Review of Recent Bans

[Lotherio]

@devrex said in Review of Recent Bans:

Raw, cruel nastiness. Which. Cool. They have a spot for that now but equating “let’s stop the cyber bullying over here now” with what’s being said and has been said is an egregious false equivalency. And this whole group of folks once told me with straight faces they would gladly accept a ban from a game just so they could abuse Derp some more

I agree but I want to point out some of the conflicting thoughts on this. The 'whole group' does not equate with all those banned. From what I've seen @RightMeow is friends with (only from what I've seen, not saying they are or not) some of those banned that aren't in with the group in question. All the banned are not part of the same groups of friends so there is some confusion. That said, a lot of the virtue signaling that doubled as dog whistling, which came off as sometimes bullying to me, was joined in by a lot of various groups and other independent parties.

I agree though, if folks want the freedom of speech as a pretext to slander, start dumpster fires, and munch popcorn while seeing how funny (mean) someone can be, there is a forum for it. Its no longer here. There are multiple forums for it actually, prior bad actors here have started similar places for similar free speech.

ETA: The funny thing is while I've been openly attacked plenty in the history of this place, I've never had a personal (DM/PM) attack until I made the comment about what it looked like from a third party, which was pretty much an insult intended to say I'm not a third party.

[Ganymede]

@rightmeow said in Review of Recent Bans:

In closing, I think this just needs to be done better.

I want to start here with a question: what needs to be done better?

Look at who you have posting. You now have the minority and you don't see this and worse, you don't see the problem with it; you see it as a win.

I don't know why you think that a "majority" of people have moved or why you think giving a "minority" of people the opportunity to post is a problem; rather, I think you need to examine this observation closely. I don't see what's wrong with having one board where a "majority" of people post and another where a "minority" of people post. Said another way, I see nothing wrong with having one board where people continue the practices that made WORA/SWOFA/MSB popular and another where people decline to follow the same.

Over the years? Most of these that have been banned have been overly supportive to those in the admin role. Did they react when they were already angry and told to stop? Yep. Same way as if I'm in a RL argument with you and you tell me I need to calm down, I'm probably not going to calm down.

I will admit that a number of people who remain banned assisted in a few ways. Because some are staff at or run other games, I have received notifications of players who have been banned for creepy / stalker behavior, so that I can keep an eye out for them. This is a good practice, and one I hope continues going forward. Roz helped coordinate the move here too.

But I will also say that none of them offered to help until this place was literally crashing down around us. Testament assisted Ark, mietze, and I with one potential plan that did not work out; then faraday, Derp, and Roz assisted in an actual move. In the wake of our successful move, I alone asked Derp and Roz to join us as admins. And that lasted for a week.

As for calming down, I think that's a personal matter, but when my partner or friends ask me to calm down, I do so. As you might imagine, I don't get upset very often.

Also, as a member of the community, I want to see the reasoning. I do not.. DO NOT.. like the cloak and dagger decisions that are going on. Even on games there is a level of transparency given to decisions.

To provide more transparency, here's what happened. Derp looked at the list of folks banned as a result of the events and posted his opinion on each as to whether the ban should remain or be lifted. I then examined the list and went through the evaluation I used here. Those who remain banned are those who I believed: (1) were intentionally trying to get banned; (2) asked to be banned; or (3) spouted profanity in response to what was going on after I asked them to cease discussing the same. So, the people who were unbanned were those that Derp and I agreed did not fall into these categories.

You mention elsewhere that this decision should have been made by the uninvolved. Unfortunately, we did not have any uninvolved moderators at the time we decided on who would be unbanned. I hope to change this; I asked for volunteers a week or so ago, and I have a couple right now. If they want to have their say after reviewing the situation, they will have their input, and that may result in other bans being lifted. And this is why I said that other bans may be lifted in the future.

Why were they not banned before that in the many, many years that some of them have been in the community?

Because they did not violate the rules or any moderator warnings prior -- at least, not clearly, directly, or blatantly.

I just know that I'm very very sad about how this has gone down in a community I cared about and with people I enjoy interacting with (Banned and Unbanned).

I don't mean to put thoughts in your head or words in your mouth, but perhaps you are very sad because you're seeing people on both sides who are worthy, valid, and smart at loggerheads. This puts you in a difficult position because you want to enjoy the company of all, but feel you can no longer do so because that might be seen as "taking sides." I'm not sure what makes you sad. I can only tell you what makes me sad.

