NS World Fair: All Aboard!

[Glen-Rhodes]

Guy, your post makes many great points. But at the end of the day, evidence needs to be presented. All of us understand the difficulty and privacy issues about making official complaints of harassment and other behavior.

Those issues don’t mean that dozens of forums and Discord servers should act based on characterizations of evidence given by a single admin or team. That is not a proper way to enact what are essentially game-wide bans. There’s no accountability or even the possibility of accountability. As soon as a mistake is made or somebody acts in bad faith, inter-region cooperation on these issues becomes much harder (and will possibly end altogether), because we can’t be sure that TRR or TNP or Euro or TSP admins are telling the unvarnished truth. And that applies both when an admin team says there’s enoug to issue a ban and when they say there isn’t enough.

[Big Bad Badger]

As soon as a mistake is made or somebody acts in bad faith, inter-region cooperation on these issues becomes much harder (and will possibly end altogether), because we can’t be sure that TRR or TNP or Euro or TSP admins are telling the unvarnished truth. And that applies both when an admin team says there’s enoug to issue a ban and when they say there isn’t enough.

I feel like you have hit the nail on the head. How can any region trust the findings of the TNP admin team as presently constructed? The apparent corruption by these two people has tarnished the region's reputation. Their unwillingness to act in good faith in giving the rationale for Imki's ban, while accusing her of harassment, puts a stain on their decision making ability.

[Guy]

Guy, your post makes many great points. But at the end of the day, evidence needs to be presented. All of us understand the difficulty and privacy issues about making official complaints of harassment and other behavior.

Those issues don’t mean that dozens of forums and Discord servers should act based on characterizations of evidence given by a single admin or team. That is not a proper way to enact what are essentially game-wide bans. There’s no accountability or even the possibility of accountability. As soon as a mistake is made or somebody acts in bad faith, inter-region cooperation on these issues becomes much harder (and will possibly end altogether), because we can’t be sure that TRR or TNP or Euro or TSP admins are telling the unvarnished truth. And that applies both when an admin team says there’s enoug to issue a ban and when they say there isn’t enough.

Evidence can only be shared when the complainant authorises it being shared. If an investigation was to commence in TRR, and a determination was made one way or another, no evidence would be shared with any other admin team if it was not authorised.

As I said in my post, admins teams of boards/servers whom have not been in receipt of that evidence may feel that they are unable to do anything. That outcome clearly has its downsides, but it’s better than evidence being shared in an unauthorised fashion. If that means that bans cannot be truly “game-wide”, then so be it.

Badger, your post jumps to various conclusions that are far from open for me on the facts that I know. Either you know a whole lot more about this than I do, in which case you should consider telling us what it is, or your post is unfounded. For starters, I do not believe that Eluvatar had ever accused Imki of harassment as part of this process. There was merely an administrative process that he was involved with - he was the decision-maker, and no decision that Imki had engaged in OOC impropriety was reached. Second, I have not seen anything to suggest that anyone had acted in bad faith.

[USS Monitor]

As soon as a mistake is made...

Mistakes are going to happen. It's not something that can ever be prevented entirely. I think too much of this conversation is people just saying they want mistakes not to happen. Well, sure, it'd be nice if mistakes didn't happen, but that's not practical.

[Glen-Rhodes]

As soon as a mistake is made...

Mistakes are going to happen. It's not something that can ever be prevented entirely. I think too much of this conversation is people just saying they want mistakes not to happen. Well, sure, it'd be nice if mistakes didn't happen, but that's not practical.

The thing about mistakes is that they do actual damage, and the way you’re supposed to address them is with acknowledgment, a full accounting of why the mistake happened, and how you’ll prevent them in the future. It’s impossible to fulfill all of that without sharing the evidence with relevant admins, because, again, we can’t actually know if we’re getting the whole untainted story.

At this point, all we can do is piece together different things people are saying, and make our best guess as to whether or not we can fully cooperate with TNP’s admin team in the future, with full faith that things are being done appropriately. The timeline of events has TNP’s admin team seeing something in the accusations to lend them a significant amount of credibility, and then ultimately saying that there was nothing really there all along. The rest of us who hold the responsibilities of keeping large communities safe are left in the dark about a) why they thought the accusations had credibility, and b) what made them reverse that original stance. We don’t know if the evidence was fake, if political pressure came into play, if the evidence was real and it’s being downplayed, etc. That all raises significant red flags that will impact how other regional admins deal with issues that originate from TNP’s admin team.

We just need a full accounting. I’m not saying that should be posted here for all to see. But it’s not unreasonable to ask that other GCR/large GP region admins get a solid debrief. And then we need to figure out a common way to work with this stuff in the future.

Evidence can only be shared when the complainant authorises it being shared. If an investigation was to commence in TRR, and a determination was made one way or another, no evidence would be shared with any other admin team if it was not authorised.

