charter peanut gallery

Discussion in 'The Undercity' started by seebs, Feb 22, 2017.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Exohedron

    Exohedron Doesn't like words

    So I had an idea that might be hard to implement: is there some way to make sure that new mod-created-threads in TSM, and in particular policy announcements, get run by at least one other mod before being posted? Maybe stick thread-starting posts in the moderation queue?

    A few reasons:

    1: Mod announcements carry a lot of weight and when carrying that much weight, wording can be pretty key, much less temper. There's a reason that spokespeople exist, and it's not just to lie to reporters. Let someone who isn't tearing their hair out write the message. Even the best of intentions can be phrased badly.

    2: Watching the new mods get taken by surprise was not reassuring. I fully understand that this is an open-border dictatorship and that new policies can come down from on high at any time without any warning, but that doesn't mean that I find it impressive that parts of the administration keep contradicting one another and having to apologize for other parts of the administration.

    3: Who knows, maybe one of the other mods has an idea and the issue can be solved without causing panic in the streets.

    This will of course cause delays in the posting of policy announcements, possibly of up to a day, and a lot can happen in a day. For instance, one of the mods can offend, terrorize, and possibly lose the trust of over half the forum in day. Sure, this was the result of a frayed temper and a lack of spoons. But given the power underlying every word that a mod makes in the forum where policy is discussed and announced, I don't see why at least thread-starting posts shouldn't be in a moderation queue. The OOP might not have been a meltdown in the clinical sense, but in terms of potential damage?

    As has been pointed out, bad non-mod behavior can also lead to bad things happening pretty quickly, but from what I can determine, we got to this point because seebs and jesse haven't had any better ideas and didn't want to put bad ideas into play until absolutely necessary. My suggestion won't really help with current situation and in the future won't really help with the inaction-followed-by-desperation issue, except to encourage that bad ideas get aired to the other mods on a shorter timeframe and especially before being made public; I would hope that the other mods would have the ability to say "that's a bad idea, what's the problem that makes you think it's necessary?" before it comes to the point where the bad idea is the only idea.

    I can understand why this wasn't implemented before, but it's not as if seebs and jesse are the only ones who can put things through the moderation queue anymore, and I think Snitch, Xaviux and Beldaran have proven to be pretty good at talking to the people.

    If implementing this requires that all posts made in this forum have to be moderation-queued, then this probably won't work. But if the mods can force themselves to talk to each other before making anything that looks like an Official Pronouncement, I think at least TSM would work a lot more smoothly.
     
    • Like x 18
  2. vegacoyote

    vegacoyote dog metaphores and pedanticism

    ... So, like, putting the mods on moderation re: mod stuff to minimize meltdown byproducts leaking into forum policy?
     
    • Like x 2
  3. Exohedron

    Exohedron Doesn't like words

    Yes.
     
    • Like x 3
  4. AbsenteeLandLady124

    AbsenteeLandLady124 Well-Known Member

    I kinda proposed that last night actually. Or at least letting things sit for a couple of days before responding.

    So the way I compared the mixing up of mod opinion and mod policy in the same post was like a politician messing up church and state. The politician can talk about their religion and be religious, but it's really irresponsible to do so while making policy.

    I proposed that instead, a brief statement should have been made here in TSM stating mod position on the topic, and a thread opened in TCHGB where the angry opinions and personal stories could be in order to explain why it's such a bad idea and open a communication channel
     
    • Like x 6
  5. Exohedron

    Exohedron Doesn't like words

    I like the analogy. It's unfortunate that in this case it's not so easy to distinguish what is "religion" from what isn't "religion" as it is with actual religion and policy. At the very least, things that are Official Positions ought to be distinguished from things that the mods merely would like to happen, and things that are Official Responses should be distinguished from things that seebs and jesse do as users, because currently they aren't.

    I agree that a brief statement of Official Position should have been made rather than what we got. But I think that discussion of policy should be in this forum rather than in TCHGB, because it sets a bad precedent to say "you can disagree with mod policy, but we're going to put you off in the fight corner" as if disagreeing is equivalent to having a fight that needs to be settled away from the topic in question. If there needs to be a separate thread for publicly disagreeing with stated policy, so be it; that's what this thread is for, so that people can comment, and possibly disagree with, stated policy, and I think it's not a bad idea to isolate it from the statement of policy so that the statement itself can be reacted to rather than other people's reactions. But don't preemptively put it in TCHGB just because it might get a little personal, not unless you really don't trust that the citizens of this forum could possibly disagree with the administration without becoming actively hostile.
    If we're allowed to disagree with stuff in the place where the stuff happened in other parts of the forum, we should be allowed to disagree with stuff at least in the same subforum when it comes to mod announcements. If it becomes a fight, the mods can deal with it like they would deal with a fight in Fan Town or General Advice. But during the time that it is a protest and not a revolt it belongs here, out in the open, and treated as a discussion rather than a fight. We've had problems enough with things that smell like censorship. Let's not invite more.
     
