2018-11-03 19:32:09 (edited by flackers 2018-11-03 19:43:32)

From the first announcement that Jade was now a moderator, I thought it was a bad decision. He hasn't  the kind of character to hold that position. He's too argumentitive, too rigid in the belief his own opinion is the correct one, and unbelievably, he's already closing threads and threatening punitive action against anyone who says anything he doesn't like. One minute he's saying the mod team are working hard to see these sorts of things never happen again, and the next he's throwing his weight around in the same way that was one of the criticisms that got Dark removed as head admin. Swapping Dark for Jade is a massive step in the wrong direction.
To moderate is to calm conflict; to pour oil on troubled water. To do this you need to put your own opinions aside and see both sides of the conflicted parties in order to find a compromise. Jade is too uncompromising to make a diplomat. I've never had a warning on here, and never thought it could ever happen, but with Jade around, it's suddenly become possible. What a bizarre twist to this already controversial event. Someone needs to take this toy off him because he's not responsible enough for it. They say if you want to test a man, give him power. Jade's only been a moderator for a few days and he's already acting like he's king dong. This is the last paragraph from Jade's deciding post on the BSG blog thread.
Jade wrote: Anyone who posts in this thread after this point will receive some sort of punitive action, whether it be further warning or a short ban, dependent upon the severity of the infraction. If I knew how to lock this topic so that no further posts would happen here, I'd do it and call it good. Until or unless that happens, however, this is to be the last public word in this thread. Anyone who has more to say is welcome to contact me privately, however; my door, as they say, is always open.

Thumbs up +8

2018-11-03 19:45:06

Flackers I just finished my own post that was centered around that quote from Jayde.  It's one of the most confusing things I've seen come from the moderation team (Jayde is speaking for them all when he posts, as of course all mods do).  He specifically starts out by saying the following is an "unofficial caution", but then throws around "official" consequences to people who don't obey it.  Either the moderation team forgotten what official and unofficial mean, or we are seeing a moderator going AWOL, who is making decisions without the rest of the team being on board.

- Aprone
Please try out my games and programs:
Aprone's software

Thumbs up +4

2018-11-03 19:50:42

And this is the problem with people like Jade: they read the rules of "civil behavior", (the AG.NET's version of the civil code), and interpret it there own way. Punishing people just for posting? Really? WTF? That's going way too far, and clearly shows how supposedly "objective" you are. Of course, I'll get a warning, just for posting this here, which will only prove my point! Or a ban, which will do the same thing! Ha!
Now, a question... how is posting on a topic warning-deserving, or ban-inducing? That makes absolutely no sense. If you are that power hungry, you aren't qualified to have power over [anything]. I was having this discussion with friends last night, about power, and I told them, "one of these days you will be presented with a choice in life. The choice, whether you do it or not, will give you power over someone or something. And what you do with that power will alter your life for ever, and it will be presented to you, whether you like it or not." I also said: "Power, itself, isn't good, neutral or evil, black, white or gray; it is the way we utilize that power and what we do with it that makes us classify it as good, neutral or evil, when in reality it is us who is committing good, neutral or evil by using the power we have in such a manner, not the power itself, for power holds no allegiances and has no allies." Clearly, Jade has chosen the darker choice -- lets hold power over people and ban them for posting on a topic. I'll also re-post something he said:

Jade wrote:

I have mailed Ethin about comments that he made, and we have begun civil dialogue in that vein.

Begun civil dialog? Civil dialog is a conversation between people; I have not receivd a message back from him. So the civil dialog is more like civil half-dialog, and I wouldn't even count it as civil but professional. He messaged me, I messaged him back....

"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.

Thumbs up +4

2018-11-03 20:23:46

Dialogue is begun. It isn't finished. I am weighing your words carefully before I reply, Ethin, because you've brought up some very good food for thought. If you had mailed me and I had never mailed you back, that's not dialogue. Since there is one message exchanged between each of us, that's the start of dialogue. And it's civil, in that we're both ultimately after the same thing and just have different ways of seeing it. We aren't insulting each other. We aren't trying to tear one another down. We're trying to see eye to eye, to talk to each other. I see no harm in that, nor in characterizing it so.

