RPC has moved! These pages have been kept for historical purposes

LiadansWhisper · **05-19-2015, 01:13 AM**

(05-19-2015, 01:10 AM)Natalie Mcbeef Wrote: I think it is because the rules are quite written quite vaguely, and are very open to interpretation.

And interpretation that if you interpret differently compared to a mod, is 1/10 of the way towards a /permanent/ in a year. Â

So many people, including myself, are arguing for either more concise rules, or looser interpretations of them, which acknowledge the context of posts.

I prefer looser interpretations, which we had before, and everything seemed to work out ok.

This is my primary issue, yes. Â It seems that the rules are, in some cases, worded in such a manner that there is a lot of leeway in terms of how they are enforced. Â Additionally, at least one of the rules (specifically the one about images in threads) seems to be confusingly worded and prone to misunderstanding.

Mercer · **05-19-2015, 01:21 AM**

That's true, it does seem like the rules are pretty vague and open to interpretation. They aren't always enforced strictly either. My personal hope with the new coming administration is clearer rules and tighter enforcement. Just make it feel like the mods are actually impartial and enforcing instead of giving leeway.

Does it break a rule? Infraction.Â

But it does feel like there are two camps growing out of this, the ones that want tighter moderation and those that want looser. I doubt anyone is going to be really happy with either outcome.

McBeefâ„¢ · **05-19-2015, 01:26 AM**

(05-19-2015, 01:21 AM)Oswin Wrote: That's true, it does seem like the rules are pretty vague and open to interpretation. They aren't always enforced strictly either. My personal hope with the new coming administration is clearer rules and tighter enforcement. Just make it feel like the mods are actually impartial and enforcing instead of giving leeway.

Does it break a rule? Infraction.Â

But it does feel like there are two camps growing out of this, the ones that want tighter moderation and those that want looser. I doubt anyone is going to be really happy with either outcome.

I'm all for strict interpretation of reasonable rules, so long as permanent bans are a special case scenario.

Though obviously I prefer the looser interpretation (how it has been in the past) better.

Mercer · **05-19-2015, 01:33 AM**

(05-19-2015, 01:26 AM)Natalie Mcbeef Wrote:
(05-19-2015, 01:21 AM)Oswin Wrote: That's true, it does seem like the rules are pretty vague and open to interpretation. They aren't always enforced strictly either. My personal hope with the new coming administration is clearer rules and tighter enforcement. Just make it feel like the mods are actually impartial and enforcing instead of giving leeway.

Does it break a rule? Infraction.Â

But it does feel like there are two camps growing out of this, the ones that want tighter moderation and those that want looser. I doubt anyone is going to be really happy with either outcome.

I'm all for strict interpretation of reasonable rules, so long as permanent bans are a special case scenario.

Though obviously I prefer the looser interpretation (how it has been in the past) better.

In most cases I think repeat offenses are the special case scenario. It's not normal for a person to accumulate strikes and told specifically what the problem is. The current issue I have stems from the fact that the problem isn't specific, if it was a lot of the problems would be more cut and dry.

Maybe it would be more appropriate to allow meme image responses in the off topic forum.

Fox · **05-19-2015, 01:34 AM**

(05-19-2015, 01:26 AM)Natalie Mcbeef Wrote:
(05-19-2015, 01:21 AM)Oswin Wrote: That's true, it does seem like the rules are pretty vague and open to interpretation. They aren't always enforced strictly either. My personal hope with the new coming administration is clearer rules and tighter enforcement. Just make it feel like the mods are actually impartial and enforcing instead of giving leeway.

Does it break a rule? Infraction.Â

But it does feel like there are two camps growing out of this, the ones that want tighter moderation and those that want looser. I doubt anyone is going to be really happy with either outcome.

I'm all for strict interpretation of reasonable rules, so long as permanent bans are a special case scenario.

Though obviously I prefer the looser interpretation (how it has been in the past) better.

I do agree very much with this, well both 'this' from each individual here. I think perma bans need to be seriously considered before giving out frivolously. Though, I'm also somewhat more in the camp of stricter- because the site has evolved from what it was in the past. It was very loose, but it was also much smaller. Larger communities do have a bit more harder rules because in general; where there are more people there are more people who want to mm... not act appropriately.

We've talked about this before in the rules thread, so you know where my thoughts are concerning passive aggressiveness lie Natalie, and you know I dislike it. So I would like to see a lot of that being cut back. But at the same time I don't want to see right out aggressiveness either from people. Not saying you are doing this, but there have been in the past other instances of stuff where; I think we all can say has resulted in locked threads. I just don't want to see that myself, I've got a lot of stress IRL as do a lot of people; and it's unfortunate.

