Total Posts:66|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

A Clarification

Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2014 1:53:27 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
There are several things that need clarification. Rather than addressing individual members, Airmax and I wanted to make a more public announcement so that we can hopefully avoid any conflict in the future. These are not geared, nor targeted towards individual members, nor are they a result of just the recent events. These are from a long list of things that have happened.

The first thing we want to go over is the intent or spirit of the personal attacks policy. DDO is meant to be a site where people of different views and opinions can come together and have open, honest and rational discourse and debates about those views and opinions. Any action taken that attempts to shut down that discourse, either by insults or intimidation, is going against the purpose of the site.

This does not just apply to insults. As the rules say, it is a violation to threaten anyone that you will get them banned. This includes telling people that you are reporting them if the intent of telling them is to silence them. There is a difference between "I'm reporting you," and "Hey, try to take a deep breath and stay calm." One is clearly to help an enraged member, while the other is going to either push them further or attempt to silence them. If you come across something that needs to be brought to our attention, simply PM us.

We also need to address PM's and the privacy that there is with those. PM is short for Private Message. As such, it is a violation of a member's privacy to post or share any PM without their permission. Members have a right to their privacy and do not have to tolerate being blackmailed or fear that what you say in private will be exposed to the site. This also applies to PMs with the moderators. Not everything we say in every PM is a policy statement, and we do our best to work with each individual member for each individual issue. Posting our PMs without our permission greatly risks things being taken out of context, misrepresenting the conversation, and undermining our ability to work with members to find solutions to problems.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
ESocialBookworm
Posts: 14,366
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2014 9:53:36 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Understood. :)

(Bump!)
Solonkr~
I don't care about whether an ideology is "necessary" or not,
I care about how to solve problems,
which is what everyone else should also care about.

Ken~
In essence, the world is fucked up and you can either ignore it, become cynical or bitter about it.

Me~
"BAILEY + SOLON = SAILEY
MY SHIP SAILEY MUST SAIL"

SCREW THAT SHIZ #BANNIE = BAILEY & ANNIE

P.S. Shipped Sailey before it was cannon bitches.
birdlandmemories
Posts: 4,140
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2014 10:21:59 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
I think that also when a person gets reported a specific amount of times, from then on until a week or so has passed, moderators should be able to see what that person sends in PMs, to make sure that they are not doing anything that violates the TOS, like spamming, harassment, etc
Ashton
ESocialBookworm
Posts: 14,366
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2014 10:40:26 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/19/2014 10:21:59 AM, birdlandmemories wrote:
I think that also when a person gets reported a specific amount of times, from then on until a week or so has passed, moderators should be able to see what that person sends in PMs, to make sure that they are not doing anything that violates the TOS, like spamming, harassment, etc

That is breaching privacy though...

The person could be blocked by other members etc or they could delete the threads.
Solonkr~
I don't care about whether an ideology is "necessary" or not,
I care about how to solve problems,
which is what everyone else should also care about.

Ken~
In essence, the world is fucked up and you can either ignore it, become cynical or bitter about it.

Me~
"BAILEY + SOLON = SAILEY
MY SHIP SAILEY MUST SAIL"

SCREW THAT SHIZ #BANNIE = BAILEY & ANNIE

P.S. Shipped Sailey before it was cannon bitches.
PeacefulChaos
Posts: 2,610
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2014 10:55:42 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/19/2014 10:40:26 AM, ESocialBookworm wrote:
At 5/19/2014 10:21:59 AM, birdlandmemories wrote:
I think that also when a person gets reported a specific amount of times, from then on until a week or so has passed, moderators should be able to see what that person sends in PMs, to make sure that they are not doing anything that violates the TOS, like spamming, harassment, etc

That is breaching privacy though...

The person could be blocked by other members etc or they could delete the threads.

It can be the DDO's Patriot Act.
ESocialBookworm
Posts: 14,366
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2014 11:44:09 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/19/2014 11:08:48 AM, AngelofDeath wrote:
Bump.

I know quite a few people who need to see this

lol
Solonkr~
I don't care about whether an ideology is "necessary" or not,
I care about how to solve problems,
which is what everyone else should also care about.

