Does the GDB need an outlet for off-topic comments?

[SuchDragonWow]

The poll options speak for themselves.  I voted for le box.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=57I4MTuxh54

[Thunkkin]

But what would we even call such a thread?

[RogueGunslinger]

Nonspecific Zalanthas Opinions?

[TheWanderer]

Words and Thoughts Vaguely or Intensely Related to Armageddon/World/Conversation Thread.

[Refugee]

It's not something I care about, but...isn't that what the Non-Armageddon Discussion forum is for?

[BadSkeelz]

Chaotic Armageddon Thoughts thread.

[SuchDragonWow]

It's not something I care about, but...isn't that what the Non-Armageddon Discussion forum is for?

Are you advocating a new thread be started in the Non-Arm sub every time someone wants to make a one-off remark that isn't on topic?  Because I can put that option in the poll ...

[Delirium]

Fun fact, Non-Armageddon Discussion was changed to that name some time ago from "OOC Discussion" or something similar to that.

Personally I think limiting Non-Armageddon Discussion to strictly non-armageddon topics is going too far along the letter rather than the spirit of the rule.

My hesitation on the chat box is that as a moderator, it sounds like it would be a nightmare to monitor.

The RAT thread was definitely a needy child as well, but it was one known thread, so it was a central place we could keep an eye on, since people will always be people and as a result threads will always end up needing to get moderated or at least have some warnings doled out. So I don't feel like it made things worse or better to get rid of it.

I'm not okay with getting too draconic about staying strictly on topic, but there's a line between conversational deviations and passive-aggressive flaming or trolling.

I do think that a lot of times people fail to give mods the benefit of the doubt when they do have to crack down on a thread.

[Patuk]

Huh, looks like Akaramu managed to drag someone into Armageddon. Nice.

[Majikal]

Just here to boost post count.
+1

[SuchDragonWow]

I'm not okay with getting too draconic about staying strictly on topic, but there's a line between conversational deviations and passive-aggressive flaming or trolling.

In a perfect world, people would simply be nice to one another and there would never be tension or conflict.  When the answer is to punish the group for the misgivings of one or the few, then I feel we've gone the draconian route.  I don't feel like this community needs a mother hen so much as a tap on the shoulder.

[evilcabbage]

if people would be nice and stop being dicks, we could have a nice rat thread.

rat as in random, not rat as in squeakum.

[nauta]

I think the rules to the forum should just get posted when someone makes an oopsies and violates them.  They're pretty explicit.  Especially #2 is one that a lot of new posters don't realize is a rule.  

One common offender is vague posting which falls somewhere between #1 (flame, baiting, trolling) and #2 (IC information).  Maybe some verbiage on that.

This board is for general discussion of Armageddon MUD. No flames, no IC-sensitive information.

1. Please don't flame. While you can criticize the opinions of other people, do so with respect for them as a fellow human.  Unnecessary, flaming, baiting and trolling will be removed and the instigator and respondees may have their posting privileges revoked.  This rule extends to criticism and baiting of staff. If you have a complaint against a staff member please place a complaint via the request tool, complaints and flaming of staff on the boards will not be tolerated.

2. Do NOT post information that is IC-sensitive. While debates over definitions of this term have raged in the past on the discussion boards, one fact has emerged: some people really prefer to experience things in the game, rather than inadvertently have the experience spoiled for them from reading this board. Therefore, when asking yourself whether or not what you're posting is too IC-sensitive, err on the side of caution.

3. We reserve the right to edit or delete any post or thread.

4. If you are abusing the PM privilege, your ability to send PMs will be removed. Attempts to get around such a removal by creating alternate accounts will result in the banning of your game account. Abuse includes persistent flaming, trolling, or harassing other players. If you feel you are being harassed and have already politely requested the harasser stop, please forward a copy of your request along with PMs received after the request was made and received to the mud account to be dealt with. Attempts to provoke other players into such a situation so you can request that they be banned will be treated as trolling.