That’s true, but it’s also true that regions can’t just take somebody’s word. We’re dealing with very real dangerous behavior, sometimes to the point where I’m conflicted if real-world authorities should be called. As in the real world, there has to be a balance between protecting victims and ensuring the process is orderly, that false accusations aren’t acted upon, and that those of us responsible for taking action have faith that nothing improper is going on. Evidence is an important part of that. If somebody is unwilling to let the evidence be seen, then it’s not unreasonable that the regions denied that evidence will be reluctant to act. Again, it’s a balance, and expecting game-wide bans while denying access to the evidence backing those bans, isn’t balanced.

So if TRR has evidence of bad behavior, and won’t share it because the complainant doesn’t let them, and TSP refuses to take action without it... the problem becomes TSP admins being accused of protecting the bad players, not taking harassment seriously, etc. Replace those variables with any combination of regions. It’s not a sustainable way to deal with this. In most games, there’s one admin team dealing with everything that happens in the game. NationStates is a game made up of smaller games, spread across the internet, each with their own admin teams. That’s difficult to work with. If we’re serious about dealing with problematic players as a whole community, we have to be serious about sharing necessary information.

[Escade]

Guy, your post makes many great points. But at the end of the day, evidence needs to be presented. All of us understand the difficulty and privacy issues about making official complaints of harassment and other behavior.

Those issues don’t mean that dozens of forums and Discord servers should act based on characterizations of evidence given by a single admin or team. That is not a proper way to enact what are essentially game-wide bans. There’s no accountability or even the possibility of accountability. As soon as a mistake is made or somebody acts in bad faith, inter-region cooperation on these issues becomes much harder (and will possibly end altogether), because we can’t be sure that TRR or TNP or Euro or TSP admins are telling the unvarnished truth. And that applies both when an admin team says there’s enoug to issue a ban and when they say there isn’t enough.

Evidence can only be shared when the complainant authorises it being shared. If an investigation was to commence in TRR, and a determination was made one way or another, no evidence would be shared with any other admin team if it was not authorised.

As I said in my post, admins teams of boards/servers whom have not been in receipt of that evidence may feel that they are unable to do anything. That outcome clearly has its downsides, but it’s better than evidence being shared in an unauthorised fashion. If that means that bans cannot be truly “game-wide”, then so be it.

Badger, your post jumps to various conclusions that are far from open for me on the facts that I know. Either you know a whole lot more about this than I do, in which case you should consider telling us what it is, or your post is unfounded. For starters, I do not believe that Eluvatar had ever accused Imki of harassment as part of this process. There was merely an administrative process that he was involved with - he was the decision-maker, and no decision that Imki had engaged in OOC impropriety was reached. Second, I have not seen anything to suggest that anyone had acted in bad faith.

I'll agree that Guy has brought up many valid points, and I've edited my previous post on the matter as well. I cannot state that people acted out of bad faith although I still think bias may have influenced some standards. Admin making decisions that impact the well-being of not only their community but individuals does hold them to a higher standard. If you cannot provide evidence, even if in redacted form where names and personal details are crossed out or covered up, then you also cannot expect another team to follow your orders blindly.

There is also a difference between gossip and slander. "So and so is an airhead," can be gossip. "I have logs to prove that so and so is a horribly toxic stalker," is serious and requires a follow up of, "Show the logs, prove your case because then we have to take actions."

I'm suspicious of anyone in this thread trying to once again conflate the OOC and the IC. Let's not do that. Let's make a pact to not do that and keep those lines so clear and separate that there is no repeat of the past.

As soon as a mistake is made...

Mistakes are going to happen. It's not something that can ever be prevented entirely. I think too much of this conversation is people just saying they want mistakes not to happen. Well, sure, it'd be nice if mistakes didn't happen, but that's not practical.

I agree that mistakes happen and I agree that in this case players were vocal enough that the mistake did not turn into a sentence against any player. However, we can ask for better processes to make sure we aren't just repeating the same mistakes.

Europeia's investigation with Brunhilde was thorough and respected but they had gone through this process and tried to improve upon it over a period of time. Not all investigations of heinous natures work out. Victims delete evidence themselves and rarely do predators confess to their guilt. So there was a lot of hard work involved but also experience gained from past mistakes.

I believe the same is true for TNP or the admins from NSWF. I think everyone involved in the foreground or background has learned a lot of "What Not to Do's." Having respect for many of the players involved on many sides, as people, I am glad that some apologies were made and I hope that in the future we can work together to make less mistakes and do better.

[Jar Wattinree]

I don't think comparing Imki to Brunhilde is applicable in this case.

[Glen-Rhodes]

I spent over two hours speaking to the TNP admin team last night, trying to understand what happened, if they understood the mistakes that they made, and what is going to be done about it moving forward. It was an incredibly enlightening conversation and I must say that I believe the TNP administration is taking the issue with as high a level of seriousness that I've seen in any admin team.

