Frankly "asshole's alt comes back" is not a big thing here.
There was one(1) recent guy who survived for awhile because we were unable to determine, if he was an alt, who he was an alt of. That latter part's been one of the lines for dealing with them; "this account feels alt-y" leads down arbitrary paths, especially since we're already in an environment where "new poster in a current events thread" is enough to get a bunch of "this is probably an alt" reports wholly independently of whether they actually are or not. I need more certainty than "new user with a default avatar" for that.
Past that, the bulk of the alts I've been aware of over the last year or so fall into a few categories:
People trying to sneak back in during a tempban and doing a bad job of covering their tracks because they are unaware of what mods/admins can look up
People trying to sneak back in shortly after a permanent ban and doing a similarly bad job of covering their tracks for the same reason
One(1) deeply obsessed individual
#3 covers, and I'm not being hyperbolic here, 90-95% of those cases.
If I woke up one day somehow confusing Blender-the-software with Blender-the-kitchen-appliance I could probably still count the instances that didn't fall under those three categories on one hand.
We are not exactly under siege by those kinds of accounts, and they're generally not capable of getting back into the forum without instantly stepping on a rake and getting rebanned anyway.
The main lists are in the SE++ and D&D Ban and Infractions thread and is already public. I think, other than the mod forums, that may be the only documentation that we have, although I'll have to check. The actual forum-exported ban lists contains users banned for any reason, which includes spam bots and whatnot.
I don't think #3 there is really enforceable. That's leading into "thought crime" territory.
1) A publicly available list of accounts banned for cause (non-spam, non-self-request). No other information should be retained (such as email addresses, ip addresses, etc) as this isn't publicly available information.
2) An explicit statement in the ban appeal process that previously banned members must follow the process to be admitted to CoRe.
3) A rule stating that if the CoRe leadership discovers that a CoRe member knew that the person was previously banned, they will be subject to disciplinary actions up to and including a permanent ban.
(1) is required for (3).
Man 3 is ridiculous
It's fine to find my or anyone's proposal ridiculous, but could you explain why? I obviously didn't think it was ridiculous, or I wouldn't have proposed it. That's not say there aren't flaws I haven't foreseen or considered, but it's helpful to know what they are.
It's almost impossible to prove what a person did/didn't know, so it's unnecessarily punitive and hostile to existing users who would either get semi-arbitrarily hit with infractions or have to defend themselves with, basically, "yeah this person posted in some discord I'm in but I don't follow that enough to piece together that Piginnie was Guinea Pig". Also, again, the problem of alts and trolls is not going to be significant, so this level of user-hostile rules towards a problem that doesn't really exist is unnecessary.
This seems like a lot of hullabaloo about a problem that is very unlikely to exist.
As people have noted, there's nothing preventing a currently banned user from making an account and posting here, and yet there's (almost) no instances of alts or troll accounts being made. (Almost) everyone who signs up for Coin Return is either active or lurking here. The number of users who are banned here and keep up with the forums and would be motivated to make an alt on Coin Return, but aren't willing to make an alt on the current forums, is going to be extremely minimal. Trying to create a detailed technical or administrative solution to this problem seems extremely high effort for the same outcome as just ad hoc banning anybody who acts shitty or reveals themselves to be an alt.
Addendum: This post is kind of funny now that a user named "Alt Zavian" has joined (I'm assuming just to post while keeping the old account wiped).
Just to clarify, zavian had their account purged based on privacy concerns when there was talk about scraping the forums, etc. I'm sure you're aware, but just want to point out that this is a very different situation than a banning-for-cause for anyone else following along here.
Oh yeah I was fully aware, I just find it funny I posted "there aren't alts here" right before seeing a literally titled alt account.
The main lists are in the SE++ and D&D Ban and Infractions thread and is already public. I think, other than the mod forums, that may be the only documentation that we have, although I'll have to check. The actual forum-exported ban lists contains users banned for any reason, which includes spam bots and whatnot.
I don't think #3 there is really enforceable. That's leading into "thought crime" territory.
1) A publicly available list of accounts banned for cause (non-spam, non-self-request). No other information should be retained (such as email addresses, ip addresses, etc) as this isn't publicly available information.