I am sad because everyone immediately presumed the worst. I have read repeatedly about how I have tossed away nearly two decades of reputation to "defend a misogynist." The way I see it, if my reputation ever meant anything to anyone, then maybe they would have reached out via PM to discuss the matter. And while I recognize that people, as you put it, do not approve of "cloak and dagger" discussions, I really saw no other way to explain to anyone why I was asking for peace: because mietze needed time to read through everything, process, and discuss our path forward, and that continually adding fuel to the fire would not help the situation. What was going on in her life was not for me to explain or describe -- so I was silent.

I also am sad because it was clear to me that the goal of the protest was to compel me to fire Derp. This was one of the repeated demands, even after I explained that I would not be doing that and why. They demanded that farfalla be "freed"; farfalla is now "freed". I think they also asked me to step down -- I don't recall -- but if that's the case, I hope they can see that this would result in Derp having sole authority here. How that would "rebuild trust" is beyond me, and even if I had followed their will, nothing proposed would have ameliorated what was going on in mietze's life, which led to her resignation. Not to mention that such a "compromise" would have compromised my own sense of fair play with people who are willing to serve voluntarily.

Finally, I am sad that others seem to think that I have no sense of self-awareness. I understand that many people think that I am but a custodian of a public square, and like most custodians I get over-looked or thought of as a servant of some kind. The thing is that if my job is merely to be a caretaker, then I am an utter failure because I have to rely on others to do this; see, e.g., how long it took for us to get to a stable place. Despite this belief, I am called upon more often than not to be an enforcer of the forum's rules, which puts me in a "law enforcement" role more than anything else and therefore a servant to those who make the rules -- the community. Either way, people seem to think that I'm not entitled to agency and to be judged on the choices I've made, and that is disappointing.

I can deal with making the choices and being judged for it. If what follows is being criticized somewhere in the Internet, so be it, but I do not know why I should tolerate being pilloried on a place that I spent time, effort, and money to keep up and running. If people believe otherwise, then we have a difference of opinion.

Just be kind.

I will, RightMeow, and I am, I think.

Kindness isn't always forgiveness or the lowering of boundaries, and right now I think there needs to be boundaries. I don't plan to set foot on Brand MU Day, and I hope their endeavor goes well. If their admins want to talk about some of the creepy stalkers that have been banned here, and share info so that their forum doesn't have to deal with them, I'm happy to do that too. If they even want to "bear the mantle" of being "the successor" in the WORA/SWOFA/MSB tradition, then I would be the first to say that they can have it. But that does not mean I will reconsider the bans I put on prior accounts, or that I think they are unjustified, or that I think they have no purpose.

To bring this back to the question, I think we are doing things better. We have settled on our "identity" as being one that no longer permits the sort of toxic shit-flinging that once existed in the Hog Pit, which makes it easier to moderate. We have decided to follow this vision because we think something different needs to be offered. For the "minority" of people returning, knowing that we will be more vigilant and direct under this forum-wide policy is, I think, reassuring. And even if we are not doing things better now, we want to do better and to be kinder, and this is reflected in our new vision of what the hobby's community needs.

If we fade away like IGU, so be it. But I do not consider a lesson from almost 20 years ago to be instructive now. I think a substantial part of the community does not care for, and never cared for, the sort of public-shaming of the Hog Pit. And I now believe, after 20 years, that the idea that public shaming will cause a change in behavior is pretty vain, if not a pretext to simply being a shitty person.

So, we are going to be better and kinder, and have knitted this idea into the fabric of the forum.

I hope you can appreciate what we are trying here and how it falls in line with what you want to see, but right now I do not think lifting the bans will help anything.

[Ghost]

@ganymede said in Review of Recent Bans:

The way I see it, if my reputation ever meant anything to anyone, then maybe they would have reached out via PM to discuss the matter.

This.

@ganymede said in Review of Recent Bans:

And I now believe, after 20 years, that the idea that public shaming will cause a change in behavior is pretty vain,

This

@ganymede said in Review of Recent Bans:

So, we are going to be better and kinder, and have knitted this idea into the fabric of the forum.

Thank you.

I have 2 cents about the whole matter but I'll keep it to myself and simply say that I didn't envy the position you found yourself in, support you in standing your ground against bully behavior, and think you're a nice person.

[faraday]

@ganymede said in Review of Recent Bans:

but perhaps you are very sad because you're seeing people on both sides who are worthy, valid, and smart at loggerheads. This puts you in a difficult position because you want to enjoy the company of all, but feel you can no longer do so because that might be seen as "taking sides."

