Or me. I'd say a good third of my posts are nothing more than snarky quips at people.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Not sure why I haven't been banned too.
We all know your on the take.
> they will moderate their forums in a manner that best ensures they keep the greatest number of customers
Funny that, I have heard from 5 separate people that they would be leaving these forums after this debacle because they are dissapointed over how it has been handled. So that's 5 customers paizo has lost over this incident. How many have they gained, exactly? How does this strategy look like in the long term?
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
> they will moderate their forums in a manner that best ensures they keep the greatest number of customers
Funny that, I have heard from 5 separate people that they would be leaving these forums after this debacle because they are dissapointed over how it has been handled. So that's 5 customers paizo has lost over this incident. How many have they gained, exactly? How does this strategy look like in the long term?
Then again, you don't know how many may have PMed the moderators that they were having a bad experience because they were flamed by an Ashiel, or a LazarX. Since Paizo isn't going to show that set of cards, we're operating from half guesses at best.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not sure why I haven't been banned too.We all know your on the take.
Well, that would be one of my criticisms of Paizo. People any kind of friendly with a Paizo employee seem to get carte blanche. They get inside news, heads up on events in general, and so on. The company nor its people seem to be able to maintain professional distance except in the most superficial of terms.
Well, that would be one of my criticisms of Paizo. People any kind of friendly with a Paizo employee seem to get carte blanche. They get inside news, heads up on events in general, and so on. The company nor its people seem to be able to maintain professional distance except in the most superficial of terms.Not sure why I haven't been banned too.We all know your on the take.
Keep in mind that many PFS officers get inside knowledge which they are under NDA not to reveal. And there is good reason. they do have this rather large competitor that they don't want to give too many forward hints to.
Then again, you don't know how many may have PMed the moderators that they were having a bad experience because they were flamed by an Ashiel, or a LazarX. Since Paizo isn't going to show that set of cards, we're operating from half guesses at best.> they will moderate their forums in a manner that best ensures they keep the greatest number of customers
Funny that, I have heard from 5 separate people that they would be leaving these forums after this debacle because they are dissapointed over how it has been handled. So that's 5 customers paizo has lost over this incident. How many have they gained, exactly? How does this strategy look like in the long term?
Did Lazar get a ban or are you just using him as an example? Knew I hadn't seen him around the rules forum in a while.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The forums represent a small number of customers.
Given that anytime something like this happens people swear up and down that they will never ever ever shop at a place again (see also facebook rants, twitter, youtube rants, etc) it doesn't come as a surprise. Some manage to stay away for a day, some never come back.
From all my time working in the Real World, you'd be shocked at how many people tell you to your face that they will NEVER shop here again!!!11one because of how you treated me/didn't take my return/asked me to pay for all the things my kid broke/etc. Next week you see them in line, buying whatever it was that they wanted that day.
People get upset during internet fights and swear they will never return. It is happening as we speak on the very thread that was linked to another forum. And yet, some of those people are still posting here. It's drama and that's all. Something shiny will distract everyone and we'll move on to talk about that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Did Lazar get a ban or are you just using him as an example? Knew I hadn't seen him around the rules forum in a while.Then again, you don't know how many may have PMed the moderators that they were having a bad experience because they were flamed by an Ashiel, or a LazarX. Since Paizo isn't going to show that set of cards, we're operating from half guesses at best.> they will moderate their forums in a manner that best ensures they keep the greatest number of customers
Funny that, I have heard from 5 separate people that they would be leaving these forums after this debacle because they are dissapointed over how it has been handled. So that's 5 customers paizo has lost over this incident. How many have they gained, exactly? How does this strategy look like in the long term?
Same ban that Ashiel got, if I recall correctly. Pretty much for the same reasons.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's consistent in that it serves Paizo's interests. People who get fed up or leave the boards may take away buisness, so it makes cold logical sense to ban one person who upsets many, rather than have the many leave on their own.Thing is, the situation (the discussion in the thread) had resolved itself, then some time later the removals happened. When that happens, it seems as though someone hit a "flag" and the posts were nuked from orbit without reading what actually had happened.
I agree that it's Paizo's forums, and they can do what they want. But to say that the moderation policy is consistent across the board is laughable.
It is consistent in it's inconsistency. Why bother having guidelines?
