by Anagonia » Fri May 26, 2023 10:15 am
by Sedgistan » Fri May 26, 2023 11:01 am
by Havl » Fri May 26, 2023 11:57 am
Sedgistan wrote:*snip*
by Anagonia » Fri May 26, 2023 12:14 pm
Sedgistan wrote:1) As per our guidance, "If players have historical posts of their own that they are concerned may cross the line in similar ways, they should take steps to remove that content, or contact us if they are unsure whether it does or are unable to remove it (e.g. if the thread has been locked)."
Sedgistan wrote:2) I'm not sure what relevance this has. The case this arose from saw a player punished for content that was illegal at the time it was posted, as set out in the response to the appeal.
Sedgistan wrote:3) Using Mods as a weapon has been against the rules since forever. Despite your disclaimer, you do seem to be suggesting that there was a Mods as a weapon attempt in the reporting of Kraven; to be clear, that is not accurate.
Sedgistan wrote:4) We cannot answer hypothetical questions, particularly on unspecified hypothetical situations. Of course Moderators will continue to delete nations when that is the appropriate punishment. This is with regard to the rules, the nature of the violation, the context, and the player's record -- as ever.
Sedgistan wrote:5) There are no Moderators on the team who "know or care nothing about it". While many Moderators have areas they tend to focus on that reflect their experience prior to joining the team, it is important they remain free to act across every area of the site. As we have advised players repeatedly; both recently and over the years, and indeed in permanently stickied guidance, if players wish to nominate someone for a Moderator position, there is a process to do so.
by The Ice States » Fri May 26, 2023 12:29 pm
Sedgistan wrote:1) As per our guidance, "If players have historical posts of their own that they are concerned may cross the line in similar ways, they should take steps to remove that content, or contact us if they are unsure whether it does or are unable to remove it (e.g. if the thread has been locked)."
by Sedgistan » Fri May 26, 2023 1:53 pm
Anagonia wrote:I do not wish to put words in your mouth, so if I may clarify this, is this stating it is therefore the players responsibility? This opens up further dialogue I wish to address in the future if so, but I wanted clarification and thank you for that.
Anagonia wrote:Question 2 is relevant since rules have updated significantly since a decade ago. At the time of Kraven posting the content, it was story related and entirely cosmetic to the themes (I'm stating our perspective vice versa as the movement stands). While we understand the ruling you have made, the rules at the time did not cover the complexity of role playing and the context therein. So the question was ensuring protections against future instances where such statements couldn't be utilized by the moderation team as actionable. I base this relevance on the fact that the player (Kraven) was around for 18 years before Moderation action was taken, and as you stated without consulting the player. This is a major fear for players on the website that we, too, could be victim to a similar instance utilizing new, more clarified rules that did not exist as clarified in past times. This is why it references a "grandfathered clause".
Anagonia wrote:To be clear, I am not suggesting it. The possibility is open to it, however, but I did not suggest it. What I was trying to press is a reassurance that such instances wouldn't happen because the situation as it transpired could open the doorway for individuals researching the past of players they don't like and using their past content (again referencing Question 2 here) as weapons against them.
Anagonia wrote:The Moderation staff, whose behavior was displayed in the beginning phases of the Kraven situation, chose deletion rather than investigation due to work overload (if I'm correct in my recollection). This, again, is a very huge fear of the player base right now.
<snip>
With all due and utmost respect, you stated in a reply that the procedure was to delete the nation rather than investigate. You stated such in response to questions about the situation and thus Question 4 was trying to ascertain if your action, in particular, was the natural and dominant procedure. And, if not, asking what the policy was as to the situation and procedure. It is not a hypothetical. The Kraven situation started due to the decision a member of your staff used (i.e. delete rather than prune) due to time constraints and thus this action cannot be hypothetical. Question 4 is asking if such decisions are procedures or if they're one-off occurrences, with all due respect.
Anagonia wrote:If I may be respectful in saying such and in no way wishing to convey any blame, the behavior of some in the moderation staff during the Kraven situation makes Question 5 all the more relevant. I reference it because it left the community feeling completely disenfranchised and violated. Question 5 is trying to pinpoint if the staff will move on from the lessons learned (i.e. "... rather than mods who know or care nothing about it?") and address the community more respectfully and with the concern they warrant and have earned. The Kraven situation exposed a lot of division and misunderstandings that all root from a lack of comprehension of role playing, how to role play, what writing is, how writers attain source material, how said source material is utilized in writing, and the processes thereof. Question 5 basically asks if the Moderation Staff will allow the voices of individuals with that experience and professionalism to take more precedence over the ones who may not understand those processes.
