Forum Etiquette & the Current Rules

[Islamadon 4442]

It's good that the Mods are attempting to uphold forum standards to make sure it's quality over "R" posting (I hate these, you didn't have anything important to say in the first place!), but I can't help but feel as if the spirit of the enforcement does not revolve around the pursuit of quality.

To me, and I emphasize I'm not trying to go at anyone's throats, the way in which this has been enforced previously comes across as two adults attempting to impose their moderation authority onto a bunch of teenagers and college kids. It doesn't seem so beneficial as it does making a vendetta to put oneself in the spotlight and impose control over the forums.

From my experience, most people who receive the snarky one-liners are making snarky one-liners themselves, and who end their posts with their character twirling a dagger or something in their private room. How, unless through anonymity or vague-posting, are people meant to respond to this kind of forum reply? By the logic of moderation, any attempt to do so legitimately cannot be done - it's Metagame. Are we meant to wait for the Blues to clean it up? Further, in the event that posts are indeed always IC and can be responded to regardless of reasonable presence, do I not hold the right to walk over to them in-game and rip their tongue out?

It is my opinion that whatever you put out on the forums should be fair game to respond to in any way one sees fit. We do not moderate the number of words, hostile intent and so on in-game. I understand it is a false equivalence to equate the forums to the in-game server, but the forums are meant to be an extension of the in-game world whereby people can see law posts and character threads. If people didn't want others to respond, why are they even making a thread or reply in the first place? A solution to not receiving feedback would be allowing for OPs to lock their own threads off the bat.

To conclude - begging the rules as law doesn't address the spirit of those rules. Being a pedantic enforcer of rules which deter player enjoyment (and indeed - a good portion of the players thinks this is annoying) only means that Mods themselves are deterring player enjoyment. As long as no one is causing harm through doxing, posting IP grabbers, slur-spewing, ETC. I don't see a need to be so tight-fisted about the forums. They've always been sassy.

[rukio 8910]

Nothing you are going to write on a forum post is going to be important enough to reserve a spot. There are infinite replies available to the playerbase. That said, the rules have more or less been the exact same for 6+ years guys. The only difference is how its handled depends on which admin/mods run the forums at the time. When I did most of it I just hid the anon/reserve/etc posts and left it at that. When others do it they give warnings, and others yet just give 0 point reminders. For some reason people find being given a 0 point reminder to be the worst thing you could do to them. 

 

End of the day I think the rules work well and they just need more consistency over the years on how they're handled/enforced. That's the only change that needs to occur. 

[MadOne 3422]

-_-

[Netphreak 461]

     I think we can all appreciate a set of standards and guidelines. Though there will always be a problem with 'interpretation', a word that I have seen over and over when skimming over these comments. 

It's a problem because you have no consistency when it comes to moderation rulings and disciplinary actions being taken, this can cause players to prefer one moderator over another, if some moderator decides to give someone an official warning point for something egregious and another mod just sends a pm being like "Yo, don't do that right?." We all would prefer the latter. 

Consistency is a common issue with a good majority of the teams that are established, it causes quite the amount of frustration and lowers morale very quickly. We're here to have fun, if you really want to try to enforce a way for people to /metagame/ by name dropping a character that has really no reason to be named, if they're by themselves or in a room. (Because as we all know; metagamers know no bounds.) Then you're doing something wrong. 

Do better! Huzzah. 

[TreeSmoothie 4905]

There should be a line between non anonposting in terms of [!] Random Peasant does xyz, and anonposting in terms of a character that purposefully stays anonymous (or, if you just dont want to outright namedrop) and thus doesnt really have One Name. A few days ago I described my main persona & iirc his title as well down to unique features only he might have, but because it didn't have a name to stick to it I got warned.

 

Imo anonposting really isn't that big of a deal, just my two cents as a non-mod but I really think this time could be put to better use moderating Telepathy replies. I.e., one character complains/argues something, so someone quotes that reply and says something along the lines of 'coincidentally, character2 replies something that fact checks and OWNS this reply'.

