulting). There's a substantial difference between removing some access, though, and removing a person's entire staff position.

You're missing/forgetting the point that members of the forum beyond the Staff were also uncomfortable with how you were acting in parts of the forum. The issue isn't just "Aaron might delete TLS" it was also that members had a problem with how you represented yourself AND Staff.

It's not exactly the first time there were complaints about my behaviour; there were probably just as many during 2012's drama and nothing ever happened from them. More importantly, I wasn't aware of any continuing problems with my conduct. I had been given what, as far as I can ascertain, was every reason to believe I had addressed them.

Furthermore continuing to be oppressively blunt in the Staff section surely hadn't helped your attempts to lighten up in the public eye.

I don't really see how public perception of me can be altered by things members can't see, and as I've said, we were encouraged to be blunt in the staff section. If you mean it hasn't made it easier for me to be less severe in public, no, maybe it didn't help. But as far as anyone had told me, I was doing all right with that.

Simply removing your ability to B7 the site wasn't the solution to an over all problem that affected the public and private sides of this board.

Which I would have accepted a lot better had I been aware there was still a problem, and if there hadn't been precedent for this exact kind of thing. Remember when Ryu was demoted for several months, but not actually completely removed from staff? People were probably even more pissed off at him at the time.

I don't like being a dick to you when your struggling, especially when you helped me a ton back in the day when I had hit some lows and I cant affect you in the same way you did me. But at the same time man its just a forum. I know you don't like how you were destaffed and I get that but if you think for a second that people as great as Yop , Carlie , etc. Thought low of you and wanted nothing more to do with you then idk what to say to you.

The fact that they had deliberate over this for so long speaks volumes. I know your to hurt to see that and only see it as a two faced situation but we all do care about you.

Well, I mean, Yop flat-out told me he doesn't respect me anymore, and several other people obviously thought I might delete the site. So that doesn't really do much for me, sorry. I mean, I'm glad for the support people have expressed in this thread, don't get me wrong, but I still can't help feeling like I've lost several friends.

 

[X-SOLDIER]

Let me step in here really quick. (i.e. I started writing this before Lex's poast was made)

One - I've warned Mage for her post, since I hadn't gotten through the staff's discussion on the whole matter surrounding how to address it since there were a few thoughts on how to handle it with folks who know her better than I. We've all been having a rough time with this as a whole -- and for the record, she's fine with me speaking about the warning openly.

Two - This has nothing to do with thinking that you'd do something because of a mental illness, Aaron and conflating that is uncalled for because it's miles from being true. Any time anyone is removed from a position where you've got access to seriously fuck things up, that comes before the information that you've been outed from X position, so that you won't do anything after the fact -- no matter how unlikely it is. Take it from someone who worked with Microsoft and had friends on other high-access accounts and things. I've had access to tons of things, and we always see the permissions change before the comments from management. We just did it because turning even a 0.1% possibility into a 0.0% certainty is always choosing to err on the side of caution. That's literally it. Period.


I really, REALLY want this thread to be something that talks about things going forward like Mog initially commented. I know that the comments here from staff are genuine, and I believe that the concerns from members are too, and I want to be able to address the concerns, but I absolutely won't have this devolve into a bunch of drama over it. I'm so SO done with internet drama, and I don't have the time or the mental energy to deal with that sort of nonsense, but I'm more than happy to chat things out to clear things up.




X

 

[Ⓐaron]

This has nothing to do with thinking that you'd do something because of a mental illness, Aaron and conflating that is uncalled for because it's miles from being true.

Staff didn't say that; Mage did. Sorry if I was unclear about that.

I appreciate the rest of your post.

 

[Dawnbreaker]

I didn't say "shouldn't have access to see the staff section", I said "will not have access to see the staff section". That's a pretty big distinction there, Tel.

That said, I'm not sure how I feel about being able to see all of it, though. As has been said, it is a logistical nightmare and has the potential to cause other people to become upset (read: some members might feel their privacy is trampled on). Maybe this shit should never have been handled privately -- that might be where all this went wrong. Perhaps the staff wanted to handle this in-house and felt it was courteous to Aaron to do so. I wouldn't disagree with that reasoning, but it sure hasn't helped matters in encouraging trust towards the staff.

