Jump to content

DRAGONMOUNT

A WHEEL OF TIME COMMUNITY

Discussion


Adella

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 72
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Posted

Thanks Verb. I would say length of time out should be determined by severity of infraction, contrition of offender, and frequency of infractions.

 

That may not be much help. I would say minimum would have to be at least 1 game.

Posted
  On 6/16/2017 at 1:41 PM, Nolder said:

Dude even D&D never had a crackdown like this since I've been on the stie wtf is going on here?

*insert captain America "language" GIF*

 

Letting the small stuff slide is where it starts.

  • Moderator
Posted
  On 6/16/2017 at 1:41 PM, Nolder said:

Dude even D&D never had a crackdown like this since I've been on the stie wtf is going on here?

 

I've probably threatened to permaban half of D&D at this point, and Ty has a good hold.  I'm not worried about them.

Posted
  On 6/16/2017 at 1:26 PM, Verbal32 said:

Going forward, any in-game issues are to be brought PRIVATELY to the game mod ASAP.  If the mod is able to handle at that point, and all parties are ok with that, then fine.  If not, then the mod needs to escalate this to me.  If I'm a player in that game and the information will mess up balance/whatever, then I'm ok with being replaced as needed, in that instance.  Otherwise, I expect it brought to me and I will handle.

 

If mods do not do that, and the issue festers within that game, then I'm not going to add that mod to the queue anymore.  If players don't obey either (1) the decision of the game mod, or (2) my decision after it is escalated to me, then I will place that player on the new usergroup and they will not be able to see the mafia board.

 

 

I'm open to ideas on how long such a "timeout" lasts, and how many strikes they are allowed before it becomes permanent.  Then again, if it comes to a need for a permanent removal, then they are in jeopardy of me just banning them from DM anyway.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thoughts?

 

 

How about a bullet list of grievances so that playstyles don't cross paths with infringement. 

Posted

Just a quick bullet list that sums up the CoC with the penalty.

 

Name calling = 2 game ban - that sort of thing. And that's with the understanding that there is difference between somebody I know calling me a "overstuffed-drunken-lout-disaster" who is terrible at the game (which I don't take offense to) vs. calling a person they don't know "stupid" and hurting that person's feelings.

 

Basically, it works hand-in-hand with your system. If offense is taken, tell the mod. The mod will sort it. If they can't, it escalates to you. And if you have the crime and peanty posted, there really isn't much to argue - you just point to the post because fair is fair. 

 

Mods can link to post in the OP of each game so the there is no excuse. 

Posted

I would venture to guess DPR is suggesting we make a list (not all inclusive) of what valid complaints are, and what is not. Someone shluld not be running to a mod or yourself because they don't like that I townread BFG for being exceptionally active and controlling a flow of dialogue, for example; that's a perfrctly acceptable course of action, and while it is fine to disagree with the conclusion, you have not been wronged by my stance. Yiu have not been wronged if I use your disagreement as incentive to push you. You haven't even been wronged if I try to pound youinto oblivion over it.

 

You have, however, been wronged if I tell you that you're stupid and don't know how to play for it. You, and the rest of the game, have been wronged if i refuse to lynch somebody because they are my friend.

Posted

The CoC is extremely long, and people don't read long.  They refer to long after the fact to see if they really broke a rule or not.  If we aim to be proactive, I think it would serve us well to have a concise list of Mafia rules that everyone must R&U before signing up for future games.  Something short enough that they can realistically be expected to read it and not just blindly click I Agree like some terms of service wot.

 

The sort of thing many of us post at the start of games we mod already, but applicable to all games at all times.

Posted
  On 4/17/2011 at 5:58 PM, yoniy0 said:

Introduction

 

This Code of Conduct ("CoC") is meant to supplement, not replace, general DM rules, and if situations arise that are not covered by the CoC but require moderator attention, the Admins will act as they believe necessary in the best interests of the site after consulting with the relevant staff and other Admins.

