W
WizO_Adele
Guest
Coc always comes first. What rules do you feel clash?
New Code of Conduct
K
Kami no Kenshin
Guest
I don't think anything in particular CLASHES It's just.......
For example, lets say two characters in ISRP get into a fight, and the fight gets a little bloody. I myself like to put a little description into my character's wounds and what effects they have, for example, instead of saying "The sword catches Kenshin in the lower leg," I might say "there is a spray of blood as the blade strikes Kenshin across the calf. He staggers as blood begins to flow down his leg, forming a small pool,".
I guess what I'm saying is, HOW do I know where to draw the line in an ISRP description? I mean.....I'm not one to engage in most of the acts mentioned in the CoC..... (for example Cybering....) but I DO like a fair amount of description in what I'm doing....which I gues might eventually lead me to violating the CoC in a completely unintentional fashion (as in, getting a little TOO descriptive about what happens in combat).
Oh...and my other question is....are any of the boards "Rules of the Road" going to be getting rewrites?
For example, lets say two characters in ISRP get into a fight, and the fight gets a little bloody. I myself like to put a little description into my character's wounds and what effects they have, for example, instead of saying "The sword catches Kenshin in the lower leg," I might say "there is a spray of blood as the blade strikes Kenshin across the calf. He staggers as blood begins to flow down his leg, forming a small pool,".
I guess what I'm saying is, HOW do I know where to draw the line in an ISRP description? I mean.....I'm not one to engage in most of the acts mentioned in the CoC..... (for example Cybering....) but I DO like a fair amount of description in what I'm doing....which I gues might eventually lead me to violating the CoC in a completely unintentional fashion (as in, getting a little TOO descriptive about what happens in combat).
Oh...and my other question is....are any of the boards "Rules of the Road" going to be getting rewrites?
W
WizO_Adele
Guest
Which boards "Rules of the Road" do you think needs to be rewritten, and what suggestions do you have? I'm always open.
A good thumbnail for description is how others react. If people are starting to get a bit disgusted then you might want to consider toning things down. You can always ask a WizO to give you an opinion; and generally speaking unless things are extremely outlandish and really out of control you'll simply be asked to tone it down, and won't receive a warning.
A good thumbnail for description is how others react. If people are starting to get a bit disgusted then you might want to consider toning things down. You can always ask a WizO to give you an opinion; and generally speaking unless things are extremely outlandish and really out of control you'll simply be asked to tone it down, and won't receive a warning.
K
Kami no Kenshin
Guest
Oiginal post by: Wizo Adele
Wizo Adele....You seem to have misunderstood my meaning. I wasn't implying that anything needed a rewrite, I was merely asking if anything was getting a rewrite. But since you mention it.......
I think a little more clarity regarding the rules on "closed" (or otherwise limited) threads need to be clarified. As written, the rules seem to suggest that it's a violation of the rules to have a "closed" thread.
Original post by: Wizo Adele
Okay. So, I'm taking this to mean that as long as I don't delve into detail about my character's innards spilling out all over the place, I'm probably okay. In other words.....
A little slice an' dice=OK......
Texas Chainsaw Massacre=Bad.....
I think I got it......
Wizo Adele....You seem to have misunderstood my meaning. I wasn't implying that anything needed a rewrite, I was merely asking if anything was getting a rewrite. But since you mention it.......
I think a little more clarity regarding the rules on "closed" (or otherwise limited) threads need to be clarified. As written, the rules seem to suggest that it's a violation of the rules to have a "closed" thread.
Original post by: Wizo Adele
Okay. So, I'm taking this to mean that as long as I don't delve into detail about my character's innards spilling out all over the place, I'm probably okay. In other words.....
A little slice an' dice=OK......
Texas Chainsaw Massacre=Bad.....
I think I got it......
S
Silmarien Aldalome
Guest
WizO Adele - the overall ethos of the Policy is great.
But, I have several concerns - and would like to discuss several items with you please.
Before beginning, want to reinforce that I agree that harm-avoidance by avoiding racial, homophobic, etc comments is a great idea.
