Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How can we go about building the kind of community we want to have? What processes should we use to try to change people's behavior? How should we respond when we don't agree that someone's behavior needs to change? How much deference should we give to the employees of Paizo and Goblinworks?
All of those questions have been forefront in my mind recently, due to a fairly innocuous occurrence in another thread. I'm not going to rehash the details of it, because I really don't want this thread to devolve in the same way. However, a general overview is probably necessary.
Someone made a relatively insignificant, but clearly sexist, joke. A Paizo employee casually tried to point out that the joke wasn't appropriate. Several members of the community then began calling out the Paizo employee for overreacting. I really want to avoid any attempts to place blame, so I'll withhold my personal opinion about all this. However, I think it's very important that we have a conversation about the answers to the questions I raised above.
Here are my thoughts:
I believe it is absolutely imperative that people be able to call out behavior without fear of being attacked as hypersensitive.
In general, I believe we need to avoid piling on to either side. If someone is allowed to make a simple statement trying to redirect some behavior, and the original offender is allowed to quietly assess their own behavior, then we stand the best chance of not creating a rancorous situation that ends up dividing the community into warring camps.
I also think it is very important that we always give the benefit of the doubt to employees of Paizo or Goblinworks. They already have the power and responsibility of moderating these forums. They will also be the people who have the power and responsibility for moderating Pathfinder Online. If there ever comes a time when we really do need to stand up to them, it's going to be much better if our powder is dry and we haven't already desensitized them by constant complaints at every moderation attempt they make.
There may be times when we don't agree that some behavior needed to be called out. That's going to be a very subjective call for each member of the community. This is why I believe we should avoid piling on to either side, and why we should generally defer to employees of Paizo and Goblinworks.
Ultimately, unless you really believe that the calling out was orders of magnitude worse than the original offense, I would ask you to simply let it go. Arguing with the mods is unpleasant all around, and I seriously doubt it's generally effective.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
truth be told I would love to see a fansite for pfo (yeah, I am working on it) and then have that grow as well. The tone can be a bit more rough and tumble there at times and no need to worry about hurting the feelings of someone of importance.
Also, always play nice with the mods, you will need them one day
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Does something like this really need a thread? I mean I feel like this is just going to open up another argument if a troll shows up to this meaty buffet you've laid out but, i will leave my thoughts anyways.
That being said I don't think anyone intended to be sexist in a true hurtful way in the comments. However I do not know him personally and therefor aren't going to vouch for him. Maybe some people were oversesative but, I think the true reasoning is that many people can talk a single message different ways. I am not say genders are to blame but, personally I have had seen jokes/comments have different reactions both ways on that street.
With regards to the treatment of Goblinworks and Paizo mods I will treat them with the respect I would any other who hasn't otherwise shown themselve to be undeserving. I would hope that everyone else would as well but, we all are human mods or otherwise. So blind faith isn't really what I would suggest.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
truth be told I would love to see a fansite for pfo (yeah, I am working on it) and then have that grow as well. The tone can be a bit more rough and tumble there at times and no need to worry about hurting the feelings of someone of importance.
Also, always play nice with the mods, you will need them one day
Let me know right now if that mod is going to seek cold, hard revenge on me so I can withdraw my pledge and find something else to do other than passionately follow a game that won't be out for 2 years.
In that very same thread i made a Puerto Rican comment (I am rican), a female avatar poster made a joke about domestic help...
Guess what, I didn't melt. Or die. Or roll into a fetal position. i don't need an apology either. It's a JOKE and it was CLEARLY not mean spirited
This is a message board for a game that will come out in two years. We will get bored from time to time, best guildies will argue and 15 page threads will be made over things that won't even be in the game.
The crowd that is in here does not deserve to be blindsided for an off the cuff remark that hurts absolutely nobody. We are adults, I think we can handle a naughty joke as long as it doesn't get flat out vulgar.
The mod was out of line and looking to pick a fight. End of story as far as I'm concerned.
