Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Koos Group
Mar 6, 2013


Greetings. Now that it's been a few weeks since D&D's moderation changed, I'd like some feedback. The main areas of interest are:

  • Has D&D been better since the change?
  • Is there anything in particular about moderation that you would change in order to better serve the goals of D&D?
  • Should D&D have its own stylesheet? If so, what should it be like? Mockups are welcome as well.

You can give feedback in one of three ways. The first is to simply post in the thread. The second, is to PM me your feedback and I'll share it with the other mods (unless you'd prefer I don't for some reason). The third is to post in this thread anonymously. To do this, send me what you'd like to be posted in the thread and I'll post it for you. It hopefully goes without saying that if you do this, don't then come and post in the thread normally to agree with yourself.

There's not going to be any post timer or hard rule on number of posts as in the previous feedback thread. I would just ask that everyone keep in mind everyone who posts in or reads D&D has a stake in its future, so please don't drown out other posters' feedback by posting excessively about your own issue.

D&D rules will be a bit relaxed for this thread since we're talking about personal opinions. However, I do ask that everyone still try to be respectful to other users, be honest in how you express your views, and try not to repeat something you've said in the thread already, which goes along with not monopolizing the thread. If you are forumbanned you unfortunately can't participate, but you may PM me to have your forumban reviewed if I haven't done so already. Currently there's no one who is both forumbanned and ineligible for review.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Leon Trotsky 2012
Aug 27, 2009


Koos Group posted:

Greetings. Now that it's been a few weeks since D&D's moderation changed, I'd like some feedback. The main areas of interest are:

  • Has D&D been better since the change?
  • Is there anything in particular about moderation that you would change in order to better serve the goals of D&D?
  • Should D&D have its own stylesheet? If so, what should it be like? Mockups are welcome as well.

You can give feedback in one of three ways. The first is to simply post in the thread. The second, is to PM me your feedback and I'll share it with the other mods (unless you'd prefer I don't for some reason). The third is to post in this thread anonymously. To do this, send me what you'd like to be posted in the thread and I'll post it for you. It hopefully goes without saying that if you do this, don't then come and post in the thread normally to agree with yourself.

There's not going to be any post timer or hard rule on number of posts as in the previous feedback thread. I would just ask that everyone keep in mind everyone who posts in or reads D&D has a stake in its future, so please don't drown out other posters' feedback by posting excessively about your own issue.

D&D rules will be a bit relaxed for this thread since we're talking about personal opinions. However, I do ask that everyone still try to be respectful to other users, be honest in how you express your views, and try not to repeat something you've said in the thread already, which goes along with not monopolizing the thread. If you are forumbanned you unfortunately can't participate, but you may PM me to have your forumban reviewed if I haven't done so already. Currently there's no one who is both forumbanned and ineligible for review.

No style sheet.

Keep up the good work boss.

Can we have a dress down day on Fridays when we can wear jeans while we post?

some plague rats
Jun 5, 2012

gather round the corpse of a friend


Here's a question about mod policy. I got probed a coupe days ago- it was a sixer so who cares but it raises some questions

Uglycat posted:

I have a radicalized leftist activist friend that I met while traveling on hippie busses through the Trump administration, and I warned him many times about qanon, and he still got catfished by an insane qanon lady and they went together to the Jan 6 riot and I'm pretty sure he was deliberately targeted and brought there to be someone they could scapegoat in an effort to shift the Overton window at exactly the moment you describe.


He and I don't talk anymore, and I kinda did everything I could to tear him down and raise alarms, after rel posted about killing, cooking and eating a cat as bookofedith was working toward forcing a standoff between that community and the feds.

Anyhow, I've suspected exactly this - the hypothesis you posit, that the Trump people had a contingency in place in advance of Jan 6th to blame antifa under a certain set of circumstances- for over a year now. And I know an 'antifa' person (more of a sea shepherd type) that got catfished into attending. I don't think the feds ever picked them up.

some plague rats posted:

What on earth are you talking about here?

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

The probe reason was "do not do these kind of posts" so I'm wondering what exactly is the Koos-era policy on asking people what the hell they're talking about? Do we need to provide a breakdown of what exactly didn't make sense? Are we supposed to ignore posts that read as absolute gibberish?
Could use some pointers on a mod approved way to ask for clarification. Cheers

Jizz Festival
Oct 30, 2012


Lipstick Apathy

I like the direction things are going, but I think moderators should either stay out of discussions or make it extremely clear when they're acting as a moderator and when they aren't. For example, commiegir recently posted this in response to petercat:

CommieGIR posted:

....are you really going down this road?

How is a post like this supposed to be interpreted? Is this a warning that continuing down this road will lead to mod action, and if it is, then why is it so vague about what, exactly, the problem with the post in question is?

