One time Bowen got kicked from the IT monkey thread and we spent the rest of the time taking about how much we loved users and always engage in their requests.
life's a game that you're bound to lose / like using a hammer to pound in screws
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
i would participate in Munkus' census but participation in the census is also consenting to participation in the forumer opinion thread and i hate those
so
i don't participate in the census
if Munkus separated those two things or made participation in the forumer opinion thread optional maybe he'd get more census data, idk
you don't have to opt in to both
Going to side with pony and say you are tacitly endorsing the opinion poll even if you opt out.
+3
Options
ceresWhen the last moon is cast over the last star of morningAnd the future has past without even a last desperate warningRegistered User, Moderatormod
It was A Steak!, and it was incredibly thorough.
And it seems like all is dying, and would leave the world to mourn
Fitocracy: Join us in the SE++ group!
XBox LIVE: Bogestrom | Destiny
PSN: Bogestrom
+7
Options
Munkus BeaverYou don't have to attend every argument you are invited to.Philosophy: Stoicism. Politics: Democratic SocialistRegistered User, ClubPAregular
I did not get a satisfactory answer to the questions I asked yesterday, and would like to restate them in such a way that will hopefully spark an actual conversation. I want to explain my thoughts and concerns in a way that will get them addressed, not dismissed. I'm going to do my best to police my tone through this post, as I can only imagine that is what provoked such an outburst last night.
Kicking users from a thread is a rather severe punishment, I feel, and used too frequently. There are situations where a single post can be made with no malice, yet it can result in eviction from a thread, regardless of if the conversation later changes topics or is even about multiple different topics. There's no chance to elaborate on a point, or to provide context, or to even apologize if indeed something inadvertently caused offense. In instances where someone may be lashing out against another user, why would a simple infraction not suffice? An infraction, at the least, allows one to continue in the discussion and address other's issues, rather than outright end a conversation. Further, it is subject to bias, where someone will be removed from a chat just because a mod does not like them. They did not break any rules, but a mod simply did not want them to talk anymore. This is wrong. Why has this functionality developed into a primary tool for the moderation staff? Are you concerned with this strategy’s potential issues, as outlined above? Are there ways we can change the functionality to remove some of the issues I have? A time-out would seem more fair, and even then would need to be used sparingly.
To speak in more general terms about moderation, having any sort of open dialog or discussion has in the past been strongly discouraged. Any time a criticism has been brought up in the past the primary response has been "too bad". Any complaints were told to be discussed in private with the mod in question, but they never had to bother giving a satisfactory response or being held accountable for a decision they've made. Any promise is openness is undercut by the possibility of capricious and unaccountable punitive action being taken against yourself. Even when concerns are raised, the response has most often been "no we aren't going to discuss this". It troubles me how many people have taken up the offer of "don't like it, leave", and how little the mods seem to care. If the prevailing rule of the forums is don't be a dick, I would hope that the mods would follow this as well, and not just dismiss complaints out of hand. Not being a dick would include clear standards for mods, being translucent, explaining why they have done what they have done, and addressing complaints in a clear and open manner. Being a mod should not mean you are beyond reproach.
I was looking forward to having a thread to discuss the current state of moderation, and at least get an understanding as to why things may be how they are. I figured this would at last be the opportunity to actually discuss moderation decisions without being ignored, infracted, or insulted. I do not think it was unreasonable to expect this, and as a result I became incredibly frustrated by all the inane, filler, non-sense Hitman and pie questions that are irrelevant to the problems I feel so strongly about.
I voiced these concerns, perhaps not eloquently, and it may have been presumptuous of me to believe that more people felt the same way. Perhaps those who would be the loudest critics already left. And, perhaps, I was too aggressive in taking a stance and did not explain myself clearly. I raised what, to me, felt like a very valid concern, and something that I have found a great deal of annoyance with. This was at first dismissed out of hand when I tried to continue the conversation about it, and then I was told I was being too passive aggressive when I brought it up again. I explained my stance, and was summarily told I would be ignored and it doesn't matter at all what I have to say. This is the exact problem I have always had with the moderation, and seems to be the exact opposite of the entire reason this thread was created. Why was a thread to discuss moderation policies even created if you don't care what users have to say? What is there to be gained in an echo chamber of those who have no issues with the moderation?
People I like and respect are being driven off by this very thread. People that are not voicing their concerns on this forum. I would strongly appreciate if you took some time to step back, look at your own actions, and consider why that would be.
Perhaps you missed @A Steak! 's rather lengthy reply to your question last night. For convenience:
So I'll pick this one up. Back before Vanilla we really only had one tool in our hard-modding arsenal: infractions (and there were the dark times before we even had that). Over time we got better at the application of them, because we found out the hard way it doesn't do a whole lot of good to throw them out like candy. We set more clear lines and the forumers in general got better about working within those lines, but it leaves a single dimension of punishment with jailings. If you post a lot it hits you hard, but if you only post a little bit it's not really that much of an issue. With the move to Vanilla we got the ability to kick, which when used correctly leads to a more equitable rebuke.
