We need to be more positive and less hostile as a forum

Deleted member 4494 · Jul 1, 2020

I feel like post limits per day wouldn't be the worst idea. Like, if you know you can just bike-shed for hours with posters who have pissed you off for whatever stupid rationale, you might continually stir shit up until ultimately you've derailed the thread, gotten someone banned, or in fact been banned yourself.

If you had, like, 5 posts per day of allowance, would you waste it all on some asshole? Sure, maybe some people would, but by and large I think people would choose to disengage and spend their time talking with people they do like. When you can actually *value* the conversation you're having, you'll definitely feel the pull on that post allowance, but it will almost certainly force you to post better and more importantly be better.

Hecht · Jul 1, 2020

eyeball_kid said:
Another idea I've had is letting the community vote on their moderation team (a la StackOverflow), which could help create less of a tense relationship between mods and users.

As an aside, what do you think would help bridge that divide between mods and users? While we try to involve ourselves in various communities and threads, that division always seems to persist (even amongst the mods we "promote" from within communities). I get the whole "us vs. 'management'" side of things - that happens in the real world as well, but there isn't really a simple solution there.

I, personally, tend to specifically seek out threads to post in that won't be hotspots, but I also seek out threads like this one where I feel I can communicate "directly" with people and address feedback. I'm aware there are users that don't like me (I mean c'mon, I just exude arrogance), but meh. :P

Dhx · Jul 1, 2020

The problem is it's a diverse audience with different ideas of what constitutes positivity, ideas which are often diametrically opposed. You see it in this very thread. Some wish discussion wasn't stifled so vehemently with liberal bannings while others feel opinions and positions they deem toxic are not actioned enough.

I'm not sure there is a solution. It seems a terrible position to be in as a moderator.

Kyra · Jul 1, 2020

Hecht said:
GameBoy
SNES
PSX
PS2
PS3
Wii
X360
PS4
Switch

Ah yes the PS Switch Series U.

Seriously though. Everyone absolutely needs to be the authority on the moment to moment topics they interact with and have to push forward their crusade at every opportunity. And people don't recognize limits and boundaries. Add the state f the world on top and you have a recipe for exhaustion.

Nawid · Jul 1, 2020

If there is one thing that I think Gaming side can just get rid of, it's review threads. Just have that shit in the OT. Just seems to exist for the sake of argument.

Deleted member 46489 · Jul 1, 2020

I have been a part of the problem. I have been passive aggressive, sarcastic, and sometimes actively hostile in my replies to people who disagree with me. Some of those people were peddling bigotry, sure, but I believe I shouldn't use that as an excuse to lose my temper.

Someone said this on reddit to a hostile poster, and I agree - "Just because you're on the right side of an argument doesn't mean you get to be an ass about it."

So here's what I plan to do with my future interactions - Disagree with people? Be calm and polite about it. Think someone is being a Bigot or Troll? Report them and move on.

I'd be happy to know how other people manage their engagements on this forum.

Carl2282 · Jul 1, 2020

eyeball_kid said:
I mentioned this in the other thread, but I feel that an open-door registration policy in some ways led us down the same path of a toxic environment as GAF, where there's just an ongoing influx of people who join the site with no interest in empathy, or listening to others, or in not being a complete bigot or shithead. And you would know better than I, but that's probably an impossible task for the mod team, and I would imagine doesn't allow for much nuance when they're playing whack-a-mole. I was on one of the first life rafts over to Era, and everyone was excited to build something better, but then we didn't really have open, honest discussions about what "better" could look like.

I would have preferred something of a closed invite system. You can bring people in, but if they catch a ban, so do you. It would make people think real hard about whether their friend is going to be a dick on the site and get them in trouble. Maybe that's something the admins would never entertain, but I think there's a reason why the community threads are the most chill. People know each other and live in the same virtual space day after day, which makes them want to take a bit more care to not mess it up. After all, that's how Era got seeded in the first place. A chain of trust.

Another idea I've had is letting the community vote on their moderation team (a la StackOverflow), which could help create less of a tense relationship between mods and users.

Do moderators get any perks? I might be naive, but message board moderators seem like they accept more responsibility than benefits on most message boards.

In terms of registration I'm not sure. I remember having to use my work e-mail at the old place and waiting months before I had an account. Sure, I always thinked twice before posting, especially as a junior.. But is that really what we want here? I'd be happy to see more participation here as long as new members aren't alienating established members and vice versa.

Bradford · Jul 1, 2020

Breaking this out from an edit into an actual post because it was kinda unrelated to the original reply.

One thing I think would help is tamping down on the transitive property of badness. While it is rare to see someone actively being hostile to specific members about their interests, it isn't hard to see the general atmosphere of passive aggression surrounding certain topics. Using some examples of games I am not really into just to make a point, but I feel like Persona and DQ fans are often passive aggressively lumped in as "bad people" simply because they like media with problematic creators. There is so much passive aggressive "Oh, well x fans are trash because Y reason related to that media" and "I cant believe terrible people buy this trash" that it actively stifles discussion about anything other than the direct and specific problems with the media that have already been discussed to death. Is isn't just an era issue -- it's an internet issue in general, but the constant extreme polarization of things being Good or Bad with no space for nuance just increases the propensity for really hollow and unsavory posturing.

