[Discussion/Announcement] NSG's "Wing" Megathreads

[Joohan]

The incident with Sib is the reason why we no longer have the facepalm smiley.

I got curious and found a way to use the facepalm

Code: Select all

[img]https://forum.nationstates.net/images/smilies/sm_facepalm.gif[/img]

Thank you, consider this a high five -

[Valrifell]

This is probably why there was a months long discussion to decide if it was really worth it.

What even was the goal in that decision? To make NS a better more friendly place? The posters from RWDT are still around, deleting the thread didn't get rid of them or wash away their supposedly, toxic, behaviors - it just got rid of their favorite forum and pissed a lot of people off.

HTG, what is the end goal of this decision?

I don't know, I'm not an admin or a mod and wasn't privy to that. That's the problem, isn't it? I don't know why we're only now finding out about a months long moderation talk into whether or not the WDT deserved to exist with relatively little warning.

If I had to guess I'd say they might have thought that removing the stomping grounds where this kind of behavior was not only somewhat underreported by regulars but encouraged as banter that didn't make them very happy, might have seemed like a good idea at the time?

[Souseiseki]

I remember the fuss being made about this circa 2014 as well, but I'm not sure why it was a big deal then as it was already common knowledge before then. That's why moderators always tell you not to delete the telegrams you're reporting: of course they can look through if they want to to see if there's any actionable content in there, but every time they do this is logged so they probably aren't going to be snooping through your telegrams for no reason.

i actually have something in my sig about this so i will pull it up now

ask moderation about reading serious moderation candidates TGs without telling them about it until afterwards and/or apparently refusing to confirm/deny the exact timeline of TG reading ~~~ i hope you never sent any of the recent mods or the ones that got really close anything personal!

signature edit: confirmation has been received. they will explicitly do it before and without asking. they can look at TGs basically whenever they want so please keep this in mind when nominating people for moderator or TGing good posters/anyone!

the issue was that if someone was a moderation candidate they'd take a look through their posts and their TGs to get a sense of who they were. this was done without their knowledge or consent, and went way beyond the restricted scope of looking at a few specific TGs for specific reported behaviour.

[Grenartia]

It happened so often that doing it becomes a chore. Its not a problem of finding a needle in a haystack, its excluding the few bits of hay from a pile of needles.

If you're going to make a controversial assertion, one would think you would provide some evidence for it.

I absolutely could, but between examples involving me, and limited other examples I could dig up, you'd dismiss them all as "isolated incidents" or "well-deserved". So why should I bother with the effort if I won't be taken seriously?

[The Marlborough]

Listen lads, many of us have admitted at various points that NSG as a whole has gotten toxic. Some of that does lie at our feet, some of it lies at my feet. Few of us, if any, are truly innocent in that matter. The RWDT at times did have toxic elements, behaviors, posters etc on it. Most threads did, it's not unique. We even have owned up to this by our admission that we were trying to clean up our act. Did we want to involve moderation in that act cleaning? No. Did we appreciate griefers and lurkers trying to stir trouble within the RWDT? Also no. But we were trying to clean it up in our own way and style that, had it been given the chance, may very well have worked.

[Auze]

Oh sure it's a big deal now but the outrage will die down and people will move on. Sure some of the petty players will hold onto it for as long as they can but the outrage will die down, with time. It is the way of things.

Yes, I'm sure that this whole thing will just pass. After all, it's not like the groups screwed over the most by this decision are also the ones that tend to hold grudges.

Honestly, I can see where both sides were coming from for this debate, though I'm not sure that it was a good idea to just suddenly declare it. Anyways, I expect that this is Forsher right now.

[Joohan]

What even was the goal in that decision? To make NS a better more friendly place? The posters from RWDT are still around, deleting the thread didn't get rid of them or wash away their supposedly, toxic, behaviors - it just got rid of their favorite forum and pissed a lot of people off.

HTG, what is the end goal of this decision?

[Arcturus Novus]

I'm gonna be frank. This is a terrible fucking idea that's only gonna make people angry at moderation.

[Luziyca]

I'm gonna be frank. This is a terrible fucking idea that's only gonna make people angry at moderation.

In the short term, yes, it will make a lot of people angry, given their favorite hangout spots are now gone. But in the long term, it will improve NSG for the better, both in terms of the community, and the level of discourse that takes place on NSG.

[Alcala-Cordel]

I'm gonna be frank. This is a terrible fucking idea that's only gonna make people angry at moderation.

Exactly. Everyone here has and will have a clique regardless.

I'm not angry about this in the slightest as I didn't really use the wing threads, but it does seem really pointless.

[Washington Resistance Army]

I'm gonna be frank. This is a terrible fucking idea that's only gonna make people angry at moderation.

