Author Topic: internal conflict  (Read 19704 times)

Thaurismunths

  • High Priest of TCoRN
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1421
  • Praise N-sh, for it is right and good!
Reply #25 on: October 06, 2009, 03:42:41 AM
Rachel complained about this on the poll thread, people blasted her, someone -- probably Rachel -- edited out the entry and reset the votes...
"probably Rachel"
Was the question never asked, or did you not get a straight answer?
If you didn't ask, that's cool. In the grand scheme of things, from your perspective, it really isn't a big deal.
If you did ask, and no one copped to it, it's a big damn problem.

How do you fight a bully that can un-make history?


lowky

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 2717
  • from http://lovecraftismissing.com/?page_id=3142
Reply #26 on: October 06, 2009, 04:19:34 AM
As your suggestiong of a title of a post Thaurismunths, it is beating a dead horse.  Instead of finger pointing the blame is held by all responsible parties.  It's unfortunate.  Some of the actions by people involved show that they are not deserving of moderator privileges whether they held that title under their name or not.  Everyone involved posted out of anger without taking a bit of time to think of the repercussions of their actions.  Strong Personalities can cause strong reactions in others.  It's unfortunate, but the best thing for the community is if we can all move past this.  I hope Russel stays/comes back to the forums (said as I haven't seen any posts from him since this happened though I admittedly don't read most story threads if I have not listened to the story yet so as to avoid spoilers).  I know that Zorathas/Zorag/Jason has his own way of dealing with things when he realizes his anger is getting the better of him, which is to take some time away from the forums.  I hope that all involved can stay involved in the forums and with EA. 

So please can we move on, I am sure there is something interesting happening in one of the other forum subsections that we can start all new arguments over ;).


Heradel

  • Bill Peters, EP Assistant
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 2938
  • Part-Time Psychopomp.
Reply #27 on: October 06, 2009, 04:36:21 AM
Rachel complained about this on the poll thread, people blasted her, someone -- probably Rachel -- edited out the entry and reset the votes...
"probably Rachel"
Was the question never asked, or did you not get a straight answer?
If you didn't ask, that's cool. In the grand scheme of things, from your perspective, it really isn't a big deal.
If you did ask, and no one copped to it, it's a big damn problem.

Thaur, your responses are inappropriate and needlessly incendiary. I honestly expected better of you.

I'm only responding to this one because it should probably be public record. I'm seriously considering some inline edits to take words out of your post, which is quite a lot further than I like to go with moderation.

I talked to Rachel via IM afterwards, she said she reset the poll in the thread and did remove 'me likey' at that time. She also entirely cops to removing Russell's post. She did not remove bdoomed's because it was posted a several minutes later, and at that point she had signed off the forum for the night. When someone locks a thread it's inviolate, including for those whose permissions let them override the lock, and Russell overstepped it. She did not delete large swaths of the comments attached to the thread. She was never evasive.

As lowky says, we should be moving on here. Unfortunate things happened, and we seek to move past them now.

Edit: One last thing.
This is so unfortunate.  I do see the need for something to be said/done in general, but it is still unfortunate.  The public arguments are not good for anybody.  Disputes should be conducted behind the scenes by the EA staff.
Yes. Absolutely.
And, as you are now aware, Russell tried to have that discussion in private; but in addition to having his public comment deleted, his private thread in the Moderator's Forum was deleted just as soon as it was posted.
Not locked. Not ignored. Deleted.
One of the other people with Moderator status decided that they knew best and there would simply be no discussion of their actions, even in private and among "peers", without even the courage to stand up and admit to it.

The thread he created is still there. I'm not going to move it somewhere people can look at it to prove the fact, but I hope my word is good enough here that you can believe me.
« Last Edit: October 06, 2009, 04:45:25 AM by Heradel »

I Twitter. I also occasionally blog on the Escape Pod blog, which if you're here you shouldn't have much trouble finding.


deflective

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1171
Reply #28 on: October 06, 2009, 06:05:50 AM
It isn't always pretty, but it's all still there; all the fights ... and the commentary on Steve's social life.

wait, we had a chance to gossip about Steve?  how did i miss that?


i understand if you want to blow off steam and you were absolutely right, this is the place to do it.  after that though, we gotta accept that the action's been taken and any additional action will cause more problems than it fixes.  if there was something to argue for i'd be getting my hands dirty but there's a point when it's best to remember why you joined the forums and move on.



