|
Hello D&D! The mod and admin team needs you! Let us know about D&D! The good things, things you are not happy with, things that should just be known. We'd love to hear about threads you think are neat or people who deserve recognition for being great in D&D. We also want to hear about the things you are not happy with and the things you think should be changed. Anything and all things D&D, this is your chance to drop us a line. This is NOT a thread for going after other posters. This is NOT the thread to report on other people. If it is your opinion a specific poster is ruining the entirety of D&D, send me a private message and we can discuss that aspect of your issue. A little addition to this, if you have comments on a mod, they should probably be shared in PM. This is not a thread to judge and jury the mod team. This is also more of a place to give your ideas and feelings, not to tear down others. I want to hear YOUR thoughts, not your criticism of other people's ideas.  I'm not going to make it a rule to not quote others, but I highly recommend, and would prefer, you create your own post with your own words. Again, I want to reiterate, this is not just bad stuff or stuff that is not working. There are good things and good people in D&D, I want to hear about those too. Maybe there is a long running thread you enjoy checking out everyday or there is someone you think deserves some recognition for being a boon to the community. Let me know that stuff too. Some other housekeeping things: This thread will be in slow mode. This thread will only be open when someone is around to monitor it. My apologies if that doesn't match up with the times you are on the forums. My PMs are always open. Probations will be handled by only me or another member of the Admin team, no D&D mods/IKs will be running probes in this thread. I'm not going to ramp probations, if you deserve one, it will probably be a long one. No other Mods or Admins will be required to post in this thread. Do not call them out to answer for things. If they would like to stop by, they are free to. If you wish to give thoughts but do not want to do so publicly you can PM me, I have the ability to add PMs to your account for a discussion. Your feedback/name/username will remain anonymous to everyone but me. You may also include if you want your post shared with the Mods or to keep it fully Admin eyes only. That's it for now. There may be more updates in this space later. I will make sure to keep the thread updated if something comes across. Any questions directed at me I will try to answer, other general things I will also leave any thoughts I have.
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 19:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 5, 2024 00:19 |
|
|
And since that is a pretty open ended OP there, let me start you off with a prompt you can answer that will help me out a lot: What makes you come to D&D to post, read and interact? What is it that keeps you coming back?
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 19:55
|
|
|
I also encourage you to give feedback specifically on Ramping Here: https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3943734 The D&D mods have been doing more specialized Feedback threads, and posting and giving opinions in those can help a ton.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 20:00
|
|
|
good: there are quite a few very smart and very knowledgable posters that say interesting things that i like reading bad: there are also quite a few people more concerned with Winning The Argument and Showing Their Posting Friends How Hard They're Owning Their Enemies, such as you cannot talk about one of the general election candidates in the general election thread without having thirty people quoting you, posting sick burns, followed by eating a probation from the thread's resident IK
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 20:21
|
|
|
Athanatos posted:And since that is a pretty open ended OP there, let me start you off with a prompt you can answer that will help me out a lot: The only reason I come back to D&D now is to post updates in the Presidents thread and occasionally pop in on the Polliwonks thread. The environment everywhere else is too toxic and the IKs governing the threads are too capricious with how they punish people.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 20:26
|
|
|
Crossposting from the other thread, as this was more about D&D in general (hopefully this isn't too specific - I'm not calling out specific posters and think the mods are in general good, if overworked!). Right now I think there's two problems with D&D: inconsistent and lax moderation (easier to fix, and I talk about this in the other thread) and the fact that the forum has become kind of an unreadable mess where the default tone and approach is "zero charity towards fellow posters, being hostile as possible, and trying to score points against your posting enemies" (harder to fix). Here's what I'd like to see: I do not think this is a controversial statement, but D&D kind of loving sucks to read. As much as this is a product of the world in which we live - which seems to be getting worse at every turn - its also because the atmosphere in D&D has become increasingly toxic. I'm tired of the default position of posters (including myself - I'm also guilty of this) being to view anyone who disagrees with them as a deliberately hostile posting enemy; to view posts as uncharitably as possible; and to relish scoring posting victories against your ideological opponents. And, even worse, there are way too many posts which are either: a. brokebrained doomposting which I think is actively harmful to the posters and the people reading it, or b. weird smug posting in which it seems the goal is to enjoy as much schadenfreude toward other posters as possible. I would love if we could cut that poo poo out. Fixing this isn't going to be easy, but I do think moderation which is a little more flexible would be a start - focusing less on the absolute letter of the law and instead on "is this post/poster making the forum more or less toxic." Obviously we should start with 6'ers - but I'd love to see probations given out for someone just making GBS threads up a thread. I also think we need to try to bring back the comedy to D&D as much as possible. That was my motivation for making the book review roulette thread - lets loving laugh at least a little bit. I would love to see the mods and IKs also try to make things more enjoyable - lets have fun mod challenges, gangtang contest, photoshop contests, etc. I think creating a better posting environment in D&D would go a long way to improving the overall atmosphere, and as a bonus would reduce reports and make ramps less necessary. D&D at its best is fun, informative, and one of the best places to talk about politics online. I want that best to happen more often.  There are some great threads - the political cartoon thread is consistently great, the president's thread is great, we had some great threads on economics.