I will chime into say that this is how I feel. I have good friends who were banned and good friends who remain, so I feel a bit caught in the middle.

I missed most of what transpired because it was in the opt-in groups, so I am not competent to speak on the merits of any individual ban.

Speaking generally, though:

On the one hand, I believe in the "house party" analogy to forums and games. If you are at a party, and the host asks you to refrain from doing something, you refrain from doing that thing. If you do not, that is a valid reason for you to be asked to leave. Full stop. There are plenty of us who had thoughts and feelings about what went down, yet still managed to respect repeated requests from admin to not throw more gasoline onto the fire.

On the other hand, I realize the above philosophy is not traditionally how MSB has been run. Especially in the Hog Pit, which basically had "call out perceived bad admin behavior" emblazoned on a banner across its door. So I can also understand how people who felt that something untoward was happening felt justified--perhaps even obligated--to speak out despite requests not to.

So mostly I just wish things had gone down differently, on both sides. It sucks to see the community splinter in two because we are not a big community to begin with.

Nevertheless, I support the changes to the code of conduct. I have long been a vocal opponent of the Hog Pit, believing that there was no way for a constructive section to effectively co-exist in a place where people were so used to mudslinging. Bad feelings and behavior constantly spilled over. I am somewhat skeptical about whether people will stay, having lived through similar experiments with ES, IGU, and even my own Ares forums, but I applaud the effort.

[Derp]

@faraday said in Review of Recent Bans:

Especially in the Hog Pit, which basically had "call out perceived bad admin behavior" emblazoned on a banner across its door. So I can also understand how people who felt that something untoward was happening felt justified--perhaps even obligated--to speak out despite requests not to.

I don't want to give people the impression that we aren't open to criticism. We are. There's just a way to do so, you know?

---

A Good Way

Hey, guys. Regarding the recent decision, I really think that you acted rashly, for the following reasons: <reasons>. I think that you should reconsider this thing, and think a much more equitable result would be <desired result>.

A Decent Way

Guys. This looks really terrible. I know that you think you're doing the right thing, but you should really rethink this. It makes you look like you're just punching down on the little guys, and that's not gonna win you any friends.

Not A Great Way

What are you guys, idiots? This is obvious to anyone with half a brain you corrupt bunch of fart-sniffing howler monkeys.

---

People have said that they're afraid to speak, but I think that you'll find that we're reasonable people, and that we have a diverse set of opinions and viewpoints. Nobody should be afraid to voice an opinion on something. All we ask is that you keep it civil and as constructive as you can manage.

[faraday]

@derp said in Review of Recent Bans:

What are you guys, idiots? This is obvious to anyone with half a brain you corrupt bunch of fart-sniffing howler monkeys.

I agree with all of your points, except isn't this exactly the sort of conversation that happened every single day in the Hog Pit? I'm not trying to justify that behavior--it's always made me uncomfortable. But when it's the norm, even encouraged, I think maybe it might be worth considering giving people some grace to downshift to a new normal.

If you think the behavior was beyond the pale even by Hog Pit standards, or feel strongly for other reasons that grace isn't warranted, that's entirely your call. As I said, I'm not weighing in on any specific bans, merely speaking in generalities.

[Derp]

@faraday

I think that you're right, of course. Giving people some leeway to downshift is always a good idea.

One of the lines of thinking from the past couple of weeks, though, had to do with other applications of the rules: namely, that when an Admin says stop, you stop.

Those that complied weren't banned. Those that were banned but were otherwise acting with a modicum of civility were those that were unbanned.

The ones that remain banned are edge cases, or the ones that Ganymede and I couldn't agree on for one reason or another. We're getting some fresh faces in, and hopefully they'll weigh in with their thoughts, too. That might change in the future.

The one thing I will solidly say is that those that decided to try and set the house on fire on their way out the door will likely remain so, because they knew full well what they were doing when they soaked the bridge in gasoline and threw a match. But if someone feels very strongly that we should reconsider those as well then they're free to advocate for such, and we'll seriously consider it. But it'd have to be a pretty well-reasoned and compelling argument.

[Macha]

@faraday I feel you very well expressed a lot of my thoughts. If I had a bunch of people over to my house, and someone started cussing at me and insulting me... they wouldn't remain in my house very long. They'd get asked nicely to cut it out, and after that, they'd be shown the door.