Oh, and "I told you" about the thread lock.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@avari3, please try to refrain from bringing the arguments that shut down the other thread into this one.
This thread is about how we go about shaping this community. You make it sound like you'd prefer a situation where no one ever called out anyone for anything. Do you really think that's practical?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@avari3, please try to refrain from bringing the arguments that shut down the other thread into this one.
This thread is about how we go about shaping this community. You make it sound like you'd prefer a situation where no one ever called out anyone for anything. Do you really think that's practical?
Absolutely not my friend.
I also have the right to call something out if I think it's wrong.
truth be told I would love to see a fansite for pfo (yeah, I am working on it) and then have that grow as well. The tone can be a bit more rough and tumble there at times and no need to worry about hurting the feelings of someone of importance.
Also, always play nice with the mods, you will need them one day
Outside of individual guild forums, which are each building their own voluntary subgroups of players, I would rather stick with one community site moderated by the game staff. They at least have the interests of the game as a whole at heart; fansites, not necessarily so.
Had my first introduction to this community been on a "more rough and tumble" site, I'd have canceled my pledge and not looked back.
@Nihimon: Good idea for a discussion, but perhaps a bit too soon?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Avari's experience does lend some value though. I mean if people can maturely make slightly racist jokes without incuring a huge outburst why did it happen with the sexist one? Seems unreasonable. I have had experiences like Avari's in real life with making a joke about being portuguese and getting laughs but, then getting an out order reaction when the target is someone else who just laughed at me.
Edit:
@Chiassa
You just gave me a great idea for some dwarven humor. "Rough and Tumble" lol thank you
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@avari3, please try to refrain from bringing the arguments that shut down the other thread into this one.
This thread is about how we go about shaping this community. You make it sound like you'd prefer a situation where no one ever called out anyone for anything. Do you really think that's practical?
I saw avari's post wanting a community where no one is ever called out for everything, the hard part about internet communities is that we have people from multiple backgrounds. Portland/Seattle is very different from rural Mississippi, but both communities can be in the same online community. Everyone has their own personal 'line', and the people with really fragile 'lines' don't mix well with the people who barely have a 'line'. What is 'rude bickering' to some people, is serious online conversation to others. People need to move in both directions, some people need to tone down, and others need to toughen up.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
There were several different dialogues happening in that thread.
This is a misrepresentation of reality:
A Paizo employee casually tried to point out that the joke wasn't appropriate. Several members of the community then began calling out the Paizo employee for overreacting.
Now I feel I must make my own assessment of the situation:
A Paizo employee casually tried to point out that the joke wasn't appropriate. The offending poster made a face-saving remark. At this point, it ceased being casual when several back-and-forth posts were made, links to external sites were posted, and 2 more employees came in to support the first one in 'educating' the offender (one of the employee's words, which is fitting).
My initial reaction made a few points:
1. The thread was being terribly derailed into dangerous, personally-involved waters.
-Off-topic forums are great places to talk politics, social issues, and religion, if you so desire.
2. Paizo has the right to control offensive speech.
-I completely agree with the stance Paizo takes on offensive speech. It is a net benefit to the community, help all feel included and respected, and is in general a happier place. That's the place I want to be.
3. The reasons for enacting that right and whether or not using that right is 'good' or 'bad' are inconsequential.
-Those are just the rules, link to a Paizo document explaining their values if somebody is confused and would like more information.
As individual persons, we hold a myriad of values and are able to express our opinions regarding point 3. Many individuals from the community did so, for either side. Make no mistake, on both sides, people were 'called out.' The only issue I took with this was that an interesting thread was getting derailed :(
As employees of the professional entity that makes the rules, I find their behavior in bad taste. Paizo's name is next to theirs when they post. If these persons were able to post in a way that hides their affiliation with Paizo (in order to separate their personal values from Paizo's), the situation would only have been an issue in the points I make in the previous and next paragraph.
I also made a point that having such a discussion in a place where speech is limited is dangerous, if not impossible. In the end, another mildly sexist comment was made and more persons were potentially offended. As I predicted, the thread was locked.