Be up front. Say you don't care if this is a friendly place to all customers. If we don't personally like a post or poster, we'll take steps.Boom done. No misunderstanding at that point.
If they want to be an overly PC Something Awful, then just say so.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's consistent in that it serves Paizo's interests. People who get fed up or leave the boards may take away buisness, so it makes cold logical sense to ban one person who upsets many, rather than have the many leave on their own.Thing is, the situation (the discussion in the thread) had resolved itself, then some time later the removals happened. When that happens, it seems as though someone hit a "flag" and the posts were nuked from orbit without reading what actually had happened.
I agree that it's Paizo's forums, and they can do what they want. But to say that the moderation policy is consistent across the board is laughable.
It is consistent in it's inconsistency. Why bother having guidelines?
Be up front. Say you don't care if this is a friendly place to all customers. If we don't personally like a post or poster, we'll take steps.
Boom done. No misunderstanding at that point.
If they want to be an overly PC Something Awful, then just say so.
You can't be a universal doormat to all customers. If there's going to be one customer who causes a bad experience to a good number, it's only good buisness sense to remove him. What makes logical sense for a retail store owner applies here as well. Paizo's stated goal is to be inclusive WITH THE GREATEST NUMBER and variety of all customers. They never promised that the boards would be an open shooting match for all and sundry.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Really, because I have always found Ashiel one of the most productive, helpful and interesting people who post on here. You on the other hand...She was banned for using and encouraging a negative, and combative environment towards Paizo.
It had nothing to do with gender.
She was becoming a bully.
I personally found her to be arrogant, dismissive, and rude, with a complete unwillingness to compromise or look at things from a different perspective.
You're more than welcome to finish that if you want, I'm an adult. :-)
Then again, you don't know how many may have PMed the moderators that they were having a bad experience because they were flamed by an Ashiel, or a LazarX. Since Paizo isn't going to show that set of cards, we're operating from half guesses at best.> they will moderate their forums in a manner that best ensures they keep the greatest number of customers
Funny that, I have heard from 5 separate people that they would be leaving these forums after this debacle because they are dissapointed over how it has been handled. So that's 5 customers paizo has lost over this incident. How many have they gained, exactly? How does this strategy look like in the long term?
I first created an account on these forums because I read a post by Ashiel where she was explaining some of her ideas on alternative spellcasting mechanics. Among other things, she mentioned giving spellcasters all spells from all spell lists and a 10-th level of spells to boot. I wrote her a private message saying (I am paraphrasing here) "What the f*~# do you mean all spells from all spell lists? Don't spellcasters get enough good toys already?"
I expected to get a short reply, perhaps 10 sentences tops, explaining her general idea. What I got was 3 pages of detailed explanations, with examples and good math, of why that makes sense, what other changes she wanted to make to balance that out, all extremely polite, kind and good-natured. In response to a random private message by a noob she knew nothing about or ever seen before.
I'd love to see a flaming Ashiel, but unfortunately, so far that sight remains as attainable to me as unicorns.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Let's say you manage a restaurant. You have a table of 6 people sitting and talking about various things. Someone walks by and misshears a statement. They decide to call out the person they misunderstood, while getting heated, while the table, for the most part, tries to explain that they misunderstood, and they need to stop, and do not get heated. Person relents, and walks away (then possibly complains to management).
Table goes back to discussion.
Do you:
1) Let it be, as it's obviously over;
2) Talk to the person that disrupted the table;
3) Ban a person at the table who's complained about service in the past.
Let's say you manage a restaurant. You have a table of 6 people sitting and talking about various things. Someone walks by and misshears a statement. They decide to call out the person they misunderstood, while getting heated, while the table, for the most part, tries to explain that they misunderstood, and they need to stop, and do not get heated. Person relents, and walks away (then possibly complains to management).
Table goes back to discussion.Do you:
1) Let it be, as it's obviously over;
2) Talk to the person that disrupted the table;
3) Ban a person at the table who's complained about service in the past.
Take the complaint, say thank you, observe the table or chime in to assure there's a fundamental understanding of peace, and let people go about their lives.
Ashiel was one of the most helpful forum members, and his enciclopedic knowledge was inmense. I even supported much (not all) his opinions. But his acid attitude was never of my liking. I do not support that ban; is a great lose for the forums, but I can understand it.