But having posted for a while now - I've identified another kind of harm. See below, under "On-Topic" section.
Two points:
1. By fiercely regulating the on-topic/off-topic agenda - the policy creates disruption, unease, anxiety, and a sense of intrusion. It's the "will the mallet come out of the sky" factor for a post that is not strictly on-topic. That is - the policing itself is harmful in this instance. It disrupts sense of Coummunity. Both these points contravene WotC policy.
While 'policing' is needed to some degree - for the other kinds of harm you've described, I think WotC have gone too far with some of their distinctions.
2. Items frequently do naturally overlap - and the distinction between "zones" here at WotC is in many senses an artificial dichotomy.
The one that I have the greatest problem with is the role-play/non-role play distinction. Even the players handbook uses role-play "posts" to highlight it's rules by example.
Role-plays bring dead-code to life - they inspire posters, warm up threads, and have many pro-social functions.
So, what is so wrong about using a role-play example to demonstrate a rule-of order? How do you really separate role-play from rules discussions - when the two are deeply interactive?
Why is WotC so invested in this particular distinction? And how does WotC's investment into the delineation between Role Play and non Role Play assist to build a better community? How does is stop harm? How does the policy cause harm?
Isn't "community" about fun? And where's the harm in some overlap?
Spam is a social lubricant. It keeps threads "warm" as opposed to clinical, hard, compassionless and cold. Spam makes us laugh, it can really be used to break the tension. It has a whole host of functions for actually avoiding harm. A whole host of pro (c.f. anti) social functions.
Isn't harm about anti-social behaviour??? So, why should WotC policy discourage pro-social behaviour? What for?
My conclusion is "it's not the spam - it's how you use it". And I would like to see several things changes in WotC policy.
1. Diversification of your policy on the On-Topic/Off-Topic item. Some off topic posting is impossible to avoid, and is great for thread-life.
2. A revision to acknowledge that your policy, being about harm avoidance, might consider how to "loosen the hold" on some of the areas (see above comments about on-topic/off-topic). The central point being that "policing" is intrinsically threatening - and potentially harmful - and as such, should be used for "real" harm avoidance (ethnic slurring, homophobia) not for an imagined harm (on-topic/off-topic).
3. Acknowledgement that Spamming has multiple uses, and to write a policy that actually permits some spamming - provided the spamming is used for prosocial purposes.
An exmaple "Please use spamming prosocially - and limit it to only a proportion of the thread's content."
E.g. "You may use Role-Plays to highlight a technical point - or to have some fun - but limit the use of role-play posts on non-role-play boards. We recommend no more than about 20% of posts...."
Looking forwards to your comments.
Thank you
But, I have several concerns - and would like to discuss several items with you please.
Before beginning, want to reinforce that I agree that harm-avoidance by avoiding racial, homophobic, etc comments is a great idea.
But having posted for a while now - I've identified another kind of harm. See below, under "On-Topic" section.
Two points:
1. By fiercely regulating the on-topic/off-topic agenda - the policy creates disruption, unease, anxiety, and a sense of intrusion. It's the "will the mallet come out of the sky" factor for a post that is not strictly on-topic. That is - the policing itself is harmful in this instance. It disrupts sense of Coummunity. Both these points contravene WotC policy.
While 'policing' is needed to some degree - for the other kinds of harm you've described, I think WotC have gone too far with some of their distinctions.
2. Items frequently do naturally overlap - and the distinction between "zones" here at WotC is in many senses an artificial dichotomy.
The one that I have the greatest problem with is the role-play/non-role play distinction. Even the players handbook uses role-play "posts" to highlight it's rules by example.
Role-plays bring dead-code to life - they inspire posters, warm up threads, and have many pro-social functions.
So, what is so wrong about using a role-play example to demonstrate a rule-of order? How do you really separate role-play from rules discussions - when the two are deeply interactive?
Why is WotC so invested in this particular distinction? And how does WotC's investment into the delineation between Role Play and non Role Play assist to build a better community? How does is stop harm? How does the policy cause harm?