[Mirtok 2848]

Fair points have been made about higher-effort posts being rolled up with low-effort ones due to the anon posting technicality. At least on my part, anonymous posting was treated the same regardless of who it was as a means of enforcing the standard equally- and not offering much preferential treatment. @Islamadon put it very simply, this was needlessly pedantic.
 

Consistency is something that teams should strive to have but consistency is difficult if guidelines and rules are too general. It's also hard to be consistent without a formal system for delivering corrective action. Although some might prefer a DM, that leaves little ability for other moderators to know if repeat behavior is occurring or if a prior explanation was even offered. Just as on the server, we have an infraction system that tracks and scales punishment to the severity and frequency of a behavior, so do we on the forums. A 0-point warning is the same as a DM but with the added incentive that you're less likely to get off scot-free if you continue to break rules or side-step standards. For posters who only need one reminder, this hasn't been an issue.
 

For posters who disregard and don't care about how they conduct themselves, historical records are necessary because DMs will be blown off. I've responded to 100% of warning point inquiries and have provided extensive reasonings for why it was applied. Correspondence isn't the baseline system, only the infractions are- in-game and on the forums. They are what must be given while everything else is extra because we care about people understanding or improving the roleplay space.
 

90+ infractions have been handed out in the last month. The volume of rule violations on the forums exceeds that which occurs on the server in the same period. Rule violations on the server have the benefit of being isolated from whoever is directly witnessing them. On the forums, all users at all times can see them. Only about 3 moderators are moderating the forums while there are 14 who moderate the server. It is not practical to choose DMing as the primary means of communicating rule breaks. Most people do not desire any correspondence past what is provided in the warning and simply make the suggested adjustments. The vast majority of warnings given were 0 points with points usually being earned when those freebie warnings went unheeded.
 

Continue the discussions, we are evaluating the public opinion and we are adjusting how we operate to better serve the wants of the community while balancing a sufficient RP quality. You can probably expect a poll to gauge desire for some proposed changes.

[Ibn Khaldun 7729]

I will reply in full tomorrow, but I'm fine with pumping brakes on the necessity of explicitly mentioning your character's name in a flavor post and instead being more interpretive on whether posts are directly or indirectly written with invective, trolling, and/or harassing of the OP.

[Destructokeith 621]

I understand the worry about anon posting and how it can be used to spread toxicity but I just wanted to bring my thoughts to the table:

 

recently I got a warning point for anon posting here is the post:

 

Now to defend why I do it, on this persona and this persona only I never refer to him by his name or even us the name in my emotes, instead opting to us the ** method for ever single one of his emotes:

 (an example emote, used in a dead men event)

so while I understand its anon posting, it is how that character has always been emoted.

Another reason I have seen for anon posting is done by people with dark MA and FA's (I.E. Naz, Vamp and blood magic) who want to include a descriptor of an action but do not want to get metagamed for it such as:

A dark haired man looks up from his papers and scoffs at the letter "it is of no matter, it will not save them" he says as he continues to prepare the ritual

 

but anyway that's my two cents on the matter, thanks to anyone who reads this and sorry if I never reply 

[Narthok 9213]

9 hours 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 should be able to make jokes with my friends on the forums without an internet janitor deleting our jokes.

[christman 2307]

i havent read this post but i think maltamoss should be removed

[Mirtok 2848]

3 hours ago, Destructokeith said:

I understand the worry about anon posting and how it can be used to spread toxicity but I just wanted to bring my thoughts to the table:

 

recently I got a warning point for anon posting here is the post:

 

Now to defend why I do it, on this persona and this persona only I never refer to him by his name or even us the name in my emotes, instead opting to us the ** method for ever single one of his emotes:

 (an example emote, used in a dead men event)

so while I understand its anon posting, it is how that character has always been emoted.