There's a huge difference between debating and being the kind of person who wants to purposefully derail, throw memes and just not contribute. I think we can all agree to that.

LiadansWhisper · **05-19-2015, 01:40 AM**

The WoW forums have a moderation policy known as the "Penalty Volcano."

It's kind of how things are set up here. Â Little things get deleted. Â More serious things get you a very brief ban (like, several hours or days). Â More serious things incur more serious punishments - several weeks or months. Â Extreme things net you a permanent ban.

However, lots of little things can add up to a more serious punishment, and lots of fairly "eh" things can eventually net you a permanent ban if (and this is a big "if") you ignore the final warning you're given before that permanent ban. Â To make sure that you aren't unfairly judged based on your past behavior, they delete all of your previous posts when you receive that final warning (which is generally accompanied by a long forum vacation) so that no one can go back and report them to try to get you permanently banned.

However, in general they don't give a fig for attitude - you can be as snarky and mean as you want, as long as you don't engage in personal attacks, harassment, name-calling, doxxing or real-life threats. They also won't moderate posts unless someone specifically reports the post in question.

Some people really hate that style of forum moderation, but I'm so used to it at this point that sometimes I blink when I see what's moderated here, because it's just so strange to me.

Mercer · **05-19-2015, 01:42 AM**

(05-19-2015, 01:40 AM)LiadansWhisper Wrote: The WoW forums have a moderation policy known as the "Penalty Volcano."

It's kind of how things are set up here. Â Little things get deleted. Â More serious things get you a very brief ban (like, several hours or days). Â More serious things incur more serious punishments - several weeks or months. Â Extreme things net you a permanent ban.

However, lots of little things can add up to a more serious punishment, and lots of fairly "eh" things can eventually net you a permanent ban if (and this is a big "if") you ignore the final warning you're given before that permanent ban. Â To make sure that you aren't unfairly judged based on your past behavior, they delete all of your previous posts when you receive that final warning (which is generally accompanied by a long forum vacation) so that no one can go back and report them to try to get you permanently banned.

However, in general they don't give a fig for attitude - you can be as snarky and mean as you want, as long as you don't engage in personal attacks, harassment, name-calling, doxxing or real-life threats. Â They also won't moderate posts unless someone specifically reports the post in question.

Some people really hate that style of forum moderation, but I'm so used to it at this point that sometimes I blink when I see what's moderated here, because it's just so strange to me.

I really, really don't think the vitriol and bile of the WoW community should be anything we try to be.

LiadansWhisper · **05-19-2015, 01:46 AM**

(05-19-2015, 01:42 AM)Oswin Wrote: I really, really don't think the vitriol and bile of the WoW community should be anything we try to be.

I'm not going to even try to argue that there isn't vitriol and bile in the General Discussion forum (which seems to be the least moderated of all the forums). Â But there are extremely healthy forums on that site, too, moderated under the same policy. Â In particular, the Healing Forum and the various Technical Support and Customer Service forums are very healthy, very useful, and seem to function just fine under that moderation system.

Do you have to be able to take people disagreeing with you, sometimes harshly? Â Yes. Â Do you have to be able to live with people dismissing your opinion because of x, y, and z (which are generally incredibly arbitrary and sometimes quite silly)? Yep.

But the conversations are, in general, a lot saner there than the ones that have gone off the rails here. Â And they absolutely do moderate things that get out of hand.

Edited to Add: I was mostly throwing that out there to show that a more hands-off moderation policy that allows for some friction isn't necessarily unhealthy or a bad idea. My concern with what I'm seeing here is that people are being encouraged to be passive-aggressive about things - i.e. to game the system so that they can still get their zingers in but not be dinged for them. The undertone of hostility and malice is not something that can be papered over by having everyone pretend they like each other. I don't know if you've ever had a boil, but I have. You lance a boil. Covering it up and pretending it isn't there just leads to blood poisoning. It needs to be cut open, cleaned out, and allowed to heal, or it will continue to fester and cause issues. I feel like the simmering discontent needs to be treated the same way. Why people are attacking each other needs to be addressed. Handing out warnings over gifs and blunt remarks really isn't doing a lot to help the general atmosphere. At least, in my opinion.