Seven Hundred Bee fucked around with this message at 20:44 on Oct 12, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 20:34
|
|
|
Athanatos posted:And since that is a pretty open ended OP there, let me start you off with a prompt you can answer that will help me out a lot: I like that d&d posters are essentially quarantined by thread so that I can keep up with the news and analysis that I find interesting, and completely ignore the other stuff. I hope that once the election is over things don't just collapse back to one "uspol" thread because you're never, ever, ever going to have a readable thread that has both polliwonks and GE thread posters in it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 20:40
|
|
|
Fritz Coldcockin posted:The only reason I come back to D&D now is to post updates in the Presidents thread and occasionally pop in on the Polliwonks thread. The environment everywhere else is too toxic and the IKs governing the threads are too capricious with how they punish people. Craig K posted:good: there are quite a few very smart and very knowledgable posters that say interesting things that i like reading Do you both think more IKs/Mods is the answer here? Having people from "both sides" so more eyes on all posts. I've always been big on "many opinions make better decisions." I've always felt more mods is good because they have different views on stuff and can find stuff that works for more people.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 20:43
|
|
|
Seven Hundred Bee posted:Fixing this isn't going to be easy, but I do think moderation which is a little more flexible would be a start - focusing less on the absolute letter of the law and instead on "is this post/poster making the forum more or less toxic." Obviously we should start with 6'ers - but I'd love to see probations given out for someone just making GBS threads up a thread. I think this can be hard. Finding the line between someone having an opinion and someone being a poo poo. It's why I like thread IKs for huge forums. People who CAN read every single post and know the ebbs and flow of a thread. Context is king. Seven Hundred Bee posted:I would love to see the mods and IKs also try to make things more enjoyable - lets have fun mod challenges, gangtang contest, photoshop contests, etc. I think creating a better posting environment in D&D would go a long way to improving the overall atmosphere, and as a bonus would reduce reports and make ramps less necessary. I like this. Sometimes it's hard to remember that everyone is another person behind a keyboard. More community stuff that brings people together that is NOT about fighting and winning might get people to see others as less of an enemy to be vanquished.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 20:47
|
|
|
awesmoe posted:I like that d&d posters are essentially quarantined by thread so that I can keep up with the news and analysis that I find interesting, and completely ignore the other stuff. This is a good point too. Do you think some threads should be broken out into further specifics or is the balance of stuff pretty good at the moment?
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 20:48
|
|
|
Athanatos posted:Do you both think more IKs/Mods is the answer here? Having people from "both sides" so more eyes on all posts. I've always been big on "many opinions make better decisions." I've always felt more mods is good because they have different views on stuff and can find stuff that works for more people. Yes, with a caveat. We do need more active moderators--probably at least three or four more. D&D is a high-traffic forum that's active during all times of the day and I don't even think we've got mods that cover the entirety of North America's timezones. I think you're toploading the staff with IKs. There's too few people with more responsibilities and too many people with few responsibilities. Does that makes sense? Fritz Coldcockin fucked around with this message at 20:55 on Oct 12, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 20:52
|
|
|
Athanatos posted:Do you both think more IKs/Mods is the answer here? Having people from "both sides" so more eyes on all posts. I've always been big on "many opinions make better decisions." I've always felt more mods is good because they have different views on stuff and can find stuff that works for more people. I certainly do. D&D needs more mods and it needs more consistency in punishments, but even more fundamentally, it needs mods that actively care about promoting a non-toxic, non-aggressive culture, rather than letting those elements fester and self-radicalize. Part of the problem right now is that making containment threads for the people you don't want to deal with doesn't work: they create toxic, self-perpetuating cultures where the worst people in the forum are allowed to constantly egg eachother on towards more toxicity and hostility, then those people take those habits and apply them to other threads, ruining them too (and I'm not talking about topic-based threads in general, but rather that it's an open secret that none of the current active mods read the GE thread or want to deal with it, and they'll tell you that directly when you ask them ) It's then even worse when you then appoint an IK who thinks it's their job to protect their friends and probe anyone who disagrees with them, as you've transformed it from a containment thread to a place where there are moderator-approved authority figures actively endorsing the bad behavior. Like, it should be no surprise to anyone that the environment is increasingly hostile and lovely when we've decided that being an aggressively toxic rear end in a top hat is acceptable in some places and will be supported by mod action on your behalf as long as you're being an rear end in a top hat to the right group of people. eke out fucked around with this message at 20:56 on Oct 12, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 20:53
|
|
|