What happened with Imki's preemptive ban from the NationStates World Fair was a mistake, as it occurred before the end of the investigation when all the evidence was thoroughly investigated. It caused a lot of public speculation that damaged Imki's reputation and put a huge strain on the NSWF Committee. However, based on what I learned from multiple sources, I understand why the decision was made. Everybody agrees that it was a mistake in hindsight, and I think it would be valuable for the collective of NS offsite admins to get together and create standard operating procedures for when it's appropriate to share preliminary findings on "OOC" misconduct.

TNP admins were in an ethically tough spot, as highlighted by QuietDad's post on their forums: "What if the forum admins didn't reach out, the complaint was legit and this person caused harm on the other forum? Would we still sleep ok?" Now knowing what the preliminary evidence was, I can see myself advocating for the same course of action, with that thought in mind. It wasn't nefarious or done with malice. There is nothing whatsoever pointing to that, aside from conspiracy theories based on which friendships people have held over the years.

The interim between the NSWF Committee banning Imki and the TNP Administration exonerating her (at least insofar as they said there was nothing warranting a ban) is a mystery to a lot of people. I think the time it's taken TNP Admins to be upfront and acknowledge the mistakes has been unacceptably long. In part, I think the regular flamethrowing happening on their forums, here, and Discord caused a siege mentality, which was very unhealthy for the whole situation. That's not a valid excuse for how long it's taking, but it is a cautionary tale about how players can turn the volume up to 11 and ultimately cause more problems that way. It also hasn't helped that what was an offsite administration-level mistake got injected with government-level politics. I thought we had all taken a stance that these issues shouldn't become politicized, but when regional governments and Gameplay politicos start coming together to apply political and social pressure, that is by definition politicization. Having highly-political actors inject themselves into the brouhaha and demand heads is never going to result in a reasoned response or fruitful debate about what to do moving forward. It's unhelpful and should stop immediately.

That being said, if the TNP Administration was more responsive and speedy, the tensions wouldn't be so high. Based on my conversation with them, they fully get that. Their own internal rules requiring consensus have caused delays, and I personally suggest they rethink those rules. But also, it's fair to say there has been foot-dragging, because this isn't a pleasant task to do on a free online game, with everyone throwing vitriol at each other. Those stress levels caused several people to take a step back from the game, and in some cases caused serious mental health issues. That is not okay. That is also not the sole fault of TNP Administrators. I've seen this game tear people down way too much.

It's my understanding that TNP will be releasing new policy changes and a "root cause analysis" (basically an autopsy report). I've seen some of the new policies, and as TSP's administrator I think they're fairly good and a lot more detailed than most other administration policies. The report they're writing will hopefully address why they made the decisions they did, acknowledging that some of it was very mistaken, and discussing changes going forward. I really implore everybody to give TNP a little more time to finalize these documents, before going back to calling for anybody's head.

Lastly, what this whole ordeal has revealed is that the ad hoc way offsite administrators have handled OOC misconduct complaints does not work all the time. I'm publicly calling upon us offsite administrators to get together and discuss how we can do better.

[Carolus Rex Francae]

Unfortunately for those who would like us to forget, we will not forget the misdeeds of The North Pacific here. There was a wrong committed against someone who was innocent due almost certainly to personal attacks, rather than mistakes of any sort, and the lack of apologies until very late, along lack of admission that it was a personal attack leads me to believe that no one in The North Pacific admin team is sorry for anything but that they're being called out for not actually addressing anything. But I'm a userite, so take my opinion on GCR politics lightly.

[King HEM]

// I am commenting here in my capacity as an OOC administrator for an offsite property associated with an NS region, not as head of government for any region //

I think we need to be careful about how far we go here.

Listen, I have come out and said numerous times that the process was handled very wrongly at the NSWF. Anybody on the TNP administrative team, particularly Eluvatar, knows exactly how I felt about that process. I think we are all in agreement? Where this discussion goes off the rails, however, is how viciously folks are trying to go after specific people and others, even sow doubt in the competence of the TNP administrative team. This is politicizing OOC administrating to a degree I hoped we would not go back to.

This isn't rocket science. The structural failure has already been found, and known, for months. The issue was that the NSWF organizers banned someone without insisting on seeing the evidence. That's it. That's the story. Going beyond that, trying to find out who said what to who and when and where, is just gossip and politics. If you're trying to find out what was in McM's soul when this whole thing started, we are never going to get there. I try to lean toward assuming the best of people when it comes to OOC matters, but you can all decide for yourself what you believe.

The intent of the NSWF organizers was good, and actually in line with everything we should recommend. They took the victim seriously, they gave the victim the benefit of the doubt, they acted proactively. And yes, when in doubt they erred toward defending someone who could possibly be the subject of harassment. That's all what we should be doing. The NSWF organizers erred in, as said before, not insisting on seeing the evidence. Again, that's the story.