Isn't "community" about fun? And where's the harm in some overlap?
Spam is a social lubricant. It keeps threads "warm" as opposed to clinical, hard, compassionless and cold. Spam makes us laugh, it can really be used to break the tension. It has a whole host of functions for actually avoiding harm. A whole host of pro (c.f. anti) social functions.
Isn't harm about anti-social behaviour??? So, why should WotC policy discourage pro-social behaviour? What for?
My conclusion is "it's not the spam - it's how you use it". And I would like to see several things changes in WotC policy.
1. Diversification of your policy on the On-Topic/Off-Topic item. Some off topic posting is impossible to avoid, and is great for thread-life.
2. A revision to acknowledge that your policy, being about harm avoidance, might consider how to "loosen the hold" on some of the areas (see above comments about on-topic/off-topic). The central point being that "policing" is intrinsically threatening - and potentially harmful - and as such, should be used for "real" harm avoidance (ethnic slurring, homophobia) not for an imagined harm (on-topic/off-topic).
3. Acknowledgement that Spamming has multiple uses, and to write a policy that actually permits some spamming - provided the spamming is used for prosocial purposes.
An exmaple "Please use spamming prosocially - and limit it to only a proportion of the thread's content."
E.g. "You may use Role-Plays to highlight a technical point - or to have some fun - but limit the use of role-play posts on non-role-play boards. We recommend no more than about 20% of posts...."
Looking forwards to your comments.
Thank you
T
Tenzhi
Guest
I think the problem is the definition of SPAM. Any given thread is a flow of conversation and conversation is a river that creates its own, often meandering course. Around here, every bend in the river is labelled SPAM - and if you take every bend out of a river you wreak havoc on the surrounding environment.
Dammed if you do, dammed if you don't...
Dammed if you do, dammed if you don't...
W
WizO_Pounamu
Guest
You will not get beat up for one off-topic post but you may be "poked". Constantly trying to get people to talk about something that has utterly nothing to do with what they came for (eg "does this color make me look fat?" 
) is annoying and harmful to the rest of the room.
I think the point you are missing is the level of tollerance. There is a difference between something meandering off the topic and someone trying to derail it. If it meanders off, it may well meander back on. That is natural in conversation and if new people join in, they can still figure out why you're now talking about clerical humour when the name of the thread is "how to get rid of a rabid zombie" and if they have a question to ask the topic returns to answer it.
It's a different story if someone insists upon comparing everything to what they saw on "Friends" last night and would Joey be able to beat your cleric up.
Erm... I think you'll find that if you are using a role-play example in a discussion, people will recognise it as an example, not just role play.
If you take comments as attacks and try to fight people or pretend that you and your character's partner are using the room for a camp site, its disruptive. 3min of role play is one thing. 15 min is another.
The opposite is also true. Most players do not jump into the in-character only ISRP rooms to hear how someone's sword should have lopped off someone else's head because "they didn't even have any stats and I'm 20lv so there!" If people want to talk about things the rest of the room doesn't need to hear, they are free to use Private Messages.
As for Spam, I personally don't see how a discussion "needs spam" to flow. General humour is not spam. Intentionally posting something pointless is spam.
If a thread or discussion needs pointless or intentionally annoying posts to get traffic, the thread is dead my friend, move on to the next topic.
) is annoying and harmful to the rest of the room.I think the point you are missing is the level of tollerance. There is a difference between something meandering off the topic and someone trying to derail it. If it meanders off, it may well meander back on. That is natural in conversation and if new people join in, they can still figure out why you're now talking about clerical humour when the name of the thread is "how to get rid of a rabid zombie" and if they have a question to ask the topic returns to answer it.
It's a different story if someone insists upon comparing everything to what they saw on "Friends" last night and would Joey be able to beat your cleric up.
Erm... I think you'll find that if you are using a role-play example in a discussion, people will recognise it as an example, not just role play.
If you take comments as attacks and try to fight people or pretend that you and your character's partner are using the room for a camp site, its disruptive. 3min of role play is one thing. 15 min is another.
