Resume

[Visla Eraclaire]

If you want to discuss something, I’d suggest that you actually discuss it, not get off topic to the point where it’s just complaining about site policy and the judges.

The fact that something is "off topic" or has "gotten out of hand" is one of the oldest and lamest excuses for closing a thread with which the moderator personally disagrees.


New topic: Rules and policies which are nonsensical and which you feel undermine the stated goals of Althanas. Most of them are simply around because nobody bothers to change rules. Things simply accumulate and actual practice drifts away from the crusty buildup of old dicta. Feel free to reframe your previous arguments to fit within this legitimate area of discussion.

There's not a damned thing off topic about that. If that can't be discussed, you're best off not lying to yourself with the Your Word description.

[Duffy]

If you wish to change Althanas or remove/revamp what you view to be nonsenical or outdated rules Visla, might I suggest you provide some examples, and reasons, and methods of dealing with them to whatever end you're pushing for?

Or, you could apply for a position and get behind the scenes and mechanics of Althanas as a staff mem...oh, wait.

[Visla Eraclaire]

If you wish to change Althanas or remove/revamp what you view to be nonsenical or outdated rules Visla, might I suggest you provide some examples, and reasons, and methods of dealing with them to whatever end you're pushing for?

Or, you could apply for a position and get behind the scenes and mechanics of Althanas as a staff mem...oh, wait.

Oh my, Duffy. I saw what you did there! Aren't you a clever little boy. Being a staff member was not very helpful for bringing about change. All it did was shoulder me with the burden of enforcing that which I disagreed with and tie my hands in terms of my public protest and commentary. In essence, I made the same sorts of protests in private that I now make in public. Being on staff didn't keep the same sorts of officious twits from sweeping dissent and attempts at change under the rug. At least this way, the board membership can see that sad process unfold.

I'm not registering any complaints. I'm just opening up a new topic for others to do so since the last one was closed on flimsy pretenses and it seemed there was more to be discussed.

I imagine many of the newer members there would fear retribution for doing so, and so I did it on their behalf as I am not afflicted with such trepidation. I know that what I do is fully justified.

[Duffy]

I'm all for change, and discussion, Visla. However, the tone of the other thread (brought about not by you) was detrimental to the discussion. Wherever or not you believe the reason to be personal is entirely your subjective opinion, the fact remains, and the staff made a motion to close the thread.

Anyone is free to bring up anything, any-time, anywhere, any-place. I implore people to do so, but people need to remind themselves that there is a correct way, a civil way to do so, and then there is the other way, which results in 'flaming' and people over personalising the conversation.

[Visla Eraclaire]

I have no desire to discuss the earlier thread. Whatever issues may or may not have existed in it are gone. That's why there's a new thread. If you don't have a complaint about a rule or a response to someone else's posted complaint, you can move along.

In any attempt to redirect your off-topic comments toward the aim of this thread:

The line between discussion and flaming is a highly subjective one, more often than not employed by a biased enforcer. I think the board needs an OOC mod/admin again that actually keeps him or herself out of the politics and makes reasoned decisions about such things.

Cory used to do this as a mod. Seril used to serve the function as well but he's been absent for some time. Task is incapable of serving this function. Max likely tires of having to clean up tantrums. You need a new person, someone that people can trust not to squelch unpopular speech and to uphold a set of rules that is actually comprehensible and not simply wielded as a justification for censorship.

[Duffy]

I'll play wit tennis and passive-aggressive speed posting another time then.

[Visla Eraclaire]

I would say that Duffy's off topic posting in this thread was very unbecoming of a staff member, but in fact all he's done is provide me with an excellent illustration of my point that there is a problem with ooc moderation.

Two solutions.

1) Don't close threads except in the most egregious instances. A thread full of pornography, a thread which makes genuine death threads, a thread that has as its stated purpose mere insults unrelated to board reform (that means a thread called, for instance, "Duffy Sucks Shit" where that is the only discussion, not one that includes a few posts insulting him or one which uses such a thing as an illustration, like this thread)

2) Get someone whose objectivity is beyond reproach who can be even handed and rebuke members and staff alike, set ground rules which do not prevent discourse, and enforce them fairly.


Frankly, I'm all in favor of #1, as a rabid free speech proponent. I think #2 is more likely to be well-received by the administration.


Finally, let me clarify that this matter is not the sole focus of the thread, but merely one example I have come up with to keep it from being derailed entirely by the other poster.

[Duffy]

What is your policy for deleting threads/posts?

Althanas moderators never delete or modify threads or posts based on content. As we do have underaged members, links to pornographic material may be removed, but it is our strict policy to allow members to freely share their beliefs, ideas, and opinions without any sort of moderator intervention. Your posted content will never be removed simply because a staff member disagrees with you.

What is your policy on profanity?

If you find any material on Althanas offensive, we remind you to take advantage of the built-in profanity filter and also to exercise your right to ignore a thread.

What is your policy on flaming?

Excessive flaming or harassment may result in moderator intervention and a reminder to keep discourse civil. Continued flaming or harassment will result in more severe action, up to and including temporary and permanent banning from the forum.

We remind our users that some discussions in our out-of-character areas may include heated debate and discussion. If this is not something you are comfortable with, we advise you to avoid posting in such threads. If you do select to engage in these conversations, we remind you that while it is perfectly acceptable to refute another's point with vigor, personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Italicisation and bolding in the above text from the FAQ my own. Whilst you have exercised your right to post in the Your Word forum to voice complaint or opinion on the methodology of Althanas, or the conduct of the staff, you cannot expect for discussion to take place without referral to the initial incident, or any of the handful of threads where the exact same thing has occured. I'd love to examine why, but given the nature of the comments in the aforementioned thread, we'd be delving into the realm of rule breaking from the very individual who is attempting to motion for chance to the OOC moderation policy.

Whilst I claim every responsibility for the non-chalant, humour driven comments from myself above; given the circumstances, and our policy of not removing or editting other's posts for content, I will not do so here. I do not believe in censorship, but I do believe in restraint, something we can all exercise and something that would work as a better 'rule' than anything proposed above.

On the other hand...

An internet community needs the right balance of protecting itself from "egregious" individuals and circumstances, and the freedom and enjoyment of it's community members. On that note, the 1st suggestion is hypocritical and as ever is a veiled display of conceit. The rules as they stand and the policy as they stand are more than adequate and more than open and reflexive enough for all. People would be banned and removed from communities for alot less than you, I, or any other member of Althanas has said.

The second, on the other hand, is something that could be examined. As ever, it'd require considerable vestment in interest.

The question there however, is would you be willing to cut out your own tongue to spite your face, as such a move for closer moderator and intervention from a non-political moderator would ultimately result in a considerably less activity from certain individuals.

[Tshael]

I'm going to say that I agree with Task in his decision to close the last thread. Not, however, because the conversation had moved on to a related topic, borne of the first question, but because there was some blatant trolling going on by a certain member that was out of hand. You are absolutely correct. There is a huge difference between flat out trolling and unpopular dissent, and I think that this new thread is a good way to get away from the trolling and start a constructive discussion. So, thanks Visla, for bringing this back up in a logical, calm manner.

Now, I will agree with you that as Althanas has aged and changed, there are things still sitting around that have not. One such thing is the word/post count rule for a thread to be deemed "complete" and get the complete judgment. We used to have a montly Vignette contest, and does this rule keep people who found that enjoyable from sharing with us impromptu character vignettes because it would keep them from gaining a reasonable amount of experience? I do think so, so we should discuss ideas for change.

Also, I do get irritated to see all this talk bashing our moderator force. Yes, they are human and fallible, but that doesn't give anyone the right to drag them through the mud. Instead of pointing fingers and bitching that everything is corrupt, we should make changes ourselves. The moderator force we have right now is very different than ones we have had in the past. Instead of condemning them for all the wrongdoings that were and weren't done by them in the past, why not focus on working with them? The mods do listen, whether we players believe it or not, and they are doing what they do because they love the site, not because they are trying to lord power over faceless names on the internet.

I think that if the players were to rally together and intelligently, logically discuss what changes could be wrought to the rubric to help balance it, or perhaps instead of focusing on the rubric, the experience formulas. It is hard to keep the balance of Althanas between a fun game with goals, and writing workshops where the story reigns as king. I've been here for eight years, and it's never been perfect, but there has always been a willingness to improve from all facets of perspective.

Anywho. I'm also eager to hear other suggestions that you might have Vis.

[Visla Eraclaire]

@ Duffy:

I'm not trying to say "you cannot talk about the other thread at all." I am attempting to make it clear that a protestation of that thread's closure is NOT the topic of this thread. This thread is merely a continuation of the discourse started in that thread, freed from whatever problems (imagined or otherwise) caused its closure.

Attempts by you to discuss the previous thread, in my view, drive the discussion in a direction which is more likely to cause this thread to be closed. Frankly, neither thread ought to be closed, but I'm a pragmatist and am attempting to drive the discussion away from topics which will bring about closure, whether or not it is unjustified. I am attempting to avoid a heckler's veto on your part.

As for your quotes, it's all well and good to cite rules. My whole point involves the interpretation and application of those rules by individuals who have little respect for their duties. It's very much akin to saying that we're safe from theft because we have a rule against it, whilst our police force is staffed from time to time with kleptomaniacs.

The fact that you view a neutral observer as a restraint on my ability to speak suggests that you do not believe those rules either, or that you do not believe they should or would be followed by such an observer. Everything I have said here is within the realm of heated debate, vigorous refutation, and attacks on principles rather than people.

@ Tshael

I'm glad at least someone appreciates the purpose of this topic and my intentions in making it.


The problem with extensive player initiated action is that even when those in "power" initiate a change or put together a package of reforms, it more often than not fails. I by no means intend for this to be my final word on the matter, that's just the first thing that came to mind. Criticism of the status quo is the simplest thing we can do and the most likely to garner attention. A fully fledged proposal of new mechanisms and changes would be so unlikely to be adopted that it's not really worth making. Not to say that it isn't ever worth making, we just need to come to a consensus with the administration that something is wrong before we can go about putting the time into a solution. More often than not when I start to work out proposed solutions, people cut me off that there isn't even a problem in the first place.

That response is a bit rushed. I've been called to go to lunch. Later