Rules Determination

[PLAYER57832]

I have to say I am of mixed feelings about this and will have to give it more thought. I am not in favor of removing porn, etc restrictions, but I don't think that was the real intent of the post. I think the intent is to get more consistantly applied rules. The problem is how to do that without being either bombastically stringent or too liberal.

Anyway, I don't care what system you have, some people will always find it unfair. I do think some specific forum accusations and pm threats should be treated more seriously, or at least as seriously as being a multis. Some of the other issues mentioned do rather take me aback, because I have not experienced or seen what is described. I found a long time ago that listing my occupation as "mom" cut back on a good deal of obnoxious commentary. I put that down becuase it was the truth, but have enjoyed some positive attitudes as a result.

That, I guess sort of sums up some of my general feelings here. No one, no site, no rules, no person or institution can truly prevent abuse. Some people just plain revel in being jerks. I ignore them and they tend to go away. When they don't, then I have found administration helpful. (note, I am talking about maybe 5-6 people I put in the 'total jerk" category in my entire CC "career").

What bothers me, what has bothered me, is when some moderators have used their mod positions to ensure that only specific viewpoints are expressed. There was a time when that was the case. It was corrected. There have also been times when the general fora seemed dominated by, well, folks who all seemed to be about 12 year old boys -- and happy to stay that way. Several of us created some sub fora in which we could discuss more serious or controversial issues in a more controlled environment. Then things began to "grow up" a bit in the regular forum and the side fora have been fairly neglected (though they still remain active for when there is need).

The one/two issue(s) that seem to consistantly be bones of contention are porn and "flaming". CC tried hosting specific areas for those types of activities, but it apparently got out of hand. The administration of CC made the decision they just did not want to host that type of activity, at least officially. However, some people still apparently engage in such during games.

This is not the only site with such a problem. The basic thing is that some people see such games as private entertainment, more or less "in their living rooms at home". But, are they really? The answer is "no". Essentially, even with pseudonyms, anything you say here is little different than something said out in the open on a street. Its not just a matter of having "public manners" ( I doubt many people would act face to face, in real life the way some do here). Administration also has to face the fact that legally, there are huge gaps, areas of untried law, areas where future laws may wind up retroactively impacting companies.... etc.

It is because of the last that CC has at times walked a tricky tightrope.. essentially keeping a pretty close hand on moderated discussions, the fora, while at the same time more or less keeping hands off the game discussions.

Anyway, just some semi random thoughts for now. I now have to go to an "incredibly urgent"/ "Earth changing" T-Ball game.

[AAFitz]

Fully disagree with said suggestion as its logic is fully flawed and seems motivated by other factors than actual positive change.

If you believe my motivation isn't for actual positive change, you can still contribute to the thread by pointing out the faulty logic. My motivation should be irrelevant to the merit or lack of merit of the suggestion.

You're someone I see as a pretty objective thinker, AAFitz, so I would really like your input on it, even if it's in disagreement with my view.

How is the logic "fully flawed"? Come on man...details!

Sorry...I gave it a quick read and it seemed like a troll, and my response was probably a little on the harsh side...but I dont really have time for it, and I genuinely dont care anymore, so, if you have a positive goal, and are looking to make positive change, I can only wish you luck with it.

[agentcom]

It's been really cool to see the moderators' perspectives come out here.

I want to add that to me the biggest problems I see with the rules are (1) the vague and overlapping nature of the baiting/trolling/flaming rules and (2) the application of the bigotry rule.

The first is pretty self-explanatory and has been discussed by others.

The second is more interesting to me. If you read the rules closely, there are actually two standards for the bigotry rules. In game chat, "any form of bigotry" is not allowed, in addition to anything that is banned by the forum guidelines, which can be read to be more lenient. This makes sense to me as I've pointed out in a C&A topic that addressed the issue. The game chat is more "unavoidable" than the forum discussion. The purpose of this site is the game, so you don't want to have bigotry being bandied about in the games.

Also, I will second the poster above (forgot who it was) that noted that it is often not bigotry that is punished. It is the use of certain words. If the mods are going to punish bad words, as I've said before, they should list those words. If they are going to look at context for actual bigotry, they should do that and not punish just for using these bad words.

