I didn't want to make promises or compromises with the Gutter knowing that in a month they might get shredded by a new company's Terms of Service. But I also couldn't really tell people why I couldn't make those promises or compromises.
As I've said before, I've been a member of MMO-champion since long before they were purchased by Curse. You'll find that mmo-champion is much more lax in some ways.
Cursing is also a non-issue. Here are a few examples of people dropping the f bomb. 12... there are countless instances of people using the F bomb without issue. Perform a simple forums search to see what I mean.
However, one thing that is quite different, and I hinted at it in this post, is that you don't get to criticize moderator action at mmo-champion. Go try to make a thread about moderator abuse at MMO-champ and see what happens. Try to contest a banning. etc.
However, one thing that is quite different, and I hinted at it in this post, is that you don't get to criticize moderator action at mmo-champion. Go try to make a thread about moderator abuse at MMO-champ and see what happens. Try to contest a banning. etc.
That's fairly standard for every site - MTGS is *extraordinarily* lenient in allowing people to criticize, and very arguable far too lenient in allowing users to attack, harass, and insult staff. Things people take for granted here!
"Sufficiently advanced experience is indistinguishable from clairvoyance." -Carsten
"Ah those eyes, those horrible creepy eyes!" -Chaosof99
DCI Level 3 Judge & TO "I do not consider myself a hero. I know only what the Vec teach:
justice must always be served and corruption must always be opposed."
Go read! I am one of the three authors of Cranial Insertion.
But seriously, if you can't remember "Woapalanne", just call me Eli.
It became harassment/abuse when it was continued beyond the point where the recipients could make use of it.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I am petitioning for the removal of all other signature petitions. WoTC doesn't give a crap about them. Get over yourself and sig this to join the cause.
Criticism and harassment are two different things. Certain "criticism" is pretty obviously thinly-veiled harassment, but most of it isn't, and that criticism still isn't allowed on a LOT of web communities. We have it good here - just about everyone posting in CI would get banned in other places just for disagreeing with the mods.
"Sufficiently advanced experience is indistinguishable from clairvoyance." -Carsten
"Ah those eyes, those horrible creepy eyes!" -Chaosof99
DCI Level 3 Judge & TO "I do not consider myself a hero. I know only what the Vec teach:
justice must always be served and corruption must always be opposed."
Go read! I am one of the three authors of Cranial Insertion.
But seriously, if you can't remember "Woapalanne", just call me Eli.
I do agree that MTGSalvation is an exception from the norm. It is no doubt a result of our roots from News.
Indeed. The "Exodus", while almost eight years ago, has had enormous impact on the culture around here, because it means that there is basically precedent for moving away if the leadership went nuts and didn't listen to the users. So MtG Salvation was founded in a way to give regular users way more say than they do on most forums. And that philosophy remains to this day.
Indeed. The "Exodus", while almost eight years ago, has had enormous impact on the culture around here, because it means that there is basically precedent for moving away if the leadership went nuts and didn't listen to the users. So MtG Salvation was founded in a way to give regular users way more say than they do on most forums. And that philosophy remains to this day.
It's not even close to the standards that were set in place when the mass exodus from News began. It's similar to the United States Constitution and Declaration of Independence...both are still the framework of our society but both are no longer being followed by our government. Both have been pooped on and crumpled up by today's politician, but we always fall back on it when the need suits them.
This place is not the same. The ability to post your mind has been stifled by the fear of infractions and warnings. There's no question that it is harder to speak about how you really feel about the administration than it was in the beginning.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Talkin outta turn....That's a paddlin'. Starin' at my sandals....That's a paddlin'. Paddlin' the school canoe....You better believe that's a paddlin'!" --Jasper
My experience on other web communities is that there is a very high degree of correlation between a lack of 'civil unrest' and moderators that are both trusted and respected by that community. It is a symbiotic relationship. Everyone benefits from good moderation (note, this is a general term, many of the communities I speak of have very few codified rules and are largely self-policed, so good could be as simple as embodying the 'ethos' of the community), and so it's in the community's best interest to have a good staff, which fosters a good community, which trusts and respects their staff, which means you get happy staff, which means they act in the best interests of everyone.
This isn't to say that these communities don't have bumps every so often, but these are rarely, if ever, due to an unjustified incident. I've seen people run out of their positions, but that was solely because they (a) lost the community's trust and/or (b) lost the community's respect by doing something counterproductive to the direction everyone was pulling at the time. The longer you keep people that have lost one or both of these things, the higher the probability of posters lashing out in frustration.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The explosion that... destroyed our city, razed our home, and turned our fields into wasteland was nothing compared to what was now happening to those who survived.