Hecht · Jul 1, 2020

Odrion said:
Anyways now I'm in a weird mood so I'm going to ramble. this is going to get a little sincere but not that intelligible. please excuse me if I start to pretentiously format the post, I'm just trying to make things more legible.

Here are some aspects that I think made the forums into the weird and hostile environment it exists today.

1 - The death of Neogaf and our inability to, as a community, reconcile what the hell happened. This might sound cringey but... Neogaf was important to us, it shaped people morality and ideology, and when suddenly the world was turned upside down we weren't able to safely talk about it. To sound even cringier, I think there was some trauma left unprocessed . If you wanted to, you had to either go to an off-site drama forum or talk about it in a private discord channel. Speaking of which...

2 - The rise of discord, and off-forum meta community discussion. When the forum shattered, many communities went to discord, not just to coordinate but to safely discuss what is happening and what will happen to their community. And when Resetera was founded, many stayed on Discord. Communities now have more of their own agenda that is no longer intrinsically tied to the forum like they did on Neogaf. They can have meta discussions, gossip about drama, and post tactfully. This isn't inherently bad, but I think it does feed into a paranoia that a post is not just a post. That maybe a post is referencing something bigger and purposely destructive to your beliefs or your own community.

3 - The moderation technology is too good. If you ever posted on Something Awful, you'd understand how a feature where anybody can report a post they didn't like would lead to a moderation team that is constantly exhausted and stressed out. Hundreds of memories of moderators screaming at SA Goons to "SHUUUUUUUUUUUUUT UP. SHUT UP. SHUT THE FUCK UP ABOUT THIS POST" in dumb threads about stuff like pastel egg shaped rugs come to mind. It use to be that toxic posts came from toxic posters, who would get banned because as a result of their toxic nature they would vomit toxic posts so much that a mod browsing a thread would take notice. That wasn't a good method, a lot of pain happened. However, now every bad post can be broadcasted. And moderators now have to take responsibility for every single one of them. That gives me a migraine just to think about.

4 - other stuff but my mania subsided and i'm now tired goodnight y'all i hope i don't get banned for this one. keep in mind that life isn't about eliminating your problems but choosing the ones you want to have, so don't take this post as a "here's a list of problems we shouldn't have" but just an observation of things that have factored into a forum whose atmosphere feels like it's from venus. maybe this was the best route to take all things considered. maybe someone smarter will figure something out. i dunno. bush did 9/11.

Added numbers for me to address.

1- I get it. The main reason that talk was discouraged wasn't really to silence discourage the discussion so much as we were looking to start anew. This was a chance to make a fresh start, and having countless threads talking about *what had happened* wasn't really going to be productive. I get it, though.

2- Discord has its place. I know that forums are a different form of communication that also has its place but is inherently different from things like chat rooms and, say, Reddit. For short-term discussions I think Discord is great. For longer-form discussions I do prefer forums given the long-term nature of the responses. That said, discord does provide a secondary outlet for dicsussions (and, for better or for worse, a place for close-knit groups to congregate)

3 - The reporting system is both a blessing and a curse. No longer do we have to comb every thread in order to find problem posts, but it also means we get hundreds of posts reported to us each day that we have to evaluate. Many of those are rejects. We get tons of reports that are basically "THIS GUY IS DISAGREEING WITH ME" and that goes straight into the bin, and then we get people wondering why we "don't respond to reports." Sigh. However, a fair amount of them are actionable, and we address them as we get them in.

4 - I, uh....ok.

Hecht · Jul 1, 2020

Carl2282 said:
Do moderators get any perks? I might be naive, but message board moderators seem like they accept more responsibility than benefits on most message boards.

In terms of registration I'm not sure. I remember having to use my work e-mail at the old place and waiting months before I had an account. Sure, I always thinked twice before posting, especially as a junior.. But is that really what we want here? I'd be happy to see more participation here as long as new members aren't alienating established members and vice versa.

Minor things, but on the plus side we have the innate feeling that we're at least better than RedMercury

Aaronrules380 · Jul 1, 2020

Spoo said:
I feel like post limits per day wouldn't be the worst idea. Like, if you know you can just bike-shed for hours with posters who have pissed you off for whatever stupid rationale, you might continually stir shit up until ultimately you've derailed the thread, gotten someone banned, or in fact been banned yourself.

If you had, like, 5 posts per day of allowance, would you waste it all on some asshole? Sure, maybe some people would, but by and large I think people would choose to disengage and spend their time talking with people they do like. When you can actually *value* the conversation you're having, you'll definitely feel the pull on that post allowance, but it will almost certainly force you to post better and more importantly be better.