I am posting here, primarily, to point out that someday, someone else is going to mess up by following the above criteria -- even when they insist on evidence. It's going to happen. And we have to prepare for it, so we don't make it into this months-long saga that undermines our ability to protect our communities. Yes, the NSWF organizers cocked up communication pretty bad, but the General Public hasn't handled this situation well at all. I worry very much that this kind of extended reaction is likely to make offsite platform administrators overcorrect and not take action in situations that they should.

I truly believe there is a real danger to what has happened here in terms of the authority of administrative action as being above OOC drama. By all means, ask questions. But some of the posts here have gone beyond that, and much more resemble gameplay feuds that honest inquiry (that doesn't mean everyone, or even most, but some).

Anyway, that's all I have to say.

[Carolus Rex Francae]

// I am commenting here in my capacity as an OOC administrator for an offsite property associated with an NS region, not as head of government for any region //

I think we need to be careful about how far we go here.

Listen, I have come out and said numerous times that the process was handled very wrongly at the NSWF. Anybody on the TNP administrative team, particularly Eluvatar, knows exactly how I felt about that process. I think we are all in agreement? Where this discussion goes off the rails, however, is how viciously folks are trying to go after specific people and others, even sow doubt in the competence of the TNP administrative team. This is politicizing OOC administrating to a degree I hoped we would not go back to.

This isn't rocket science. The structural failure has already been found, and known, for months. The issue was that the NSWF organizers banned someone without insisting on seeing the evidence. That's it. That's the story. Going beyond that, trying to find out who said what to who and when and where, is just gossip and politics. If you're trying to find out what was in McM's soul when this whole thing started, we are never going to get there. I try to lean toward assuming the best of people when it comes to OOC matters, but you can all decide for yourself what you believe.

The intent of the NSWF organizers was good, and actually in line with everything we should recommend. They took the victim seriously, they gave the victim the benefit of the doubt, they acted proactively. And yes, when in doubt they erred toward defending someone who could possibly be the subject of harassment. That's all what we should be doing. The NSWF organizers erred in, as said before, not insisting on seeing the evidence. Again, that's the story.

I am posting here, primarily, to point out that someday, someone else is going to mess up by following the above criteria -- even when they insist on evidence. It's going to happen. And we have to prepare for it, so we don't make it into this months-long saga that undermines our ability to protect our communities. Yes, the NSWF organizers cocked up communication pretty bad, but the General Public hasn't handled this situation well at all. I worry very much that this kind of extended reaction is likely to make offsite platform administrators overcorrect and not take action in situations that they should.

I truly believe there is a real danger to what has happened here in terms of the authority of administrative action as being above OOC drama. By all means, ask questions. But some of the posts here have gone beyond that, and much more resemble gameplay feuds that honest inquiry (that doesn't mean everyone, or even most, but some).

Anyway, that's all I have to say.

You're taking the blame away from the TNP admins just a bit, aren't you? And no, there's really no posts here that are at all about gameplay drama. There's posts about people being rightfully angry about people using their power to oppress someone else because of an OOC spat, but that's about all I see. The NSWF committee has been the most helpful part of the guilty parties, and the TNP admin team a wonderful combination of deceptive and powergrabbing. But isn't that what GP is about?

[McChimp]

even sow doubt in the competence of the TNP administrative team. This is politicizing OOC administrating to a degree I hoped we would not go back to.

I don't see why you're casting this as some great surprise. The TNP admin team made a public assertion that an innocent player was OOC guilty despite knowing that their investigation was incomplete and knowing that they had only inconclusive evidence to back it up. That is incompetence.

This isn't rocket science. The structural failure has already been found, and known, for months. The issue was that the NSWF organizers banned someone without insisting on seeing the evidence. That's it. That's the story. Going beyond that, trying to find out who said what to who and when and where, is just gossip and politics. If you're trying to find out what was in McM's soul when this whole thing started, we are never going to get there. I try to lean toward assuming the best of people when it comes to OOC matters, but you can all decide for yourself what you believe.

This is indeed a structural failure, though you do play it down in the next paragraph. What isn't rocket science is the idea that there is, alongside a responsibility to ask for evidence before acting, a responsibility for those prompting action to give it. Both the NSWF team and TNP's team are at fault here, TNP moreso because it was them making the accusation.

The intent of the NSWF organizers was good, and actually in line with everything we should recommend. They took the victim seriously, they gave the victim the benefit of the doubt, they acted proactively. And yes, when in doubt they erred toward defending someone who could possibly be the subject of harassment. That's all what we should be doing. The NSWF organizers erred in, as said before, not insisting on seeing the evidence. Again, that's the story.

No, that's not what we should be doing. Harassment is to be taken seriously and the only way to do this is to take accusations of it seriously. We cannot allow a culture that destroys somebody's reputation the moment somebody points their finger.

I truly believe there is a real danger to what has happened here in terms of the authority of administrative action as being above OOC drama.

You got that right, at least.