Ken~
In essence, the world is fucked up and you can either ignore it, become cynical or bitter about it.

Me~
"BAILEY + SOLON = SAILEY
MY SHIP SAILEY MUST SAIL"

SCREW THAT SHIZ #BANNIE = BAILEY & ANNIE

P.S. Shipped Sailey before it was cannon bitches.
Fanath
Posts: 830
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2014 11:58:03 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/19/2014 10:21:59 AM, birdlandmemories wrote:
I think that also when a person gets reported a specific amount of times, from then on until a week or so has passed, moderators should be able to see what that person sends in PMs, to make sure that they are not doing anything that violates the TOS, like spamming, harassment, etc

That's not a good idea, a member could just slip once and then they lose all privacy,
Dude... Stop...
NiqashMotawadi3
Posts: 1,895
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2014 1:26:37 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I no longer trust our moderation team so I feel hesitant in accepting the doctrine of PM secrecy, perhaps because potential abuse could be committed by the moderators themselves in the PMs, and they can force their victim to remain secretive on such abuse, so that they preserve their reputation and Cop status on DDO.

According to a recent blogspot by LarzTheLoser[1], one moderator broke every single rule of the Moderation Policy in the PMs, and this strengthens my position on PM secrecy, , knowing that in Larz's case, such violations occurred after the new Moderation Policy was implemented in the end of March.

Perhaps Juggle's biggest mistake is that it allows practicing members of DDO to volunteer as moderators, when it should employ outsiders without any friend biases or social connections, in order to avoid their moderation depreciating into a circus show that allows their friends to get away with implicit cyberbulling, while people who cause some harmless trouble and are despised by DDO's established structure of oldies gradually get banned over reasons that are not so convincing, or deactivate their accounts because they are fed up with the bullying of the moderation team or the clique of protected friends.

Moreover, I'm not saying that because I feel that my previous ban was not justified. So please don't try to assess passages based on what you think are the intentions of the person writing it, as that is nothing more than allergy to conventional honesty that sinks in the forums, while agreed-upon propaganda flows like weightless and empty chunks of corn seeds.

[1] http://philomenamagikz.net...
TheGreatAndPowerful
Posts: 3,012
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2014 2:13:17 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/19/2014 1:53:27 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
There are several things that need clarification. Rather than addressing individual members, Airmax and I wanted to make a more public announcement so that we can hopefully avoid any conflict in the future. These are not geared, nor targeted towards individual members, nor are they a result of just the recent events. These are from a long list of things that have happened.

The first thing we want to go over is the intent or spirit of the personal attacks policy. DDO is meant to be a site where people of different views and opinions can come together and have open, honest and rational discourse and debates about those views and opinions. Any action taken that attempts to shut down that discourse, either by insults or intimidation, is going against the purpose of the site.

But, apparently, not deleting people's posts to win a game.


This does not just apply to insults. As the rules say, it is a violation to threaten anyone that you will get them banned. This includes telling people that you are reporting them if the intent of telling them is to silence them. There is a difference between "I'm reporting you," and "Hey, try to take a deep breath and stay calm." One is clearly to help an enraged member, while the other is going to either push them further or attempt to silence them. If you come across something that needs to be brought to our attention, simply PM us.

We also need to address PM's and the privacy that there is with those. PM is short for Private Message. As such, it is a violation of a member's privacy to post or share any PM without their permission. Members have a right to their privacy and do not have to tolerate being blackmailed or fear that what you say in private will be exposed to the site. This also applies to PMs with the moderators. Not everything we say in every PM is a policy statement, and we do our best to work with each individual member for each individual issue. Posting our PMs without our permission greatly risks things being taken out of context, misrepresenting the conversation, and undermining our ability to work with members to find solutions to problems.
PotBelliedGeek
Posts: 4,298
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2014 3:59:58 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Anyone else notice that everyone accusing the mods of less than ethical moderation has also been banned in recent history? I think people are just sore.
Religion Forum Ambassador

HUFFLEPUFF FOR LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!
NiqashMotawadi3
Posts: 1,895
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/20/2014 12:10:19 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/19/2014 3:59:58 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
Anyone else notice that everyone accusing the mods of less than ethical moderation has also been banned in recent history? I think people are just sore.