Indeed. The "Exodus", while almost eight years ago, has had enormous impact on the culture around here, because it means that there is basically precedent for moving away if the leadership went nuts and didn't listen to the users. So MtG Salvation was founded in a way to give regular users way more say than they do on most forums. And that philosophy remains to this day.
There was generally a pretty high level of acceptance on MTGN too back in the day; I think a lot of it had to do with the fact that DG was never around, and the Admins there were sort of thrown in without a clear idea of what they wanted to allow.
It's not even close to the standards that were set in place when the mass exodus from News began. It's similar to the United States Constitution and Declaration of Independence...both are still the framework of our society but both are no longer being followed by our government. Both have been pooped on and crumpled up by today's politician, but we always fall back on it when the need suits them.
This place is not the same. The ability to post your mind has been stifled by the fear of infractions and warnings. There's no question that it is harder to speak about how you really feel about the administration than it was in the beginning.
I can tell you straight up, as a guy who was a mod in the beginning and has been here longer than you, that it is now in fact easier and more common to criticize the staff than it ever was at the beginning of this site. Most of the threads in CI in the last six months would have been locked very, very early on in the past.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Sing lustily and with good courage.
Be aware of singing as if you were half dead,
or half asleep:
but lift your voice with strength.
Be no more afraid of your voice now,
nor more ashamed of its being heard,
than when you sang the songs of Satan.
I can tell you straight up, as a guy who was a mod in the beginning and has been here longer than you, that it is now in fact easier and more common to criticize the staff than it ever was at the beginning of this site. Most of the threads in CI in the last six months would have been locked very, very early on in the past.
Absolutely true. The site has really improved on this, over time.
It's also been hugely important that we've had admins who are willing to work with informal userbase delegates to break down thorny issues and compromise, in real time. We've resolved some pretty ugly squalls that way, and it seems like a great way to continue nipping these kinds of things in the bud in the future and fast-track compromises that serve each side's interests. Not an exclusive way, but a pretty effective one.
So, upon learning from the Mafia Council thread that Kpaca was banned, I decided to read up and weigh in on this issue.
I think that most people are missing a very important aspect of this situation, although some (namely Sene and Nai, to their credit) have touched on it:
If you're posting here, you're a member of the "elite few" (if you'll pardon the terminology) that cares about the "elite fewer" (Kpaca et al) who care most deeply about the site. Your random rumor-monger, Standard player, EDH battler, water-cooler, debater, mafiate, etc don't really care about the site that hosts them. They take it for granted that it exists, and ignore the behind-the-scenes goings on that keep their home afloat. I'm not going to pretend to know everything about Kpaca, as I've frankly had few interactions with him. But from what I -have- seen of him, as well as what general popular opinion tends to be of him, he's someone who cares deeply about this site, and the healthy of all of its various communities.
As a result, regardless of what rules are in place, of what agreements had been reached previously, and of what the consequences might be, it makes perfect sense to me that Kpaca, upon hearing of (rumored) fallout of the Curse deal, would go off literally and figuratively. I see no possible world where someone with Kpaca's traits would NOT choose to go down swinging, as it were. The sad thing is that the staff is right, too. Kpaca was on probation, he knew he was on probation, and I think there's a very real chance that whether he read Sene's PM or not (the evidence points to not), he at least suspected that this would be the end of him.
But the true tragedy is that by losing Kpaca, the Salvation community is losing one of those "elite fewer" that actually -care- about what happens here. About what's right and wrong...not just about the bottom line that keeps the site going. That, to me, is why threads like this exist. A very, very small fraction of people on this site are both intelligent enough and care enough to actually post about issues like this, which is why it can be very easy to dismiss them -- oh, they're just the drama queens, they just want to cause trouble and stir dissent to get their jollies! Clearly. IMO, the truth of the matter is that that small, vocal contingent that has been protesting for months is made up of the BEST this site has to offer. It doesn't take much to make the mouthbreathing durdles who compose 85% of any web community happen. It takes a lot more to keep the truly intelligent content, and if anyone reading this seriously thinks there isn't a major problem of some kind lurking around here somewhere, you're delusional. Azrael is exactly right -- there's just been too many of these situations for there NOT to be an issue somewhere.
I would really love to know who leaked the incomplete information to Kpaca, because I'd like to ram a proverbial boot up their ass. There are two possibilities: the leaker genuinely wanted the information to get out to the masses so that they could prepare for our New Overlords, and thus elected to use Kpaca as a fall-guy, intentionally or unintentionally; or the leaker maliciously leaked the incomplete information to Kpaca knowing how he would act. That latter dips more into conspiracy theory than anything else, but it's easy enough to imagine it as a possible circumstance. I don't even know Kpaca that well and I know with absolute certainty that the way he reacted is just in his character....it's what makes him, HIM.