This was a very odd situation. For nearly a year, when somebody breaks the forum rules/etiquette, Ross pops in to drop a line, something along the lines of "Don't do that, that's against the Paizo posting rules. Please review the rules [link]." Because there may have been some confusion, it might have been acceptable to post a link to another Paizo company document that details the reasons for their rules. Then, the offender usually makes a mildly rebellious post to save face, and discussion continues. If the offense is repeated, offending posts are deleted and further action is taken.
I am unsure why this did not happen in this case. Whatever the reason, I think that a mistake was made in not following the normal response to breaches of forum conduct. The Paizo boards, in my experience, are relatively moderation-free. I'm sure there are many financial and social reasons why this is the case. This is also in large part due to the excellent community here.
Not to get off point, but now the issue for me is that one sexist remark was responded to, and another was not. I think it's pretty terrible that this was not acknowledged officially. This is why it is dangerous for Paizo to not have ended the discussion earlier.
EDIT: I see many others have already responded. I think you would have done better to keep your own characterization of what happened out of your post, which I think could actually create a meaningful discussion.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I haven't seen the original issue.
I think we should work out things as an group of adults confined to one space would. Moreover, I prefer that we not splinter the community into a bunch of different sites, as Chiassa mentioned.
Side note, forums should never be run as a direct democracy. More like a benevolent dictatorship.
As an aside, GW needs a Community Manager position. This KS has made that sorely evident, and given the crucial importance of community to this type of game, will continue to be important moving forward.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
In my mind, Paizo has, and even should use their right to limit offensive language/jokes, and to enforce that right in every case possible.
To be honest, I think I glossed over the earlier comments that Avari3 mentions. Then again, I'm sure we were bound to get a few considering the topic of the thread...
I'm glad avari3 wasn't offended by it. Whatever the reasons why somebody is or isn't offending by something and whatever the effects of that mentality are on that person's day-to-day life, are inconsequential. That racial remark could have been offensive to somebody. I doubt Paizo has the means to police every instance of it, but in their space, we have a responsibility to not be offensive. Those are the rules.
And the response in that thread could have, should have, and usually is just that.
@Elorebaen, I definitely think GW would do well to have an official moderator position/community manager.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think the purpose is to say "how do we guide people away from comments that cause this situation without causing this situation?" How do you tell someone that saying something like that tends to degenerate into an uncomfortable argument about intent and motives and generally leads to animosity.
How do we diffuse the situation before it gets to that point?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
For my part, I think "letting it go" is a large part of the answer.
True, but if people feel they have been treated unfairly, that doesn't happen, and I can see that happening a lot, speaking generally, not about this particular instance, when someone feels they are attacked or that the reaction is disproportional, how do we calm things down again? It seems to me that anyone trying to diffuse the situation will be perceived as taking sides, rightly or wrongly, which just makes the situation worse.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I happen to disagree that "letting it go" is the answer. I've known quite a few people over the years who decided to not bother with PnP games or MMOs because of the attitude and culture that is there. Several of them are outstanding roleplayers who got sick of hearing the same jokes, or same style of jokes, every time they showed up.
I think the value of people is far more important than the value of an ill thought out joke.
If we took the same line towards griefers in PFO (let it go), no one would take us seriously. Why, then, is "let it go" the appropriate answer for jokes or comments that are personally offensive?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think the purpose is to say "how do we guide people away from comments that cause this situation without causing this situation?" How do you tell someone that saying something like that tends to degenerate into an uncomfortable argument about intent and motives and generally leads to animosity.
How do we diffuse the situation before it gets to that point?
With the way it has always been dealt with:
This was a very odd situation. For nearly a year, when somebody breaks the forum rules/etiquette, Ross pops in to drop a line, something along the lines of "Don't do that, that's against the Paizo posting rules. Please review the rules [link]." Because there may have been some confusion, it might have been acceptable to post a link to another Paizo company document that details the reasons for their rules. Then, the offender usually makes a mildly rebellious post to save face, and discussion continues. If the offense is repeated, offending posts are deleted and further action is taken.
