Jump to content
Awoo.

Zero-Tolerance Concerns


gala

Recommended Posts

The argument hasn't gone anywhere because we made points that explained our perspective and gave reasoning as to why we said / made note of these things (including noting that we're not making any moves against logic or morals here), but none of that has been good enough. Instead, it's been a process where despite giving our reasoning, we are nitpicked and complained about for our every action as if we don't know how to do our jobs. We've explained ourselves enough, but are treated like we explained nothing. 

And every post made so far as a retort to our irritance has been "but I haven't been tearing down your work and telling you you're not doing your job right! I'm just gonna tell you that you're not doing your job right", and then we loop back around to where we started.

So I restate this: what do you want from us? To just take back everything we said? Because with everything made in the initial post combined with our explanations are more than justified in my eyes, and I definitely don't think mentioning that Komodin helped out with reporting is anything out of line or in ill will.

  • Thumbs Up 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to throw my two cents out there as I usually do;

I think members are simply worried. People are flawed and, honestly, even as a group, the moderators too are flawed. By introducing this rule you've effectively given yourselves even more power and that causes people to be concerned. You're telling them that a mod at, what to us is basically, will can choose to completely ignore the solid strike system for an instant ban. And as much as you try to justify yourselves, people will remain to be worried. We don't know what's going on in your heads, and without a system to defend us, the reaction is natural.

Give it a month or so and enough proof that this power isn't abused and I'm sure people will calm down about it.

And other members, I suggest just dropping the discussion now, it's really just nitpicking. Let the mods prove themselves and then we can potentially voice our opinion on the results.

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Ryannumber1gamer said:

Where you all keep getting this idea that I'm flat out complaining about how you all do your jobs I honestly don't know, because I actively have not said or complained in any regard specifically about you or your jobs, and I'm actively getting annoyed that I keep getting the claim that I'm contesting your skill at doing your jobs when I've already said at least twice that isn't what I am doing.

It's a little hard for us to not feel like we're being raked over the coals when you keep taking something we've said, such as in regards to Komodin, and blown it up into how your privacy is at risk because one of the staff gave an anecdote and named a member. My last sentence was a retread of the original announcement and a more generalized point about reporting. If a member is on the receiving end of some kind of abuse or harassment, and they don't report it, and we don't know about it, yet complain about us being lax because they refused to take action, that's their problem.

52 minutes ago, Crow the BOOLET said:

We were mostly concerned if this meant any kind of argument or any kind of heated debate would get us banned by a massive hair trigger.

[...]

All I will ask for is that make fair assessments in making decisions, make sure they're the right ones, and follow by SSMB's moral code in a sense.

We've addressed this, though. I've even outlined the kinds of behavior we do have an issue with both in the original announcement, as well as in this thread. But going by how discussion has gone, my and other mods' answers haven't been satisfactory in easing people's concerns because we didn't state something we didn't think we had to, especially that every mod action is subject to discussion and we aren't going to drop the banhammer without cause or that members are allowed to appeal if it turns out we're wrong. I honestly don't know what I can do to convince you we will continue to do these things, and not just ban people because we feel like it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/7/2016 at 2:30 PM, Chris said:

I'll be reopening this topic for a short while to allow for any questions that you may have for me. This topic was a direct response to several issues that we've been dealing with and was my suggestion - Gala stepped up to the plate and addressed the issue while I had to be away.

As stated, the ban involved in this is for extreme circumstances; we can take a joke just as well as you can. This is to be implemented to deal with deliberate member drama or off-site drama that spreads to our public elements (status, posts), not accidents. You will only be affected by this if you're A) trolling extensively or B) going out of your way to ruin the experience for your peers.

I understand your concerns but I assure you that it won't end up as you fear.

I'm bringing this quote back because I think many people here need to read this several times over to drill it into their heads. If you still have a problem with how Chris addressed this matter, then we're all ears, but rest assured we're out of responses and frankly tired of repeating ourselves for the sake of your own unfounded fears.

Actually, for the sake of my own fucking sanity, from now on I'm just going to completely ignore any and all points brought up about bans. As far as I'm concerned, that matter is settled. So no, I'm not all ears :V

  • Thumbs Up 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone else said it but I will jump in and say that the post wasn't insulting at all and was more of a tribute to what he has done for this forum. It was more of a "yeah we though the report was silly at first but it actually could have helped nipped fights in the butt if we took it more seriously" kind of thing and for the members to keep up this legacy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Ice Prince Jin said:

I think members are simply worried. People are flawed and, honestly, even as a group, the moderators too are flawed. By introducing this rule you've effectively given yourselves even more power and that causes people to be concerned. You're telling them that a mod at, what to us is basically, will can choose to completely ignore the solid strike system for an instant ban. And as much as you try to justify yourselves, people will remain to be worried. We don't know what's going on in your heads, and without a system to defend us, the reaction is natural.

And we can understand them being worried, which is why this thread was allowed to remain open and then re-opened by Chris so people can voice their concerns.  And at this point in the job, we've come to understand that nothing we say will completely erase fears.  But at this point, I feel like if someone said "the sky is blue!" someone will say "I'M FROM COSTA RICA AND IT'S CURRENTLY NIGHTTIME THERE AND I CAN NOT BELIEVE YOU DIDN'T THINK OF THIS!"  As Azoo said, if Komodin wasn't brought up, we would be asked for specific examples, and I'm honestly at a complete loss for words for how the habit of using the report system (without any context as to when and against which members) counts as a breach in confidentiality when I'm hard-pressed to find someone on this forum who hasn't used the report system.

Ryan makes a good point that if I were to say "Soandso reported something" in the aftermath of a huge flame war or something. it would definitely be a problem.  But the problem is that this wasn't in the aftermath of a huge flame war.  So it's, again, a matter of hypothetics and not what is actually happening.  And it's extremely daunting because I've seen people divulge much more personal information on their own free will.  Heck, without mentioning any names, it's not hard for us to tell when some reports were premeditated and clearly talked over with other people before being sent in.

And don't get me wrong, I understand that with how recent the events are that people are going to be emotional.  There's a whole debate to be had as to rather or not Komodin's name specifically needed to be mentioned, but I feel like the entirely wrong debate is being had.  And seriously, the whole "guilt tripping" accusation is no more right than me saying that the accusations of it being a guilt trip are in turn an attempt to guilt trip us.

  • Thumbs Up 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

These concerns people have aren't things that will be smoothed over until things actually pan out , and it feels to me like this thread is just turning into people actively looking for things to argue about and arguing about it for the sake of it, so there's not much to talk about. I say just close the topic. Nobody's really budging, here. 

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Wraith said:

These concerns people have aren't things that will be smoothed over until things actually pan out , and it feels to me like this thread is just turning into people actively looking for things to argue about and arguing about it for the sake of it, so there's not much to talk about. I say just close the topic. Nobody's really budging, here. 

this thread was opened in case we had questions, it wouldn't be fair to close it as if someone did have a legit question and the admins were busy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • The topic was locked
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

You must read and accept our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy to continue using this website. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.