Athanatos posted:I think this can be hard. Finding the line between someone having an opinion and someone being a poo poo. It's why I like thread IKs for huge forums. People who CAN read every single post and know the ebbs and flow of a thread. Context is king. I think it can be hard to moderate based on overall intent/contribution value instead of letter of the law, but I think right D&D errs too far on the side of 'explicitly breaking rule 1.3b', because thats easier when you have an understaffed moderating team, and because it creates less drama and QCS threads. My ideal moderation approach would be IKs as the first level of moderation for the big threads which generate reports, with mods stepping in for more serious punishments or during especially busy periods. The challenge comes, though - and this is a specific D&D thing - is that you need to be careful that IKs aren't making decisions based on ideology or political stance, but rather on how disruptive someone is being (obviously there are notable exceptions, i.e. we don't want a literal white nationalist posting here). But I do think right now that there are posters who get away with just constant, toxic shitposting because they fall on the "right side" of an ideological divide (or their beliefs echo that of the thread IK). Here's a clearer example in practice: I think the polls thread needs an IK, and I think that person should make judgements based on rather someone is posting in good faith (i.e. actually reading the posts they reply to, not posting weird speculative doombrain fan fiction) rather than if that person thinks Biden will win or not. Of course we don't want to apply this to an absurd extreme - which is why I think there needs to be more flexibility than there is right now, and we don't want a "Cyrano assigns an essay to a neo-Nazi" to take place in D&D. To help thread this difficult needle, though, I think it'd be immensely helpful if we just had more IKs cycling through, more IKs in general, and a stickied thread to discuss IK and mod decisions and give reasonable critiques outside of QCS. But yea, I think you're right on the money - right now D&D has no sense of community. Instead its a series of hostile camps in which people view posters from the opposing "camps" as enemies who must be vanquished. And for me, personally, I'm tired of the awful personal attacks. I think it would help if everyone took a deep breath, stepped back, and acknowledge at the end of the day that other posters are not the architects of the things we're angry about. I think that more "fun" things could be a step towards bridging that gap. Athanatos posted:This is a good point too. Do you think some threads should be broken out into further specifics or is the balance of stuff pretty good at the moment? Yes and no. I think having topic-specific thread is obviously good, but containment threads are bad for the reasons other posters have outlined. And - I think its important to be honest here - the GE thread is functionally a containment thread, which is good in the short term because it keeps toxicity out of other threads, but bad in the long term because once the election ends I am scared of what USPol is going to look like (and we've already had instances of GE leaking...). I think the ultimate sign that there something wrong with a thread and why containment threads don't work is when a non regular D&D poster comes in and is horrified with what they read - and thats especially perilous because D&D is supposed to be the place to have more serious discussions about political topics and tends to get busiest around election when non-regulars stop in. Also, we should rename the GE thread into something else, now that I think about it. Seven Hundred Bee fucked around with this message at 21:01 on Oct 12, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 20:56
|
|
|
Fritz Coldcockin posted:Yes, with a caveat. Perfectly. 3 or 4 more was honestly a number I've heard be tossed around before. I don't know if there is a specific "perfect" number, but I always think more cant hurt. Hell, even with a ton, if you feel overwhelmed on something you can pass it off to someone else and take a mental break and not have to worry. We've been doing more IKs right away because that is an easy add. I also think the D&D mods do a drat good job communicating with current IKs about stuff.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 20:58
|
|
|
Athanatos posted:Do you both think more IKs/Mods is the answer here? Having people from "both sides" so more eyes on all posts. I've always been big on "many opinions make better decisions." I've always felt more mods is good because they have different views on stuff and can find stuff that works for more people. yes, to be fair; without knowing anything about the site i kinda have to assume that D&D probably has the highest ratio of reports generated to mods/ik available to look at it on the site
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 21:00
|
|
|
Athanatos posted:Do you both think more IKs/Mods is the answer here? Having people from "both sides" so more eyes on all posts. I've always been big on "many opinions make better decisions." I've always felt more mods is good because they have different views on stuff and can find stuff that works for more people. The nominal issue with more IKs and more Mods, absent clearer and stricter rules on what is and isn't allowed, is that if there are two sides and there are mods and IKs on each side, Side A's mods and IKs probe/ban Side B people where they have discretion and Side B's mods and IKs probe/ban side A people where they have the same discretion and thus nothing actually get discussed as it's just the continuation of an ideological proxy war. What ostensibly needs to happen is clearer rules and examples on what is and isn't allowed and being consistent about it and being able to confront and reprimand IKs and Mods who act despite the clarified guidelines. Ideology, largely should not come into play in determining moderating decisions save for a number of very obvious things (racism, homophobia, etc.). Obviously people have their own political ideologies they subscribe to, but it shouldn't be the case that someone making an effort to post a political opinion that's runs against the majority of D&D gets run out on a rail by posters making GBS threads down their throat and with the assistance of IKs and/or mods. Edit: Discerning good faith and bad faith is a tricky thing fwiw, but as an example in a LAN thread, when a political subject got brought up, it was obvious to tell who as merely there to drop their opinions and not engage with anyone else as they never quoted or directly responded to anyone responding to them except when the subject turned away from politics. It's in the name of the subform and if they can't even manage to meet that minimum, they should probably shuffle over to CSPAM or GBS or elsewhere. Xelkelvos fucked around with this message at 21:09 on Oct 12, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 21:04