The main accuser is LarzTheLoser and he hasn't been banned in recent history, and hence your argument from personal intentions was why I made that final preemption in my argument to avoid such thinking, which I guess focuses on who the person is more than what the person is saying.
NiqashMotawadi3
Posts: 1,895
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/20/2014 12:14:44 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
I can also add a few other names that have critiqued the moderation in a way or another for being less than ethical and have not been ever banned, for all I know, or banned in recent history such as Rross, Wrichirw and Romani.
PotBelliedGeek
Posts: 4,298
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/20/2014 11:40:46 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/20/2014 12:14:44 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:
I can also add a few other names that have critiqued the moderation in a way or another for being less than ethical and have not been ever banned, for all I know, or banned in recent history such as Rross, Wrichirw and Romani.

Larz threw a tizzy fit when someone made an accusation against him. he was pissed off and acted like a kid. His criticism is useless. Romanii and Ross are two noobs who have no idea what is going on, all they see are a bunch of angry people yelling at max. They are simply believing what others tell them. I cannot speak for Wrichirw.
Religion Forum Ambassador

HUFFLEPUFF FOR LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/20/2014 2:39:02 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/20/2014 12:14:44 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:
I can also add a few other names that have critiqued the moderation in a way or another for being less than ethical and have not been ever banned, for all I know, or banned in recent history such as Rross, Wrichirw and Romani.

I have spoken with most if the people on your list, as well as several others not on the list, regarding what is and is not allowed. I have also spoken with them about what to look for moving forward and what can result in a ban. As I have said, no one is going to be banned for what they said or did 3 months ago. We will keep a closer eye on them, but if anyone is going to be banned, it is going to be based on what they are doing now. And as I've said, things need to be reported. We can't do anything if it isn't reported to us.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
NiqashMotawadi3
Posts: 1,895
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/20/2014 2:56:20 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/20/2014 11:40:46 AM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
At 5/20/2014 12:14:44 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:
I can also add a few other names that have critiqued the moderation in a way or another for being less than ethical and have not been ever banned, for all I know, or banned in recent history such as Rross, Wrichirw and Romani.

Larz threw a tizzy fit when someone made an accusation against him. he was pissed off and acted like a kid. His criticism is useless. Romanii and Ross are two noobs who have no idea what is going on, all they see are a bunch of angry people yelling at max. They are simply believing what others tell them. I cannot speak for Wrichirw.

You're clearly unaware of Larz's case, which wasn't at all childish, I would have done the same thing if I was in his case, and you call RRross a noob who is believing what others tell her, which is a clear misrepresentation of a user here who has spent a long time in DDO and is very intelligent and skeptical. I don't see how ad hominem towards others is good defense for the moderators, who I'm afraid, have some sort of worship status that clears them out of any mistakes and abuses.
Romanii
Posts: 4,851
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/20/2014 3:18:25 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/20/2014 11:40:46 AM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
At 5/20/2014 12:14:44 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:
I can also add a few other names that have critiqued the moderation in a way or another for being less than ethical and have not been ever banned, for all I know, or banned in recent history such as Rross, Wrichirw and Romani.

Larz threw a tizzy fit when someone made an accusation against him. he was pissed off and acted like a kid. His criticism is useless. Romanii and Ross are two noobs who have no idea what is going on, all they see are a bunch of angry people yelling at max. They are simply believing what others tell them. I cannot speak for Wrichirw.

...

Lol I don't even remember strongly critiquing the moderation around here...
Romanii
Posts: 4,851
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/20/2014 3:19:10 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/20/2014 12:14:44 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:
I can also add a few other names that have critiqued the moderation in a way or another for being less than ethical and have not been ever banned, for all I know, or banned in recent history such as Rross, Wrichirw and Romani.