[Escade]

I spent over two hours speaking to the TNP admin team last night, trying to understand what happened, if they understood the mistakes that they made, and what is going to be done about it moving forward. It was an incredibly enlightening conversation and I must say that I believe the TNP administration is taking the issue with as high a level of seriousness that I've seen in any admin team.

What happened with Imki's preemptive ban from the NationStates World Fair was a mistake, as it occurred before the end of the investigation when all the evidence was thoroughly investigated. It caused a lot of public speculation that damaged Imki's reputation and put a huge strain on the NSWF Committee. However, based on what I learned from multiple sources, I understand why the decision was made. Everybody agrees that it was a mistake in hindsight, and I think it would be valuable for the collective of NS offsite admins to get together and create standard operating procedures for when it's appropriate to share preliminary findings on "OOC" misconduct.

TNP admins were in an ethically tough spot, as highlighted by QuietDad's post on their forums: "What if the forum admins didn't reach out, the complaint was legit and this person caused harm on the other forum? Would we still sleep ok?" Now knowing what the preliminary evidence was, I can see myself advocating for the same course of action, with that thought in mind. It wasn't nefarious or done with malice. There is nothing whatsoever pointing to that, aside from conspiracy theories based on which friendships people have held over the years.

The interim between the NSWF Committee banning Imki and the TNP Administration exonerating her (at least insofar as they said there was nothing warranting a ban) is a mystery to a lot of people. I think the time it's taken TNP Admins to be upfront and acknowledge the mistakes has been unacceptably long. In part, I think the regular flamethrowing happening on their forums, here, and Discord caused a siege mentality, which was very unhealthy for the whole situation. That's not a valid excuse for how long it's taking, but it is a cautionary tale about how players can turn the volume up to 11 and ultimately cause more problems that way. It also hasn't helped that what was an offsite administration-level mistake got injected with government-level politics. I thought we had all taken a stance that these issues shouldn't become politicized, but when regional governments and Gameplay politicos start coming together to apply political and social pressure, that is by definition politicization. Having highly-political actors inject themselves into the brouhaha and demand heads is never going to result in a reasoned response or fruitful debate about what to do moving forward. It's unhelpful and should stop immediately.

That being said, if the TNP Administration was more responsive and speedy, the tensions wouldn't be so high. Based on my conversation with them, they fully get that. Their own internal rules requiring consensus have caused delays, and I personally suggest they rethink those rules. But also, it's fair to say there has been foot-dragging, because this isn't a pleasant task to do on a free online game, with everyone throwing vitriol at each other. Those stress levels caused several people to take a step back from the game, and in some cases caused serious mental health issues. That is not okay. That is also not the sole fault of TNP Administrators. I've seen this game tear people down way too much.

It's my understanding that TNP will be releasing new policy changes and a "root cause analysis" (basically an autopsy report). I've seen some of the new policies, and as TSP's administrator I think they're fairly good and a lot more detailed than most other administration policies. The report they're writing will hopefully address why they made the decisions they did, acknowledging that some of it was very mistaken, and discussing changes going forward. I really implore everybody to give TNP a little more time to finalize these documents, before going back to calling for anybody's head.

Lastly, what this whole ordeal has revealed is that the ad hoc way offsite administrators have handled OOC misconduct complaints does not work all the time. I'm publicly calling upon us offsite administrators to get together and discuss how we can do better.

I'm glad that people are at least attempting communication and attempting to build an understanding of what happened. Then, I think this call for offsite administrators to work together is key here.

For a long time in NationStates, nothing was done about incidents until players like Xoriet demanded actions for players wrongdoing. None of us are perfect and if we play this game we definitely have a host of flaws. Working together to say," This is a really messy and hard to deal with situation, how can we make it better" would be ideal for the offsite admin especially those who can separate the IC and the OOC.

Unfortunately for those who would like us to forget, we will not forget the misdeeds of The North Pacific here. There was a wrong committed against someone who was innocent due almost certainly to personal attacks, rather than mistakes of any sort, and the lack of apologies until very late, along lack of admission that it was a personal attack leads me to believe that no one in The North Pacific admin team is sorry for anything but that they're being called out for not actually addressing anything. But I'm a userite, so take my opinion on GCR politics lightly.

Excuse you? The North Pacific is not a monolithic entity, or are you perhaps another of the bombastic and vitriol filled voices that recently (on their forums nonetheless) called the entire community toxic and members of it to be trash. That's what we don't need more of - that kind of despicable verbiage that assumes the worst of not only a whole community but also is ascribing intentions to players you don't allegedly know in any capacity and nor have you tried to talk to in a civil way to actually get any information from.

// I am commenting here in my capacity as an OOC administrator for an offsite property associated with an NS region, not as head of government for any region //

I think we need to be careful about how far we go here.

Listen, I have come out and said numerous times that the process was handled very wrongly at the NSWF. Anybody on the TNP administrative team, particularly Eluvatar, knows exactly how I felt about that process. I think we are all in agreement? Where this discussion goes off the rails, however, is how viciously folks are trying to go after specific people and others, even sow doubt in the competence of the TNP administrative team. This is politicizing OOC administrating to a degree I hoped we would not go back to.