5. Deliberately derailing a thread (posting nonsense, disrupting the topic etc) will be treated as trolling.  Idle commentary and discussion that is off topic belongs in the OOC topic forum.

http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,28823.msg308728.html#msg308728

ETA: I also noticed that RAT got locked during a time when (I assume) we had a low helper/player moderator count, since a call was put out a few weeks afterwards for more helpers.  I'd imagine the workload of monitoring RAT is high.

[valeria]

I really don't mind posts that meander around a topic, and I wouldn't mind an off-topic area on the GDB. I would mind a chat box though. Keeping it civil under rule 1 would be a nightmare.

Q.E.D. RAT, which turned into was a bunch of people being passive-aggressive or downright aggressive dicks to each other. Because you're not in the moderatorsphere, you probably don't have a realistic idea of how much of an issue it was because the posts got moderated out under the flaming/trolling rule, but the sheer number of complaints RAT generated and amount of moderation it required (and we're talking multiple complaint emails a day toward the end) made it a problem child. Since that's about how I picture a chat box would look, I'm opposed.

For some reason, "While you can criticize the opinions of other people, do so with respect for them as a fellow human" is very difficult rule for people to follow. And yes, we really should just punish the offenders. Ideally, if we could implement a system of swift and sure correction, a chat box or RAT resurrection would probably work fine.

But GDB bans are neither swift nor sure. Just because something gets moderated doesn't mean there's a ban attached. In my experience, some people seem to look at it as a yellow flag to keep doing what they're doing and skating over the line. Most of the time there is no consequence at all because staff are too busy to talk to everyone that really should know how to behave civilly already but don't (which is why we ended up with player mods in the first place).

Anyway, that's just my take on it. People seem to feel that because it's an anonymous Internet game they have the right to be dicks. We could probably get into the psychology of why that is, but the bottom line is that unlike other Internet game forums, we're trying to maintain some standards here. I think having a chat box would make that much more difficult to do.

[SuchDragonWow]

People seem to feel that because it's an anonymous Internet game they have the right to be dicks.

Would you cite that as the reason for locking the Confessional thread?  Because I'm not seeing it, to be honest.  I see some joking around, but nothing all that hostile or hurtful.

... the bottom line is that unlike other Internet game forums, we're trying to maintain some standards here.

It's okay to have standards and want to hold this community to a higher caliber of discussion, but I think it's equally important to remember that this is a game, and when you suck all the fun out of the air, you're breeding an atmosphere to take this shit all too seriously.

Look at what happened when you isolated a handful of people, and you suddenly had an entire forum where people felt they could speak their mind freely and comfortably horse around.  Like it or not, but we drove them to that.  Last I checked, it's just the crazies over there, now, but that's always subject to the whims of the playerbase.

[Drayab]

I like the GDB to be a place for civil debate and exchange of ideas, but I don't think there is anything wrong with a little joking around so long as people treat each other with respect. If players have demonstrated collectively that we can't be trusted, then I'm fine with keeping discussion strictly on-topic.

[Large Hero]

Would you cite that as the reason for locking the Confessional thread?  Because I'm not seeing it, to be honest.  I see some joking around, but nothing all that hostile or hurtful.

It's okay to have standards and want to hold this community to a higher caliber of discussion, but I think it's equally important to remember that this is a game, and when you suck all the fun out of the air, you're breeding an atmosphere to take this shit all too seriously.

Look at what happened when you isolated a handful of people, and you suddenly had an entire forum where people felt they could speak their mind freely and comfortably horse around.  Like it or not, but we drove them to that.  Last I checked, it's just the crazies over there, now, but that's always subject to the whims of the playerbase.

I think an important part of Valeria's point was that we don't see a lot of the worst posts because they're swiftly moderated away.

I know I've caught eye of a few containing stuff I wouldn't yell at a Peruvian Pudge.

So, some threads that seem tame to us may be already heavily moderated. And it's those moderated posts that get a thread locked and which waste people's time.

[SuchDragonWow]

So, some threads that seem tame to us may be already heavily moderated. And it's those moderated posts that get a thread locked and which waste people's time.

