Discord wrote:
[11:15 AM] Ryozuki: @heinrich5991 why you close
<snip>
[11:15 AM] Ryozuki: it was such an interesting discussion
[11:16 AM] Ryozuki: @heinrich5991 it starts looking like gg kid has the reason:
<snip>(edited)
[11:17 AM] Ryozuki:
<snip>
[11:17 AM] Ryozuki:
<snip>
[11:18 AM] Ryozuki: atleast you cannot prevent me from discussing this here
[11:18 AM] Ryozuki:
<snip>
[11:21 AM] Ryozuki: i am coming to the conclusion myself that the rule about not discussing about staff members is a complete injustice and really unfair. You don't notice the injustice until it affects you, but since you are an admin @heinrich5991 i guess you don't even notice
[11:22 AM] onby: thats what i said a long time ago
[11:22 AM] Ryozuki: and i'm copying this text and saving it, ill repost it everyday to make you remember this is unfair(edited)
[11:30 AM] Ryozuki: lets change this rule
[11:30 AM] Ryozuki:
<snip>
[11:30 AM] DanilBest: lol
[11:32 AM] onby:
<snip>
[11:33 AM] Ryozuki: they even moved the thread
[11:33 AM] Ryozuki: to a more hideable site
[11:33 AM] Ryozuki: sec i find it
[11:33 AM] Ryozuki:
<snip>
[11:33 AM] Ryozuki: u can read it all there
[11:33 AM] Ryozuki: ofc they ended up closing it
[11:34 AM] Ryozuki: due to rule 11 of user guidelines
[11:34 AM] Ryozuki: which im gonna make a post now against it
[11:37 AM] onby: "Moderators and administrators have the final say on anything."
lol
[11:37 AM] Shishigami: well thats pretty normal
[11:37 AM] Ryozuki: read the rule completly
[11:37 AM] Ryozuki:
11. Moderators and administrators have the final say on anything.
If you have a problem, you may make a complaint to them directly and not publicly on the forum. Creating threads or posts that question or reference administrative decisions or potential administrative decisions, such as post removals and thread closures, is not permitted. We are not perfect and if you feel that we have made a mistake, please privately contact a staff member and we will review the situation.
[11:38 AM] Ryozuki: @onby thats the thing
[11:38 AM] onby: yea i think the last part could be a problem
[11:38 AM] Ryozuki: but i'm not even user about Moderators and administrators have the final say on anything.
[11:39 AM] onby: well by definition its true because theyre the ones with power
[11:39 AM] onby: but i dont think it means they have to censor all complaints
[11:40 AM] Amu~Cookie: I don't see any problem, it's normal.
[11:40 AM] Ryozuki: put goverments for example, there is always the oposition, and the one with power, usually in normal countries with "normal" democracy the oposition can speak freely. Yet the power will have majority and thus the final vote
yes2
[11:41 AM] Ryozuki: but censoring the oposition is not good
yes2
[11:41 AM] Ryozuki: never
[11:41 AM] Amu~Cookie: you are funny comparing a game to a government(edited)
[11:41 AM] Ryozuki: nice argument
[11:41 AM] fokkonaut: good morning
[11:41 AM] Amu~Cookie: it's not comparable
[11:41 AM] fokkonaut: What are you discussing
[11:41 AM] Amu~Cookie: hello
[11:41 AM] Ryozuki: i think it is completly comparable
[11:42 AM] ChillerDragon: Ddnet leader
[11:42 AM] fokkonaut: me
[11:42 AM] Amu~Cookie: we are discussing the combat of Ryosuki for democracy because he don't like the way ddnet is handled
[11:42 AM] onby: [4:41 AM] Amu~Cookie: you are funny comparing a game to a government(edited)
thats how an analogy works ..