 

I. Post Content

 

1. Bigotry – DM takes a strong stand against discrimination in any form. Anyone found posting sexist, racist, homophobic or religious hate messages will be dealt with quickly and severely. Typically, the response from staff will be a lifetime ban.

2. Swearing - Only language found in the Wheel of Time may be used. If it is not in the books DO NOT USE IT. This applies on all boards.

 

II. Member Conduct

 

1. Privacy. No member of Dragonmount should ever publish private correspondence, without the approval of ALL Parties involved in the exchange. This includes PMs, E-mails, and Instant Messages.

 

2. Bullying. Bullying takes many forms and can be far more destructive than many people will realize. Some people will laugh off the most vicious comments; others may be driven nearly to suicide. The Staff reserve the right to remove any posts, avatars or sig pics that are deemed to fall into this category. As a general rule of thumb – if you wouldn’t say what you’re about to post in real life, in a dark alley, to someone twice your size and better trained in fighting than you, don’t post it at all.

 

3. Personal Attacks (including on Private Boards). Personal attacks on other members are not tolerated, period. Group Leaders and their staff are expected and obligated to deter any personal attacks made by one of their members. Failure to do so will result in immediate disciplinary action.

 

4. Account Information. The individual who registered for an account will be held responsible for all actions taken by the account. To avoid being accused of something you did not do, never give your account information to anyone.

 

5. Off-site boards.

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

6. Instructions by staff.

 

 

(a) Ignoring instructions given by staff, or these rules is grounds for discipline, which will, for first offenses, typically take the form of a 30-day temp ban. However, if the nature of the conduct requires it, the discipline imposed may vary at the discretion of the Admins, up to and including a permanent ban even for a first offense. Should the conduct continue after the expiration of any temp ban or imposition of other discipline, or should the member require further discipline for other misconduct, the member will typically be permanently banned from the site. Again, however, the Admins have discretion to impose a lesser punishment should the situation warrant it.

(b) If you believe Staff is wrong in an instruction they gave you, open a discussion with them about it via PM (not on-thread). If, after making an attempt to discuss the issue with the Staffer, you believe you are not being adequately heard, feel free to include the relevant supervisor (see below for information on the Staff hierarchy). In the interim, follow the Staffer's instructions even if you disagree with them.

7. Account/Name changes. Members should only have 1 account on Dragonmount, unless given specific permission by the Admins. If a member decides to make another account, they must gain permission from the Admins, who will then either merge the accounts or delete the one the member no longer wishes to use. Members who wish to have their display names changed should PM the Admins with the request and an explanation of why they want their name changed. Members who do not abuse the process by seeking to repeatedly change their display name will typically be given permission to change their display name, so long as they either use "Formerly [Prior Name]" as their personal text or include it prominently in their signature for a 90 day period following the change.

 

III. Conflict Resolution

As DM is on the Internet, it is inevitable that drama will ensue. If internet drama happens to you, please follow the following procedures.

 

1. Notify Staff of any Issues.

 

 

(a) If a member has an issue with another member (and this includes issues with DM Staff members- if the dispute is based on anything other than the Staff member’s actions as DM Staff), please bring it to the attention of the relevant staff (Moderator/Social Group Leader/Admin) by PM. A list of staffers, the boards they are responsible for, and their supervisors is available here.

(b) If a member has an issue with a DM Staff member’s actions as DM Staff (i.e. a problem with how a particular issue or situation was handled by the Staff member in their official capacity) please PM both the Staff member and the Staff member’s supervisor (again, the Staff hierarchy may be found here).

2. Keep Disputes Private. DM strongly believes that issues between members, or between members and staff, are best resolved in private, via PM and e-mail. Keeping issues private allows the parties involved to consider the problems and possible solutions without grandstanding or worrying about “losing face”, and avoiding public disputes is thus more conducive to reaching a resolution that works for all parties involved. DO NOT call out other members or Staff on-thread; doing so is in and of itself grounds for discipline.