If this is a "normal post" disconnected from commiegir being a mod, then how is it an acceptable post? It's equivalent to saying "this is cringe" which is hardly adding anything to the discussion.

edit: I'd like to add that I think CommieGIR is generally a fair mod although I suspect we disagree on a lot of things.

Jizz Festival fucked around with this message at 02:39 on Jan 29, 2022

some plague rats
Jun 5, 2012

gather round the corpse of a friend


Yeah following on from that post I just want to highlight this exchange

Lib and let die posted:

No, I don't. You're making up the argument that we'd have socialized healthcare if it weren't for military spending.

But you've also got the star and buttons so :shrug:

CommieGIR posted:

Have I probed or threaten to probe you a single point in this discussion? gently caress off with this poo poo.

Lib and let die posted:

Nope. but I know better than to push an issue when you specifically are arguing from moderation - you've told me I need to respond to an argument you've made up in your head and I am declining to do so, because that way leads frustration, lashing out, and probations. I'm good - I've gotten all I think I'm reasonably going to out of this discussion and am happy to drop it.


CommieGIR posted:

You invented the 'or else'. Asking for proof is pretty normal in D&D. Done discussing this with you.

feel like LALD raises a reasonable concern, and commie proceeds to escalate things in a way that would have got literally anyone else in d&d hit with a stiff probe- imagine if one of us had told him to "gently caress off with that poo poo"- and throw his weight around. It's lovely moderation from someone who seems consistently unwilling to post by the rules he enforces on everyone else, especially when the other mods now seem to be sticking so strenuously to the Koos Model.

mawarannahr
May 21, 2019



Jizz Festival posted:

I like the direction things are going, but I think moderators should either stay out of discussions or make it extremely clear when they're acting as a moderator and when they aren't. For example, commiegir recently posted this in response to petercat:

How is a post like this supposed to be interpreted? Is this a warning that continuing down this road will lead to mod action, and if it is, then why is it so vague about what, exactly, the problem with the post in question is?

If this is a "normal post" disconnected from commiegir being a mod, then how is it an acceptable post? It's equivalent to saying "this is cringe" which is hardly adding anything to the discussion.

edit: I'd like to add that I think CommieGIR is generally a fair mod although I suspect we disagree on a lot of things.

I think it’s almost certainly the latter — the post was minimizing wage theft by claiming it, at least, wasn’t enforced by gun violence, as opposed to other kinds of theft. These other kinds of theft happen orders of magnitude less than wage theft. It’s probably better if they clarified but I think CommieGIR was suggesting that this is a ridiculous argument to make. If that is the case, I agree.

I’ve observed most of the time if there might be mod action on a particular topic CG will give warning first.

mawarannahr fucked around with this message at 02:52 on Jan 29, 2022

exmarx
Feb 18, 2012


The experience over the years
of nothing getting better
only worse.


every d&d rule update is intended to make the american politics threads less awful, but the most recent set is the first i can remember being applied so mindlessly that it fucks up other regional threads. a probation for this incredibly mild post

bike tory posted:

Mate you're the one who aligns with Simeon Brown on this issue so I'm not sure you're in any position to criticise.

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
during an argument about transport policy has derailed the nz thread into talking about the probation for like half a day so far. this doesn't benefit anyone, and inventing some bizarre category of "demilitarised" threads is a bad alternative to just moderating with regard to context.

Potato Salad
Oct 23, 2014

Nobody Cares




poo poo's fine, for what it is

moderation is hard

MikeC
Jul 19, 2004


I don't want to retype my thoughts as they are succinctly found in these two posts in the China thread. If D&D is supposed to be separate from CSPAM in a meaningful way, I think the issues I raised need to be looked at.

https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3466532&userid=0&perpage=40&pagenumber=659#post520975623

https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3466532&userid=0&perpage=40&pagenumber=659#post520976462

Potato Salad
Oct 23, 2014

Nobody Cares




reading onward a little bit, it kinda looks like those got addressed pretty solidly

like I'm curious what you see was left out when mods went on to further engage with you

Koos Group
Mar 6, 2013


some plague rats posted:

Here's a question about mod policy. I got probed a coupe days ago- it was a sixer so who cares but it raises some questions



The probe reason was "do not do these kind of posts" so I'm wondering what exactly is the Koos-era policy on asking people what the hell they're talking about? Do we need to provide a breakdown of what exactly didn't make sense? Are we supposed to ignore posts that read as absolute gibberish?
Could use some pointers on a mod approved way to ask for clarification. Cheers

That one was a personal mistake on my part, as indicated in my followup.

Koos Group posted:

Sorry about that. I didn't realize the post actually did come off as gibberish, lol.

Because the post was reported, I thought you were being willfully ignorant. That's what I would want to avoid with asking someone "what are you talking about," because usually you could ask for clarification on specific points instead. But as you showed, there are some cases where something is so wholly incomprehensible you honestly have no choice but to ask them to explain the whole thing again.