Sailor July · **05-19-2015, 06:16 AM**

So. 7th page. From what I've gathered, I think everyone should just lighten up. It's a forum, and some people express themselves with words, some with gifs, some with both. Gifs aren't harmful, unless they break a rule (racist, sexual, etc.) If you don't like them, ignore them, or maybe the mods can make a rule to spoiler them with a gif tag. That way you won't have to see them.Â

This entire post hasn't moved. The mods said they're going to review the wording. Maybe they'll make a change. But everyone is just arguing the same points over and over, burying the advice and thoughts given.

Cato · **05-19-2015, 07:23 AM**

I really dislike the seemingly feigned outrage over this. If people are receiving multiple warnings and getting into trouble then the burden is on their shoulders rather than being a problem with the site's moderation.
It's not unusual for a site to employ a 'three strikes and you're out' approach. It's also not unusual for a site to make the use of gifs/images impossible or frowned upon. You can't embed such things into posts over on WoW's official site for instance.

I'm far from a prude but it does get tiring to be reading an interesting thread only for someone to post a silly image that is then given a lot of attention/praise. If it's a silly thread/forum game then it's perfectly fine in my eyes but let's be honest here: if there's a debate going on about Au Ra and someone swoops in with a 'this again lol' comment and silly image then it's going to risk dragging the thread through the dirt.

There's a time and a place for them - and they're much better suited to threads that aren't going to be heavy on debate/in-depth responses.

Fox · **05-19-2015, 07:41 AM**

(05-19-2015, 07:23 AM)Graeham Ridgefield Wrote: I really dislike the seemingly feigned outrage over this. If people are receiving multiple warnings and getting into trouble then the burden is on their shoulders rather than being a problem with the site's moderation.
It's not unusual for a site to employ a 'three strikes and you're out' approach. It's also not unusual for a site to make the use of gifs/images impossible or frowned upon. You can't embed such things into posts over on WoW's official site for instance.

I'm far from a prude but it does get tiring to be reading an interesting thread only for someone to post a silly image that is then given a lot of attention/praise. If it's a silly thread/forum game then it's perfectly fine in my eyes but let's be honest here: if there's a debate going on about Au Ra and someone swoops in with a 'this again lol' comment and silly image then it's going to risk dragging the thread through the dirt.

There's a time and a place for them - and they're much better suited to threads that aren't going to be heavy on debate/in-depth responses.

However a lot of gifs are breaking the rule in the manner that they're dropped down with an intent to provide little to no contribution other than to 'lul' mentality as Graeham has pointed out in the above. (I do apologize if this doesn't make much sense, I'm pretty tired and I'm going to call it an evening now as I've had to edit this a few times to try to clarify things.) I'm quoting the post because it's quite true. The fact that they derail legitimate, interesting debates and often times turn the thread nearly into something very close to "yo' momma' jokes" and completely off of the original topic is harmful.

Just as the way of using memes as a "I'm not passive aggressive, I'm funny, see I'm funny!" weapon against a person is harmful. Using them in a snide-y manner is against the rules so yes, they are harmful in that case and they certainly don't contribute at all when used like this.

I'll use the au ra threads as an example as well. As when I first found out about the au ra I was super excited and I wanted to see what others thought about them, and lo' it became a slag-fest of slinging mud + the drop-in memes thing turns a good thread into a complete train-wreck.

I personally would like to see gifs removed from discussion threads if people aren't going to use them appropriately.

Could I ignore them? Yes, and often times I do. But when they turn a thread into garbage it's disheartening. Also, just to say I'm not going to directly link to any post where this is an example as it would fall under the name-calling thingy.

I will also agree that many sites do not allow the use of memes in such a way. The mod teams just don't want to deal with it because it causes derail often.

***Alothia*** · **05-19-2015, 08:07 AM**

Alright, I've held my peace until I calmed down, and now I feel sufficiently well rested to respond to this thread as a whole.

Not everyone is going to like all the rules all the time. It's a fact of life. Does that mean you don't have to uphold them? No. Does that mean we can't discuss them in a peaceful manner? Also no. But raging in a thread that uses a title that is hyperbolic and incendiary is not discussion. It's rabble rousing. If I remember correctly, there is a thread that is specifically for discussion of the rules. I think that the majority of what is being said there could have been said there.