|
|
|
I don't post a lot, but I usually stay current with a the USPol thread, the General Election thread, and the Coronavirus thread. The reposts from Twitter are informative and often funny. There are a few posters who make huge effort posts that provide interesting insight and perspectives that I wouldn't find anywhere else. If something is bullshit, there are enough smart people on the forums that it gets called out reasonably quickly. I'm not aware of any other place online (because I'm getting old as gently caress and coming to SA is a deeply ingrained habit) that has the quality of discussion that I find here. I'm also reasonably sure that at least 70% of the folks posting aren't bots, which is pretty excellent compared to Twitter or Reddit. I can't really think of anything I'd like to see more of. Maybe mod punishments? Those are way more fun than 6'ers.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 21:19
|
|
|
I want to second the extreme toxicity of the General Election thread and its moderation. I have been probated there half a dozen times...and nowhere else. There is too much probating of people based on the views they express rather than adherence to the rules. I was recently had two separate 1-week probations in the General Election thread for polite posts that addressed, factually, claims that were being made by other posters, because the conclusions I reached were unacceptable to a particular group of other posters, who deal with disagreement by hanging together, taunting and attacking the person they disagree with and drawing mod attention to get them probated.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 21:41
|
|
|
I've pm'd you in the past with some things, but the biggest thing is DND needs more mods and iks, the people that are active and handling the majority of the reports are noticeably tired and burnt out because they have been left to deal with whats been going on, partially because some of the other mods stopped doing much due to reasons that aren't relevant, or because their really isn't an easy way to install new mods in DND. There really feels like their is two issues with that though, Why is it hard to appoint new mods? and why do the mods we have burn out? From one standpoint adding new mods is getting increasingly hard due to the doxxing issue, which can pretty heavily impact some of the people that could be mods, more then a few people are actively worried about having their forum accounts linked to their rea life due to various reasons, not the smallest being they literally could lose their jobs. But many people see how the mods are just blatantly attacked for taking any action to enforce the rules, which can be dogpiled on by a group of posters that just don't actually like having a mod act, or because they don't agree that the mod should punish someone for that specific post. There is an issue with many threads where any action to qwell a derail or falsehoods gets that ik or mod attacked which does affect moral, and it seems to keep repeating time and time again over the last few months. That rolls into the burnout issue, the mods we do have are tired and its noticeable, They get shiton constantly typically by the same group of posters that keep getting probed for the same shitposts and hottakes that aren't fit DND posts, and they aren't even really fit for cspam. They are just shitposts meant to cause derails and be bad and rile up others. Every time they do act and try to fix things its the same cycle. When we only have two mods that actively seem to do reports and constantly get attacked when they try to stop derails or turn a thread out of a massive shitpile of stupid it ends up just driving them further from the community they are trying to help. And it limits the possibility of others wanting to help by being iks or mods, why would you want to be one when you just get attacked constantly? We have GOOD mods for the ones that do try and do stuff, and GJB and Herstory have been good on how they try and guide the threads that they take part in. But its just not enough, specially when we don't seem to have any other backup for if things get bad. Also the ge thread is not about the general election, its literally a thread that is meant to be a screeching chamber that constantly attacks mods and other posters, Countless examples have been given in pms and in qcs threads and it needs to be decided on whether it is healthy to keep a thread dedicated to basically being a toxic hellhole that even the op states is a containment thread, we got rid of them in GBS because it was insular and horrible, it leads to nothing but exactly what has happened where it causes more drama and issues then it was ever worth. UCS Hellmaker fucked around with this message at 21:51 on Oct 12, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 21:48
|
|
|
Here's an honest question: why are admins so gunshy about making more mods? Are mod positions a finite resource? I can understand not wanting to deal with the drama of a bad mod (I definitely can think of a few IKs who absolutely should not be mods) but if something really egregious happens then they can be demodded. It seems like less energy should be focused on making sure that "all sides" are representing by moderation staff and IKs and more should be focused on making sure that mods are moderating according to the stated rules of the forum.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 21:52
|
|
|