Overall, I'm generally in favor of less restrictions on speech in general. But I do understand that other users feel differently and the admins have to please the customers.

[stahrgazer]

Before I weigh in with a response, who exactly in CC hierarchy is going to agree to implement these changes (if changes occur)?

99 times out of 100 we just piss in the wind.

A post by Lack would encourage me to offer my thoughts. But seeing as how this suggestion isn't going to raise revenue I doubt we're going to hear f*ck all from him.

AndyDufresne is the one that matters here, lack doesn't worry about this stuff, that's why he hired Andy.

I agree. If Andy and KingA buy in, then it's done. This sort of thing doesn't require any webmastering support.

It requires something, because the moderation of the site doesn't totally work on "what King A says." Maybe it should, but it doesn't.

Case in point I alluded to in my original comment. King A directed a player to send a pm to a mod who directed a part of the forum to discuss a disagreement. The mod didn't want the pm discussion and that mod took action that negatively affected the player on the entire forum. The mod took this action even though the mod knew the pm was only sent because King A told the player to send the pm; and then King A allowed the mod's decision to stand on the entire forum because, "we do not interfere with how forum mods direct their forums." And was allowed to stand despite the pm technically wasn't "in the forums."

[DoomYoshi]

Tldr

Also, don't care,I enjoy the site plenty. I respect the mighty bog rollers at the upper echelons. I like a quick and unpredictable dose of bigotry to keep my feet wet. Most importantly, I enjoy my right to be a troll.

[2dimes]

I don't know what I should add here. I guess I'll tell a tale.

Once many years ago I was banned for being a TB Stachewaker. I asked every one involved for a reason and never got a reply. Sometimes here it's just the way it is.

Have a great summer everyone.

[thegreekdog]

I don't know what I should add here. I guess I'll tell a tale.

Once many years ago I was banned for being a TB Stachewaker. I asked every one involved for a reason and never got a reply. Sometimes here it's just the way it is.

Have a great summer everyone.

I think the point is that it shouldn't be that way anymore. And I don't believe it is, but I have a one-sided perspective. At some point, the forum-goers should acknowledge that there are different moderators now than there were in 2008 or 2009. I don't mean this to be snarky, but when we don't ban someone for something that someone else was banned for four years ago, it may seem unfair, but we're trying to get away from the bullshit bannings.

[squishyg]

I think it would be nice if owenshooter, pimpdave, and phatscotty would stop getting banned for the sorts of posts Night Strike makes on a regular basis.

[The Voice]

On that note, it would be nice if mods were held accountable for their actions like every other player. I think it would add a great deal of legitimacy to the rules.

[jgordon1111]

On that note, it would be nice if mods were held accountable for their actions like every other player. I think it would add a great deal of legitimacy to the rules.

+1 Got to say thank you for bringing that point forward. As a MOD they are representing CC,Admin and The owner. For the rules not to be applied to them as they do to everyone else makes it look like the only thing important here is the premium players $25

If you are on the site and hold the position of Moderator,there should not be a time you are not representing CC and the owner. You have been given a responsibility to look after what happens here.

Your game play,what you say,and how you act is under a microscope that everyone looks at. If you bend the rules or show favoritism to a buddy,You make the site look bad,and inspire others to challenge rules that do not apply to everyone equally.

And every time a MOD does something along these lines,you are cheating every other player on this site and discriminating against them.

[stahrgazer]

On that note, it would be nice if mods were held accountable for their actions like every other player. I think it would add a great deal of legitimacy to the rules.

BINGO!

If you are on the site and hold the position of Moderator,there should not be a time you are not representing CC and the owner. You have been given a responsibility to look after what happens here.

Your game play,what you say,and how you act is under a microscope that everyone looks at. If you bend the rules or show favoritism to a buddy,You make the site look bad,and inspire others to challenge rules that do not apply to everyone equally.

And every time a MOD does something along these lines,you are cheating every other player on this site and discriminating against them.

DOUBLE BINGO!

[deathcomesrippin]

On that note, it would be nice if mods were held accountable for their actions like every other player. I think it would add a great deal of legitimacy to the rules.