On the other hand, certainly the general attitude of Paizo seems to be less friendly lately. Not for this particular case, but on general.
Let's say you manage a restaurant. You have a table of 6 people sitting and talking about various things. Someone walks by and misshears a statement. They decide to call out the person they misunderstood, while getting heated, while the table, for the most part, tries to explain that they misunderstood, and they need to stop, and do not get heated. Person relents, and walks away (then possibly complains to management).
Table goes back to discussion.Do you:
1) Let it be, as it's obviously over;
2) Talk to the person that disrupted the table;
3) Ban a person at the table who's complained about service in the past.
>3) Ban a person at the table who's complained about service in the past.
...given that that person is having a birthday party and other 5 people on the table are their friends.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Let's say you manage a restaurant. You have a table of 6 people sitting and talking about various things. Someone walks by and misshears a statement. They decide to call out the person they misunderstood, while getting heated, while the table, for the most part, tries to explain that they misunderstood, and they need to stop, and do not get heated. Person relents, and walks away (then possibly complains to management).
Table goes back to discussion.Do you:
1) Let it be, as it's obviously over;
2) Talk to the person that disrupted the table;
3) Ban a person at the table who's complained about service in the past.
That's not really a fair analogy. If you have one person who habitually engages in disruptive behavior at your restaurant, not once, but over enough visits that this person has enraged a lot of customers, it's simple buisness sense that you bar them from the premises. Paizo is a buisness to make money, not a freeform debate club. If they judge that you're being abusive in your statements, it dosn't matter how much helpful information you may have.
Keep in mind that on that side, livelihoods are at stake.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Respectfully, this is a good example of why it's just not a wise idea to write an e-mail (response) in anger - whether in business, personal life, etc. Or write the e-mail, walk away from it before pressing 'Send' and then come back to it later and delete it.
Concerning the employee (moderator) who represents the business point-of-view, I can certainly see from the quoted text why a decision was made to say "just not worth it" and part ways after receiving that emotional e-mail reply, regardless of the perceived "right" or "wrong" of the situation that led up to it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Nevermind.
Customer Service Manager
|
| 24 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hi folks!
Chris has asked me for an assist here and as a back-up member of the moderation team at Paizo I am stepping in.
First, I’d like to thank everyone who is coming to this thread to participate in in the discussion of our moderation practices. While there will never been total and complete agreement between every community member as to what ideal forum moderation looks like, I appreciate that you are here, wanting to engage with us. I can read the passion behind your words and I know that what’s driving this discussion is a desire to see a healthy and enjoyable gaming community. I can relate to this feeling because its the same feeling that drives my own goal of helping foster a welcoming and inclusive place for gamers to socialize, learn and grow.
Discussions directly calling into question our moderation practices can be difficult to process and respond to, they deserve to be addressed in a thoughtful and respectful manner and I’d like to ask for y’alls continued patience as we do our best to respond to your concerns.
I've gone through the thread and there are some things I'd like to address for the sake of transparency and/or to clear up potential misunderstandings.
and I hope that Customer Service does what it can to get to the bottom of it.
I am hoping customer service would carefully review this issue. Really, that's the only thing we could hope for at the moment.
Customer Service is not part of the moderation team. While Customer Service can assist with clerical issues (fixing bbcode typos/errors, moving threads, removing spam, etc) and are empowered to remove egregious posts, the Customer Service department is not part of the chain of command that would sort out complaints about user bans or post removal. When I do assist with moderation, its not due to my role as Customer Service Manager, it’s as my role as part of the moderation team. While many of the reasons I am in Customer Service are the reasons I am part of the moderation team, the one role at Paizo does not beget the other. For those of you who do wish to escalate concerns via email, community@paizo.com is the correct chain of command. If you are not comfortable with that, you can send emails to customer.service@paizo.com and they will forward it to the correct person(s); however, Customer Service Representatives will not address moderation issues other than to pass feedback or concerns along.
I would hope that no Paizo moderator would ever deliberately make a deletion or lock without giving the standard clarification as to why.
It is our moderation policy, for the majority of issues, to indicate when a post or posts have been removed. If a thread, post or series of posts has been removed without notification, sending an email to community@paizo.com will likely have the best results. Reviewing threads that may need moderation, removing posts and crafting a thoughtful and helpful moderation comment can take time, its possible we erred and forgot to leave a note before getting pulled in another direction, its possible we’re still writing a response, it could be someone deleted their own posts or a forum-code bug ate it. “I think posts were removed in this thread, but I don’t see a moderator note, can you help clarify this for me?” is going to get a much better response than a call-out thread or accusations of censorship or simply assuming nothing can be done.