I will admit that I have a bit of personal interest here, as from what I've read, Kpaca is one of the better Mafia players on the site, and I feel like I stand to learn a lot from him. But, shoving that aside, I find the entire situation around him disturbing. This is very rapidly turning into a martyr situation, and unless something is done to curb the tide (or reverse it), I fear this will get much worse before it gets better. I will lend my voice to the others who have posted before me here, and agree that Clock King deserves to remain banned. However, Kpaca and those who reacted on his behalf should not be banned -- especially if there was malicious intent behind leaking him the information, which, at this point, must be entertained as a possibility. Frankly, given the circumstances, Kpaca reacted better than my mental profile of him would allow -- as previously noted, he only posted in a place where people previously privy to the information could react. This shows a degree of conscientiousness that should definitely be taken into account. If Kpaca had meant any harm, he could have very easily done real damage. Instead, that damage which he tried to prevent is seeping through the cracks like some insidious disease. If you bury a skeleton in your garden, sooner or later the neighbor's dog is going to dig it up.
As far as the whole free speech thing goes, I'm shocked that some mods seem surprised that this is becoming a big deal. Think about it. This is a community site for Magic: the gathering, which is commonly regarded as somewhere just south of Chess in terms of being a game for generally intelligent people. On top of that, this forum hosts debate forums, heavily intellectualized forum games such as Mafia, and a water-cooler forum that attracts and retains members with a wide variety of life experiences. To top THAT off, this entire site is founded on the CONCEPT of free information (see: Rumor Mill).
TL;DR: there are a lot of really ****ing smart people here, who are naturally predisposed to care about such issues.
So, addressing those who believe that gag orders in general are a good thing, how do you see this NOT imploding at some point in the future, whether it happens now, six months from now, or six years from now.
Note: if Curse specifically asked the admins not to discuss the possibilities of the transaction, the blame for ALL OF THIS rests squarely on their shoulders and their shoulders alone. The thought that you can take a site like Salvation, which, as noted previously in this thread is explicitly KNOWN as a safe harbor for leaked information, and then proceed to try to gag order something of this magnitude is absolutely asinine. It also shows that they don't truly understand the dynamics behind what makes this website tick, and it frankly worries me with regards to the future. I also find their purported desire to shut down the Debate and Gutter subforums at least (I believe it has been suggested that Mafia is in danger well) highly troubling, as there is a significant contingent of the user base that is retained by those forums alone. If Curse wants to acquire Salvation, they should first and foremost learn what the essence of Salvation as a community is, as opposed to treating it like just another business deal. Everyone says oh, it's just an online community and why get worked up over it and blah blah blah. I call bull****. Directly or indirectly, this affects peoples' lives. There are a lot of people that call Salvation their home on the web for a host of reasons so diverse that I couldn't begin to describe it. And yeah, they can pick up and leave. But maybe another forum that fits their needs doesn't exist. Maybe they hang out here both because of the content they need and because of the friends they've made (I'm thinking of things Iso in particular has said). Maybe they don't have the time to build their own community the way they may want.
And again, if you're spending time posting in here, it obviously matters to you. So don't belittle everyone here by saying that this is "just a forum," and is insignificant because "it's just the web." There's a whole bevy of digital theory that vehemently disagrees that there is such a thing as "just the web."
All of these are reasons why this whole situation stinks. To conclude, in my opinion, Kpaca and those who self-destructed with him should be allowed back, but not because they were unfairly banned. According to the rules, as Harkius will be quick to point out, the bans were just. But given the turbulent times that the site finds itself afloat in, can we really afford to be without those members who care so much about the site and its communities that they would literally sacrifice themselves for it? I believe that there is more than enough evidence that Kpaca acted with sufficient restraint, given his character, to merit overturning his ban, especially considering the questionable circumstances surrounding his ban in the first place, as noted by Nai@post 133.
I will close with two final parting shots:
-) I am very interested to hear Megiddo's side of things, as he said several days ago in this thread that he had a more complete view of the situation. He has not yet posted that view, and I anxiously await reading it.
-) I am also very disappointed in the way the staff chose to handle this situation. While I place the initial blame squarely on Curse's shoulders for assuming that Salvation was just another community they could absorb per their status quo, I believe that the staff are also at blame because they treated Salvation under the same consideration that Curse was regarding the site with. If you're selling a horse and the buyer declares that your horse is a palomino instead of a Clydesdale, you don't suddenly bow and scape and agree that your horse is actually a palomino-and-beg-your-pardon-Sir! You move on and find another ****ing buyer. Given the ethos of Salvation as a community, the staff should have pushed to allow at least a certain subset of users to have the right to discuss this sale and what it might mean for the community. While it is Hannes' profit to make and the admins' duty to hold together, it is the users' traffic that both stand to lose.