2) An explicit statement in the ban appeal process that previously banned members must follow the process to be admitted to CoRe.
3) A rule stating that if the CoRe leadership discovers that a CoRe member knew that the person was previously banned, they will be subject to disciplinary actions up to and including a permanent ban.
(1) is required for (3).
Man 3 is ridiculous
It's fine to find my or anyone's proposal ridiculous, but could you explain why? I obviously didn't think it was ridiculous, or I wouldn't have proposed it. That's not say there aren't flaws I haven't foreseen or considered, but it's helpful to know what they are.
I'll be honest, I'm not able to follow what #3 is actually saying. I might be getting pronouns confused. But is the proposal that if Mod #1 discovers that Poster #3 knew that Poster #2 was an alt of previously banned Poster #1, that Poster #3 is banned for not coming forward with information about Poster #2?
Frankly "asshole's alt comes back" is not a big thing here.
There was one(1) recent guy who survived for awhile because we were unable to determine, if he was an alt, who he was an alt of. That latter part's been one of the lines for dealing with them; "this account feels alt-y" leads down arbitrary paths, especially since we're already in an environment where "new poster in a current events thread" is enough to get a bunch of "this is probably an alt" reports wholly independently of whether they actually are or not. I need more certainty than "new user with a default avatar" for that.
Past that, the bulk of the alts I've been aware of over the last year or so fall into a few categories:
People trying to sneak back in during a tempban and doing a bad job of covering their tracks because they are unaware of what mods/admins can look up
People trying to sneak back in shortly after a permanent ban and doing a similarly bad job of covering their tracks for the same reason
One(1) deeply obsessed individual
#3 covers, and I'm not being hyperbolic here, 90-95% of those cases.
If I woke up one day somehow confusing Blender-the-software with Blender-the-kitchen-appliance I could probably still count the instances that didn't fall under those three categories on one hand.
We are not exactly under siege by those kinds of accounts, and they're generally not capable of getting back into the forum without instantly stepping on a rake and getting rebanned anyway.
There was one instance the past few months of somebody basically continuously troll posting until they got banned and then making an alt to do the same kind of troll posting, but I don't even really know how to classify that or what their history was prior to... whatever happened there. Otherwise yeah, my experience with other sites points towards the same thing; a huge portion of alt problems boil down to one or two singularly obsessed individuals, in my experience often ones who wanted the fight with the mods more than they actually cared about posting wherever they were beefing with.
The main lists are in the SE++ and D&D Ban and Infractions thread and is already public. I think, other than the mod forums, that may be the only documentation that we have, although I'll have to check. The actual forum-exported ban lists contains users banned for any reason, which includes spam bots and whatnot.
I don't think #3 there is really enforceable. That's leading into "thought crime" territory.
1) A publicly available list of accounts banned for cause (non-spam, non-self-request). No other information should be retained (such as email addresses, ip addresses, etc) as this isn't publicly available information.
2) An explicit statement in the ban appeal process that previously banned members must follow the process to be admitted to CoRe.
3) A rule stating that if the CoRe leadership discovers that a CoRe member knew that the person was previously banned, they will be subject to disciplinary actions up to and including a permanent ban.
(1) is required for (3).
Man 3 is ridiculous
It's fine to find my or anyone's proposal ridiculous, but could you explain why? I obviously didn't think it was ridiculous, or I wouldn't have proposed it. That's not say there aren't flaws I haven't foreseen or considered, but it's helpful to know what they are.
Because the idea of mod action over someone maybe knowing who another poster is, is dumb. It's dumb because there's no way you can prove they knew, it's dumb because even you could so what it's not like they're aiding and abetting the enemy (there are banned posters I prefer over 9/10 historic moderators on this site) and it's dumb because this is a quirky little forum not a COINtel operation.
It's unworkable in like a million ways
0
ChanusHarbinger of the Spicy Rooster ApocalypseThe Flames of a Thousand Collapsed StarsRegistered User, Moderatormod
I don't think it's the most far-fetched a hypothetical that some CoRe Community Members are made aware that one of their Discord / Steam buddies created an alt and started hanging out on CoRe again despite knowing their buddy was banned. I would think in that situation and in line with CoRe Values of at minimum Safety and Accountability that situation would be reported to the moderators.