This is an awful idea. If anything, I think it'd empower assholes who don't post much anyways because they have no stake in the community (many of whom abuse alts anyways and wouldn't be affected much), it ignores that certain conversations require extensive back and forth, and that different people have different amounts of time with which they can post on era anyways.

Honestly people who post a ton on this forum honestly don't tend to be the assholes, because they're the ones who despite having a high output, are not getting banned. Unless you think the moderation is giving them a free pass for some reason, somebody making a ton of posts and being here right now is someone who's making a ton of posts that the mods don't think are against the rules

Hecht · Jul 1, 2020

Nawid said:
If there is one thing that I think Gaming side can just get rid of, it's review threads. Just have that shit in the OT. Just seems to exist for the sake of argument.

OT threads are great for people who have purchased the game and are making their way through it. They can also have review info in their OPs. Review threads, on the other hand, are for people who just want to talk about the game as a whole and its impact and place amongst other games. I personally think review scores are dumb, but I get that people want to talk about it, and the two discussions are distinct enough that they deserve separate threads.

eyeball_kid · Jul 1, 2020

Hecht said:
As an aside, what do you think would help bridge that divide between mods and users? While we try to involve ourselves in various communities and threads, that division always seems to persist (even amongst the mods we "promote" from within communities). I get the whole "us vs. 'management'" side of things - that happens in the real world as well, but there isn't really a simple solution there.

I, personally, tend to specifically seek out threads to post in that won't be hotspots, but I also seek out threads like this one where I feel I can communicate "directly" with people and address feedback. I'm aware there are users that don't like me (I mean c'mon, I just exude arrogance), but meh. :P

Yeah, that's a hard question. Any time there's a power dynamic there's going to be some friction. I do personally miss the site feedback thread that used to exist. It felt like the community had a seat at the table which no longer exists. And the reason why I liked the idea of community voting is in a similar way it makes them feel more empowered about who is holding the handcuffs, and the process of candidate nominations itself gives a slightly better insight into who these people are what how they perceive the role.

Gotdatmoney · Jul 1, 2020

Hecht said:
I will apologize for individual bans here and there. We don't always get it right. But I do stand by the standards we set forth.

I have posted both here and at the old place for a while and I never got a ban or even so much as a warning and I don't feel I have to censor myself on most issues. If there is a topic where I know my opinion is openly against the sentiment I know to read the room about whether it is or is not appropriate. Do I think ban durations are sometimes excessive? Yeah (but bans are also about history which many people do not want to accept when they whine about them). In the same notion I am just so beyond tired of reading disingenuous bullshit and it being slap on the wrist would just encourage more disingenuous bullshit.

The users of the site need to post more positive stuff if that's what they want to see. I spend lots of time posting in the Mario Maker Community thread. It's fun and we have a good time. I don't think the site is flooded with negative shit inherently.

HardTimesFamilyPride · Jul 1, 2020

Gotdatmoney said:
Much of what I see is just bitching and complaining about bans and "having to censor myself" to which I say good. Having to actually think about what the fuck you are typing before you put it down is good.

Outside of the kind of shit you outlined in the rest of your post (I appreciate the mods' efforts to provide a welcome space), I really don't get why people take their bans so seriously tbh. Like, sometimes we get heated or we show our asses due to blind spots or wanting to stir the pot or whatever and the mods will decide we oughta take a breather. Think about where in that situation we erred or what we might be ignorant to. If you're sincere and you're learning anything from these bans you should be seeing few enough of them to ever get you a perm. Growing as a person is good! Giving a shit is kind of awesome!

subpar spatula · Jul 1, 2020

I don't believe there is any power dynamic between mods. If you feel that way, it may do with your own notion of how you post / your view on authority. As far as I know, the mods generally are fair. They aren't going to ban you for disagreeing. There is a reason. It's very similar to a job where some folks will naturally just listen while others will go, "OK, how do I appear good to my boss."

Mars · Jul 1, 2020

Odrion said:
The rise of discord, and off-forum meta community discussion. When the forum shattered, many communities went to discord, not just to coordinate but to safely discuss what is happening and what will happen to their community. And when Resetera was founded, many stayed on Discord. Communities now have more of their own agenda that is no longer intrinsically tied to the forum like they did on Neogaf. They can have meta discussions, gossip about drama, and discuss ways to post tactfully. This isn't inherently bad, but I think it does feed into a paranoia that a post is not just a post. That maybe a post is referencing something bigger and purposely destructive to your beliefs or your own community. Or that maybe you need to post that way in order to support your own community.

I can see where you're coming from with this. I don't really think they are detrimental but I do agree they are much more important than they were on the old site.

Zeno · Jul 1, 2020

Yerba_Sutra said:
Outside of the kind of shit you outlined in the rest of your post (I appreciate the mods' efforts to provide a welcome space), I really don't get why people take their bans so seriously tbh. Like, sometimes we get heated or we show our asses due to blind spots or wanting to stir the pot or whatever and the mods will decide we oughta take a breather. Think about where in that situation we erred or what we might be ignorant to. If you're sincere and you're learning anything from these bans you should be seeing few enough of them to ever get you a perm. Growing as a person is good! Giving a shit is kind of awesome!