As a note, I used to work on a website that was bought out by a group similar to Curse years ago (we provided World of Warcraft data and such).
We actually lost our contract due to breaking public disclosure and discussing it with member of our community and as such the sale fell through, costing us what was discussed in the 5 digit range of value for the owner and staff.
Just a note of reference, talking about the Curse deal when its explicitly stated not to can have terrible consequences that most people don't understand.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Proud Member of the "Help Fblthp Get Home in DGM" Society
I know people feel lied to, but the ownership of the site isn't really a public issue. It's between the owner and the future owner - we were made privy to this information because Hannes/Admins wanted feedback and saw that a sale mattered a lot to how we run the day to day back in July.
Um. Can you clarify what you mean by "Hannes/Admins," please? 'Cuz the way I'm reading this is that the Admins don't consider themselves members of the public.
I mean, don't get me wrong. I'm asking for clarification specifically because I know I'm just reading this in a most paranoid fashion, but you know how backwards this sounds, right? You don't ask internal employees or volunteers for feedback on external ownership issues... the ownership makes those changes and then the worker has a chance to respond.
If you're posting here, you're a member of the "elite few" (if you'll pardon the terminology) that cares about the "elite fewer" (Kpaca et al) who care most deeply about the site.
Kpaca cares more about the site than I do? He has a funny way of showing it.
Um. Can you clarify what you mean by "Hannes/Admins," please? 'Cuz the way I'm reading this is that the Admins don't consider themselves members of the public.
I mean, don't get me wrong. I'm asking for clarification specifically because I know I'm just reading this in a most paranoid fashion, but you know how backwards this sounds, right? You don't ask internal employees or volunteers for feedback on external ownership issues... the ownership makes those changes and then the worker has a chance to respond.
I can't speak for the Admins, but I assume they see themselves as members of the public... But there is an inevitable divide between staff and non-staff because of the nature of the job. I can infract you and you cannot
And the way most places work, yes. When you get bought out, the employees just sit there going "huh" usually. Hannes appears to treat this differently than most companies though - the discussion never felt like it was about money at all... it was about "is Curse the kind of company that will treat my baby the way I want her treated."
Criticism and harassment are two different things. Certain "criticism" is pretty obviously thinly-veiled harassment, but most of it isn't, and that criticism still isn't allowed on a LOT of web communities. We have it good here - just about everyone posting in CI would get banned in other places just for disagreeing with the mods.
All I'm seeing here is Argumentum ad Miserecordiam. The mods aren't victims of harassment and the criticism is not "obviously" thinly-veiled harassment. Show me one example where someone openly harassed a moderator, and called it criticism.
When it stopped being constructive criticism. Not anything that is criticism is constructive. If you're (the general You, not the Yanni You, I don't want you to think that I am speaking about you, Yanni -- God, I wish English had a different second person plural pronoun!!!) trying to be constructive, you need to take a few moments to consider your audience and couch your criticism appropriately. Some people can take, "Hey! Don't be an asshat!" as constructive criticism. Some can't.
So instead of providing examples of where someone harassed a moderator instead of providing constructive criticism, you'd rather just example that some moderators don't have as thick skin as others? No one is saying "Hey don't be an asshat!" they're raising complaints that have basis.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Originally Posted by Arcadic View Post
scumbag
Want Higher Level Card Evaluation? Visit Diestoremoval.com
So instead of providing examples of where someone harassed a moderator instead of providing constructive criticism, you'd rather just example that some moderators don't have as thick skin as others? No one is saying "Hey don't be an asshat!" they're raising complaints that have basis.
I find this update -- specifically #4 -- to be disgusting, ridiculous, and utterly unsurprising. I continue to be incredibly disappointed in the work your team is doing.
How is that constructive? Criticism, yes, but "This is terrible and you're terrible, and I'm not surprised" is not constructive without reasoning why, or how to make it better.
How is that constructive? Criticism, yes, but "This is terrible and you're terrible, and I'm not surprised" is not constructive without reasoning why, or how to make it better.
Context is everything. If I recall correctly, Brandon went on to explain what he meant later in the thread. Also that is hardly harassment as Brandon was referencing the rule, not the moderation staff as being terrible.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Originally Posted by Arcadic View Post
scumbag
Want Higher Level Card Evaluation? Visit Diestoremoval.com
All of these are reasons why this whole situation stinks. To conclude, in my opinion, Kpaca and those who self-destructed with him should be allowed back, but not because they were unfairly banned.
Most banned members may apply to be unbanned after 1 years time (rippers cannot, evading with a gimmick is +1 year). At that time, their situation will be reviewed and a decision will be made.
So if they want to come back, there exists an avenue to do so.