[11:42 AM] Ryozuki: it's Ryozuki
[11:42 AM] Ryozuki: not ryosuki
[11:42 AM] fokkonaut: I dont like it too
[11:43 AM] fokkonaut: jao can decide everything
[11:43 AM] Amu~Cookie: there is your right
[11:43 AM] fokkonaut: bad
[11:43 AM] Shishigami: @onby thats not a good analogy however lol
[11:43 AM] Ryozuki: why not
[11:43 AM] Ryozuki: explain further
[11:44 AM] Ryozuki: well it's true we all can agree that ddnet resembles more a dictatorship than a democracy
[11:44 AM] Amu~Cookie: rofl
[11:44 AM] Shishigami: if blizzard decides that they dont want to sell a subscription to you anymore, you can make a fuss all you want, its their good right
but no one thinks north korea is okay
its a completely different thing
[11:44 AM] Ryozuki: this is not a corporation or company
[11:44 AM] onby: no one is saying ddnet administration is as important as real life governments its just an example of how power is divided in different systems wtf
[11:45 AM] Amu~Cookie: If we play a game it's not for talking about politics
[11:45 AM] Ryozuki: @heinrich5991 what you think
[11:46 AM] Ryozuki: it's not politics imo, its the way administration works
[11:48 AM] Amu~Cookie: you can say your opinion to admin they will listen. But if they choose to not agree with you. you don't need to cry and scream dictator
[11:48 AM] Ryozuki: "admins will listen"
[11:48 AM] Ryozuki: yeah closing every thread about them is listening
[11:48 AM] Amu~Cookie: why not asking in private then ?
[11:48 AM] Amu~Cookie: they will listen
[11:48 AM] Ryozuki: i like open discussions where everyone can give his opinion
[11:49 AM] Ryozuki: and imo it shouldn't be private
[11:49 AM] Ryozuki: i think everyone should know what administration is doing to judge if they are doing correctly or not
[11:50 AM] Ryozuki: there are sure some things u want to keep private such as password etc
[11:50 AM] Ryozuki: but lot of decisions dont involve that
[11:50 AM] Ryozuki: they ofc prefer people to not know and keep them ignorant
[11:50 AM] Ryozuki: thats why they want private discussions about staff
[11:51 AM] Ryozuki: and their only argument is that it can start witch hunting
[11:51 AM] Ryozuki: but they can use their moderative power
[11:51 AM] Ryozuki: to prevent that
[11:51 AM] Ryozuki: and imo its worth even with witch hunting
[11:51 AM] onby: [4:48 AM] Amu~Cookie: why not asking in private then ?
thats the whole point of this conversation
[11:52 AM] onby: that requiring all admin complaints to be private could be a bad thing
[11:52 AM] Amu~Cookie: I think you are taking thing too seriously
[11:52 AM] Amu~Cookie: And what i saw from the closed thread, that's is was meant only to spread hate on someone
[11:53 AM] Ryozuki: please this thing about "dont take it too seriously" i find it ridiculous, ddnet has a big community that imo administration should be taken seriously
1
[11:53 AM] Ryozuki: there is also a lot of decisions in ddnet, map releases, new features, etc
[11:55 AM] onby: next time a user has a problem the admin should just tell them its an online game and dont take it seriously
[11:55 AM] Ryozuki: but don't worry, this chat will soon be filled with another convo and be forgotten forever, that's what happens with most of this discussions
[11:56 AM] Amu~Cookie: because people don't care maybe
mmm2
[11:56 AM] Ryozuki: :face_palm:
[11:58 AM] Amu~Cookie: but now I wait to see if we are getting censored. Because you said they censor us
[11:59 AM] Ryozuki: if you mean in discord, i think you didnt read it all
[11:59 AM] Ryozuki: im talking about the forum
[11:59 AM] Amu~Cookie: you can still read the closed thread
[11:59 AM] Amu~Cookie: and you can still discuss here
[11:59 AM] Amu~Cookie: where is the censor
[11:59 AM] Ryozuki: as i said, discord discussions go fast and get forgotten soon, thats why i think they wont bother deleting this
[12:00 PM] Ryozuki: the censor is that you cannot continue the discussion
[12:03 PM] snail: its funny because you wanted us to ban prankster from here and to "handle his stupidness" (how is that different from censorship?) you even blamed us for not doing anything when he started trolling in there, but when he continues his troll on forum and gets locked its a huge drama
[12:03 PM] snail: :thonkery:
[12:03 PM] Ryozuki: thats the thing, he started trolling
[12:03 PM] snail: and you wanted us to actually "censor" him
[12:03 PM] snail: which we didnt do
[12:04 PM] snail: now hes polluting forum so we lock the threads, and you cry
[12:04 PM] snail: OK
[12:04 PM] Ryozuki: he opened a second thread do to you closing the first
[12:04 PM] snail: because it was troll + not following the rule u disagree with + polluting forum?