When I moderated a forum, there were way too many people who took their 24-hour bans personally despite it mostly just being a sterner warning.

Aaronrules380 · Jul 1, 2020

Yerba_Sutra said:
Outside of the kind of shit you outlined in the rest of your post (I appreciate the mods' efforts to provide a welcome space), I really don't get why people take their bans so seriously tbh. Like, sometimes we get heated or we show our asses due to blind spots or wanting to stir the pot or whatever and the mods will decide we oughta take a breather. Think about where in that situation we erred or what we might be ignorant to. If you're sincere and you're learning anything from these bans you should be seeing few enough of them to ever get you a perm. Growing as a person is good! Giving a shit is kind of awesome!

yeah. Most bans are not permabans and it's not easy to get those. I was banned for around a month for something I said during a heated arguement. I regretted what I said and apologized even before I was banned. That said while I don't think the ban needed to be as long as it was, it wasn't a huge deal and I do think I deserved it. But while it really sucked during the time I was banned as someone who spends a lot of time here and had several topics I would have loved to be able to discuss with everyone during that time, it wasn't the end of the world, the ban period ended, and I'm not really any worse off for it in the long run

Mariolee · Jul 1, 2020

Zeno said:
When I moderated a forum, there were way too many people who took their 24-hour bans personally despite it mostly just being a sterner warning.

I think so much of it has to do with it being public, so it's "embarassing" to be reprimanded.

I wonder if there was a way to just ban people without making a notification they've been banned how that would go.

BLEEN · Jul 1, 2020

Read a few pages now:

If you're getting attacked here, and you're factually correct - also feel it in your gutheart — respect. Simply.

Hecht · Jul 1, 2020

eyeball_kid said:
Yeah, that's a hard question. Any time there's a power dynamic there's going to be some friction. I do personally miss the site feedback thread that used to exist. It felt like the community had a seat at the table which no longer exists. And the reason why I liked the idea of community voting is in a similar way it makes them feel more empowered about who is holding the handcuffs, and the process of candidate nominations itself gives a slightly better insight into who these people are what how they perceive the role.

The moderation staff is filled with people, just like you, who just want to really talk about games and the like. We want to take part in discussions the same as everyone.

Honestly, the only thing we ask is that if there is a problem you have, just let us know without assuming we are the scum of the earth. Personally I'm happy to answer any PMs I get, provided they don't start with "Hey, fuck you,"

night814 · Jul 1, 2020

Arc said:
I disagree that that is worth shitting up the forum every time she opens her mouth. I would argue it does more harm than good. Just make a "JK Rowling comments" thread instead.

Does it really shit up the forum to have a new thread about her though? Like I said it helps to inform people who don't see the other threads or don't go to the community thread/ot or other Harry Potter threads even if they may be fans of the series. Like I don't go to any of the community threads often even though I like a lot of the things that have threads there, I do go to etc though so having a new thread there when there's a new development gets my eyes on it.

Antrax said:
There are some swift diminishing returns on this though. When people create threads around another stupid tweet from an idiot (Trump, JKR, you name it), what they're basically doing in a lot of cases is bumping a thread they made yesterday about another stupid tweet. I don't know what the "rush" is or whatever from seeing your threads on the front page, but the endless flood of Star Wars threads (99% of which should've been locked immediately and sent to the Star Wars OT) really showed me how many people post things not for discussion but so they can get on the front page. It's not like that OT is even inactive. There are plenty of people there who will react to the 84th hot take about Rian Johnson.

That kind of implies that every new thread is being made in bad faith, I get that Star wars is touchy around here given people's opinions but I also don't think it's that hard to ignore them especially when you are finding them annoying. Report a thread if you don't think it's made in good faith and the mods will look into it. I feel like locking discussion of something to only it's OT isnt going to help discussion to be more positive or negative. And trust me I agree that there's been way too many Star wars threads at times, but I also find it to be very easily avoidable as most threads are marked as such.

subpar spatula · Jul 1, 2020

Mariolee said:
I think it has to do with it being public, so it's "embarassing" to be reprimanded.

This is 100% true. If you feel as if you are sort of known you will think to yourself, "OK, I was banned for X, now if the in future someone brings it up, how do I respond." and it becomes a pride / ego thing at that point.

Hecht · Jul 1, 2020

Zeno said:
When I moderated a forum, there were way too many people who took their 24-hour bans personally despite it mostly just being a sterner warning.

Yeah. I've deleted several accounts for people who simply received 1-day bans. So weird.

Mars · Jul 1, 2020

Regarding taking BANs personal. It's clear some folks don't like to be sat in a corner like a baby... on the Internet. Some people take it even worst than they really should because of the sometimes (sooommmeeetimes) vagueness surrounding it or simply because they are ...babies. Especially since they can't defend themselves on any front afterward. Haha.

But let's be real, there are occasional bans that are kind of bullshit and more of a person getting caught in crossfire. But it's rare.

