Posts made by Derp

@autumn

Oh, I totally agree. I was just telling @Surreality that I think timers and justifications need to be a thing. Growth in certain areas just should not happen quickly, nor happen out of the blue. I personally believe that it was something of a mistake moving away from such to start with, and would LOVE to see a game where they are a thing again, if for no other reason than to make it feel like more organic growth.

The system would get complicated, sure, but I personally feel that the bigger the advantage (generally), the longer it should take, and the harder it should be to get your ducks in a row. Both Resources and Status have been overlooked heavily in those areas, and I think we should be trying to come up with ways to make it balance competing areas in their life. Especially in CoD games, because that sort of thing is baked into the system now too (Touchstones, etc).

I wholly believe that this would at least be a great experiment at making class and social standing actually matter. A Status 5 member of, say, a Mage Order just isn't going to have time to stay the VP of that multinational trading firm unless he is neglecting one or the other, most likely, and he definitely won't have time to fly to New Zealand for the filming of his next movie.

@surreality

A general 'Gamerunner' or 'Gamestaff' tag would likely be less of a pain in the ass to administrate. But I don't know how those group tags work with NodeBB permissions.

It would require less groups get made. And I think NBB only shows one of your many, anyway, so it probably would be less useful. Of it showed them all, then people like Thenomain or Cobalt suddenly become tag confetti if every game has a different tag.

@krmbm

We asked for moderation to enforce some of the ideological reasons for the creation of the Pit in the first place. Arkandel said we could try it. People objected. Arkandel asked what harm there could be in at least trying it on an experimental basis, and @thatguythere said it would cost his participation.

Where is that an inaccurate summation of what is being said right now?

That said, I'm really also not super interested in being baited into yet another debate about whether enforcing the freaking spirit of the rules as they already exist (evidence: the creation of the Hog Pit) is a good idea or not. Because that's what we've been doing here so far.

We're adults. We all know full well what constitutes civil discourse, and we know how to behave in public among a group of peers. We can have different ideas, sure, and maybe sometimes some lines will be crossed. We can point that out. We can provide warnings. We can do a lot of things. Nobody is likely to ever get run out on a rail for it.

But of people don't want to do that, then what are we even doing here? This just becomes another empty discussion where the mods ask for feedback and a vocal few who want the whole board to be basically WORA block any progress, and at some point, someone has to call that out for what it is. And that's apparently me, today.

I'm not interested in having any progress we have made on getting more and better moderation get bogged down in yet another debate about definitions. Because, again, we are adults, and we tend to know what shit will fly and what won't.

If people either don't, or can't figure it out, then there is still a Hog Pit for that.

Another idea: you could make Resources beyond 1 or 2 chargen only. Same with Status. If you want to be a big mover in a group or super rich, that kind of thing often takes years of work (not weeks or months), and people should have to make some real choices about what their toon's actual focus areas are. Do you want the money, the connections, the cool abilities, or the powers?

ETA: You could also put a cap on the total of these things you can have. If you are so busy being a runner for Status, maybe your finances take a hit. Or overtime at your job costs you face. Sanctity of Merits can handle this, but it should still be a slow process. Either way, it still retains the feel that a character cannot do everything.

@krmbm

Except it isn't. It's the summation of what @bored and @thatguythere have been saying so far. We have been asking for at least slightly more moderation outside of the pit to maintain civil discourse, and just like every other time the mods have asked for feedback, we are seeing the loyal and vocal minority think pf a thousand reasons why enforcing basic civility outside of the Pit is a no good very bad terrible idea that will cause them to walk off. And I'm calling it what it is, at this point. It's basically just a less interesting filibuster in the name of there being no consequences for keeping every thread a free for all until they all get dragged into the Pit, and some of us are tired of being held ideologically hostage to it in the name of hearing all sides again until any momentum on this fades into the ether.

The Pit was created to keep that kind of thing contained, and we are asking for that to be enforced. If that means that people who can't keep it there lose interest in participating, so what?

@thatguythere

"If I can't be negative and such wherever the hell I feel like, then I will just quit posting."

Fine? I mean, for those of us who want a more civil discourse in areas that aren't the Hog Pit, that's no great loss. Hell, that's one of the best solutions so far, honestly. If everyone who can't follow basic rules of civil discussion quits participating, then the mods don't even have to do anything.