For example, the kicks you're taking umbrage with are two posters who are in a lot of threads and post at a pretty decent volume. The alternative to kicking them was jailing, and I figured that would actually be a harsher punishment, as it affects all the posting they do for two weeks. The kick just excludes them from one of many threads, and will probably recycle before they'd even be out of jail. Kicking also efficiently stops issues at hand, and can stop snowball effects and lapsing that may occur if the parties are both sill present. Weedlord was just flat-out abusing another poster, and -Tal went off with no provocation and was baiting the other poster (who was saved by a quick edit on his part). Both are otherwise decent posters, so it just seemed more prudent to drunk tank them and let em cool off. There are times people get infracted and kicked, but that's usually because of prior history.
Ultimately it's just another tool. It's used differently than infractions, and when used correctly can solve issues with less disruption. It also doesn't appear in the poster's history, which does come into play as they rack up infractions. As for why we do it and don't just tell people to ignore that one person, why the heck would we do that? It's completely unfair to the rest of the posters.
0
Options
Munkus BeaverYou don't have to attend every argument you are invited to.Philosophy: Stoicism. Politics: Democratic SocialistRegistered User, ClubPAregular
"A steak's name is Bill" doesn't have quite the same ring to it.
Humor can be dissected as a frog can, but dies in the process.
I did not get a satisfactory answer to the questions I asked yesterday, and would like to restate them in such a way that will hopefully spark an actual conversation. I want to explain my thoughts and concerns in a way that will get them addressed, not dismissed. I'm going to do my best to police my tone through this post, as I can only imagine that is what provoked such an outburst last night.
Kicking users from a thread is a rather severe punishment, I feel, and used too frequently. There are situations where a single post can be made with no malice, yet it can result in eviction from a thread, regardless of if the conversation later changes topics or is even about multiple different topics. There's no chance to elaborate on a point, or to provide context, or to even apologize if indeed something inadvertently caused offense. In instances where someone may be lashing out against another user, why would a simple infraction not suffice? An infraction, at the least, allows one to continue in the discussion and address other's issues, rather than outright end a conversation. Further, it is subject to bias, where someone will be removed from a chat just because a mod does not like them. They did not break any rules, but a mod simply did not want them to talk anymore. This is wrong. Why has this functionality developed into a primary tool for the moderation staff? Are you concerned with this strategy’s potential issues, as outlined above? Are there ways we can change the functionality to remove some of the issues I have? A time-out would seem more fair, and even then would need to be used sparingly.
To speak in more general terms about moderation, having any sort of open dialog or discussion has in the past been strongly discouraged. Any time a criticism has been brought up in the past the primary response has been "too bad". Any complaints were told to be discussed in private with the mod in question, but they never had to bother giving a satisfactory response or being held accountable for a decision they've made. Any promise is openness is undercut by the possibility of capricious and unaccountable punitive action being taken against yourself. Even when concerns are raised, the response has most often been "no we aren't going to discuss this". It troubles me how many people have taken up the offer of "don't like it, leave", and how little the mods seem to care. If the prevailing rule of the forums is don't be a dick, I would hope that the mods would follow this as well, and not just dismiss complaints out of hand. Not being a dick would include clear standards for mods, being translucent, explaining why they have done what they have done, and addressing complaints in a clear and open manner. Being a mod should not mean you are beyond reproach.
I was looking forward to having a thread to discuss the current state of moderation, and at least get an understanding as to why things may be how they are. I figured this would at last be the opportunity to actually discuss moderation decisions without being ignored, infracted, or insulted. I do not think it was unreasonable to expect this, and as a result I became incredibly frustrated by all the inane, filler, non-sense Hitman and pie questions that are irrelevant to the problems I feel so strongly about.
I voiced these concerns, perhaps not eloquently, and it may have been presumptuous of me to believe that more people felt the same way. Perhaps those who would be the loudest critics already left. And, perhaps, I was too aggressive in taking a stance and did not explain myself clearly. I raised what, to me, felt like a very valid concern, and something that I have found a great deal of annoyance with. This was at first dismissed out of hand when I tried to continue the conversation about it, and then I was told I was being too passive aggressive when I brought it up again. I explained my stance, and was summarily told I would be ignored and it doesn't matter at all what I have to say. This is the exact problem I have always had with the moderation, and seems to be the exact opposite of the entire reason this thread was created. Why was a thread to discuss moderation policies even created if you don't care what users have to say? What is there to be gained in an echo chamber of those who have no issues with the moderation?
