| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
never jump in pre-coffee.Would it be possible for the web team to add a breathalyzer that detects coffee on the breath and prevents posting if it's not there? People having to have their coffee before posting would conservatively reduce posts needing moderated by 37%.
It would discriminate against people that don't drink coffee.
Duh. How something smelling so nice can taste so awful?!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Youjustneedcream! Toreducetheacidity!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Good. Ban the drinkers of the herb stew.
We really shouldn't be speculating about why users got banned. We will never know the full story behind it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As a software engineer, I'm quite familiar with this kind of set up. The correct solution is almost always to redesign and rebuild from scratch.
As a developer, I'm well aware there's never time or budget to do that.
Indeed. It's classic Not Invented Here Syndrome. All business have corner cases and crazy customers and vendors. That doesn't make you special and is only compounded in the software space by slowing you down from doing other things. It's a literal hindrance to the business. This is proved by the aforementioned brittle nature of making changes.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Actually, here's a thought: You guys should really add the "Please use email to discuss moderation of your posts, not the thread the posts were on" rule to the Community Guidelines. It's an important rule, and it seems weird that it's not on the list considering how often it comes up.
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
From my own personal interactions Chris, both email and in person, I can tell you that she cares about the community here. Incredibly so.
I value Chris's opinions on these boards because I know she has the best interests of Paizo's community at heart. Availing yourself of the community email address is a very good way to address issues that popup. I know, I've used it on more than one occasion. Every time Chris has written back to me with reasoning to either why my complaint is being acted upon or not.
It takes time to pull out the invasive posters, both in the player/poster and PFS Venture Team, by the roots. We do take each other to task, sometimes publicly, but most often in private. I admit it is easier to call someone a posterior orifice in private rather than in public. Maybe we need to be more open in the public boards about calling out our fellow VOs when we need to. We can try.
I would, in fact, be in favor of more strict moderation provided such moderation is made clear. The who's, what's and so on should be obvious. A good moderator is like a gardener. It should also allow for inconsistencies to be able to be raised when things are not enforced which Paizo does have. My whole problem with the current state of things is the lack of transparency into what is apparently OK and what isn't. It is very subjective.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think recent events have shown just how terrible the general public's concept of moderation practices is.Not necessarily. One can be pleased enough with the moderation in general and still disagree with some cases.
Not only that, but you might even be a moderator in other forums yourself and still disagree with some cases or even some general principles that Paizo works on.
Now generally, I think that Paizo does a fine job with their moderation policy though I'd prefer a return to the time when Paizo moderation basically was Paizo members chiming in and remember the posters to behave. But that was before the PFRPG beta test "sinfall" (just kiddin' of course) which destroyed the paradise we had beforehand by making it explode with new forum members.
The problem being that the need for more moderation also means the need for more moderators and that might lead to different interpretations of the moderation policy or even to problems with self-moderation, as far as the officials are concerned.
So while I wouldn't know about how Paizo handles this behind the curtain, I definitely agree that it would be a good idea to explain and clarify to people why their posts got moderated or why they got (temporarily) banned if they (nicely) ask for it.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
Self-policing cuts down on their work, cuts down on misunderstandings and hurt feelings, and makes the place better overall.
It's generally not a matter of people failing to self-police, so much as it's a matter of people thinking that X is acceptable when it's not.
For example, there are folks who honestly believe that sarcastic hyperbolic metaphors are a normal, reasonable way to express your displeasure with something They then respond to people taking offense by assuming the listeners aren't open to "honest criticism" because (in their minds) that's all they gave them. This isn't even all that weird, really; plenty of families and tightly-knit friend groups communicate this way regularly, without getting hurt. But just because I know better than to bring out in public the same sass I give my brothers at a family reunion, doesn't mean everyone does. And if nobody tells them, how can they self-police?
Another example would be the all-too-pervasive "I'm just calling a spade a spade"/"If it quacks like a duck, etc" mindset . Speakers in such cases are already honestly self-policing, they're just wrong about what's actually acceptable. And if the only people telling them it's not okay are the ones they're calling a "spade"/"duck", then they think they're doing nothing wrong (and might even think they're doing some kind of public service).