It's because of the attitude stated above -- the willful disregard for civility in areas clearly delineated for it -- that we're asking for more moderation in the first place.

Re: ad threads -- Fate's Harvest. It had a couple of actual reviews, and turned into pages and pages of people bitching in full panic mode about Spider, and YET ANOTHER retelling of all the stories. Nobody was talking about the game itself. So much so that I made a Spider thread in the HP and asked people to keep it there, and leave the ad thread for game discussions.

And people lost their shit about that, too.

@ifrit said in Dead Celebrities 2018:

DJ Avicii, 28

Whaaaaat?! Nooooo!

@auspice said in Hello MSBites! Grade your administrators.:

@wizz said in Hello MSBites! Grade your administrators.:

"We've got moderators, but we don't want to moderate, but there's a still a problem" is the conversation that is still happening like five months after I went back to occasional lurking?

As I've stated, I don't mind moderating, [but] I also need consistency and support from my fellow moderators. And there have been (for the sake of transparency) days where I have gone to them, pointed at something, and said: "I want to moderate this." and received a sort of 'eh, I think it's fine.' in return.

This is kind of what many of us are seeing, too. We have mods. But the mods don't have a consistent message about their ability or desire to mod. Gany is cool with tyranny for the sake of peace, Auspice is cool with modding, but Ark seems to be kind of wibbly and dragging his feet about it, and less is done than what many of us think is even a reasonable middle ground of moderation.

That is kind of a problem. Because, like or not, you guys are in that position, and some stuff needs to happen there. Not saying that you aren't discussing it or whatnot, but the rest of us out here without those powers are seeing a pretty inconsistent message about it. Ark might not like that part, but that's part of the job.

And it is a job. But it doesn't have to be a 24/7 one. Post rules. Enforce rules. Impose consequences, at least mostly consistently, for breaking the rules (beyond dragging threads into the Pit because people don't care about standards of behavior if we just throw things into the mud pit after they get mud everywhere else anyway).

@auspice said in Hello MSBites! Grade your administrators.:

@tyche said in Hello MSBites! Grade your administrators.:

IMO, less moderation, more drinking.

Are you volunteering to pay my alcohol bill?

@Auspice, remember that time that you said I could drink on your tab?

@ganymede said in Hello MSBites! Grade your administrators.:

I agree.
So, we're all here good with my taking the mantle of permanent despot, right?

I know you're trying to be cute or whatever, but this is a misuse of logical extremes, which is generally disallowed in reductio ad absurdum as being fallacious.

It's also not particularly helpful, when people are trying to make a genuine appeal for practical and reasonable change, for one of the admins in question to treat the topic so flippantly.

@auspice

Kill them. With fire.

@Apos It's almost like people would have to learn how to engage in civil conversation with at least a moderately measured tone. I don't see that as a downside.

@krmbm

I don't mind its existence. I just think that the mud needs to be kept there, and it should remain muddy. Not bloody. No teeth, no bone chips. There needs to be certain 'beyond the pale' limits even in the Pit, and the mud from the Pit needs to remain squarely in the Pit.

I wouldn't mind seeing it gone. I don't mind seeing it stay. But there definitely needs to be a bar there.

@thenomain

That's such a disturbingly accurate version of the Peter Principle.

@kanye-qwest said in Hello MSBites! Grade your administrators.:

If this place got rid of the hog pit and didn't allow the drama and slapfighting that goes on there, this place's traffic would slow down a lot, and it would eventually be mostly the same half dozen people posting gifs and RL gripes and occasionally an ad thread would blow through, like a tumbleweed.

It's not the worst thing in the world. But it seems like it would be a lot of work to maintain a board that could easily be a discord chat.

I don't think it would slow down at much as some people think. I think that more people would post more frequently when some of the louder, more grating voices are gone. Some might leave, sure, but plenty would stay. And the people who want to have their slapfight can have it elsewhere, since they can never seem to keep it contained to the proper areas.

And by the way, that's one of the other issues I think needs to be addressed: There needs to be consequences for violating the 'posting pit material outside of the pit' beyond 'I guess we have to move the thread now'. Because certain people do that A LOT. And just moving the thread does nothing but let them know that it's okay because someone is willing to follow them and try and clean up their mess.