Thaurismunths

  • High Priest of TCoRN
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1421
  • Praise N-sh, for it is right and good!
Reply #29 on: October 06, 2009, 10:35:21 AM
Rachel complained about this on the poll thread, people blasted her, someone -- probably Rachel -- edited out the entry and reset the votes...
"probably Rachel"
Was the question never asked, or did you not get a straight answer?
If you didn't ask, that's cool. In the grand scheme of things, from your perspective, it really isn't a big deal.
If you did ask, and no one copped to it, it's a big damn problem.

Thaur, your responses are inappropriate and needlessly incendiary. I honestly expected better of you.

I'm only responding to this one because it should probably be public record. I'm seriously considering some inline edits to take words out of your post, which is quite a lot further than I like to go with moderation.

I talked to Rachel via IM afterwards, she said she reset the poll in the thread and did remove 'me likey' at that time. She also entirely cops to removing Russell's post. She did not remove bdoomed's because it was posted a several minutes later, and at that point she had signed off the forum for the night. When someone locks a thread it's inviolate, including for those whose permissions let them override the lock, and Russell overstepped it. She did not delete large swaths of the comments attached to the thread. She was never evasive.
Heradel, if you expected better, you should look at some of the Tweedy conversatons.

I do, however, appreciate you filling in some of the gaps of what happened; which was the intent of my post.
Rachel shouldn't have deleted Russell's post if she wasn't going to delete Bdoomed's post. But if both post were made AFTER she locked the thread, then neither post should have been made in the first place. The time-line is totally unobservable to us on this side of the curtain. And I appreciate knowing that she does admit to it, because it sounded like Ben didn't know.
As to the "big damn problem", if a mod is deleting or editing threads/posts/etc. and would lie to cover it up, I feel it shows a complete lack of morals.

Quote
As lowky says, we should be moving on here. Unfortunate things happened, and we seek to move past them now.

Edit: One last thing.
This is so unfortunate.  I do see the need for something to be said/done in general, but it is still unfortunate.  The public arguments are not good for anybody.  Disputes should be conducted behind the scenes by the EA staff.
Yes. Absolutely.
And, as you are now aware, Russell tried to have that discussion in private; but in addition to having his public comment deleted, his private thread in the Moderator's Forum was deleted just as soon as it was posted.
Not locked. Not ignored. Deleted.
One of the other people with Moderator status decided that they knew best and there would simply be no discussion of their actions, even in private and among "peers", without even the courage to stand up and admit to it.

The thread he created is still there. I'm not going to move it somewhere people can look at it to prove the fact, but I hope my word is good enough here that you can believe me.
The first thread, or the second one?
One was deleted before any of you, presumably, were able to read it.
And how would one excuse that?

How do you fight a bully that can un-make history?


eytanz

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 6109
Reply #30 on: October 06, 2009, 10:54:31 AM
The first thread, or the second one?
One was deleted before any of you, presumably, were able to read it.
And how would one excuse that?

What's the purpose of all of this? Both Russell and Rachel made mistakes (and I'm not just talking about the specific poll incident). As a result, both of them are no longer moderators on these forums. Any mistakes there were done in public are known to everyone who was here at the time, and uninteresting to the people who were not as they will no longer be moderated by either Russell or Rachel. Any mistakes that were done behind the scenes are the business of those people who have access to those forums and shouldn't be aired here (not that I'm against transparency, I'm just not sure what the point is).

Are you arguing that either Russell or Rachel should be re-instated? If so, can you please make that clear? Maybe you can rally more people to the cause, and maybe Ben will listen. But if all you want to do is express anger at events of the past, for which the participants already suffered rather major consequences within the context of the community - why?

I really think the best thing for the community at large, and our current cadre of moderators, is if we move on. I'm not saying that they should just forget this unfortunate sequence of events happened - lessons, I hope, have been learnt - but we should wait until we see evidence that lessons haven't been learnt before we bring it back up.



Praxis

  • Guest
Reply #31 on: October 06, 2009, 08:20:02 PM
We do no respect Rachel for her over-eager use of it, and other tactics, to defend her indefensible actions.


Who are you talking about, here?  'we' as in all EP/forum users? 
'cos you ain't talking for me, that's fer sure.
Or are you royalty?

Really, this thread needs to go now.  It's been read and seen by all concerned, it's not serving any useful purpose (anymore).



eytanz

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 6109
Reply #32 on: October 06, 2009, 08:40:32 PM

Really, this thread needs to go now.  It's been read and seen by all concerned, it's not serving any useful purpose (anymore).