"People need to self-police" doesn't help much when nearly every unacceptable post was written by someone who thought they were self-policing.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
...or policing others.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Who watches the watchers.
I have to say, after reading this topic and then investigating what exactly went on (and the email tract actually was posted elsewhere), I would not agree that the moderation on this forum is always wonderful.
I actually think that at times the moderation is hostile, and it becomes so due to one reason.
When one has a problem with a moderator, it is that moderator who handles it in many instances. In otherwords, if I were a moderator and if removed your post calling me a ninnybobby...how biased do you think I would be at that point. Then, you have a problem with my moderation...and it is turned over to me to handle...do you REALLY think I'm going to be non-partial in my decisions?
It becomes hostile because they have the same moderator that there may be an issue with at times, also they can be the one that handles the problems from that issue.
If we want fair, then in reality it should be a non-biased, uninvolved party that looks at the exchange at that point.
In addition, it sounds like they DO keep tabs and an ongoing number, but no one but they have any idea what that number is, what these tabs are, or what the collective problems are. Beyond a short email (if one is lucky) none of us know explicitly what the problems with a post that was deleted was. It may be that it just quoted something, or it could be that we ourselves were the offender, but we don't ever know exactly.
In that light, a private tab sounds AWESOME, especially if it details exactly WHAT and WHY that was an infraction.
HOWEVER...I SEE PROBLEMS with both of those.
.
First, Paizo is a business. These forums are there to support their business and their sales. It is not a game table. If you have a problem with a manager or customer service at a store, you deal with either customer service, or the manager. You can disagree, but it is STILL THEIR STORE AND THEIR PROPERTY.
They can hold whatever view they wish. If they want to make everyone mad, so be it. If they want to make everyone glad, that's their prerogative. Look at Walmart, a pretty huge chain. They have people that hate their guts and can't get along with their customer service. You have others that love them. It's just part of being the business.
As a private company (I don't think they are a Corp, I think they are an LLC?), they can do what they wish on their property as long as they don't break any laws.
In that light, we really don't have a say in what they decide. In that light, even if I dislike something a moderator did or has done...I will always be in the wrong unless it comes down to an actual legal issue, because it is THEIR PROPERTY, and not mine.
I am NOT a model forum goer. I TRY really hard to conform to the rulesand respect their property, but I have had problems in the past. I am not clear exactly on WHAT the problems are, but I TRY to not get into their hair. I ADMIT, I HAVE BEEN IN THE WRONG BEFORE. I HAVE EVEN WRONGED Chris Lambertz (of which I apologize again). I might not be the best person to write these things. However, I am from the viewpoint of a member of the forum, not as someone who has to run the business.
In that light, customer service are the ones who deal with customers, and if one has a problem with customer service...they still deal with customer service. Paizo has chosen that way to handle things, and that's their decision. I have been WRONG at times, and perhaps having the same moderator who made the decision able to clarify it, is the right decision (which Paizo has done and is doing in many instances from what I see). I can see WHY THAT IS WISE from a business point of view. Do we really want them having others waste their time when a quick response from Customer service is almost as effective (more on that below).
Bottom line, this is Paizo's forums, not ours.
.
Secondly, even if Paizo wishes to extend a privilege to their forums, such actions as I brought up above would be time consuming and perhaps utilize money, time, and effort that would be better spent elsewhere.
I can be a trouble customer...I admit that. I don't see eye to eye with Paizo on some things. That said, I realize that this is THEIR property, and that this is a privilege rather than a right to be able to talk and write on their forums. I actually try to keep the rules on the forums and try to be a good poster (apparently not always successful), but I try to respect that this is their property that were are being allowed to utilize.
They are NOT the US or UK or any other government. They are NOT tied to uphold government rights. We are on THEIR property, and as such, under whatever rules they are allowed to place on their own property as it is.