People I like and respect are being driven off by this very thread. People that are not voicing their concerns on this forum. I would strongly appreciate if you took some time to step back, look at your own actions, and consider why that would be.
i would participate in Munkus' census but participation in the census is also consenting to participation in the forumer opinion thread and i hate those
so
i don't participate in the census
if Munkus separated those two things or made participation in the forumer opinion thread optional maybe he'd get more census data, idk
you don't have to opt in to both
Going to side with pony and say you are tacitly endorsing the opinion poll even if you opt out.
see i always thought so!
people said you could opt out but it never felt like you could
plus i mean people would sometimes include me in the forumer opinion thread sometimes because they just felt they wanted to even though i never participated in it at all, i'd still get an @ mention and i'd be like "what the..."
and I'd have to PM them about it after to gently ask them to like remove it or something so other people wouldn't start doing it and it wouldn't become a thing and i wouldn't get unofficially added to the list somehow
fortunately everyone was good about that when that happened
0
Options
PiptheFairFrequently not in boats.Registered Userregular
anybody have a link to steaks post I can't seem to find it
Munkus BeaverYou don't have to attend every argument you are invited to.Philosophy: Stoicism. Politics: Democratic SocialistRegistered User, ClubPAregular
The mad rush of people posting over the past couple of pages of this thread to be helpful to someone and direct them to a post that contains answers or to just provide the answer themselves says pretty much everything you need to know about how much this place has changed since ye olde days
Which Ninja turtle do you find best represents your personality?
0
Options
Munkus BeaverYou don't have to attend every argument you are invited to.Philosophy: Stoicism. Politics: Democratic SocialistRegistered User, ClubPAregular
i would participate in Munkus' census but participation in the census is also consenting to participation in the forumer opinion thread and i hate those
so
i don't participate in the census
if Munkus separated those two things or made participation in the forumer opinion thread optional maybe he'd get more census data, idk
you don't have to opt in to both
Going to side with pony and say you are tacitly endorsing the opinion poll even if you opt out.
see i always thought so!
people said you could opt out but it never felt like you could
plus i mean people would sometimes include me in the forumer opinion thread sometimes because they just felt they wanted to even though i never participated in it at all, i'd still get an @ mention and i'd be like "what the..."
and I'd have to PM them about it after to gently ask them to like remove it or something so other people wouldn't start doing it and it wouldn't become a thing and i wouldn't get unofficially added to the list somehow
fortunately everyone was good about that when that happened
well you can opt out in the sense that you can ask not to be included in the list of people being officially opined on. There isn't really a way to stop people going off-piste with opinions, but it might be a good idea to point out in the OP that if people have not signed up to the opinion section there is probably a good reason for that, and please don't drag them in.
Maybe something like that is already there, I can't be bothered to check.
I've never had an instance where someone opined about me in the opinion thread and I was like "hey could you not" and they were like "NO SCREW YOU PONY THIS IS MY OPINION"
they're always like "oh sorry, my bad dude, yeah okay i'll remove it" which is nice
they don't mean any harm and they mean well and generally they have nice things to say!
what it is, is i don't want to be added to the list for other people to say things
the whole reason i don't want to be part of the forumer opinion thread is i know damn well how i'm largely regarded around these parts and uhhhhh no that's okay i don't need to be told, thanks
feels shitty enough as it is, i just try to do better and own up to what a d-bag i've been over the years
+1
Options
Munkus BeaverYou don't have to attend every argument you are invited to.Philosophy: Stoicism. Politics: Democratic SocialistRegistered User, ClubPAregular
i would participate in Munkus' census but participation in the census is also consenting to participation in the forumer opinion thread and i hate those
so
i don't participate in the census
if Munkus separated those two things or made participation in the forumer opinion thread optional maybe he'd get more census data, idk
you don't have to opt in to both
Going to side with pony and say you are tacitly endorsing the opinion poll even if you opt out.
see i always thought so!
people said you could opt out but it never felt like you could
plus i mean people would sometimes include me in the forumer opinion thread sometimes because they just felt they wanted to even though i never participated in it at all, i'd still get an @ mention and i'd be like "what the..."
and I'd have to PM them about it after to gently ask them to like remove it or something so other people wouldn't start doing it and it wouldn't become a thing and i wouldn't get unofficially added to the list somehow
fortunately everyone was good about that when that happened
well you can opt out in the sense that you can ask not to be included in the list of people being officially opined on. There isn't really a way to stop people going off-piste with opinions, but it might be a good idea to point out in the OP that if people have not signed up to the opinion section there is probably a good reason for that, and please don't drag them in.
Maybe something like that is already there, I can't be bothered to check.
I couldn't even remember, but I checked and yes, there is specifically something there!
Sign up to be counted for the Census as an active member of the forum (any forum) by posting !Census2015 in your message and nothing else. These are counted to see the number of active members, lurkers included.
