Regarding administration on MSB

Thenomain

Sometimes people have to be reminded how you expect them how to behave. That's why businesses have an employee manual. That's why we sometimes ask posters to please cut it out. These actions help remind everyone that yes, sometimes we get emotional and that yes, sometimes we forget the context of where we are.

Reminders are the first and most reasonable step towards the problem escalation process, and if done in a respectful manner then leaves the de-escallation process in the hands of the person who you believe started it. It shows them that you don't immediately think that they are a troll, or are causing problems on purpose, and so you respect their ability to manage themselves. (edit: And people managing themselves is what you want. I want it too.)

Adulting. Sometimes it's hard, but it builds respect and trust.

Apos

@arkandel said in Regarding administration on MSB:

@thenomain said in Regarding administration on MSB:

I personally think that this is a bit of an insult to the ability for adults to act like adults when treated like adults, and expected to act like adults, but this is my take on the entire issue.

To me the really insulting thing is the implied suggestion we can only be adults and treat each other with some civility if there is some rule forcing us to. Or that otherwise we'd all be acting the way of the Hog Pit, all the time.

I really detest that idea.

I harbor doubts about the Hog Pit being productive or useful and I still don't think that. What I do think is that a light touch in moderation or no moderation guarantees derails will happen in most cases. Someone says something provocative or accusatory, someone responds, that response gets a counter, and on and on and on even if it had nothing to do at all with the topic itself. So if you allow provocative statements, and this can be positive statements too as I'd consider 'Ditko is a swell dude' a pretty fucking provocative statement, then derails are just natural and any thread is gonna have to be forked or moved if it happens.

I think the vitriol isn't great but that's almost really beside the point, if there's 50 pages of 'are furries good or bad on comic book games' and 2 pages of 'hey this staffer sexually harasses people in pages and drives everyone off the game', I'd really rather those 2 pages be noticed than the Great Furry Debate of '17.

Thenomain

So I had a thought. This isn't to derail Apos' point, but I was reminded that this thread exists.

We have another thread on this board that is focused entirely on venting outside of the rules and confines of the context of what we're venting about.

This one. Here's an example of venting for the sake of venting, and sometimes even swearing and insulting in a not at all friendly manner. And it's still mostly constructive. Why? Because there is no to almost no chance that anyone who is being vented at or about will see it. We don't have to tell people to not vent about people on these boards or in this hobby, even if they are driving us insane in an RL manner. The limits of that thread are understood almost universally without extra rules being enacted.

And yet I don't for a second doubt that it's not useful. We get things off our chest to fellows who either commiserate or ignore it if they disagree. Even shouting into the void is considered healthy, in moderation.

There is no stated conclusion here, but in my mind it's a lynchpin of many of these related comments.

Tempest

So, did @Auspice consult the rest of the MOD team before posting in the Stranger than Fiction thread?

Was that a joint decision, between all three of you, that you needed to post a warning telling the board to not plot against games, in 'mod voice'?

Or was she acting independently?

Arkandel

@tempest The 'Mod Voice' isn't some magical thing. It's just a way to separate what we think as regular posters and when we want to make it clear we're speaking on behalf of the forum itself.

We did all have a conversation about that game's allegations about MSB beforehand. We agreed on the obvious (i.e. that this didn't come from us, wtf).

What Auspice said sounded like a repetition of that chat. Was it necessary to go ahead and state it for the record? Probably not. Did it hurt anyone? I don't think so, although here we are talking about it anyway.

My interest in this is very, very low.

Tempest

@arkandel said in Regarding administration on MSB:

@tempest The 'Mod Voice' isn't some magical thing. It's just a way to separate what we think as regular posters and when we want to make it clear we're speaking on behalf of the forum itself.

We did all have a conversation about that game's allegations about MSB beforehand. We agreed on the obvious (i.e. that this didn't come from us, wtf).

What Auspice said sounded like a repetition of that chat. Was it necessary to go ahead and state it for the record? Probably not. Did it hurt anyone? I don't think so, although here we are talking about it anyway.

My interest in this is very, very low.

It seems like, every time there is a question of "should we moderate this or not?"

You guys are choosing yes.

Which IDK, just seems kind of out of place to me.

Apparently I'm in the minority though, so I will shut up now!

Tempest

This post is deleted!

Arkandel

@tempest What did we moderate?

Tempest

@arkandel said in Regarding administration on MSB:

@tempest What did we moderate?

...So you are saying, necro'ing a 2 week old thread to randomly go "GUYS DON'T PLOT AGAINST THIS GAME" isn't a form of moderation? Even more curious when the thread in question had been very mild.

Auspice

@tempest said in Regarding administration on MSB:

It seems like, every time there is a question of "should we moderate this or not?"
You guys are choosing yes.

Well, obviously. All the times we discuss and choose 'no,' you guys don't see it.

That's kind of how it works.

Some of y'all love to flag posts, for example.