The opposite is also true. Most players do not jump into the in-character only ISRP rooms to hear how someone's sword should have lopped off someone else's head because "they didn't even have any stats and I'm 20lv so there!" If people want to talk about things the rest of the room doesn't need to hear, they are free to use Private Messages.
As for Spam, I personally don't see how a discussion "needs spam" to flow. General humour is not spam. Intentionally posting something pointless is spam.
If a thread or discussion needs pointless or intentionally annoying posts to get traffic, the thread is dead my friend, move on to the next topic.
Pou pretty much covers it. The CoC as it is enforced by WizOs is quite liberal. We hire WizOs based on their sound judgement to make a call on the spot and this has generally worked out well.
WizOs often let discussions wander a bit off topic if they seem self-righting. Same with humor. They generally gauge the mood of the room/thread and intent of the poster/chatter and act accordingly.
WizOs don't "bring a hammer down" on any but the most egregious offenders. Most WizO policing is in the form of a PM or email that asks the poster/chatter to get back on track or refrain from a certain thing, thanks much.
While the off topic/on topic distinction can be made within ISRP about too much OOC chat, the basis of this rule is largely to let RPG Live live peaceabley next to ISRP. It isn't a Wizards imposed segregation, but rather a ground up created rule so that people with differnt interests do not have to be subjected to chat they arent interested in. Lots of folks find IC stuff "weird" and just want to talk about their game last night. That's okay.
TCG players are even more stringent abut their segregation. ever try to bring up YuGiOh! in a Magic themed chat?
So that is the basis of the rule and how it gets used most often.
As far as spam goes, no one minds a little levity in a thread. Again WizOs use their own judgment here. Spending a little time on the boards generally gives posters a good idea where the threshold is.
WizOs often let discussions wander a bit off topic if they seem self-righting. Same with humor. They generally gauge the mood of the room/thread and intent of the poster/chatter and act accordingly.
WizOs don't "bring a hammer down" on any but the most egregious offenders. Most WizO policing is in the form of a PM or email that asks the poster/chatter to get back on track or refrain from a certain thing, thanks much.
While the off topic/on topic distinction can be made within ISRP about too much OOC chat, the basis of this rule is largely to let RPG Live live peaceabley next to ISRP. It isn't a Wizards imposed segregation, but rather a ground up created rule so that people with differnt interests do not have to be subjected to chat they arent interested in. Lots of folks find IC stuff "weird" and just want to talk about their game last night. That's okay.
TCG players are even more stringent abut their segregation. ever try to bring up YuGiOh! in a Magic themed chat?
So that is the basis of the rule and how it gets used most often.
As far as spam goes, no one minds a little levity in a thread. Again WizOs use their own judgment here. Spending a little time on the boards generally gives posters a good idea where the threshold is.
S
Silmarien Aldalome
Guest
Thank you for the responses –
I recognise generosity in the views I see here and really appreciate the thoughtfulness in the voice you guys have used. This is corrective for me in many ways – and contrasts with several other experiences I’ve had with the area of the CoC and experiences in board-moderation. In particular, the last week has been anxiety-provoking, threatening, humiliating and alarming. I feel like the thing I’ve worked six months to build is threatened. The new Foundation guidelines are threatening.
So, to see the word “liberal” – posted – on this board above was a huge relief. To see your encouragement of community, kindness, well-wishes, warmth and thoughtfulness was restorative. And (speaking now to posters at our Foundation) I also recognise that the term “liberal” should not be used as an excuse to “go too far”.
What I found most encouraging was the notion that a thread has a “tone” and provided the posts are pro-social, that there is scope for being liberal.
I really appreciated this.
I also wish to give a commitment to a course-change at the Foundation – provided it’s a fair request that is made of us. And that I’ve re-familiarised myself with the CoC and am doing the responsible thing here – overt discussion about my concerns with the CoC.