That is my answer to your question. And there too, is the normal end to such situations on these forums.
This is what I think should have happened. My first post in that thread acknowledged that something wrong had been said, but I pointed out that this normal response did not happen, and I feared the consequences.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I happen to disagree that "letting it go" is the answer. I've known quite a few people over the years who decided to not bother with PnP games or MMOs because of the attitude and culture that is there. Several of them are outstanding roleplayers who got sick of hearing the same jokes, or same style of jokes, every time they showed up.
I think the value of people is far more important than the value of an ill thought out joke.
If we took the same line towards griefers in PFO (let it go), no one would take us seriously. Why, then, is "let it go" the appropriate answer for jokes or comments that are personally offensive?
For what it's worth, when I said "letting it go", I most definitely did not mean letting offensive remarks go.
What I was really trying to say is that, if you don't have a direct stake in the dispute - that is, you are neither the one being called out, nor the one calling out - then it's probably best not to weigh in on either side.
I happen to disagree that "letting it go" is the answer. I've known quite a few people over the years who decided to not bother with PnP games or MMOs because of the attitude and culture that is there. Several of them are outstanding roleplayers who got sick of hearing the same jokes, or same style of jokes, every time they showed up.
I think the value of people is far more important than the value of an ill thought out joke.
If we took the same line towards griefers in PFO (let it go), no one would take us seriously. Why, then, is "let it go" the appropriate answer for jokes or comments that are personally offensive?
I read "let it go" as "let the moderators handle it". If you've been offended, say so - simply and without vitriol - flag the post, and let the moderation team handle it. They may occasionally get it wrong, but continuing to bicker amongst ourselves and/or countercomplain only prolongs the issue without resolving it. Unlike a PvP encounter in-game, forum PvP will just keep going on and on and on, until somebody (usually the less confrontational party) gives up, shuts up, and goes away.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The problem is that if we flag it and move on, the person hurt by the offensive comment does not know that we support them, and do not support the offensive behavior. Silence is tacit approval, and even if we flag it, it will come across as that the community approves of the message. We need to find a way to support those who are insulted, while not escalating the situation.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The problem is that if we flag it and move on, the person hurt by the offensive comment does not know that we support them, and do not support the offensive behavior. Silence is tacit approval, and even if we flag it, it will come across as that the community approves of the message. We need to find a way to support those who are insulted, while not escalating the situation.
Hence, "If you've been offended, say so - simply and without vitriol - flag the post, and let the moderation team handle it." Also send a PM to the person involved; trust me, it will be appreciated.
The key here is not starting a forum war. It's difficult - especially if one side of the discussion posts long dissertations and the other just posts brief support - but something as simple as saying "Thanks for speaking up" or "You know, you're right, that could be taken badly" is helpful to the person offended.
It's human nature to want to defend yourself and like-minded people if "attacked", but it's just going to end in tears.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Flagging the comment is not silence. Flagging it leads to a moderator commenting in order to point out the transgression and to make the rules more available and then to monitor the situation if further comments are made that warrant further action.
That is how the community has shown support for a friendly environment in the past. It is adequate, it educates the offender that what he did was against the rules (not why it is the rule).
If you feel somebody has just come through an emotional experience, a private message can convey sympathy and any further feelings you have on the matter.
If community members start publicly posting in support of whichever party they feel was insulted, the situation will necessarily be escalated. Private messages do not escalate the situation and convey the same support.
This is the 21st century. Publicly shaming people is no longer the norm, and it is a hotly debated issue as to what it's total effects are on those doing the shaming, those being shamed, and those spectating.
I hope it is apparent in my posts: My problem was that the offender was being publicly shamed after being told that he broke the rules; by Paizo employees, no less. My problem was that such a high punishment was handed down for a single comment.