Regarding official vs. unofficial. The caution is unofficial in the sense that we do not have a hard-and-fast system set up for it. I've addressed this elsewhere. It is official in that I could have and would have levied actions against people who went against it. I apologize for the confusion. I will be more concise about such things in future.

As for my suitability as a moderator, everyone is, of course, perfectly free to come to their own conclusions. I ask, however, that you bear this in mind:
1. You know that topic that was just closed, the one where I basically asked people not to talk about a topic anymore? That is literally one step further than when others have, in the past, closed topics that have gotten out of hand. Sometimes, that's what we mods have to do in the interest of keeping order. It isn't pleasant. I don't like it. I'm not enjoying throwing weight around, and that's definitely not why I came here. It was a lesser-of-two-evils scenario.
2. While I don't really want the overall issue which prompted that moderator action being discussed openly for the time being, I have numerous times expressed openness to talking with individuals about their concerns. I have an open-door policy in that regard. This should make it clear that I am not attempting to silence people entirely, merely trying to minimize the impact on the forum as a whole.
3. I am not going to warn or ban you just because you disagree with me or say things I find unflattering or unfair about my potential as a member of this staff team. That's ludicrous in the extreme. I have never been the power-hungry sort, and I've said from the first that I have thick skin. I will listen to honest criticism and will basically shrug off the rest as irrelevant. This is not, I repeat NOT, a slippery slope. This is a situation we have never dealt with before, so we have deemed it necessary to impose some limitations on this topic alone. That's it. That's all. This doesn't mean you're living in a police state where the slightest dissention means you're getting the hammer. It doesn't mean we are no longer listening. It absolutely doesn't mean this is even a permanent issue. It is, as I've stated multiple times now, damage control. With that in mind, please try and work with us.

Check out my Manamon text walkthrough at the following link:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/z8ls3rc3f4mkb … n.txt?dl=1

Thumbs up

2018-11-03 20:26:52

let's see if I get a warning, or a ban for this. if I do, point will be proven. Dark got replaced by Jayde, and on the other hand, we also lost a relatively important member of the Mod team. I was pretty opened to welcome him as a moderator. Here we are, I see flame and lava holes all around me. I just gave 3 likes to 3 posts, in the last  5minutes. I'm really not known to do those things, I barely give them. yet, it had to be done. what I can say is, if Jayde appears to be like dark, I'm sure BSG will be at it again. for now, we can sit back and relax.

Thumbs up

2018-11-03 20:32:34

@4, that's the problem, Jade, moderation is a slippery slope. That's in its entirety, unknowns be damned. Even if you have unknown situations presented to you, you are still on a very tight rope, and you need to very carefully weigh what you say and do. Closing that topic, for example, was probably not the best thing you could've done. You could've left the topic open, and let the discussion continue. Closing it has no benefit to you or any of the other moderators, and you have nothing to gain by doing so.

"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.

Thumbs up +2

2018-11-03 20:38:41

@5 he's indeed showing the dark behaviour by closing down topics which don't go in the way he wants them to go. big_smile

If you want to get in touch with me you can follow me on Twitter
have a nice day.
Paul

2018-11-03 20:43:35

Ethin wrote:

Closing that topic, for example, was probably not the best thing you could've done. You could've left the topic open, and let the discussion continue. Closing it has no benefit to you or any of the other moderators, and you have nothing to gain by doing so.

Well said Ethin.  Closing down a topic when people are still talking about an issue is only going to make it worse.  It's only been a short while and that 1 troublesome topic has generated 2 to take it's place.  Will a 3rd pop up, or a forth?  Who knows, but that topic was containing a lot of people with various things they wanted to express.  Now that it is closed, those varying views will spill out into multiple places.  These will likely grow and you'll once again be tempted to just shut them down.

Multiple times you've implied that you're looking at the big picture while others are not, but there are a lot of your posts piling up that show nothing but a lack of "big picture" planning.