Fair enough.  Ban those idiots.   

[Drayab]

I agree with the sentiment, but I think Valeria's point was that it was becoming burdensome to do it right, so the powers-that-be decided it was better to not do it at all: time better spent elsewhere and all that. I can see that point of view, too.

I don't think that just because we don't have a RAT thread that we can't still have a nice community.

[Armaddict]

Eh.  Sometimes people are overly sensitive, as well, and read total aggression out of what is actually just an assertive post of disagreement with points brought up.

It's hard to tell someone that their post is actually irrelevant to what you were discussing without coming across as a dick; you have to go back and re-edit often to make sure you're not essentially telling them to buzz off, and that's when posting becomes tiresome and hard to do.  If you're in strong disagreement, someone -always- feels under attack because you're pointing out why their ideas are bad ones, or ones that you don't think apply.  In more impassioned conversations, that line gets crossed all the time, even though there is not so much ill will as 'I find your idea appallingly bad.'

At some point, we hit a point of over-moderation rather than people just being able to ignore bad posts.  I post bad posts sometimes; sometimes other people post bad posts.  They happen.  Not every one of them needs to be thought of as a 'Damn, I need to moderate, this is a neverending process.'  One very serious requirement of a peaceful community is everyone maintaining some thick skin.  You can't have a peaceful community if everyone is always ready to jump on everything perceived as an attack.


Soooo....I don't think there's a problem with the RAT thread.  I don't particularly need it, but I think the idea that it had to be this carefully maintained, moderated-to-be-friendly place was part of the problem.  It's random thoughts.  If someone doesn't like how something is in the game, let them post their random little rant and be done with it.  If it explodes, make it a more serious discussion.  If not, let it fade away.

[Vwest]

The pretensions here are hilarious.

Just re-make the RAT thread and let people have some fun.

[Drayab]

If new players come here and the top thread is a cesspool of villany, it's going to turn off new players which are the lifeblood of the game. The argument for a well-moderated forum isn't just to protect people's thin skins. It's to make it a welcoming place to new players.

[Armaddict]

If new players come here and the top thread is a cesspool of villany, it's going to turn off new players which are the lifeblood of the game. The argument for a well-moderated forum isn't just to protect people's thin skins. It's to make it a welcoming place to new players.

If you're insinuating that the on-topic threads are somehow more friendly since the removal of RAT, I'd encourage you to reread some of the more recent threads made by less-well-known GDB identities.  The 'bad posts' are just as numerous in them, and the moderation still occurs.  They are just as prominent to a new player since they are current discussion.  Thus, it's kind of a moot point.

[SuchDragonWow]

If new players come here and the top thread is a cesspool of villany, it's going to turn off new players which are the lifeblood of the game. The argument for a well-moderated forum isn't just to protect people's thin skins. It's to make it a welcoming place to new players.

You're assuming two things:

1) All new players are uptight stiffs with a stuffy attitude towards conversation.  I think even Ned Flanders has more flexibility in communication than the presumed "new player" model of someone who would quit a game over a few internet jabs.

2) Your average GDB posters comprise a cesspool of villainy.  No need to elaborate on this one.  Just:  Really?

[BadSkeelz]

lol cesspool of villainy? Really? At worst the RAT would get an occasional vague butthurt post that, if it garnered any attention at all, was as like to be people refuting the point as supporting it. Even the episode that got it locked was someone being down on a clan, and then being called out on how wrong they were.

I'd argue that a forum containing a bunch of threads about why X sucks is probably more unwelcoming.

[Large Hero]

lol cesspool of villainy? Really? At worst the RAT would get an occasional vague butthurt post that, if it garnered any attention at all, was as like to be people refuting the point as supporting it. Even the episode that got it locked was someone being down on a clan, and then being called out on how wrong they were.

I'd argue that a forum containing a bunch of threads about why X sucks is probably more unwelcoming.