+1 Got to say thank you for bringing that point forward. As a MOD they are representing CC,Admin and The owner. For the rules not to be applied to them as they do to everyone else makes it look like the only thing important here is the premium players $25

If you are on the site and hold the position of Moderator,there should not be a time you are not representing CC and the owner. You have been given a responsibility to look after what happens here.

Your game play,what you say,and how you act is under a microscope that everyone looks at. If you bend the rules or show favoritism to a buddy,You make the site look bad,and inspire others to challenge rules that do not apply to everyone equally.

And every time a MOD does something along these lines,you are cheating every other player on this site and discriminating against them.

I don't feel I represent CC as a whole, just my single facet. I represent the C&A forums, and the enforcement of our rules as they pertain to C&A areas of concern. I have nothing to do with any of the other areas, and feel that my opinions in regards to other areas should be taken as the opinion of just another person. In the months I have been a mod, I have really barely interacted with anyone outside of my department, and I think people have the wrong idea about us mods being some kind of borg collective. If someone put a case through C&A that wan't just "This mod is abusing his power because he kicked me out of live chat!!1!!11" or "I was given a ban by this mod because he hates me because I hate his friend because he likes the mod" about a mod, I would treat it exactly like any other case, and I would hope the other mods would too. As for mods showing favouritism, I think I just answered that, or I hope I did. I can only speak for myself, but there is no modwide conspiracy to cover up our tracks if/when we mess up. I would hope that in each area we would be treated just as a user. If a mod fired off in one of my reports, I would warn him and lock the report same as anyone else. I think all mods would act the same way.

[ender516]

The comment made by rdsrds2120 about precedents being difficult to trace is a valid one. I think the difficulty could be alleviated in part by posting a record of nearly every moderating decision to a topic associated with the rule that was applied. I say "nearly" because it might become onerous for some moderators who make many such decisions every day.

The criteria indicating that a record is needed would be:

1. did the moderator have to think more than a little about the decision?
2. did the decision provoke debate?

An answer of yes to either of these would mean we want to retain the result of the decision-making process as a precedent.

[SirSebstar]

I have read the first post and all seven pages.
Humbog i tell you. woodruffs post is filled with inaccurate generalizations, faulty assumptions and skwered logic and most of all a very bias point of view whereby purposly ignoring every bit of data that is unwelcome to him.
however i am going to assume he is is partly honest with his intentions. I am going to assume that the key question is that several highprofile cases have been out in the public, and that rampant spamming and speculation turned your head upside down.
Yes since the inception of this site the rules have changed. right alongside the community..
As i see the question of woodruff, well it would seem to me that he is asking permission to see where the line is and if he can cross it. Its not really that hard. the rules i mean. basicly, it is do not be annoying. Don't be stupid and don't behave like a little child when you don't get it your way..
Take Wicked. that was a total bust. a moderator going wild... sure it happens. since then it turns out to be the high profile exception.
now high profile players get a lid on their nose after the community has been after them for years. Sure it could have been done on day one, but then mods still are not spychic and omnicient.
to show your case is absurd, lets pull it into the real world.
thou shall not steal. pretty easy, right?! real world rule.
so you are in your moma's house and you are hungry and you take a cookie without asking. is it your cookie? no, therefor it is stealing. would a jury convict you. hell no. case dismissed.
the site rules are not made by me, but my posts and actions have influence over them, you might actually have more influence, but we all have influence. not all mods have the exact same definition. true. don't ask me about C&A works, cause I aint the judge there I don't see what they see, i don't know what they know, and i dont really want too, in general its not too hard though, its people lying about the unfair advantage they are taking advantage off and how it was always someone else who did it, and oh look he did that and got away with it. (mostly untrue, since they are already lying, facts are in short supply) but in general it is about people who purposly try ti screw things over for everybody else. I keep a tighter watch on Q&A then on discussions. does that need to be writen in stone?!. i hardly think so. if needed(hardly ever) i'll let the person know that its over the line and why.

