The Community Is Hurting

[Cori Marie]

So here's the thing. It's been an incredibly stressful and intense week in the Paizo fandom. We've seen lots of threads, lots of posts, lots of old members of the community returning because of the things that have happened.

This isn't another thread about the allegations though, instead, this is a thread about the thing that I have felt absent during this whole mess, and that's a strong hand from the Paizo side of the community.

Some of this is due to the CS staff losing two of it's team members suddenly, but as that was the inciting incident of the whole mess, it feels like that can't really be taken into consideration here.

We've seen heated threads start up and go days without moderation at all, despite people admitting that they are on those threads just to troll other community members. We've seen people on both sides of the argument hurling personal insults and attacks at each other (I'm not without fault here). We've seen several versions of the same topics pop up.

All the while, the Director of Community has been mostly silent. The Director of Community has moved a couple of threads, deleted some spam, and then really only in the last couple of days made her presence known in the actual threads where there have been problems. Even then it's short little snippets to detail what moderation she has done, and not actually talking with the community to see why we're hurting and what she can do to help.

This might just be me, but it seems like the Director of Community should be there to support the community, to help keep conversations on topic, to prune things up if there are too many threads going with the same topics (speaking plainly the "Care to Rebuttal" and "Let me make this clear" threads should probably be closed and consolidation condensed just to the main blog and the call for accountability threads).

Plainly stated, the community is hurting and the Paizo team member that should be the one to help us heal seems to be mostly missing.

[Cori Marie]

And yes, Gen Con was also this weekend, but now we're a few days past Gen Con and still aren't seeing any interaction other than brief notes of what's been modded away.

[Sunderstone]

Lol. When I criticized the exact same thing about locking some of these threads, my post was deleted (I think by Heather F). Let's see how far your thread goes.
Moderation here is erratic at best.

Also the community director has been deleting off OP topic posts in some of these threads but in other threads they go unmodded.

[Reckless]

Interesting tactic, calling someone out in all but name. Pretty clear this is a veiled but directed personal attack on a Paizo Employee you likely blame for the firing and subsequent resignation.

[Cori Marie]

I don't think I'm being harsh in asking the Director of Community to interact with the community in a way to help make it stronger and healthier. There's been no interaction from her at all, just notes of what she has modded.

[BigNorseWolf]

Digital or not gencon just ended I would expect more than putting out the immediate fires to take a back seat to sleep. I know I didn't wake up till late mon.. wait. It's wednesday? When did that happen?

[Reckless]

Funny, how about you use her name instead of her title and talk to her like a person instead of a position, then?

I'd say you have no idea what the cool down from GenCon is like at Paizo, but you've always seemed like an intelligent and empathetic person to me, so I don't believe that to be the case.

I'd say a normal Gen Con takes at least a week to get things up and running normally afterwards. And that's when you don't have the kinds of activities we've had since last Wednesday. And without being short staffed on top of it.

If you want to heal the community, please consider giving some of your considerable empathy to people you don't think deserve it.

[dirtypool]

I'd say you also have no idea what the cool down for a Virtual appearance at a hybrid in-person/online GenCon is like at Paizo any more than the rest of us, since it has literally never happened before.

Placing yourself into position as an authority to shut down an argument you don't like is maybe not the best way to urge someone else to use their empathy.

Maybe we should all try stepping back from combative responses to things we don't agree with?

[Tristan d'Ambrosius]

BigNorseWolf wrote:

Digital or not gencon just ended I would expect more than putting out the immediate fires to take a back seat to sleep. I know I didn't wake up till late mon.. wait. It's wednesday? When did that happen?

Not just ended. It ended 3 days ago now.

[Cori Marie]

I used the job title because I'm speaking to the job title.

And of course I understand cons are intensive, even cons that are virtual. I'm a comics journalist who regularly attends SDCC as a member of press. I also know that when your job title is Director of Community, there should be some expectation for community engagement, shouldn't there? Since her promotion in August, I see a single post trying to interact with the community in a way that wasn't modding.

Since you'd prefer I'd ask her by name, I will. Tonya, do you plan to engage with the community to help us build a stronger and more inclusive community to make this environment a healthy place for gaming and discussion for everyone?

[Heather F]

I'm just popping in to remind everyone to speak to each other as you would like to be spoken to, BEFORE things get out of hand. Please flag posts you feel need to be removed, and PLEASE do not quote other people's posts. It really does sadden me when someone makes a really great post that needs to be taken down simply for quoting something else.

[Cori Marie]

Thank you Heather. I'm going to do my best to try to keep my end of this as civil as possible, I just want some communication.

[Reckless]

I didn't place myself as an authority, nor did I ask for the conversation to be shut down.

I asked for Tonya to be treated like a human being and for more empathy towards her.

The same thing Cori would be likely asking for when Sara Marie held the same title.

[Leg o' Lamb]

Reckless wrote:

I didn't place myself as an authority, nor did I ask for the conversation to be shut down.

I asked for Tonya to be treated like a human being and for more empathy towards her.

The same thing Cori would be likely asking for when Sara Marie held the same title.

yep

[Leg o' Lamb]

Tristan d'Ambrosius wrote:

If Customer Service is requesting that we not quote other people's posts then the reply button probably shouldn't automatically quote the post you are replaying to.

Also it is hard to not quote a post when you are replying and there are several posts in between due to time.

That might be "Please do not quote the post you flagged."

[Cori Marie]

I am wondering where you found a lack of empathy? I'm very empathetic, I know this week has been hard on all of us, Tonya included. I am just pointing out my concerns about the apparent lack of community engagement by a person with a title of Director of Community, dating back to even before Gen Con.

[Tristan d'Ambrosius]

She literally said "...PLEASE do not quote other people's posts." nothing about flagging in her post.

[Leg o' Lamb]

Tristan d'Ambrosius wrote:

She literally said "...PLEASE do not quote other people's posts." nothing about flagging in her post.

Heather F wrote:

Please flag posts you feel need to be removed, and PLEASE do not quote other people's posts.

[Heather F]

I'm sorry, I will make myself a little clearer here. If you quote a post that needs to be removed, I have to remove your post as well, regardless of how well thought out your post may be. I've had to remove a lot of really great comments because people are just quoting one bad post and then quoting each other. Whenever possible, it's best to try and say your piece as a separate entity. Far too many times, especially in the last week, I have thought, "if only they hadn't quoted that."

[knightnday]

I do not think anyone is getting what they want no matter which crowd they happen to be in.

[The Inheritor]

Heather F wrote:

I'm sorry, I will make myself a little clearer here. If you quote a post that needs to be removed, I have to remove your post as well, regardless of how well thought out your post may be. I've had to remove a lot of really great comments because people are just quoting one bad post and then quoting each other. Whenever possible, it's best to try and say your piece as a separate entity. Far too many times, especially in the last week, I have thought, "if only they hadn't quoted that."

In the past, Mods have trimmed quotes from posts. Can we get that again? Or is that extra effort too much?

[Tristan d'Ambrosius]

I apologize.

[Sunderstone]

knightnday wrote:

I do not think anyone is getting what they want no matter which crowd they happen to be in.

QFT

[Leg o' Lamb]

Tristan d'Ambrosius wrote:

I apologize.

No need; we cool.

[Tender Tendrils]

I don't see how a member of the community politely asking the director of community to help the community deal with some pretty severe community trouble is a personal attack.

It's a pretty reasonable request, it's presumably the community departments role to interact with the community, so they are probably the correct part of Paizo to contact for this.

People accusing anyone who says anything they don't agree with of making personal attacks or being an angry mob (angry mob being a placeholder for the far more offensive terms actually used that I won't repeat here) is like, 80% of what is derailing the forums.

[Leg o' Lamb]

Tender Tendrils wrote:

I don't see how a member of the community politely asking the director of community to help the community deal with some pretty severe community trouble is a personal attack.

It's a pretty reasonable request, it's presumably the community departments role to interact with the community, so they are probably the correct part of Paizo to contact for this.

People accusing anyone who says anything they don't agree with of making personal attacks or being an angry mob (angry mob being a placeholder for the far more offensive terms actually used that I won't repeat here) is like, 80% of what is derailing the forums.

Many people have made many posts saying Othering is poor form.

[Cori Marie]

I didn't other, though. I referred to her by her job title, because it's the job title that I'm asking for support from. Othering comes from using a portion of someone's identity that they have no control over as the only way to refer to them. I didn't do that (least of reasons being that a job title is not a trait that is immutable to the person, it's a job title that they earned), and after you asked me to I started using her name as well.

[Fergie]

The Inheritor wrote:

In the past, Mods have trimmed quotes from posts. Can we get that again? Or is that extra effort too much?

If I remember correctly, this practice was discontinued because in addition to taking more time, it also caused communication issues. By altering peoples posts, the meaning could change, sometimes in unexpected ways.

While deleting the whole post might be inconvenient, it usually resolves the issue without further need for back and fourth with the the mods.

Edit: Perhaps I'm missing something, but the "Don't quote it" has always been about not quoting posts that break, or even bend, community guidelines (See link below). Rather than quote something you feel is bad, "flag it and move on".

One thing I noticed (or perhaps failed to notice?) is that the guidelines used to specifically prohibit bringing drama from outside websites into the Paizo community. I didn't see anything about that in the current text, but I haven't achieved full coffee levels yet, so maybe I missed it.

[Reckless]

Because Cori being capable of understanding the situation from Tonya's point of view is the premise of asking for empathy.

By saying I don't believe Cori doesn't understand the chaos following Gen Con, I remove a potential excuse for that lack of empathy being shown.

Is the call for more community engagement from Tonya an egregious attack? Probably not. Does it lack empathy for a person new to a position during a turbulent period? Yes.

Was it worded in a dehumanizing way in a public forum, asking a specific person to do what Cori presumes that person's job is? My opinion was yes, and I asked for an increase in empathy and a more humanized manner of speaking to Tonya.

Cori has provided a degree of the requested modifications, and you may notice if you take the time to look that I'm not harping on my points or continuing to "troll" the thread, but rather responding to you.

Which is how threads derail, so how about we just leave each other alone from here on out. I've said my piece and I'll let you get in the last word if you need that.

[Leg o' Lamb]

Cori Marie wrote:

I didn't other, though. I referred to her by her job title, because it's the job title that I'm asking for support from. Othering comes from using a portion of someone's identity that they have no control over as the only way to refer to them. I didn't do that (least of reasons being that a job title is not a trait that is immutable to the person, it's a job title that they earned), and after you asked me to I started using her name as well.

Othering may have been a poor choice of word on my part, I apologize. The sentiment that one can refer to another human as a title or what have you can be seen as dehumanizing. There are far too many instances in my life where I have responded, "I have a name, you know."

[Reckless]

Cori, I appreciate how you have responded. A class act, as usual.

[Tender Tendrils]

Addressing someone via their job title in this context isn't othering.

Firstly it can be a lot less confrontational to address concerns to a position (so that the person behind the position doesn't feel that the concerns are about them, the person behind the job role, but about the the work).

Secondly, this isn't a request being made of the person behind the job role. That would be disrespectful to their work life balance. It's a request being made of the job role itself (something the worker inhabits during office hours, but isn't what defines them as a person).

I think Cori Marie's choice to frame things that way probably came out of wanting to be respectful, not out of malice.

I think if Cori had used the name instead, we would be debating with someone who claims that using the name was a personal attack.

[Leg o' Lamb]

Tender Tendrils wrote:

Addressing someone via their job title in this context isn't othering.

Firstly it can be a lot less confrontational to address concerns to a position (so that the person behind the position doesn't feel that the concerns are about them, the person behind the job role, but about the the work).

Secondly, this isn't a request being made of the person behind the job role. That would be disrespectful to their work life balance. It's a request being made of the job role itself (something the worker inhabits during office hours, but isn't what defines them as a person).

I think Cori Marie's choice to frame things that way probably came out of wanting to be respectful, not out of malice.

I think if Cori had used the name instead, we would be debating with someone who claims that using the name was a personal attack.

upon reflection, I agreed.

please see above

[Tender Tendrils]

Leg o' Lamb wrote:

Tender Tendrils wrote:

Addressing someone via their job title in this context isn't othering.

Firstly it can be a lot less confrontational to address concerns to a position (so that the person behind the position doesn't feel that the concerns are about them, the person behind the job role, but about the the work).

Secondly, this isn't a request being made of the person behind the job role. That would be disrespectful to their work life balance. It's a request being made of the job role itself (something the worker inhabits during office hours, but isn't what defines them as a person).

I think Cori Marie's choice to frame things that way probably came out of wanting to be respectful, not out of malice.

I think if Cori had used the name instead, we would be debating with someone who claims that using the name was a personal attack.

upon reflection, I agreed.

please see above

I saw the post above after I finished my post :) - despite being a touch typer who can type very very fast, on forums I like to be careful how I phrase things so it takes some time (I'm also on my phone which shows things down as well).

Glad to see some reflection :) it gives me faith that at least some people are listening to each other.

[Reckless]

An entirely probable scenario, especially given Cori's ascribing it as so.

Cori, I apologize if my initial response was to place malice where none was intended. These are indeed tough times, and I know some of the messaging out there on the interwebs specifically blames Tonya for a number of things. I'm sorry if I carried some of those accusations over into the reading of your post.

[Cori Marie]

Thank you Reckless, and thanks for keeping things in here civil. No malice was meant on my end at all, and no singular blame for any of these problems lays at the feet of one person. It's a systemic issue and one that I would like to help the community rebuild from.

[Leg o' Lamb]

Tender Tendrils wrote:

Leg o' Lamb wrote:

Tender Tendrils wrote:

Addressing someone via their job title in this context isn't othering.

Firstly it can be a lot less confrontational to address concerns to a position (so that the person behind the position doesn't feel that the concerns are about them, the person behind the job role, but about the the work).

Secondly, this isn't a request being made of the person behind the job role. That would be disrespectful to their work life balance. It's a request being made of the job role itself (something the worker inhabits during office hours, but isn't what defines them as a person).

I think Cori Marie's choice to frame things that way probably came out of wanting to be respectful, not out of malice.

I think if Cori had used the name instead, we would be debating with someone who claims that using the name was a personal attack.

upon reflection, I agreed.

please see above

I saw the post above after I finished my post :) - despite being a touch typer who can type very very fast, on forums I like to be careful how I phrase things so it takes some time (I'm also on my phone which shows things down as well).

Glad to see some reflection :) it gives me faith that at least some people are listening to each other.

I will admit that that rhetorical device really makes me upset. I don't like it, never have, and never will. To me it is a way of putting somebody in their place by acknowledging them, by not acknowledging them. I am not saying Cori was using that method of speaking. Just whenever I encounter it, I instantly get on edge.

[Tender Tendrils]

Leg o' Lamb wrote:

Tender Tendrils wrote:

Leg o' Lamb wrote:

Tender Tendrils wrote:

Addressing someone via their job title in this context isn't othering.

Firstly it can be a lot less confrontational to address concerns to a position (so that the person behind the position doesn't feel that the concerns are about them, the person behind the job role, but about the the work).

Secondly, this isn't a request being made of the person behind the job role. That would be disrespectful to their work life balance. It's a request being made of the job role itself (something the worker inhabits during office hours, but isn't what defines them as a person).

I think Cori Marie's choice to frame things that way probably came out of wanting to be respectful, not out of malice.

I think if Cori had used the name instead, we would be debating with someone who claims that using the name was a personal attack.

upon reflection, I agreed.

please see above

I saw the post above after I finished my post :) - despite being a touch typer who can type very very fast, on forums I like to be careful how I phrase things so it takes some time (I'm also on my phone which shows things down as well).

Glad to see some reflection :) it gives me faith that at least some people are listening to each other.

I will admit that that rhetorical device really makes me upset. I don't like it, never have, and never will. To me it is a way of putting somebody in their place by acknowledging them, by not acknowledging them. I am not saying Cori was using that method of speaking. Just whenever I encounter it, I instantly get on edge.

I can definitely understand that.

On a side note, when working in retail I actually often got really uncomfortable when people read my name tag and used my name. I mostly forgot I was wearing it, and having some stranger use my name was often a shock, and sometimes felt kind of invasive, like they knew something about me that was supposed to be mine to share. I have had a lot of retail coworkers who felt the same (which is why you sometimes see people working in retail wear their name badge somewhere where it's obscured by clothing, wear someone else's name badge, or just "forget" to put it on).

[Leg o' Lamb]

Tender Tendrils wrote:

Leg o' Lamb wrote:

Tender Tendrils wrote:

Leg o' Lamb wrote:

Tender Tendrils wrote:

Addressing someone via their job title in this context isn't othering.

Firstly it can be a lot less confrontational to address concerns to a position (so that the person behind the position doesn't feel that the concerns are about them, the person behind the job role, but about the the work).

Secondly, this isn't a request being made of the person behind the job role. That would be disrespectful to their work life balance. It's a request being made of the job role itself (something the worker inhabits during office hours, but isn't what defines them as a person).

I think Cori Marie's choice to frame things that way probably came out of wanting to be respectful, not out of malice.

I think if Cori had used the name instead, we would be debating with someone who claims that using the name was a personal attack.

upon reflection, I agreed.

please see above

I saw the post above after I finished my post :) - despite being a touch typer who can type very very fast, on forums I like to be careful how I phrase things so it takes some time (I'm also on my phone which shows things down as well).

Glad to see some reflection :) it gives me faith that at least some people are listening to each other.

I will admit that that rhetorical device really makes me upset. I don't like it, never have, and never will. To me it is a way of putting somebody in their place by acknowledging them, by not acknowledging them. I am not saying Cori was using that method of speaking. Just whenever I encounter it, I instantly get on edge.

I can definitely understand that.

On a side note, when working in retail I actually often got really uncomfortable when people read my name tag and used my name. I mostly forgot I was wearing it, and having some stranger use my name was often a shock, and sometimes felt kind of invasive, like they knew something about me that was supposed to be...

I refuse(d) to wear a name tag for that specific reason and never required anyone who worked under me to wear one. It can also be a safety issue for female or female presenting employees.

It was always used as a power dynamic; to establish who is in control and who must needs listen. Grrrr.

[thejeff]

Tender Tendrils wrote:

On a side note, when working in retail I actually often got really uncomfortable when people read my name tag and used my name. I mostly forgot I was wearing it, and having some stranger use my name was often a shock, and sometimes felt kind of invasive, like they knew something about me that was supposed to be mine to share. I have had a lot of retail coworkers who felt the same (which is why you sometimes see people working in retail wear their name badge somewhere where it's obscured by clothing, wear someone else's name badge, or just "forget" to put it on).

Oh god yes. I've only done a little retail work, but I've always hated wearing name tags in other situations - like conventions or other events. I almost never will use a name tag to casually address some one in a retail store or similar situation.

[Tender Tendrils]

thejeff wrote:

Oh god yes. I've only done a little retail work, but I've always hated wearing name tags in other situations - like conventions or other events. I almost never will use a name tag to casually address some one in a retail store or similar situation.

This is what I like to see in a customer.

[Freehold DM]

Tender Tendrils wrote:

thejeff wrote:

Oh god yes. I've only done a little retail work, but I've always hated wearing name tags in other situations - like conventions or other events. I almost never will use a name tag to casually address some one in a retail store or similar situation.

This is what I like to see in a customer.

But how else will people at conventions know its me?!?

Yes this is a joke considering I'm easy to pick out of a crowd at cons. Or at least I used to be.