|
i could spend a whole ton of words to detail what exactly is wrong with d&d but others have put it far better than i have so i'll just be punchy instead. d&d is complete and utter dogshit right now. it will never get better unless the mods are removed. they are unfathomably bad.
|
#
¿
Oct 25, 2021 01:09
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 9, 2024 09:12 |
|
|
to reiterate my previous post, the current moderation of dnd is actively smothering the forum into a slow but inevitable death. this will not change with the current moderators in place because if there is one thing they are consistent about, it is a steadfast refusal to alter their habits. Some may not be as bad as others, but as a whole, they have combined to make this subforum the worst posting environment in the entire history of something awful. the only way to avoid this forums eventual death is to completely remove all the current mods and then pick new ones with zero connection to those mods. things will not get better without doing this because the current mods have zero incentive to stop their corrosive administering of this forum. also thread/forumbans are a complete and utter disaster of an idea, especially when the current mods are eager to utilize them to remove anyone that challenges them.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 26, 2021 01:08
|
|
|
a genuine question to fool of sound: Why do you expect things to get better? this is the latest in a relentless iteration of feedback and user pushback against the actions of mods, and things never change. nothing is ever settled, and the enmity between poster and admin just grows deeper. Do you look at yourself, do you look at your staff, and see them radically altering their moderation style? its an extremely hard thing to change oneself like that, and as long as this style of modding remains, things will continue to get worse. If you truly wish to see a dnd that gets better rather than gets worse, step down, and encourage your staff to follow your example. this is the only way we aren't all back in another thread like this three months down the line. e: like, their contributions in this feedback thread has either been wholly aggro (commiegir and you to a lesser extent), wholly absent (handsome ralph) or focused on minutiae (greyjoy, and to be fair it does seem like his jam). why should any user see how the mods have reacted to this thread and hold any optimism whatsoever for the future? A big flaming stink fucked around with this message at 01:40 on Oct 27, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2021 01:38
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Let's not start that up here, thanks. are you ever gonna deal with the fact that you gave him a slap on the wrist for some absolutely disgusting actions and words? Are you going to take action that redresses that? at all?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2021 03:26
|
|
|
fool of sound posted:You have been probated one time ever in D&D that I can tell, by exmarx, and I just scrolled through your post history here and it's all completely uncontroversial USPol/Trump/Right Wing media white noise and some QUILTBAG posting up until Benghazi 2 got banned, and you haven't participated in D&D basically at all since then. I post in this forum far, far, far too much and I agree wholeheartedly with both these poster's sentiments The Shortest Path posted:And most of us aren't super interested in the trust or respect or opinions of mods that they we think should be demodded, yet here we are forced to entertain your whims if we want this place to be able to have a functional politics discussion forum in the near future. Jimong5 posted:Welp, there's your answer folks, nothing wrong here, just accept that D&D is the hugbox forum and post in C-SPAM. e: for my own criticisms, the fact that are unable to not take feedback personal is yet another sign that you are unsuited to being a moderator here. It would be the best thing for both the forum and for yourself to step down as a moderator. A big flaming stink fucked around with this message at 21:31 on Oct 27, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2021 21:25
|
|
|
Ok I actually have a legit question regarding moderation. Is disputing that the actions of the PRC in Xinjiang constitute a genocide permissible in D&D, or even disputing the severity of the harmful actions that the PRC has undertaken in Xinjiang permissible? If the answer to the above is yes, then is it acceptable for posters to call other posters who post such things (whether or not xinjiang is a genocide, how severe are the PRC's actions) to call them genocide deniers, tankies, or other epithets common in the china thread in D&D? I'm trying to figure out to what extent ideological rigidity is enforced in debate and discussion, and if a good faith debate on controversial topics is permissible, or if discussion of this topic alone is considered beyond the pale.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2021 22:37
|
|
|
enki42 posted:I think ultimately any sort of debate on any sort of genocide needs to have a base line of "this line shall not be crossed" in the community. There's clear lines that we wouldn't allow being crossed for questioning or debate of Canadian residential schools, or the Holocaust, even though I'm sure there's some horrible, horrible papers and books that call into question the severity and fatalities of both of those. certainly, but the danger here is that due to the moderation-enforced impermissibility of discussion previously, there has been ideological uniformity on this issue in the china thread, with outright contempt shown to people who do not hew to that line. if we are sincere about the desire to hold good faith discussion of the topic, then not only will posters have to know that they will not face retaliation from the moderators for bringing up the topic, they also must have confidence that they will not be completely acceptable targets for a variety of insults. A big flaming stink fucked around with this message at 23:06 on Oct 29, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2021 23:03