Koos Group
Mar 6, 2013


Jizz Festival posted:

I like the direction things are going, but I think moderators should either stay out of discussions or make it extremely clear when they're acting as a moderator and when they aren't. For example, commiegir recently posted this in response to petercat:

How is a post like this supposed to be interpreted? Is this a warning that continuing down this road will lead to mod action, and if it is, then why is it so vague about what, exactly, the problem with the post in question is?

If this is a "normal post" disconnected from commiegir being a mod, then how is it an acceptable post? It's equivalent to saying "this is cringe" which is hardly adding anything to the discussion.

edit: I'd like to add that I think CommieGIR is generally a fair mod although I suspect we disagree on a lot of things.

I've been thinking about how exactly to deal with this, and there are a few options. Ideally I would just tell my mods, and I suppose Commie in particular, to be especially gentle when debating and watch for anything that could be interpreted as a threat. I could also make a rule for mods that they can never probate someone they're arguing with, which doesn't sound like a bad idea. The extreme solution would be forbidding mods from debating entirely, which I'd like to avoid.

Koos Group
Mar 6, 2013


exmarx posted:

every d&d rule update is intended to make the american politics threads less awful, but the most recent set is the first i can remember being applied so mindlessly that it fucks up other regional threads. a probation for this incredibly mild post

during an argument about transport policy has derailed the nz thread into talking about the probation for like half a day so far. this doesn't benefit anyone, and inventing some bizarre category of "demilitarised" threads is a bad alternative to just moderating with regard to context.

Demilitarized isn't a category I intend to invent, it's just a cheeky way of referring to something that already exists, which is lighter moderation for regional threads. This is because the members tend to know each other quite well, and there's socialization involved in addition to debating and discussing. This is also a good example of why its' good to have regional IKs, because there is some context that mods from other countries are likely to miss even if they're careful (as I seem to have in this case, as it was apparently meant less seriously than I thought). I actually had a cordial chat with bike tory after that probe, and they were in favor of just using a lighter touch on the thread.

some plague rats
Jun 5, 2012

gather round the corpse of a friend


Koos Group posted:

That one was a personal mistake on my part, as indicated in my followup.

Because the post was reported, I thought you were being willfully ignorant. That's what I would want to avoid with asking someone "what are you talking about," because usually you could ask for clarification on specific points instead. But as you showed, there are some cases where something is so wholly incomprehensible you honestly have no choice but to ask them to explain the whole thing again.

Yeah, that makes sense. It wasn't you who probated me though, so is this your personal take, or something that is agreed on by all the mods here?

Koos Group
Mar 6, 2013


some plague rats posted:

Yeah, that makes sense. It wasn't you who probated me though, so is this your personal take, or something that is agreed on by all the mods here?

They're taking my lead at the moment, so that would be the policy. It will come down to some individual judgement as many of these things do, on whether someone is being willfully ignorant or not, but we should be better equipped to handle this somewhat specific circumstance in the future.

MikeC
Jul 19, 2004


Potato Salad posted:

reading onward a little bit, it kinda looks like those got addressed pretty solidly

like I'm curious what you see was left out when mods went on to further engage with you

I was asked to post it here for visibility reasons (Fritz's post). I let it drop after that because I wasn't out to get a probation for someone. I just felt that D&D wasn't the place to drop random assertions that take more time to refute than it does to post.

Koos Group
Mar 6, 2013


MikeC posted:

I don't want to retype my thoughts as they are succinctly found in these two posts in the China thread. If D&D is supposed to be separate from CSPAM in a meaningful way, I think the issues I raised need to be looked at.

https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3466532&userid=0&perpage=40&pagenumber=659#post520975623

https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3466532&userid=0&perpage=40&pagenumber=659#post520976462

My main takeaway from this is you would like the bad faith rule enforced for false claims about what a source says, and I would very much like it to be as well. If you see another instance of this behavior, please report it.

MikeC
Jul 19, 2004


Koos Group posted:

I've been thinking about how exactly to deal with this, and there are a few options. Ideally I would just tell my mods, and I suppose Commie in particular, to be especially gentle when debating and watch for anything that could be interpreted as a threat. I could also make a rule for mods that they can never probate someone they're arguing with, which doesn't sound like a bad idea. The extreme solution would be forbidding mods from debating entirely, which I'd like to avoid.

I don't think that is necessary at all as long as if posters report shitposts from mods who themselves cross the line, then other mods take a meaningful look at it. Mods are volunteer positions still on SA are they not? It shouldn't be a job where they can't do this or that.

