MU Soapbox

    • Register
    • Login
    • Search
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Muxify
    • Mustard
    1. Home
    2. Ganymede
    3. Posts
    • Profile
    • Following 2
    • Followers 15
    • Topics 44
    • Posts 7501
    • Best 4335
    • Controversial 89
    • Groups 2

    Posts made by Ganymede

    • RE: Review of Recent Bans

      @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.

      posted in Announcements
      Ganymede
      Ganymede
    • RE: Positivity Going Forward...

      @faraday said in Positivity Going Forward...:

      I applaud the shift to a more positive environment, but I'm skeptical as to whether the community has the bandwidth to really support multiple forums.

      For all that you do and have done to make the hobby better, that you still can post up here from time to time indicates to me that the community probably has more bandwidth than it takes credit for.

      posted in Mildly Constructive
      Ganymede
      Ganymede
    • RE: Review of Recent Bans

      @lordbelh

      I have missed you here and elsewhere. We may not have agreed on everything, but I strongly respect what you have said here about making an effort to correct mistakes rather than doubling down on them.

      posted in Announcements
      Ganymede
      Ganymede
    • RE: Positivity Going Forward...

      @derp said in Positivity Going Forward...:

      Now there is an alternative. People have choices. Two different cultures can come out of it. Or, if not that, then at least there are options and redundancy for if something terrible happens to one or the other.

      This.

      I was approached about giving a copy of the database to Tributary, a long-standing member and someone that I trust. Her concern was that we would let MSB and the Hog Pit die or get deleted. This is part of the reason why we decided to switch all of the boards to a mode that can be viewed by anyone, with or without an account. The folks at Brand MU Day (I think that's what it's called) therefore can link to threads here (I think) or otherwise cite to them.

      But we don't need to compete. We just want to head in a different direction, that's all. I think people can enjoy both places for what they provide. Who knows? Maybe a third group will pop up.

      posted in Mildly Constructive
      Ganymede
      Ganymede
    • RE: Critters!

      @il-volpe said in Critters!:

      But they spend all their XP on whatever stats it takes to dive headfirst down that long vertical tube and catch oneself from freefall at the chosen entry.

      there's a double meaning

      posted in Tastes Less Game'y
      Ganymede
      Ganymede
    • RE: RL-Friendly Game Design

      @devrex

      I think the opposite.

      I think we need to plan RP. I think games need to ensure there are scenes available for “off times.” I think we should try to embrace async RP.

      But honestly I am out of the RP game because I don’t want to right now.

      posted in Mildly Constructive
      Ganymede
      Ganymede
    • RE: Review of Recent Bans

      @tnp

      I'm sorry, that was unclear.

      Our decision to unban certain folks, and not others, was not because we were petitioned to do so by a member. We had decided to review the bans a while back, and we so far agreed on those announced. And we may decide to unban more accounts in the future.

      That's what I meant to say. No one is required to petition to be let back in for their account to be unbanned. Sorry for the confusion.

      posted in Announcements
      Ganymede
      Ganymede
    • RE: Review of Recent Bans

      @lordbelh said in Review of Recent Bans:

      Making them have to come and ask to return is just petty, though.

      No one is asking them to do this. I'm certainly not. What I'm saying is that Derp and I are still discussing the bans, which means that there may be some future reversals; however, for right now, we are focusing on a couple of other matters.

      I respect your opinion and follow your logic, but I disagree with a number of premises and ultimately your conclusion. I am trying neither to wash my hands nor save face, but to do what I believe is correct for now and under the circumstances.

      posted in Announcements
      Ganymede
      Ganymede
    • RE: Review of Recent Bans

      @inherentvalue

      I did make errors.

      I made an error banning Coin. I completely misconstrued what he had to say. I sent a message to his account and asked Cobalt to reach out to him to let him know about the reversal.

      I made an error regarding farfalla. I think it was MisterBoring who put up a post about making sure consequences matched offenses. I have historically not done this out of expediency. This is not good leadership or stewardship.

      I made an error regarding Meg. Meg was always just trying to advocate for farfalla. She did this when the initial ban came down. On review, she fell into the fourth category, so I apologize for that.

      And with Scar, the comment that I seem unhinged was probably a fair observation under the circumstances, and I don't think there was any intent to get banned doing so.

      No member petitioned me to change my mind on the bans. Derp did most of the arguing in our discussions as to whose bans should be lifted. We didn't agree on everyone, but those we did agree on have had their bans lifted. We're still talking, but we have other concerns to deal with right now.

      Accountability is one such concern.

      posted in Announcements
      Ganymede
      Ganymede
    • RE: Positivity Going Forward...

      @testament said in Positivity Going Forward...:

      If you want to come back, fine. But there isn't really a need to hide it.

      I have no doubt that my name is being uttered in parts of the Internet in ways that would give me a reason to hide who I am.


      @ghost said in Positivity Going Forward...:

      I'd like to see a community in the hobby where those elements (or the urges to clap back because people are being mean) aren't necessary where I can make friends and swap ideas.

      That's why we are trying this.

      posted in Mildly Constructive
      Ganymede
      Ganymede
    • RE: Review of Recent Bans

      The decision to lift a few, but not all, of the bans was a simple one.

      We elected to review the thread in which most of the "action" occurred to determine, in TNP's words, who were "specifically trying" to get banned. Some arguably tried to get banned by not following my request; some did so by spouting profanity; some asked to be banned; and others simply posted after I had made it clear that there was to be no further discussion. Of these four groups, those who fall in the first or fourth category were those we spent most of our time on.