Huh, I did?
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/20/2014 3:21:11 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I don't have strong criticisms of the moderation [outside of Ore_Ele hating me, :'-(], but I highly disagree with the general attitude of 'they're mods, trust them!'
NiqashMotawadi3
Posts: 1,895
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/20/2014 3:26:42 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/20/2014 3:19:10 PM, Romanii wrote:
At 5/20/2014 12:14:44 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:
I can also add a few other names that have critiqued the moderation in a way or another for being less than ethical and have not been ever banned, for all I know, or banned in recent history such as Rross, Wrichirw and Romani.

Huh, I did?

That's what I understood of your responses on the JiffPop ban-post, I could be wrong.
Mikal
Posts: 11,270
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/20/2014 3:30:55 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I think the moderation does fine

(a) you always receive warnings (multiple ones) before any action is taking
(b) if you chose to continue acting out after receive the warning, you probably will receive another
(c) then and only then if the actions continue will you be banned. Then probably only for a day

It takes extreme circumstance to get a 2 week - 2 month ban like we normally see. They have to go above and beyond to violate that kind of conduct on the sites policies and procedures.

In regards to larz, I am in full agreement with pots mostly. If you decide to run for any office you will always and I do mean always receive criticism or hate. Someone merely brought up an instance about his stance and statement in regards to his good relationship with juggle. As soon as that sparked back an issue that had occurred months ago (which is all fair game) in a election. Dude closes his account and drops his presidency.

Frankly happy it happened now rather than after (he possibly got elected. Anyone that rage quits like that is more than welcome to do so, but they have no place in office.
Romanii
Posts: 4,851
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/20/2014 4:33:17 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/20/2014 3:26:42 PM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:
At 5/20/2014 3:19:10 PM, Romanii wrote:
At 5/20/2014 12:14:44 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:
I can also add a few other names that have critiqued the moderation in a way or another for being less than ethical and have not been ever banned, for all I know, or banned in recent history such as Rross, Wrichirw and Romani.

Huh, I did?

That's what I understood of your responses on the JiffPop ban-post, I could be wrong.

No, I am undecided on whether or not Jifpop should have been banned.
The most strongly I can remember criticizing the mods here was in questioning Imabench's ban.
That being said, I can certainly see where you are coming from about the mods and their friend biases; there are a couple prominent users on here who I think have done things just as bad as people who HAVE been banned, seemingly escaping a ban only by being friends with airmax.
NiqashMotawadi3
Posts: 1,895
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/20/2014 4:49:58 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/20/2014 3:30:55 PM, Mikal wrote:
I think the moderation does fine

(a) you always receive warnings (multiple ones) before any action is taking
(b) if you chose to continue acting out after receive the warning, you probably will receive another
(c) then and only then if the actions continue will you be banned. Then probably only for a day


The main problem is that there are other users who got warnings but were never banned when they have personally insulted and cyberbullied many other members, simply because they either helped a certain moderator cyberbully someone or because they are friends with the moderators, you know what they say about taking socially-advantageous positions in a chicken-den psychology framework.

It takes extreme circumstance to get a 2 week - 2 month ban like we normally see. They have to go above and beyond to violate that kind of conduct on the sites policies and procedures.

In regards to larz, I am in full agreement with pots mostly. If you decide to run for any office you will always and I do mean always receive criticism or hate.

In regards to Larz, you're simply unaware of the back-story and simply evaluating his behavior based on what you've seen from it in the last few weeks, when this has nothing to do with it is a rather childish simplificiation that he recieved criticism for his presidency. There are actually good reasons for him to rage-quit and those are because he was extensively bullied by people with moderation status and an another clique of friends within a period of 10 months. Please read the following post by him to see the history of abuses: http://philomenamagikz.net...

Someone merely brought up an instance about his stance and statement in regards to his good relationship with juggle. As soon as that sparked back an issue that had occurred months ago (which is all fair game) in a election. Dude closes his account and drops his presidency.

What was brought up was a complete and utter fabrication. He has a good, if not an excellent, relationship with Juggle, it's the moderation team which he has conflicts with, mainly because it uses it's diatribe of authority to spread lies around like he has a bad relationship with Juggle or that he rage-quitted because of criticism. He rage-quitted simply because there is no policy against cyberbullying and because he was cyberbullied constantly by people who are either moderators or protected by ones.