Aaronrules380 · Jul 1, 2020

Mariolee said:
I think so much of it has to do with it being public, so it's "embarassing" to be reprimanded.

I wonder if there was a way to just ban people without making a notification they've been banned how that would go.

I think letting people know why specific users were banned though is important for transperency and for making a statement. I get why people might be embarrased, but honestly, those people should probably get over it and realize that most people won't remember specific instances of the exact post when someone got banned at all even a few days later. They're far more likely to remember the general circumstances that led to a ban than the exact post that's highlighted as the ban reason, so the mods not explicitly pointing it out to everyone wouldn't really help them

Deleted member 4494 · Jul 1, 2020

Aaronrules380 said:
This is an awful idea. If anything, I think it'd empower assholes who don't post much anyways because they have no stake in the community (many of whom abuse alts anyways and wouldn't be affected much), it ignores that certain conversations require extensive back and forth, and that different people have different amounts of time with which they can post on era anyways.

Honestly people who post a ton on this forum honestly don't tend to be the assholes, because they're the ones who despite having a high output, are not getting banned. Unless you think the moderation is giving them a free pass for some reason, somebody making a ton of posts and being here right now is someone who's making a ton of posts that the mods don't think are against the rules

It's probably less bad than you'd think.

I'd disagree with the assertion that conversations require as much back and forth as all of that. In the history of seeing back and forth 'conversations' on this forum and the last, most of those seem to devolve into name-calling and -- insofar as they are arguments -- come to an impasse. If the conversations actually go well, they're usually summed up reasonably quickly; turns out that genuine and normal people don't go picking fights all the time. There are still people, rare as they are, who can say "Sorry" or "I messed up" on this forum when called out, and that's really all that needs be said a lot of the time.

A limit is a limit. It sucks, until you realize just how much you're wasting your time engaging with certain people, and by not compiling your thoughts together. It's a lack of peoples' ability to imagine the best version of their argument, and defend it to a reasonable degree without the conversation itself spiraling.

And yes, people have limited time, but they can post when they can post.

I would say that there are people on this forum -- and I'm not going to point fingers at them, because I don't think they are bad people, quite the contrary in many cases -- who are more ... established when it comes to creating controversial topics, or being quick to frustration (reasonable, as it may be). And yes, I think some of these users, while not untouchable, are well-known enough if their respective sub-communities that it is quite a bit more difficult for the moderation team to moderate them. There are many people who post far, far more than they really need to, and who post tersely and without much consideration. Some of them overlap. Some do not.

If there were a limit -- which I realize, by the way, would not be a popular idea in the least -- people would gravitate towards writing better posts if for no other reason than they would have to. It would be a resource that you wouldn't want to waste, especially if you are a good actor. For people who would want to waste theirs on 3 lines, fine, but they would see how useless it ultimately is to express yourself that way.

Anyway, it doesn't matter since in practice this board would never enact these rules. But I do think it's hard to argue that it would incentivize better posting in the longer run, once people acclimated to the limit.

nekkid · Jul 1, 2020

Hecht said:
As an aside, what do you think would help bridge that divide between mods and users? While we try to involve ourselves in various communities and threads, that division always seems to persist (even amongst the mods we "promote" from within communities). I get the whole "us vs. 'management'" side of things - that happens in the real world as well, but there isn't really a simple solution there.

I, personally, tend to specifically seek out threads to post in that won't be hotspots, but I also seek out threads like this one where I feel I can communicate "directly" with people and address feedback. I'm aware there are users that don't like me (I mean c'mon, I just exude arrogance), but meh. :P

Just spitballing, but what about mods dropping the visible tag on each post unless they're making moderation-type comments or actions? Just to be seen as any other community member most of the time.

Hecht · Jul 1, 2020

Mars said:
Regarding taking BANs personal. It's clear some folks don't like to be sat in a corner like a baby... on the Internet. Some people take it even worst than they really should because of the sometimes (sooommmeeetimes) vagueness surrounding it or simply because they are ...babies.

But let's be real, there are occasional bans that are kind of bullshit and more of a person getting caught in crossfire. But it's rare.

I won't disagree. Things happen, and while we absolutely try to take context into account, if someone goes overboard we will end up doing something about them, even if they weren't the antagonist. I'm not really apologizing, per se, but I do get it. We just want people to report things before it gets out of hand.

Hecht · Jul 1, 2020

nekkid said:
Just spitballing, but what about mods dropping the visible tag on each post unless they're making moderation-type comments or actions? Just to be seen as any other community member most of the time.

We have debated that. Unfortunately the software doesn't really let us remove tags ad-hoc for individual posts.

BLEEN · Jul 1, 2020

Hecht said:
The moderation staff is filled with people, just like you, who just want to really talk about games and the like. We want to take part in discussions the same as everyone.

Honestly, the only thing we ask is that if there is a problem you have, just let us know without assuming we are the scum of the earth. Personally I'm happy to answer any PMs I get, provided they don't start with "Hey, fuck you,"

💯%
I've hit up staff, I think even Sir Hecht exactly recently-ish, and I got answers. Mostly happy with the upfrontal.