If not, and if it were discovered, I think Moderators would need to consider the evidence - logs, transcripts, posting behaviors, etc to determine if the aware CoRe Community Members violated our values and need extra moderation action. Just 'might have known' is different than knowingly interacting, participating, or egging on the banned former community member and there's enough unknowns in this already hypothetical situation that this would largely have to go to a moderator review and determination based on their discretion of how badly CoRe Values / CoC were violated.
That said, I don't know if this hypothetical needs a specific process or rules that aren't already covered in CoRe Values & Code of Conduct.
0
ChanusHarbinger of the Spicy Rooster ApocalypseThe Flames of a Thousand Collapsed StarsRegistered User, Moderatormod
i for one am not interested in being thought police concerned with what posters knew and when they knew it
Isn't bringing in information from outside of the forum a violation of the stalking/harrassement ethos?
Or to put it another way.
If Forumer A discovers that Forumer B is being a racist twit in Discord, that information cannot be shared with the forum.
If Forumer B posts his racist crap on the forum and gets banned, makes an alt as Forumer Bee and then mentions on the discord that he made that alt, then that is information that is okay for Forumer A to share with the forum?
+1
QuetziHere we may reign secure, and in my choice,To reign is worth ambition though in HellRegistered User, Moderatormod
Isn't bringing in information from outside of the forum a violation of the stalking/harrassement ethos?
Or to put it another way.
If Forumer A discovers that Forumer B is being a racist twit in Discord, that information cannot be shared with the forum.
If Forumer B posts his racist crap on the forum and gets banned, makes an alt as Forumer Bee and then mentions on the discord that he made that alt, then that is information that is okay for Forumer A to share with the forum?
The general idea here would be that you shouldn't bring it up publicly but you could PM a mod about it to let them know
+3
Zonugal(He/Him) The Holiday ArmadilloI'm Santa's representative for all the southern states. And Mexico!Registered User, Transition Teamregular
if it were discovered, I think Moderators would need to consider the evidence - logs, transcripts, posting behaviors, etc to determine if the aware CoRe Community Members violated our values and need extra moderation action.
As has been mentioned, I know folks don't want mods to be viewed as akin to police, but I think THIS firmly situates that image.
Isn't bringing in information from outside of the forum a violation of the stalking/harrassement ethos?
Or to put it another way.
If Forumer A discovers that Forumer B is being a racist twit in Discord, that information cannot be shared with the forum.
If Forumer B posts his racist crap on the forum and gets banned, makes an alt as Forumer Bee and then mentions on the discord that he made that alt, then that is information that is okay for Forumer A to share with the forum?
No, the Values & Code of Conduct specifically call out off-site behavior such as sexual harassment, stalking, doxxing, and generalized harassment that would be actionable if it occurs between CoRe members off the forums.
I would assume similar things like if a bunch of CoRe members were planning to brigade a thread or something in a way that violates Values & CoC that would also be something that should be presented to the moderators as a concern / for attention.
I've got a bit of work to do at the moment, but I believe the big thing is it should be privately presented to the moderators for their review and consideration, not dumped in an open thread but I might be mixing up the old rules and the new Values / CoC and discussion around them.
Edit - basically, if CoRe members are egging on activity on CoRe that goes against our stated values, just because the egging on occurred elsewhere doesn't mean total diplomatic immunity, moderation staff's hands are tied.
zagdrob on
0
ChanusHarbinger of the Spicy Rooster ApocalypseThe Flames of a Thousand Collapsed StarsRegistered User, Moderatormod
we need to be very careful about the line between someone being threatening or harassing users offsite being brought to the attention of the mods and opening the door to mods being flooded with complaints about someone having bad opinions elsewhere in an attempt to have action taken about it on CR
we need to be very careful about the line between someone being threatening or harassing users offsite being brought to the attention of the mods and opening the door to mods being flooded with complaints about someone having bad opinions elsewhere in an attempt to have action taken about it on CR
I for sure think it would have to be a pretty severe case for anything actionable to happen in the hypothetical and definitely more than a just 'might have known' situation. It's certainly not intended as an expectation people are going to go digging up dirt on everyone for everything.