That's the kind of thinking that created this mess to begin with. One lesson I learnt very early (and very hard) in my own forum moderation days - people get really angry if you delete their posts, no matter why you do so. People spend time and effort composing their posts and it is unfair to request that they be deleted just because you don't see a value to them.



Praxis

  • Guest
Reply #33 on: October 06, 2009, 09:37:16 PM
I don't see why.

It's pretty much a private matter (yes, it involved internet boards but most people who use those boards were none the wiser and most people who use the podcast that the boards are here to support were even less involved.

Everyone involved has seen that changes were made publicly and reasons explained publicly.

I'm not talking about particular posts being removed from a discussion (and hence distorting how the discussion reads, etc.) I'm talking about taking down a public advert, now that it has served its purpose.



Talia

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2682
  • Muahahahaha
Reply #34 on: October 06, 2009, 09:43:52 PM
I don't see why.

It's pretty much a private matter (yes, it involved internet boards but most people who use those boards were none the wiser and most people who use the podcast that the boards are here to support were even less involved.

Everyone involved has seen that changes were made publicly and reasons explained publicly.

I'm not talking about particular posts being removed from a discussion (and hence distorting how the discussion reads, etc.) I'm talking about taking down a public advert, now that it has served its purpose.

You should have seen the epic mess that ensued after BoingBoing decided to delete all the posts they made about a blogger named Violet Blue. People flipped the hell out. It became a big enough controversy to make the news in a few places.

On the other hand, I'm pretty sure people here aren't as insane as those people and we wouldnt have a revolt on our hands. :p



Praxis

  • Guest
Reply #35 on: October 06, 2009, 09:52:40 PM
On the other hand, I'm pretty sure people here aren't as insane as those people and we wouldnt have a revolt on our hands. :p

*looks about*

Umm, yeeess, yes that would never happen

*bolts door of safety bunker*



eytanz

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 6109
Reply #36 on: October 06, 2009, 10:33:27 PM
I don't see why.

It's pretty much a private matter (yes, it involved internet boards but most people who use those boards were none the wiser and most people who use the podcast that the boards are here to support were even less involved.

I'm pretty sure that the fact that two moderators - including the most senior and active one - lost their status is of import to everyone in these boards. The events that led to that were mostly a private matter, but the consequences are public, as far as this community goes. It needed to be explained - the choice of what and how much to explain was up to Ben, but I think he chose well, explaining enough so that people don't feel confused and not much unnecessary detail.

These forums are not just here to support the podcasts. They create a community, and this community has value on its own - as Steve and Ben have both said at multiple times. This has not been a good situation, but changes in the governance of the community are very much the business of people in the community.

Quote
I'm talking about taking down a public advert, now that it has served its purpose.

I don't see how you can say it "has served its purpose" - the purpose is to inform of a change in the forums. How can you know that everyone who needs to see that has? What if someone who left several months ago decides to come back a few months from now, and they wonder what happened to Russell? Surely it's better to have a post to point them to, rather than have a new discussion restart everytime anyone asks.

Note that I do agree people should just let the matter rest - if this thread was locked, I would not be upset (though others may be, so perhaps it's wise not to). But I can't see what can be gained by deleting it, and I can see several downsides to doing so.



Praxis

  • Guest
Reply #37 on: October 06, 2009, 10:39:43 PM
Everyone is entitled to an opinion that is not mine.

Partly I'd say it is better to take down this thread as, given the reasons why changes were made, it also provides a spur for past disagreements to re-surface and old arguments to be re-hashed, as has happened already on this thread.

If someone didn't use the fora for a while, came back and, noticing that some people's status had changed, could ask the people concerned, or Ben or Steve or any of the editors.  I think it would be fine in that situation.

I'd agree with locking the thread, at least.



deflective

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1171
Reply #38 on: October 06, 2009, 11:34:38 PM
It's pretty much a private matter (yes, it involved internet boards but most people who use those boards were none the wiser and most people who use the podcast that the boards are here to support were even less involved.
)

*relieved sigh*  if you aren't a programmer then you might not know what effect an unclosed parenthesis has on us.  i was twitching a little.


the great thing about threaded forums is that you don't have to see the content you don't want to see.  close the metachat area and this all goes away.  i personally don't understand either of the extremist points of view in this topic but i do understand that there are people who have them.  if it's important enough that people want to talk about it then that's exactly what this area is for.

in forums that i've taken part in there's been a pretty consistent tell that a major meltdown is on the way: they get overly self-congratulatory.  a balanced forum seems to have everybody concentrating on the topics at hand or healthy amount of background dispute.  it's when you consistently find posts about how nice everybody is and how this is an exceptional community compared to the normal internet that you have to worry.  it's an 8-10 month warning sign.

mod powers should be used as a last resort.  any argument that's contained within a single thread and running its course without taboo offenses should be allowed to run itself down (general guideline, exceptions exist).  moderation through feedback is always preferred to locking or deletion.