Let me preface the following with the fact that I understand that folks need to be held accountable for their actions. But they should not have been banned in the first place. The best example of what happened is: Someone yells fire in a crowded room of some sort and people panic. Some people get trampled to death as a result. The person (or people) responsible for yelling "fire" are the ones that are held responsible for the incident, not the ones who did the trampling. From my stand point, and I have been reading CI for at least the past two years almost daily, these people who have been banned were banned for doing the trampling. And no, what Kpaca, Kijin, Madding, and I_am_a_badman did is not directly comparable to a life or death situation, but it's something that they all, apparently, felt very strongly about.
From an outsiders perspective, it just seems convenient that a few users whom some looked at as problem children, suddenly all went off the deep end at roughly the same time and ended up banned for it. I know that only so many excuses and exceptions can be made, but even with the rescinding of the bans on Madding and I_am_a_badman, this feels very heavy handed and convenient.
It might appear heavy-handed, but consider that we're not talking about the course of normal forum operation here. We're talking about a business deal with a sizable corporation. If we're told to keep the details private, then we can't afford to condone any leak, either through action or inaction. Failure to do so could jeopardize the deal and potentially open the door for more troubles for the site. The stakes are simply much higher than normal in this case.
This is in addition to their probation, which meant that any suspension would be turned into a ban. Not following through on that would be a strike against our integrity.
The stakes are simply much higher than normal in this case.
Not following through on that would be a strike against our integrity.
So what you're saying is, this instance is an exception to the rules, hence the heavy handedness. So if you (the moderators) are allowed to have exceptions to the rules, why can't the userbase? I'm for equality along all lines, and I know that we just got done dealing with a "moderators need to be held to the same standards" situation. Yes, this deal with curse is (seemingly) important, but if you can use this as an excuse to be heavy handed, then what next? I'd say that your integrity is already compromised by the fact that you allowed an exception to dictate your course of action without treating how the others acted as exceptions as well.
You guys realize that Kpaca didn't leak anything, right? He just asked about information that N_S leaked a while before. I saw Kpaca's posts and he was just asking about informaiton that N_S had already leaked.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Originally Posted by Arcadic View Post
scumbag
Want Higher Level Card Evaluation? Visit Diestoremoval.com
I am inclined to agree with the above (before encountering two ninjas) - I do not think that what they did (on its own merits) is a banworthy offense in and of itself. However, if they were on probation, then the staff does need to enforce the rule that suspension -> automatic ban. If the staff fails to do so, then there is uneven moderation and it opens the doors to favoritism allegations and the like, and then we get to go through another CI fight because of that.
The rule either needs to be enforced evenly, without regard to who the individuals are and how many supporters they can garner for their cause in CI threads, or the rule needs to be thrown out. The "option" of enforcing the policy halfway isn't one.
One can argue that the policy of Probation = suspensions -> automatic bans is a poor policy, and we can debate the merits of such policy, but we can't say that we have one policy and enforce something completely different.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Former Level 2 Judge (Retired / Renounced)
Went to a new shop from a friend's recommendation, DQ'ed for willful violation of CR 100.6b.
As I've said before, I've been a member of MMO-champion since long before they were purchased by Curse. You'll find that mmo-champion is much more lax in some ways.
Here, a moderator flames a user with no repercussions. Just flat out calls the other user a dick.
Cursing is also a non-issue. Here are a few examples of people dropping the f bomb. 1 2... there are countless instances of people using the F bomb without issue. Perform a simple forums search to see what I mean.
However, one thing that is quite different, and I hinted at it in this post, is that you don't get to criticize moderator action at mmo-champion. Go try to make a thread about moderator abuse at MMO-champ and see what happens. Try to contest a banning. etc.
That's fairly standard for every site - MTGS is *extraordinarily* lenient in allowing people to criticize, and very arguable far too lenient in allowing users to attack, harass, and insult staff. Things people take for granted here!
"Sufficiently advanced experience is indistinguishable from clairvoyance." -Carsten
"Ah those eyes, those horrible creepy eyes!" -Chaosof99
DCI Level 3 Judge & TO
"I do not consider myself a hero. I know only what the Vec teach:
justice must always be served and corruption must always be opposed."
Go read! I am one of the three authors of Cranial Insertion.
But seriously, if you can't remember "Woapalanne", just call me Eli.
scumbag
Want Higher Level Card Evaluation? Visit Diestoremoval.com
I am petitioning for the removal of all other signature petitions. WoTC doesn't give a crap about them.
Get over yourself and sig this to join the cause.
"Sufficiently advanced experience is indistinguishable from clairvoyance." -Carsten
"Ah those eyes, those horrible creepy eyes!" -Chaosof99
DCI Level 3 Judge & TO
"I do not consider myself a hero. I know only what the Vec teach:
justice must always be served and corruption must always be opposed."