I'm pretty sure what got it locked was obvious flame posts that were moderated out, not vague jabs or whatever

[BadSkeelz]

Oh, right. Still, that was a pretty weak flame all things considered (though it got the appropriate punishment).

[Majikal]

Re-title this thread to: Does the game need the Random Armageddon Thoughts thread reopened?

I personally enjoyed random armagedddon thoughts, I could always click on it and usually see some new posts or type something up myself.

Is my life affected by RAT being locked? No. Is my enjoyment of the game affected by it being closed? No. Would I be sad if the entire gdb exploded and there was no place for anyone to post outside of clan boards/announcement threads/ask the staff. Nope. It would probably INCREASE my enjoyment of the game actually.

[Drayab]

Man, you guys must think I'm a real stiff, huh?  

I thought comparing RAT to /b/ was an obvious internet joke, but just goes to show how much gets lost in text.

[Armaddict]

I dunno what /b/ is.

[SuchDragonWow]

I thought comparing RAT to /b/ was an obvious internet joke, but just goes to show how much gets lost in text.

Why are you joking on the GDB, dude?   

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J5XRGrpiBjY

[Vwest]

We could just commandeer this thread for the purposes of RAT-like shitposting.

It's already going in that direction, really.

[Drayab]

Seriously. I apologize for my Ned Flanders-esque yet /b/ inspired joke that only made sense in my head.

[SuchDragonWow]

Seriously. I apologize for my Ned Flanders-esque yet /b/ inspired joke that only made sense in my head.

I can see you took my comments about your presumptuous post as a personal attack.  I assure you, I was addressing the assertions in your post, not your character as a person, to which I have no basis (or desire) to judge.

Edit for incorrect word usage.

[manonfire]

I can't tell if my utter apathy for maintaining "standards" vis-a-vis hyperactive thread-locking is a symptom of immaturity or the opposite.

I mean, what's the end-game for internet butthurt and passive-aggressive bullshit? Does it culminate in an apotheosis of hurt feelings, dogs and cats living together, and mass hysteria?

Or does it just.. fizzle out?

[Drayab]

Well, let's go back to where we left off, ignoring my bad joke.

1) All new players are uptight stiffs with a stuffy attitude towards conversation.  I think even Ned Flanders has more flexibility in communication than the presumed "new player" model of someone who would quit a game over a few internet jabs.

I don't know what to say to this other than we may have to just agree to disagree. People have different preferences as far as the type of online communities they want to be a part of, and I really can only speak for myself, but I feel very strongly about treating people that I don't know very well with the utmost politeness. When I don't get that from others, yes, I feel like it is rude. I guess it is just how I was raised. You guys can call me thin-skinned if you want to, and I will think you are rude for it? To me, it just seems like life is so much easier if people can just be polite and treat each other with respect.

I can't tell if my utter apathy for maintaining "standards" vis-a-vis hyperactive thread-locking is a symptom of immaturity or the opposite.

I mean, what's the end-game for internet butthurt and passive-aggressive bullshit? Does it culminate in an apotheosis of hurt feelings, dogs and cats living together, and mass hysteria?

Or does it just.. fizzle out?

Well, for people who don't feel like they fit in, they just go somewhere else. People want to be part of internet communities that hold to whatever standards they are comfortable with. Is this news to anybody? It's just human nature. It happens with the kinds of friends we have, it happens with the kind of workplace we're willing to put up with. Nobody wants to complicate their life with unnecessary bullshit.

[SuchDragonWow]

Well, let's go back to where we left off, ignoring my bad joke.

1) All new players are uptight stiffs with a stuffy attitude towards conversation.  I think even Ned Flanders has more flexibility in communication than the presumed "new player" model of someone who would quit a game over a few internet jabs.

I don't know what to say to this other than we may have to just agree to disagree. People have different preferences as far as the type of online communities they want to be a part of, and I really can only speak for myself, but I feel very strongly about treating people that I don't know very well with the utmost politeness. When I don't get that from others, yes, I feel like it is rude. I guess it is just how I was raised. You guys can call me thin-skinned if you want to, and I will think you are rude for it? To me, it just seems like life is so much easier if people can just be polite and treat each other with respect.