The admins might not think that we should need an adult in the room. That's fair. We probably shouldn't. But should and do are different animals. We shouldn't need one, but we clearly do, and that is the job of the admins.

If they have neither the inclination nor the time to do so, the solution there is also pretty straightforward: give the job to someone who does. If you don't want to do the stuff that is clearly in the job title, then don't take the job. I and respect all three of you, but damn, the 'but we do not want to do the things that we are here to do' arguments make my eye twitch.

@ganymede

That's a bad analogy. Law enforcement can be held accountable and voted out. The administration is not beholden to the members here in any way except by cult of personality, and the occasional thread like this. Which makes them essentially royalty. Which doesn't work as an analogue for 'entrusted with power by the people'.

Even in our society of laws, a few people with power have had to take some unpopular actions in order to protect the minority. Almost every civil rights case has been actively against the tide of public opinion. But those actions were taken anyway, because those people needed protection despite their very existence being against the will of the majority. This may be an analogue for 'a land of laws', but it has to function in the same way.

It's only a difficult decision if you wibble about it. Sure, you risk losing popularity among some of the crowds, and that can be a concern. But it shouldn't even really be that much of a factor. You aren't elected. You don't get re-elected. The biggest revolution you can face is that you lose face in some of the catty circles, and frankly, that should be the price to play if you have admin powers. Not that I think losing face in those circles is cause enougj to give anyone pause. Ever.

You've been given power. Use it. Monarchies are the most efficient form of governance for a reason.

@arkandel said in Hello MSBites! Grade your administrators.:

What can we do as a compromise between censorship or the appearance of clique-ism by the admins, yet keep cliques from doing their thing to their enemies of the day?

Simple: You set clear boundaries, and you enforce them. If the purpose of the Hog Pit is to be an unmoderated free for all, then everywhere else needs to be moderated. The administration cannot be afraid of 'oh god what about censorship and free speech' in the rest of the board.(1)

I understand that's a real concern. But that's also part of what it means to take responsibility and run the show. You can't do that hands-off. It requires you to actively put hands on it, enforce rules in a clear fashion, and not be afraid of looking like a censor. There is a difference between an unpopular viewpoint and an unacceptable behavior that just happens to be tangential to an unpopular point of view. The behaviors need to be moderated.

(1) Purely Opinion, as additional commentary: Hell, you shouldn't even put up with the jerkass ad hominen attacks in the Hog Pit, either, because they're just doing more damage than good. Nobody here should ever be made to feel unwelcome or attacked by some of these groups, PERIOD. You wanna shit post about a topic, a game, current events, cool. But MSB members themselves, at a bare minimum, should be given at least a modicum of respect even if they aren't being called something racist, sexist, etc.

@surreality said in Hello MSBites! Grade your administrators.:

Yours is a very easy perspective to have when you're not the subject of regular dogpiles nearly any time you disagree with someone in any given circle of friends, are not being chased all over the forum (including outside of the Hog Pit) being bullied, or having completely irrational attacks slung at you, which are things more than a few people around here have experienced and are experiencing here.

This is one of the things I was talking about, yes. There is a very real circle of people that gravitate around a few key figures, and will attack any who dare to disagree with a barrage of attacks whose magnitude is simply unwarranted, both inside the Pit and out of it. While some of this is petty childishness, a lot of it is not-so-borderline harassment. I think it's easy for people who are used to heated argumentation to overlook stuff like this and mentally diminish its scope. But it is a very real, and increasingly frequent, thing that had been happening. It drives people away, or into silence, and I know that the administration of the boards are just as aware of it as others, which is why I really question the 'hands off' policy. Moderators definitely need to make sure that kind of asinine behavior doesn't happen. And in case anyone thinks that's overstating matters, when down votes were still enabled, people in this group would follow those who often get dog piled on just to downvote every single post a person made, no matter the context or subject matter.

It really needs a more active hand in ensuring that jerkass behavior isn't allowed. Tolerance isn't substantially different from approval, in that situation.

@ganymede said in Hello MSBites! Grade your administrators.:

gay club where I'm at now.

I wish we had more of those here. Maybe if I get the urge to hang with a lawyer bot, I'll take a drive over the state border. I'll buy you a drink and everything!