Go read! I am one of the three authors of Cranial Insertion.
But seriously, if you can't remember "Woapalanne", just call me Eli.
Indeed. The "Exodus", while almost eight years ago, has had enormous impact on the culture around here, because it means that there is basically precedent for moving away if the leadership went nuts and didn't listen to the users. So MtG Salvation was founded in a way to give regular users way more say than they do on most forums. And that philosophy remains to this day.
It's not even close to the standards that were set in place when the mass exodus from News began. It's similar to the United States Constitution and Declaration of Independence...both are still the framework of our society but both are no longer being followed by our government. Both have been pooped on and crumpled up by today's politician, but we always fall back on it when the need suits them.
This place is not the same. The ability to post your mind has been stifled by the fear of infractions and warnings. There's no question that it is harder to speak about how you really feel about the administration than it was in the beginning.
This isn't to say that these communities don't have bumps every so often, but these are rarely, if ever, due to an unjustified incident. I've seen people run out of their positions, but that was solely because they (a) lost the community's trust and/or (b) lost the community's respect by doing something counterproductive to the direction everyone was pulling at the time. The longer you keep people that have lost one or both of these things, the higher the probability of posters lashing out in frustration.
The explosion that... destroyed our city, razed our home, and turned our fields into wasteland was nothing compared to what was now happening to those who survived.
There was generally a pretty high level of acceptance on MTGN too back in the day; I think a lot of it had to do with the fact that DG was never around, and the Admins there were sort of thrown in without a clear idea of what they wanted to allow.
I can tell you straight up, as a guy who was a mod in the beginning and has been here longer than you, that it is now in fact easier and more common to criticize the staff than it ever was at the beginning of this site. Most of the threads in CI in the last six months would have been locked very, very early on in the past.
Be aware of singing as if you were half dead,
or half asleep:
but lift your voice with strength.
Be no more afraid of your voice now,
nor more ashamed of its being heard,
than when you sang the songs of Satan.
Absolutely true. The site has really improved on this, over time.
It's also been hugely important that we've had admins who are willing to work with informal userbase delegates to break down thorny issues and compromise, in real time. We've resolved some pretty ugly squalls that way, and it seems like a great way to continue nipping these kinds of things in the bud in the future and fast-track compromises that serve each side's interests. Not an exclusive way, but a pretty effective one.
I think that most people are missing a very important aspect of this situation, although some (namely Sene and Nai, to their credit) have touched on it:
If you're posting here, you're a member of the "elite few" (if you'll pardon the terminology) that cares about the "elite fewer" (Kpaca et al) who care most deeply about the site. Your random rumor-monger, Standard player, EDH battler, water-cooler, debater, mafiate, etc don't really care about the site that hosts them. They take it for granted that it exists, and ignore the behind-the-scenes goings on that keep their home afloat. I'm not going to pretend to know everything about Kpaca, as I've frankly had few interactions with him. But from what I -have- seen of him, as well as what general popular opinion tends to be of him, he's someone who cares deeply about this site, and the healthy of all of its various communities.
As a result, regardless of what rules are in place, of what agreements had been reached previously, and of what the consequences might be, it makes perfect sense to me that Kpaca, upon hearing of (rumored) fallout of the Curse deal, would go off literally and figuratively. I see no possible world where someone with Kpaca's traits would NOT choose to go down swinging, as it were. The sad thing is that the staff is right, too. Kpaca was on probation, he knew he was on probation, and I think there's a very real chance that whether he read Sene's PM or not (the evidence points to not), he at least suspected that this would be the end of him.
But the true tragedy is that by losing Kpaca, the Salvation community is losing one of those "elite fewer" that actually -care- about what happens here. About what's right and wrong...not just about the bottom line that keeps the site going. That, to me, is why threads like this exist. A very, very small fraction of people on this site are both intelligent enough and care enough to actually post about issues like this, which is why it can be very easy to dismiss them -- oh, they're just the drama queens, they just want to cause trouble and stir dissent to get their jollies! Clearly. IMO, the truth of the matter is that that small, vocal contingent that has been protesting for months is made up of the BEST this site has to offer. It doesn't take much to make the mouthbreathing durdles who compose 85% of any web community happen. It takes a lot more to keep the truly intelligent content, and if anyone reading this seriously thinks there isn't a major problem of some kind lurking around here somewhere, you're delusional. Azrael is exactly right -- there's just been too many of these situations for there NOT to be an issue somewhere.