It's just that there are situations where I think expecting that as members of CoRe our Values & CoC (especially Safety and Accountability) apply to our interactions with one another around our space even if they aren't strictly posts on the forum. Something that I think is affirmed by the general harassment / doxxing / etc portions of the CoC.
zagdrob on
0
SolyspPreviously Kayne Red RobeRegistered Userregular
If hypothetically I know of one or more posters who are alts of banned users who were banned for non-harmful shenanigans back in the day and who have been posting without issue for years now you're suggesting that I should get banned for not snitching on them?
No. Absolutely not, under no circumstances.
+11
ChanusHarbinger of the Spicy Rooster ApocalypseThe Flames of a Thousand Collapsed StarsRegistered User, Moderatormod
we need to be very careful about the line between someone being threatening or harassing users offsite being brought to the attention of the mods and opening the door to mods being flooded with complaints about someone having bad opinions elsewhere in an attempt to have action taken about it on CR
I for sure think it would have to be a pretty severe case for anything actionable to happen in the hypothetical and definitely more than a just 'might have known' situation. It's certainly not intended as an expectation people are going to go digging up dirt on everyone for everything.
It's just that there are situations where I think expecting that as members of CoRe our Values & CoC (especially Safety and Accountability) apply to our interactions with one another around our space even if they aren't strictly posts on the forum. Something that I think is affirmed by the general harassment / doxxing / etc portions of the CoC.
i for one will firmly state i have no interest in punishing anyone ever for not coming forward about anything someone else is doing
we need to be very careful about the line between someone being threatening or harassing users offsite being brought to the attention of the mods and opening the door to mods being flooded with complaints about someone having bad opinions elsewhere in an attempt to have action taken about it on CR
I for sure think it would have to be a pretty severe case for anything actionable to happen in the hypothetical and definitely more than a just 'might have known' situation. It's certainly not intended as an expectation people are going to go digging up dirt on everyone for everything.
It's just that there are situations where I think expecting that as members of CoRe our Values & CoC (especially Safety and Accountability) apply to our interactions with one another around our space even if they aren't strictly posts on the forum. Something that I think is affirmed by the general harassment / doxxing / etc portions of the CoC.
i for one will firmly state i have no interest in punishing anyone ever for not coming forward about anything someone else is doing
Isn't bringing in information from outside of the forum a violation of the stalking/harrassement ethos?
Or to put it another way.
If Forumer A discovers that Forumer B is being a racist twit in Discord, that information cannot be shared with the forum.
If Forumer B posts his racist crap on the forum and gets banned, makes an alt as Forumer Bee and then mentions on the discord that he made that alt, then that is information that is okay for Forumer A to share with the forum?
No, the Values & Code of Conduct specifically call out off-site behavior such as sexual harassment, stalking, doxxing, and generalized harassment that would be actionable if it occurs between CoRe members off the forums.
I would assume similar things like if a bunch of CoRe members were planning to brigade a thread or something in a way that violates Values & CoC that would also be something that should be presented to the moderators as a concern / for attention.
I've got a bit of work to do at the moment, but I believe the big thing is it should be privately presented to the moderators for their review and consideration, not dumped in an open thread but I might be mixing up the old rules and the new Values / CoC and discussion around them.
Edit - basically, if CoRe members are egging on activity on CoRe that goes against our stated values, just because the egging on occurred elsewhere doesn't mean total diplomatic immunity, moderation staff's hands are tied.
Ok, let's not dance around this. There are several discords out there with PA/CoRe members on them. In these locations, both regular members and people who are part of the transition team talk a lot in the way friend groups often do, including talking about active threads or users. I can't see any reasonable way to moderate generalized harassment and planning brigading without considering all of these various spinoff groups part of the CoRe umbrella and requiring active moderation presence there, which seems both totally unworkable and very undesirable.
To the extent that offsite harassment/forum beef continuation rules have to exist, I think they basically need to be limited to "this person privately messaged me on other sites about forum shit" or "this person linked forum drama to fully public social media"; moderating discords or FFXIV guild chat or whatever seems out of scope.
I think that if you're banned and you come back as an alt, that's pretty shit. Shame on you.
I think if you know somebody was removed by the community and came back as an alt and you're choosing to help them hide their identity, that's also pretty shit. Shame on you.