Arkandel

Man, @tempest, sometimes you really get fixated. I still don't know what ruffled your feathers so hard, several posts later.

We have no authority over you, MOD VOICE or not, in what you do outside of MSB. If you go to a game and start a riot or something I can't stop you even if I wanted to, which I don't. I'm not responsible for what you do elsewhere on the interwebs.

As I just said in this thread the MOD VOICE was probably unnecessary, but I guess Auspice thought it wouldn't hurt anything to make it clear we're not actually condoning attacking games - in case anyone wondered. We don't. I definitely don't. A few weeks ago someone brought up the dumb-ass idea of going to that superhero game and harassing the perpetrators to which - at the time - I responded to say it was a dumb-ass idea and please don't do that. No one took exception to it, but they jumped on Auspice now because she said the same thing, but put two words in all-caps.

I don't know what else I can tell you.

Roz

@Tempest you just make it feel impossible to have a reasonable discussion about modding issues when you get into a melodramatic FRENZY every time someone puts a toe out of line. Why do you think anyone is going to listen to your opinion about board administration when you can never state it in a reasonable fashion?

Apos

@auspice said in Regarding administration on MSB:

Well, obviously. All the times we discuss and choose 'no,' you guys don't see it.

I'm really sympathetic to people getting shit while doing a lot of invisible work, as one of the lone apologists for staff everywhere on the boards. And I'm one of the people that argued for more moderation. That said, I kind of think the term MOD VOICE should be sent up state to live with a nice farm family and quietly retired.

When we didn't have much moderation, it almost never came up, and ES and Glitch weren't exactly throwing themselves into every discussion so it just wasn't jarring. But going into more moderation, I think it really doesn't fit the boards well. Everything here is conversational and frequently argumentative, so when you have something super formal suddenly showing up right in the middle of threads, it's super jarring, and comes across as a little patronizing. "Hey time to MODERATE with MOD VOICE to make sure there is MODERATION." It's just offputting, even if what it's doing is fine.

I think it would read a thousand times more helpful if a mod just said, "Speaking as a moderator, this thread is way off track and we need to split it." I don't think people are going to forget any of the moderators are moderators, and that's just the nature of the forum, so it's better to approach it more conversationally than have strict distinctions. Just my opinion.

Kanye Qwest

I agree with @Apos. After Auspice's turn in this thread calling people who didn't realize she wasn't using "mod voice" stupid, any subsequent MOD VOICE is just going to come off flip at best, and snarky at worst. Find a more mature way to do it.

Roz

Well, the mod team was asked to make it clearer when they're speaking as moderators and when they aren't. Glitch and ES just weren't prolific posters, which is a really relevant difference. That said, they were the ones to start the MOD VOICE trend, and they actually offered it as a suggestion when the board was handed over. But there was less confusion with Glitch and ES because they just didn't post as much. So, like. Idek.

Auspice

I don't like using it either, but a whole flood of people tried to insist that I should use it.

So I ask that maybe I be excused for being a touch gunshy at this point. I'm sitting here right now feeling that this is a bit of a trap.

I don't want to use it. I'm lazy and forgetful. But it launched a whole discussion into how a number (not all) of people felt that maybe mods should tag official statements. So I did.

And yet here we are.

So I won't use it moving forward. But if it turns into a repeat of the first go 'round, I won't be surprised. Hurt, but not surprised.

Kanye Qwest

@roz I think the difference is that Glitch and ES never used MOD VOICE as obvious sarcasm. This mod team has, and thus it is kind of ruined. I'm not going @tempest over it, whatever. People are people, snark happens, mistakes are made. But I do think that makes it very hard to use "MOD VOICE" going forward.

Ghost

ModeratorAlpha
ModeratorBravo
ModeratorGamma

I'm repeating my suggestion, because I think that had @Arkandel said it and not @Auspice this discussion would be happening differently.

I'll also note that this is the second time someone has cried foul at @Auspice using ModVoice, and the rate is seeming disproportionate to when Ark does.

I mean, FFS people, she was just trying to point out that someone reached out to her as forum moderation to let her know that someone was allegedly planning to use MSB as a way to bring the game down. This is exactly the kind of information you'd expect a moderator to receive, and if it were your favorite game you'd appreciate someone getting involved to try to stop the space from being used as an attack platform for selfish purposes.

My Spider-Senses are tingling. In my experience, this may not be so much a complaint about the use of ModVoice, but that the use of ModVoice is possibly the justification for a round of mud slinging.

saosmash

@ghost I mean I personally think it was silly to respond to the MSB coup idea in any way regardless of whether you use mod voice. I think regardless of which moderator expressed it I would have found it so.

Ghost

@saosmash You're one of the ones I would wholly trust to approach that point of view exactly as you say you do. You make yourself very clear on a case by case basis. As well I know XD

This wasn't dirrcted at you. I think your voice can be appreciated to not address an issue like this without petty poo flinging.