Praxis

  • Guest
Reply #39 on: October 06, 2009, 11:47:59 PM
(interesting point..................



Thaurismunths

  • High Priest of TCoRN
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1421
  • Praise N-sh, for it is right and good!
Reply #40 on: October 07, 2009, 12:12:20 AM
I'd like to apologize to Heradel. My answer this morning was flippant. I was rushed for work and didn't take the time I should have in replying.
I realize I was brusque in my string of posts, but I didn't mean for my language to be incendiary. I will take your post as a nod-from-a-mod to watch my tone.

What's the purpose of all of this?
You do, as it happens, answer your own question: "Both Russell and Rachel made mistakes (and I'm not just talking about the specific poll incident). As a result, both of them are no longer moderators on these forums." In internet terms, that's pretty serious and shouldn't be taken lightly.
In a disagreement about the overstepping boundaries we have lost the most senior mod, a handful of active forum members, and an editor has been rebuked. This was not the first, or even second run-in Russel has had with Rachel over this kind of thing, but now that he is gone it will be his last. I do not hope for Rachel's head on a platter, or for her to be removed from office, nor for Russell's reinstatement. Rachel has a queendom to run and Russell is... doing whatever a displaced god does with his free time.
I hope that by illuminating the maltreatment others have been subjected to that this won't happen again.

Quote
Any mistakes there were done in public are known to everyone who was here at the time, and uninteresting to the people who were not as they will no longer be moderated by either Russell or Rachel. Any mistakes that were done behind the scenes are the business of those people who have access to those forums and
shouldn't be aired here (not that I'm against transparency, I'm just not sure what the point is).
Quote
I really think the best thing for the community at large, and our current cadre of moderators, is if we move on. I'm not saying that they should just forget this unfortunate sequence of events happened - lessons, I hope, have been learnt - but we should wait until we see evidence that lessons haven't been learnt before we bring it back up.
I don't feel the same way.
I had been assured in the past that Rachel wouldn't be moderating outside of PodCastle, but that's what happened just a few days ago*. In a few months, it might happen again, as it has happened before. I also realize it might never happen again. And although Russell is gone, Rachel is still here, so it will effect future forum participants.
As to what happened behind the scenes; if the effects had stayed there then there wouldn't be any point in discussing them, but they did lead directly to some large changes in forum life.

*I realize that the thread was about podcastle, but the moderation should have been handled by someone else.

How do you fight a bully that can un-make history?


Thaurismunths

  • High Priest of TCoRN
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1421
  • Praise N-sh, for it is right and good!
Reply #41 on: October 07, 2009, 12:12:29 AM
Who are you talking about, here?  'we' as in all EP/forum users? 
'cos you ain't talking for me, that's fer sure.
Or are you royalty?
I've been speaking on behalf of the other members who have chosen to leave over this or related issues
That has been wrong of me. There is no consensus or secret counsel. Although I know of others who share some my views, I should not have presumed they would share all of my views.
I speak only for myself.

Quote
Really, this thread needs to go now.  It's been read and seen by all concerned, it's not serving any useful purpose (anymore).
I'm sorry you are uncomfortable with this thread. As with all of the threads here, you are welcome to ignore it.

How do you fight a bully that can un-make history?


Bdoomed

  • Pseudopod Tiger
  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 5891
  • Mmm. Tiger.
Reply #42 on: October 07, 2009, 12:17:28 AM
we have lost the most senior mod
hey hey hey now, I am the most senior mod here.  If by senior you mean longest-around and not age.

anyway.  I was going to lock this thread, because personally I believe enough is enough, I've hated this whole argument from before it even started. (when I first got the damn contest submissions).  But I also believe steam does have to be blown off, so ... whatever.
If this gets totally out of hand this thread is going on lockdown, but so far it's been relatively civil.

I'd like to hear my options, so I could weigh them, what do you say?
Five pounds?  Six pounds? Seven pounds?