Is having a staff section private a good idea? I don't know. I see both sides of it, tbh. Having a staff section private creates distrust between the memberbase and the staff, but at the same time, not having it causes fragmentation in staff -- how are they effectively communicate if every single sneeze they make will be scrutinized?

There IS precedent for telling a member that their report was handled, however, because I got it back when Mako was on staff (he told me he'd warned the member I reported). Is that standard procedure? I have no idea. But to say that it's completely unheard of, well, that’s not completely accurate.

And as for “take responsibility for your behavior”…for a guy who won as many awards as Aaron did, did anyone actually expect him to suddenly think “oh, geez, I’m shit, I’m not doing better” just randomly? You can’t expect someone to just know when their behavior is overstepping somewhere if they are hearing how much they have improved. It is part of the responsibility of the boss of said person to keep that person informed if his progress isn't sufficient, after all.

Also, I respect that the staff were concerned about the risks to the forum. It IS an insult to Aaron, but, in their position, I'd be hard-pressed to run even the slimmest chance of harm to the site just to spare Aaron's feelings. I don't really fault them (the staff) for that, although you are all ware naive (it's the truth) if you're surprised at how Aaron's feels toward it. I think, if your positions were reversed, you'd feel exactly the same.

As for going forward, well, I've already suggested to Aaron some things that would be good projects for him. I do think that the trust has irrevocably broken, on both sides, so the best thing for everyone involved is to make peace with this shitty change.

 

[Ⓐaron]

Regarding the potential to destroy the board, I specifically limited this for every single person on staff apart from Yop while I was on staff. Yes, I had the ability to remove content via MySQL access, but as already mentioned, this is easily removed. I removed hard deletion powers for every single staff member except Yop, so without MySQL access I wouldn't have been able to remove content. The ability to edit posts is a concern, but vBulletin keeps a record of every post that's been marked as edited, which is currently every message more than five minutes old (except for messages edited by admins, which I wouldn't have been after the demotion). This can easily be changed so that the edit message shows up immediately if the five-minute grace period is a concern. There's also the possibility of moving threads. These display where they've been moved from in the thread description accessible to moderators, so thread moves can easily be undone. The only actual concern I can think of is moving threads from private sections, and it's honestly so unthinkable to me that it didn't even occur to me as a possibility until thirty minutes ago. I've been one of this board's most steadfast advocates for privacy rights, and I can't think of anyone on staff who wouldn't know that. Furthermore, even this simple potential problem can be prevented by removing a person's mod powers in private sections (as well as, perhaps, the ability to mass move threads).

So really, if properly handled, there isn't much potential for a disgruntled staff member to do much, as long as they're not an admin. And I announced a lot of the changes I made, and why they were made, in staff. And really, like I said, there's precedent for it - it was done for Ryu.

 

[Starling]

@ Starling, no, the post from Yop clearly requested no more dragging over the coals on this. That includes revising past discussions, that time has now passed and was done in the staff section where we can't see it, hence the outcome in this thread. Clearly this whole shitstorm came about from a lack of communication.

The whole point of looking back on it is to address the communication issue. The best way to learn from past events is to look back with a new perspective and see what you can learn from it. It's also s good way to avoid saying something you'll regret when discussing said issue, which is why I suggested it. The marring of longstanding friendships is a painful thing to experience and watch occur and I'd rather that not be the outcome. While harm has already been done, this issue doesn't seem to have reached the point of irreparable damage just yet, as far as I can tell. who knows how long it'd take but a positive outlook and willingness from both sides can go a long way to recover from stuff like that.

I like that there is a name for this [Godwin's Law]. The fact that it has a name and it applies to TL;DR discussions should clearly indicate that the discussion has gone on for far far too long. The comment I made about your attitude being Stalinesque was months ago and I don't even remember the specific wording. If you want me warned for something I said a long time ago, go search for the comment. It'll be in the debate section, where you were behaving like a cunt.

You can't just end a discussion about an unresolved issue on the grounds of it getting too wordy. That doesn't actually solve the problem and just lets it sit there to inevitably return. I can say from experience that dismissing unresolved issues between people doesn't usually end well. If it counts for anything, I found you were somewhat harsh in your first post on this thread, especially considering things were starting to cool down. Being blunt about your opinions doesn't usually help in these situations. I mean, I tend to swear quite a bit without really noticing when speaking casually but put in the effort to swear less in written form as I feel it's easier to have civil conversations that way. In spoken language, people can tell how you're trying to convey what you're saying. In written form, perceived intonation tends to assume the harshest variation unless some other indication is given, like outright stating you mean what you're saying in a lighthearted way or use the appropriate emoticon. It's really easy to come off as harsher than you intend to if you don't watch your wording.