Ostracizing a member of the community for making a single comment, even if it were passionately spiteful, is unacceptable. People make mistakes. You are not going to 'educate' somebody on how to be an upstanding member of the community by ostracizing them. It is more likely to harden their heart from what you are trying to say and invite others to support them.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I happen to disagree that "letting it go" is the answer. I've known quite a few people over the years who decided to not bother with PnP games or MMOs because of the attitude and culture that is there. Several of them are outstanding roleplayers who got sick of hearing the same jokes, or same style of jokes, every time they showed up.
I think the value of people is far more important than the value of an ill thought out joke.
If we took the same line towards griefers in PFO (let it go), no one would take us seriously. Why, then, is "let it go" the appropriate answer for jokes or comments that are personally offensive?
Which was one of my points in the other thread. Male "locker room" humor belongs just there, in the boys locker room. Though many would say that isn't a safe place for it anymore. It certainly doesn't belong on a game forum, not in this day and age.
I can't agree that letting it go is the right thing, initially. If a person isn't socially aware enough to know that what they are about to say could possibly offend someone, then it rightfully should be pointed out to them. Maybe they will learn, often times they won't.
Now, here is the pivot point. If they acknowledge the issue, apologize without trying to save face, THEN it needs to be let go.
More often than not, though, you get some half arsed apology with "ifs" and "buts" and a quip or two that suggests the offended has flaws in that they can't take a joke. Those people are Socially Immature (Dr. Robert Kegan, Harvard, The Evolving Self, 1982) in most cases. There is no point in trying to get them to see how they could have offended, not on a forum anyway and especially as regular forum folk.
In this latter case once the person continues the pattern of behavior, again because in their mind they are doing no wrong, then just flag them and let normal admin take course. If a person isn't willing to see their faults when pointed out to them by multiple individuals who aren't affiliated and have no personal gain out of speaking up, there usually, again, is very little their peers can do to change their way of thought.
That's my opinion anyway based on life experience and university.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Ostracizing a member of the community for making a single comment, even if it were passionately spiteful, is unacceptable. People make mistakes. You are not going to 'educate' somebody on how to be an upstanding member of the community by ostracizing them. It is more likely to harden their heart from what you are trying to say and invite others to support them.
Yes, but that person gets to choose whether they are ostracized or not. As I said above when multiple folks say "Hey, that wasn't cool" and the person chooses not to apologize unequivocally, but instead say to the effect "I'm sorry, but you shouldn't be so sensitive"...Then they can and may be over just one comment.
That person has to show that they are mature enough to see what they did and own it. THey have to show that it was a one time thing, I believe.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
That person has to show that they are mature enough to see what they did and own it.
I'm not sure that's necessary; as long as the person simply refrains from doing it again, I think we're all fine. It's a lot easier to accept that it might not have been the best idea and simply move on - certainly much easier than being asked to humble yourself in a spotlight.
"Building" a community means adding to it. Personally, I want to include the people who may have said something they ended up regretting, but resolved not to do it again and quietly moved on.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Yes, but that person gets to choose whether they are ostracized or not. As I said above when multiple folks say "Hey, that wasn't cool" and the person chooses not to apologize unequivocally, but instead say to the effect "I'm sorry, but you shouldn't be so sensitive".
Particularly when reasons were given in the initial response why it's not just a case of over sensitivity. Which is why the whole point of ostracism is an important one- the comment itself ostracizes a section of the community , which is why it was inappropriate, and what the "words mean things" post was about.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Maybe it will be helpful to explain where I'm coming from.
I'm considering the case where a person has no idea that what he/she said could ever be construed as offensive. In all of the social circles that he/she interacts with, this is acceptable and encouraged behavior. He/she gets on the internet...
...makes a post, his fellow community members flag it, a moderate comments that this speech is offensive and is against the rules. He is likely confused, embarrassed, and maybe even ashamed. He makes a post during his immediate reaction to save face and to communicate that his intent was not to harm. "It was a joke" etc. He has now at least learned that that behavior is not acceptable everywhere. He goes on to be a productive, friendly member of the community. Yay community!