- Aprone
Please try out my games and programs:
Aprone's software

Thumbs up +4

2018-11-03 21:07:55

closing that topic is a class a mistake. that wasn't damage limitation that's lets splatter this all over the town with 100 foot signage for everyone to see. because people will ensure that it is seen.

Thumbs up +2

2018-11-03 21:11:59

I'd trust a fire in a packed orphanage more than jayde at this point, In other words, no. I think the moderator team need to re-evaluate the appointment of this person.  It's clearly not working.

All the seats are taken in the house that makes the rules.
All the seats are taken in the parliament of fools.

Thumbs up +1

2018-11-03 21:16:14

well if this continues i think richard needs to step in sack the whole team and replace it because stuff like this simply cannot continue. get people in who are not close to this community who don't have favouritism towards certain people. put a permanent end to this.

Thumbs up +3

2018-11-03 21:23:42

Yeah... I'm glad this topic was created. I can't believe that other topic was closed. It was a protest, and people have the right to protest, and NOTHING! bad was coming out of it. people were just expressing their opinions like people have the right to do. closing that topic is like sending the police in with riot gear to silence people for protesting. if those people were hurling bricks at windows and causing harm, sure, but all they were doing was speaking their minds, which we should all have the right to do on this forum. The fact that that topic was closed is a very bad omen in so many ways it's not even funny. If civil discussions are going to get closed by our new moderator with the excuse of quote, damage control, when there was no damage to begin with, we need a new moderator. That's just not cool on so many levels.

I am a web designer, and a game developer. If you wish see me at http://www.samtupy.com

2018-11-03 21:25:57

sam the stupid thing is that the conversation was pretty much confined to that particular thread. now it's spread into multiple threads and it's not going to stay on the forum it's going to go elsewhere. all it's done is make things a whole lot worse.

Thumbs up

2018-11-03 21:26:02

When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say.

I was originally attempting to squeeze that in at the end of the bsg topic, but someone closed it... alas.

All the seats are taken in the house that makes the rules.
All the seats are taken in the parliament of fools.

Thumbs up +2

2018-11-03 21:35:27

That was just one of my implications. If you scater a protest and try to shut it down, that won't make people stop. it will just make people protest in other ways. That action of closing the topic may have done something almost irreversible to this forum's reputation, and enough has already been done in that matter. People were completely happy writing there opinions in a calm protest. that has been taken away, and my bet is that after people saw that, some will probably leave and never come back, people who would have posted here no longer will because as stated, people will protest elsewhere now, and people already know about the bsg post. Now they will know about this as well. However, something just struck a nerve while reading the question about unofficial and official messages topic posted by Aprone, post 2. Jade states that anyone denouncing the moderation team would have gotten a warning. That sentence was absolutely... just, appalling to read.

I am a web designer, and a game developer. If you wish see me at http://www.samtupy.com