CommieGIR
Aug 22, 2006

The blue glow is a feature, not a bug




Pillbug

Jizz Festival posted:

I like the direction things are going, but I think moderators should either stay out of discussions or make it extremely clear when they're acting as a moderator and when they aren't. For example, commiegir recently posted this in response to petercat:

How is a post like this supposed to be interpreted? Is this a warning that continuing down this road will lead to mod action, and if it is, then why is it so vague about what, exactly, the problem with the post in question is?

If this is a "normal post" disconnected from commiegir being a mod, then how is it an acceptable post? It's equivalent to saying "this is cringe" which is hardly adding anything to the discussion.

edit: I'd like to add that I think CommieGIR is generally a fair mod although I suspect we disagree on a lot of things.

Yeah this one was very much "This is going to be a poo poo argument" more than threatening mod action. I at least try to bold the statement or tell people to back off if there will be mod action.

But yeah, there's been concerns I'm not very clear, and trying to do better there.


some plague rats posted:

feel like LALD raises a reasonable concern, and commie proceeds to escalate things in a way that would have got literally anyone else in d&d hit with a stiff probe- imagine if one of us had told him to "gently caress off with that poo poo"- and throw his weight around. It's lovely moderation from someone who seems consistently unwilling to post by the rules he enforces on everyone else, especially when the other mods now seem to be sticking so strenuously to the Koos Model.

I mean...if you feel its probe worth: Report it. Mods are fair game, and I've been hit before as a mod. But in no way did I use probes as a way to shut down arguments I was involved with in that example. So I guess: What's the problem? I have no doubt Koos will freely probate me or call me out if I'm doing something wrong and I also specifically asked for mod peer review of that argument in general.

Lib specifically said I was threatening to use my buttons on them and then they refused to engage because of it.

And fully agree with Koos: There should be a rule against Mods using their buttons against people they are debating with. Its already pretty much a defacto unstated rule as it is.

CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 04:07 on Jan 29, 2022

some plague rats
Jun 5, 2012

gather round the corpse of a friend


CommieGIR posted:


I mean...if you feel its probe worth: Report it. Mods are fair game, and I've been hit before as a mod. But in no way did I use probes as a way to shut down arguments I was involved with in that example. So I guess: What's the problem? I have no doubt Koos will freely probate me or call me out if I'm doing something wrong and I also specifically asked for mod peer review of that argument in general.

Koos addressed it a couple pages later, agreeing that there was a tone issue there and that you hadn't taken the mod star into account when posting, so he clearly didn't think it was probe-worthy. Which doesn't foster much faith in the mod peer review system, considering anyone else posting like you did would have got hit for it, and you're the one who is supposed to be keeping us in line. It's all a bit one law for us, one for them. I mean, here was your followup, where you're still flipping your poo poo about it:


CommieGIR posted:

If I was going to probe anybody for debating and discussing with me, I would've already done it.

Here, I'll help you:
If you believe I am threatening to use my buttons or my position as a mod to force you to do something when debating and discussing the topic at hand, contact Koos Group and provide evidence. Now shut the gently caress up about it

Bolding not mine. the tone of everything you post, moderation-wise, is just wildly out of step with every other mod here and also with the type of forum Koos keeps saying he wants to foster

exmarx
Feb 18, 2012


The experience over the years
of nothing getting better
only worse.


Koos Group posted:

Demilitarized isn't a category I intend to invent, it's just a cheeky way of referring to something that already exists, which is lighter moderation for regional threads. This is because the members tend to know each other quite well, and there's socialization involved in addition to debating and discussing. This is also a good example of why its' good to have regional IKs, because there is some context that mods from other countries are likely to miss even if they're careful (as I seem to have in this case, as it was apparently meant less seriously than I thought). I actually had a cordial chat with bike tory after that probe, and they were in favor of just using a lighter touch on the thread.

thanks for clarifying. i think lighter-touch enforcement is appropriate for like 95% of the threads here, they can mostly resolve issues by themselves.

Willa Rogers
Mar 11, 2005



CommieGIR posted:

I mean...if you feel its probe worth: Report it. Mods are fair game, and I've been hit before as a mod. But in no way did I use probes as a way to shut down arguments I was involved with in that example. So I guess: What's the problem? I have no doubt Koos will freely probate me or call me out if I'm doing something wrong and I also specifically asked for mod peer review of that argument in general.

Lib specifically said I was threatening to use my buttons on them and then they refused to engage because of it.

And fully agree with Koos: There should be a rule against Mods using their buttons against people they are debating with. Its already pretty much a defacto unstated rule as it is.

You're not getting it: You issue commands, directives & challenges that are... inappropriate coming from a mod, as is what seems to be your ego having to have the last word & not gracefully terminating an argument once it's run its course.

It has nothing to do with reporting your poo poo & everything to do with your being unpleasant in the way you engage with & respond to other posters. It's not about you probating people with whom you're arguing, but rather your hostile & threatening tone.

