+- Hydaelyn Role-Players (https://ffxiv-roleplayers.com/mybb18)
+-- Forum: Off-Topic (https://ffxiv-roleplayers.com/mybb18/forumdisplay.php?fid=42)
+--- Forum: Off-Topic Discussion (https://ffxiv-roleplayers.com/mybb18/forumdisplay.php?fid=14)
+--- Thread: Feedback for moderation policy post (/showthread.php?tid=11381)
RE: Feedback for moderation policy post - Faye - 04-30-2015
Are people seriously concerned that "don't be rude frequently" is a rule?
RE: Feedback for moderation policy post - Aysun - 04-30-2015
(04-30-2015, 08:29 PM)Faye Wrote: Are people seriously concerned that "don't be rude frequently" is a rule?
The people who are concerned are the ones who violate that rule frequently, probably.
RE: Feedback for moderation policy post - cuideag - 04-30-2015
(04-30-2015, 07:24 PM)Nakoli Chalahko Wrote:(04-30-2015, 07:11 PM)Edda Wrote: I fully agree with Natalie. Especially on a site filled with RPers that tend to be hugboxing carebears, even polite dissension can be interpreted as an insult by the highly sensitive. While I do not disagree with the rules, I have hope that our moderators will not hastily perceive harsh disagreement as intentional nastiness.These rules have always been here.
From the moment you signed up to the site, the rules were there. You agreed to abide by them by registering.
I think what Edda might be trying to say is that there are people who aren't actually breaking rules but will be punished/reported anyway by because of people who are looking for reasons to be offended.
(04-30-2015, 07:31 PM)FreelanceWizard Wrote: snip snip
With that said, let's look at another example. Calling a group of people "hugboxing carebears" as a means of dismissing an argument or concern is, in fact, the sort of thing that will get a warning. That's obviously intended to provoke, it doesn't add to the discourse, and it doesn't support any point. You could easily make the exact same point without doing that.
I wonder if it's good to dismiss a concern because it wasn't worded nicely enough? Kind of seems like it is proving a point, but perhaps not the one you might be pushing for, friend.
(04-30-2015, 08:26 PM)Kayllen Wrote: The problem that this line of reasoning perpetuates is that it becomes an issue of tone policing and that never ends well.
DING DING DING
RE: Feedback for moderation policy post - Nebbs - 04-30-2015
I would post a gif of munching popcorn but I think that would be taking the piss too much.
It's a forum it has rules and moderators to manage the smooth operation. I don't really get all this hair splitting for the sake of hair splitting.
It seems the rules have been clarified to add some consistency for moderators, not much more. No one should be surprised by the moderation that will follow.
Just apply Wheaton's Law and you should be okay
RE: Feedback for moderation policy post - ArmachiA - 04-30-2015
(04-30-2015, 08:31 PM)Aysun Wrote:(04-30-2015, 08:29 PM)Faye Wrote: Are people seriously concerned that "don't be rude frequently" is a rule?
The people who are concerned are the ones who violate that rule frequently, probably.
ding ding ding.
Again, I'll say it. I'm not really "nice" here. I'm blunt and word my arguments neutrally and speak freely. Usually my arguments are met with meme's and people being troll-y, like they are trying to shut down the argument because they don't agree with it. You don't agree with it, tell me you don't, don't be a jerk about it (Even worse don't be condescending which adds nothing to the convo beyond "Look how cool and detached I am."). This isn't rocket science.
RE: Feedback for moderation policy post - FreelanceWizard - 04-30-2015
Kayllen, you can, of course, appeal a warning to me if you don't feel it was properly given. Being tactless won't get someone a warning unless it's blatant rudeness. Telling someone they're a jerk publicly falls under not making posts to call specific people out -- call someone a jerk if you must, but do it over PM.
Natalie, you and I both know there's lots of ways to word a post and still get the same point across. Graeham showed one example; you can take one subordinate clause out of the post I used as an example and be fine.
cuideag, I found that post to be a teachable moment about the exact sort of phrasing that we've let pass in the past but actually hasn't been okay and won't be okay now. If it came off as dismissive of the concern, I apologize, but I think I've been over the "reports do not instantly become warnings, and the mods aren't going to suddenly start blasting people with warnings for not being nice" several times now. I don't know how many other ways I can say it.
All, what it ultimately comes down to is whether you trust the mods and me to apply the rules and policies reasonably and fairly. If you don't, so be it, but then I must ask -- why are you still here?
RE: Feedback for moderation policy post - K'nahli - 04-30-2015
(04-30-2015, 08:26 PM)Kayllen Wrote: I underlined a few things that I would find concerning because it seems that this is where there might be a disconnect due to subjective interpretation. I've been accused of rudeness before when I speak in as neutral a 'tone' as I am, now. The problem that this line of reasoning perpetuates is that it becomes an issue of tone policing and that never ends well.
If you mean like blatant rudeness like calling people morons for disagreeing with you or making long-winded statements about their personality based on your own claims then yeah, I think that's pretty rude and should earn a slap on the chops. As Natalie and FreelanceWizard state, though, calling someone's argument stupid isn't an insult, it's kind of a tactless way to put it, yes, but it's not an insult. Ad Hominem or 'To the man' is when you attack the person rather than the argument or statement. I'm all for tackling arguments while tackling people, which does happen on occasion, isn't usually all that beneficial.Â
I would put out that there's one caveat to that: pointing out someone's being a demonstrable jerk over a patterned series of events isn't necessarily an insult, either, though as I've learned recently that does seem to fall under the purview of the admins to handle that.
I do not understand what you are getting at here. Are you implying that there is actually a method of tackling unfavourable posts/attitudes without being subjective in some form or another?
Moderators have to try and maintain a neutral ground and make the decisions on what is tolerable and what is not. These kinds of thing will never be entirely objective because everyone has a different version of what that means.