Bdoomed

  • Pseudopod Tiger
  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 5891
  • Mmm. Tiger.
Reply #43 on: October 07, 2009, 12:40:45 AM
PRAXIS! where'd you go?! :(

I'd like to hear my options, so I could weigh them, what do you say?
Five pounds?  Six pounds? Seven pounds?


stePH

  • Actually has enough cowbell.
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 3906
  • Cool story, bro!
    • Thetatr0n on SoundCloud
Reply #44 on: October 07, 2009, 02:33:41 AM
Who are you talking about, here?  'we' as in all EP/forum users? 
'cos you ain't talking for me, that's fer sure.
Or are you royalty?

I have a mouse in my pocket.



 :P

"Nerdcore is like playing Halo while getting a blow-job from Hello Kitty."
-- some guy interviewed in Nerdcore Rising


Thaurismunths

  • High Priest of TCoRN
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1421
  • Praise N-sh, for it is right and good!
Reply #45 on: October 07, 2009, 03:06:51 AM
we have lost the most senior mod
hey hey hey now, I am the most senior mod here.  If by senior you mean longest-around and not age.

anyway.  I was going to lock this thread, because personally I believe enough is enough, I've hated this whole argument from before it even started. (when I first got the damn contest submissions).  But I also believe steam does have to be blown off, so ... whatever.
If this gets totally out of hand this thread is going on lockdown, but so far it's been relatively civil.

While I don't see any reason to lock it, I think it's just going to die under its own weight.
I've had my say, and apparently said more than enough.
My apologies to Praxis.

How do you fight a bully that can un-make history?


Ben Phillips

  • Lich King
  • Matross
  • ****
  • Posts: 299
    • Pseudopod
Reply #46 on: October 07, 2009, 08:12:40 PM
Rachel complained about this on the poll thread, people blasted her, someone -- probably Rachel -- edited out the entry and reset the votes...
"probably Rachel"
Was the question never asked, or did you not get a straight answer?

I didn't have a chance to ask, and that was the only reason for my qualifier there.  I simply didn't have a good chance to talk to her before the not-entirely-daylight hour I finally made myself sit down and write this very difficult announcement, in which I was already doing a lot of work to compile the results of the research I did over the previous several days just to try to get as many facts straight as I feasibly could.  I also don't particularly care who it was because personally I see the removal of a bogus contest entry as a perfectly valid action, and so wasn't that concerned about finding who was responsible.

As for this "internal conflict" thread right here, I agree it's in order so people can speak their piece the way they want instead of having all this tension simmering under the surface.  Of course the flip side of that coin is that sometimes these types of threads blow up when someone takes the opportunity to be a drama queen, which is why the mods are eying it nervously.  There is an extent beyond which public communication about such things loses its value, but for my own part:  the reason I don't like it if someone talks about me behind my back isn't just because I might not like what they have to say -- it's because they're denying me any rebuttal, which is unfair and lends itself too readily to slander.  (As an aside:  Whenever I hear people passing rumors behind someone else's back, I have the tendency to walk right up to whoever's being discussed and say, "So is this true?"  More often than not it simply isn't.  Issue resolved.)  I have asked the mods to err on the side of taking no mod-privileged action in this thread, since there seems to be controversy to the effect that we suppress opinions.  I trust you all not to abuse this, of course, though if anyone does I'll be overseeing any resulting action myself, and we'll be as clear as possible about what we moderated and why.  Hopefully, though, we've already heard most of what we're going to anyhow.  I'm just making that clear for the record.  Metachat is the place to debate forum policy and moderator actions if they need to be debated.



Talia

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2682
  • Muahahahaha
Reply #47 on: October 07, 2009, 09:33:07 PM
PSST.


didja hear that thing about Bdoomed? SHOCKING, I tell you. SHOCKING.



Bdoomed

  • Pseudopod Tiger
  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 5891
  • Mmm. Tiger.
Reply #48 on: October 08, 2009, 12:04:26 AM
ITS NOT TRUE I SWEAR! GOD YOU PEOPLE ARE MEAN!

I'd like to hear my options, so I could weigh them, what do you say?
Five pounds?  Six pounds? Seven pounds?


Jason M

  • Guest
Reply #49 on: October 12, 2009, 02:34:17 AM
I think I should make clear that I am being very inactive right now more due to real life issues.  I would have actually taken a complete break from the forums had I not had the names of the contestants. 

On top of that, I've had to switch lap tops.  At least I'm back to an XP machine.