This is a pattern a lot of people are noticing, mentioning itt & PM'ing Koos about. And instead of acknowledging what these issues are, you're digging in & doubling down.

Gumball Gumption
Jan 7, 2012

GET BACK UP




A lot of it really just is that you make very direct statements that come off as a demand and, fair or not, the blue star will make people read things in a harsher tone than you probably intend because you can't express tone on the internet.

You post like a pretty normal CE poster which I'd describe as low key aggro all the time, that thread is really mad still. But people will be weirder about it from you.

Willa Rogers
Mar 11, 2005



Generally, I'm v. happy with life under Koos Your Daddy and it seems as if we're getting a wider range of posters these days, which means more interesting content.

Broader allowable discourse is a good thing, not a bad thing, as are challenges to one's beliefs outside of echo chambers & circle jerks. It's not "trolling" or "bad faith"; it's sharpening the discourse instead of dulling it.

If one's beliefs are firm, and one trusts them, one should welcome challenges to those beliefs to help solidify them, rather than dismissing them out of hand by trying to label them as insincere.

Improvements that still could be made:

Get Rid of the White Noise
Not sure why “fox news will have a field day with this!,” “conspiracists will love this!” or other fantasies/ventriloquizing about ideological enemies is considered hallowed content to be celebrated & propagated.

It’s boring! Who cares what they’re “going to say”! If you’re that obsessed then go visit freerepublic, or at least the freeper-oriented threads, but if conservatives are taking up that much free[p] space in your mind then at least keep that poo poo out of a “current events” thread bc such fantasies are neither current nor events.

Practice What You Preach
Mods don't always give posters the benefit of the doubt; mods don't always play nice with posters; mods don't always avoid claiming hivemind-like think themselves.

Clamp Down on Vague, Unsourced Accusations
Eg, crap like "Nice to see people in this thread believe Hitler was a cool guy" without quoting the poster to whom they're directing their misguided venom. Probate that poo poo on sight.

Get Rid of the Deadwood
No, not the guy who backseat mods every thread (although seeing a probation or two land in his lap for it would be novel), but rather the necromancy in the topic list of threads. Rules thread should stay at the top, like an admin/forums announcement. Not sure why the other threads are stickied rn, except for maybe the toon contest. (eta: And please gas CRAP-rated threads already. They're gassed for a reason--they're crap!)

Posters Should Be Encouraged to Walk Away from Arguments
Pissing contests are boring to read, and I say this as someone who's streamed a lot of urine here. Ain't no one want to read 6 pages of back-n-forth.

vvv Yah, I agree that the easing-off has been a positive development, in spite of my harshing above.

Willa Rogers fucked around with this message at 06:28 on Jan 29, 2022

A big flaming stink
Apr 26, 2010


I'd just like to let fritz know they should chill with trying to police what is or is not on-topic. I recall them being particularly quick on the draw to demand posters drop something in the COVID and China thread from recent memory.

Oh, also compliments to commieGIR, they have seriously chilled out in terms of probing people in a way I absolutely did not believe would happen after the last feedback thread.

Fister Roboto
Feb 21, 2008



Buglord

D&D seems a lot better now than it was just a few weeks ago, so good job :thumbsup:

UCS Hellmaker
Mar 29, 2008


Toilet Rascal

I said this to beetus in a PM, but finding out wang commander was actually one of the most toxic threadbanned posters (which legit was not the mods or admins faults for not seeing, who runs an alt check on an account from 03??) made the thread 1000% better. Posters that want to slam insane things they read on twitter dont belong on the forums unless its a mock thread, and actively hurt any subforum when its used to just sow anger fear and stupidity in order to push their issues on others.

forbidden dialectics
Jul 26, 2005







I think the new leadership and overall direction in D&D has made a huge improvement. There has been more genuinely interesting debate and discussion in the last month than this forum has seen in year. So yeah, uhh...nice job, mods?! Gotta hand it to you; and not in the dril ISIS tweet kind of way.

Lib and let die
Aug 26, 2004

There's a lot of products that you can buy with money but my posts are the only limited product, that only you can have.



Willa Rogers posted:

Generally, I'm v. happy with life under Koos Your Daddy and it seems as if we're getting a wider range of posters these days, which means more interesting content.


Improvements that still could be made:

Get Rid of the White Noise
Not sure why “fox news will have a field day with this!,” “conspiracists will love this!” or other fantasies/ventriloquizing about ideological enemies is considered hallowed content to be celebrated & propagated.

Practice What You Preach
Mods don't always give posters the benefit of the doubt; mods don't always play nice with posters; mods don't always avoid claiming hivemind-like think themselves.

Clamp Down on Vague, Unsourced Accusations
Eg, crap like "Nice to see people in this thread believe Hitler was a cool guy" without quoting the poster to whom they're directing their misguided venom. Probate that poo poo on sight.