Pin this. 🧷

Edit* Was happy with the quick, professional, and thought-out response. It shows that staff is willing to not only hear – but listen, too.

HardTimesFamilyPride · Jul 1, 2020

subpar spatula said:
It's very similar to a job where some folks will naturally just listen while others will go, "OK, how do I appear good to my boss."

I am dealing with this now at my job, as well as people who habitually just "yes sir, thank you sir" as what I'm saying goes in one ear and out the other

Also on topic of bans I def have people there who get real petty if you ever call them out on anything

Dmax3901 · Jul 1, 2020

I personally hate all the posts that are like "do you know where you're posting" or "that's just Resetera man" that paint the entire forum with the same brush. Adds nothing to the conversation, is rarely accurate and often exacerbates the very problems they're decrying.

subpar spatula · Jul 1, 2020

It's weird how a thread about hostility has to turned into a discussion about hostility. I believe a learning moment for a lot of people is that it's not the mods or admins that are hostile. You have to accept that.

nekkid · Jul 1, 2020

Hecht said:
We have debated that. Unfortunately the software doesn't really let us remove tags ad-hoc for individual posts.

Could be that the tag is dropped altogether, then, maybe? The community has a list of mods if you need to contact someone, and we know it's possible for their moderation posts to be strongly highlighted already.

Aaronrules380 · Jul 1, 2020

Spoo said:
It's probably less bad than you'd think.

I'd disagree with the assertion that conversations require as much back and forth as all of that. In the history of seeing back and forth 'conversations' on this forum and the last, most of those seem to devolve into name-calling and -- insofar as they are arguments -- come to an impasse. If the conversations actually go well, they're usually summed up reasonably quickly; turns out that genuine and normal people don't go picking fights all the time. There are still people, rare as they are, who can say "Sorry" or "I messed up" on this forum when called out, and that's really all that needs be said a lot of the time.

A limit is a limit. It sucks, until you realize just how much you're wasting your time engaging with certain people, and by not compiling your thoughts together. It's a lack of peoples' ability to imagine the best version of their argument, and defend it to a reasonable degree without the conversation itself spiraling.

And yes, people have limited time, but they can post when they can post.

I would say that there are people on this forum -- and I'm not going to point fingers at them, because I don't think they are bad people, quite the contrary in many cases -- who are more ... established when it comes to creating controversial topics, or being quick to frustration (reasonable, as it may be). And yes, I think some of these users, while not untouchable, are well-known enough if their respective sub-communities that it is quite a bit more difficult for the moderation team to moderate them. There are many people who post far, far more than they really need to, and who post tersely and without much consideration. Some of them overlap. Some do not.

If there were a limit -- which I realize, by the way, would not be a popular idea in the least -- people would gravitate towards writing better posts if for no other reason than they would have to. It would be a resource that you wouldn't want to waste, especially if you are a good actor. For people who would want to waste theirs on 3 lines, fine, but they would see how useless it ultimately is to express yourself that way.

Anyway, it doesn't matter since in practice this board would never enact these rules. But I do think it's hard to argue that it would incentivize better posting in the longer run, once people acclimated to the limit.

You're right that it's a limit that good actors wouldn't want to waste. Which is the problem, bad actors would. Which would mean a far higher proportion of the posts you'd find on this forum would be coming from bad actors which hurts the entire community. And my point on limited time is that it hurts people who have more time when they can post, because they're constrained the most. People who only have an hour a day to post won't care at all about moderating their tone or making a long arguement because they have no reason to, they weren't going to hit the limit anyways.

Also, I hate this "not naming names" stuff in these contexts because it completely stifles discussion by being vague under the pretext of "respect". Have you reported any of these individuals? Or do you just assume you wouldn't be heard? It's dumb because it makes the subject of an arguement a vague nonentity to which anyone can attribute any qualities they want which makes judging the fairness of any assessment impossible

astro · Jul 1, 2020

TheIdiot said:
I believed it was overall unfair because while there were definitely a fair amount of people conveniently misinterpreting the OP, there was still an interesting and nuanced discussion taking place, and there was no hostility present in the thread.

You're being very unfair by ignoring the fact those posts were frequent enough to warrant that response, honestly.

Antrax · Jul 1, 2020

Hecht said:
As an aside, what do you think would help bridge that divide between mods and users? While we try to involve ourselves in various communities and threads, that division always seems to persist (even amongst the mods we "promote" from within communities). I get the whole "us vs. 'management'" side of things - that happens in the real world as well, but there isn't really a simple solution there.

