[Petition/Discussion] Harassment and Off-Site Evidence

[Greater vakolicci haven]

Was my post on the mods resigning issue deleted by a mod or did it just not post? I'm having internet issues currently so if it just didn't post I'll repost it (otherwise appeal incoming)

[Eluvatar]

Was my post on the mods resigning issue deleted by a mod or did it just not post? I'm having internet issues currently so if it just didn't post I'll repost it (otherwise appeal incoming)

No post of yours has been deleted in the last few hours.

[Greater vakolicci haven]

Or, you could arrange the site little by little so that people start doing their stuff here and not offsite.

That idea has come up in our discussions. It is a possibility, but would be a long-term thing, not an immediate fix.

Oh come on.

It takes literally seconds to install a free forum script like ns uses, and unless ns uses some shitty cheap hosting provider then it's got more than enough bandwidth. At least you could make it so smaller regions don't have to move offsight immediately, by allowing the hosting of elections and the like on the ns forums.

[Greater vakolicci haven]

Was my post on the mods resigning issue deleted by a mod or did it just not post? I'm having internet issues currently so if it just didn't post I'll repost it (otherwise appeal incoming)

No post of yours has been deleted in the last few hours.

Sorry for the off topic post, but is their a way of finding out posts that have been deleted, or can the mods send you them like they can your warning history?

[King HEM]

As an administrator of an off-site property, I know how frustrating it can be to have hostile commentary ensue after a decision has been made. I don't expect anything that is said here will create an about-face, so I'll be brief in my one concluding point:

It is becoming my suspicion that there are a not-insignificant number of moderators who simply do not understand gameplay. We've had some of them step forward during this discussion, but I suspect there are many more who have never been involved in gameplay, and have made no effort to understand how it works. Would a company that operates communication services on, say, Slack abdicate responsibility of enforcing harassment that took place there because it isn't in the company's physical building? That's not a perfect comparison, but it certainly strikes at the matter closer than pretending all these properties populated by NSers, for the purpose of playing NS, have no relationship with NS.

Very disappointing decision.

It is clear the leadership will have to come from the grassroots local administrators, and not from Nationstates.net.

[USS Monitor]

Like others, I am very disappointed in this statement. It feels like a side-step rather than a decision. However, I'm going to limit my substantive comments to one particular contradiction that the moderation team should address. In the statement, it says:

Acting on off-site information: We do act on off-site information to the extent that when we receive such information we often start our own investigation here. Anything we find that supports the information from off-site can and will be acted on here. This has been standard practice for years and will remain so. Any such information can be submitted via Getting Help.

However, the defamation rule appears to directly contradict this assertion. In particular, it states:

Please don't bring non-NationStates business to the NationStates forums, Getting Help page, or #themodcave. In particular, accusations of misconduct outside of NationStates do not belong in NationStates and will be punished as defamatory.

Note that the defamation rule does not distinguish between the forums, the getting help page, and #themodcave. If it would be defamatory to talk about it on the forum (under the incredibly broad definition used in the policy), it would also be defamatory to submit the same thing in a Getting Help Request. Wed know that I cannot post "Player X has been banned from region Y for sexual harassment" and link to the announcement from the region; that is exactly the kind of post that triggers a defamation warning. Therefore, under the current rule and policy, I should also receive a defamation warning for submitting the same information in a Getting Help Request. If nothing else, I hope the rule can be tweaked to make it clear that submitting evidence to the mods in private will not lead to a defamation warning.

You wouldn't get warned for submitting a GHR linking offsite evidence and asking us to investigate a player who you think may be dangerous. Just don't use the GHR page to complain about less serious offsite issues like flaming on an offsite forum. I'll give the hivemind a poke and see if we want to update OSRS to make that clearer.

[USS Monitor]

That idea has come up in our discussions. It is a possibility, but would be a long-term thing, not an immediate fix.

Oh come on.

It takes literally seconds to install a free forum script like ns uses, and unless ns uses some shitty cheap hosting provider then it's got more than enough bandwidth. At least you could make it so smaller regions don't have to move offsight immediately, by allowing the hosting of elections and the like on the ns forums.

It takes more than a few seconds to discuss what we want to do and agree on a course of action.