In the short term, yes, it will make a lot of people angry, given their favorite hangout spots are now gone. But in the long term, it will improve NSG for the better, both in terms of the community, and the level of discourse that takes place on NSG.

How?

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Listen lads, many of us have admitted at various points that NSG as a whole has gotten toxic. Some of that does lie at our feet, some of it lies at my feet. Few of us, if any, are truly innocent in that matter. The RWDT at times did have toxic elements, behaviors, posters etc on it. Most threads did, it's not unique. We even have owned up to this by our admission that we were trying to clean up our act. Did we want to involve moderation in that act cleaning? No. Did we appreciate griefers and lurkers trying to stir trouble within the RWDT? Also no. But we were trying to clean it up in our own way and style that, had it been given the chance, may very well have worked.

If I may... as someone who went through something similar regarding the location threads a few years ago (and with the understanding that yes, losing the threads blows for many of you), the best thing you can do is step back for a bit. Let the dust settle. Right now nothing you guys say will change the directive. At least not now.

It angers you, and I get it, but give it time and then readdress the situation. Location threads eventually made a comeback. If you guys concertedly decide to approach a future thread (hopefully you’ll get to) with this understanding you’re demonstrating, you may very well get it back. Just my two cents.

[Arcturus Novus]

In the short term, yes, it will make a lot of people angry, given their favorite hangout spots are now gone. But in the long term, it will improve NSG for the better, both in terms of the community, and the level of discourse that takes place on NSG.

How?

I can't believe I agree with WRA on pretty much all of this, but yeah, how? I'll admit, the -WDTs could be kinda circlejerk-y sometimes, but they were often home to good, solid discussion. I learned a lot from reading through LWDT.

Also, I don't see how this is going to improve the community much? People on this site have always run with the same circles of people, taking away the threads they talk in isn't going to change that. They're just gonna be forced to move to other threads. If anything, we might see a few prolific members of the community get banned, have a good number get all pissed off because of it, and change the overall climate of the forums for the worse.

[Luziyca]

How?

I can't believe I agree with WRA on pretty much all of this, but yeah, how? I'll admit, the -WDTs could be kinda circlejerk-y sometimes, but they were often home to good, solid discussion. I learned a lot from reading through LWDT.

Also, I don't see how this is going to improve the community much? People on this site have always run with the same circles of people, taking away the threads they talk in isn't going to change that. They're just gonna be forced to move to other threads. If anything, we might see a few prolific members of the community get banned, have a good number get all pissed off because of it, and change the overall climate of the forums for the worse.

I was around during the whole "It's Only Politics" debacle, and let me tell you, in the end, the climate of the forum in the long term did not change for the worse. I don't know if it changed for the better, but it certainly didn't change for the worse.

This too shall pass: in the long term, the overall climate will not change for the worse. Maybe it'll change for the better, but it certainly can't be worse than 2003 NS.

[Joohan]

How?

I can't believe I agree with WRA on pretty much all of this, but yeah, how? I'll admit, the -WDTs could be kinda circlejerk-y sometimes, but they were often home to good, solid discussion. I learned a lot from reading through LWDT.

Also, I don't see how this is going to improve the community much? People on this site have always run with the same circles of people, taking away the threads they talk in isn't going to change that. They're just gonna be forced to move to other threads. If anything, we might see a few prolific members of the community get banned, have a good number get all pissed off because of it, and change the overall climate of the forums for the worse.

I will reiterate:

What was the goal here? The supposedly toxic players are still around, and they haven't changed ( if anything, they're more resentful than ever now ), you just got rid of their favorite hangout. Removing a thread does not correct behavior, it just forces those players to express themselves in other threads.

What was the goal here?

[Arcturus Novus]

I can't believe I agree with WRA on pretty much all of this, but yeah, how? I'll admit, the -WDTs could be kinda circlejerk-y sometimes, but they were often home to good, solid discussion. I learned a lot from reading through LWDT.

Also, I don't see how this is going to improve the community much? People on this site have always run with the same circles of people, taking away the threads they talk in isn't going to change that. They're just gonna be forced to move to other threads. If anything, we might see a few prolific members of the community get banned, have a good number get all pissed off because of it, and change the overall climate of the forums for the worse.

I will reiterate:

What was the goal here? The supposedly toxic players are still around, and they haven't changed ( if anything, they're more resentful than ever now ), you just got rid of their favorite hangout. Removing a thread does not correct behavior, it just forces those players to express themselves in other threads.

What was the goal here?

I honestly think that the goal was just, y'know, deleting the threads. I have no idea what the fuck they had planned for the inevitable backlash. The fact that all of this went through with zero community input, zero warnings, zero foresight is just... frustrating.