Sign up to be counted for the 2015 Opinion Thread AND Census by posting !Opinion2015 in your post and nothing else. If you have a name that more people might recognize, then post !Opinion2015 followed IMMEDIATELY by your preferred name and nothing else.
If you want me to include special instructions in the OP to either ensure you DON'T have an opinions posted despite not signing up then send me a private message. Please only do this if having any opinion made of you, even accidentally, would cause you unneeded duress. If you have special needs or a request that I haven't mentioned in this post, send me a private message.
Humor can be dissected as a frog can, but dies in the process.
well you're definitely not added to the list if you don't sign up to be added to the list, so I think you're good there? Basically you get the option of saying "CENSUS" or "OPINION" and if you say census you're counted but not on the opinion list. Opinion is both.
Sorry buddy. Most spiders and I have reached an accord, but I'm not about to be trapped in what should be my safest place with an angry wasp. And I had a hard enough time coaxing him out of my light fixture--I didn't have the steel nerve to try and somehow guide him outside.
0
Options
denihilistAncient and MightyRegistered User, Moderatormod
I've never had an instance where someone opined about me in the opinion thread and I was like "hey could you not" and they were like "NO SCREW YOU PONY THIS IS MY OPINION"
they're always like "oh sorry, my bad dude, yeah okay i'll remove it" which is nice
they don't mean any harm and they mean well and generally they have nice things to say!
what it is, is i don't want to be added to the list for other people to say things
the whole reason i don't want to be part of the forumer opinion thread is i know damn well how i'm largely regarded around these parts and uhhhhh no that's okay i don't need to be told, thanks
feels shitty enough as it is, i just try to do better and own up to what a d-bag i've been over the years
The last opinion thread we had I didn't really see anything other than people saying nice things about forumers who had made a positive impression
In general, if somebody had a negative opinion of someone (which seemed rarer than it ever has been), they for the most part just didn't post that opinion
Posts
bugboy how do you feel when my housecats eat bugs
like it's not us killing them
it's the cats
that's like circleoflife.gif right
can't be sad about that
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
I'm sorry, a duck, I got it wrong.
as a fellow cat owner, I realize there's nothing to be done about it
they're really, really good at bug hunting
XBox LIVE: Bogestrom | Destiny
PSN: Bogestrom
This happens to people who don't even sign up at all.
Like, their names are hidden behind a spoiler. I could even do it where I don't post any of the census names there at all and you would still show up.
Perhaps you missed @A Steak! 's rather lengthy reply to your question last night. For convenience:
True! It is probably unavoidable!
@Zay A Duck A Truck A Steak's response is here in case you missed it.
Maybe this is what you're looking for:
http://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/comment/32830804/#Comment_32830804
see i always thought so!
people said you could opt out but it never felt like you could
plus i mean people would sometimes include me in the forumer opinion thread sometimes because they just felt they wanted to even though i never participated in it at all, i'd still get an @ mention and i'd be like "what the..."
and I'd have to PM them about it after to gently ask them to like remove it or something so other people wouldn't start doing it and it wouldn't become a thing and i wouldn't get unofficially added to the list somehow
fortunately everyone was good about that when that happened
Didge made you look worse.
http://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/comment/32836391/#Comment_32836391
Got you covered.
did you check
Tubesteak?
I dunno, all of @a steak! is pretty cut.
well you can opt out in the sense that you can ask not to be included in the list of people being officially opined on. There isn't really a way to stop people going off-piste with opinions, but it might be a good idea to point out in the OP that if people have not signed up to the opinion section there is probably a good reason for that, and please don't drag them in.
Maybe something like that is already there, I can't be bothered to check.
they're always like "oh sorry, my bad dude, yeah okay i'll remove it" which is nice
they don't mean any harm and they mean well and generally they have nice things to say!
what it is, is i don't want to be added to the list for other people to say things
the whole reason i don't want to be part of the forumer opinion thread is i know damn well how i'm largely regarded around these parts and uhhhhh no that's okay i don't need to be told, thanks
feels shitty enough as it is, i just try to do better and own up to what a d-bag i've been over the years
I couldn't even remember, but I checked and yes, there is specifically something there!
Yes, a large number of built-in Vanilla badges were disabled to prevent geese from point farming.
Sorry buddy. Most spiders and I have reached an accord, but I'm not about to be trapped in what should be my safest place with an angry wasp. And I had a hard enough time coaxing him out of my light fixture--I didn't have the steel nerve to try and somehow guide him outside.
Wait you get points for badges? I thought it was just for reactions
The last opinion thread we had I didn't really see anything other than people saying nice things about forumers who had made a positive impression
In general, if somebody had a negative opinion of someone (which seemed rarer than it ever has been), they for the most part just didn't post that opinion