Why do I still read SA/D&D after a couple decades? As currently constructed, the forum is pretty well curated with topics of decent depth and breadth but nothing ridiculous. I can always find information on the news or topic I want more knowledge of with relative ease. I say that because one thing this place has always had in spades are people who post excellent sources which are ever increasingly difficult to come by now. The banter here is generally great even with the occasional derails between people for various reasons. Which leads into... What could change? 99% of what few addressable issues exist here would be solved by having better internet janitor coverage 24 hours a day to catch stupid rear end derails and inexcusably bad posts before a page or two of dumb poo poo sprouts from it. I don't think it means bans or long probations either, just people consistently around (with enough so that its not just one sap being relied on to always be on at 1 am Pacific 7 days a week) to nudge people on course with sixers as needed. The vast majority of posting people find obnoxious isn't done in bad faith/ malice so it doesn't need a heavy hand. It just needs a hand to nip it in the bud sooner. Most other things that have ever been viewed as problems here can't be eliminated without having a shadowy cabal approve each and every post before it appears to the masses.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 22:05
|
|
|
DrNutt posted:Here's an honest question: why are admins so gunshy about making more mods? Are mod positions a finite resource? I can understand not wanting to deal with the drama of a bad mod (I definitely can think of a few IKs who absolutely should not be mods) but if something really egregious happens then they can be demodded. It seems like less energy should be focused on making sure that "all sides" are representing by moderation staff and IKs and more should be focused on making sure that mods are moderating according to the stated rules of the forum. I'm open to having lots of mods. I've only been an admin a short time, but now that Lowtax is for sure gone I want to start working on making this place better. There is no Mod limit or anything. Adding Mods is just a question of finding people that the community will thrive under. I posted this back in QCS a while ago, but will repost it here: quote:I think every forum on SA is it's own place with its own rules and communities. There is an overlap sometimes, but for the most part each is it's own place. The forums at large have a set of rules for everyone, but in your own subforum there are also rules to be aware of. Stuff that works in that forum, but not elsewhere. Each Mod is in charge of their own place and sets the tone. Best case scenario, the Mod is someone that an overall majority of posters agree with and has been there long enough to know what the forum needs. It's just a matter of finding people who give a poo poo about the community and not just people who want buttons to burn people they dislike.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 22:08
|
|
|
DrNutt posted:Here's an honest question: why are admins so gunshy about making more mods? Are mod positions a finite resource? I can understand not wanting to deal with the drama of a bad mod (I definitely can think of a few IKs who absolutely should not be mods) but if something really egregious happens then they can be demodded. It seems like less energy should be focused on making sure that "all sides" are representing by moderation staff and IKs and more should be focused on making sure that mods are moderating according to the stated rules of the forum. I do believe the biggest issue and why IKS are the first step is because there have been a few people in recent memory that have openly said they dont give a flying gently caress about leaking the mod forum and mod only areas of hidden threads removed for personal information or legal reasons because they feel that things are being hidden and nothing should be hidden ever. Being a mod should require some modicum of trust by the other mods because there is information that shouldn't be posted on the wide forums, because it can cause a major drama storm when taken out of context or cherrypicked to make others look bad for personal gain.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 22:10
|
|
|
Really, D&D needs three things: 1. More mods. Demote Ardennes (who doesn't actually moderate, as far as I can tell) and promote Greyjoybastard and herstory from IK to moderator. Add several new IKs too. 2. Require moderators and IKs to cite the rule that has been violated when they probate someone. D&D has a huge problem with arbitrary and capricious moderation, partly because the existing mods are burned out and are almost always in a foul mood. Such moderation only breeds resentment and distrust. I know catch-all rules are useful, but they should be relied on as little as possible. If a particular behavior keeps getting covered by the catch-all rule, then it's time to make a new, discrete rule for it. The benefit of this is that it would drastically reduce the amount of appeals and complaints, because the moderator/IK can simply point at the rule they are enforcing, rather than having to justify their decision after the fact. 3. Have these types of "State of D&D" threads regularly -- maybe once every three or six months.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 22:13
|
|
|
I think the real question I'd be curious to see people answer: what would you like D&D to be, and how do you think we can get there? For me: a less toxic forum How we get there: more IKs and mods, a proactive effort to create a better community
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 22:17
|
|
|
