My question was serious.
I wasn't sure. I wiped my post because I thought it was sarcasm. Since it's not, here we go. Read only the bold if you want the tldr:
So they condemned the sexual harassment.
No. They just condemned 'abuse' in general. I'm not sure if that's in reference to the abuse of sexual harassment, the abuse of banning of a player speaking out their complaint (likely the reason this thread was started), the abuse of using staff information on another character or even something else. Maybe it's about the banning of anyone saying the S-name in Discord the immediate days after the allegations were made. It is an open apology that lets the reader fill-in-the-blank with whatever assumptions they read it with. Before a small amount of clarification was given and with the context of multiple staff stepping down at the same time, it could have been Shabago eating some player's baby (as far as I'm aware that didn't happen) or almost any other notion you can conceive.
A number of the posts here at the GDB in response stated that they have no idea what occurred. I personally had no idea what it was about when I first read it and had to look at the shadowboards to get context. There were a number of allegations, some more grievous than others.
I'm still not sure. The only clarifying information we have is from the second post ("..
long term, pervasive rudeness towards players"). That doesn't sound like sexual harassment to me. We'll likely never know what he meant because he has stepped down and never clarified. It could be one, any or all of the types of abuse I mentioned.
Do you have some extra information to be able to conclude it was about sexual harassment and not rude behavior in response to the submitted complaint?
The fourth paragraph, he asks for the players' feedback and further: "We are asking for your help by participating in good faith in that conversation."
This as others have noted elsewhere is cart before horse. I'd like to see that they're capable of making amends on their own volition. That would assure me they understand what happened, thought about it seriously and took actions to make amends without being provoked or instructed by others. This is very much one of the things that should not be in an apology.
It's "What do you think I should do?" not "Here's what I've done to mend the damage done."Unfortunately, that ship has sailed. Perhaps current staff could be transparent with their own thoughts on what changes they thought were necessary, as they were asked to make a list. I'd very much like to know that they are capable of responsibly handling this sort of issue in the future.
When it exploded, before a full investigation was able to be reasonably conducted, the staffer was no longer a staffer. No, not in the way everyone wanted to see, but Halaster ALSO apologized for that: "I was clearly wrong, and I apologize for that."
I don't think a full investigation was done. There hasn't been any statement they've were investigating or investigated it. Other than checking logs and asking the staff member for their response to the allegations, there isn't anything else that I can think of that they can investigate. That shouldn't take long and I believe we're still waiting.
Plus, I can't seem to find it now, but there was further acknowledgement that the whole lack of a Sexual Harassment policy is being addressed.
I hope that's the case. We're talking about changing a couple text files by adding a sentence or two, not an annual budget bill. I can't imagine there's a lot of partisanship politics bogging it down. Specifically what needs to be said and put into policy: "Sexual harassment of players is not acceptable in any part of our community and will be punished. This includes... This does not necessarily apply to characters, although... Don't be an obnoxious git. Also read help consent and help r."
It doesn't have to be precisely that. So far it's not said anywhere and hasn't been said anywhere to my knowledge. I'll take you at your word that you said you saw somewhere someone was intending to do that, but
they still need to do it. A week ago. This shouldn't be controversial. Even the new rules posted (
https://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,59147.0.html) have rules about not abusing game bugs, but nothing about harassment or even just following Discord guidelines (
https://discord.com/guidelines) which includes harassment. The reluctance to include the language, especially after recent events here is inexplicable. I give them the benefit of the doubt and consider it a small mistake.
The second post of that thread he provides transparency which has been demanded repeatedly. He gives it. Shal was on the chopping block before this thing exploded.
That's not clear.
They haven't given us a timeline of when request tool complaints were sent and when the conversations happened.
Halaster apologized for not being good enough in his steps! He wasn't brought on to manage an organization. Staff are brought on to drive stories, build, code, and be creative.
This might be my own personal confusion, but as I understand it,
Producer is the top of the hierarchy, responsible for managing the organization. I have never heard anything else. If Producers don't manage the organization, I'm confused as to who you think does.
This part of the thread is confused at best. It's starts like it's from one person, but ends with a 'we'. The reason for the delay makes no sense. A plurality most certainly didn't write the paragraphs before. Perhaps he delayed with the intent to cover the former staff member's identity, incorrectly finding it necessary to wait until he had a consensus of staff before disclosing. That's how I read it. I can't think of many reasons he needed to ask the staff he signed on if he was allowed to clarify an apology. I'm open to other interpretations on this curious contradiction.
----
I didn't quote everything you said because you did raise some points that I agree with or where a good job was done. They understood they needed to apologize and did try. They are making changes, but I have no idea into their thoughts behind why they are making them or what they think needs done to prevent this sort of thing happening again. The current model of (Player Feedback)->(Secret Staff Deliberation)->(Changes) isn't good. How about transparency? Responses or even ideas of their own? I haven't seen any staff member say "Here's some of my ideas, what do you guys think?" Instead, mum's the word and it feels like talking to a wall that may or may not be listening. It appears they are listening now, but
listening isn't the same as transparency.
This post is more negative than I'd have liked to post, but you did want to hear what needs to be heard. It's a critical look over what was said from a different perspective. Hopefully it helps you understand where I and perhaps other players are coming from.