 

3. Speak Your Mind. DM will never discipline any member for telling Staff something Staff does not want to hear. That doesn’t mean that members have license to be ruder to Staff than they would to other members. But it does mean that if you see a problem, you need to tell us about it, no matter what it is.

 

4. Remember that Reasonable People Can Disagree. There are certain things that are black and white, of course: bigotry won’t be tolerated, favoritism is wrong, American football is better than soccer. But most disputes don’t fall within these realms of incontrovertible truth; more often, there are shades of gray, and reasonable people acting in good faith can and will take different positions even when looking at the same set of facts. As a general rule, people who come into a discussion of issues with this in mind tend to be able to find a mutually agreeable resolution much more often than people who don’t.

 

 

TERMS OF SERVICE (A reminder of what you agreed to when you registered)

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

 

IV. Staff Rules

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

V. Staff Structure

 

Social Admin --(Social Groups Admin)--(Social Groups Assistant Admin)--(Social Group Leader)--(Social Group Staff)

 

RP Admin --(PSW Community Admin)--(RP Groups Admin)--(RP Group Leader)--(RP Group Staff)

 

Discussions Admin/WoT Admin---(Moderators)

 

The Moderators and Group Leaders are the Admins’ Staff, and as such are appointed by the Admins. Group Staff are appointed by the GL, and when a new Group Leader is appointed at any time, they have the right to ask the former Group Leader's Staff for their resignation, and choose their own new Staff.

 

 

VI. Social Group Leader Responsibilities

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

So I've spoilered the stuff that seems most irrelevant and highlighted things I think need editing to apply to mafia.

 

In order

 

Mention release of QTs without everyone agreeing, also prohibits role quoting etc, so people doing that are breaking the official CoC not just the games integrity

 

Expanded

 

First talk to mod then Verb(?)

 

Don't air things that are taken personally in thread. But need to emphasise that for game integrity mod has to initiate conversation

 

Obvious troll :dry:

 

Make mods more official, or something? At the moment it's just Verb

Posted

It's still too long, I'd take out the bits in blue (and any that other people think are important), expand, clarify as needed. Link to the official CoC and leave it at that?

Posted
  On 6/16/2017 at 1:26 PM, Verbal32 said:

Going forward, any in-game issues are to be brought PRIVATELY to the game mod ASAP.  If the mod is able to handle at that point, and all parties are ok with that, then fine.  If not, then the mod needs to escalate this to me.  If I'm a player in that game and the information will mess up balance/whatever, then I'm ok with being replaced as needed, in that instance.  Otherwise, I expect it brought to me and I will handle.

 

If mods do not do that, and the issue festers within that game, then I'm not going to add that mod to the queue anymore.  If players don't obey either (1) the decision of the game mod, or (2) my decision after it is escalated to me, then I will place that player on the new usergroup and they will not be able to see the mafia board.

 

 

I'm open to ideas on how long such a "timeout" lasts, and how many strikes they are allowed before it becomes permanent.  Then again, if it comes to a need for a permanent removal, then they are in jeopardy of me just banning them from DM anyway.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thoughts?

Sounds good :)

Posted
  On 6/16/2017 at 1:30 PM, Verbal32 said:

 

  On 6/16/2017 at 10:18 AM, BFG said:

We have this conversation every few months and I'm fed up of it.

 

Agreed, and I'm mostly to blame for that.  I apologize to everybody for stepping back and thinking it would solve itself - that was dumb of me to think.

 

All I can say is that I promise not to abandon the board again.

 

:unsure: it's on us players not you lol

Posted

I like Verb's stance here. I think a lot of the "is this crossing the line" stuff could be expanded on like DPR, Chris and BFG (at least) have been saying. At the same time I trust Verb's discretion and don't think he'll ban people without thinking there's a serious offense.