I would really love to know who leaked the incomplete information to Kpaca, because I'd like to ram a proverbial boot up their ass. There are two possibilities: the leaker genuinely wanted the information to get out to the masses so that they could prepare for our New Overlords, and thus elected to use Kpaca as a fall-guy, intentionally or unintentionally; or the leaker maliciously leaked the incomplete information to Kpaca knowing how he would act. That latter dips more into conspiracy theory than anything else, but it's easy enough to imagine it as a possible circumstance. I don't even know Kpaca that well and I know with absolute certainty that the way he reacted is just in his character....it's what makes him, HIM.
I will admit that I have a bit of personal interest here, as from what I've read, Kpaca is one of the better Mafia players on the site, and I feel like I stand to learn a lot from him. But, shoving that aside, I find the entire situation around him disturbing. This is very rapidly turning into a martyr situation, and unless something is done to curb the tide (or reverse it), I fear this will get much worse before it gets better. I will lend my voice to the others who have posted before me here, and agree that Clock King deserves to remain banned. However, Kpaca and those who reacted on his behalf should not be banned -- especially if there was malicious intent behind leaking him the information, which, at this point, must be entertained as a possibility. Frankly, given the circumstances, Kpaca reacted better than my mental profile of him would allow -- as previously noted, he only posted in a place where people previously privy to the information could react. This shows a degree of conscientiousness that should definitely be taken into account. If Kpaca had meant any harm, he could have very easily done real damage. Instead, that damage which he tried to prevent is seeping through the cracks like some insidious disease. If you bury a skeleton in your garden, sooner or later the neighbor's dog is going to dig it up.
As far as the whole free speech thing goes, I'm shocked that some mods seem surprised that this is becoming a big deal. Think about it. This is a community site for Magic: the gathering, which is commonly regarded as somewhere just south of Chess in terms of being a game for generally intelligent people. On top of that, this forum hosts debate forums, heavily intellectualized forum games such as Mafia, and a water-cooler forum that attracts and retains members with a wide variety of life experiences. To top THAT off, this entire site is founded on the CONCEPT of free information (see: Rumor Mill).
TL;DR: there are a lot of really ****ing smart people here, who are naturally predisposed to care about such issues.
So, addressing those who believe that gag orders in general are a good thing, how do you see this NOT imploding at some point in the future, whether it happens now, six months from now, or six years from now.
Note: if Curse specifically asked the admins not to discuss the possibilities of the transaction, the blame for ALL OF THIS rests squarely on their shoulders and their shoulders alone. The thought that you can take a site like Salvation, which, as noted previously in this thread is explicitly KNOWN as a safe harbor for leaked information, and then proceed to try to gag order something of this magnitude is absolutely asinine. It also shows that they don't truly understand the dynamics behind what makes this website tick, and it frankly worries me with regards to the future. I also find their purported desire to shut down the Debate and Gutter subforums at least (I believe it has been suggested that Mafia is in danger well) highly troubling, as there is a significant contingent of the user base that is retained by those forums alone. If Curse wants to acquire Salvation, they should first and foremost learn what the essence of Salvation as a community is, as opposed to treating it like just another business deal. Everyone says oh, it's just an online community and why get worked up over it and blah blah blah. I call bull****. Directly or indirectly, this affects peoples' lives. There are a lot of people that call Salvation their home on the web for a host of reasons so diverse that I couldn't begin to describe it. And yeah, they can pick up and leave. But maybe another forum that fits their needs doesn't exist. Maybe they hang out here both because of the content they need and because of the friends they've made (I'm thinking of things Iso in particular has said). Maybe they don't have the time to build their own community the way they may want.
And again, if you're spending time posting in here, it obviously matters to you. So don't belittle everyone here by saying that this is "just a forum," and is insignificant because "it's just the web." There's a whole bevy of digital theory that vehemently disagrees that there is such a thing as "just the web."
All of these are reasons why this whole situation stinks. To conclude, in my opinion, Kpaca and those who self-destructed with him should be allowed back, but not because they were unfairly banned. According to the rules, as Harkius will be quick to point out, the bans were just. But given the turbulent times that the site finds itself afloat in, can we really afford to be without those members who care so much about the site and its communities that they would literally sacrifice themselves for it? I believe that there is more than enough evidence that Kpaca acted with sufficient restraint, given his character, to merit overturning his ban, especially considering the questionable circumstances surrounding his ban in the first place, as noted by Nai@post 133.
I will close with two final parting shots:
-) I am very interested to hear Megiddo's side of things, as he said several days ago in this thread that he had a more complete view of the situation. He has not yet posted that view, and I anxiously await reading it.
