Question: Code of Conduct
-
Greetings.
I hope this is not taken inflammatory, but the thread is locked and I have some questions. I am not offering my thoughts, but I am offering the questions respectfully. A few items I would like some clarity upon. I wasn't sure what board to put it on, so I picked this. Feel free to move it if it's not the right one.
-
"Keeping this thread locked to keep it clear and uncluttered, but commentary and suggestions are, as always, welcome via PM to the admins." -- Clarity question - why are they welcome via PM and not to boards? Which maybe I am going to be banned for, but I'm curious about this. Again, I am asking with respect not a reactionary.
-
"Admins will interpret this code of conduct based on the spirit, rather than the letter, of the Code. Constantly walking the knife-edge and attempting to rules-lawyer this Code of Conduct shall be considered a violation of the spirit of the Code, and punished accordingly." -- Clarity question -- I might be reading it wrong (I probably am) but the wording sounds like rules can change at a notice because this is just a vague rule. Does that mean that any interpretation could be a violation? Also, what is the punishment? Or is that up to interpretation?
Again, I am just curious about this. I mean, I suppose if it gets me a ban, I'll be saddened by it, but in the end it's your boards.
Thank you for reading. Don't forget a few things. When responding we decide if we empower or demoralize. The other is to be kind.
-
-
@rightmeow Andrew Jackson is smiling today.
-
@bloodangel questions are only acceptable via dm so that they may be dismissed or misrepresented as pleases the lieges
-
@kanye-qwest martial law. Is always in favor of those in power.
-
I'm going to take a swing at point #2 and see if I'm right.
When dealing with any community primarily based on debate/communication there is an issue of spirit of a rule vs the written rule. A classic example of this is the Supreme Court stating you know it when you see it in relation to... Obscenity (had to google that one). So in the event someone is clearly (to the moderator) violating the spirit of the rule the enforcement is done whether or not it violates the written rule.
While this obviously opens up to the favoritism, double standards, and tyranny angle of concern the answer to that is simple. If you believe the moderators would execute the spirit of the rule inappropriately than why would you stay? Just because they have written in that they won't be limited to the letter of the rule but the spirit of it doesn't mean they are seizing power. There is no higher authority on the forum than the moderators so them being up front and telling you that technicalities won't save you doesn't mean if they had not been up front about it that they would have restrained themselves or acted differently.
TLDR - If you believe the moderators would be unethical or unfair than any answer to the question is moot.
-
@jeshin said in Question: Code of Conduct:
If you believe the moderators would execute the spirit of the rule inappropriately then why would you stay?
If you hate America so much, why don't you just move?
-
I'll just go ahead and answer these.
Point number 1: Questions are welcome via PM because Ganymede has said that questions are welcome via PM when it comes to administrative decisions. She might decide to open up the board for it. I don't know. What I do know is that our standing request is to have them done via PM, so I put them in there via PM.
Point Number 2: This isn't a bug. It's a feature. You might have noticed, but certain persons have gone to great lengths to skate right along the very border of what a written, explicit rule will let them get away with, and then choose to cite that rule back in the face of the mods when told to knock it off. So now we've given notice that this kind of behavior will be seen as violating the rule in question. For 99% of our users, this won't ever be an issue. For that other 1%, they're now on official notice.
Racism isn't Tinkerbell. It doesn't need you to believe in it for it to exist.
-
Ex pat rates are on the rise!
More realistically the ability to create a competing forum with hypothetically more ethical moderators is easier than creating a country in which to live with a more ethical government. Also the barrier of entry to website ownership vs international travel is pretty spread.
-
@derp said in Question: Code of Conduct:
certain persons have gone to great lengths to skate right along the very border of what a written, explicit rule will let them get away with, and then choose to cite that rule back in the face of the mods when told to knock it off
literally the only person I have ever seen do this is you
-
@jeshin That's kind of missing the point. People who were part of this community have an emotional investment in it. Some of us even have a little bit of our sense of self tied up in it. We don't want it to die; we don't want to lose it. We want it to be better than it currently is.
"Better for whom" is a fair question to ask and we can bicker all night long on that topic, but the point is, this isn't about giving up and walking away. It's about fighting for something we think is good enough to be worth keeping.
-
@prototart Then you haven't been paying attention. What you just declared is that you, and everyone upvoting this, literally think nothing else here has ever been someone skating the edge of the rules and violating the spirit of them.
No one, ever.