This isn't rocket science. The structural failure has already been found, and known, for months. The issue was that the NSWF organizers banned someone without insisting on seeing the evidence. That's it. That's the story. Going beyond that, trying to find out who said what to who and when and where, is just gossip and politics. If you're trying to find out what was in McM's soul when this whole thing started, we are never going to get there. I try to lean toward assuming the best of people when it comes to OOC matters, but you can all decide for yourself what you believe.

The intent of the NSWF organizers was good, and actually in line with everything we should recommend. They took the victim seriously, they gave the victim the benefit of the doubt, they acted proactively. And yes, when in doubt they erred toward defending someone who could possibly be the subject of harassment. That's all what we should be doing. The NSWF organizers erred in, as said before, not insisting on seeing the evidence. Again, that's the story.

I am posting here, primarily, to point out that someday, someone else is going to mess up by following the above criteria -- even when they insist on evidence. It's going to happen. And we have to prepare for it, so we don't make it into this months-long saga that undermines our ability to protect our communities. Yes, the NSWF organizers cocked up communication pretty bad, but the General Public hasn't handled this situation well at all. I worry very much that this kind of extended reaction is likely to make offsite platform administrators overcorrect and not take action in situations that they should.

I truly believe there is a real danger to what has happened here in terms of the authority of administrative action as being above OOC drama. By all means, ask questions. But some of the posts here have gone beyond that, and much more resemble gameplay feuds that honest inquiry (that doesn't mean everyone, or even most, but some).

Anyway, that's all I have to say.

I completely agree that the line between administrative action and gameplay drama (which can descend into the depths of hell) needs to be clearly demarcated. Mob mentality and an eye and for an eye don't work when it comes to real life without tragic consequences.

~

All of the people involved are real people. We can justify treating each other badly for IC reasons although that itself is debatable and also should be within boundaries of civility.

We agree that Imki was wronged. That the NSWF and the TNP admin could have functioned better. The intent on their part from the various accounts seems to be that they all were trying to protect people. From what I know now, I do not think anyone on the admin teams acted with the intent to maliciously harm someone. Gossip, pre-emptive action without verifying and double checking all evidence and context, and inability to keep a lid on things seem the main critical problems here.

Everyone here is a human being. Beyond the people who need to be removed from the community for the safety of its members we are all HUMAN BEINGS. As much as possible, our reactions should be (rather than a vindictive trying to gouge each other's eyes out for some ridiculous reasons) HUMANE.

[Cormactopia Prime]

It's truly perplexing to see TSP and Europeia now leaping to TNP's defense, after months of the opposite. What changed?

[Carolus Rex Francae]

Excuse you? The North Pacific is not a monolithic entity, or are you perhaps another of the bombastic and vitriol filled voices that recently (on their forums nonetheless) called the entire community toxic and members of it to be trash. That's what we don't need more of - that kind of despicable verbiage that assumes the worst of not only a whole community but also is ascribing intentions to players you don't allegedly know in any capacity and nor have you tried to talk to to get any information from.

A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. The fact is, if this is how TNP's Admin team is addressing things, and the government's only response is "We don't control our admins", then it's as much of a problem as if the whole community were doing this to Imki, because a government that saw this as a problem would have called out its admin team. And if citizens of the North Pacific and the government of the North Pacific have both not called out their admins, I'm not sure the community is anything but toxic in this regard.

I completely agree that the line between administrative action and gameplay drama (which can descend into the depths of hell) needs to be clearly demarcated. Mob mentality and an eye and for an eye don't work when it comes to real life without tragic consequences.

~

All of the people involved are real people. We can justify treating each other badly for IC reasons although that itself is debatable and also should be within boundaries of civility.

We agree that Imki was wronged. That the NSWF and the TNP admin could have functioned better. The intent on their part from the various accounts seems to be that they all were trying to protect people. From what I know now, I do not think anyone on the admin teams acted with the intent to maliciously harm someone. Gossip, pre-emptive action without verifying and double checking all evidence and context, and inability to keep a lid on things seem the main critical problems here.

Everyone here is a human being. Beyond the people who need to be removed from the community for the safety of its members we are all HUMAN BEINGS. As much as possible, our reactions should be (rather than a vindictive trying to gouge each other's eyes out for some ridiculous reasons) HUMANE.

I'll give TNP the same treatment I gave Union of Confederate Regions. While TNP's case is less severe, both places exhibited a toxicity that goes beyond repair-ability. Toxicity has no place on NS, regardless of the actions that take place. I used to believe that fighting on the NS forums didn't solve any problems, but it's making the unicyclists in TNP backpedal awfully hard, so I was obviously wrong. No human has any inherent right to respect. They earn that from me by not pulling shit like this. TNP can have my respect back when they remove McM from the admin team. And before they say, "Our government is separate from our admin team," again, I'd like to ask all of you: What did people say when Grand Central and KoGB said that?