Frankly happy it happened now rather than after (he possibly got elected. Anyone that rage quits like that is more than welcome to do so, but they have no place in office.

I understand why you won't find him eligible to be a president, but Larz didn't just drop his presidency. He dropped his membership here when he is a valuable user to DDO. If you seriously don't see that and rather shift focus on whether he could have been a good president, that is your area of interest, but that's not really a good assessment of what happened. DDO lost Larz. We didn't just lose another presidential candidate.
rross
Posts: 2,772
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/20/2014 8:18:29 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/20/2014 3:21:11 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
I don't have strong criticisms of the moderation [outside of Ore_Ele hating me, :'-(], but I highly disagree with the general attitude of 'they're mods, trust them!'

This is it exactly. And also the converse - just because you disagree with a particular action by the mods does not make you anti-mods in general.

In fact, on the whole, I like Airmax and ore_ele quite a lot from what little I've seen of them. I think they do an amazing job. I also think it's a given that they'll make mistakes, that this is inevitable given the amount of information that they need to process, and again - on the whole - these mistakes don't really matter.

However, sometimes there'll be a type of error or a systematic kind of error that will lead to site-wide effects, and I think that those are the kind of errors I've been objecting to.

For instance, if someone is "allowed" to deliberately and publicly harass members off the site, that affects us all. And there have been issues related to voting that I've raised in the past, because of the silent effects of mod decisions.

For example, if someone is "allowed" (I put quotation marks because I don't necessarily mean that this is conscious mod decision - it could be an unintended consequence of the system) to harass a voter for voting against them, then this will have the consequence of people being reluctant to vote against that person, or against anyone.
rross
Posts: 2,772
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/20/2014 8:23:57 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/20/2014 11:40:46 AM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
At 5/20/2014 12:14:44 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:
I can also add a few other names that have critiqued the moderation in a way or another for being less than ethical and have not been ever banned, for all I know, or banned in recent history such as Rross, Wrichirw and Romani.

Larz threw a tizzy fit when someone made an accusation against him. he was pissed off and acted like a kid. His criticism is useless. Romanii and Ross are two noobs

Eh? I've been here about a year and a half (more than twice as long as you). I've done more than 50 debates, not to mention 2 team debates (more than twice as many as you). When do I stop being a noob?

who have no idea what is going on,

So what is going on then? Explain it to me, oh wise and experienced one.

all they see are a bunch of angry people yelling at max.

I honestly have not seen that.

They are simply believing what others tell them.

What are you talking about?

I cannot speak for Wrichirw.

Why not? How come he gets excused?
rross
Posts: 2,772
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/20/2014 8:32:08 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/20/2014 3:30:55 PM, Mikal wrote:
I think the moderation does fine

(a) you always receive warnings (multiple ones) before any action is taking
(b) if you chose to continue acting out after receive the warning, you probably will receive another
(c) then and only then if the actions continue will you be banned. Then probably only for a day

It takes extreme circumstance to get a 2 week - 2 month ban like we normally see. They have to go above and beyond to violate that kind of conduct on the sites policies and procedures.

In regards to larz, I am in full agreement with pots mostly. If you decide to run for any office you will always and I do mean always receive criticism or hate.

Yes, I agree. He should have stayed and fought it out.

Someone merely brought up an instance about his stance and statement in regards to his good relationship with juggle. As soon as that sparked back an issue that had occurred months ago (which is all fair game) in a election.

It was not "someone" it was ore_ele who is not only a mod but runs the elections. So it was not "fair game" it was totally out of order.

Also, a thread from 10 months ago is not relevant to Larz's relationship with Juggle now. I think ore_ele's actions were totally unjustified.

Dude closes his account and drops his presidency.

yeah...

Frankly happy it happened now rather than after (he possibly got elected. Anyone that rage quits like that is more than welcome to do so, but they have no place in office.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/20/2014 8:35:13 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/19/2014 1:53:27 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
There are several things that need clarification. Rather than addressing individual members, Airmax and I wanted to make a more public announcement so that we can hopefully avoid any conflict in the future. These are not geared, nor targeted towards individual members, nor are they a result of just the recent events. These are from a long list of things that have happened.