      Inferring intent is a difficult thing to do. Finding intent is almost always a matter of discretion. We could spend a lot of time discussing whether some or all remain unjustly banned under the circumstances; after all, the original controversy is more or less over, and we have adopted a new set of rules. We could also spend a lot of time discussing whether there's a point to lifting any of the bans, as another site has arisen, thus giving a place for anyone to criticize the administration of this site without reprisal.

      For now, the decision to unban some and not others will stand.

      A couple of things I would like to note in closing. First, we have opened up the section formerly known as the Hog Pit so that visitors can view its contents without needing to have an approved account. Second, as we have changed our tone around here, I would recommend that anyone looking to engage in the same style of debating as once was enjoyed or encouraged in the Hog Pit go elsewhere to do so.

      If there is further reconsideration of some or all the bans in the future, we will notify the community.

      posted in Announcements
      Ganymede
      Ganymede
    • RE: Review of Recent Bans

      @meg

      Take care, Meg. I'm sorry to hear of your loss.

      posted in Announcements
      Ganymede
      Ganymede
    • Blood Angel banned

      Blood Angel has been banned for blatantly ignoring a warning to quit using personal attacks. This was done in the Mildly Constructive area of the board, which we have tried to keep clean of the same.

      I realize some folks have disagreements with the way that this board has been and continues to be operated, but calling us "fascist fucks" is neither appreciated nor a productive start for a constructive conversation.

      posted in Announcements
      Ganymede
      Ganymede
    • RE: The ethics of IC romance, TS, etc

      @ghost said in The ethics of IC romance, TS, etc:

      IC Romance/TS is often approached on an OOC level as "dating and cybersex", and I find the duality of it all to be very...interesting.

      So how did you approach our IC romance?

      I mean, aside from laughing hysterically.

      posted in Mildly Constructive
      Ganymede
      Ganymede
    • RE: Critters!

      @misadventure said in Critters!:

      You are now staff. They have xp spends in the +jobs queue.

      It must be real awkward when they offer TS for favors.

      posted in Tastes Less Game'y
      Ganymede
      Ganymede
    • RE: Something Completely Different

      @il-volpe

      I don’t know. I was pretty anonymous for a while.

      posted in Mildly Constructive
      Ganymede
      Ganymede
    • RE: Wikidot has been hacked?

      Well, now the MUSH community can hate Russia.

      Thanks, Obama.

      posted in Tastes Less Game'y
      Ganymede
      Ganymede
    • RE: Mustard MUSH List

      @hella

      This is an awesome resource. Thank you for posting it up.

      posted in Adver-tis-ments
      Ganymede
      Ganymede
    • RE: RL Sads

      @arkandel

      When you remove the rampant sexism, it's not terrible advice. Sewing machines are kind of dangerous.

      (Warning: link does contain a graphic injury.)

      posted in Tastes Less Game'y
      Ganymede
      Ganymede
    • RE: Something Completely Different

      @greenflashlight said in Something Completely Different:

      To people who perceive it as an injustice, "Hey guys please allow this injustice to carry on until I can consult with someone who actually matters (unlike you) about whether this actually is unjust" isn't a super reasonable request.

      I asked everyone for the opportunity to talk with mietze about what was going on. Mietze has already explained things from her perspective. I knew that she had other things going on and that the protesting was triggering her and causing more stress. I told her I would do what I can to quiet things down.

      We talked about shutting the place down for a couple of weeks, but she shot down that idea. In the end, we decided that I would do my best to get everyone to hold off so that, when she was ready, she could go back, review the record, and we could deal with the situation together. I told her to take all the time she needed.

      Ultimately, I think I failed.

      To me, there were four matters that arose contemporaneously, which I'll address in no particular order. First, there was Derp's and Roz's elevation to staff, the former of which was met with loud skepticism. Second, there was the matter on the Politics board, which led to demands that Derp be removed as staff. Third, there was the locking of the "Admin Derp" thread, which was connected to the first matter and raised the issue of whether threads attacking members or admins were permitted. Finally, there was farfalla's banning for continuing to communicate with a member who asked them to stop communicating with them.

      The first three are all interwoven. Regarding the thread, I concluded that a thread targeting a member or staff did not violate our Rules of Engagement, so mietze's lock on the topic at issue was lifted. I also concluded that it would have been unfair for me to dismiss an admin to whom I failed to communicate my expectations, but still had a long talk with Derp about what my expectations of him are. As such, I stated that I would not remove him for what happened on the Politics board.

      The matter involving farfalla is what I believe set off the firestorm. Some people felt that it was a borderline call; some people felt that the complaining member instigated the matter; some people felt that I was too punitive. We had previously banned another member for paging someone who told them to stop (Ortallus), so a ban as a consequence for continuing to PM someone after they tell you to stop should have been no surprise. Further, when someone tells someone else to stop, they should stop. That said, farfalla's ban is still being review and may be lifted under the circumstances.

      As an aside, after farfalla's ban, Meg asked if farfalla would be given access to her account so that she could take a log of the conversation. This request was granted, and farfalla was unbanned for 24 hours for that purpose, on the condition that she not communicate with anyone through the account (thus respecting the effect of the ban).

      If the injustice is the ban, then, as I said, it is under review. Staff agreed to review all bans levied out of the event. We have not yet made any decisions, but we intend to complete the review within the next few days.

      Whether the protesting was reasonable is I think a matter of opinion, as is my decision to ban those who were doing so. All I can offer is an explanation, tell the community what we are doing now, and how we hope to restore faith going forward.

      posted in Mildly Constructive
      Ganymede
      Ganymede
    • 1
    • 2
    • 10
    • 11
    • 12
    • 13
    • 14
    • 375
    • 376
    • 12 / 376