[Glen-Rhodes]

It's truly perplexing to see TSP and Europeia now leaping to TNP's defense, after months of the opposite. What changed?

To be quite honest, I don't think TSP's Cabinet (or at least Roavin and Tim, who were the only ones really involved until now, though not as "the official TSP Cabinet") really tried that hard to have a calm and adult conversation with TNP. I think a lot of people riled themselves up on conspiracies and assumptions, then started going hard attacking TNP, ensuring that they would never actually be able to have that calm and adult conservation that was needed.

[Cormactopia Prime]

It's truly perplexing to see TSP and Europeia now leaping to TNP's defense, after months of the opposite. What changed?

To be quite honest, I don't think TSP's Cabinet (or at least Roavin and Tim, who were the only ones really involved until now, though not as "the official TSP Cabinet") really tried that hard to have a calm and adult conversation with TNP. I think a lot of people riled themselves up on conspiracies and assumptions, then started going hard attacking TNP, ensuring that they would never actually be able to have that calm and adult conservation that was needed.

I think Roavin and Tim want(ed) the TNP administrators who are responsible for all of this to be held accountable, something you're insisting shouldn't happen for unclear reasons. Whether those admins' actions were malicious or not, they were reckless, and they should be held accountable for them.

In regard to only Roavin and Tim being involved, Roavin and Tim are, respectively, the TSP Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs. They're the only ones who should have been involved, and frankly your involvement has just muddied what was otherwise a refreshingly clear and correct response from TSP.

[Almonaster Nuevo]

The list of things that Almonaster Nuevo blames for how the NSWF Committee handled the situation:

Unreasonable expectations
Sabotage
The reaction to the forum skin that nobody had experience making/Europeia didn't help with
The Committee themselves
A very hostile atmosphere leading to a "siege mentality" within the committee
Having to give people "free speech"
Lack of expertise from a lecturer
Having to back off from asking a lecturer to modify their lecture
Committee members being worldwide
Bad timing
Tiredness
Rumors adding 'fuel to the flames', making the committee determined to keep the ban
Europeia "jumping in", giving the Committee another argument to deal with while they were "already stretched"

The actual list of things to blame for how the NSWF Committee handled the situation:

The Committee themselves

Bullshit.

I'm not interested in blame. You have clearly made up your mind on that.

The question I was responding to asked for details on how the situation arose. I tried to give a rundown on the internal process, including any factors which I thought were relevant. That's all.


As has now been revealed, only McM and Elu saw the evidence. We trusted them to have accurately reported to us the credibility and seriousness of what they had seen. When working as a team, it is normal to trust your colleagues. Sadly, it seems we were wrong to do so.

---

On a couple of other points which have arisen...

As far as I could tell, there was no overt "witch hunt" against Imki within the committee. (I had barely heard of her prior to the event.) Obviously I can't know the motivations behind what was said, but the actual discussion was not about who she was, but about the nature of the allegations, and whether a ban was necessary. If I had seen any signs of a personal agenda against her I would have been very reluctant to agree to a ban. Once again - it could have been there, but I really did not see the slightest sign.

"You should have followed protocol". - We did. The only protocol which was in place was that when a controversial decision had to be made the committee voted. With hindsight, we might have spent time cooking up protocols for various scenarios, but that would have been time not spent preparing for the fair. We are not an ongoing team with time to develop good practice, but a bunch of people who get together once a year to try and provide a fun event for NS. Outwith the fair, I very rarely talk to any of the others.


EDIT: borked tag.

[RiderSyl]

The list of things that Almonaster Nuevo blames for how the NSWF Committee handled the situation:

Unreasonable expectations
Sabotage
The reaction to the forum skin that nobody had experience making/Europeia didn't help with
The Committee themselves
A very hostile atmosphere leading to a "siege mentality" within the committee
Having to give people "free speech"
Lack of expertise from a lecturer
Having to back off from asking a lecturer to modify their lecture
Committee members being worldwide
Bad timing
Tiredness
Rumors adding 'fuel to the flames', making the committee determined to keep the ban
Europeia "jumping in", giving the Committee another argument to deal with while they were "already stretched"

The actual list of things to blame for how the NSWF Committee handled the situation:

The Committee themselves

Bullshit.

I'm not interested in blame. You have clearly made up your mind on that.

The question I was responding to asked for details on how the situation arose. I tried to give a rundown on the internal process, including any factors which I thought were relevant. That's all.

Well, when reading your rundown on the internal process, I had two choices of how to react to it in the end:

A: It's just a coincidence that all but one of these included relevant factors give the Committee sympathetic excuses, and make everyone else involved seem like some sort of affliction or stressor.
B: Almonaster Nuevo is spinning this

I would've given you the benefit of the doubt, but it felt like too much of an insult to my intelligence to buy into that big of a stretch.

