Regarding administration on MSB

[Arkandel]

@faraday @Sunny - If one of you has verbiage you think better reflects on the current situation please feel free to offer some up. Else we'll have to go to some sort of lawyer for this shit and no one wants that door opened.

The Rules of Engagement were written by yours truly over a lunch break at work, typing with one hand while eating pulled chicken with the other. They are not exactly the Declaration of Independence - the Nic Cages of the future won't be spending any time trying to steal this stuff.

I hoped the spirit covered my intent but if it doesn't we can absolutely revise them.

[Collective]

Is there any reason why everyone can't just move discussions on a given ad to Mildly Constructive and then if they get heated to the Hog Pit and leave a link to those threads in the original?

I understand that it is a bit of extra effort but it seems like the easy way to achieve both goals, notification and discussion.

[Arkandel]

@collective I don't see any reason, except it didn't seem like Mildly Constructive material to begin with.

Also why would it have been any different if @Auspice had moved it from MC to the Hog Pit?

[Alzie]

So are we upset that someone took an action to move a thread using a tool that's 100% transparent? It's a forum. It's easy to see if something wasn't moved or deleted. This is silly.

@Arkandel @Auspice

[Sunny]

@arkandel

I'm not just like arguing semantics here. There is a difference between 'don't do this' and 'don't do this unless the game runner, who we'll contact, doesn't mind'. That you did it over lunchbreak at work isn't the problem, it's leaving out a part of what is going on.

Rule 1, spoken: We can't wear blue shirts.
Rule 2, unspoken: Unless we're also wearing jeans.

When people see mods wearing blue shirts because they know about rule #2 (and the other isn't said), it's perfectly reasonable for there to be confusion.

[faraday]

@Arkandel - To be clear, I'm speaking in generalities. I have no idea what the post that started this thread was all about, as it was in a thread I didn't read about a game I have no interest in. That said, I agree with this:

@sunny said in Regarding administration on MSB:

I'm not just like arguing semantics here. There is a difference between 'don't do this' and 'don't do this unless the game runner, who we'll contact, doesn't mind'.

The rules for the ads forum rather clearly and explicitly say "negative stuff to a different thread". It doesn't say "... unless the game-runner doesn't mind" or "...only if the game-runner requests".

If that's the actual policy, then just add it. No biggie. But then you'll have to have a back-and-forth with the game runner any time you or they think that something should be moved. That sounds like a PITA to me but I'm not the one who has to deal with it.

[Ganymede]

@sunny @faraday

What I'm doing is my practice at the moment. We'll discuss tomorrow and amend as appropriate.

I recognize that the concern and request is not semantic.

[Wizz]

Not to pile on, but I'd echo Sunny and Faraday.
If you're declaring a collection of posts out of line, there is already a rule you can point to. If we can see you enforcing it equally across the board, an accusation of bias doesn't stick.

[Sunny]

@ganymede Thank you.

[Collective]

@arkandel said in Regarding administration on MSB:

@collective I don't see any reason, except it didn't seem like Mildly Constructive material to begin with.

Also why would it have been any different if @Auspice had moved it from MC to the Hog Pit?

Not to me. I didn't mind things being moved at all. My suggestion was meant to be more of a constructive suggestion and certainly not critique, overt or implied. Having been a forum mod with some 50,000 doomed souls under my jackboot, I have nothing but sympathy and empathy for anyone who would willingly take up that job and do it for free.

Well, sympathy, empathy and a suspicion of masochism.

[Pandora]

Far be it from me to discourage name-calling and shade-throwing, but I think calling a group of staffers the sexually frustrated rejects from some other game in their own ad thread is one of those things where common sense might tell you that's going to get moved.

If you want to voice a complaint in an ad thread there are informative, non-biased ways to do so. Every opinion won't be a 5-star review but they can at least strive to be civil. And no amount of unbiased moderation is going to please 100% of everyone 100% of the time; there's a level of human error allowed when judging what can stay, what has to move, and when to step in.