But I think "oh, that's pretty shit, shame on you" should be the extent of the response unless the person is, like, helping the dude mask their IP.
Punishing people for Knowing Too Much is a little too Red Scare for my liking.
Would you say I had a plethora of pinatas?
Legos are cool, MOCs are cool, check me out on Rebrickable!
I think that if you're banned and you come back as an alt, that's pretty shit. Shame on you.
I think if you know somebody was removed by the community and came back as an alt and you're choosing to help them hide their identity, that's also pretty shit. Shame on you.
I mean, the wrinkle in this is that we had a previous admin who used to throw out bans like they were going out of business.
If I know somebody operating under an alt because Tube banned them for, oh, talking about Hitman 2, well, good for that alt.
I think that if you're banned and you come back as an alt, that's pretty shit. Shame on you.
I think if you know somebody was removed by the community and came back as an alt and you're choosing to help them hide their identity, that's also pretty shit. Shame on you.
I mean, the wrinkle in this is that we had a previous admin who used to throw out bans like they were going out of business.
If I know somebody operating under an alt because Tube banned them for, oh, talking about Hitman 2, well, good for that alt.
Fair, but I was speaking in the context of our new forums, where anyone who feels they were banned for stupid reasons can appeal their ban and be let back in. In this situation, if you're trying to sneak in as an alt, it's because we reviewed your case and even with a policy of kindness and amnesty decided, nah, we're good. So: pretty shit.
Would you say I had a plethora of pinatas?
Legos are cool, MOCs are cool, check me out on Rebrickable!
I just want to say as an old participant turned lurker, I have a lot of fond memories and appreciate all the work going into coin return. I want to get back into being more active there than I was here and I'm liking what I see being done so far. This truly is the best community on the Internet.
+19
ChanusHarbinger of the Spicy Rooster ApocalypseThe Flames of a Thousand Collapsed StarsRegistered User, Moderatormod
Sorry to break up the intense conversation, but I had an idea for CR and wanted to ask about it.
I was thinking about how there's a divide between G&T and SE++ and was wondering how to provide a fun bridge between the members. I liked the idea of a "Who's that person?" thread where we highlight a single person. Each person would be decided by nominations and community votes. Once someone is selected, whoever's in charge sends them a form to fill out with questions about themselves. Things like, what do you do, your hobbies, favorite games, hidden talents, funny/heartbreaking stories, etc. Basically, tell us as little or as much about yourself as you want.
The idea is that I know a lot of people here, but mostly by a avatar and screen name. This whole process has me learning that we have a lot of people here with a variety of talents (technically, business management, design, etc) and others who are suffering and might need help. I just...want to know more. It could really help foster the community more and create closer bonds with one another.
Of course, the entire highlight thread would be opt-in for those who'd prefer not to have their more personal side on display. If people think it's a bad idea, I totally get that as well. Just wanted to share this and get it out of my head.
Need a voice actor? Hire me at bengrayVO.com
Switch ID: MNC Dover SW-1154-3107-1051 Steam ID
0
ChanusHarbinger of the Spicy Rooster ApocalypseThe Flames of a Thousand Collapsed StarsRegistered User, Moderatormod
on the one hand i think that's cool and fun but on the other hand i know there are people who get bad feelings from the forumer appreciation thread because they don't ever get mentioned
maybe if it were a random selection (and agreed by the person being profiled) or something like that
Allegedly a voice of reason.
+1
QuetziHere we may reign secure, and in my choice,To reign is worth ambition though in HellRegistered User, Moderatormod
You could do a like, thread that you post in to opt in, and then randomize it from there or similar
+2
minor incidentpublicly subsidized!privately profitable!Registered User, Transition Teamregular
I’m just envisioning Gort making a “Who’s That Pokemon?”-esque avatar silhouette post every Monday and summoning that random forumer to come tell us about themselves.
Hell, New Jersey, it said on the letter. Delivered without comment. So be it!
XenForo has an About section in the profile you can fill in with whatever you want. We could perhaps encourage people to fill in these details with a template or something, and socialize it more so the community knows to look at it. But a lot of people are naturally going to be cautious about info that could allow them to be identified IRL.