I, personally, tend to specifically seek out threads to post in that won't be hotspots, but I also seek out threads like this one where I feel I can communicate "directly" with people and address feedback. I'm aware there are users that don't like me (I mean c'mon, I just exude arrogance), but meh. :P

I'm not in every community ever obviously, so take it with a grain of salt, but I've never seen things change around one of these promotions. Not that they shouldn't happen, I think they're a good step 1. But I haven't seen a step 2.

night814 said:
That kind of implies that every new thread is being made in bad faith, I get that Star wars is touchy around here given people's opinions but I also don't think it's that hard to ignore them especially when you are finding them annoying. Report a thread if you don't think it's made in good faith and the mods will look into it. I feel like locking discussion of something to only it's OT isnt going to help discussion to be more positive or negative. And trust me I agree that there's been way too many Star wars threads at times, but I also find it to be very easily avoidable as most threads are marked as such.

Saying they're in bad faith is a bit strong. I just think the bar for a thread should be a bit higher than "Hi, I'm OP here to talk about my personal opinion on Rey's last name." If stuff like that isn't for the Star Wars OT, then there's really no reason to have OTs at all for anything. The point is to aggregate. The front page only shows so many threads, and for awhile there, it felt like half of them were random people's opinions on a Star War. It's one thing if there's some, like, news associated with it (X cast member involved in Y, X films have been greenlit, etc...). But it seems very self-centered to me when people decide that their personal opinion on it demands its own thread for some reason. Like I said, there's already a thread for that.

I shudder to think what the next thing will be that spawns a million hot take threads. Maybe the next Matrix or something.

Hecht · Jul 1, 2020

nekkid said:
Could be that the tag is dropped altogether, then, maybe? The community has a list of mods if you need to contact someone, and we know it's possible for their moderation posts to be strongly highlighted already.

Ehhhhh...not a terrible idea, but I think the tags are useful overall for staff interactions vs the lack thereof. I know it's not going to be a simple request to ask users to essentially accept us as "one of their own," but I think the tags are largely useful.

SimonSimon · Jul 1, 2020

Antrax said:
I shudder to think what the next thing will be that spawns a million hot take threads. Maybe the next Matrix or something.

The Snyder Cut.

Hecht · Jul 1, 2020

Antrax said:
I'm not in every community ever obviously, so take it with a grain of salt, but I've never seen things change around one of these promotions. Not that they shouldn't happen, I think they're a good step 1. But I haven't seen a step 2.

I know of at least 4 off of the top of my head that have happened, but I'm probably forgetting some. What do you mean by "step 2?"

Aaronrules380 · Jul 1, 2020

Antrax said:
I'm not in every community ever obviously, so take it with a grain of salt, but I've never seen things change around one of these promotions. Not that they shouldn't happen, I think they're a good step 1. But I haven't seen a step 2.

Saying they're in bad faith is a bit strong. I just think the bar for a thread should be a bit higher than "Hi, I'm OP here to talk about my personal opinion on Rey's last name." If stuff like that isn't for the Star Wars OT, then there's really no reason to have OTs at all for anything. The point is to aggregate. The front page only shows so many threads, and for awhile there, it felt like half of them were random people's opinions on a Star War. It's one thing if there's some, like, news associated with it (X cast member involved in Y, X films have been greenlit, etc...). But it seems very self-centered to me when people decide that their personal opinion on it demands its own thread for some reason. Like I said, there's already a thread for that.

I shudder to think what the next thing will be that spawns a million hot take threads. Maybe the next Matrix or something.

I don't really agree, because I think one of the strengths of individual threads on some of these topics is to allow for nuanced and indepth discussion on a specific topic within a greater whole that might be hard to do in an OT where there are so many people talking about so many different things that tracking the conversation on a particular topic would be hard. And when ongoing discussions do start in an OT, it can be hard for new ones to happen because they get drowned out by the current topic a lot of the time

Also, I'd like to point out that for threads to stay on the front page, people need to be actively engaged. Especially since this forum moves very fast and inactive threads get pushed off the front page quickly. Now you might have a point if it was just the same two people bouncing back and forth for hours, but I don't really feel like that's the case that often. If multiple threads on a topic are constantly on the front page of the forum for a time, it's because people are interested in those discussions. Which is why I'd argue the one being self centered is the one acting like these discussions should be hampered because they can't be assed to ignore the stuff they aren't interested and maybe go to the second or third page of the forum to find stuff they care more about.

Like if you're only interested in new topics that are directly about some type of news and not more general discussion, plenty of news blogs exist for both gaming and other topics that would better serve your needs

Poodlestrike · Jul 1, 2020

SimonSimon said:
The Snyder Cut.

I've got plans to be sick the week that starts dropping.

Hecht · Jul 1, 2020

BLEEN said:
💯%
I've hit up staff, I think even Sir Hecht exactly recently-ish, and I got answers. Mostly happy with the upfrontal.

Pin this. 🧷

crap, I meant to ignore that PM

eyeball_kid · Jul 1, 2020

subpar spatula said:
It's weird how a thread about hostility has to turned into a discussion about hostility. I believe a learning moment for a lot of people is that it's not the mods or admins that are hostile. You have to accept that.

I haven't seen anyone saying the mods are hostile. I think they are overworked, and sometimes get things wrong, but that's a function of the amount of shit they have to deal with every day. I think the tone of the site has been somewhat hostile for sure, and that makes people a bit defensive and tense, and that tension washes over everything including how the people with the "power" are viewed.

