I guess I just don't see the big hangup with a GM coming to a moderator when they have a crybaby and asking us to intervene/help them out/give them advice on how to move forward. Why is that so much to ask?
Discussion on Potential NES and IOT Forum Merger
- Thread starter BSmith1068
- Start date
- Status
Luckymoose
The World is Mine
Yeah, but this says you have to have an openly discussed selection process, which isn't the norm. We only really do applications to fake out the inclusivity clause when we already had decided who could be what beforehand. What comes of that?
Because staff is slow and doesn't have context for many of these. Why should I have to rely on you to handle things in the work I produce for the joy of serious, dedicated players? What do I gain from a middle man save a headache and hurry-up-and-wait mentality? Not to mention after the last such case of this, and other rulings conducted in the NES subforum, I don't particularly trust the staff to do the right thing at any point.
...If it ever starts that is... 
(No offense intended of course. Just a lot of sadness at false starts)
(No offense intended of course. Just a lot of sadness at false starts)
Does running my own count? Though I have been eying a couple of things that have come out lately and are rather tempting.
Because to move forward we are going to have to work together? Butting heads hasn't exactly produced stellar results.
ChiefDesigner
Sunset Emperor
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2007
- Messages
- 761
I would be happy to provide mentoring or revisions to anybody who feels like they're having trouble.
Lucky does not speak for all of us; please believe me when we say we are trying to make an inclusive, welcoming community, one that can can balance "growing promising players" with "preventing disruptive players from ruining everybody else's experience."
You bring up an excellent point, though, Valka -- prospective players definitely need some sort of safe space, as well as knowing who to go to for help and support. Do you have any suggestions as to what you might find useful?
Civ'ed
I ain't gotta explain a thing
hm...
Maybe a "Quick guide to NES and IOT" thread with tips for prospective players, gms, and so on?
Maybe a "Quick guide to NES and IOT" thread with tips for prospective players, gms, and so on?
Thlayli
Le Pétit Prince
Just like PDMA, which is tightened and relaxed as the individual feelings and desires of the mods change, strictness of enforcement is something that the moderators have a role in, as well. And given the extremely fragile context in which the forum currently exists, I think that both EQ and BSmith aren't going to rush to infract, delete posts, censor discussions or impose restrictions on NESers and IOTers. They know the tension could pretty much be cut with a knife right now and they don't want to aggravate it.
This whole discussion could probably boil down to the NESers saying, "We don't trust you!" to which the mods reply, "Why don't you trust us?" and this repeating over and over again. There are two ways to build trust. Either put someone in place who people do trust (and I'm sure this is being considered on some level,) or build that trust yourself through years of humility and outreach, which includes being willing to make concessions.
So far BSmith and EQ have said the right things in this thread. It doesn't necessarily translate into trust yet because the trust has been violated in the past. But over time, *if* things move forward without more crises, and the effort is seen as sustained, that trust can gradually begin to build up again.
I'm willing to concede that the mods are trying to defend a civil and fair and open forum for everyone, and that some of their traditional practices have served as a buttress against chaos in other forums with low maturity levels. I think that they, in return, are willing to concede that special communities deserve special treatment. And we'll just move forward from there.
The mods say they are looking at inclusivity rules, they're looking at PDMA reform, they're looking at new moderators. I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt and trust them to follow through with this. It might not be a popular position, but somebody needs to back down first. Also, I think the mods know that if they don't deliver, we're just going to end up here again in a few months complaining, so it's in their best interest to do something concrete as well.
This whole discussion could probably boil down to the NESers saying, "We don't trust you!" to which the mods reply, "Why don't you trust us?" and this repeating over and over again. There are two ways to build trust. Either put someone in place who people do trust (and I'm sure this is being considered on some level,) or build that trust yourself through years of humility and outreach, which includes being willing to make concessions.
So far BSmith and EQ have said the right things in this thread. It doesn't necessarily translate into trust yet because the trust has been violated in the past. But over time, *if* things move forward without more crises, and the effort is seen as sustained, that trust can gradually begin to build up again.
I'm willing to concede that the mods are trying to defend a civil and fair and open forum for everyone, and that some of their traditional practices have served as a buttress against chaos in other forums with low maturity levels. I think that they, in return, are willing to concede that special communities deserve special treatment. And we'll just move forward from there.
The mods say they are looking at inclusivity rules, they're looking at PDMA reform, they're looking at new moderators. I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt and trust them to follow through with this. It might not be a popular position, but somebody needs to back down first. Also, I think the mods know that if they don't deliver, we're just going to end up here again in a few months complaining, so it's in their best interest to do something concrete as well.
The only thing I would add to the above is that trust goes both ways. 
SouthernKing
crickety cricket
This is an excellent idea. We've had ones in the past but they're all currently suffering from neglect. IOT is somewhat better than NES at this, but neither is particularly great at telling newcomers what is actually happening with the weird maps and stories in each forum and why they should care.
Ailedhoo
wonderer
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2012
- Messages
- 7,811
The more the merrier!
Luckymoose
The World is Mine
We worked fine with Birdjaguar. Maybe we aren't the problem?
I think we can also say that the CFC mods are saying "We don't trust you!" and NESers are saying "Why don't you trust us!" in regards to running our games. Aside from one notable incident, most NES mods have been completely welcoming of new players, provided that they showed a willingness to take the game seriously, and accept the role that the mod gives them. I think most Nesers follow the Inclusive rule, but would prefer that we don't have it codified. Aside from again, the one incident, I cannot remember an instance where a mod outright rejected a player for a game.
While I try to be open with who gets what and my selection process, I do "reserve" nations for certain people. Those who have helped me with research or map making, for example, will get a spot in their preferred country. We have that in all neses to an extent, and that really shouldn't be regulated, as long as we're allowing other players to continue joining.
That being said, if you have a mod not letting people play, then the CFC mods can and should intervene.
While I try to be open with who gets what and my selection process, I do "reserve" nations for certain people. Those who have helped me with research or map making, for example, will get a spot in their preferred country. We have that in all neses to an extent, and that really shouldn't be regulated, as long as we're allowing other players to continue joining.
That being said, if you have a mod not letting people play, then the CFC mods can and should intervene.
Then I guess you are OK with the inclusivity rule then seeing how BJ wrote it (word for word I might add) with consultation with the NES community? That and the fact that the whole inclusivity issue that sparked them happened on his watch and before I was even a mod in NES?
EDIT: That was in response to Lucky...
EDIT: That was in response to Lucky...
Luckymoose
The World is Mine
I've been assured by some that if I tried to run a game on CFC they would have me banned for not letting them play. How does the system account for threats?
Report them. Threats are unacceptable regardless of who they are against.
I think it's more like "Wow, that sounds like a great game to play" and a mod saying "I don't like you, you're not allowed to play". At that point, I think it's less a threat and more of "Follow the basic rules of letting people play, which is the entire reason for having the Inclsuvity rule
Luckymoose
The World is Mine
So if I denied someone for this behavior it would be fine, and if they went through with it they would not shut down my game? If a person wishing to join knows their actions are to cause conflict, and then they black mail the mod with threats, that should be grounds for ignoring their plea entirely. Especially under witness testimony?
It wasn't a threat, it was just saying "If you run this nes, I would like to play. If you are not allowing me to play under inclusivity rules, I would report you for not following the rules". That is like saying "If you stab me in the chest, I'm going to call the police". I don't think it's a threat at that point. It's just asking for a fair chance to play in a Nes
- Status