+1
Alt Zavianthis isn't even my final formRegistered Userregular
I have been lurking this sub-forum for awhile but just want to say I've been really impressed by the progress being made and overall mutual consent going on with the development of the new forums. I'm really hopeful that there'll be less of an 'us vs them' feeling and more of a positive space for people
+5
ShadowfireVermont, in the middle of nowhereRegistered Userregular
I’m just envisioning Gort making a “Who’s That Pokemon?”-esque avatar silhouette post every Monday and summoning that random forumer to come tell us about themselves.
I’m just envisioning Gort making a “Who’s That Pokemon?”-esque avatar silhouette post every Monday and summoning that random forumer to come tell us about themselves.
Posts
There was one(1) recent guy who survived for awhile because we were unable to determine, if he was an alt, who he was an alt of. That latter part's been one of the lines for dealing with them; "this account feels alt-y" leads down arbitrary paths, especially since we're already in an environment where "new poster in a current events thread" is enough to get a bunch of "this is probably an alt" reports wholly independently of whether they actually are or not. I need more certainty than "new user with a default avatar" for that.
Past that, the bulk of the alts I've been aware of over the last year or so fall into a few categories:
#3 covers, and I'm not being hyperbolic here, 90-95% of those cases.
If I woke up one day somehow confusing Blender-the-software with Blender-the-kitchen-appliance I could probably still count the instances that didn't fall under those three categories on one hand.
We are not exactly under siege by those kinds of accounts, and they're generally not capable of getting back into the forum without instantly stepping on a rake and getting rebanned anyway.
It's almost impossible to prove what a person did/didn't know, so it's unnecessarily punitive and hostile to existing users who would either get semi-arbitrarily hit with infractions or have to defend themselves with, basically, "yeah this person posted in some discord I'm in but I don't follow that enough to piece together that Piginnie was Guinea Pig". Also, again, the problem of alts and trolls is not going to be significant, so this level of user-hostile rules towards a problem that doesn't really exist is unnecessary.
Oh yeah I was fully aware, I just find it funny I posted "there aren't alts here" right before seeing a literally titled alt account.
I'll be honest, I'm not able to follow what #3 is actually saying. I might be getting pronouns confused. But is the proposal that if Mod #1 discovers that Poster #3 knew that Poster #2 was an alt of previously banned Poster #1, that Poster #3 is banned for not coming forward with information about Poster #2?
There was one instance the past few months of somebody basically continuously troll posting until they got banned and then making an alt to do the same kind of troll posting, but I don't even really know how to classify that or what their history was prior to... whatever happened there. Otherwise yeah, my experience with other sites points towards the same thing; a huge portion of alt problems boil down to one or two singularly obsessed individuals, in my experience often ones who wanted the fight with the mods more than they actually cared about posting wherever they were beefing with.
Because the idea of mod action over someone maybe knowing who another poster is, is dumb. It's dumb because there's no way you can prove they knew, it's dumb because even you could so what it's not like they're aiding and abetting the enemy (there are banned posters I prefer over 9/10 historic moderators on this site) and it's dumb because this is a quirky little forum not a COINtel operation.
It's unworkable in like a million ways
If not, and if it were discovered, I think Moderators would need to consider the evidence - logs, transcripts, posting behaviors, etc to determine if the aware CoRe Community Members violated our values and need extra moderation action. Just 'might have known' is different than knowingly interacting, participating, or egging on the banned former community member and there's enough unknowns in this already hypothetical situation that this would largely have to go to a moderator review and determination based on their discretion of how badly CoRe Values / CoC were violated.
That said, I don't know if this hypothetical needs a specific process or rules that aren't already covered in CoRe Values & Code of Conduct.
Or to put it another way.
If Forumer A discovers that Forumer B is being a racist twit in Discord, that information cannot be shared with the forum.
If Forumer B posts his racist crap on the forum and gets banned, makes an alt as Forumer Bee and then mentions on the discord that he made that alt, then that is information that is okay for Forumer A to share with the forum?
The general idea here would be that you shouldn't bring it up publicly but you could PM a mod about it to let them know
As has been mentioned, I know folks don't want mods to be viewed as akin to police, but I think THIS firmly situates that image.