-) I am also very disappointed in the way the staff chose to handle this situation. While I place the initial blame squarely on Curse's shoulders for assuming that Salvation was just another community they could absorb per their status quo, I believe that the staff are also at blame because they treated Salvation under the same consideration that Curse was regarding the site with. If you're selling a horse and the buyer declares that your horse is a palomino instead of a Clydesdale, you don't suddenly bow and scape and agree that your horse is actually a palomino-and-beg-your-pardon-Sir! You move on and find another ****ing buyer. Given the ethos of Salvation as a community, the staff should have pushed to allow at least a certain subset of users to have the right to discuss this sale and what it might mean for the community. While it is Hannes' profit to make and the admins' duty to hold together, it is the users' traffic that both stand to lose.
-Finis.
We actually lost our contract due to breaking public disclosure and discussing it with member of our community and as such the sale fell through, costing us what was discussed in the 5 digit range of value for the owner and staff.
Just a note of reference, talking about the Curse deal when its explicitly stated not to can have terrible consequences that most people don't understand.
RRR Khorenthos - The Red Block (Feedback needed!) RRR
Um. Can you clarify what you mean by "Hannes/Admins," please? 'Cuz the way I'm reading this is that the Admins don't consider themselves members of the public.
I mean, don't get me wrong. I'm asking for clarification specifically because I know I'm just reading this in a most paranoid fashion, but you know how backwards this sounds, right? You don't ask internal employees or volunteers for feedback on external ownership issues... the ownership makes those changes and then the worker has a chance to respond.
Kpaca cares more about the site than I do? He has a funny way of showing it.
I can't speak for the Admins, but I assume they see themselves as members of the public... But there is an inevitable divide between staff and non-staff because of the nature of the job. I can infract you and you cannot
And the way most places work, yes. When you get bought out, the employees just sit there going "huh" usually. Hannes appears to treat this differently than most companies though - the discussion never felt like it was about money at all... it was about "is Curse the kind of company that will treat my baby the way I want her treated."
Is that what you mean?
WUBRGPauper Battle BoxWUBRG ... and why I am not a fan of Wayne Reynolds' Illustrations.
What?
All I'm seeing here is Argumentum ad Miserecordiam. The mods aren't victims of harassment and the criticism is not "obviously" thinly-veiled harassment. Show me one example where someone openly harassed a moderator, and called it criticism.
So instead of providing examples of where someone harassed a moderator instead of providing constructive criticism, you'd rather just example that some moderators don't have as thick skin as others? No one is saying "Hey don't be an asshat!" they're raising complaints that have basis.
scumbag
Want Higher Level Card Evaluation? Visit Diestoremoval.com
How is that constructive? Criticism, yes, but "This is terrible and you're terrible, and I'm not surprised" is not constructive without reasoning why, or how to make it better.
Have any questions or concerns? Come take a dip in my pool.
Context is everything. If I recall correctly, Brandon went on to explain what he meant later in the thread. Also that is hardly harassment as Brandon was referencing the rule, not the moderation staff as being terrible.
scumbag
Want Higher Level Card Evaluation? Visit Diestoremoval.com
Most banned members may apply to be unbanned after 1 years time (rippers cannot, evading with a gimmick is +1 year). At that time, their situation will be reviewed and a decision will be made.
So if they want to come back, there exists an avenue to do so.
From an outsiders perspective, it just seems convenient that a few users whom some looked at as problem children, suddenly all went off the deep end at roughly the same time and ended up banned for it. I know that only so many excuses and exceptions can be made, but even with the rescinding of the bans on Madding and I_am_a_badman, this feels very heavy handed and convenient.
This is in addition to their probation, which meant that any suspension would be turned into a ban. Not following through on that would be a strike against our integrity.
As I said before, I read this section of the forum daily, so I know that their suspensions have been automatically updated to bans.
So what you're saying is, this instance is an exception to the rules, hence the heavy handedness. So if you (the moderators) are allowed to have exceptions to the rules, why can't the userbase? I'm for equality along all lines, and I know that we just got done dealing with a "moderators need to be held to the same standards" situation. Yes, this deal with curse is (seemingly) important, but if you can use this as an excuse to be heavy handed, then what next? I'd say that your integrity is already compromised by the fact that you allowed an exception to dictate your course of action without treating how the others acted as exceptions as well.
scumbag
Want Higher Level Card Evaluation? Visit Diestoremoval.com
The rule either needs to be enforced evenly, without regard to who the individuals are and how many supporters they can garner for their cause in CI threads, or the rule needs to be thrown out. The "option" of enforcing the policy halfway isn't one.
One can argue that the policy of Probation = suspensions -> automatic bans is a poor policy, and we can debate the merits of such policy, but we can't say that we have one policy and enforce something completely different.
Went to a new shop from a friend's recommendation, DQ'ed for willful violation of CR 100.6b.
Have played duals? I have PucaPoints for them!
(Credit to DarkNightCavalier)
$tandard: Too poor.
Modern:
- GW Birthing Pod(?)
Legacy:
- UWR Delver