...makes a post, is warned, makes a post to save face and to indicated that his intent was not to harm...and is engaged by a person telling him that as-a-matter-of-fact it is harmful, no matter what his intent was. And by the way, here is some link from the interweb that he should look at. Then, various people come in to support him in one way or another; some believing that what he did is barely harmful, and so didn't warrant a response, and some few just posting wishing that it had never happened in the first place and the whole thread was off the rails. More people pile in with their 2 cents. Peoples' passions pour forth. More people get hurt.
I'm not saying that this is what happened. These are only possible scenarios. I think clear goals are achieved in the first case without allowing what happens in the second case to occur. I feel the best 'set' of outcomes comes from the first case, even if it is possible to achieve better outcomes by initiating a discussion.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
That person has to show that they are mature enough to see what they did and own it.I'm not sure that's necessary; as long as the person simply refrains from doing it again, I think we're all fine. It's a lot easier to accept that it might not have been the best idea and simply move on - certainly much easier than being asked to humble yourself in a spotlight.
"Building" a community means adding to it. Personally, I want to include the people who may have said something they ended up regretting, but resolved not to do it again and quietly moved on.
This.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
For some it is easier to humble oneself than for others.
I know I just posted it, but in my above example, I think I explain why that person may not fully believe that what they did was 'Bad' or 'Wrong' (caps intentional). We don't require they acknowledge that to get along, anyway.
I'm also not sure it's reasonable to expect people to be mature. Welcum to teh interwebz d00d
All we require is that they do not act in an offensive manner. No doubt, if a moderate makes a single post pointing something out as offensive, the offender understands it is inappropriate and whoever might be offended understands that they are made safe in the community by the rules it enforces.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
That only works if he actually understands what the issue with the post was. If he doesn't understand what was offensive about it, he may either feel that he has to walk on eggshells around the community, when that is not the actual issue.
In the case here, I think he did understand, and it should have stopped there.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...
<shortened quote to jump into point, not to be rude :P>
So it seems where you and I differ is how that example goes is the saving face part. To me that's just an extension of the "everyone gets a trophy" phenomena that has been plaguing western society and filtering out to the rest of the world over the last 15 years.
You either win or place. Trophies for 1st, 2nd and 3rd. No participation trophies. Tell the kid to try harder next time.
Same here, you're wrong or you're right. No saving face. Humility. Admit you're wrong and move on. When you try to save face the other person isn't going to a) really accept your apology) and b) let it go.
Somewhere somehow personal responsibility for ones actions became a bad thing or was misplaced. Now days its okay for a person to admit they are wrong...as long as it isn't me. Frankly, that attitude stinks. It won't get you anywhere in the real world, that's for sure. Somewhere, someday, someone is going to severely work you over if you have trouble saying "I apologize, I was wrong", and leaving it at that.
I contend that in both of your examples above...that if he makes the apology without the saving face part, it is accepted and the issue forgotten. Where this fails, though, is that after that has happened, people who are late comers to the discussion adding their 2 cents in such a way that only flames the fires. Especially after an apology, 3 hours later you get "He shouldn't have had to apologize. Freedom of speech, blah blah blah <insert rant that only applies to American rights on a forum that has international membership>".
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Kafi, I totally get your point, and I'm very sympathetic to it in general. For the vast majority of "offenses", a single warning and a deliberate effort not to engage the inevitable face-saving post from the offender are appropriate.
However, I think we all need to accept that there will be times when it is appropriate to follow-up. I can easily bring to mind a single word that, if posted here, would generate so much furor that a "sheesh, relax, it was just a joke" follow-up post would be rightly and roundly criticized. There will be other areas where, for whatever reason, the moderators feel they need to make a larger case out of something in order to set the proper tone for the rest of the community. You may not feel that a particular case rises to that level, but I would hope that you can see the wisdom in giving the moderators the benefit of the doubt if they feel it does.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@V'rel, No offense taken :)
It is certainly valid to feel that way, personally. I, personally, feel the same way, believe it or not. One of my friends in particular that grew up in the suburbs of Chicago with me likes to characterize himself as a hillbilly-esque persona. While I can stomach all the talk about trucks, muddin', country music, etc, I took it upon myself to condemn the sort of slurs and language he used, which apparently he felt was fitting to his persona (honestly, I don't know what happened... when we were kids we were innocent, kind geeks... I hadn't seen him for a long time and was shocked by the change).