I have taken part in the hog pit before. I am not saying I never said anything untoward about things. But I guess I always felt there was a line you do not cross, and I tried not to cross it. I was honestly surprised at some of the things people said, accused Gany and Derp of, etc. I get heat of the moment (I was very heated at times, but I had it politely suggested to me that I keep quiet, so I did), but some people just wouldn't quit.

I am glad Farfalla's ban was lifted. Which I know comes across strange, since it was my reporting her messaging me after I asked her to not, that got her banned. But as I previously stated, I didn't think it would result in a ban. I am by no means tossing Gany under the bus for doing as they did. Gany knows I was surprised at the action taken.

But you know what? I was also relieved. Relieved someone looked at the screenshots and believed me, supported me. I have come to know first hand, that in some circles, it doesn't matter if you have the proof. It matters who is involved.

I've been finding that while it is quieter here, currently? That I am seeing a lot more names pop up, some of which I have never or rarely seen. That it seems a.. I can't think of the word at the moment, but almost like a healthier mindset to the place.

[RightMeow]

I'm not going to lie (I rarely do too ADHD to keep up with fake bs), I didn't want to read the comments here after my post. It was fine though.

It is not my 'friendships' on either side that cause my view. My view is on my perspective that I see and my reality as I define it. I agree a lot with the gray areas that faraday is talking about and the areas of grace she mentioned.

I'm sad because it could have gone down so differently on all sides. I'm sad because I'm reading on these boards that banned people are still being bashed and 'the other board' being put down. Then in the same breath saying they would never do something like that 'unlike them'. It makes me sad.

I'm disappointed by how things went down. Not on one side over the other. Just in general disappointment. I can only speak to my actions, but I feel I've been respectful and listened. Maybe not though. As humans we intend one thing and it can be perceived the other.

As it stands, decisions have been made. It is what it is. It will be what it will be. I'm still allowed to feel sad that it seems the community has been ripped apart.

Also, I don't think (I could be wrong) that anyone called for Gany to be removed but Gany. As Derp goes. I don't really have too much a personal feeling other than I think his posts could go with more empathy, but that's my opinion.

I also stay out of politics boards because they tend to make me blah, so I'm not fully invested in the OMG EVIL that came from it.

It is what it is. We can't move backwards or we'd live life in reverse. We only strive forwards. I guess I'm just saying, no matter who said what; remember they are still people. They still have feelings even if they aren't showing it. People can be total tools online while they are crying offline. I try (and I'm probably unsuccessful at it) to ask if something is going to be empowering or demoralizing when I say it or type it. If it's going to be demoralizing or can be seen that way - I ask myself why I'm saying it?

I don't know. I don't have a dog in this fight or that fight or most fights. I'm just a person who posts from time to time, I don't have impact, influence or such. I'm also okay with this. I'm just really to the sad sort of shrug area of my life now in regards to all of this.

Anyways, I said my piece - thanks for reading.

[Devrex]

@rightmeow For heaven's sake, if you didn't read the comments how the heck do you know what anyone is saying?

[Hella]

@devrex I empathize with her statement. I used to feel it every time I posted something, that rising dread. It's a learned exposure. I think it'll just take time to realize that it's different now.

[Devrex]

@hella Yeah I felt it too. Often feel it too. Just...I gotta raise an objection to "I didn't read what you said but what you said was definitely wrong." Just...what? But the dread? The dread I 100% get.

[Lotherio]

@rightmeow said in Review of Recent Bans:

I don't know. I don't have a dog in this fight or that fight or most fights. I'm just a person who posts from time to time, I don't have impact, influence or such. I'm also okay with this. I'm just really to the sad sort of shrug area of my life now in regards to all of this.

You do have impact and you are valuable. Whether someone agrees/disagrees with your opinion, it is impactful. I'm pretty sure I've upvoted comments you've made along the way. You have enough buy-in to what his community is/was/may become.

You've shown that one can disagree through civil discourse. That speaks highly of everything you've said.

[Hella]

@devrex Oh, I believe what she said was that she didn't want to read our replies (to her last post) not that she didn't read them. But I could be misinterpreting.

[Devrex]

@hella @RightMeow You're right, that is what she said. My apologies, RightMeow.

[Doozer]

I’ve been like this the past 30 min playing catch up.

DAYUM

y’all @admins aight? This is some crazy shit. lol.

rip hog pit

[Ganymede]

@doozer

The Hog Pit isn’t dead; it has been moved elsewhere.