Forum Etiquette & the Current Rules

[Ibn Khaldun 7729]

The following thread is intended to encourage discussion of the current set of rules found here & an intentional effort to educate all users of the current set of rules & how forum moderation has been executed starting within the last month. As of right now, all moderators have the ability to moderate the forums, but formally there has only really been 4 moderators who have taken an active role in moderating the forums: Mirtok, annabanana1014, itdontmatta, & myself. I base this off of the moderator-level viewable notifications of forum warnings being given out.

 

 

Of those rules listed under the General Forum Rules subheading, most rules have been followed & are pretty basic. Basic civility & decency is not a scarce commodity exchanged and proof of most players following these basic rules is evidence of that.

 

The only rule of the General Forum Rules that some players may benefit from a reminder of is the following:

 

Quote

Certain behaviors are prohibited: Posting “r” or otherwise reserving a post for later editing and updating.

 

When one happens upon a roleplay topic that they consider their character(s) would have reason for interfacing with, there is no need to reserve post as most other players will take the opportunity to skim through a forum topic's reply. If I had to take an educated guess as to the why - why reserve-post? I would guess it has to do with players becoming psychologically dependent on the effects of the upvote system - a mini-attention economy if you will. Regardless, unless this rule is removed, moderators will enforce it.

 

 

 

Of those rules listed under the Roleplay Subforum Rules subheading, here is a break down of the rules:

 

Rules #1 & #2 are pretty self-explanatory and there hasn't been too much trouble with ensuring players follow them.

 

Quote

Rule #3: Responses in topics should be at least three sentences in length, be related to the original topic or prior responses, and contribute to character development or the value of the original topic.

The forum moderators, by consensus, have agreed to not enforce the "three sentences in length" clause of this rule. We allow for one-liners so long as they abide by the remaining parts of this rule. Whether a user types 1, 2, 3, or 100 lines - the number of lines has no bearing on whether the user is trying to intentionally break rules, be disrespectful, or convey some invective to another user directly or indirectly.

 

Rule #4 is pretty self-explanatory.

 

Quote

Rule #5: Mentioning the death of a non-permakilled character, unless that character has been perma-killed (PKed) is prohibited unless the player has given their consent.

I think this rule is one where a number of players take issue with in that it creates discrepancy between something that actually occurred in-game (a character death) & how the player whose character is killed chooses to respond. I would like to get some opinions on this rule, but as far as I know - there has only been one instance where this rule was brought up in a forum report in the past month or so.

 

Quote

Rule #6: Players must roleplay with a character which they currently control and play.

This is the rule which Mirtok & I have brought up as it regards anon-posting. Anon-replies have been used both for prose flavor to add to forum threads & to get jabs & quips in about the player you just love to hate. I think for those who are sincerely writing good prose, it isn't too difficult an ask that you specify the subject of your sentence by name (it being a character you currently control & play). So instead of:

'He frolicked through the garden' -> 'Cunimund frolicked through the garden'

 

If this is a herculean ask of users of the forums, then forum moderation will get into the interpretive weeds of whether a sentence[s] with unspecified subjects is really trying to take the piss out of another player in the thread or whether it is just adding flavor to the thread.

 

PS: Rest easy, even some other moderators don't like my opinion ;)

 

Spoiler

 

 

Rule #7 is pretty self-explanatory.

 

 

I can only speak for myself in that I usually try to get engagement from someone who has broken the forum rules because I acknowledge the forums have not been well-maintained or moderated in the past and that general slip of acknowledgement of existing rules is real. If you ever have an issue with how I am personally moderating, want to ask a question, or otherwise like to express an opinion (and are comfortable with dialogue both ways) - please feel free to reach out to me on Discord at ibnkhaldun8.

 

PS: Feel free to have a read over a thread I created when I first started actively forum moderating:

 

[femurlord 2365]

You should take back my warning point because I didn't breach ANY of these rules! @Mirtok

[Brawms 741]

you WILL not have fun on my forums!!! you WILL consult the 400 page rule lawyer post on how to specifically word your post!!!

 

[Wizzar 481]

Responding to posts is starting to feel a lot like responding to that discussion post due Sunday at 11:59 pm ET. 

(Please upvote, I NEED it) 

[megavoltar 1110]

Question about this, do you think bias has affected the ability for moderators to make decisions and made it very loose-goose?  Is there any kind of, 'pass-off' like jury duty?

 

Because its very obvious when it does not happen

[Hunnic 348]

Rule #5 definitely conflicts with RP. 
And I do wonder, does this extend to IRP?

Example, if my inquisitor kills a witch named Garsenda who attacked a canonist the other day can I tell the local militia "I killed the Nun Garsenda, she is a witch" would that be against the rules?
I sure hope not, but then not allowing someone to mention it on the forums but allowing them to mention it to everyone they meet in-game is- odd.

I get its done to protect players from being pressured to PK their character since if Garsenda the Nun's player continue to play as Garsenda they are now "undead" and will be eternally chased after. But if there were no consequences to established in-game, IRP laws and values and whatnot then, why RP the conflict out? Why bother to RP having laws or customs. 

I think if your darkspawn/criminal character gets caught lacking then he must suffer the consequences, RP is RP. Censoring it on the forums make these situations unnecessarily difficult. 

[Ibn Khaldun 7729]

15 minutes ago, Brawms said:

you WILL not have fun on my forums!!! you WILL consult the 400 page rule lawyer post on how to specifically word your post!!!