2018-11-03 21:37:42

I understand what Jayde is trying to do to an extent. He seems to feel that the moderators have done what needed to be done and are trying their best to improve and ensure this doesn't happen again, and the current discussion is not likely to produce any positive outcomes, but rather prolong the current state of instability. The thing is though, a large number of people seem not to agree, and still have unresolved issues they want addressed. I understand the desire to move passed this, but trying to artificially stop the conversation is likely to have the opposite effect. If the conversation was allowed to continue, it would have probably petered out, and noone would have walked away from it thinking that it was being suppressed. I'm also not saying people should be ignored entirely, people seem to be unsure to what extent they can trust the moderators at this point so engaging and being transparent is I think the best way to handle this. But trying to halt the conversation altogether is more likely to trigger a backlash that will just prolong the situation. I'm also not suggesting suspending moderating people entirely, obviously the normal rules should still apply, but if the desired outcome is to return to a normal state then using abnormal measures is perhaps not the best way to get there. Considering that one of the issues raised was what people felt were arbitrary decisions by moderators, making decisions which seem arbitrary at this point are not going to reassure anyone. Someone mentioned that this might dissuade developers from coming onto the forums. I really don't think this is likely, for one all places with enough users will have issues, and if something as simple as a discussion in a handful of topics among thousands is enough to stop someone from joining then it is likely they wouldn't have lasted long anyway. I personally think the current registration system is more likely than any content on the forum to stop people from joining. I do understand the need to prevent spambots, and it is very effective for this purpose, but I can't imagine people talking about unhappiness with a few individuals in a few topics being any more of a deterrent. Also, if that topic stayed open the entire discussion would have likely remained within that one topic, but closing it just results in people starting multiple topics like what has happened now, which serves to spread the discussion rather than contain it. And keeping the discussion public allows everyone to see the different views, requesting that this discussion only be carried out in private does not seem very transparent, and might lead to having to give the same answer to multiple people instead of posting it once for everyone to see.
Ultimately most people are doing what they think is the best thing to do. The characterisations of Jayde do seem a bit premature, he is obviously new at this and it's understandable that he might not be sure how to handle this situation. Similarly, I can't see Aprone raising his issues being in bad faith, he also has a vested interest in the forum and it makes sense that he would prefer to see it improve. Most people seem to have essentially the same end goal in mind, with different ideas about how it should be reached. At this point what is happening is effectively a very charged difference in opinion. And it is better to have everyone say everything they want to say now and get it out, so that it doesn't have to come back up at some future point because people want to share things which they had kept to themselves.
Basically, I sort of get why the moderators are doing what they're doing, but I think it's not likely to produce the desired outcome. And I also understand why people want to have their concerns heard instead of having the discussion shut down. Maybe I have too much faith in humanity, but I assume the majority of people here are mature and rational enough to talk it out without warnings/bans and personal insults being necessary, so do that.

Thumbs up +4

2018-11-03 21:56:56

Sam_Tupy wrote:

Jade states that anyone denouncing the moderation team would have gotten a warning. That sentence was absolutely... just, appalling to read.

Jayde wrote:

A post denouncing the mod team in detail or starting further arguments would've gotten a couple of days worth of ban so the person could cool off.

Sam I completely agree.  I can't seem to remember where he recently spoke about it, but Jayde did say that he and the other mods are in agreement about these things he is posting.  If it were just Jayde, as an individual, using threats to silence opposition then it would be worrying and possibly a reason to think he was a bad choice for a new moderator.  Knowing that the mod team, as a whole, are making this message is something Far Worse.

Jayde wrote:

This doesn't mean you're living in a police state where the slightest dissention means you're getting the hammer.

Telling us we are not in a police state doesn't work well when you're also showing us that we are.  If you really cared about hammering out the issues fairly, why are you promoting 1 of the "sides" using threats and force (closing a topic)?!  You've got a room fully of people divided on an issue, you hand weapons to one side and tell them they can strike if they don't like what they hear, and then claim you're goal is to be fair?  I'm just not following you here.  Since becoming a mod your posts (which you've said are agreed upon by the team) have been a train wreck.  How can anyone follow the posts you've been making, and have faith in how things are being ran?

- Aprone
Please try out my games and programs:
Aprone's software

Thumbs up +3

2018-11-03 22:03:29

Zak, thank you for recognizing where we're trying to come from.

The issue is that we as a team felt that more harm was being done to let that discussion continue than would be to shut it down. Unfortunately, you forum-goers have decided to call our bluff and have your say anyway. I wish you would realize the harm you are doing. I wish you would trust that yes, we are actively looking into making changes, updating things and ensuring that this never happens again. When people are engaged in a more-or-less constant echo chamber of negative opinion, recrimination and unjust judgments, it is toxic, and we are trying to stop that. We have tried to appeal to your sense of community spirit, and when that didn't work, we have attempted to demonstrate a very small show of force to display that we do, in fact, mean business. The characterizations in both of these new topics about what will happen if you speak out are patently ignoring the text I have taken pains to craft. Put simply: we want you to stop talking about this, and give the community a moment to catch its collective breath. You aren't going to do any good talking this to death. No one deserves any more mud thrown. Saying the same things over and over and having your interloculars say "Yeah I agree" isn't doing any good. You are essentially talking just to hear yourselves talk, and it's creating toxic after-effects for those who do not share your worldview. We thoroughly respect your right to hold that worldview in these matters, but are trying to get you to realize that we need some time and space to figure out what we're doing here. Every post denouncing Dark, smearing the mods, wailing on Lori, calling out bull on the processes, is not only unhelpful, it's taking up resources that would better be spent elsewhere.