A large part of the problem with D&D is whether it should be a place where all arguments that are made without being rude or bigoted should be contended and discussed versus a place where some arguments are unacceptable because "they've already been discussed too much" or "it is easily defeated" or "that is too frustrating to read" or other reasons that the impact of those arguments on the community aren't worth allowing them to be posted. Using the climate thread as an example because I think it both suffers from the same problems as the rest of the threads and is a good example where the community at large mostly agrees on a set of arguments about the topic (D&D posters in general believes climate change is real) without the discussion of it being as ladened as other threads. The difference between the two visions of D&D would be is it ok to post pro-coal posts in the climate change thread if they're made respectfully or should one get a probation for pro-coal posts in the climate change thread regardless of how well constructed the post and its argument is. We can't have it both ways and still be fair, since we won't have agreement on which posts are unacceptable due to the content of their argument, the frequency the argument appears, the ease of rebutting it, etc. I and that theoretical pro-coal poster would certainly disagree over the ease of refuting their arguments. Either we allow discussion and arguments that some feel are boring and over-done or we restrict threads and admit that certain polite and non-bigoted viewpoints are unacceptable regardless how well argued or reasoned, because the community in the thread disagrees with them fiercely. If I have to pick a poison I'd still rather have the open debate and pro-coal posts in the climate change thread rather than de-facto or even officially restrict viewpoints. Drawing that line on which arguments are too disruptive even when made well is dangerous since we don't all agree on where the line should be drawn and may not like where it lands. Conversely the harms suffered by allowing these arguments and instead having to put posters on ignore isn't as significant as the harms if we say "no pro-coal posts" or "no pro-fossil fuel posts" or "no anti nuclear posts" or wherever that line would get drawn. If the community disagrees and really needs to have threads where they can restrict non-rude and non-bigoted arguments for the sake of peace, then a semi-technological solution that might be interesting would be to use ASK/TELL style thread tags for debate/discussion and utilizing different rulesets for each. Let there be a debate Climate thread that functions with stricter rules on politeness and poo poo-posting with effectively all arguments allowed and a discussion Climate thread focused on TV/IVing politics where differing opinions are expected to just be stated and respected but not debated. The pro-coal poster could post their opinion in both, but in the debate thread expect to be ridiculed with logic and evidence and in the discussion thread be politely ignored with no expectation on debate and if they try and debate someone who posts an anti-coal opinion get a probation. I'd favor one thread with all the climate posts, but at least allowing debate over dissenting views in half of the space is better than none.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 22:18
|
|
|
An out-there idea that people might hate, but one of the better mod solutions for GBS 2.0 was bringing in posters who weren't GBS posters per se like g0m and letting them have free reign, and I can't help but wonder if that might help D&D, if it wasn't governed by regulars but more outsiders from other forums who can react to things in their own individual ways as opposed to the "expected" way of D&D. Everyone talks about how they hate D&D, including the regulars, so maybe the regular way of doing things isn't going to work. It's a bit weirder because g0m made GBS a more fun carefree adventurous place instead of the shitpost hellpit it'd been before while D&D takes itself pretty seriously, defines itself from CSPAM as a place to take seriously, and therefore a lighter tone might not work (and joke probations in D&D generally suck from what I've seen), but on the other hand, it could create a new culture for the subforum which it seems pretty desperate for. I'm not entirely sure what that culture would look like, but maybe an exclusively Goons with Spoons poster would? These are strictly brainstorming ideas, I don't have high hopes that would solve anything and think most of D&D's problems are cultural problems at large that aren't being solved in real-life, much less on a internet forum.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 22:18
|
|
|
UCS Hellmaker posted:I do believe the biggest issue and why IKS are the first step is because there have been a few people in recent memory that have openly said they dont give a flying gently caress about leaking the mod forum and mod only areas of hidden threads removed for personal information or legal reasons because they feel that things are being hidden and nothing should be hidden ever. Being a mod should require some modicum of trust by the other mods because there is information that shouldn't be posted on the wide forums, because it can cause a major drama storm when taken out of context or cherrypicked to make others look bad for personal gain. The "thing being hidden" in this context was a mod being a nazi
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 22:19
|
|
|
enraged_camel posted:2. Require moderators and IKs to cite the rule that has been violated when they probate someone. D&D has a huge problem with arbitrary and capricious moderation, partly because the existing mods are burned out and are almost always in a foul mood. Such moderation only breeds resentment and distrust. I know catch-all rules are useful, but they should be relied on as little as possible. If a particular behavior keeps getting covered by the catch-all rule, then it's time to make a new, discrete rule for it. The benefit of this is that it would drastically reduce the amount of appeals and complaints, because the moderator/IK can simply point at the rule they are enforcing, rather than having to justify their decision after the fact. One of the things I think is important for all mods, not just D&D is to make anything over a 6er have a good reason. I've rejected a lot of queued probations for things that are not clear. People are still going to have issues even if you write the most well thought out lawyer proof reason, but it can help. Citing a rule can be tricky because sometimes "just being a loving rear end, take some time off" is a fine reason. The more specific rules you add, the more people try and play the "Well, it's not exactly XXX why am I probed?" Going back to my "What is a mod" post, having someone people trust goes a lot further than having 500 rules with subrules that you have to go by. enraged_camel posted:3. Have these types of "State of D&D" threads regularly -- maybe once every three or six months. It's still early to say for this one, but do you think they should be run by D&D Mods/IKs, or by "outsider" admins who have fresh eyes on things?