Posters Should Be Encouraged to Walk Away from Arguments
Pissing contests are boring to read, and I say this as someone who's streamed a lot of urine here. Ain't no one want to read 6 pages of back-n-forth.

Seconding all of this, but on point 2 specifically, in the interaction I had with CGIR that SPR pointed out, the original crux of the meta-argument was that a poster had created a strawman of an argument and then demanded that other posters defend that strawman he'd made for them and as labored as the metaphor might be, reporting a mod arguing in bad faith (who has a historical pattern of doing so, even!) seems a bit like calling the cops on a cop - d&d mods largely being self-selected by existing d&d mods makes it difficult to feel like such reports would be taken seriously given how often the issue of authoritative tone has come up (Koos' recent intervention in the situation not withstanding - its very much seen and appreciated that Koos acknowledged that his tone is often an issue whether intentional or not).

Only other thing I'd mention as an abject failure is that the guy that secretly hoped the "Reade chat" would just disappear eventually still has a position of authority here which is uhhhh...generously, "not a great look."

BIG-DICK-BUTT-FUCK
Jan 26, 2016

Just a funny Av. Not an own, calm down people. tyvm


A big flaming stink posted:

I'd just like to let fritz know they should chill with trying to police what is or is not on-topic. I recall them being particularly quick on the draw to demand posters drop something in the COVID and China thread from recent memory.

Yes this, it’s impossible to do consistently. Here’s a recent example:

Fritz the Horse posted:

I realize I waded into the conversation some myself, but per Koos' edict we ought to avoid revisiting conversations that have already been done to death, it's probably not adding much new or interesting to Current Events discussion.

I'm not threatening probes or anything, just suggesting folks wrap up 2020 primary discussion unless there's fresh information that might add something new. It's a Sunday night and the thread is slow, but it would be best if this particular area of discussion came to a close soon-ish. Thanks.


A decent discussion popped up on the failings of the 2020 Warren primary campaign. Despite having contributed to it themselves, Fritz lets us know that the discussion is over and should not be revisited. I thought it was a fruitful discussion and I had seen some points presented that I had never seen before but fine rules are rules ... but then a few pages later there’s a big derail about Hamilton: the musical which is even less “current” of an event and has also been discussed before in the thread. Fritz gives it a mod endorsement:

Fritz the Horse posted:

The current derail about Hamilton, Les Mis, and other politically relevant musical theater is fairly new territory for D&D. Certainly folks have dunked on Hamilton before, but going into somewhat more depth is a new thing and interesting.

There doesn't seem to be any objections from the mod team so... carry on!

For the record, I have no issue with people posting about Hamilton in CE thread. I have zero interest in Hamilton or musical theatre but if other posters wanna talk about it, no biggie—I can just scroll past. But it’s frustrating to see the moderation of topics being applied inconsistently.

I think the CE thread is at it’s best when it’s loosely moderated and posters themselves determine where it leads. A semi-relevant derail every now and then isn’t something that warrants active intervention.

Catpetter1981
Apr 9, 2020

by Jeffrey of YOSPOS


The poster who posted these grotesque pieces of ahistoricism has not been probated or even mildly chided for them. Does this mean that genocide denialism is, after all, permitted in D&D?

quote:

How many BLM members have been jailed for political crimes of disturbing social harmony? Is the BLM website not up? Are BLM members being tortured and sent to work camps? We're significant parts of Portland public grounds not occupied for months on end?


quote:

I am not an expert in the civil rights movements but I am unaware of any mass systemic attempt by the highest levels of the US government to suppress the movement and kill and jail its leaders. Certainly, there was immense opposition by large segments of the population and political leaders but never a single-minded state-run campaign to exterminate the movement.

UCS Hellmaker
Mar 29, 2008


Toilet Rascal

Catpetter1981 posted:

The poster who posted these grotesque pieces of ahistoricism has not been probated or even mildly chided for them. Does this mean that genocide denialism is, after all, permitted in D&D?

Did you report it? And why are you here when you exist to empty quote dnd over the entire forums.

selec
Sep 6, 2003

KAZ!


have liked it and though I have taken a few probes in that time, none of seemed especially unfair or about anything deeper than my admittedly habitual line-stepping ways.

I like that there is less TAKE IT TO X THREAD where the conversation often goes and dies.

I appreciate that we seem to have a little wider band to talk about politics as not being entirely encompassed by electoralism which also seems good to me. I am trying to get better at seeing when I’ve reached the uncrossable divides in worldview that basically mean a conversation should be over—despite the somewhat popular refrain, I don’t think everyone in, for instance the CE thread “wants the same thing” and it’s felt a little easier to tease out those differences.