You might want to double check on that before making an absolute stance your own.
This literally applies in all cases of an absolute stance. <-- an absolute stance.
-
@misadventure said in Question: Code of Conduct:
@prototart Then you haven't been paying attention. What you just declared is that you, and everyone upvoting this, literally think nothing else here has ever been someone skating the edge of the rules and violating the spirit of them.
No one, ever.
yes, correct, the only person I have ever seen go to lengths to violate every spirit of a rule and then spit it back in someone’s face because they allegedly remained within the exact wording is him
-
Sorry, I didn't want this to be a 'no you are wrong' thing.
Thank you for those that read my questions and gave answers.
Again, remember there are people behind screens, a pandemic and lots of RL going on, being kind is good.
Thanks again for the answers.
-
@rightmeow said in Question: Code of Conduct:
- "Keeping this thread locked to keep it clear and uncluttered, but commentary and suggestions are, as always, welcome via PM to the admins." -- Clarity question - why are they welcome via PM and not to boards? Which maybe I am going to be banned for, but I'm curious about this. Again, I am asking with respect not a reactionary.
I guess it's a matter of preference, for me, to discuss policies via PM. I've been doing this ever since Arkandel passed the wheel to me. I don't mind public discussion. I think that's what we're having now.
- "Admins will interpret this code of conduct based on the spirit, rather than the letter, of the Code. Constantly walking the knife-edge and attempting to rules-lawyer this Code of Conduct shall be considered a violation of the spirit of the Code, and punished accordingly." -- Clarity question -- I might be reading it wrong (I probably am) but the wording sounds like rules can change at a notice because this is just a vague rule. Does that mean that any interpretation could be a violation? Also, what is the punishment? Or is that up to interpretation?
This policy was crafted not due to recent events, but to reflect how have been handling matters prior. I can think of a handful of folks who "escaped" sanctioning because they never "clearly" broke the rules, and most of us sighed in relief when they finally went far enough that no one complained when we stepped outside of the rules and banned them. As with most matters, we will look at everything case-by-case.
-
@rightmeow I can take a stab at #1. This is just based on my experiences online with various communities etc, I have no inside track on info here.
TL;DR Forum threads are too chaotic and volatile to work with easily.
==============
Threads are an okay way to discuss something specific. They tend to fray into a lot of different directions, some focusing on minutia of some aspect, others on interpretations, relating other events, then arguing with each other, making quick comments or jokes, etc.
Then your original content creators intermittently reply where they can, both answering questions, and trying to stop or set aside certain tangents.
Timeliness, variable availability, etc all make for what you see here, really meandering conversations.
That's all fine when people are really just chatting, or brainstorming.
When you have something you are working on, or considering changing significantly, those threads aren't directly helpful. Imagine you are considering a character arc change in a series and fans are saying what they'd like the unchanged character to experience. It may be great ideas, but it's going to be scattered across pages and pages over a long time, and a lot of it may not be relevant if you DO make the change.
==============
DMs would hopefully be succinct, present an idea clearly, potentially use information that the sender didn't want public, and like posts also have a name attached so if needed you can ask for clarification, ask if a change meets their need specific etc. Like a +job thread on a game, if you're familiar with that format.
Ideally, after both internal (here being among admins) discussions, and those DM discussions, either a decision would be reached, posted and be done, or potential new content (here expectations, rules, whatever) would be posted for comment and either public discussion, or another round of DMs, or a mix.
TL;DR Forum threads are too chaotic and volatile to work with easily.
-
@derp said in Question: Code of Conduct:
I'll just go ahead and answer these.
Point number 1: Questions are welcome via PM because Ganymede has said that questions are welcome via PM when it comes to administrative decisions. She might decide to open up the board for it. I don't know. What I do know is that our standing request is to have them done via PM, so I put them in there via PM.
Point Number 2: This isn't a bug. It's a feature. You might have noticed, but certain persons have gone to great lengths to skate right along the very border of what a written, explicit rule will let them get away with, and then choose to cite that rule back in the face of the mods when told to knock it off. So now we've given notice that this kind of behavior will be seen as violating the rule in question. For 99% of our users, this won't ever be an issue. For that other 1%, they're now on official notice.
So who is on notice, exactly? I ask because an admin just made a vague disciplinary threat in a thread, and I personally am only accepting them in PM. But not from you- don’t ever contact me directly thx
-
@kanye-qwest you should probably @ that at another admin. Seems like it would get seen faster.