It was highly unpopular both with him and a few of our mutual friends, but I care about them and believe in it, so I stuck with it. I explained how he could unintentionally offend somebody with it and what type of a person people thought he was when he used it. I can't be sure, but I'm pretty sure that he has left behind that language and the thinking behind it. Win, world!
As a member of a community, I understand that not everybody holds my personal views, even if I believe they are "Right" (capital intended). In the sole purpose of building, enjoying, and socializing in PFO, we don't need somebody to apologize for their behavior; we don't even need them to know why it is inappropriate. For an enjoyable experience in PFO, we only need it to not happen.
If a person immediately expresses that they don't understand why or it happens again, I feel the best way (best 'set' of outcomes) to disseminate information is to link to an official document that further explains the WHAT of the rule and the WHY. If that doesn't seem sufficient or more questions are asked, a private discussion may be warranted. Of course, how many warnings a person gets before being banned is up for debate, but I hope we can all agree on at least one...
A public discussion has many more chances of going badly than either of those options, for the reasons I outlined in another post above. Publicly calling a person's morality into question will almost certainly be met with resistance, especially if that behavior is normally accepted where that person normally interacts, and where others normally interact.
One point to remember is that I've always stated it is Paizo's right to limit speech. I added my personal support for their stance on limiting speech.
But in at least one place in the world, free speech is a fundamental human right. In the USA, you have the right to be bigoted or to simply make offensive jokes, so long as you are doing so in a private place that does not have limits to such (private places have the right to limit offensive speech, like Paizo does) and do not harm another person personally or from a position of power. The problem with this is all too apparent recently: There is a small organization of people that routinely protests funerals, screaming insults at the families of fallen soldiers, in order to advance their believe that God is killing them in retribution for our tolerance of people different from them (or some such nonsense). The irony is that the only reason they are able to do this is because of that tolerance, but I digress... the point of this paragraph is that there is no right to be able to avoid being offended here (as Jessica is all too aware), so it may be difficult for Americans to understand that concept when they move to a private space where that is enforced.
Some people do not belong to any social circles where something they say here might be construed as offensive. They might come to the Paizo forums and learn something, if we don't try to berate them for their ignorance.
@Nihimon As the nature of the offense naturally becomes more and more offensive/perverse, yeah, I would expect it to be roundly criticized by the community. There isn't anything wrong with criticizing such an obvious offense, as I don't think a moderator would judge any but the harshest criticisms as 'being a jerk'. Once the responses reach that point, I would expect the moderators to tell people to return to the thread topic, locking the thread if necessary.
I believe it is the place of the moderators to make sure discussions stay friendly by using their moderator tools (deleting posts, banning accounts, etc). Entering the discussion blurs the line between the official position of moderating and the personal position of participating.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
I find that an effective way to indicate support without adding to the din is to flag the offensive comment and favorite the one indicating that it is offensive.
Another good skill for the community to have is separating our identities and face from our words. That would allow, for example, anyone to admit that they made a bad joke and move on.
Removed a post. Pointing fingers isn't helping, and I'll remind everybody to follow the messageboard rules. If you have a problem with how the messageboards are moderated, then please direct your concerns to webmaster@paizo.com.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Kafi
Agree with you 100% :)
Ideally I'd like the person to realize what they said that was offensive but I do agree that trying to get them to realize that on forums is most often futile. Yes, it isn't necessary for a great community but it seems a disservice to them and open for them to then determine that they are being persecuted. Idealistic me? Probably.
@Decius
Yep, that's probably the best thing to do considering our forum options.
@Valkenr
Aye. I do like that system where I've seen it used.
@Mogloth
Noted! *sneaks across yard one more time* :D