|
|
|
i know youre being piled on for this response but i'm genuinely curious, did the moderators consult any rape survivors at all about their plan? if no, do you feel like you should have involved them in the process? For the future, if it becomes necessary to make moderation decisions involving topics relating to rape culture, do you plan to reach out to survivors and involve them in the decision making process (with their consent, of course)?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2021 00:14
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:certainly, but the danger here is that due to the moderation-enforced impermissibility of discussion previously, there has been ideological uniformity on this issue in the china thread, with outright contempt shown to people who do not hew to that line. if we are sincere about the desire to hold good faith discussion of the topic, then not only will posters have to know that they will not face retaliation from the moderators for bringing up the topic, they also must have confidence that they will not be completely acceptable targets for a variety of insults. A big flaming stink posted:Ok I actually have a legit question regarding moderation. hey, mods, any chance of getting a response to this question? if you're working on a more meaningful response, that's fine, just want to make sure this isnt forgotten in the churn.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2021 00:56
|
|
|
fool of sound posted:The admins are going to give us their guidance on this, and we'll get back to you. Sorry for the wait. GreyjoyBastard posted:my immediate response is "hell if I know", you're welcome no problem! i recognize its a contentious topic, to put it mildly 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2021 01:03
|
|
|
socialsecurity posted:I mean it's the truth just look at someone like a big flaming stinks rap.sheet where he's been probed dozens of times for posting misleading tweet or articles that say the opposite of what he claims, why should we pretend that doesn't happen? What the hell, I am not remotely involved in this conversation??
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2021 16:45
|
|
|
socialsecurity posted:I mean it's the truth just look at someone like a big flaming stinks rap.sheet where he's been probed dozens of times for posting misleading tweet or articles that say the opposite of what he claims, why should we pretend that doesn't happen? i'm actually really offended by this post's implication and it perfectly sums up the ridiculously corrosive effect that dnd's draconian moderation has on conversations. My rap sheet has a series of probes in which mods punished what they believed were low-effort or white noise posting. I'm not going to spend too much effort to argue with a sixer, and most of them were indeed sixers. Then those sixers became proof of me being a bad faith poster, and what would be a sixer offense became a 3 day offense. Suddenly, I was a habitually bad faith poster, and mods used their own actions as evidence that I needed to be more harshly punished. The long and short of it is that it pretty much drove me to stop posting in dnd for months, and even now that I have returned i post much, much less. And even now, my "pattern" of posting low effort posts worthy of sixers is used to cite me, out of the blue, as a spreader of disinformation worthy of contempt. seriously, are you all trying to make this place as closed off as possible? A big flaming stink fucked around with this message at 20:44 on Oct 30, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2021 20:41
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:The thread was not about the CIA, his comments were irrelevant to the thread topic with the intent to derail the conversation and was obviously trolling. It is behavior we do not want around here. do you not see how this is a profoundly corrosive assumption?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2021 20:47
|
|
|
socialsecurity posted:This is not an argument anyone made and a perfect example about how someone tries their best to warp a conversation into an attack on their enemies. Mods, this is the environment you have created. I made low effort posts, and a good deal of them were bad, I do not deny. Now I am irrevocably cast as "bad faith", and it is extremely cool and good to attack me out of the blue. Is it any wonder fewer and fewer people want to post here? A big flaming stink fucked around with this message at 21:46 on Oct 30, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2021 21:43
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:As I recall, this issue was addressed in the thread. It probably doesn't need to be relitigated here. do you mind recounting how that issue was addressed for those of us that don't post in the thread
|
|
#
¿
Oct 31, 2021 03:10
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 9, 2024 09:12 |
|
|
Deteriorata posted:No, go read the thread. I'll not post about it further here. If you have any questions, ask them there. i have zero interest in reading a thousand post thread i have not ever looked at, and I find myself rather suspicious of your refusal to even summarize what was determined
|
|
#
¿
Oct 31, 2021 03:17
|
|