So be sure to do your best, MSB administration, you don't want this thread to have to move into the Hog Pit - entertaining as the thought may be.

[Thenomain]

@pandora

Currently I think the question is whether or not all game reviews/feedback/flaming belong outside of the advertisement board, or just when the original poster is asked or asks.

[Pandora]

@thenomain
To the best of my understanding, civil commentary is fine but anything that turns into a conversation/debate should go to Mildly Constructive or the Hog Pit depending on the tone of the response. Bonus points if people display some level of tone-awareness and can plant their response in the correct place without it needing to be moved in the first place, but Rome, unlike my new local McDonald's, was not built in a day.

[Sunny]

@pandora said in Regarding administration on MSB:

@thenomain
To the best of my understanding, civil commentary is fine but anything that turns into a conversation/debate should go to Mildly Constructive or the Hog Pit depending on the tone of the response. Bonus points if people display some level of tone-awareness and can plant their response in the correct place without it needing to be moved in the first place, but Rome, unlike my new local McDonald's, was not built in a day.

This is supposed to be what is happening by the rules as they stand. This is not what is happening by the rules as they are being enforced.

[Arkandel]

@pandora We'll clarify once we know ourselves.

I'd rather not have super detailed rules because that leads to people trying to play rules lawyer with them - the idea though is that it's an ad thread. An one-line negative review such as "I tried it and CGen took too long for my tastes so I left" is probably okay, but a 3-page long heated debate on it isn't.

What do you expect to find in an ad thread? Think of that.

The best solution is probably what several people have already suggested; one post, editable by the game's staff/owner with links to other posts in the MC or Hog Pit categories. The one thing I'd miss then is the chance for folks to ask quick questions directly ("are FCs more powerful than OCs?", "do you allow custom Bloodlines?", etc) to gauge if the game is right for them.

[phatdenny]

@pandora Was that a bit much? I'm unironically sorry. I must have thrown it in at the heat of the moment and forgot it was there. I even had a friend who I considered relatively level-headed check it over. That being said I understand your decision.

I will go to the pit and play with the other piggies

:oink:

[Apos]

@arkandel Yeah I kind of think one post and then a link to FAQs or Rant threads would be good. With some questions you expect to find in a FAQ like, 'What game system are you using?' would be fine, while, 'Why is Apos worse than Hitler?' might be frequently asked, but would probably go to the latter.

[Pandora]

@arkandel said in Regarding administration on MSB:

@pandora We'll clarify once we know ourselves.

I'd rather not have super detailed rules because that leads to people trying to play rules lawyer with them - the idea though is that it's an ad thread. An one-line negative review such as "I tried it and CGen took too long for my tastes so I left" is probably okay, but a 3-page long heated debate on it isn't.

What do you expect to find in an ad thread? Think of that.

The best solution is probably what several people have already suggested; one post, editable by the game's staff/owner with links to other posts in the MC or Hog Pit categories. The one thing I'd miss then is the chance for folks to ask quick questions directly ("are FCs more powerful than OCs?", "do you allow custom Bloodlines?", etc) to gauge if the game is right for them.

Not sure tempting people into signing up for the Hog Pit to get the gist of a specific discussion is an entirely stellar idea, but that's just my two cents. Not that I'm saying every negative comment will wind up in the Hog Pit as opposed to the Mildly Constructive thread, but it's the responses that make up a thread's designation; plenty of perfectly civil and constructive things are said in the Hog Pit every day because that's just where the conversation is.

[Ganymede]

@pandora said in Regarding administration on MSB:

Not sure tempting people into signing up for the Hog Pit to get the gist of a specific discussion is an entirely stellar idea, but that's just my two cents. Not that I'm saying every negative comment will wind up in the Hog Pit as opposed to the Mildly Constructive thread, but it's the responses that make up a thread's designation; plenty of perfectly civil and constructive things are said in the Hog Pit every day because that's just where the conversation is.