Edit:

One thing I feel is different is the haste with which certain types of posts lead to suspension, which is to say I think folks are given a little bit more time and leeway to discuss and debate. I think a great example is the post that proved so egregious to someone’s sensibilities that they gave me my custom title and the link to the post that pissed everyone off so bad. But go read that post: at no point do I recommend doing anything actually illegal, it’s just leveraging the system, and in ways that have been done by all flavors of political actors in our system in the past. Any discussion of illegal acts in the post is use to frame the lengths to which political actors have gone before, not as a suggested course of action, as a rhetorical device for measuring the exact level of fecklessness of the administration at the time the post was made.

I think I could’ve explained all that had there been a less hasty, angry reaction, and more of a “it seems you’re saying” and a request for clarification.

I will say it was validating to see the individual points I made become boilerplate discussion fodder in the months that followed and I hope whoever bought me my title and text reflects on that; I took my probe with the feeling of an eighteen year old who has been caught playing on a Babe Ruth little league team, and what was once heretical has become banal.

selec fucked around with this message at 16:34 on Jan 29, 2022

Koos Group
Mar 6, 2013


BIG-DICK-BUTT-gently caress posted:

Yes this, it’s impossible to do consistently. Here’s a recent example:

A decent discussion popped up on the failings of the 2020 Warren primary campaign. Despite having contributed to it themselves, Fritz lets us know that the discussion is over and should not be revisited. I thought it was a fruitful discussion and I had seen some points presented that I had never seen before but fine rules are rules ... but then a few pages later there’s a big derail about Hamilton: the musical which is even less “current” of an event and has also been discussed before in the thread. Fritz gives it a mod endorsement:

For the record, I have no issue with people posting about Hamilton in CE thread. I have zero interest in Hamilton or musical theatre but if other posters wanna talk about it, no biggie—I can just scroll past. But it’s frustrating to see the moderation of topics being applied inconsistently.

I think the CE thread is at it’s best when it’s loosely moderated and posters themselves determine where it leads. A semi-relevant derail every now and then isn’t something that warrants active intervention.

I spoke with Fritz after the incident you're referring to and concluded that it if a thread is veering toward a topic that's unlikely to bear fruit, rather than trying to head off the conversation it would be better to just give a reminder/warning that posts should be insightful and not common talking points or basic political rhetoric.

Koos Group fucked around with this message at 16:55 on Jan 29, 2022

Koos Group
Mar 6, 2013


Catpetter1981 posted:

The poster who posted these grotesque pieces of ahistoricism has not been probated or even mildly chided for them. Does this mean that genocide denialism is, after all, permitted in D&D?

Positions aren't moderated in D&D. In those cases, it looks as though he's leaving open a lot of room for his position to be attacked with opposing evidence, so that's what I would have recommended there.

CommieGIR
Aug 22, 2006

The blue glow is a feature, not a bug




Pillbug

Lib and let die posted:

Seconding all of this, but on point 2 specifically, in the interaction I had with CGIR that SPR pointed out, the original crux of the meta-argument was that a poster had created a strawman of an argument and then demanded that other posters defend that strawman he'd made for them and as labored as the metaphor might be, reporting a mod arguing in bad faith (who has a historical pattern of doing so, even!) seems a bit like calling the cops on a cop - d&d mods largely being self-selected by existing d&d mods makes it difficult to feel like such reports would be taken seriously given how often the issue of authoritative tone has come up (Koos' recent intervention in the situation not withstanding - its very much seen and appreciated that Koos acknowledged that his tone is often an issue whether intentional or not).

Only other thing I'd mention as an abject failure is that the guy that secretly hoped the "Reade chat" would just disappear eventually still has a position of authority here which is uhhhh...generously, "not a great look."

Its worth pointing out: D&D mods are not self-selecting. We can suggest people for mod and then they get reviewed by the admins. Sometimes the admins themselves help with the selection or suggest people. The Admins have rejected plenty of our selections as well, and quite a few of those we've selected chose not to accept.

Professor Beetus
Apr 12, 2007


Speak, Charles Barkley. Tell me what it is you want from me. I do not have much time and only one gift left to give.




Yeah, neither myself or EHF were hand selected by mods in DnD as far as I am aware, my initial appointment to IK the Covid thread was pretty much all between Athanatos and me. I'm sure the mods had opinions about it but I wasn't already part of the mod clique or anything.

Re: derails, my personal opinion is if something is fun, harmless, or interesting/informative, I'm going to more likely to let it slide for a bit. Specifically referring to BIG-DICK-BUTT-gently caress's example, I don't recall anything particularly informative or interesting about the Warren 2020 chat, it was all pretty much reheated leftovers (DNA testing, was a Republican until 40) and tbh the only interesting bit that came out of it was the blood quantum stuff Fritz was able to speak on. Everything else was stuff we already knew/clearly saw in 2020 and there wasn't, iirc, anything new or revelatory about that discussion. In addition, rehashing old primaries tends to be one of the more contentious and drama-causing things in CE and I can understand why Fritz wanted to step in sooner rather than later.