[USS Monitor]

No post of yours has been deleted in the last few hours.

Sorry for the off topic post, but is their a way of finding out posts that have been deleted, or can the mods send you them like they can your warning history?

We can find out who deleted the post, but can't get a copy of the text of the post.

[Bursalavoro]

I haven't seen anyone mention the fact the moderators, and administrator of forums can edit members posts. Therefore, if a moderator and or administrator holds some sort of vendetta against a user they can easily frame a user. There are scripts that can be added to zetaboards that make it so it doesn't appear that a post has been edited. While what's to stop someone from registering on a forum with a vpn as a user they hate on nationstates then going on it and harassing people or posting porn? Although it has good intentions, it can just be weaponized too easily.

[Greater vakolicci haven]

I haven't seen anyone mention the fact the moderators, and administrator of forums can edit members posts. Therefore, if a moderator and or administrator holds some sort of vendetta against a user they can easily frame a user. There are scripts that can be added to zetaboards that make it so it doesn't appear that a post has been edited. While what's to stop someone from registering on a forum with a vpn as a user they hate on nationstates then going on it and harassing people or posting porn? Although it has good intentions, it can just be weaponized too easily.

Luckily ns uses phpbb and that has some pretty indepth logging.

[Greater vakolicci haven]

Sorry for the off topic post, but is their a way of finding out posts that have been deleted, or can the mods send you them like they can your warning history?

We can find out who deleted the post, but can't get a copy of the text of the post.

I'm just wondering about the 'in the last few hours.'

[Jakker]

As an administrator of an off-site property, I know how frustrating it can be to have hostile commentary ensue after a decision has been made. I don't expect anything that is said here will create an about-face, so I'll be brief in my one concluding point:

It is becoming my suspicion that there are a not-insignificant number of moderators who simply do not understand gameplay. We've had some of them step forward during this discussion, but I suspect there are many more who have never been involved in gameplay, and have made no effort to understand how it works. Would a company that operates communication services on, say, Slack abdicate responsibility of enforcing harassment that took place there because it isn't in the company's physical building? That's not a perfect comparison, but it certainly strikes at the matter closer than pretending all these properties populated by NSers, for the purpose of playing NS, have no relationship with NS.

Very disappointing decision.

It is clear the leadership will have to come from the grassroots local administrators, and not from Nationstates.net.

I think HEM's post is well-said and should be reflected upon extensively.

[Bursalavoro]

I haven't seen anyone mention the fact the moderators, and administrator of forums can edit members posts. Therefore, if a moderator and or administrator holds some sort of vendetta against a user they can easily frame a user. There are scripts that can be added to zetaboards that make it so it doesn't appear that a post has been edited. While what's to stop someone from registering on a forum with a vpn as a user they hate on nationstates then going on it and harassing people or posting porn? Although it has good intentions, it can just be weaponized too easily.

Luckily ns uses phpbb and that has some pretty indepth logging.

Except not every single region that has an offsite forum uses phpbb

[Greater vakolicci haven]

As an administrator of an off-site property, I know how frustrating it can be to have hostile commentary ensue after a decision has been made. I don't expect anything that is said here will create an about-face, so I'll be brief in my one concluding point:

It is becoming my suspicion that there are a not-insignificant number of moderators who simply do not understand gameplay. We've had some of them step forward during this discussion, but I suspect there are many more who have never been involved in gameplay, and have made no effort to understand how it works. Would a company that operates communication services on, say, Slack abdicate responsibility of enforcing harassment that took place there because it isn't in the company's physical building? That's not a perfect comparison, but it certainly strikes at the matter closer than pretending all these properties populated by NSers, for the purpose of playing NS, have no relationship with NS.

Very disappointing decision.

It is clear the leadership will have to come from the grassroots local administrators, and not from Nationstates.net.

I think HEM's post is well-said and should be reflected upon extensively.

The way I see it is that when I administrate/moderate a forum I want to keep the users of that forum safe when they use it. I think that ns moderation doing what has been proposed would be a step in the right direction to them doing the same.

[Conservative Values]

I think this discussion has become far more emotional than helpful to be frank.