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 22:21
|
|
|
I've taken quite a while to write this all up, apologies in advance for the length. I think this forum can be a place for informed, effortful discussion. There have been many threads here over the years that have taught people a lot of things and led to interesting discussion. While it was in LF, the thread about prisons was one of the most interesting things I had read on a forum up to that point. More recently, the thread Fritz has been maintaining with Presidential biographies is a really great jumping-on point for learning about the bios of these leaders and has generated a lot of interesting discussion. I believe the fundamental problem in this forum is that it is no longer a place for any sort of discussion, debate, analysis or information-sharing. It has primarily become a place to air your grievances against a perceived enemy and get in sick burns so you can high-five your posting pals. I am not immune to this, so I count myself as Part of the Problem which is why I've by and large ceased posting here. This posting mentality has driven out all the previous subject matter experts and people with interesting perspectives. Years ago we had a thread about Venezuela with actual expats and people on the ground posting about what was going on but it was invaded by people pushing an ideology and the posting became so toxic/hostile that all those previously sharing info were driven out and the thread became a circle-jerk about how wonderful Maduro was. For a more recent example, there's the GE thread, where expressing support for either major party candidate results in a dog-piling. All supporters, regardless of whatever reason they state, are name-called and jeered at by posters who insist on their own moral superiority. These are posters who have repeatedly said they're opposed to electoral politics in any form whatsoever, so one must ask, why are they bothering with a thread that is explicitly about that? There's no discussion added as their points will boil down to "it doesn't work", which may warrant its own thread but doesn't belong in a thread about following the US elections. If I were to make a thread about space policy and have it filled with posters saying that space policy is inherently wrong/immoral and we should instead be doing X, drowning out all discussion of actual space policy, there would be no sense in making the thread. There's no discussion to be had. It is almost as if their goal is to prevent any discussion of space policy (or an election) because they themselves disagree with the existence of it. This is hijacking the discussion space and something we shouldn't allow. Making matters worse, the attacks are all essentialism. It's not merely that you're in favor of a "bad" policy (even indirectly), no that's what you yourself actually are. We've had actual victims of sexual assault called rape apologists because they're voting for Biden or any Dem candidate, or caring about voting. Made even worse, because it's a moral crusade, the posters aren't even allowed to defend themselves, lest they face a barrage of further insults and finally a probe because they're "being disruptive". This is a big part of what drives the reputation D&D has developed and why posters have fled the subforum. The problem is not every single poster in D&D, but a select clique who have ginned each other up into more and more radical positions. I have no idea, nor do I care how/why this happened, I only care about the end result, which is that it's impossible to actually have a discussion about anything, in any thread. Every single post/thread is some titanic struggle of Good and Evil and everyone must employ every tactic in the book, regardless of its crassness or absurdity because we cannot for any minute let The Bad Guys win. This ends up running out anyone not interested in participating in some huge battle and causes things to get more and more insular and radical until we're at where we are now. Ironically, PJ's compaction cycle theory sees its best example in these forums. So what is to be done? I propose the following ideas/philosophies. These are more spirits of what we should strive for rather than hard and fast rules. #0: Don't be a dick. Corollary: Whatever your ideology is, it is not inherently the best/most righteous/whatever and likely has flaws you yourself are unaware of. Don't post like a zealot. #1: This forum doesn't matter. -The debates/arguments you have here will not meaningful change the world in any way so don't act as if every post is a life or death struggle #2: Use facts/sources when you assert a claim. -Not all facts/sources are created equal. Trust a paper written by a climate scientist over a random twitter post #3: Report bad posts. -Part of why things have gotten so bad is because no one has been doing anything about it, it's on all of us to enforce the rules to a degree as no mod can read every post. If things go unreported they likely will never be acted on. #4: Respect people's lived experience -For example, if there's a thread about the Armenian/Azerbaijani conflict and someone itt is Aremenian and talking about what's going on on the ground, don't call them a Russian toady/imperialist stooge/whatever else. Listen to what they have to say and accept they might know more than you about this topic. I suspect this is not an exhaustive list but it's at least a start. I would very much like this place go back to how it was circa 2014-2017 where there were a lot of interesting, high effort threads/posts and we had an actual diverse set of experiences and viewpoints rather than the very homogenized and hostile forum we have now. Thanks for reading y'all. axeil fucked around with this message at 22:26 on Oct 12, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 22:21
|
|
|