No, the Values & Code of Conduct specifically call out off-site behavior such as sexual harassment, stalking, doxxing, and generalized harassment that would be actionable if it occurs between CoRe members off the forums.
I would assume similar things like if a bunch of CoRe members were planning to brigade a thread or something in a way that violates Values & CoC that would also be something that should be presented to the moderators as a concern / for attention.
I've got a bit of work to do at the moment, but I believe the big thing is it should be privately presented to the moderators for their review and consideration, not dumped in an open thread but I might be mixing up the old rules and the new Values / CoC and discussion around them.
Edit - basically, if CoRe members are egging on activity on CoRe that goes against our stated values, just because the egging on occurred elsewhere doesn't mean total diplomatic immunity, moderation staff's hands are tied.
I for sure think it would have to be a pretty severe case for anything actionable to happen in the hypothetical and definitely more than a just 'might have known' situation. It's certainly not intended as an expectation people are going to go digging up dirt on everyone for everything.
It's just that there are situations where I think expecting that as members of CoRe our Values & CoC (especially Safety and Accountability) apply to our interactions with one another around our space even if they aren't strictly posts on the forum. Something that I think is affirmed by the general harassment / doxxing / etc portions of the CoC.
No. Absolutely not, under no circumstances.
i for one will firmly state i have no interest in punishing anyone ever for not coming forward about anything someone else is doing
Agreed.
Ok, let's not dance around this. There are several discords out there with PA/CoRe members on them. In these locations, both regular members and people who are part of the transition team talk a lot in the way friend groups often do, including talking about active threads or users. I can't see any reasonable way to moderate generalized harassment and planning brigading without considering all of these various spinoff groups part of the CoRe umbrella and requiring active moderation presence there, which seems both totally unworkable and very undesirable.
To the extent that offsite harassment/forum beef continuation rules have to exist, I think they basically need to be limited to "this person privately messaged me on other sites about forum shit" or "this person linked forum drama to fully public social media"; moderating discords or FFXIV guild chat or whatever seems out of scope.
if an issue arises that you feel you want mods to take care of, you are obligated to use the report button as opposed to airing issues in threads
I think if you know somebody was removed by the community and came back as an alt and you're choosing to help them hide their identity, that's also pretty shit. Shame on you.
But I think "oh, that's pretty shit, shame on you" should be the extent of the response unless the person is, like, helping the dude mask their IP.
Punishing people for Knowing Too Much is a little too Red Scare for my liking.
Legos are cool, MOCs are cool, check me out on Rebrickable!
This is the purity you desire in the new lands.
I mean, the wrinkle in this is that we had a previous admin who used to throw out bans like they were going out of business.
If I know somebody operating under an alt because Tube banned them for, oh, talking about Hitman 2, well, good for that alt.
Fair, but I was speaking in the context of our new forums, where anyone who feels they were banned for stupid reasons can appeal their ban and be let back in. In this situation, if you're trying to sneak in as an alt, it's because we reviewed your case and even with a policy of kindness and amnesty decided, nah, we're good. So: pretty shit.
Legos are cool, MOCs are cool, check me out on Rebrickable!
I was thinking about how there's a divide between G&T and SE++ and was wondering how to provide a fun bridge between the members. I liked the idea of a "Who's that person?" thread where we highlight a single person. Each person would be decided by nominations and community votes. Once someone is selected, whoever's in charge sends them a form to fill out with questions about themselves. Things like, what do you do, your hobbies, favorite games, hidden talents, funny/heartbreaking stories, etc. Basically, tell us as little or as much about yourself as you want.
The idea is that I know a lot of people here, but mostly by a avatar and screen name. This whole process has me learning that we have a lot of people here with a variety of talents (technically, business management, design, etc) and others who are suffering and might need help. I just...want to know more. It could really help foster the community more and create closer bonds with one another.
Of course, the entire highlight thread would be opt-in for those who'd prefer not to have their more personal side on display. If people think it's a bad idea, I totally get that as well. Just wanted to share this and get it out of my head.
Switch ID: MNC Dover SW-1154-3107-1051
Steam ID
maybe if it were a random selection (and agreed by the person being profiled) or something like that
"It's minor incident!"
"It's Chanus!"
"FUUUUUUCK!"
https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561197970666737/
shit, they figured it out. they're all Chanus