I wish the Mods could do more, but I trust them when they say messing with off-site evidence is not workable. Thank you for all that you do, and for keeping this type of behavior off of NationStates.net to begin with. Without you volunteers harassment on the off-site would be the least of our concern.

I wonder if the site team has thought about a warning message like you get on bank or government sites for in-game links? “Warning: You are leaving NationStates.net, NationStates is not responsible for content or behavior on other sites. Do not give your password to any other sites.”

Maybe with a strong enough discouragement NS staff could keep victims safe by keeping them on a safe site.

[Ever-Wandering Souls]

If I were a mod, I would resign today.

I’d also look at it as “you’re making it a lot less likely that anyone from GP accepts an offer to be a mod whenever you get around to it, if they feel that they can’t sufficiently act to take on the issues more serious than a bit of forum flaming.”

[Greater vakolicci haven]

If I were a mod, I would resign today.

I’d also look at it as “you’re making it a lot less likely that anyone from GP accepts an offer to be a mod whenever you get around to it, if they feel that they can’t sufficiently act to take on the issues more serious than a bit of forum flaming.”

Oh I don't know, I'd actually be more likely to apply now simply to be able to put my views in where it mattered.

Although the mods are highly unlikely to welcome someone with my record in.

[Ever-Wandering Souls]

As an administrator of an off-site property, I know how frustrating it can be to have hostile commentary ensue after a decision has been made. I don't expect anything that is said here will create an about-face, so I'll be brief in my one concluding point:

It is becoming my suspicion that there are a not-insignificant number of moderators who simply do not understand gameplay. We've had some of them step forward during this discussion, but I suspect there are many more who have never been involved in gameplay, and have made no effort to understand how it works. Would a company that operates communication services on, say, Slack abdicate responsibility of enforcing harassment that took place there because it isn't in the company's physical building? That's not a perfect comparison, but it certainly strikes at the matter closer than pretending all these properties populated by NSers, for the purpose of playing NS, have no relationship with NS.

Very disappointing decision.

It is clear the leadership will have to come from the grassroots local administrators, and not from Nationstates.net.

One of the better lines of comparison I’ve seen. You can go to HR with even say, texts of someone’s behavior and have it addressed, much less a group chat somewhere focused specifically on company work.

If NS doesn’t want to help here, or take any responsibility at all for the effects of the offsite community it has fed, then it logically really should promote them less. A “You are now leaving this site” Banner with a couple bullets and a link to another page somewhere like the FAQ or OSRS that goes into more detail, discusses that offsite generally are a thing and safe but what the risks can be, and some general internet safety/what to do if you feel uncomfortable tips would be...something, at least.

[Tim-Opolis]

I haven't seen anyone mention the fact the moderators, and administrator of forums can edit members posts. Therefore, if a moderator and or administrator holds some sort of vendetta against a user they can easily frame a user. There are scripts that can be added to zetaboards that make it so it doesn't appear that a post has been edited. While what's to stop someone from registering on a forum with a vpn as a user they hate on nationstates then going on it and harassing people or posting porn? Although it has good intentions, it can just be weaponized too easily.

Nothing's to stop someome from pretending to be someome else. However, I can't speak for non-GP, but established GP Forum Administration isn't stupid and we have extensive security and verification procedures. You're describing a hypothetical that can be pretty easily handled through effective and inteligent security practices.

The majority of our forums don't even allow someone to participate on our forum and use a VPN/Proxy/Public Network. Those that do usually have to log in at least once from a residential IP Address. If you can't provide that residential IP, or a damn believable reason as to why you can't, you don't get to participate - no debate about it.

Also, as I've been doing for most of this thread, I completely echo HEM's sentiments.

[King HEM]

As an administrator of an off-site property, I know how frustrating it can be to have hostile commentary ensue after a decision has been made. I don't expect anything that is said here will create an about-face, so I'll be brief in my one concluding point:

It is becoming my suspicion that there are a not-insignificant number of moderators who simply do not understand gameplay. We've had some of them step forward during this discussion, but I suspect there are many more who have never been involved in gameplay, and have made no effort to understand how it works. Would a company that operates communication services on, say, Slack abdicate responsibility of enforcing harassment that took place there because it isn't in the company's physical building? That's not a perfect comparison, but it certainly strikes at the matter closer than pretending all these properties populated by NSers, for the purpose of playing NS, have no relationship with NS.