I need to add several things
– that getting a WizO post on your thread is – a humiliating, threatening, and unpleasant thing. It goes to all your subscribers’ in-boxes, and sends ripples through the Thread community. Moderation posts can disrupt well-being on the thread. It can disrupt a sense of safety in the posters, and scares people off. So – while moderation is essential for keeping homophobia, sexism etc away - I question the overuse of moderation for controlling spam and for the sake of keeping discussions “pure” (on-topic). After six months of this CoC presence in the background – when I work so hard to keep my posters happy at our Foundation – I’m needing to speak about the experience.
– The foundation I host – has a hit rate of 1 item of output for every 100 posts. I think that’s a fair and reasonable statistic – and think that to pressure us to up the ante on output isn’t fair. We keep a summary URL of our work, and use that URL to share our “goods” with WotC posters and the gen-community. Between R&D – we spam and laugh, to keep the thread “warm” “alive” healthy and happy. The 99 posts are about “breath for fun’s sake” – and is a good thing. I tried to say all this at the Foundation Discussion thread – but never got a response. No-one consulted thread-keepers and Members of Foundations directly about how we think we should work and strive to better the community here (e.g. “please post your submission for recommendations to PO Box….”). Many of us are mature members of the community – and community workers ourselves – with expertise in the “what works” to make a community healthy. Expertise aside, many of us young and old – have wisdom anyhowz about “what works”. I would have loved to have made recommendations that were heard. I don’t want to see the community I’ve worked so very hard to keep alive and happy over the last six months disrupted. I’ve seen the thread nearly die several times when we’ve tried to force/coerce a research-pure-on-topic focus. Posters just vanish because no-one wants to work too hard when they come to WotC – they want to have fun while they explore game stuff.
– To inspire output on the thread, I sometimes use a roleplay post – to “get people excited”. I can assure you – it’s a huge feat to keep people actively producing work – and it takes sensitivity, humour, energy and commitment. And there is a method to what I do.
e.g. You hear a rumbling in the mountains – and the earth groans. There is a flash of lightning and rumble of thunder. In her sleep, Silmarien has a nightmare – and in her dream, she sees the Drow – incanting in demonic tones: they have mastered the Lore of the Dark Mythal and she sees a volcano suddenly erupt to life, and from it pours forth a living ash – that is imbued with the Living Darkness of the Dark Mythal. This ash chokes the land – and you see the Elves and Half-Elves perish under the weight of Darkness.
Silmarien wakes up screaming.
Something like this – was designed to provoke the Half-Elves to “counter-produce” Foundation Output – to inspire us to create “things to save the Elves and Half-Elves”.
So, how is enmeshing this second use of role-play really off-topic? Why is it any more off-topic, than posting a question to Races about Drow and Dark Mythals? E.g. “Do Drow have the innate capacity to use the Dark Elven equivalent of High Elven magic?” Where should I post this? It overlaps with Forgotten Realms stuff. So, why should some role-play not be OK – if it is used to highlight, service, provoke, or enlighten a discussion about Players Handbook tools? And that last comment might be useful in a revision to the CoC.
So – like spam – it’s all in the definition of “roleplay” – and after many thousands of posts – my conclusion is that “it’s not the roleplay it’s how you use it”.
Again, I really appreciate the overall ethos of the CoC – but do think we can use poster-experience to think about some of the issues.
And again, my thanks for the thoughtful comments.
Cheers
stavros
I recognise generosity in the views I see here and really appreciate the thoughtfulness in the voice you guys have used. This is corrective for me in many ways – and contrasts with several other experiences I’ve had with the area of the CoC and experiences in board-moderation. In particular, the last week has been anxiety-provoking, threatening, humiliating and alarming. I feel like the thing I’ve worked six months to build is threatened. The new Foundation guidelines are threatening.
So, to see the word “liberal” – posted – on this board above was a huge relief. To see your encouragement of community, kindness, well-wishes, warmth and thoughtfulness was restorative. And (speaking now to posters at our Foundation) I also recognise that the term “liberal” should not be used as an excuse to “go too far”.
What I found most encouraging was the notion that a thread has a “tone” and provided the posts are pro-social, that there is scope for being liberal.