Deleted member 4494 · Jul 1, 2020

Aaronrules380 said:
You're right that it's a limit that good actors wouldn't want to waste. Which is the problem, bad actors would. Which would mean a far higher proportion of the posts you'd find on this forum would be coming from bad actors which hurts the entire community. And my point on limited time is that it hurts people who have more time when they can post, because they're constrained the most. People who only have an hour a day to post won't care at all about moderating their tone or making a long arguement because they have no reason to, they weren't going to hit the limit anyways.

Also, I hate this "not naming names" stuff in these contexts because it completely stifles discussion by being vague under the pretext of "respect". Have you reported any of these individuals? Or do you just assume you wouldn't be heard? It's dumb because it makes the subject of an arguement a vague nonentity to which anyone can attribute any qualities they want which makes judging the fairness of any assessment impossible

In reality, you'd probably see about the same amount of posts per day by the same people, they would just likely have more coherency and density thanks to the perceived limit. In a worst case scenario, if you are a bad actor, you'd produce 5 bad posts per day. That's probably not that bad, honestly, since it's not as if moderation goes away suddenly just because people are being more careful with their posts. I suspect if you are truly a bad actor, you're not going to just stop after your first 5 shit posts, so in some of those extreme cases you may actually find you curb some of these peoples' output. I accept that you don't see it that way, though; and I could very well be wrong in my assumption. It may not be a bad idea to *try* for a few weeks though, if people were game.

I don't want to name names because 1) I don't think these people are bad people, 2) I don't think it is in the service of the thread, per se, to name or shame anyone for, well, essentially being pillars in the community and generally well-liked, 3) I think a lot of people already *know* who these people would be, and 4) I think the moderation community absolutely knows who they are, because it's their business in the first place. It's literally bike-shedding. Maybe it was a mistake to mention it, but if you've been around since the days of the other place (and I think you have? I think I recognize your name), you know well that despite the best of intentions there will always be political machinations at play when dealing with certain community members. It's a tale as old as time, I'm a nobody, and it's red herring for the most part *anyway*.

Also, by the way, we haven't mentioned one thing that I do think is important: I wouldn't support a limitation on PMs or anything. I think more people should be encouraged to PM each other on the forum and continue conversations which interest them but may not be of the interest of the thread. It is also the case that, I think, many disagreements can come to better conclusions through PM where the interest isn't first and foremost in the public spectacle of it all.

Deleted member 42055 · Jul 1, 2020

Poodlestrike said:
I've got plans to be sick the week that starts dropping.

I will ignore more threads than ever before lol

Hecht · Jul 1, 2020

Poodlestrike said:
I've got plans to be sick the week that starts dropping.

Ditto. I'm just happy it's coming out so that I never have to hear about it again :P

Vern · Jul 1, 2020

Hecht said:
As an aside, what do you think would help bridge that divide between mods and users? While we try to involve ourselves in various communities and threads, that division always seems to persist (even amongst the mods we "promote" from within communities). I get the whole "us vs. 'management'" side of things - that happens in the real world as well, but there isn't really a simple solution there.

I, personally, tend to specifically seek out threads to post in that won't be hotspots, but I also seek out threads like this one where I feel I can communicate "directly" with people and address feedback. I'm aware there are users that don't like me (I mean c'mon, I just exude arrogance), but meh. :P

Why is there a divide between mods and users?

I can't count the number of times I've seen posts like "I reached out to mods and they never got back to me, so I'm posting this here." I know from my experience when contacting staff I've got I think one reply out of 6 emails? I get that you are all busy and volunteers, but might as well just eliminate the contact us button if it's not gonna be used by you guys.

Also more transparency? I got banned for one month, then when my ban was up, I logged in and got a notice that my ban had been increased a ridiculous amount of time, after further review. Why are mods readjudicating bans after a month? Is it a different mod? Same mod that gave the ban? I don't need to know which mod gave which ban, I get that people are assholes and might dox someone or take it personally and hold a grudge, or some other nonsense. But there must be some kind of happy medium that increases transparency in moderation. Honestly I think better communication would do that, and that goes back to the first paragraph in my post. Staff needs to reply when contacted.

Finally, I think ban messages should be tied to specific rules. We have a list of rules, cite the rule violated when posting the ban message. There have been plenty of bans in which, yea, I get why the person is banned, but the message is vague. Make it specific so that you can actually defend the ban.

We need to be more positive and less hostile as a forum

Too damn tired

The Eggplant Queen

Self-requested ban

User requested account closure

terminus est

Too damn tired

Too damn tired

Too damn tired

Refuses to Wash his Ass

Too damn tired

One Winged Slayer

Refuses to Wash his Ass

Too damn tired

Too damn tired

Too damn tired

Refuses to Wash his Ass

Too damn tired

Alt Account

Too damn tired

Smooth vs. Crunchy

Too damn tired

User requested account closure

Too damn tired