I think the war on  in this forum, while mostly justified especially when it comes to politics, is also being waged among posters. I don't see how this can't turn into a poo poo slinging contest when poo poo slinging is sort of the point or motivation behind a lot of poster's actions. It's sort of compounded when people are being accused of being racists or nazis way too loving fast, then the poo poo slinging becomes justified in their mind.I don't really see a way around that. People are hostile as gently caress here, it's exhausting.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 22:26
|
|
|
Oh Snapple! posted:The "thing being hidden" in this context was a mod being a nazi One of the charms of SA has always been its consistent history of terrible people having forums power. With Lowtax, an objectively lovely person, finally being gone, hopefully that changes now. Maybe Jeffrey has an eye for people and will mostly appoint folks who do the job for awhile, actively, then eventually grow weary of it and step down without any legal issues, scandals or internet mobs forming against them forcing their hand. The OMGWTFBBQs, Livestocks, NMN, etc of the world versus the list of bad mods/admins that rivals the Browns draft pick bust list in scope and scale.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 22:26
|
|
|
So, while there are threads here that are toxic and actively make me sad to read, I want to focus on two threads that I really like. The first is the presidential biographies thread, which is really well done, really effort, and both entertaining and informative to read. The second is the political maps thread. It's generally pretty chill, and people show up there and post there just because they like maps, especially strange and quirky ones. It's just a fun place to hang out and even to just lurk. So congrats to those two threads.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 22:36
|
|
|
I like D&D and have no complaints about it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 22:42
|
|
|
Why don't IKs get reports? GJB and HS are both very good IKs but it feels like they miss a lot of stuff simply because they don't get reports and the mods have to do all of the work anyways, so the IKs aren't really doing as much good as they could be.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 22:47
|
|
|
gjb and hs are decent IKs but my suggestion is to see if like 8 mods of different forums that don’t post in dnd would be willing to be part time mods of dnd. if this is the most difficult to mod forum, then bring in some experienced ringers for a while
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 22:54
|
|
|
If people have nominations for D&D mods, I'd be interested in hearing them. Paineframe, Helsing, and I were all nominated in a prior state of D&D thread so it's only fair we hear suggestions.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 22:57
|
|
|
fool of sound posted:If people have nominations for D&D mods, I'd be interested in hearing them. Paineframe, Helsing, and I were all nominated in a prior state of D&D thread so it's only fair we hear suggestions. Yeowch My Balls!!
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 22:59
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:gjb and hs are decent IKs but my suggestion is to see if like 8 mods of different forums that don’t post in dnd would be willing to be part time mods of dnd. if this is the most difficult to mod forum, then bring in some experienced ringers for a while That could only work if those different forum mods were also fairly regular D&D posters.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 23:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 5, 2024 00:19 |
|
|
Athanatos posted:Citing a rule can be tricky because sometimes "just being a loving rear end, take some time off" is a fine reason. The more specific rules you add, the more people try and play the "Well, it's not exactly XXX why am I probed?" Sure, but when it comes to a heavily politics-based forum, I don't think you can have a trust-based system where moderators are arbitrary and subjective in their decisions. Even if they start out as people whom other posters like and trust, over time the "just being a loving rear end, take some time off" probations would result in a buildup of strong resentment by posters who simply feel they are being silenced. I read your "what is a mod post" but I found myself disagreeing with it somewhat. As I described above, it may apply to other forums that are less confrontational by nature, but in my opinion a D&D moderator should first and foremost be a judge. And just like a judge, their moderation should first and foremost be rules-based. Otherwise, again just like with judges, their decisions would be immediately appealed to a higher authority. This is in fact what has been happening for a while now with greater frequency, and it is not only a huge pain in the rear end to deal with but also leaves a sour taste in everyone's mouth. You are right that if you require mods to cite the rule that is broken when they probate someone, you would get some rules-lawyering. But "I didn't technically break rule X!" is still far more preferable to "he probated me because he hates me and my buddies!". The former litigates an issue based on technicality and encourages improvements and refinements in the rules that are in place (which in turn improve and strengthen the forum), whereas the latter undermines the entire system and results in further schisms. Athanatos posted:It's still early to say for this one, but do you think they should be run by D&D Mods/IKs, or by "outsider" admins who have fresh eyes on things? I personally would prefer outsider admins but I don't have a strong opinion on it. As you say, I think we should see how this one goes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 23:03
|
|