So like if one of Ashiel's posts had big bold letters saying (USER WAS PROBATED FOR THIS POST) and then gave a little explanation as to why I'd find it a lot more acceptable.
It is our policy that we do not discuss moderation steps taken with a user with anyone in the community but that user. User privacy, including issues relating to leaving the community voluntarily or otherwise, is very important to us. We believe that overall, it is healthiest for the community to maintain this policy as is.
Forums are asynchronous by nature. No consideration need be given to the work/sleep cycle of forum participants. And that's a feature, not a flaw.
We’ve got a worldwide community who are posting at all hours of a given 24 hour cycle, and asking a portion of those folks to post at a time convenient for our moderation staff feels dismissive of their issues. However, the kind of discussion occurring here can easily become a pile-on. By posting these complaints late at night and copying and pasting text from another user’s email correspondence I have to wonder what the end goal is.
In my experience Paizo ask that any discussion of moderation decisions be made by email.
It’s something that’s entirely situationally dependent. Email is generally going to get the best results. While we do not want to stifle conversations or feedback on how we (as a company or as individuals) are doing, we are also not in the business of allowing our employees to be dog-piled for doing their jobs.
It is sad when people are banned; that said, it is sad when people argue on the forums as well.
Agreed.
•
With regards to this thread. The original thread title has been edited to something less baiting. Some posts, replies to or discussion of these posts have been removed. Removal reasons include: tit-for-tat personal arguments or insults, discussion of the account status of other paizo.com users, commentary on PFS volunteer attitudes, debate or guesses on how many or which posts will be removed, if or when the thread will be locked and a couple sarcastic one-liners that did not help the conversation.
Some posts that I would normally have removed may have been left in as I feel they provide context and transparency to the discussion. This includes the original post which quotes an email conversation between another community member and our Community and Digital Content Director. Posting private conversations that occurred between other users is not something we would usually leave on the boards, but at this point the discussion is happening and I feel removal of the thread or post would have a negative impact on the conversation and the parts of our community wishing to review or take part in this topic.
Regarding a theme come up a couple times within the context of this issue, we are specifically not inclined to list out “things your post will get removed for”. So much of messageboard posting is, as has been pointed out, highly contextual. Trying to list out each specific instance of what one post has been removed for and codifying a hard and fast rule off of it would result in a list a mile long.
Forums and online communities are in a state of constant flux and growth. All of us together, employees & community members, are growing and learning together. The paizo.com forums handle an insanely high amount of post-traffic and a very wide variety of viewpoints, lifestyles and beliefs. We are not interested in censoring, stifling or otherwise preventing people from engaging in discussion within the paizo.com community. However, this does not mean we will not or should not remove posts (or posters) who are unable to engage in the community in a civil manner or in accordance with our Community Guidelines.
I would like to make it clear that we are more than willing to engage with folks about our moderation policies, about our theories behind it, and suggestions on how to improve it. We are willing to revisit moderation decisions including bans and thread/post removal. This is something we have done in the past and no doubt, will need to do again in the future. It’s okay to disagree with us, and to voice said disagreement, however that disagreement, if its going to take place on Paizo’s forums, needs to happen in a manner that fosters the emotional growth and connection of the community.
Lastly, despite the public nature of this thread, decisions we make regarding specific instances of forum moderation remain, from our end, between the individual user and Paizo. I am reviewing with Chris the last couple days and trying to suss out what happened. This is ongoing and the process is not yet complete. Any additional changes or contact regarding specific users will not be publicly disclosed by us.
I'm going to go ahead and leave this thread locked until either Chris or I are back in the office tomorrow morning. It is really, really easy to have a thread like this go quickly off the rails and I think in this case that would do a huge disservice to the portion of the community that wishes to engage in discussion on this topic.
Thanks, Sara Marie!
A question, since this is perhaps at the root of the contention: is there a reporting mechanism regarding moderator action that a community member can use if we feel that the moderators have not acted fairly or sufficiently explained decisions regarding moderation activity?
Essentially, who do we ask for a second opinion?