They could do as WotC as simply stop that ability or deem it too much trouble. We are fortunate that they provide a place where we can discuss their games and books in this manner, and lucky that they consider costumer service as such a priority.
.
Finally, as a business, is the time and effort dedicated to running these forums a good choice. Paizo got popular among some groups because of their noted customer service. It also has been noted to have quite a bias in some areas against certain groups of people as well. They are the ones who have to decide what time and effort is worth the most for them as a business. We might appreciate if they added a tab that we can see privately about infractions, but the time it would take to add that, the effort it would take each moderator to type that additional information and post it in our tab area...is that REALLY going to be worth the time and effort from Paizo that could be spent on something more profitable to them as a company?
Instead of working on shipping the massive orders we may have made (or at least, some of us make occasionally), or trying to resolve REAL issues such as someone's CC not working or someone not receiving their books, or someone's account not working...they'd be busy filling out a personal report for ONE individual that in the long run...doesn't make as much of a difference as we might think...is that REALLY WORTH the cost to Paizo?
I think we might want to see some things as forum goers, but I think we are the MINORITY in that regard. I think as a business, Paizo might have other priorities...and that is their right.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Self-policing cuts down on their work, cuts down on misunderstandings and hurt feelings, and makes the place better overall.It's generally not a matter of people failing to self-police, so much as it's a matter of people thinking that X is acceptable when it's not.
For example, there are folks who honestly believe that sarcastic hyperbolic metaphors are a normal, reasonable way to express your displeasure with something They then respond to people taking offense by assuming the listeners aren't open to "honest criticism" because (in their minds) that's all they gave them. This isn't even all that weird, really; plenty of families and tightly-knit friend groups communicate this way regularly, without getting hurt. But just because I know better than to bring out in public the same sass I give my brothers at a family reunion, doesn't mean everyone does. And if nobody tells them, how can they self-police?
Another example would be the all-too-pervasive "I'm just calling a spade a spade"/"If it quacks like a duck, etc" mindset . Speakers in such cases are already honestly self-policing, they're just wrong about what's actually acceptable. And if the only people telling them it's not okay are the ones they're calling a "spade"/"duck", then they think they're doing nothing wrong (and might even think they're doing some kind of public service).
"People need to self-police" doesn't help much when nearly every unacceptable post was written by someone who thought they were self-policing.
Your second paragraph highlights the problem. I can only speak for the USA here, as I've only attended school there, but both myself and many (many) years later my children were both given the same sorts of lessons on being nice, not acting up, not "speaking your mind" and so on.
People manage this every day -- we go to work, the store, the theater and so on without being overly offensive. Just as you wouldn't speak to a bank teller the same way you'd speak to your brothers, I still hold that people are aware of how they are speaking here, they just choose to ignore social niceties because, well, it's the internet and they don't have to look the person in the eye or be held accountable.
<Insert crazy old man back in my day ramblings>
We're asking the mods to strive to a higher standard. It isn't too much to ask the same of the posters, is it?
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Your second paragraph highlights the problem. I can only speak for the USA here, as I've only attended school there, but both myself and many (many) years later my children were both given the same sorts of lessons on being nice, not acting up, not "speaking your mind" and so on.
People manage this every day -- we go to work, the store, the theater and so on without being overly offensive. Just as you wouldn't speak to a bank teller the same way you'd speak to your brothers, I still hold that people are aware of how they are speaking here, they just choose to ignore social niceties because, well, it's the internet and they don't have to look the person in the eye or be held accountable.
<Insert crazy old man back in my day ramblings>
We're asking the mods to strive to a higher standard. It isn't too much to ask the same of the posters, is it?
You would think that however years of retail work have shown me people do not have that filter you believe they posses. Most yes wouldn't come in and act anything short of cordial, but a far larger percentage than you might think will come in and before you even have spoken to them are already in a-hole mode from the start simply because their day has gone awry in some way.
Who watches the watchers.
Hey, I saw V for Vendetta, too!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I prefer 'who watches the watchmen'.