[12:05 PM] Ryozuki: he broken ingame rules several times
[12:05 PM] snail: he literally wrote a big long ass text to keep on trolling
[12:05 PM] snail: but apparently thats ok on forum for u
[12:05 PM] snail: while on discord he should be instantly censored
[12:06 PM] Ryozuki: prankster was not just complaining about staff but he was being annoying and it is clear that many people complained about his annoyance.
[12:07 PM] onby: if a troll or any other person makes a post on the forum complaining about a ban or something, which looks more suspicious
-the admin replying and saying nah u deserved the ban bcs _
-the topic getting deleted/hidden/locked immediately
[12:07 PM] snail: and is it not obvious that these forum posts are just a way to continue his annoyance?
[12:07 PM] snail: what he says is full of shit
[12:10 PM] Ryozuki: And what you say about
<snip>
[12:11 PM] snail: @onby nothing gets hidden or deleted lol, stop making up things
[12:12 PM] onby: i said hidden/deleted/locked because i didnt know which of the three things were happening
[12:12 PM] onby: but its the same idea i think
[12:12 PM] snail: not at all
[12:12 PM] snail: its locked with the reason aka the rule being quoted
[12:12 PM] snail: aka "feel free to pm an admin to solve th situation"
[12:13 PM] snail: its not like it gets locked and then we ignore the guy
[12:14 PM] Ryozuki: go heinrich answer all the questions
[12:17 PM] heinrich5991: the rule about "no discussion about moderation in public" is very common. it's used to stop witch hunts before they start. it assumes that the admins generally act reasonably, but if that's the case, then it reduces the total work load
[12:18 PM] Ryozuki: thanks for ignoring all the discussion
[12:18 PM] Ryozuki: and thats not true
[12:19 PM] Im 'corneum: can someone give me a neutral TL;DR of the discussion this morning?
[12:19 PM] Ryozuki:
Re: User Guidelines
Post by Schwertspize » Sat Oct 24, 2015 8:03 am
in $11 of the User Guidelines
(...) please privately contact a staff member and we will review the situation.
why privately? on SE (Stack Exchange) there is always a Meta Page where you can ask the moderators about why they did somethinf, what is allowed and so on. it would be easy to add such a forum where you can ask these things public because, I quote many forum/mailinglist rules, "everything which is private will only help you and won't help the community"
you can manage it like the staff forum, where you place strict rules.
i think there should be a place where admins have to explain theirselfes to the community, not only to one user.