The Ice States wrote:Sedgistan wrote:1) As per our guidance, "If players have historical posts of their own that they are concerned may cross the line in similar ways, they should take steps to remove that content, or contact us if they are unsure whether it does or are unable to remove it (e.g. if the thread has been locked)."
If a player makes such a query, resulting in Moderation finding out about rulebreaking content, will Moderation take punitive action against that player, before said player can take the content down?
by Anagonia » Fri May 26, 2023 3:16 pm
Sedgistan wrote:If players have content on the site that violates the site rules, it's their responsibility to resolve that, absolutely.
Sedgistan wrote:I must be clear on this: much of the offensive content submitted by The Kraven Corporation was illegal at the time it was submitted. There have been tens of millions of "bits" of content submitted to the site over the 20+ years it has been running; Moderators are not aware of all of it, or of every player. It would obviously have been preferable for all if the content had been brought to our attention and addressed at a much earlier stage.
Sedgistan wrote:If people have posted illegal content, we want it reported so it can be addressed. That is, and always will be the case.
Sedgistan wrote:That is wholly incorrect. As was explained repeatedly before, Moderators investigate reports; they are not assumed to be taken at face value. The report on Kraven cited a single dispatch, and it was investigation by the team that uncovered the much wider-ranging problem. You seem to be confusing that with Moderation removing all the content rather than sifting through each bit individually to only remove those that definitively violated the rules. In cases where a significant proportion of a player's submitted content violates the rules, it is policy to remove it all. That is both for the sake of efficiency, and as a punishment to the player.
Sedgistan wrote:I believe the ruling on Kraven - that their content was a persistent and significant violation of the rules over a period of many years - indicates the opposite. Given the protests from many players that no such violation took place, it is clear that there are players amongst the roleplay community whose idea of what is acceptable within the Malicious and Obscene Content rules, is incorrect and needs to be adjusted.
by Picairn » Fri May 26, 2023 10:40 pm
I must be clear on this: much of the offensive content submitted by The Kraven Corporation was illegal at the time it was submitted. There have been tens of millions of "bits" of content submitted to the site over the 20+ years it has been running; Moderators are not aware of all of it, or of every player. It would obviously have been preferable for all if the content had been brought to our attention and addressed at a much earlier stage.
If people have posted illegal content, we want it reported so it can be addressed. That is, and always will be the case.
by United Calanworie » Fri May 26, 2023 11:04 pm
Picairn wrote:I must be clear on this: much of the offensive content submitted by The Kraven Corporation was illegal at the time it was submitted. There have been tens of millions of "bits" of content submitted to the site over the 20+ years it has been running; Moderators are not aware of all of it, or of every player. It would obviously have been preferable for all if the content had been brought to our attention and addressed at a much earlier stage.
If people have posted illegal content, we want it reported so it can be addressed. That is, and always will be the case.
I am concerned about this, so I'll ask directly: Are you authorizing, abetting or allowing future accusers to scour up decade-old offending posts of people they dislike to invite punishment on said people?
by Picairn » Fri May 26, 2023 11:40 pm
United Calanworie wrote:No. If they're doing it to target people for punishment because they don't like them, that's mods-as-weapons. Suffice it to say that we are discussing internally how we want these reports to be handled going on into the future and we are taking lessons from this saga (for lack of a better word) on how to improve.
by United Calanworie » Fri May 26, 2023 11:46 pm
Picairn wrote:United Calanworie wrote:No. If they're doing it to target people for punishment because they don't like them, that's mods-as-weapons. Suffice it to say that we are discussing internally how we want these reports to be handled going on into the future and we are taking lessons from this saga (for lack of a better word) on how to improve.
