Re: Concerns about moderation conduct
Posted: Wed Apr 28, 2021 11:48 pm
Thank you for responding, Chitin.
As I have pointed out above, the game rules explicitly give Moderation "the discretion to make exceptions in special circumstances, and also to make amendments to the rules as deemed appropriate." If you do not think that this situation merits an exception, that's your prerogative, but I wish you would say so. I will again say that I think insisting on adhering to rule 1.3 gives the impression that you don't want to disclose the reason for Aquinas' ban, which is troubling.
I am glad to hear that Aquinas has not been banned for being an annoyance. Will he be told the reason that he was banned? My understanding is that Aquinas himself has not been given any reason for his ban. Is this incorrect?
Thank you - I am glad to hear it.
To be clear, this is not my own complaint. I completely understand not being available around the clock, and I'm sure all of us wish we had more free time. I hope your family member is okay.
ChitinKal wrote:While I cannot go too deep into the details of Aquinas’ ban as per section 1.3 of the game rules, I can assure everyone that he has not been banned for being an “annoyance” to Moderation. Frankly, if so-called “annoying” people were to be booted from the game, we’d have a much smaller and much less interesting community, and in all likelihood I personally would have been thrown out a long time ago.
ChitinKal wrote:One of the major issues I’ve seen brought up in this thread is more and more backlash to section 1.3. While I understand the original intention of this rule to be in place in order to curtail gossip and drama (which is definitely something the community as a whole needs to take incredibly seriously), I get the concern with the rule that it makes Moderation less accountable. Personally, I think my job would be a lot easier if I could be straight with y’all whenever we issue a sanction instead of having to undergo the all-too familiar community meltdown that’s becoming increasingly characteristic of this game. Vesica and I have been talking since I joined the Moderation team about implementing a series of rule changes and opening up a discussion within the community in order to see these implemented, and no doubt this discussion would give us the chance to decide the future of section 1.3.
As I have pointed out above, the game rules explicitly give Moderation "the discretion to make exceptions in special circumstances, and also to make amendments to the rules as deemed appropriate." If you do not think that this situation merits an exception, that's your prerogative, but I wish you would say so. I will again say that I think insisting on adhering to rule 1.3 gives the impression that you don't want to disclose the reason for Aquinas' ban, which is troubling.
I am glad to hear that Aquinas has not been banned for being an annoyance. Will he be told the reason that he was banned? My understanding is that Aquinas himself has not been given any reason for his ban. Is this incorrect?
ChitinKal wrote:As for the edits and deletes, I’ve discussed with the team the circumstances and content of the messages in question, and we came to the conclusion that the deletions were overzealous and wrong on our part. While message deletions can in extreme circumstances be justified, editing the messages of other players has always been verboten and will continue to be so. Going forward, Moderation will not be deleting messages in this manner, because as Jellybeans pointed out, it can be malicious and (in my opinion) makes our job more difficult by removing what can be vital information to explain a situation.
Thank you - I am glad to hear it.
ChitinKal wrote:As Kubrick put it, Vesica and I are seen as “absent mods.” While I reject this characterization of us (given that, for the most part, at least one of us is always present and we are usually quick to address requests and reports the day of, or at the latest a day or two behind, and I’ve heard that there have been previous Mod teams who would be absent for many days or weeks at a time), I can understand frustration when we’re at those periods when we are a few days late. As quite a few of you have mentioned, we are both real people with lives who sometimes get busy. Whether this is regular things (like family, school, or work) or irregular pressing matters (such as yesterday as I had to take a family member to the emergency room and wait there with them for a good portion of the day), we cannot dedicate every waking hour of our days to patrolling the forum or being active on Discord. Nobody can.
To be clear, this is not my own complaint. I completely understand not being available around the clock, and I'm sure all of us wish we had more free time. I hope your family member is okay.