 

 

I bet your growled like AJ Hawk when you wrote this one out.

 

 

[Ibn Khaldun 7729]

20 minutes ago, megavoltar said:

Question about this, do you think bias has affected the ability for moderators to make decisions and made it very loose-goose?  Is there any kind of, 'pass-off' like jury duty?

 

Because its very obvious when it does not happen

 

I can only speak for myself & about forum moderation specifically, I am notorious for being "out of the loop" about current playergroups, cliques, etc. I usually lean into that by taking more charitable interpretations of player behavior (unless it is unavoidably obvious that behavior is done with malice, asshatery, etc). If you have a direct moderator decision of mine that you wish to contest, I welcome you to speak with me on Discord about it, but otherwise I've enjoyed mostly positive feedback in how I conduct myself with others as it pertains to forum moderation.

[sam33497 2793]

I don't really care about this one way or another, but I don't think the way the 'anon-posting' rule is being interpreted here makes sense

 

It's not against the rules to go ingame and rp without specifying the subject in your emotes, making environmental emotes, etc. People can still hatepost with their characters, and pretty often do so. I may not have the full picture but I don't really see what's being accomplished with that interpretation

 

the rule itself seems in actuality geared towards stopping people from rep farming and owning people from the seven skies or trolling/impersonating people

[Ibn Khaldun 7729]

5 minutes ago, sam33497 said:

I don't really care about this one way or another, but I don't think the way the anon-posting rule is being interpreted here makes sense

 

It's not against the rules to go ingame and rp without specifying the subject in your emotes, making environmental emotes, etc. People can still hatepost with their characters, and pretty often do so. I may not have the full picture but I don't really see what's being accomplished with that interpretation

 

That is a fair point. Would you say you would want us as forum moderators to make more of an effort to interpret whether a forum reply [with or without direct mention of character name] meets the criteria of harassment, "shit-posting", or otherwise rule-breaking in nature?

 

Edit: What do you think about the following point: What we want to avoid are throwaway characters used only for shit posting, it doesnt embody any metric of player conduct or RP standards (give and take). Played characters in game are more or less actual characters that can be consequenced for being jerks in RP. Making random throwaways in game too is arguably against conduct and standards.

[Jentos 6884]

[Mirtok 2848]

9 minutes ago, Ibn Khaldun said:

 

That is a fair point. Would you say you would want us as forum moderators to make more of an effort to interpret whether a forum reply [with or without direct mention of character name] meets the criteria of harassment, "shit-posting", or otherwise rule-breaking in nature?

 

Edit: What do you think about the following point: What we want to avoid are throwaway characters used only for shit posting, it doesnt embody any metric of player conduct or RP standards (give and take). Played characters in game are more or less actual characters that can be consequenced for being jerks in RP. Making random throwaways in game too is arguably against conduct and standards.

To add, when someone chooses to post anonymously and it isn't clear that they are responding as an actual character, then it's obvious to us that they aren't adding to the Role Play. Instead, they are just injecting OOC opinion which more often than not is a negative one. If people want to communicate how they actually feel then they should do so plainly and if in an RP thread put it under a spoiler.

 

Not everyone may have respect for the immersion of forum RP but it's been a goal since the beginning of the forums that it is legitimate RP and RP threads should have their immersion protected. With how accessible reaction posts have become compared to the past where only feasibly involved characters could respond, we like there to be some actual value added to the thread. As such, we are trying to apply these rules as systematically as possible.

[sam33497 2793]

4 minutes ago, Ibn Khaldun said:

 

That is a fair point. Would you say you would want us as forum moderators to make more of an effort to interpret whether a forum reply [with or without direct mention of character name] meets the criteria of harassment, "shit-posting", or otherwise rule-breaking in nature?

 

Edit: What do you think about the following point: What we want to avoid are throwaway characters used only for shit posting, it doesnt embody any metric of player conduct or RP standards (give and take). Played characters in game are more or less actual characters that can be consequenced for being jerks in RP. Making random throwaways in game too is arguably against conduct and standards.

 

If a comment fails to meet roleplay standards, you should remove it. If it contributes to roleplay, you should keep it. An over-generalized rule doesn't seem to be needed when it could also possibly restrict RP. The intentions are obviously good here but I think it might not be the totally correct approach to tackle the problem of player toxicity and poor RP standards. Forcing people to tie a character to their shitposts will not actually change the quality of those shitposts. People aren't going to receive consequences IRP because of their forum replies - the server just doesn't work like that.

[Jihnyny 2572]

If smne mentions

 

’the princess’ just look up their char if ur unsure if theyre being fr. Doing ‘james…’ x50 because you cannot ‘anon’ post is outright stupid. Most of the forum rules are stupid, this proves itself by the fact that you all ‘forum moderators’ dont even enforce one of the rules said by the server.

 

let the forums be freeform fr

[Mirtok 2848]

3 minutes ago, Jihnyny said:

If smne mentions

 

’the princess’ just look up their char if ur unsure if theyre being fr. Doing ‘james…’ x50 because you cannot ‘anon’ post is outright stupid. Most of the forum rules are stupid, this proves itself by the fact that you all ‘forum moderators’ dont even enforce one of the rules said by the server.

Rule 3 is a choice for us to enforce because it's a guideline with suggestive verbiage, not directive. Just like posts that contain no RP and only OOC hidden under a spoiler arent against the rules either- even though rule 1 says: Posts should primarily consist of roleplay.