I really appreciated this.
I also wish to give a commitment to a course-change at the Foundation – provided it’s a fair request that is made of us. And that I’ve re-familiarised myself with the CoC and am doing the responsible thing here – overt discussion about my concerns with the CoC.
I need to add several things
– that getting a WizO post on your thread is – a humiliating, threatening, and unpleasant thing. It goes to all your subscribers’ in-boxes, and sends ripples through the Thread community. Moderation posts can disrupt well-being on the thread. It can disrupt a sense of safety in the posters, and scares people off. So – while moderation is essential for keeping homophobia, sexism etc away - I question the overuse of moderation for controlling spam and for the sake of keeping discussions “pure” (on-topic). After six months of this CoC presence in the background – when I work so hard to keep my posters happy at our Foundation – I’m needing to speak about the experience.
– The foundation I host – has a hit rate of 1 item of output for every 100 posts. I think that’s a fair and reasonable statistic – and think that to pressure us to up the ante on output isn’t fair. We keep a summary URL of our work, and use that URL to share our “goods” with WotC posters and the gen-community. Between R&D – we spam and laugh, to keep the thread “warm” “alive” healthy and happy. The 99 posts are about “breath for fun’s sake” – and is a good thing. I tried to say all this at the Foundation Discussion thread – but never got a response. No-one consulted thread-keepers and Members of Foundations directly about how we think we should work and strive to better the community here (e.g. “please post your submission for recommendations to PO Box….”). Many of us are mature members of the community – and community workers ourselves – with expertise in the “what works” to make a community healthy. Expertise aside, many of us young and old – have wisdom anyhowz about “what works”. I would have loved to have made recommendations that were heard. I don’t want to see the community I’ve worked so very hard to keep alive and happy over the last six months disrupted. I’ve seen the thread nearly die several times when we’ve tried to force/coerce a research-pure-on-topic focus. Posters just vanish because no-one wants to work too hard when they come to WotC – they want to have fun while they explore game stuff.
– To inspire output on the thread, I sometimes use a roleplay post – to “get people excited”. I can assure you – it’s a huge feat to keep people actively producing work – and it takes sensitivity, humour, energy and commitment. And there is a method to what I do.
e.g. You hear a rumbling in the mountains – and the earth groans. There is a flash of lightning and rumble of thunder. In her sleep, Silmarien has a nightmare – and in her dream, she sees the Drow – incanting in demonic tones: they have mastered the Lore of the Dark Mythal and she sees a volcano suddenly erupt to life, and from it pours forth a living ash – that is imbued with the Living Darkness of the Dark Mythal. This ash chokes the land – and you see the Elves and Half-Elves perish under the weight of Darkness.
Silmarien wakes up screaming.
Something like this – was designed to provoke the Half-Elves to “counter-produce” Foundation Output – to inspire us to create “things to save the Elves and Half-Elves”.
So, how is enmeshing this second use of role-play really off-topic? Why is it any more off-topic, than posting a question to Races about Drow and Dark Mythals? E.g. “Do Drow have the innate capacity to use the Dark Elven equivalent of High Elven magic?” Where should I post this? It overlaps with Forgotten Realms stuff. So, why should some role-play not be OK – if it is used to highlight, service, provoke, or enlighten a discussion about Players Handbook tools? And that last comment might be useful in a revision to the CoC.
So – like spam – it’s all in the definition of “roleplay” – and after many thousands of posts – my conclusion is that “it’s not the roleplay it’s how you use it”.
Again, I really appreciate the overall ethos of the CoC – but do think we can use poster-experience to think about some of the issues.
And again, my thanks for the thoughtful comments.
Cheers
stavros
Z
zollex5
Guest
I'd like to point out that some off-topic posts actually discourage CoC violations. Are you more likely to insult an avatar and some text or a real person? The internet itself distances people - you can't really see who I am. Off-topic posts such as "How are you?" show that there is a normal human being behind the avatar.
Just my opinion.
Zollex :mage:
Just my opinion.
Zollex :mage:
Similar Threads