In the first post, the warning that is in question was given by me. Before I gave the warning, I checked with the two other mods that happened to be online to see if I was correct in giving the warning. While the thread was in the Off-Topic forum, it seemed to be of a fairly serious nature. People were contributing to the thread in an insightful and well thought out manner. While I appreciated the humor in Edda's post, it didn't fit with the spirit of the thread, I felt. Again, this is why I tried to get consensus from the other moderators before taking any action. Both moderators online agreed with my assessment, and I went forward with the warning. My justification was that, although it was funny, it did try to derail the thread somewhat. No one is saying that you can't post pictures at all in threads. But it didn't add anything to the discussion other than a haha. If the picture and comment had been followed by something that contributed to the thread as a whole, I would have taken no issue with it. I think that that's the line that we're trying to fall on. Sure, there are some threads where just a picture is warranted, like the ones specifically labeled as picture/gif threads. There is a tendency for people to go off onto tangents of image/meme/gif postings, and so I was trying to keep that from happening. I'm not as verbose in explaining things as Melkire is, so forgive me if this comes off as disjointed. I'm doing what I can.

There is going to be times when people don't think things are fair. I get that. Again, raising a hubbub over it isn't the way to get your voice heard. In general, I think we're more likely to hear out a well thought out post that is sent to us in PMs than an entire thread to calling us a "police state." Â I think that goes for most people.

As far as the number of warnings that it takes to get a permaban, I'm in the camp that says that perhaps what we've set is even too much. How many chances does it take to understand what is expected? I don't want this to be a place where anyone can say whatever they want with no expected consequences. There's a reason I love this website and this community as a whole. We're not like some of the other RP sites for other games. We've always had a higher standard for our members. I don't think that it's a bad thing. And we can agree to disagree on that point. I'd rather have a place with some semblance of order than chaos. There's a reason I avoid places like 4chan. Again, some people don't like that. You're entitled to your opinion.Â

Many people in this thread have left valid concerns, and it's something that we as a mod team are taking into consideration. We're trying to clarify the rules so that everyone can be consistent: mods and non mods alike. You're going to make mistakes. We're going to make mistakes. We're only human. I will reiterate...if you're feeling angry or emotional, take a step away from the keyboard. I've had to do it before. I had to do it last night.Â

I don't have much else to say on the subject. I just wanted to get my thoughts down before I lost it all. This is a great community with a great player base. I'd like to see us come together to figure this all out together. But I can't make people stay if they dislike how things are done. I can only say that we'll try and work with suggestions and we'll take thoughts into consideration. But we can't listen to everyone. Keep that in mind. Someone is going to end up unhappy, and as much as it sucks, it's the truth of the matter.Â

Happy journeys in Eorzea and here on the RPC. I'll probably go quiet for the rest of the day, but I'll be keeping tabs on stuff. If you need me, you know how to get a hold of me.

Gone. · **05-19-2015, 08:21 AM**

... so let me get this straight.

You're upset that a post which clearly violates the RPC rules (which in themselves are quite cut and dry) resulted in a warning issued to the poster in the most open, transparent way possible?

And you think this is somehow 'liberal policing'?

Image macros aren't funny; they're a cop-out devoid of any real critical thinking, the most blatant shitpost one can ever make on a forum. It doesn't add to the discussion in any rational way. It veers it off-course in one obnoxious, self-indulgent swoop.

The RPC moderation team dealt with the situation accordingly, if not admirably so. That they're willing to let your thread stay open when it truthfully amounts to nothing more than a disproportionate knee jerk reaction is a testament to that in the fullest extent.

Sailor July · **05-19-2015, 08:29 AM**

Perfectly said,Â Alothia!

hauntmedoitagain, I can say that I use gifs often, and they often portray me perfectly. Me, or my humor, or my beliefs. I can understand not using them in this discussion or that one, but I wouldn't rule them out all together. They do have their purpose for some of us. ^_^

Askier · **05-19-2015, 09:07 AM**

I think it boils down to this:

Do your tax dollars pay for this web site?Â No?Â So it's not government property and therefor not public property to the people and not subject to public opinion.

Does your monthly internet fee to a private company go to paying for this website's upkeep?Â No?Â Then you aren't paying for the rights to use this website.

Is this website privately owned and required you to sign a policy agreement form to use it where you agreed to all the rules? You bet ya.

So, in the end, you might disagree with something this website does.Â But it's up to the discretion of the moderators and owners of this website to decide how things ultimately play out.Â If I buy a house and I want to paint the inside blood red, it's my right to do so. And if I let people in and they don't like the color, I'm under no obligation to change it.

However, I think Freelance and ALL the moderators here do an excellent job giving us a place to indulge out hobby and socialize while also listening to our opinions if we disagree with something.

EDIT: Also, had to add this, linking this to the idea of a liberal police state is just tacky and ,honestly, reduced any validity of your comment to zill.

« Next Oldest \| Next Newest »
Thread Closed Pages (9): « Previous 1 … 5 6 7 8 9 Next » Jump to page:

Liberal police state

RPC has moved! These pages have been kept for historical purposes