[12:20 PM] Ryozuki: you can easily implement that
[12:20 PM] Ryozuki: and i'm sure stack exchange is a example as community
[12:20 PM] Ryozuki: (i mean, its a good one, and well done)
[12:20 PM] Amu~Cookie: hmm i'm not sure about that(edited)
[12:20 PM] Amu~Cookie: but yeah it's subjectiv(edited)
[12:22 PM] heinrich5991: shall I follow this thread or shall I also address other questions from today
[12:23 PM] heinrich5991: I feel like doing any of the two could be interpreted as negative
[12:24 PM] Ryozuki: if you can answer why you closed that thread about
<snip>
[12:24 PM] Ryozuki: and why you moved it
[12:24 PM] heinrich5991: I closed and moved it due to the rule you know and that I consider sensible
[12:25 PM] Ryozuki: In my opinion there wasn't witch hunting
[12:25 PM] Ryozuki: but ok
[12:25 PM] Ryozuki: now you can answer the quote i made about the meta page
[12:25 PM] heinrich5991: no, but it was "discussion of moderation [or moderators or admins] in public"
[12:26 PM] heinrich5991: we can try it out if you want. you could create that page and if the additional work load seems reasonable, then we can go with it
[12:27 PM] Ryozuki: this problem could easily be solved making a section in the forum where you can make public complains about the staff, ofc they can be moderated to prevent insults etc. I would also like the post about
<snip> to be reopened
[12:27 PM] heinrich5991: even on your quoted example, the discussion platform was not inline
[12:27 PM] heinrich5991: to even stop any accusations of corruptedness it would be best if an outsider moderated the forum
[12:28 PM] Ryozuki: i think it becomes quite obvius when someone is making insults or not
[12:28 PM] Amu~Cookie: yes how you draw the limit between public complaint and hate spreading or defamatory
[12:28 PM] heinrich5991: that's the job of the unbiased third party
[12:29 PM] Ryozuki: i would still go for it.
[12:29 PM] heinrich5991: if ryozuki would create the forum, then the usual suspects wouldn't have the rights to do anything there
[12:29 PM] Ryozuki: "everything which is private will only help you and won't help the community"
[12:29 PM] heinrich5991: and if the work load doesn't increase in a way that we can't support, then we can continue doing that
[12:29 PM] Ryozuki: even if there are some discussions that can be difamatory
[12:29 PM] Ryozuki: there are also good discussions
[12:30 PM] Amu~Cookie: I dont think so
[12:30 PM] heinrich5991: cool. let's try it out. create a forum or whatever you want and we can certainly link to it
[12:30 PM] heinrich5991: call it an experiment
[12:30 PM] Ryozuki: why another forum? why not a section in the currentforum?
[12:30 PM] heinrich5991: because it should be out of line IMO
[12:31 PM] heinrich5991: e.g. on stack overflow it's also not the same platform
[12:31 PM] heinrich5991: you have to intentionally click "meta"
[12:31 PM] heinrich5991: for the rust community, there's a dedicated team [which contains no one from any other teams] that deals with complaints with team members
[12:32 PM] Ryozuki: we could try that yes
[12:32 PM] Ryozuki: but who would moderate it
[12:32 PM] heinrich5991: you?
[12:33 PM] Ryozuki: fine
[12:33 PM] Ryozuki: but what if i make the complain
[12:33 PM] Ryozuki: i could also be biased
[12:33 PM] heinrich5991: then you maybe need to find another moderator
[12:36 PM] Ryozuki: but that has a obvius downside
[12:36 PM] Ryozuki: most people wouldnt see the complains
[12:36 PM] heinrich5991: yes, like on the example you showed: stack overflow
[12:36 PM] heinrich5991: but people interested in them can click the link
[12:50 PM] n000b: I am wondering what @Ryozuki point is. I never had/saw a moderator do wrong except not being there, which is obviously not possible all the time. I think the team is doing a fair job and ofcourse people's reasons are questionable some times but you dont know the background of the story most of the time. They try to do their job like they think it should and do what they think is the best in that situation and is the for ddnet.
[12:51 PM] Ryozuki: "you dont know the background of the story most of the time" why we cannot fix that
[12:53 PM] Ryozuki: " I think the team is doing a fair job" and they removed
<snip> because of his opinion and nott his actions
[12:54 PM] n000b: For starters the helper role is almost useless so i think he doesn't care.