That's good to hear, thank you. So if I understand it correctly, frivolous reporting of decade-old posts, displaying a clear intent to intentionally harm a player, is a punishable Mods-as-Weapons offense?
by Sedgistan » Sat May 27, 2023 1:12 am
Picairn wrote:I am concerned about this, so I'll ask directly: Are you authorizing, abetting or allowing future accusers to scour up decade-old offending posts
by Velstrania » Sat May 27, 2023 4:07 am
Sedgistan wrote:Picairn wrote:I am concerned about this, so I'll ask directly: Are you authorizing, abetting or allowing future accusers to scour up decade-old offending posts
I've deliberately snipped your post there. Yes, we want rule-breaking content reported; that includes if someone has a record of to-date unspotted obscene or malicious content from years ago, as was the case with Kraven. That allows us to remove content that is prohibited on the site, and where appropriate punish the player responsible for it.
You seem to be suggesting that we should turn a blind eye to illegal content still hosted on the site, simply because it's been around a while. We do not want that content on the site, and we therefore want it reported.
If there are a dozen more players with Kraven-esque posting behaviour in their history, we need to know about them. We were grateful for the report on Kraven, and the last thing we want to do is go and warn players who are helpfully bringing illegal content to our attention.
by The Rio Grande River Basin » Sat May 27, 2023 4:09 am
Battle of Mar’Sa’Nakar ends in Pyrrhic victory as the Galactic Federation suffers losses, in defending the critical sector. GFS Andromeda severely damaged, GFS Comet destroyed. Mass evacuation of outer sector worlds beginning.
by Sedgistan » Sat May 27, 2023 4:27 am
by Havl » Sat May 27, 2023 5:33 am
Sedgistan wrote:It should be crystal clear to players from the team's decision to delete Kraven's content that we want reports of such rule-breaking content so we can address it. Given the surprised reaction from players to the action taken, it seems highly likely that there is more such content that needs to be dealt with.
by Sedgistan » Sat May 27, 2023 5:43 am
Havl wrote:our logic—which I would summarize as “they’re mad, so they must be guilty”—assumes bad faith and is disappointing to see from a mod.
by Picairn » Sat May 27, 2023 6:28 am
Sedgistan wrote:We want rules-violating content reported, so we can investigate and address it. We do not want people making frivolous reports made solely with the intent of getting someone in trouble because of a dispute with them.
by Twilight Imperium » Sat May 27, 2023 6:59 am
Velstrania wrote:Sorry, but you're actually encouraging people to go through peoples old posts and report them now? Posts from 10 years ago, and people could end up losing their nation or getting banned as a result?
by Sedgistan » Sat May 27, 2023 7:08 am
Picairn wrote:To clear up the confusion: Do you consider reporting decade-old posts to be Mods-as-Weapons or normal procedure?
Picairn wrote:I was given the impression from United Calanworie that scouring ancient content for possible violations and displaying a clear intent to harm a player through reporting them qualified as Mods-as-Weapons.
Twilight Imperium wrote:Velstrania wrote:Sorry, but you're actually encouraging people to go through peoples old posts and report them now? Posts from 10 years ago, and people could end up losing their nation or getting banned as a result?
It seems to me they're encouraging people to go through their own old posts if they're that worried about it, no?
Can't get smacked if you get there first.
by The Macabees » Sat May 27, 2023 7:14 am
Sedgistan wrote:It should be crystal clear to players from the team's decision to delete Kraven's content that we want reports of such rule-breaking content so we can address it. Given the surprised reaction from players to the action taken, it seems highly likely that there is more such content that needs to be dealt with.
by Picairn » Sat May 27, 2023 7:26 am
Twilight Imperium wrote:It seems to me they're encouraging people to go through their own old posts if they're that worried about it, no?
Can't get smacked if you get there first.
by Deamonopolis » Sat May 27, 2023 7:27 am
Sedgistan wrote:We want rules-violating content reported, so we can investigate and address it. We do not want people making frivolous reports made solely with the intent of getting someone in trouble because of a dispute with them.
by Jar Wattinree » Sat May 27, 2023 7:52 am
Deamonopolis wrote:Isn't this likely to happen anyway? Suppose someone wants to piss me off and digs up 10 year old dirt on me, then you are obliged to act... Knowing quite well the report is not made in good faith?
Sedgistan wrote:However, there is a world of difference between reporting someone with hundreds of clearly obscene and malicious posts, and someone dredging through through the posts of another player they have a record of negative interactions with to report a load of borderline ones with the hope that throwing enough mud might get something to stick.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Asuncion City Paraguay, Grishahakkaverchynot, The Web Citadel
Advertisement