I've always wondered. "Who winds up the watchmen."
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Oh, The Watchmen. Sorry, I always get my mediocre-movie-adaptations-of-comic-books-that-got-picked-up-by-internet-cu lture-and-turned-into-sources-of-weird-paranoid-memes-that-are-way-too-sinc ere-for-their-roots confused.
You would think that however years of retail work have shown me people do not have that filter you believe they posses. Most yes wouldn't come in and act anything short of cordial, but a far larger percentage than you might think will come in and before you even have spoken to them are already in a-hole mode from the start simply because their day has gone awry in some way.
Your second paragraph highlights the problem. I can only speak for the USA here, as I've only attended school there, but both myself and many (many) years later my children were both given the same sorts of lessons on being nice, not acting up, not "speaking your mind" and so on.
People manage this every day -- we go to work, the store, the theater and so on without being overly offensive. Just as you wouldn't speak to a bank teller the same way you'd speak to your brothers, I still hold that people are aware of how they are speaking here, they just choose to ignore social niceties because, well, it's the internet and they don't have to look the person in the eye or be held accountable.
<Insert crazy old man back in my day ramblings>
We're asking the mods to strive to a higher standard. It isn't too much to ask the same of the posters, is it?
Oh I know, I've been in retail as well. Still, it's a dream of mine and one that costs a heck of a lot less than revamping the software here. :)
Your second paragraph highlights the problem. I can only speak for the USA here, as I've only attended school there, but both myself and many (many) years later my children were both given the same sorts of lessons on being nice, not acting up, not "speaking your mind" and so on.
People manage this every day -- we go to work, the store, the theater and so on without being overly offensive. Just as you wouldn't speak to a bank teller the same way you'd speak to your brothers, I still hold that people are aware of how they are speaking here, they just choose to ignore social niceties because, well, it's the internet and they don't have to look the person in the eye or be held accountable.
<Insert crazy old man back in my day ramblings>
We're asking the mods to strive to a higher standard. It isn't too much to ask the same of the posters, is it?
If everyone were new posters, this would be a fine critique. However, with time comes familiarity, and that "just say it" style of expressing yourself simply feels natural. Which, you can't really expect someone hanging out around here for YEARS without that happening. Plus, it's a far cry from a fundamentally professional, transactional interaction.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've always wondered. "Who winds up the watchmen."
Get a pair of binoculars?
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
If everyone were new posters, this would be a fine critique. However, with time comes familiarity, and that "just say it" style of expressing yourself simply feels natural. Which, you can't really expect someone hanging out around here for YEARS without that happening. Plus, it's a far cry from a fundamentally professional, transactional interaction.Your second paragraph highlights the problem. I can only speak for the USA here, as I've only attended school there, but both myself and many (many) years later my children were both given the same sorts of lessons on being nice, not acting up, not "speaking your mind" and so on.
People manage this every day -- we go to work, the store, the theater and so on without being overly offensive. Just as you wouldn't speak to a bank teller the same way you'd speak to your brothers, I still hold that people are aware of how they are speaking here, they just choose to ignore social niceties because, well, it's the internet and they don't have to look the person in the eye or be held accountable.
<Insert crazy old man back in my day ramblings>
We're asking the mods to strive to a higher standard. It isn't too much to ask the same of the posters, is it?
You cannot expect people to comport themselves politely after years in the same place? Er... people do it all the time at jobs. Again, it's a matter of don't want to, not cannot.
It's a double standard. There are expectations that mods should leave their bad day or personal likes/dislikes at the door and comport themselves professionally, but when it is suggested that posters do the same you'd think that we're asking for the moon.
You cannot expect people to comport themselves politely after years in the same place? Er... people do it all the time at jobs. Again, it's a matter of don't want to, not cannot.
It's a double standard. There are expectations that mods should leave their bad day or personal likes/dislikes at the door and comport themselves professionally, but when it is suggested that posters do the same you'd think that we're asking for the moon.
This speaks to Jiggy's point. They probably feel they're being perfectly polite or at least keeping themselves to a standard of respect that is acceptable.
And, yes, I agree it's a double standard. That's largely part of why I'm for more strict moderation provided the rules of that moderation are made clear. I feel wholly that the safe space Paizo has crafted for themselves in their offices should apply here as well. I also believe that if a Paizo employee shows their ass on the forums that should be grounds for dismissal or reprimand just the same as if they did it to a coworker. If a poster did the same to a Paizo employee, they get the boot. Equality all around!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You cannot expect people to comport themselves politely after years in the same place? Er... people do it all the time at jobs. Again, it's a matter of don't want to, not cannot.
It's a double standard. There are expectations that mods should leave their bad day or personal likes/dislikes at the door and comport themselves professionally, but when it is suggested that posters do the same you'd think that we're asking for the moon.
This speaks to Jiggy's point. They probably feel they're being perfectly polite or at least keeping themselves to a standard of respect that is acceptable.
And, yes, I agree it's a double standard. That's largely part of why I'm for more strict moderation provided the rules of that moderation are made clear. I feel wholly that the safe space Paizo has crafted for themselves in their offices should apply here as well. I also believe that if a Paizo employee shows their ass on the forums that should be grounds for dismissal or reprimand just the same as if they did it to a coworker. If a poster did the same to a Paizo employee, they get the boot. Equality all around!
Well yes, but then people believe that starting a sentence with "No offence but .." or "I'm not a racist but .." removes any responsibility to be civil as well.
Well yes, but then people believe that starting a sentence with "No offence but .." or "I'm not a racist but .." removes any responsibility to be civil as well.
Which is a scapegoat and no defense.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I too want a Moderated Posts tab on my account.
I have lost some...posts in the Flamewars, good soldiers too, full of locqacious ramblings, profundity, sass, misplaced humor, actual humor, misunderstood actual humor, and occasionally, quoted bile. Mebbe once or twice it was my bile, but mostly..yep....caught in the crossfire.
[wipes tear from eye]
Good soldiers those posts, and I'll never get 'em back. I fought in the Spamwars too - happy to see all those posts (and users) frosted, dusted and incinerated from mod-orbital lazorrzzz. But these posts...good soldiers....
[breaks down and cries manfully]
Srsly, I can't favourite Jiggy's proposal enough. In fact, I haven't even favorited his post yet... [races off to do just that]
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You cannot expect people to comport themselves politely after years in the same place? Er... people do it all the time at jobs. Again, it's a matter of don't want to, not cannot.
It's a double standard. There are expectations that mods should leave their bad day or personal likes/dislikes at the door and comport themselves professionally, but when it is suggested that posters do the same you'd think that we're asking for the moon.
Myself I'd hold to one standard - that people can have a bad day.
Personally I didn't even realize that you could get 'banned' from these forums - although it doesn't surprise me. What does surprise me is that someone with a long history of adding value to the forums would be removed due to a bad day. 'Value' here is subjective - however I think that regardless of how you define 'value' - a great deal of the value of these forums isn't created by Paizo - but instead it is created by the fans willing to interact and be excited about the game. This is where things get murky however the 'value' of the forums at some level must be worth the effort in hosting, computer power, and salaries needed to keep them running.
I don't believe that you can make 100% of the people happy 100% of the time without never stating an opinion. The simple fact is - on a forum like this someone who posts *more* will end up being in 'trouble' *more* by simple virtue of being seen by *more* eyeballs. So with all this being said - going to my first point again - 'people can have a bad day'. Combine that with the idea of 'value', and that a prolific poster with a very long history brings more 'value' to the forums - I think that should factor in when talking about a permanent ban.
I personally hope that if an account gets a history and hundreds of posts (or more) that something as serious as a ban is handled by Paizo with more than one person reviewing the infraction, and even a possible cooling off period to ensure it's not an over-reaction. That may happen - currently it's impossible to know, and that generates fear.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There are expectations that mods should leave their bad day or personal likes/dislikes at the door and comport themselves professionally, but when it is suggested that posters do the same you'd think that we're asking for the moon.
Nobody's suggesting that it's unreasonable to ask posters to behave themselves. I'm suggesting that (at least a good portion of the time) they think they already are. I don't understand how you got "asking posters to behave is being treated like asking for the moon" out of "posters don't realize they're not already behaving".
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There are expectations that mods should leave their bad day or personal likes/dislikes at the door and comport themselves professionally, but when it is suggested that posters do the same you'd think that we're asking for the moon.Nobody's suggesting that it's unreasonable to ask posters to behave themselves. I'm suggesting that (at least a good portion of the time) they think they already are. I don't understand how you got "asking posters to behave is being treated like asking for the moon" out of "posters don't realize they're not already behaving".
Probably from the general responses in the posts that followed mine, suggesting that it is hard for people to be polite/behave, as well as the idea that they aren't aware that they aren't already behaving.
It's a matter of disagreeing that many (not all) posters are somehow unaware that snark, sarcasm, and general aggressive posting styles, while popular on the internet, are nonetheless problematic. As I said above, people in general are experts at self-delusion. Some honestly believe that they are just "speaking bluntly", not realizing or not wanting to understand that without the inflections and body language and whatnot that we have in face to face contact that it comes across poorly in text.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One thing I've learned from this, is not all posts need a response, and that I really wish Paizo had a blocking feature built in. Some folks just aren't worth the hassle of dignifying with a response.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One thing I've learned from this, is not all posts need a response, and that I really wish Paizo had a blocking feature built in. Some folks just aren't worth the hassle of dignifying with a response.
another mage has a blocking script.
There are expectations that mods should leave their bad day or personal likes/dislikes at the door and comport themselves professionally, but when it is suggested that posters do the same you'd think that we're asking for the moon.Nobody's suggesting that it's unreasonable to ask posters to behave themselves. I'm suggesting that (at least a good portion of the time) they think they already are. I don't understand how you got "asking posters to behave is being treated like asking for the moon" out of "posters don't realize they're not already behaving".
All this results in is people making passive aggressive insults instead of the outright aggressive kind.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
All this results in is people making passive aggressive insults instead of the outright aggressive kind.
I'm not sure I understand what the "this" is that you're saying will do nothing but alter the delivery of aggressive comments. Can you be a bit more thorough/explicit?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Personally I have little interest in seeing the moderation policies on these forums become much more codified, and I certainly wouldn't want a more comprehensive set of rules to be put up. It's impossible to capture every nuance that makes interactions a problem or not, and I think forums that try feel very unfriendly places.
At the end of the day, if I don't trust the moderators then it doesn't matter what the policies are. I wouldn't much want to post here if I didn't trust the staff anyway, and the hypothetical untrustworthy moderators could make posting life hard for me whatever the written regulations. On the other hand if I trust the moderators then I'll trust them to use their judgement whatever regulations are written down.
So what you're saying is you prefer a rules-light system, that is based off of trust between the referee (read: GM) and the posters (read: players)?
I don't think Pathfinder is what you're looking for, and Paizo publishes that system.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oh, The Watchmen. Sorry, I always get my mediocre-movie-adaptations-of-comic-books-that-got-picked-up-by-internet-cu lture-and-turned-into-sources-of-weird-paranoid-memes-that-are-way-too-sinc ere-for-their-roots confused.
Or one could be referring to the Clockwork Aliens of Dr. Who that DO need to be wound up every now and then.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It might be nice to know when a post I have made has been flagged and how many flags it has and which flag it has. While for some people this might encourage bad behavior as they go out of their way to provoke people and see what line they can push, in general the people that will do that are already doing that. For those who don't know they are stepping on toes it might help them be better participants in the forums by making them more aware of when they have caused someone to flag their post.
To be absolutely clear, I am explicitly not asking for who flagged a post, just that a post has been flagged.
Can we get a rift of repose that contains the dead avatars of banned posters?
|
I think that something to consider is that some of the rules are pretty subjective. What does it mean to be or not be a jerk? Some people might have a dryer sense of humor or even not have English as their primary language and so these things can get lost in the online environment. There are also some people that are overly sensitive to anything or anyone that does not meet within their preconceived notions of how things or people should act. Not everything is meant to be taken as offensive. Once that becomes the norm of behavior, then in their own way, they become what they complain about, bullying others.
|
|
I think that something to consider is that some of the rules are pretty subjective. What does it mean to be or not be a jerk? Some people might have a dryer sense of humor or even not have English as their primary language and so these things can get lost in the online environment. There are also some people that are overly sensitive to anything or anyone that does not meet within their preconceived notions of how things or people should act. Not everything is meant to be taken as offensive. Once that becomes the norm of behavior, then in their own way, they become what they complain about, bullying others.
Posting a link to a screen shot of a deleted post is considered a no-no.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just because one believes one is not giving offense does not mean that something isn't offensive. As remarked above, people believe all sorts of things about what they do, whether they are right, wrong, mean, rude, and so on. One person's "speaking bluntly" can come across as dismissive and rude to many others.
Creative Director
|
| 17 people marked this as a favorite. |
The person being offended is the one AND THE ONLY ONE who gets to decide if something is offensive.
If I say something that someone else finds offensive, and they tell me that I offended them, I don't get defensive. I apologize and adjust future speaking with the knowledge that the topic that someone just found offensive could be offensive to other people.
It works for me. I wish it worked for everyone.
I think that something to consider is that some of the rules are pretty subjective. What does it mean to be or not be a jerk? Some people might have a dryer sense of humor or even not have English as their primary language and so these things can get lost in the online environment. There are also some people that are overly sensitive to anything or anyone that does not meet within their preconceived notions of how things or people should act. Not everything is meant to be taken as offensive. Once that becomes the norm of behavior, then in their own way, they become what they complain about, bullying others.
Participation in any community is a learning experience. Typically, the older members help set the basis for what's acceptable. However, people are fallible and even they, especially they, can be wrong. Private communities typically codify these behaviors to some extent either through common understanding or some written do/don't list.
When people get into an argument, typically rationality goes out the window. Emotions get involved even when we like to think we're sticking to "just the facts." Then, the aftermath is always s!!!ty for both sides. I know with recent events, I'm a bit emotionally drained. I still haven't bounced back, and I know I can't be completely positive about it.
That said, there's never an excuse to make someone else feel bad. It is incumbent upon us as individuals to be receptive to feedback about how our action are received regardless of some notion of being "too soft." A good way (imo) to see if that's actually the case is if you're giving them what they're dishing out. If they're being aggressive and want to call foul when you're aggressive then you have a choice. You can either flatly call b*##*+&@, or you can basically tell them what comes around goes around, and they need to fix their own behavior. Then, whatever discussion is going on can proceed. You shouldn't escalate, though. That helps no one.
|
Creative Director
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
The person being offended is the one AND THE ONLY ONE who gets to decide if something is offensive.
If I say something that someone else finds offensive, and they tell me that I offended them, I don't get defensive. I apologize and adjust future speaking with the knowledge that the topic that someone just found offensive could be offensive to other people.
It works for me. I wish it worked for everyone.
To a certain point. As long as everyone involved is really playing fair.
Taking that approach too far makes it easy to weaponize offence. Some people find the presence of LGBTQ people in your products offensive. I do not think you should apologize and adjust future products to avoid offending them.
As in all things, tempering yourself and your actions with kindness and inclusivity should go without saying. If someone is offended because of their intolerant or bigoted or misogynistic or homophobic or whatever beliefs... I respect their right to be offended but am not going to apologize for being kind and inclusive.
In a more perfect world, the homophobe (or whomever) would understand that Paizo is inclusive and would take their business elsewhere. I know I've done this very thing, upon learning of a business's homophobic nature—I've voted with my wallet and took my business elsewhere.
In a PERFECT world, of course, there wouldn't be homophobia, and we wouldn't have these conversations in the first place.