Here, I'll put it to you a different way. I -am new to this, but I am not acting alone. I -am new to this, but I do truly care what all of you are saying. I am new to this, but I do not want to establish bad precedents. I have said before and will say again: power abuse is not going to be the order of the day going forward. If I am misstepping, it is because I have stepped into boiling water and am trying to swim in it. I truly do believe that limiting conversation was the best course, and I truly do feel that just letting it continue was doing a lot of harm. I wish you folks could realize that. you're going to get resolution if you're patient; you're not going to get it any faster by thrashing this out further. That's what I keep trying to tell you.

If the mod team wants to fire me, that's one thing, but I will not be resigning any time soon. If damage has been done here, I will work hard with you as a community to try and repair it. This means pursuing facts. this means listening to the will of the people. This also means standing up for what is right, not only for individuals, but for the community as a whole. Sometimes that is going to mean that I do something or say something you don't agree with. Disagree with me constructively if you wish; I'd like to note that not a single person has messaged me since the closure of the BSG thread, but many are instead going directly against what I asked of you. We cannot simply edit the rules page on the fly, or we'd probably have done so. In case you are not aware, the owners of this forum are often quite difficult to get hold of, and busy besides. This means that some of the changes you want to see, and which we want to bring you, simply can't happen right now. I beg your patience in these trying times.

Check out my Manamon text walkthrough at the following link:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/z8ls3rc3f4mkb … n.txt?dl=1

Thumbs up +1

2018-11-03 22:09:26 (edited by Exodus 2018-11-03 22:10:45)

18:
Eh. not a single member of the moderator team has spoken out against  your little power trip, or the fact that you're speaking for them all. So multiply the fires in post 10 by four, but keep the same number of packed orphanages. I'd still trust that horror more than the team we have here.
The fact that no one wishes to message you should also really tell you something.

All the seats are taken in the house that makes the rules.
All the seats are taken in the parliament of fools.

Thumbs up +2

2018-11-03 22:12:59

So while I was typing this a lot of people responded making some of the same points. I like Sam's analogy about police suppressing peaceful protest. It might be extreme to compare closing a topic to teargas and rubber bullets, but the underlying principle is essentially the same. Usually when there is such a protest, most people might never even hear about it, but if an effort is made to suppress it it will immediately spread and gather supporters. It doesn't even matter what the original issue was, you basically create victims who people will rally around and support. Whenever a group does this they are just playing into their detractors, and giving them ammo. Even if the person isn't entirely innocent, if people feel that they are being treated unfairly they will get support anyway. Ok so I guess I'm not sure to which extent this generalises to the entire world, it might be that this could differ in different societies, but it's the way things generally work in my personal experience. Everyone has some sense of fairness, and when they perceive something as being unfair they won't easily let it go. This is especially true when it is coming from some one in a position of power. That is probably why a disproportionate amount of criticism is directed at the moderators. If it was just another forum member, their behaviour would be inconsequential and easily dismissed. But when someone holds more power, people will more easily feel threatened since that person's decisions can have consequences for them and others, so there will necessarily be a bigger reaction.

Thumbs up +2

2018-11-03 22:18:14

@18, the problem is that if we are doing harm by speaking out against what you are doing, your only causing more harm than we are by playing these little power games. You most certainly aren't helping anyone or anything by closing down topics, by attempting to remove our right to free speech, by attempting to privatize all discussions and suggestions that we give you, and then by failing to justify your actions. You are abusing your authority -- and I say that to all the moderators here. The ban button is not something you use lightly. I don't give a rats ass how long it is or whether its permanent or not, you do not ban someone for speaking against you. You do not ban someone for saying something that you don't like. I'm telling you right now and throwing down the gauntlet when I say in this post that this forum will not stand for your dictatorial behavior.

"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.