I'll use the new X-Men game thread as a counter-example to what happened in the recent post in the Fear and Loathing thread. Also, as a preliminary matter: yes, we are discussing how the rules will be implemented, and, yes, I recognize that my handling is not consistent with what's already posted.

If you look through the new X-Men game thread, the discussion is mostly civil and inquisitive. When there was a questioning of staff choices, I reminded people to keep it clean or move it elsewhere. I also PM'd Enoch to tell her that I would divide and move anything, any time, if she wanted me to. She acknowledged that, but directed nothing.

With the Fear and Loathing thread, based on the general mood towards that game I decided that sending the new post to the Hog Pit was the best idea, and I will stand by that decision.

Moving forward, that's kind of how I'd like things to roll. For example, in Flashpoint: Gotham, RizBunz and Lithium (or Tempest?) I think had a good discussion about mechanics. Something was done about the issue addressed, and, to my knowledge, we're all waiting for an opening date. That was an example of raising concerns or potentially negative comments, and turning into (hopefully) positive change.

All we can do is: (1) try to enforce things evenly; and (2) consider who is doing what and why, so as to not create an appearance of impropriety.

[Arkandel]

So, for a mild dose of necromancy I wanted to address this here:

@tempest said in Fixing United Heroes- Too bad we cannot talk about it on the game:

I would like to report @Ganymede for moving this thread and committing treachery most foul. She has let the nazis win.

@Arkandel, don't let this injustice stand!

I know you're half joking but to give a quick answer, which can cover others' concerns as well. Please keep in mind I'm tired, and my ideal evening does not include MSB. It's the time I can actually play games or watch some basketball on TV, so if it doesn't make sense I'll go over this again in the morning.

The concern here seems to be that if a thread is in the Hog Pit it's 'hidden' behind the opt-in wall, and thus invisible to casual viewers. That makes our system prone to being played by malevolent posters who want to hide their dirty laundry from those viewers.

However MSB isn't a court of public opinion. It's not wikileaks for MU*. That's one of the roles we serve, and I think we've done pretty damn well in that way for a long time, but it's not our goal. Its purpose is not, to coin a term I never agreed with but have often seen, there to 'shut down games'. Not only does it not have that power, it shouldn't.

MSB is here for the MU* community, all of it or as much as we can have, and not just for the popcorn-and-lolz masses hoping to see someone burn a bit more in the court of public opinion. There are those - there are many - who don't want to read massive flamewars, fuck-you memes and personal attacks; that's precisely what the Hog Pit is there to do, it's a compromise between the two crowds.

So to actually address your issue (generic 'you' now, since it's not just you voicing it), if you think a thread ought to stay out of the Hog Pit then don't turn it into a dumpster fire. It will stay out of there, then.

The poster we all know was a staff alt/friend from UH didn't foul the thread up. Sure, he/she stirred the pot, but I didn't see any particular foul language in there. We stooped to that level ourselves - we did that - and in doing so, the thread went away.

So can someone play us like that? Use the system to hide their dirty laundry? Yes - by design. And yes - if we allow them to. We don't have to. If this guy had started shouting profanities that novelty account would have been banned within minutes, believe me. So ... take some responsibility as well here, please. If you want a thread to stay out of the Hog Pit, don't make sure it ends up exactly there.

Now, having said aaaaall that.... someone pointed out to me we could have split the thread better. We could have not moved the entire thing but only select posts.

I think that's something we can improve on, yes. It's just a matter of every admin figuring out this forum's ins and outs, not to mention having the time to do so. So to address @Tempest's actual complaint, I back Gany 100% here - it was objectively the right call to make - but I'll also see that we all us admins get some practice using our vast powers for which you hate and fear us , since we could have split up the nasty parts of the thread and left the rest up for public consumption.

If you have thoughts to share please do so. I actually felt we had been doing something good here - there were two cases of games lately where staff abused its own players and protected themselves which we didn't allow it to happen. That is a healthy sign.

Thanks for reading. I'll catch up on y'all tomorrow, my Tauren paladin needs some new boots.