Another reason I have seen for anon posting is done by people with dark MA and FA's (I.E. Naz, Vamp and blood magic) who want to include a descriptor of an action but do not want to get metagamed for it such as:

A dark haired man looks up from his papers and scoffs at the letter "it is of no matter, it will not save them" he says as he continues to prepare the ritual

 

but anyway that's my two cents on the matter, thanks to anyone who reads this and sorry if I never reply 

Your style for RPing your played character is a fair point. We are adjusting our enforcement to be much more lenient again for this sort of thing.

As for spooks who don't want to get metagamed. If I wanted to metagame a spook, I'd use their MC Name to do it. Posting a name or descriptions may be a concern that some have but posting at all opens them up to people just looking at their forum profile and learning what their MC Name through various means. After that, its one stop to NameMC or simply typing /seen in-game.

[Minuvas 2888]

Not allowing people to forum bully people into a PK is a good rule. Don't remove it. 

 

Snarky one liners - glad they are gone. Ideas trend here, and when a post comments are dominated by anonymous hate comments it deflates the poster and potentially their post content. 

 

Why do people R? Simple, image. Anyone whose been a NL knows you carefully curate posts so that the first page is filled with positive comments. Im a boomer but I understand the effect of this on the young community here. It's not just the clicks, it showcases a positive atmosphere for potential new players. I think you should let people R and have 24 hours to respond. 

[Boom_steel 117]

23 hours ago, Ibn Khaldun said:

 

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

 

 

Mods please assess this unruly individual a warning point. They are injecting out-of-character animus into the forums. I feel unsafe, please do something about this.

[Ibn Khaldun 7729]

45 minutes ago, Boom_steel said:

Mods please assess this unruly individual a warning point. They are injecting out-of-character animus into the forums. I feel unsafe, please do something about this.

 

The Pat McAfee Show? Animus? Where is the connection?!

 

[Ibn Khaldun 7729]

23 hours ago, Islamadon said:

It's good that the Mods are attempting to uphold forum standards to make sure it's quality over "R" posting (I hate these, you didn't have anything important to say in the first place!), but I can't help but feel as if the spirit of the enforcement does not revolve around the pursuit of quality.

To me, and I emphasize I'm not trying to go at anyone's throats, the way in which this has been enforced previously comes across as two adults attempting to impose their moderation authority onto a bunch of teenagers and college kids. It doesn't seem so beneficial as it does making a vendetta to put oneself in the spotlight and impose control over the forums.

From my experience, most people who receive the snarky one-liners are making snarky one-liners themselves, and who end their posts with their character twirling a dagger or something in their private room. How, unless through anonymity or vague-posting, are people meant to respond to this kind of forum reply? By the logic of moderation, any attempt to do so legitimately cannot be done - it's Metagame. Are we meant to wait for the Blues to clean it up? Further, in the event that posts are indeed always IC and can be responded to regardless of reasonable presence, do I not hold the right to walk over to them in-game and rip their tongue out?

It is my opinion that whatever you put out on the forums should be fair game to respond to in any way one sees fit. We do not moderate the number of words, hostile intent and so on in-game. I understand it is a false equivalence to equate the forums to the in-game server, but the forums are meant to be an extension of the in-game world whereby people can see law posts and character threads. If people didn't want others to respond, why are they even making a thread or reply in the first place? A solution to not receiving feedback would be allowing for OPs to lock their own threads off the bat.

To conclude - begging the rules as law doesn't address the spirit of those rules. Being a pedantic enforcer of rules which deter player enjoyment (and indeed - a good portion of the players thinks this is annoying) only means that Mods themselves are deterring player enjoyment. As long as no one is causing harm through doxing, posting IP grabbers, slur-spewing, ETC. I don't see a need to be so tight-fisted about the forums. They've always been sassy.

 

I'm going to put this to the test. I like what you've come with as a rebuttal, so I am going to be more lax on enforcing the rules, but preferring to take an interpretive stance on certain posts. I'll leave reserve posts, unidentified flying posts (no name posts), & one-liners (I already do this anyways) alone even when reported (and certain players are now abusing the system for shits & giggles).

 

Cheers & have a good day!