Regardless of your personal feelings on this subject, you're presuming that every new player (or even an influential portion of them) would be so offended by the RAT that they couldn't play the game.  I can't fathom this being true.  "Well, some guy didn't like another guy's opinion, and he gave him a rude response.  Better not play this game!"  I mean ...  Heh.

Yet, you're a Helper.  By all rights, I should trust that you have sound opinions about our new players because of your experiences with them.  Interesting, to say the least.

[Drayab]

You're overstating the kind of things I think would turn people away. I browsed RAT on rare occasions and yes, it was just fine. RAT was kept at an acceptable level because it was being constantly moderated. I don't know what was being moderated out; I can only wonder. It was apparently generating several complaints a day and become too burdensome to maintain that appearance of civility.

[SuchDragonWow]

Let me give you an example of what kinds of posts got moderated.  One time I was goofing off with Malken, and he said something or other, but in a jokingly childish manner, so I returned with "You're stupid.   "  That post got moderated, even though, in my opinion, it was obvious I was joking around with him.

Maybe it would've been better if I'd say "You're a stupidhead!"

[Asmoth]

I think Helpers sometimes get overzealous in the moderating of posts.  Almost like they fear that if you were serious with your stupid comment and it turned into a flaming exchange that they would be looked at funny for not ending it before it started.

I've been moderated for "baiting" which is basically just a catch all for saying "Anything that could potentially, even to the smallest degree, turn into an argument."

My whole issue with the moderation thing, is that people get moderated for doing the same thing that others do wily nily.  But this is a group of volunteers, a group of very vocal volunteers and they form cliques of players that make it okay for the goose but not the gander.

Should there be an outlet, yes, but all that will happen is eventually, someone will freak out like whatever helper closed the last one, and then we will have this conversation again in a few months.

[Vwest]

It was apparently generating several complaints a day and become too burdensome to maintain that appearance of civility.

That is all it is, too.

The appearance of civility.

[Drayab]

Let me give you an example of what kinds of posts got moderated.  One time I was goofing off with Malken, and he said something or other, but in a jokingly childish manner, so I returned with "You're stupid.   "  That post got moderated, even though, in my opinion, it was obvious I was joking around with him.

Maybe it would've been better if I'd say "You're a stupidhead!"

The smiley does help. From what you just told me, yeah, sounds fine to me, but I wasn't there and don't know if there is more to the story, so I'm reticent to support one side or the other. For example, maybe you got wrapped up in a whole pack of moderated posts? I don't know about your specific situation. But I do support the principle of keeping a moderated forum.

(I don't have moderating privileges)

[BadSkeelz]

I like gurth.

[Malken]

I've only posted once since the RAT got locked, the GDB is so dull now.

Not sure if it's a pro of keeping it random-free, since it also keeps it Malken-free  

And to me, it's the GDB/community that makes me want to play again. If the GDB is dull, my desire to play Arm again is null since I just assume that the game is in a dull period.

[SuchDragonWow]

Well, the skinny of the situation is this:  The staff hired moderators to lighten their workload, and those moderators have shown a willingness to interpret the (vaguely defined) GDB rules in their own fashion.  Their rationale for doing so?   "It was creating too much work for us."  Child, please.

If the answer is to sacrifice the quality of a product for the ease of its distribution, maybe we need to have more moderators.  I'm positive beyond the shadow of a doubt that a responsible forum moderator can be sussed out to dedicate themselves to moderating a thread like RAT.

[Armaddict]

You guys can call me thin-skinned if you want to, and I will think you are rude for it?

To clarify, I wasn't saying that anyone is particularly thin-skinned, just that the moderation under the pretense that everyone was thin-skinned was what was leading to the overmoderation and constant 'need' to moderate.  There may be a few thin-skinned people who were reporting left and right, or feeling it was their duty, but I think we are, even in heated debates, a pretty remarkably civil online community.  The -idea- that we were all too thin-skinned to deal with points that may have been worded poorly in our direction was more problematic to most people than our actual posts were.