[Joohan]

I will reiterate:

What was the goal here? The supposedly toxic players are still around, and they haven't changed ( if anything, they're more resentful than ever now ), you just got rid of their favorite hangout. Removing a thread does not correct behavior, it just forces those players to express themselves in other threads.

What was the goal here?

I honestly think that the goal was just, y'know, deleting the threads. I have no idea what the fuck they had planned for the inevitable backlash. The fact that all of this went through with zero community input, zero warnings, zero foresight is just... frustrating.

Do we have a term for that? Bad Faith Moderation?

[Souseiseki]

I will reiterate:

What was the goal here? The supposedly toxic players are still around, and they haven't changed ( if anything, they're more resentful than ever now ), you just got rid of their favorite hangout. Removing a thread does not correct behavior, it just forces those players to express themselves in other threads.

What was the goal here?

I honestly think that the goal was just, y'know, deleting the threads. I have no idea what the fuck they had planned for the inevitable backlash. The fact that all of this went through with zero community input, zero warnings, zero foresight is just... frustrating.

i mean i don't think they expected a 44 page thread on it. whether or not they should have expected this i can't say.

[Arcturus Novus]

I honestly think that the goal was just, y'know, deleting the threads. I have no idea what the fuck they had planned for the inevitable backlash. The fact that all of this went through with zero community input, zero warnings, zero foresight is just... frustrating.

Do we have a term for that? Bad Faith Moderation?

Y'know, can't say I'm familiar with the term? It's certainly not something we've seen on here before.

[Joohan]

I honestly think that the goal was just, y'know, deleting the threads. I have no idea what the fuck they had planned for the inevitable backlash. The fact that all of this went through with zero community input, zero warnings, zero foresight is just... frustrating.

i mean i don't think they expected a 44 page thread on it. whether or not they should have expected this i can't say.

Oh this is just the first day. Give it a week and we'll easily get to 500.

[Washington Resistance Army]

I can't believe I agree with WRA on pretty much all of this, but yeah, how? I'll admit, the -WDTs could be kinda circlejerk-y sometimes, but they were often home to good, solid discussion. I learned a lot from reading through LWDT.

Also, I don't see how this is going to improve the community much? People on this site have always run with the same circles of people, taking away the threads they talk in isn't going to change that. They're just gonna be forced to move to other threads. If anything, we might see a few prolific members of the community get banned, have a good number get all pissed off because of it, and change the overall climate of the forums for the worse.

I was around during the whole "It's Only Politics" debacle, and let me tell you, in the end, the climate of the forum in the long term did not change for the worse. I don't know if it changed for the better, but it certainly didn't change for the worse.

This too shall pass: in the long term, the overall climate will not change for the worse. Maybe it'll change for the better, but it certainly can't be worse than 2003 NS.

You didn't answer the question. How will deleting some of the only threads with long lasting and worthwhile discussion left on General improve the level of discourse?

[Alcala-Cordel]

I will reiterate:

What was the goal here? The supposedly toxic players are still around, and they haven't changed ( if anything, they're more resentful than ever now ), you just got rid of their favorite hangout. Removing a thread does not correct behavior, it just forces those players to express themselves in other threads.

What was the goal here?

I honestly think that the goal was just, y'know, deleting the threads. I have no idea what the fuck they had planned for the inevitable backlash. The fact that all of this went through with zero community input, zero warnings, zero foresight is just... frustrating.

I agree. It would be nice if the mods looked at community input going forward before making a final say.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

I was around during the whole "It's Only Politics" debacle, and let me tell you, in the end, the climate of the forum in the long term did not change for the worse. I don't know if it changed for the better, but it certainly didn't change for the worse.

This too shall pass: in the long term, the overall climate will not change for the worse. Maybe it'll change for the better, but it certainly can't be worse than 2003 NS.

You didn't answer the question. How will deleting some of the only threads with long lasting and worthwhile discussion left on General improve the level of discourse?

It doesn’t. It just eliminates a perceived problem thread.

[Diarcesia]

I honestly think that the goal was just, y'know, deleting the threads. I have no idea what the fuck they had planned for the inevitable backlash. The fact that all of this went through with zero community input, zero warnings, zero foresight is just... frustrating.

I agree. It would be nice if the mods looked at community input going forward before making a final say.

I can foresee replies like "you're stupid for even thinking about this". I dunno if the mods prefer this kind of thread to be done before or after said thread nuking.

[Alcala-Cordel]

I agree. It would be nice if the mods looked at community input going forward before making a final say.

I can foresee replies like "you're stupid for even thinking about this". I dunno if the mods prefer this kind of thread to be done before or after said thread nuking.

Good point. Maybe they could do polls, that would be a sinple solution