In contrast, musical chat was funny, people were having a good time, and the actual somewhat critical nature of Les Mis discussion was neat to see. Makes me wish FoS's media thread had taken off, I'd love to see more DnDers critiquing media through political lenses, the kind of stuff that's typically frowned on in Games, TVIV, or CD.

That's just my perspective though, I generally try to have a lighter touch anyway and am not super active outside of Covid thread. I'm pretty dumb so I like to lurk more than I post.

Willa Rogers posted:

Get Rid of the Deadwood
No, not the guy who backseat mods every thread (although seeing a probation or two land in his lap for it would be novel), but rather the necromancy in the topic list of threads. Rules thread should stay at the top, like an admin/forums announcement. Not sure why the other threads are stickied rn, except for maybe the toon contest. (eta: And please gas CRAP-rated threads already. They're gassed for a reason--they're crap!)

Wanted to address this because I just brought up the Covid thread being stickied with the other mods last night and suggested that it was probably time to be unstickied, but we decided to wait until the feedback thread to see if it came up/see what posters think about it. So thanks for the feedback.

Professor Beetus fucked around with this message at 17:25 on Jan 29, 2022

Raere
Dec 13, 2007



I think that the mod team is doing a swell job. I think that Beetus and Fritz have been great additions.

I particularly enjoy reading the D&D COVID thread, and I appreciate the most toxic posters being either threadbanned or otherwise chased off. It seems like traffic decreases by an order of magnitude with the worst offenders gone and it makes for a much easier and enjoyable read (at least until the next person comes along and riles everyone up and the cycle repeats).

BIG-DICK-BUTT-FUCK
Jan 26, 2016

Just a funny Av. Not an own, calm down people. tyvm


Koos Group posted:

I spoke with Fritz after the incident you're referring to and concluded that it if a thread is veering toward a topic that's unlikely to bear fruit, rather than trying to head off the conversation it would be better to just give a reminder/warning that posts should be insightful and not common talking points or basic political rhetoric.

Great, thank you! Also wanted to add: I didnt mean to single Fritz out, was just the most recent example I could find. I think the moderation has been pretty good, all told.

Professor Beetus posted:

Yeah, neither myself or EHF were hand selected by mods in DnD as far as I am aware, my initial appointment to IK the Covid thread was pretty much all between Athanatos and me. I'm sure the mods had opinions about it but I wasn't already part of the mod clique or anything.

Re: derails, my personal opinion is if something is fun, harmless, or interesting/informative, I'm going to more likely to let it slide for a bit. Specifically referring to BIG-DICK-BUTT-gently caress's example, I don't recall anything particularly informative or interesting about the Warren 2020 chat, it was all pretty much reheated leftovers (DNA testing, was a Republican until 40) and tbh the only interesting bit that came out of it was the blood quantum stuff Fritz was able to speak on. Everything else was stuff we already knew/clearly saw in 2020 and there wasn't, iirc, anything new or revelatory about that discussion. In addition, rehashing old primaries tends to be one of the more contentious and drama-causing things in CE and I can understand why Fritz wanted to step in sooner rather than later.

Since I provided the example, I’ll elaborate further: There was a point presented that Warren received favorable attention due to her gender which was entirely new and interesting to me. Also, it’s been a couple years and I wasn’t here for 2020 primary chat so I enjoyed seeing what other posters thought of it.

Fwiw, Hamilton had previously been discussed in the same CE thread, earlier this month. Arguably more of a rehash, less recent and less relevant to CE .. but the people clearly wanted to post about it, so who am I to cry foul? The point about primary chat causing drama is valid and completely understandable.

Also - I wanted to commend you for letting the obesity chat take place in the covid thread recently. It’s only tangentially related to covid but it was a good, fruitful discussion. That’s the kind of moderation I like best.

BIG-DICK-BUTT-FUCK fucked around with this message at 17:55 on Jan 29, 2022

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Majorian
Jul 1, 2009

I mean, I'm smiling, but I am very fucking furious.



:agreed: 100%. I'm genuinely impressed with Koos and the other new mods/iks so far. I especially like the requirement that one should at least try to say something new or insightful with one's takes. I also feel like cracking down on things like forums clique wars and backseat modding/"working the refs" has made a really positive impact here. I'm also pleased that open hostility seems less welcome here across the board.

I'd encourage the newer mods who aren't as pathologically steeped in DnD lore to keep learning who the longtime trolls/gimmick posters are, but that's always going to be an ongoing effort, because hey, it's an online forum. Otherwise, no notes that I can think of.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply