lol i know i just realised that..... wonder how many posts i can go to get shot of that one
You are not logged in. Please login or register.
2024 Note on Registrations
the old system to register for an account is back with a few security improvements. Please tell your friends to click the register link and, once a password is confirmed via email, visit the sticky topic in the "Introduce Yourself to Gain Access" room.
A BSG Blog Post About The Forums (Page 5 of 14)
AudioGames.net Forum → Site and forum feedback → A BSG Blog Post About The Forums
Posts: 101 to 125 of 328
#102 2018-10-17 19:06:27
@100, probably not. My guess is that they either use a distribution list, which would make it completely private, or if they are using something more traditional like Mailman, or even a list on a place like Groups.io, it would be either hidden, the archives only viewable by subscribers, or both. While I agree that there should be some transparency here, I actually don't agree with barging into any list archives there may be. If it were me, I would also keep such a list as far away from prying eyes as possible, because you'd have the headache of making sure people didn't accidentally stumble on it.
The glass is neither half empty nor half full. It's just holding half the amount it can potentially hold.
#103 2018-10-17 21:16:42
I agree in theory with the administrators being transparent here, part of the reason the trust is so low is because we just hear oh yeah, we're working on it. then that's all we hear, and we have to trust that something happens. That's great and all, but right now the trust in the moderation for AgNet is very very low. This being said though, there are still some certain people who wish there names to remain private such as the moderator who smoke interviewed, etc. I agree with transparency, but if the admins are talking about any of these people on this list or whatever, there names could potentially get leaked. Again though that being said, a summery of what is being talked about, or a version of this list with any private names removed, etc would be very nice.
I am a web designer, and a game developer. If you wish see me at http://www.samtupy.com
#104 2018-10-17 21:44:28
yeah but being honest though and this is me saying objectively that if someone is going to submit information without putting their name to it then i would question it's validity. information is worth more if the person who imparts said information actually stands by it. by not putting your name to that information you aren't standing by it which therefore means they could say something else later entirely different and have absolutely no accountability what so ever.
#105 2018-10-17 21:57:46
@108, this would be true if it weren't for the fact that this happens practically everywhere. Journalists use 'anonymous sources', bloggers use them, ... you get the idea.
"On two occasions I have been asked [by members of Parliament!]: 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out ?' I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." — Charles Babbage.
My Github
My Github
#106 2018-10-17 23:00:22
#107 2018-10-17 23:13:39
well like i say i automatically put a question mark on anything that is considered to be unknown. how easy is it to trust someone who could say 1 thing by not putting their name to it, but then directly contradict themselves in the next breath and put their name to that when they know that what they are saying is effectively on the winning side? you can trust a friend to defend you, your enemy to harm you but someone who seemingly sits on the fence is far more dangerous and for very obvious reasons. the same thing applies here with information without revealing the source. again smoke j is respecting the wish of the provider of said information but that person has put themselves in a position whereby they can go right ahead and contradict what has been said without people even knowing they have done it. yes i know it happens all the time i totally know that but that doesn't change what it is.
#108 2018-10-18 00:22:04
yeah well, ut i don't actually think this is the case at the current moment. like right now maybe he doesn't want to put his name on so he doesn't get in trouble. cause who knows, dark might be demoting the mods that do not agree with him too, wouldnt he do that? i already know how this works, thanks for prooving it in different points though smoke.
#109 2018-10-18 00:27:17
I think it is just common courtesy at this point. If the mod comes forward with their side, then that's that, otherwise Smoke has no need to reveal names when they aren't necessary.
#110 2018-10-18 02:03:01
Should I say something? I mean I am doing it now but ... er
The reason I am only going to watch this topic with the exception of this miner contribution is because what happened with Walter is something I ... feel incredibly strongly about. It needs to be said that I neither know Walter or Lorri. However how that topic even became a thing is beyond all my ability to comprehend, or wishing to comprehend.
It is blatent character assassination with no proof to back it up. That is something I wish to repeat to Dark 100 times over, screaming it like a little child. There was ... no ... god ... damn ... evidence!
The reason there was no evidence is because it didn't take place on this forum. If it had, other moderators other than Dark could confirm should the trust in Dark's judgement be questioned. That is strike number 1 for Dark. It did not take place on this forum.
Hey guys, did you know that Dark has been bullying me for years on forum X? Let's ban him from here!
There is no evidence! Dark took action based on hearsay and the reputation of another user. The fact that action was taken based on no upholding evidence just baffles me. It makes me scream and cry and smack my head against a wall.
The only sort of logical evidence we saw was the counter-evidence, which yet again shouldn't have been needed. Or are we suddenly guilty if Dark decides it? I much rather prefer innocent until proven guilty.
Also, people say that they are waiting on Dark's defense. However, what defense can you possibly take if you commit murder in front of a camera? The evidence of dark's power abuse is clear, stored on this very forum. I am going to say it, and I hope that others aren't as brash as I am, that I personally wish for Dark's resignment as head moderator and be given a position of database maintenance instead. I really hope others can be more calm and logical in this decision than what I am, but as stated above this is something I feel very strongly about and have ever since I read through the Walter case years ago. I have wanted to speak up about the injustice, but if better people than me were unable to do it, what chance would I have?
I want to thank SmokeJ for presenting a biust, but undoubtedly a well-researched and accurate post. The evidence is, yet again, available for anyone to see in this here forum.
I wish everyone a good day, or as it's here in Sweden, a good night.
#111 2018-10-18 02:51:02 (edited by blaze 2018-10-18 02:52:01)
@114: Right. The only evidence he had was the evidence of the victim, but since they were friends I guess that makes any evidence provided by the defense meaningless. He didn't involve other moderators in the decision of walter's banning, as far as that thread indicates anyway, nor did he even bother to consider Sam's points. I'll admit that the proof Sam provided had holes, not the least of which was that most of it was logs and info gathered by him that could have been changed, but again, Dark didn't bother trying to disprove it or back up his argument with more solid examples. I guess that's the kind of moderation decisions we've come to accept, and even to defend. To the people saying we should respect what we get for free and all this, you're entirely missing the point that someone's online life was ruined by this guy's decisions. I do respect the disproportionate amount of time he puts into the site, but I'll never be able to let go of the fact that he is incapable of separating his job from his feelings.
#112 2018-10-18 03:11:06
I'm not sure I would go so far as saying that Dark would demote mods or admins based on them disagreeing with him. I didn't see any evidence of that in the post. If such a thing has gone on behind closed doors, then it's been very well hidden, but I wouldn't be too hasty in jumping to that conclusion. While I certainly do have strong feelings about this whole thing, I don't think throwing around baseless accusations will help anyone's case.
The glass is neither half empty nor half full. It's just holding half the amount it can potentially hold.
#113 2018-10-18 03:22:21
Ok ... let me clear up since some people do not seem to understand the term evidence.
To take a quote from my last post, which was only meant in a sarcastic manner but which serves to get my point across none the less:
Hey guys, did you know that Dark has been bullying me for years on forum X? Let's ban him from here!
- that is not evidence, that is a claim. Evidence is the body of facts which proves that my claimb is true and that Dark indeed has been bullying me for years. If someone posts a chat log between two involved parties, and the other party does not varify that this is indeed the conversation that took place between him / herself and the poster, then the poster is only making a claim and is not submitting any sort of evidence. However, should the conversation be varified to have happened, for example varified directly from skype, or in way of screen shots, then the conversation can serve as evidence - only evidence that the parties in the conversation made claim x or claim y, not that the claims themselves were true, only that they were made. Those claims need further evidence. Presenting evidence is a tricky business. If Lorry had made an audio recording of her browsing through the chat logs on her skype, then that would be a stronger case of evidence than submitting simple text files, however in cases like this I would still argue that it is not sufficient. I just want to make the distinction to people what the difference is between a simple claim and evidence is.
And sadly, no evidence is full-proof. But as moderators it is their job to make sure that evidence is strong enough before it warrents action ... or hey, you know ... let's ban Dark because he's an evil dictator and I said so!
Now please don't give me another excuse to post anymore to this topic. And sorry if it was a bit scatter-brain, it's 3:22 in the morning.
#114 2018-10-18 04:46:00
I know I did say I'd keep silent, but what the hell, I'm incapable of doing that and everyone knows this by now.
The reason I'm posting here again is so that I could make my stance very clear, in case I didn't already. I kind of felt I was being very vague about my opinions. As I said before, I think some of the things Dark did were unquestionably wrong. However, if he knows this and can admit it, except it, and try to change for the better, then I think he should continue to be chief. I also hope that no matter what happens, weather he's demoted or not, that he is still allowed to be on the forum and contribute to the database and news posts, because he is a pretty memorable person. I think that no matter what people think of his moderating abilities, we can all agree that Dark is generally a fun-loving person and brings a lot to this community. I'd like to bring one final note to this post. Remember that even though Dark isn't able to separate his job from his feelings, that doesn't make him a bad person. Moderators are humans too, and like all other humans on this planet they make mistakes. Whatever he does or did, and no matter what any other moderator on this forum does or did, please do not hate them for it.
#115 2018-10-18 07:25:37
@118, you have a point. However, the moderation panel is there to provide support and to assist Dark (or to have Dark assist and vice versa) in all the mods keeping absolute balance for rules. OK, that was one fucked up combination of words, so I'll restate it: The moderator team is there not only to keep the forum a peaceful (and safe) place to interact with others on, but they are also there to back each other up, to re-enforce decisions, to enforce the rules, and to ensure that none of the moderators go too far towards one or another side of the spectrum -- either too lenient or too strict. Dark went towards the "too strict" category with Walter, driven by emotion alone, and therefore should've been punished; the same could be said if any of the other mods had been in his position and had done the same thing. If you've got rules, they should be enforced on everyone, no matter who they are. There should be absolutely no exceptions to that particular form of enforcement. No one is exempt from the rules, just as no one is exempt from the law.
"On two occasions I have been asked [by members of Parliament!]: 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out ?' I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." — Charles Babbage.
My Github
My Github
#116 2018-10-18 07:29:14
I have been on this forum for four plus years.
In that time, I have watched Dark moderate with a calm disposition and a fair perspective, better than many others could do in the same situation.
It is a shame, that based on one article and a few decisions they dislike, that so many seem to be calling for Dark to step down.
Click on his profile, and read through all the posts he's made on this forum.
Then do the same for others who are posting in this thread.
If you click on my profile, you will see that I am no fan of confrontation, and that when I respond to a controversial topic, I tend to be extremely positive, and nurturant if I can.
What I am saying is that if you view the person's contribution to the forum in its entirety, you may get a very different picture, than what you get with one article or even a few recent things that you dislike.
I am on the mailing list where board moderation is discussed, and I can tell you that banning someone is not done on a whim. It is discussed, other solutions are tried, and as a last resort, a ban occurs.
I have no problem being completely transparent in what I say regarding moderation, except where it might be detrimental to a member of the forum. In other words, if Johnny is feeling bullied by Bob and George, would it really help Johnny for the moderators to come on and discuss him in front of the entire group?
I will say this as plainly as I'm able.
I do not believe Dark was involved in an character assassination. I would not support him if I did believe it.
Is he perfect? No.
Am I perfect? No.
Are you perfect? No.
But I can tell you that board moderation is a thankless impossible task, which requires time, patience, and the ability to do difficult things without receiving thanks and in fact receiving a lot of crap from a lot of people.
Dark has willingly moderated this forum for over a decade.
And in my four years here, not once have I seen egotism from him.
I've moderated on other sites, so I do have some experience with which to speak.
If this forum is to remain a valuable resource for gamers, and a comfortable place to be, everyone is going to have to step back, take a breath, and realize that massive anger and bitterness gets you nowhere.
It seems that of late on this forum, we have an overabundance of that, of snark and negativity.
Let's work to make things better, instead of throwing all our dissatisfaction on Dark.
A group makes the decisions to ban, not one person.
Everyone please calm down, reevaluate your strong feelings, and use your wisdom and maturity to think how we can make this forum for blind gamers a fun and positive place to be.
Thank you for reading.
#117 2018-10-18 07:31:02 (edited by UltraLeetJ 2018-10-18 07:42:52)
alright...
have read it ALL
When I opened this blog post, I was unfortunately not really convinced. Most of you who have read my posts will notice that I do come in here for mostly, just what i need, and what i have enjoyed, period.
I guess its an age difference thing, because from what I have read so far (the way most people talk, the way most treat each other, the way most also have a melodramatic stance towards their views) sadly, takes my interest away from getting more involved in the community as it is now.
Reasons for that are complex and many but hopefully summarized int he few lines above, and are also recent.
So, with that out of the way,I think I am pretty impartial here, fact is I do feel like an outsider who just contributes info or reflection on topics of interest and helps a few people out, but that is it. I am not friends with absolutely anyone on this forum, and if I had been at one point (because i do recognize some past names) such friendships eventually dried up, or now are gone for whatever reason, and that is just life. That happens, to everyone.
Regarding this whole situation, a few things should have been done a long time ago:
1. Like many say, clarify and have rules at one place, though I am always curious and found the FAQ without being told about it.
2. A ranking/score system for users, as well as a verifiable age system which will allow accounts to be created. (by the way, I have been checking this site out since year 2001, and truly we have moved from everyone can post to we will make an account system to prevent spammers.)
I decided to register in 2013 or 2014, cannot remember now, because i found the community intriguing, now its just sort of a who gets the last word war. And no, mods have not had anything to do with this.
oh, and why did this big blog post not convince me:
1. The research has been done, in perhaps a referenced way, but lamentably a side of an argument has been missing and it is the one most are expecting to hear, dark's side. Though he is entitled just like anyone to say whatever, or not say anything at all (silence is also part of your concept of freedom of speech)
2. Its just silly to think this all could go on, that a person could have suffered much because of a giant post (its wrong if it is true) but it is something that still is anecdote after anecdote there is no real record of it (besides some posts which do show a point) but not the main one. Could someone actually post in here the victim's side? does that person have any proofs to give? that is also missing.
3. The blog is worded in a contradictory manner, and yes, the situation is hard to explain, but of course this sounds or reads like a one sided view, as much as you would have said your intentions were not really so. Moreover, the rather destructive, emotional comments or blog responses there continue, so that really gives a bad impression and oh look, that site has no moderation, right?
So to conclude, its clear that its not just the mod staff or the site who should be taking a good hard look at themselves for changing.
This does not have to be or will it ever be a community that pleases everyone, same goes for every company, software program, or person you will meet out there.
Also, some people have proposed other avenues of communication you could join, in reddit if I am not mistaken if you definitely want to leave.
With great freedom also comes great responsibility, and this is no exception. If you wish to leave because of whatever reason (all are valid, its freedom after all) then do so, and do not just advertise it on your posts in such a negative manner.
I once said this, developers are probably working in whatever other field they can instead of making games, because the so called community did not support them and or their dreams, and they did realize that audio games was a waste of time and money and backstabbing all around, so nah nah, no more audio games for you!
that received many thumbs up and agreement.
So maybe a step off for a few days from this forum with the moderator that has to put p with the most crap in here would be that same idea, wouldn't you think?
things have been gotten so out of hand sometimes that its just a nightmare all around, and for me its not the mod team that is in fragile reputation, is this very forum. Sad, but true.
And all because of lack of civilized discussions, which has been asked of posters many times before. its called coping and living with others.
this sounds dry and harsh and all, but its regrettably the only perspective I have to give as an outsider.
A bus station is where a bus stops. A train station is where a train stops. On my desk, I have a work station…
#118 2018-10-18 07:44:36
Well fucks sake people just keep pushing my buttons.
God fucking damn it.
You ask for it.
On the surface he was attractive, charming, and charismatic. He was an intelligent and articulate law student. The police didn't suspect him initially
because he seemed so normal. However, in actuality he was an incredibly manipulative, misogynistic, narcissistic, sadistic, and depraved sociopathic murderer.
Bundy also had a profile for the type of women that he killed. They all had brown hair with a side part because they reminded him of his ex-girlfriend
from college, Diane Edwards a.k.a. Stephanie Brookes.
Bundy murdered lots of women.
But he also contributed to society, so I guess we can forgive his murders?
"Harold Shipman was our family doctor. It was very shocking when the truth came out. He had came to our house many times whilst my mum was pregnant and
she always noted how good he was at taking blood... He was always nice and polite never rude to anyone which is why him being a mass murderer was so shocking.
As a doctor this lady-killer also saved many lives. I guess because he did that look the other way.
I could give so, so many more examples which I might have for my wickid amusement except that would derail the topic into something else. I simply want to get my point across. Sure, Dark has contributed a lot to this forum. He has also helped in character assassination and gone on powertrips. So just because he has contributed, should we look the other way to how he has done very bad things as well when we can see things for what they are and request appropriate action.
#119 2018-10-18 07:51:38 (edited by UltraLeetJ 2018-10-18 07:55:45)
haha I see the sarcasm.. and yes,lets be a bit more blunt, and this will definitely be frustrating, but such is life.
Until you upload authenticated, signed pdf reports from the victim suffering from trauma, distress, or whatever else I will not believe a single thing.
and yes, its hard to see things for what they are. Not everyone sees the same way and that is the problem.. people in here have not been able to grasp that very well. You are free to join and post, and if you really dislike that people do not see the same way you do, then there are a million other sites to join or you could start your own. This is why we do have such things as forum categories, for example.
A bus station is where a bus stops. A train station is where a train stops. On my desk, I have a work station…
#120 2018-10-18 07:54:57
@123 I don't have to upload a thing. I don't care about the victims, I can see what Dark did without asking the victim, do you think this individual engaged in character assassination towards you? It doesn't matter the victim's reaction, as a matter of fact it was done. If the victim was hurt as a result I have no authority to say. But if I see you firing a bullet at someone but don't see that someone being hit, I can still say with certainty that you fired a bullet.
#121 2018-10-18 08:00:08 (edited by UltraLeetJ 2018-10-18 08:02:04)
could be, but this situation has been made way bigger and way more exaggerated than what it really is. this is internet, this is thankfully not real life, there are indeed worse sites. And refer to my points above, its not only the mod team that could benefit from a change of communication, or operation, or what have you.
A bus station is where a bus stops. A train station is where a train stops. On my desk, I have a work station…
#122 2018-10-18 08:18:16
I don't have any personal issues with dark, but I think what he did to Walter just isn't right. You just cant defend him for that. It just doesn't work like that.
---------------
There will come nothing, for there was nothing.
There will come nothing, for there was nothing.
#123 2018-10-18 08:52:09
@125, this is not real life? I call bullshit on that. The internet is real life. It is apart of real life, therefore it is life.
@120, right. So we should all go on your words because you claim you have access to the board where the moderators discuss moderation decisions. I highly doubt that, I really do. It seems highly unlikely that the moderators would let you, someone who they've only "known" for about 4 years or so, on the board where they make decisions of such a magnitude.
"On two occasions I have been asked [by members of Parliament!]: 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out ?' I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." — Charles Babbage.
My Github
My Github
#124 2018-10-18 10:50:57
@116: I disagree. From a purely objective point of view, no rules were broken, thus there was no reason to close the topics listed. The one that jumped out at me right away is should accessible steam games be added to the database. Dark disagreed with the majority, and when the majority got passionate about what it wanted, he closed the topic without siting any of the rules, either official or unofficial. The only reason he gave was his vague and hardly correct definition of "mob mentality." "If you look closer at these you’ll find it is not a mob mentality, but rather someone disagreeing with him in a civil way. The question then has to be asked, why is a forum moderator shutting down topics because a group of people disagree with him?" (bsg ¶9) If our goal is to remove as much subjective decision-making from moderator decisions, requiring mods to follow the rules as well as users would definitely be a start.
@125: You are displaying a shocking level of naivete about the first world problems the internet can cause. What are authenticated, signed pdf's going to prove about someone's stress levels? Just ask anyone that knew him and you'll get a far better idea of how this effected him. Words, whether said to one's face, on paper or through a cable, have the same meaning and the same mental effect. Anyone who believes the internet is a playground where no one can get hurt outside their computer is kidding themselves; in deed it could be argued that it's easier to get hurt, as I doubt very highly that if Dark had known Walter in person he would have dared pull such a stunt.
Posts: 101 to 125 of 328
AudioGames.net Forum → Site and forum feedback → A BSG Blog Post About The Forums
Generated in 0.024 seconds (58% PHP - 42% DB) with 9 queries