Thumbs up +3

2018-11-03 22:28:59 (edited by flackers 2018-11-03 22:35:23)

This is quite dramatic language for something so trivial, but my issue is that if you're a law-abiding citizen, the police are not your masters, and although it was a sensitive topic, and there was disagreement, no one in that thread was breaking any rules. The authorities can quite easily make themselves masters if they choose to, and that's how I view Jade's behaviour. He says it was a team decision, but he was the one doing the arguing in the immediate run-up to the lock-down, and he was the one who said if I knew how to lock this thread I would, so it's clear it was his idea. It's the exact sort of behaviour that Dark was accused of, and that's why it was such a bizarre thing to do at that point. I along with many others hadn't stepped out of line, yet we would have received punishment had we posted after Jade's pronouncement. He did exactly what the police officer who sees himself as a master would do: he tried to get the law-abiding to commit a crime to enable him to impose his authority. I haven't read much of his posts outside of the BSG thread, so I don't have any opinion of him beyond the last few days. He seems like he'd be a reasonable person as a regular poster, but as an authority figure, he's too conspicuous. He's been at the head of a very controversial decision already. He's using language that suggests he views himself as being in an elevated position. It just doesn't look good. I have absolutely nothing against the guy personally, I just think his character is not suited to that of a moderator.

Thumbs up +2

2018-11-03 22:37:15

@18
The only thing I've seen here is dictatorship, not business.
We may as  well not realize the harm we're doing by protesting, but you seem to not understand over and over, that the more you guys are vague and silent, the worse it is. How can we trust that you guys are trying to make this situation not happen ever again, if 2 seconds later, you close the topic down, threatening punishments? How can we trust you, if you want at all costs  informations to be said to you and only you privately? Why can't we know what's going on? Are we little kids who do not have a proper brain that functions, and a proper thinking? Are we so useless, that we do not deserve to know what's going on, to address our issues, and to have a civil discussion without a moderator closing it down, because it doesn't go the way they want? I am sorry to repeat my self, but you seem to pretending that we should at all cost understand and trust you even though  you (the moderation team), do not clearly trust us as a community. The proof is that most of what has been going on we discovered from aprone who I really respect for having done this. If he hadn't said such things we would have never known anything.

Jayde wrote:

The characterizations in both of these new topics about what will happen if you speak out are patently ignoring the text I have taken pains to craft.

You, instead seem to keep ignoring us and the pain we've been passing as a community. You have been a member your self but it doesn't seem you did really understand the feelings of us.
If I said anything wrong, please anyone step in and correct me.

If you want to get in touch with me you can follow me on Twitter
have a nice day.
Paul

2018-11-03 22:44:38

@Jayde:
I understand what you're saying, but it can also be argued that trying to close the discussion does more harm than good. You make a valid point about an echo chamber where everyone just reinforces one another's views, which is not really conducive to a constructive conversation. That is why I'm glad you continue to engage with people despite the substantial criticism directed at you rather than just stepping out and completely disregarding it. I also agree that continuing to criticise Dark, Lori etc is really not going to do any good. Dark has resigned and apologised, I'm not sure what more people would want from him. But a lot of posts in this and Aprone's thread are not about that, they are primarily about people's unhappiness with the topic being closed. Also, I can understand that you want time to address certain issues like updating the rules, but again, the main concern of most recent posts are immediate actions, not demands for longer-term changes to happen immediately. I think the problem was the "show of force to display that we do, in fact, mean business." That is not going to help in the current situation, only make it worse. Everyone is surely aware of what the mods could do if they wanted to. At this point people want to feel like the mods are listening to them, not see a display of authority. I also don't think getting people to cool down will work. These are not things that will go away easily. Many people have written thought-out posts, and a few days of being unable to air their views are unlikely to change their minds, and more likely to harden their attitudes.
I also want to make it clear that I'm not attacking you or anyone else personally, and I understand you have good intentions, but I simply disagree with your methods and don't think they will achieve what you're aiming for.

Thumbs up +1

2018-11-03 22:45:33

at 21 you're dead right. people won't stand for it. which is exactly why i said what i said earlier that closing that topic was a class a mistake and i stand by it whole heartedly.

Thumbs up +1