If we want to be able to have free discussion, we have get used to the idea that people are going to say things we don't necessarily like at all, sometimes.

[Delirium]

To be clear, it wasn't a player-moderator decision to close the RAT down, nor were we involved in it at all, it was a staff decision.

From a player/GDBer standpoint I was initially annoyed, but honestly I don't really care either way now.

Other mods have made the point that RAT took up most of their attention, though I posit that we're moderating the same amount, just in different threads now.

So let's not start leaping to conclusions here.

[Drayab]

Well, the skinny of the situation is this:  The staff hired moderators to lighten their workload, and those moderators have shown a willingness to interpret the (vaguely defined) GDB rules in their own fashion.  Their rationale for doing so?   "It was creating too much work for us."  Child, please.

If the answer is to sacrifice the quality of a product for the ease of its distribution, maybe we need to have more moderators.  I'm positive beyond the shadow of a doubt that a responsible forum moderator can be sussed out to dedicate themselves to moderating a thread like RAT.

Hire more moderators so we can have a RAT thread? I'd support that.

You guys can call me thin-skinned if you want to, and I will think you are rude for it?

To clarify, I wasn't saying that anyone is particularly thin-skinned, just that the moderation under the pretense that everyone was thin-skinned was what was leading to the overmoderation and constant 'need' to moderate.  There may be a few thin-skinned people who were reporting left and right, or feeling it was their duty, but I think we are, even in heated debates, a pretty remarkably civil online community.  The -idea- that we were all too thin-skinned to deal with points that may have been worded poorly in our direction was more problematic to most people than our actual posts were.

If we want to be able to have free discussion, we have get used to the idea that people are going to say things we don't necessarily like at all, sometimes.

To an extent, I'm inclined to agree! I enjoy lively debate. I think criticism is good and integral to vetting ideas, but I prefer my criticism with a side-order of respect. I have zero interest in a conversation that devolves into name calling and the like. That's the kind of stuff that needs to be moderated to maintain a welcoming environment.

[SuchDragonWow]

Fair enough, Delirium.  I'm personally inclined to trust your opinion on a topic such as this, so I'll bear your comments in mind.

However, I think we either:

1)  Need an outlet for off-topic remarks that will occur in healthy, fun interactions.

or

2)  Need to chill out on the moderation front.

Barring some outstanding opinion to come, I think I've said all I want to say.

[Tuannon]

Frankly, the talk about Tuluk's current goings on and closure irritated me on TS3 earlier. But generally TS3 is a better forum for shit posting that the GDB, in my opinion.

[TheWanderer]

Sensitivity is needed. Oversensitivity? Probably not. I find myself rolling my eyes at the stuff helpers moderate/lock more often than I'd like to lately.

Without an outlet for idle-minded conversation on the GDB, you're just suggesting people take the chit-chat to places you have no control over.

[Refugee]

It's not something I care about, but...isn't that what the Non-Armageddon Discussion forum is for?

Are you advocating a new thread be started in the Non-Arm sub every time someone wants to make a one-off remark that isn't on topic?  Because I can put that option in the poll ...

I'm not advocating anything, I'm just asking, isn't that what we already have?  But apparently, from reading the rest of this thread, you meant reopening the RAT, which isn't how I took the title of the thread.

[SuchDragonWow]

Well, to answer your question, that isn't what we already have, and no, there's no real motive here for opening the RAT.  I wanted to know if my own thoughts were in line with the player base.  As I said in the OP, I voted for a chat box.

[Cowboy]

Disregard this post.  Too early.

[Harmless]

I wanna use teamspeak but i forgot to update my teamspeak again and again and then i say fuck it, I didn't really want to share that thought and I bet everyone's afk anyway, and I give up every time.

I'm gonna use the teamspeak now.

[ChibiTama]

There is a teamspeak? >>

[Patuk]

There is a teamspeak? >>

Yes, there is.