[Glen-Rhodes]

To be quite honest, I don't think TSP's Cabinet (or at least Roavin and Tim, who were the only ones really involved until now, though not as "the official TSP Cabinet") really tried that hard to have a calm and adult conversation with TNP. I think a lot of people riled themselves up on conspiracies and assumptions, then started going hard attacking TNP, ensuring that they would never actually be able to have that calm and adult conservation that was needed.

I think Roavin and Tim want(ed) the TNP administrators who are responsible for all of this to be held accountable, something you're insisting shouldn't happen for unclear reasons. Whether those admins' actions were malicious or not, they were reckless, and they should be held accountable for them.

I happen to think it’s necessary to fully understand what happened before you can start demanding accountability, otherwise you don’t actually know what anybody should be held accountable for. If Eluvatar and McMasterdonia resigned in disgrace in January, at the behest of the mob mentality, then that’s all that would’ve happened. There would be no accountability for the actual core problems, which were not based around individual personalities but instead admin protocols.

My reasons for not supporting your guillotine calls are not unclear. I’ve explained several times to you directly that your basis for the demand is wrong. If you want more reasons, then read HEM’s post again, particularly the part where admins will end up making mistakes in the future following the perfect protocols. As somebody who has made so many mistakes yourself in this game, you should be a bit more willing to accept when people make good faith mistakes. Removing dedicated administrators for making a bad call when they were trying their best to deal with a difficult problem, isn’t an emotionally mature response. They’ve acknowledged their mistakes, very publicly even, and are working towards solutions. That’s what matters here.

In regard to only Roavin and Tim being involved, Roavin and Tim are, respectively, the TSP Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs. They're the only ones who should have been involved, and frankly your involvement has just muddied what was otherwise a refreshingly clear and correct response from TSP.

You can ask Roavin yourself, but I’m fairly confident he never acted in his official capacity as Prine Minister, and the government of TSP never took an official stance on this, as it’s an OOC administration issue.

[RiderSyl]

There would be no accountability for the actual core problems, which were not based around individual personalities but instead admin protocols.

Are you expressing your opinion on what the actual core problems were, or are you literally telling us what the actual core problems were from a position of (relatively) insider knowledge?

Genuinely asking.

[Zaolat]

The intent of the NSWF organizers was good, and actually in line with everything we should recommend. They took the victim seriously, they gave the victim the benefit of the doubt, they acted proactively. And yes, when in doubt they erred toward defending someone who could possibly be the subject of harassment. That's all what we should be doing. The NSWF organizers erred in, as said before, not insisting on seeing the evidence. Again, that's the story.

Look, I respect you HEM, and believe you've done pretty well in being fair and finding the truth. But, I'm not sure I can agree with the section quoted. First of all, this post will have nothing to do with what I personally think about TNP admins and NSWF staff's actions. What this reply is for is explaining why I don't agree with again the quoted section.

Back before, around 2016-17, we (being multiple regions and groups that I have or currently frequent) have dealt with OOC issues. Hell, maybe going back into 2015 too (that's not to say there haven't been any before those years though). Anyways, we kept hearing about such and such and just banned people in order to protect victims and the community/group. Turns out, that a few of these cases were total lies. Damn, that's awkward. Don't get me wrong though, most of them were backed by plenty evidence in the end and were goners.

Moral of the story, while we want to protect victims and our communities, acting without evidence or enough can have bad effects. Reputations get shot to hell IC and OOC, destroying trust, and inadvertent toxicity is created in the fallout.

The only thing I have any direct input into now, is the NSGP server of about 265-270 members, give or take. We either have to see someone in the server commit an act or we demand enough evidence to back up any claim. Mind you we also have 6 NS Moderators and 1 NS admin (and had 2 previous NS mods) in the server with full access to everything in it. I bring that up because I and the server staff want the server to be a safe space and we do have the NS mods observing us on top of that.

Now, on the otherhand, I do understand a few victims do not like to share what happened for privacy reasons outside a select few people they trust. This can be problematic. Do we, other admins of discord servers and regional forums and the regions themselves (except TRR) ban someone accused immediately? or do we not act without enough evidence?

In the case, the victim doesn't mind sharing, which do we do? Take other's words for it when we haven't seen the evidence or go straight to ban? What happens when we ruin someone who isn't guilty in the end? Do we just apologize and act like nothing happened after? Despite the huge negative effect that has happened on the cleared accused?

Do we not act immediately and it potentially causes more harm for the victim when the accused is actually guilty in the end?

I am not advocating either position here, even though I lean one way on it. Merely explaining experience and where that has taken me. I once was very trigger happy on those accused of scummy behaviour and I still am (but only if the evidence proves it). I think this issue has to be explored in answering those questions and finding a solution on that. Food for thought.

[Almonaster Nuevo]

TNP have now produced an analysis of their part in this.

http://forum.thenorthpacific.org/topic/9160733/1/