  6. AbsenteeLandLady124

    AbsenteeLandLady124 Well-Known Member

    Oh, no that's not what I meant - I meant that personal bad response to Things That Happen should have gone in argument island instead of be mixed up in policy, and it would have been a 'hey this messes me up personally' thing directed at wiwaxia and an invitation to discuss where it's not Mod Hat, it's just upset person working things out with another upset person.
     
    • Like x 2
  7. Hobo

    Hobo HEYYEYAAEYAAAEYAEYAA

    I agree with what Kathy said, but I'm wondering whether TCHGB is an appropriate place for stuff when it's like this situation where the person being yelled at has no real intention to engage with it. Like, I feel like it may be too one sided to be appropriate for that forum, since it's theoretically meant to be for hashing things out, not yelling into the wind and showing everyone how much you disagree with Person Who Is Not Present, you know? I don't really have any better recommendations short of making a new forum entirely for that sort of thing (since Holler Closet can do the latter, but it's far too personal an area to be appropriate for public dissent where everyone should be posting and I'm not aware of others that fit), but yeah. I'm just not sure about TCHGB specifically.
     
    • Like x 3
  8. rigorist

    rigorist On the beach

    I missed this between going to bed and the thread merger. I want to follow up, not to argue with seebs, but to complete my point. Seebs need not respond.

    If the forum "burns down" then the forum burns down. That does not prevent any other person from being hospitable. More importantly, it does not preclude you from being hospitable.

    Try. Fail. Try again. Fail better.

    It seems to me that the way of hospitality either works or it does not. But the way cannot be forced upon another; it can only be practiced by one's self. My friend, I fear you have taken on a far too heavy burden here by trying too hard to make others practice the way. And, when that inevitably fails, you beat yourself up over it. That is their problem, not yours. Please stop doing these things.

    Try. Fail. Try again. Fail better.
     
    Last edited: Feb 24, 2017
    • Like x 14
  9. AbsenteeLandLady124

    AbsenteeLandLady124 Well-Known Member

    Yeah, I don't know where it would go if the person on the other side doesn't want to engage. Ideally the TCHGB post would be Less Shouty and more Hey Look, Let's Talk About This.
    It's more for the future that we need to work this out I think, and figure out what people are happy with?
    Because the mods have emotions too, and I've observed people regarding new mods as...Other, now. I get that they have new authority but they're still the same people who have been on the forum. I don't know quite yet what to suggest as an appropriate venue where they are all allowed to have the messy emotions the rest of us do, but it is important that they can do so for their own sakes without it causing forum bonfires and scaring the users.
     
    • Like x 4
  10. AbsenteeLandLady124

    AbsenteeLandLady124 Well-Known Member

    We discussed this last night, just pinging to check I can share the quote of the conclusion that was drawn. The conclusion was that you are correct, I'm just asking for permission to share exact wording.

    Just personally - thank you very much for stating things more plainly, I often can't follow where you're going with things because of all the heavy language and advanced literary references.

    *edited to add some missing words, I'm very tired*
     
    Last edited: Feb 24, 2017
    • Like x 2
  11. TheSeer

    TheSeer 37 Bright Visionary Crushes The Doubtful

    I see your point, and TCHGB has some very consensual traditions around it that are worth protecting. On the other hand, if one is making people frightened and angry but one has no real intention to engage with that... well, I think that ought to be interrogated. I can imagine situations where not engaging would be the right call, and I can also imagine a lot of situations where it would be pretty toxic. I don't want the community to do anything that would tend to chill conversations about that. "This isn't the best place for that" would be chilling in that way, unless there's a place you can point to that would be best for that.
     
    • Like x 2
  12. Lissa Lysik'an

    Lissa Lysik'an Dragon-loving Faerie

    I don't think interrogating wax is either a good idea or likely to do any good.
    wax has made it clear that she is not willing to discuss any of this, so bringing it up yet again is probably offensive to her.
    She has consistently refused to discuss it, not even to clarify phrases or statements that made no sense.
    Putting up more talking AT her (since you can't talk TO someone that is not listening) is wrong.
    Each time a call to hurt people is put out challenge that call and then leave the stuff alone. It doesn't do anyone good to prolong this knowing the person in question is not interested in discussion on this topic.
     
    • Like x 6
  13. AbsenteeLandLady124

    AbsenteeLandLady124 Well-Known Member

    Hm, yeah. I might ask in a few days if they would be willing to talk to jesse later in an TCHGB thread about this. They indicated willingness on skype to hear me out on why I think the proposed situation is a really bad idea, I'd rather have discussion be public though.

    In any case I don't think anything is happening with this for at least a few days, and my ideas were mainly focused on what if this happens again, I think, since we can't go back and change how things went down this time. We can ID what should have happened instead, and use that as a model for proceeding next time.
     
