Hog Pit as read only
-
So with hog pit, I'm not going to lie some of it is my own sick amusement about what people get upset over. However, that normally soon makes me sad That said...
Hog pit is a few times when I realized it wasn't just me going through an issue. Or when a known creeper was out there and circling me again - then turned someone against me - we actually talked here when OTHERS pointed out maybe that wasn't how it rolled out.
I'm not part of any groups, or perhaps part of all of them? Since I tend to rose-tint view most people and things. That said, people I didn't really know came to my defense and that is how we put two and two together. It does serve a purpose.
-
Guys. Before we get too far down this rabbit hole...
@ganymede said in The Hog Pit and the Politics Boards -- SHUT DOWN:
After a short conference, we have decided to cut access to the Hog Pit and the Politics thread until we have had a chance to fully discuss recent events.
Emphasis mine.
That's an important qualifier.
Racism isn't Tinkerbell. It doesn't need you to believe in it for it to exist.
-
@derp Another suggestion from me...
Make the Politics sub-board opt-in as well.
I agree that it shouldn't go away, but for some of us, we need a refuge from Real Life. I don't want to silence anyone speaking out about the very real suffering and injustices happening, but I'm already engaged in other aspects of social media and RL in trying to combat things. I would like to have one corner of my life that doesn't act as an echo chamber of things I'm already aware of and doing my best to fight. I don't activate Politics channels in any game I play on for this reason; not because I want to pretend the bad things aren't happening or stick my head in the sand and ignore them, but to avoid sheer message fatigue.
-
@runescryer I could swear that the Politics board was opt-in, once upon a time, but I might be really wrong. Either way, it's not a bad idea.
-
It's certainly a discussion that could be had.
That said, though, I'm not a fan of the idea. I'm also not a fan of the Hog Pit being opt-in, rather than opt-out. Opt-out should always be the default.
I don't like the idea that there are 'secret' parts of the board that you can only get to if you know to join a specific group and then go look for them. To me, that just feels like we're hiding the ball.
Especially when it's easy to turn off notifications and unwatch entire categories. Nobody ever has to see a Hog Pit post show up in their unread, or a Politics post. They can choose to opt-out of those a lot easier than it is to opt-in to them. You have to know there is something to opt into in the first place.
ETA: Obviously that would be a discussion with more than just me, and my voice is only one voice. Not even the important one. Just my thoughts on the matter.
Racism isn't Tinkerbell. It doesn't need you to believe in it for it to exist.
-
@derp It's not exactly a 'secret' part of the board. Keep it as a pinned Announcement: 'We have some sections of this Board that are Opt-In. Here are those sections and their focus; here is how to opt-in to them...'
-
@runescryer said in Hog Pit as read only:
@derp It's not exactly a 'secret' part of the board. Keep it as a pinned Announcement: 'We have some sections of this Board that are Opt-In. Here are those sections and their focus; here is how to opt-in to them...'
Maybe? But then they'd still have to actually read that there is a part there.
As compared to a person who wants to opt out of a category only having to take a single action:
You go into the category, and in the top right corner, you just toggle that box down to 'Ignoring'. Nothing shows up for you in Unread or Recent. It just goes away, save for the link on the main dash.
I think one of them is much more fair to new people than the other, personally. But again, I'm just one opinion.
Racism isn't Tinkerbell. It doesn't need you to believe in it for it to exist.
-
@derp Well, that convinced me, actually.
-
Disagree. There are plenty of places on the internet to talk politics. I don't object to the politics forum existing - obviously, I read and post it - but making it opt-in rather than opt-out was a better solution for that and the hog pit.
Our political opinions and our hog pit arguments are unsightly, like warts. Let people decide to commit before they have to see the warts.
-
@derp True. But do Users automatically know how to Opt-Out, either? I've been on this Board for years now, and this is the first time I've heard or seen anything about how to mute/ignore/opt-out of a category.
Ultimately, it's a sort of 'six of one/half-dozen of another' sort of thing. I sort of view 'opt-out' like I view shovelware on my phone and computer: 'I didn't ask for this, don't want it, how do I get rid of it?' It puts the onus on everyone to not see things rather than to affirm that they do want to see things.
-
The benefit of opt-out is that it works for ANY category. Don't want to be bothered by codey stuff? Ignore the MU Code category and it won't show up in your recent list any more.
I agree that the flammability of Hog Pit and Politics probably warrant a pinned topic at the top of the categories to remind folks they CAN opt out, but at the end of the day it's not the admin's job to teach people how to use the basic forum features.
-
Opt-out also gives you more fine-grain access.
You want to opt-out of an entire category, set the category to ignore.
You want to opt-out of specific threads, then you just ignore those threads the same way.
If you want to opt-out of everything in a category except for specific threads, you can go in and set the category to ignore, and then set the specific threads to 'Watching' which will override the category behavior.
It really does give people a hell of a lot more control over their ultimate experience.
-
@faraday Counter-Point: Most users aren't as code-savy and don't bother to learn extra functions unless it's pointed out to them that they exist.
-
@runescryer said in Hog Pit as read only:
Most users . . .don't bother to learn extra functions unless it's pointed out to them that they exist.
Yeah, but like... isn't your whole argument for opt-in that users are savvy enough to figure out they're there all on their own, despite them being far less in-your-face and obvious than the buttons you're saying people won't notice or use because nobody explicitly points them out?
Racism isn't Tinkerbell. It doesn't need you to believe in it for it to exist.
-
It's probably best just to wait and see until folks have had the chance to calm down and think about things before anyone makes any assumptions about what that should or shouldn't look like. Discussing/arguing it now is rather putting the cart before the horse, I think.
-
@derp Again, six of one/half dozen of the other. Either way, I think we both agree that whichever way it goes, there needs to be a Pinned announcement about the Board's purpose and how to Opt-Out/Opt-In.
-
@sunny said in Hog Pit as read only:
It's probably best just to wait and see until folks have had the chance to calm down and think about things before anyone makes any assumptions about what that should or shouldn't look like. Discussing/arguing it now is rather putting the cart before the horse, I think.
I would prefer this as well.
There was a past thread almost 5 years ago that discussed this matter extensively. It was a very vigorous and emotional debate. I suspect this is one of the many things that must be discussed again.
But as one of the mods has requested some time off, the debate and action will not be forthcoming. I think there are other options to explore, and I will discuss with Derp after the weekend, as he's the one with the most knowledge of how this place works (between us).
-
In regards to the politics board - I just never read it. I also never turn on that channel on games. Hot topics.
-
@kanye-qwest said in Hog Pit as read only:
@phaedrus I'm still here! PS (pspspsps), a lot of it was noticing your attempts to skirt around the game rules for new characters twice. Also, the copious amounts of other people who reported you, like Glitch, one of the founders of this forum
But go off, I guess, if it makes you feel better.
Maybe you'll get upvotes from those still very upset about people not liking them over a decade ago. Find your own clique to call home.
What's funny is, and I realize that that's not necessarily a requirement, not one of these "reports" was every brought to my attention at all, or anyone saying "Hey, don't make sarcastic comments on an OOC channel". Which, you know, might have helped (at least with the other concerns).
As far as skirting rules for new characters "twice", the first was really just a question, and once told the rule, I said ok. The second was expected to be well within the rules the entire time, and I had been told repeatedly it was fine to lay the ground work for things as long as the actual irrevocable part was later (the rule in question, dear reader, was about forming relationships during the first three months of having the character - which is a very sensible rule that I was very much happy to follow).
At the end of the day, though, no one told me when I took that character that he was reserved for his IC sister, which is fundamentally what the whole issue was in the first place, and led to all of this regrettable offense. If I had known that, I'd have stayed away and just played a nice quiet character that didn't have nearly the rigorously imposed RP demands on him. And who knows, maybe I could have continued to play there to this day, stimulating RP and running events that (at least to those who spoke to me directly or publicly) people seemed to really enjoy.
As near as I can tell, aside from having an acerbic reaction to things on OOC channels and daring to want my character to have relations outside of his IC sister, I didn't actually do anything outside the pale there. But, again, it is what it is.
And no, I don't need a clique to survive. I came to that game as the first time returning to MUSHing after a long absence, and it was nice to get the MUSH muscles out again. And also see that OOC politics and cliques still rule some games. Had I had forethought (and known this place existed before you and your cadre spent pages of posts trashing me) I'd have probably avoided a place that has such a long thread about how awful it is. It'd have been better for my mental health.
But, as I said, I've grown as a person since then. And learned some lessons. Most notably - don't take a character whose IC sister will do anything she can, ICly and OOCly, to prevent from having a relationship or a marriage because no one else is allowed to have him. As I said, that character needs to have a warning label attached.
-
@phaedrus said in Hog Pit as read only:
At the end of the day, though, no one told me when I took that character that he was reserved for his IC sister, which is fundamentally what the whole issue was in the first place, and led to all of this regrettable offense.
You can keep saying things like this, I suppose, but that won't make them true.
There's an entire set of manipulative tactics I see from online people - often bad actors - and they are so painfully transparent. One of them (1) is to keep asserting falsehoods as if they are something anyone else has confirmed or agreed with.
You were playing the character against his sheet, first of all. You were planning to obey the letter of the 3 month rule while completely trashing the spirit of it. It's not about the number of days, it's about encouraging people to play a character as written, both for CONTINUITY of the world - and because they might find they like the character as written. And if they don't, they should probably find another character.
Another of those painfully transparent manipulation tactics is (2) fishing for clues as to who reported them after they are banned. I'd say fully 75% of the people I banned or paid attention to the bannings of did this. And here you are, doing what looks suspiciously like padding the stats.
Sometimes they do this by pretending innocence. "Gosh, I don't even know what I could possibly have done! No one has talked to ME about it. No one has complained to ME, whatever is this about?"
Sometimes they do this by immediately trying to guess. "Oh, is this about x that happened? I told them they misunderstood, I didn't mean it like that!"
Sometimes they do it by appearing contrite. "Oh no! I would never mean to do such a thing! I'd really like to apologize, for my own peace of mind! But - to whom?"
Sometimes they do it by stating something false or oversimplified, in the hopes eventually it will annoy someone so much they'll be baited into giving away those clues. Such as, hm, glance above this post.
PS (pspspsps) I played your brother for the end of your tenure on this char. I went to a big open scene with an NPC to support your char, being vocal and involved. My experience of you was:
- you barely acknowledged me
- you attacked a powerful NPC no one could scratch with no armor, and then complained in OOC (and? I don't actually remember if it was both) channels about how apparently USELESS and WEAK your char was when you didn't win (which is against the rules of the game)
- you said something OOC to me about having to go for RL, completely unprompted, I assume as a way to indicate we'd have to RP another time
- you then were on @where IC elsewhere with other chars. Now, maybe your RL was quick! I can't know, and don't care. But you def chose to use OOC communication with me instead of IC.
- the next few days, you sent an IC message to me and our IC sister, indicating we should get together for a family dinner wherein you would 'try to be nice to each other' or something.
The end. Not the most extensive experience but it didn't leave me with much hope you were really out there 'stimulating rp and running events'.
I'm sure some people are happy to buy your narrative of this. I am just not, considering my experience with the behavior markers I see.