the rules in place are not designed to be writen in stone(and a fat lot of good did this do the romans when they asked for writen rules, interpretation is still in the hands of the lawyers) they are there to give some flexability and weed out the worst. the worst, not everybody and everything that you don't agree with.
Someone sprouting bigotry in a clear and persistant manner? then report him. dont report the guy you had an argument with over every single posts where you two are flaming eachother. because then it looks like you have an alteror motive... bad mojo right there..
in short, nobody ever got banned that did not try to be a purposefull jackass. since that is the case, why do you want to change the playingfield?? unless you are stating that there are a lot of people who do not deserve to be here. on that last bit i concurr. there are a lot of people in the forum or game that are simply nightmarish, and yes they are low level jackasses, not to the level of a Wicked. Lets hope they never make it there and we can simply turn them on the good path with a friendly word, request or action. i don't seek to ban anybody, unless they force me to ban them.

in short, your story is nice to read. it looks like the barbarians are at the gates and everybody here is a closet nazi homo and/or republican (okay, that was funny)
But really, if you have specific questions, ask yourself this first.(warning: metafor for common sense) Would you mother mind if you did/say it?! if yes, then don't do it

[Robinette]

I have read the first post and all seven pages.
Humbog i tell you. woodruffs post is filled with inaccurate generalizations, faulty assumptions and skwered logic and most of all a very bias point of view whereby purposly ignoring every bit of data that is unwelcome to him.
however i am going to assume he is is partly honest with his intentions. I am going to assume that the key question is that several highprofile cases have been out in the public, and that rampant spamming and speculation turned your head upside down.
Yes since the inception of this site the rules have changed. right alongside the community..
As i see the question of woodruff, well it would seem to me that he is asking permission to see where the line is and if he can cross it. Its not really that hard. the rules i mean. basicly, it is do not be annoying. Don't be stupid and don't behave like a little child when you don't get it your way..
Take Wicked. that was a total bust. a moderator going wild... sure it happens. since then it turns out to be the high profile exception.
now high profile players get a lid on their nose after the community has been after them for years. Sure it could have been done on day one, but then mods still are not spychic and omnicient.
to show your case is absurd, lets pull it into the real world.
thou shall not steal. pretty easy, right?! real world rule.
so you are in your moma's house and you are hungry and you take a cookie without asking. is it your cookie? no, therefor it is stealing. would a jury convict you. hell no. case dismissed.
the site rules are not made by me, but my posts and actions have influence over them, you might actually have more influence, but we all have influence. not all mods have the exact same definition. true. don't ask me about C&A works, cause I aint the judge there I don't see what they see, i don't know what they know, and i dont really want too, in general its not too hard though, its people lying about the unfair advantage they are taking advantage off and how it was always someone else who did it, and oh look he did that and got away with it. (mostly untrue, since they are already lying, facts are in short supply) but in general it is about people who purposly try ti screw things over for everybody else. I keep a tighter watch on Q&A then on discussions. does that need to be writen in stone?!. i hardly think so. if needed(hardly ever) i'll let the person know that its over the line and why.

the rules in place are not designed to be writen in stone(and a fat lot of good did this do the romans when they asked for writen rules, interpretation is still in the hands of the lawyers) they are there to give some flexability and weed out the worst. the worst, not everybody and everything that you don't agree with.
Someone sprouting bigotry in a clear and persistant manner? then report him. dont report the guy you had an argument with over every single posts where you two are flaming eachother. because then it looks like you have an alteror motive... bad mojo right there..
in short, nobody ever got banned that did not try to be a purposefull jackass. since that is the case, why do you want to change the playingfield?? unless you are stating that there are a lot of people who do not deserve to be here. on that last bit i concurr. there are a lot of people in the forum or game that are simply nightmarish, and yes they are low level jackasses, not to the level of a Wicked. Lets hope they never make it there and we can simply turn them on the good path with a friendly word, request or action. i don't seek to ban anybody, unless they force me to ban them.

in short, your story is nice to read. it looks like the barbarians are at the gates and everybody here is a closet nazi homo and/or republican (okay, that was funny)
But really, if you have specific questions, ask yourself this first.(warning: metafor for common sense) Would you mother mind if you did/say it?! if yes, then don't do it

That was a fun and interesting read sir..

Not sure i would appreciate that last part as much if I were a Nazi or a Republican, but since i am more of a Libertairian I would have enjoyed it even more had you been an equal oppourtunity basher and added a marxist Democratic twinge to it... hehehee... now that was funny too...