 

Bottom line is, if the game mod and/or site mod intervenes and tells you you're crossing the line, you probably are. Take some time, cool off, if you still feel unfairly treated, talk it over with them, but not in a hostile tone. Explaining how you feel is fine. Telling someone they are idiots for not understanding how you feel is not. 

Posted

Also worth noting that a lot of the worst fighting I've seen has happened post-game, often when most of the players were not even aware that a conflict was brooding in the background because the moderator handled it well while it was under their jurisdiction.  I don't think D&D level leniency should apply to posts made outside of an active game, and I would generally be much more strict about rule enforcement in that setting.  If players need to vent at each other post-game they should be expected to take it to PM.

Posted

It's difficult to think of precise rules for an inherently subjective topic.  Obviously there are extremes of behavior that can result in immediate removal.  In most situations no one is at 'fault' and a clash of personality is simply creating a very uncomfortable and unpleasant thread state.  The damage is already being done whether or not it breaks into a fairly objective rules violation.  Destigmatize substitutions and encourage players to replace without penalty if it's just not working out this game?

Posted

I don't know how easy it would be for Verb to create a mafia mod user group and move people in and out of it when they have an active game.

 

Game mods (and potentially comods, if the situation warrants) would benefit from being able to pin their threads, lock the thread when posting is not allowed (and especially in the case of needing a pause to consult with another mod or Verbal on a thorny issue), and potentially edit player posts if they break the CoC instead of waiting for the player to respond to a mod request.

 

Just a thought for consideration.

Posted
  On 6/16/2017 at 1:26 PM, Verbal32 said:

Going forward, any in-game issues are to be brought PRIVATELY to the game mod ASAP.  If the mod is able to handle at that point, and all parties are ok with that, then fine.  If not, then the mod needs to escalate this to me.  If I'm a player in that game and the information will mess up balance/whatever, then I'm ok with being replaced as needed, in that instance.  Otherwise, I expect it brought to me and I will handle.

 

If mods do not do that, and the issue festers within that game, then I'm not going to add that mod to the queue anymore.  If players don't obey either (1) the decision of the game mod, or (2) my decision after it is escalated to me, then I will place that player on the new usergroup and they will not be able to see the mafia board.

 

 

I'm open to ideas on how long such a "timeout" lasts, and how many strikes they are allowed before it becomes permanent.  Then again, if it comes to a need for a permanent removal, then they are in jeopardy of me just banning them from DM anyway.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thoughts?

Added this to my sig so it's available in any game I play.

Posted

I haven't been following the conversation closely but just a note -

 

For myself personally, when I've gotten into conflicts with other people here in the past I haven't always wanted a game mod to take care of the problem.

In some cases they have been very good friends with the person I was having conflict with and in other cases I just felt like the problem was already above their head and required someone with actual authority on DM. I have also felt in over my head as a mod once or twice.

 

What I'm trying to say is that it might be a bad idea to make it a hard rule to go to the game mod first to fix a problem and then an admin.

A game mod usually has the priority of preserving their game and may try to downplay or make some sort of deal between two people whereas I don't think an admin would have that perspective.

 

So maybe word it as a suggestion or add a note or something? Just a thought.

Posted
  On 6/17/2017 at 12:18 PM, Nolder said:

I haven't been following the conversation closely but just a note -

 

For myself personally, when I've gotten into conflicts with other people here in the past I haven't always wanted a game mod to take care of the problem.

In some cases they have been very good friends with the person I was having conflict with and in other cases I just felt like the problem was already above their head and required someone with actual authority on DM. I have also felt in over my head as a mod once or twice.

 

What I'm trying to say is that it might be a bad idea to make it a hard rule to go to the game mod first to fix a problem and then an admin.

A game mod usually has the priority of preserving their game and may try to downplay or make some sort of deal between two people whereas I don't think an admin would have that perspective.

 

So maybe word it as a suggestion or add a note or something? Just a thought.

It would also be simple to tell the mod you want to take it higher. I don't think any mod would be opposed to that.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...