Calling someone's argument stupid or pointless would be considered blunt and inconsiderate(technically it's also a bit rude, yes, but I think people can get past that so long as it's not recurring).
Calling someone stupid and annoying for having a certain opinion is rude and encourages animosity. For obvious reasons, that is not tolerable and does not help the community in any shape or form.
I'm sorry if my previous post was unclear - as am I should this one be just as bad.
RE: Feedback for moderation policy post - McBeefâ„¢ - 04-30-2015
"If you fail to tone it down a bit or back out of a topic when it's clear that you're beginning to offend people rather than simply disagree with them, then you are venturing into punishable territory."
What if you offend someone simply by disagreeing with them?
I just think it's ok if someone reads a post and goes 'This makes me mad'.
I don't think people should get warnings for not always wording things in the most proscribed way. I think the focus should be on posting that impacts the discussion or is needlessly targeting an individual. For example spamming, personal attacks that have nothing to do with the situation at hand, posting non related things to stop a conversation.
If something is offensive to someone, but is appropriate to the conversation at hand, and doesn't personally attack another poster. My reaction would be "So what?"
As others have said, policing offence is just a road we shouldn't go down.
RE: Feedback for moderation policy post - PerkPrincess - 04-30-2015
(04-30-2015, 08:50 PM)FreelanceWizard Wrote: All, what it ultimately comes down to is whether you trust the mods and me to apply the rules and policies reasonably and fairly. If you don't, so be it, but then I must ask -- why are you still here?
Sadly because this happens to be the one centralized RP community that FFXIV has at the moment. There's Tumblrs for sure, but there's no real way to organize things.
RE: Feedback for moderation policy post - Edvyn - 04-30-2015
if something is pointless why is it bad to call that thing pointless?
would it be considered reasonable to say "this has no point"? because that's what pointless means anyway
what about asking "where is your point"? or "i don't see a point"? this also pretty much means the same thing
pointless shouldn't be considered a rude word, even if used frequently - it's a valid descriptor in many cases, and people who are offended by being told their post was pointless should probably get a clearer point
RE: Feedback for moderation policy post - Kellach Woods - 04-30-2015
Problem is that they're not policing disagreement, which is what they've stated numerous times. They're policing the thinly veiled jabs at other people's character/RP preference/etc. that have been very prevalent in the past month or so.
Some of which has been even mentioned on this thread (implications that people are too sensitive, "hugbox", etc.)
I swear like a sailor and am brash as fuck enough that I've been told there's some people on the site that wouldn't RP with me because of this OOC behavior, yet I'm fairly confident I can hang without getting an infraction or a warning 'cause I don't insult people on this site.
So long as you don't do that you should be fine.
RE: Feedback for moderation policy post - McBeefâ„¢ - 04-30-2015
(04-30-2015, 09:11 PM)Kellach Woods Wrote: Problem is that they're not policing disagreement, which is what they've stated numerous times. They're policing the thinly veiled jabs at other people's character/RP preference/etc. that have been very prevalent in the past month or so.
And as this thread shows, it still doesn't stop anything.
There is a whole host of people in the wings who are making personal attacks and generalizations about a group of people right now.
Aka all the people implying that any opposition to this policy means that one encourages people to be assholes to each other. Or that if someone breaks the rules they must be an asshole.
I'd much rather have dissenting viewpoints in the clear, where they can be discussed. Even if they may be inflammatory rather than have them be snooty and censored. The anger will still be there either way, and people will just get more and more passive aggressive.
RE: Feedback for moderation policy post - Aysun - 04-30-2015
(04-30-2015, 08:44 PM)ArmachiA Wrote:(04-30-2015, 08:31 PM)Aysun Wrote:(04-30-2015, 08:29 PM)Faye Wrote: Are people seriously concerned that "don't be rude frequently" is a rule?
The people who are concerned are the ones who violate that rule frequently, probably.
ding ding ding.
Again, I'll say it. I'm not really "nice" here. I'm blunt and word my arguments neutrally and speak freely. Usually my arguments are met with meme's and people being troll-y, like they are trying to shut down the argument because they don't agree with it. You don't agree with it, tell me you don't, don't be a jerk about it (Even worse don't be condescending which adds nothing to the convo beyond "Look how cool and detached I am."). This isn't rocket science.
I started seeing this behavior over the last several months. It bugs the crap outta me. It's probably why I don't bother with most actual discussion threads anymore. Having to weed through all the I-disagree-so-I'm-derailing is just frustrating.
RE: Feedback for moderation policy post - Fox - 04-30-2015
Again it comes down to critique vs. Things like passive agressiveness which have been concerning lately. This comes in all forms, it can be out right smarmy comments directed at a person or using the sensitivity card in an abusive manner.
Critique is being welcomed by the mods, it's been even stated that debates are good. But it does become problematic when it is the "teehee I don't like your point but I'm going to smile daggers and jab at you" like Kellach has said.
I think that the mods are going to try very hard not to thought police but people have to try to meet part ways.
RE: Feedback for moderation policy post - McBeefâ„¢ - 04-30-2015
(04-30-2015, 09:18 PM)Foxberry Wrote: Again it comes down to critique vs. Things like passive agressiveness which have been concerning lately. This comes in all forms, it can be out right smarmy comments directed at a person or using the sensitivity card in an abusive manner.
Critique is being welcomed by the mods, it's been even stated that debates are good. But it does become problematic when it is the "teehee I don't like your point but I'm going to smile daggers and jab at you" like Kellach has said.
I think that the mods are going to try very hard not to thought police but people have to try to meet part ways.
Yes, this exactly. I feel like it discourages people from voicing open disagreement, and instead rewards users for being passive aggressive and veiled.