Very disappointing decision.

It is clear the leadership will have to come from the grassroots local administrators, and not from Nationstates.net.

One of the better lines of comparison I’ve seen. You can go to HR with even say, texts of someone’s behavior and have it addressed, much less a group chat somewhere focused specifically on company work.

If NS doesn’t want to help here, or take any responsibility at all for the effects of the offsite community it has fed, then it logically really should promote them less. A “You are now leaving this site” Banner with a couple bullets and a link to another page somewhere like the FAQ or OSRS that goes into more detail, discusses that offsite generally are a thing and safe but what the risks can be, and some general internet safety/what to do if you feel uncomfortable tips would be...something, at least.

It's worth noting that too, that the official gameplay explanation thread posted by a former NS staff member promotes offsite forums as a way to engage in gameplay.

So, basically, NS staff is encouraging people to create/join offsite forums, get harassed, and then are claiming they have no responsibility for the predators who are unrooted because those properties are not related to NS (??).

I'd say more, but I think it's all been said.

[Insaeldor]

As a moderator in an offsite forum for NS I'll back the mods on this subject and respect their ruling on the matter.

[Caelapes]

If I were a mod, I would resign today.

Would that be genuinely helpful? If there ever comes a time where I am told that I am doing more harm than good -- and I believe it is being said in earnest and reflects the feeling of the community, not just one or two people speaking from anger -- I have no problem resigning. Right now I don't see that it would be good for the site.

it's not "just one or two people" speaking in—very righteous—anger about this. people aren't angry for the sake of being angry or contrarian, they're angry because this was a terribly cowardly stance to take on the part of this website's administration

[Greater vakolicci haven]

One of the better lines of comparison I’ve seen. You can go to HR with even say, texts of someone’s behavior and have it addressed, much less a group chat somewhere focused specifically on company work.

If NS doesn’t want to help here, or take any responsibility at all for the effects of the offsite community it has fed, then it logically really should promote them less. A “You are now leaving this site” Banner with a couple bullets and a link to another page somewhere like the FAQ or OSRS that goes into more detail, discusses that offsite generally are a thing and safe but what the risks can be, and some general internet safety/what to do if you feel uncomfortable tips would be...something, at least.

It's worth noting that too, that the official gameplay explanation thread posted by a former NS staff member promotes offsite forums as a way to engage in gameplay.

So, basically, NS staff is encouraging people to create/join offsite forums, get harassed, and then are claiming they have no responsibility for the predators who are unrooted because those properties are not related to NS (??).

I'd say more, but I think it's all been said.

Given NS' stance on linking offsite, if their was a non-ns related website where people were regularly harassed would moderation even allow links to it?

[Conservative Values]

It's worth noting that too, that the official gameplay explanation thread posted by a former NS staff member promotes offsite forums as a way to engage in gameplay.

So, basically, NS staff is encouraging people to create/join offsite forums, get harassed, and then are claiming they have no responsibility for the predators who are unrooted because those properties are not related to NS (??).

I'd say more, but I think it's all been said.

Given NS' stance on linking offsite, if their was a non-ns related website where people were regularly harassed would moderation even allow links to it?

Well, yes. Because they wouldn’t know people are regularly harassed because it isn’t allowed to be discussed on-site.

So a site where people are regularly harassed would look the same from on-site to a site with a clean record.

[Ever-Wandering Souls]

It's worth noting that too, that the official gameplay explanation thread posted by a former NS staff member promotes offsite forums as a way to engage in gameplay.

So, basically, NS staff is encouraging people to create/join offsite forums, get harassed, and then are claiming they have no responsibility for the predators who are unrooted because those properties are not related to NS (??).

I'd say more, but I think it's all been said.

Given NS' stance on linking offsite, if their was a non-ns related website where people were regularly harassed would moderation even allow links to it?

I think that’s coming at the wrong angle. Banning a link is usually becuase the site is bad. While there are one or two offsites in existence at least that have knowingly harbored harassers, actively antagonistic DOS players, etc, the super vast majority are not bad or unmoderated places. They have admin teams that do act, and apparently act more than the Ns one does on some issues.