 

[X-SOLDIER]

@Dawn: While I understand your commentary, as before, I'd prefer that you have a chat with the staff about it, and we can discuss the way things are done there. Private Staff forums are standard procedure for the same reason that the whole company doesn't get to see your yearly review or write-ups, and just the management does. Yop's exceptionally good about putting anything else that potentially effects the userbase out into the open, and not keeping the discussion just within staff when it involves things beyond single users, moderation, etc.

@Starling: While I appreciate the concern, the meta commentary isn't really helpful in this case. We've already addressed the issues with Mage's post from staff, and I've chatted with her directly about it when doing so. Additionally, she's stepped off from this thread and won't be responding to it as such, since we're trying to diffuse this sort of thing rather than exacerbate it and she knows that and has opted to do so after my earlier post to those ends.

Again, let's focus this back in on interactions with Aaron, rather than about the surrounding situation. He deserves support and real communication from everyone like a proper "intro/departure thread" rather than just rehashing this staff-change discussion ad nauseum.



Also - I get that song stuck in my head again every time I reply here.





X

 

[Starling]

A lot of posts were made by the time I finished the post, especially since I had connection issues while working on it. It still feel it was something that needed to be said, as it can be easy to forget about that kind of thing when discussions get heated.

 

[Cat Rage Room]

Just wanted to step in here;

Is having a staff section private a good idea? I don't know. I see both sides of it, tbh. Having a staff section private creates distrust between the memberbase and the staff, but at the same time, not having it causes fragmentation in staff -- how are they effectively communicate if every single sneeze they make will be scrutinized?

It is a good idea.

A good number of people seem to think that 1. The only active members of this site are the ones that come to mind and we're all happy free friends, both are false 2. The Staff has constant wishes to hide something and to run a North Korea-esque secret thought police on the membership via a Staff forum.

As someone who has been a Staff member on this site since literally before this place even existed as code I can assure you that is not the case. The single biggest reason I have always advocated that at least a portion of the site is secret is for the sole fact that are are some fucked up people who have the potential, and actually have come here.

It's an uncomfortable truth that in order for leadership to work, there has to be trust, and part of that trust is understanding that not everything can be aired out, and that includes a lot of stuff that happens in the Staff forum. This includes reported posts, discussions on how to handle complaints, solving disputes between members, and other sensitive issues that in reality, would probably cause chaos if everyone could see it all the time.

If someone wants to see something specific, by all means, we're glad to accommodate. And if you want us Staff to be accountable to earn trust, sure, that's reasonable too. But I've been here since the beginning, so please don't think that a private Staff forum on a privately owned website to begin with is indicative of North fucking Korea. As a member of Staff who has absolutely no ulterior motives and just wants to see this place not burn to the ground, trust me on this.

 

[Dawnbreaker]

I wrote a post then it got ba-leted because I'm a tech noob. lol @ me.

I'm too lazy to repeat it all and honestly, it's probably better to pare down:

tl:dr:

I am talking to staff outside of this about my misgivings; do realize that an open staff section is a powder-keg waiting to happen; have encouraged Aaron to look to his future; and am not trying to supersede the staff's desire to reduce ad-nauseum about this. (Honestly? There we things that needed to be clarified to the public, since there were some were inaccuracies.)

 

[Cat Rage Room]

I'm not really addressing that to you in particular, but there has been sentiment of that before.

I can absolutely assure you guys that there's no sort of secret Stalinesque cabal in the Staff forum of us wringing our hands together plotting the takeover of TLS (which in mind, the Admin already owns). When it comes to secret forums, the Staff forum is pretty fucking dry.

 

[Dawnbreaker]

sorry, double post:

Mog, you have upset me greatly by that dig and now I'm going to remove myself from the thread in order to calm myself.

...just when I was getting to understand the staff's side of this, too.

well, I must concede that you are a single member of staff and your dig is not reflective of their behavior.

Any ways, toodles.

 

[Cat Rage Room]

I definitely wasn't taking a dig at you, WoL. I apologize if that's how you interpreted my post, but I made it clear that I wasn't specifically referencing you.