The first thing we want to go over is the intent or spirit of the personal attacks policy. DDO is meant to be a site where people of different views and opinions can come together and have open, honest and rational discourse and debates about those views and opinions. Any action taken that attempts to shut down that discourse, either by insults or intimidation, is going against the purpose of the site.

Why is it okay for the mod to "shut down that discourse", but not individual users en masse?
Real threats of banning from the mod seems much more intimidating than someone who is posting their objection to another.

This does not just apply to insults. As the rules say, it is a violation to threaten anyone that you will get them banned. This includes telling people that you are reporting them if the intent of telling them is to silence them. There is a difference between "I'm reporting you," and "Hey, try to take a deep breath and stay calm." One is clearly to help an enraged member, while the other is going to either push them further or attempt to silence them. If you come across something that needs to be brought to our attention, simply PM us.

We also need to address PM's and the privacy that there is with those. PM is short for Private Message. As such, it is a violation of a member's privacy to post or share any PM without their permission. Members have a right to their privacy and do not have to tolerate being blackmailed or fear that what you say in private will be exposed to the site. This also applies to PMs with the moderators. Not everything we say in every PM is a policy statement, and we do our best to work with each individual member for each individual issue. Posting our PMs without our permission greatly risks things being taken out of context, misrepresenting the conversation, and undermining our ability to work with members to find solutions to problems.

This is ridiculous.
How is there an expectation of privacy in a PM for the other party?
My work here is, finally, done.
rross
Posts: 2,772
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/20/2014 8:36:14 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/20/2014 8:32:08 PM, rross wrote:

Dude closes his account and drops his presidency.

yeah...

I also don't like this way of hinting darkly at injustices. Larz isn't the only person who does it. I think there's two options: come right out and accuse people with specifics, or smile and shut up. I don't care much for this middle ground.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/20/2014 8:40:36 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/20/2014 8:35:13 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 5/19/2014 1:53:27 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
There are several things that need clarification. Rather than addressing individual members, Airmax and I wanted to make a more public announcement so that we can hopefully avoid any conflict in the future. These are not geared, nor targeted towards individual members, nor are they a result of just the recent events. These are from a long list of things that have happened.

The first thing we want to go over is the intent or spirit of the personal attacks policy. DDO is meant to be a site where people of different views and opinions can come together and have open, honest and rational discourse and debates about those views and opinions. Any action taken that attempts to shut down that discourse, either by insults or intimidation, is going against the purpose of the site.

Why is it okay for the mod to "shut down that discourse", but not individual users en masse?
Real threats of banning from the mod seems much more intimidating than someone who is posting their objection to another.

The mods should not be shutting down rational discourse. If there are insults and violations, that is not rational discourse that is being stopped, but the barriers to discourse that is being removed.


This does not just apply to insults. As the rules say, it is a violation to threaten anyone that you will get them banned. This includes telling people that you are reporting them if the intent of telling them is to silence them. There is a difference between "I'm reporting you," and "Hey, try to take a deep breath and stay calm." One is clearly to help an enraged member, while the other is going to either push them further or attempt to silence them. If you come across something that needs to be brought to our attention, simply PM us.

We also need to address PM's and the privacy that there is with those. PM is short for Private Message. As such, it is a violation of a member's privacy to post or share any PM without their permission. Members have a right to their privacy and do not have to tolerate being blackmailed or fear that what you say in private will be exposed to the site. This also applies to PMs with the moderators. Not everything we say in every PM is a policy statement, and we do our best to work with each individual member for each individual issue. Posting our PMs without our permission greatly risks things being taken out of context, misrepresenting the conversation, and undermining our ability to work with members to find solutions to problems.

This is ridiculous.
How is there an expectation of privacy in a PM for the other party?

The PM is a "private message." Just like in the real world, there is a legal expectation of privacy on personal phone calls from being taped without permission. The only persons that this expectation does not extend to is Juggle, as it is there private property.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"