    • Like x 3
  14. Hobo

    Hobo HEYYEYAAEYAAAEYAEYAA

    Can you really interrogate someone who isn't engaging? I don't really think you can. Also, what are you referring to with the bolded stuff? Are you suggesting that people should be speculating on motives behind non-engagement in these sorts of threads, or is it something different? My suggestion would be a new subforum in TCHGB dedicated to talking about issues where the other user won't engage, but I also think that a lot of care would be needed in tending to it, because I feel like the potential for it to become 'come shit on this user' would be pretty high. I don't know. I've got some conflicting feelings on this, but I agree that people should be able to talk about stuff, and that includes the mods.
     
  15. seebs

    seebs Benevolent Dictator

    I want to clarify a thing: No, the stuff you did to protect yourself doesn't make you a Bad Person. And banning people doesn't make a forum a Bad Forum. But banning, and ostracization, would make this a Bad Kintsugi, because Kintsugi is trying to be a specific thing it can't be if we start kicking people out. You aren't required to run your personal life that way, and it would actually be ridiculously hard or just plain impossible.
     
    • Like x 15
  16. spockandawe

    spockandawe soft and woolen and writhing with curiosity

    I mean, TCHGB sees pretty minimal traffic. Even at the worst times, in the middle of a fight with a thread moving fast, it's still usually just one TCHGB thread moving fast. I don't think there's any need to split off more subforums over this. We actually did have one TCHGB thread already where Josie tried to engage with Vivec and Khan, and they didn't come play at all, and TCHGB still served it's purpose. Even if this thread and that one went into this new subforum, it would be a subforum with two total threads.

    Maybe it's worth OPs clarifying in their new threads why they're putting it in a particular place and what their expectations might be (and mods could disagree and move things, as has happened before), but I think basic forum structure isn't much of an issue here. With the caveat, again, that I've said before, that I don't think this particular thread was executed that well, but the issue of what forum it was placed in seems like a pretty minor part of that (especially since Seebs clarified earlier why it's staying in the meta subforum). I've already seen people get mixed up over which subforums are for what, including TCHGB, and I'm generally vaguely opposed to making the subforum situation more complicated.

    eta: tl;dr, I guess I don't see the benefit? I don't understand what we would gain from laying out a subforum to be used just for that one specific, rarely relevant purpose
     
    • Like x 2
  17. TheSeer

    TheSeer 37 Bright Visionary Crushes The Doubtful

    Well, when you put it that way, it sounds kinda stupid... :-/

    I think the fact that Wiwaxia's not participating in this conversation bugs me, in ways I don't understand and which are very possibly my own issues and not the result of anyone doing anything wrong. Given that, I personally am going to stop discussing that subject and think about why I feel this way.
     
  18. AbsenteeLandLady124

    AbsenteeLandLady124 Well-Known Member

    Personally, it bugs me because it makes me feel like it would be a dismissal of every dissenting view and explanation of why it would be a poor idea, because of who made the thread.

    Also because it's kinda fucked up to have a thread discussing a thing a user did without them being there, like I mentioned previously has been a thing that never ended well. That's why I've been trying to shuffle foward conversation to overall policy and things again, rather than drawing attention back to wiwaxia.

    Maybe if I make a TCHGB thread in like, two weeks, some discussion could happen there? it does make me feel p awful though because I've put in a lot of energy to explaining things in case they were being read, and I had it confirmed that they are not and will not be in this thread.

    *edited to add a thing i thought i did, but then didn't*
     
    Last edited: Feb 25, 2017
  19. Hobo

    Hobo HEYYEYAAEYAAAEYAEYAA

    That's fair. I'd definitely prefer some clarification in the OPs if it's to be a TCHGB thing, since I was also not happy with the thread you mentioned because it seemed to go against the point of that part of the forum, and I'm not sure I can agree that it served its purpose since no actual hashing out happened between Josie and Khan/Vivec (unless you count Vivec accepting Josie's apology at the end, their only actual post in the thread). That said, that could well be a personal and unnecessary hangup on my part since I'm prone to reading things literally and get a bit 'ehhh' if people aren't using things for their intended purpose (I hated the Brainbent forum for a long time before it sort of became the established vent thread area, for example). That said, the rules/purpose of the forum can be amended, that's also an option to make it obvious and I'm fine with that.
     
  20. spockandawe

    spockandawe soft and woolen and writhing with curiosity

    Oh, I just meant that it was a receptacle for fighty things, and the fighty things stayed largely contained (except for people using their brainbent threads, but they weren't fighting through the brainbent posts, if that makes sense?). Even if Khan and Vivec mostly declined to participate, there was some social debugging for the things that led to the thread being created in the first place, so I'd say it served at least some of its purpose, even without two of the main players. I'm just being nitpicky, though! I largely agree with what you're saying.
     
    • Like x 1
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice