Temple of Kraden News:
| Greetings, heathen. Perhaps some fortuitous blessing of Kraden's grace hath led you to our humble Temple, or perhaps you are simply curious about this strange and wonderful cult. Should you be willing - and dare to hope - to achieve enlightenment, the door opens before you. Lo! Leave your old life behind! For once you step through, you become something more than just yourself. You become a Kradenette. Are you willing to make the rapturous plunge? Do you have what it takes? One of us! One of us! One of us! Already one of us? Make your presence known: |
| Regarding the Staff's Handling of Ulta's Topic; and Bowse's subsequent suspension | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Sep 27 2011, 02:48 AM (3,488 Views) | |
| UltaFlame | Sep 27 2011, 11:18 AM Post #21 |
![]()
Thanks Poui.
![]()
|
The letter: Is what is written specifically in the rules / laws of anything The spirit: The basic idea behind having laws in the first place is the betterment of the society and protection of the individuals therein. |
![]() |
|
| ShinyGirafarig | Sep 27 2011, 11:20 AM Post #22 |
![]()
Giraffes are adorable.
![]()
|
Probably don't take the rules too literally and use common sense to at least get an idea of what they are trying to convey. |
![]() |
|
| Hisui | Sep 27 2011, 11:27 AM Post #23 |
![]()
Seccy "no fun allowed" Secundum
![]()
|
Oh right. I feel like a derp now. Thanks guys. But yeah, I agree with Adranel even more now. |
![]() |
|
| simplechild | Sep 27 2011, 11:38 AM Post #24 |
|
My only feel is murder
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I think we should wait and let the person who actually administered the punishment post here before we go any farther. Just because it was a staff action does not mean that all the staff agreed to the judgment, but I feel that was overlooked in this topic. In actuality, there are few issues where the staff have to come together and form a consensus; most reports are handled by the staffer's individual judgment. This is why some reports feel lenient while others feel harsh: each staffer has their own philosophy on how to moderate the forums. Sometimes these ideals clash and those are sorted out and reasoned with in the Staff forums or the Feedback forums if necessary, but for the most part when major judgment is given it's first run by most of the staff before we go ahead with it. Obviously, this action is an exception and so the split is not only between the staff and Adnarel but also within the staff. We are currently discussing the repercussions of Bowse's ban and at the same time reconsidering the judgment and possibly other factors of this event as well. |
![]() |
|
| Adnarel | Sep 27 2011, 12:43 PM Post #25 |
![]()
I'd rather be outside.
![]()
|
I read you loud and clear, Crash. I retract my criticisms of your response; it was mostly due to miscommunication. My other points stand. |
![]() |
|
| Kiki | Sep 27 2011, 01:54 PM Post #26 |
|
Kiki Martius Chantico
![]()
|
Fair enough. I didn't join the decision-making process, but I watched it happen while on a skype call with a friend. I didn't object to the ban, so I guess I'm part of it. Sorry, Bowse. It would have been better if someone had just talked with you. Mistakes happen, guys. That's how we learn. There was a topic made in the staff forum about fifteen minutes before this one where discussion has been underway about possible rule reform and whatnot. Overall, I'd wager that staffers will be more thoughtful when it comes to discipline in the future. |
![]() |
|
| Ian889 | Sep 27 2011, 03:43 PM Post #27 |
|
Death comes to all of those who oppose me.
![]()
|
Ian agrees with andy, and satty for once? at least in part. This is unheard of. As far as the sexual nature of the temple goes it's always been that way at least a little bit. I would say it has advanced a little bit. Considering that calling someone an orange is based off of a topic I made. I don't think that Ulta was out of line because he/she is uncomfortable with being called an orange or their sexuality. The lack of moderator togetherness is exactly what I have had a problem with numerous times before. I am not calling it that the lone staffer is bias against bowe (Although it is possible, as well as a number of other human factors), but when you have less than half of the votes I don't think you should at least have the majority of the votes before such a thing goes into place. I don't think waiting a day or two could have hurt if you could have had an agreement upon the staffers for actions. They could have said bowse you are under consideration for a ban, and then reached a verdict together or made a vote. |
![]() |
|
| DJ Octavio | Sep 27 2011, 03:55 PM Post #28 |
![]()
Check out my spicy wasabi beats
![]()
|
Since most people probably already know by now, (mostly due to the fact that all other staffers have posted in this topic by now) I'll come forward and say I was the one who modded Bowse. I did exactly what I did because that is how our rules that were voted in by the members declare we handle these things. This also isn't the first time someone's been banned for a day for these reasons either, I find it funny that it only comes up now. I'll also note that I still have not been approached personally by the accused, only by third parties, who demand I explain myself. Did I step over the line with this ruling? Maybe. Will I take this into consideration for future moderations? Maybe. Do I feel regret for taking this action here? No. I did what we've been charged to do, when we're needed we enforce the rules that have been declared and accepted by the community. I'll also note that the way everyone is reacting here it sounds like everyone thinks we permabanned him, which isn't the truth at all. He got a 24 hour ban, and that ban will be up in a few hours and he'll be back posting. This topic is undermining the steps I was taking to try to work with the staff to fix this problem, however. After I was approached once again by Adna, I made a topic in the staff forum to gather feedback on the decision, and I thought we could handle it from there. However, waking up to see this topic thrown at, essentially, me, is pretty disheartening, especially since I rarely actually have the need to do any moderation on this forum. We'll continue to talk about this and come to a conclusion on future policy, but I'll openly declare that I didn't do anything that violated what we said we would do in these situations. |
![]() |
|
| Saturos | Sep 27 2011, 03:58 PM Post #29 |
![]()
heart-under-blade
![]()
|
That's just it, Ryu. xD It's not necessarily an attack against you, we're discussing the system or way we have of doing things at the moment, and if it needs to be fixed, how to fix it. |
![]() |
|
| Adnarel | Sep 27 2011, 04:08 PM Post #30 |
![]()
I'd rather be outside.
![]()
|
|
![]() |
|
| Sundancer | Sep 27 2011, 04:42 PM Post #31 |
|
Stargazer
![]()
|
I agree that from all the evidence I've seen, speaking both to Bowse and what has been said in this thread, that the decision - whichever staffer decided on this, I really don't care about that - was unfair. I don't think Bowse is totally free of being warned/punished/whatever for his actions, but I'm not going to get into that, that's definitely not my job. Just putting in my two cents that I definitely disagree with the process here, mruuw. |
![]() |
|
| Saturos | Sep 28 2011, 09:23 AM Post #32 |
![]()
heart-under-blade
![]()
|
Yeah, we're thinking of adopting Ian's suggestion of a day or two of discussion before issuing any warns. :3 |
![]() |
|
| UltaFlame | Sep 28 2011, 11:16 AM Post #33 |
![]()
Thanks Poui.
![]()
|
Now see, I'm not so happy about that. So if someone's being an obvious ass and wasting peoples' time and/or going too far, you're not going to take any action in favor of waiting a few days just to get more input? No! If someone's breaking the rules I don't want to have to deal with tolerating it until you come to a decision that won't get bad feelings sent at you. If anything, take an action, deliberate afterwards, and if the overall consensus is that the action taken was disproportional, end it early and have better judgment next time. That's how I feel on it. I would honestly feel like making 24-48 hours mandatory before any action is taken to be an injustice. |
![]() |
|
| Artemis | Sep 28 2011, 11:22 AM Post #34 |
![]()
Plus Ultra
![]()
|
I believe it's a good idea. |
![]() |
|
| Saturos | Sep 28 2011, 11:25 AM Post #35 |
![]()
heart-under-blade
![]()
|
Crash has further suggested something to accommodate that, Ulta, that it only be when suspensions or bans were taken into account. That being said, we did used to confer for every warning, but warnings were issued so seldom that it was never a problem. |
![]() |
|
| Seoulbowz | Sep 28 2011, 11:29 AM Post #36 |
![]()
Supergeil
![]()
|
It's a better idea to hand out justice correctly the first time, rather than suspending somebody because a few members thought they were being an asshole, and realizing you were too harsh after the fact. After you hand out judgment, it's too late to correct yourself. If the judgment was wrong, your justice system has already failed. It's better to take some time and get the judgment correct! It doesn't even have to multiple days, it could be just a couple hours. So long as the staff has a proper dialogue, and communicates to the user who is in risk of being punished properly, it's better than banning them without a second thought and realizing later that you may have made a mistake. If you do that, then you failed as a staff. You handed out an improper punishment on a member that did not deserve said punishment. The system your post suggests comes off as awfully close to "guilty until proven innocent" which is not a good way to conduct business at all. |
![]() |
|
| UltaFlame | Sep 28 2011, 11:34 AM Post #37 |
![]()
Thanks Poui.
![]()
|
I'm not saying that. I'm saying when someone is doing something that obviously requires interference and letting them roam around continuing their negative behavior and not doing anything just because "we have to think for a couple days or it wouldn't be fair" I'm just saying, I'm not in favor of a policy that's afraid to take action. Nobody should act alone; I'm not saying "ban everyone who commits an offense" I'm saying; when something needs to get done, I'd rather not have to sit with an intolerable menace for hours or days because the staff has to wait for every single staffer to have weighed in on it. You can be too hasty, but necessitating a 24 hour period before -any- action can be taken? No, I do not like the sound of that. |
![]() |
|
| simplechild | Sep 28 2011, 11:41 AM Post #38 |
|
My only feel is murder
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
And as Satty stated earlier, we will use the notify-before-judgment mechanic for instances where suspension or ban seems imminent. Warns can be issued to stop immediate behavior, but if a user is on the brink then that's when we would consider waiting for a consensus. Most immediate action you see on the forums rarely stems from a multilateral perspective. It's usually unilateral, and therefore not properly discussed between us. Usually it works out since most judgments end in warns and post preview rather than suspension, but keep in mind that we will always run into problems regarding efficiency of moderation because the system isn't designed to be perfect. |
![]() |
|
| Adnarel | Sep 28 2011, 12:20 PM Post #39 |
![]()
I'd rather be outside.
![]()
|
I've always been a proponent of utilizing Post Preview more extensively. It is not as difficult as Crash has suggested. Post Preview may be enacted on a member who is truly being a loose cannon before enough staffers can converge and discuss how to handle the situation. |
![]() |
|
| Kiki | Sep 28 2011, 01:49 PM Post #40 |
|
Kiki Martius Chantico
![]()
|
So what do you guys think of this remedy: -Staffers take more consideration when issuing punishments in the future. -If a ban or suspension is possible, the user is notified and the entire staff discusses the possibility for a day -Immediate-action punishments are warns and post-preview. These can be done without the entire staff conferring because they are easy to take back, and need to be done quickly in order to stop a flame war or trolling spree. |
![]() |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Feedback and Suggestions · Next Topic » |














![]](http://z1.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)










3:16 AM Jul 11






