Request

[niklinna]

Given that EN World would absolutely be poorer without Snarf here, and that his account won't be deleted until Monday, I hope the mods are discussing ways to fix this, since it was one of their own that precipitated this unfortunate state of affairs. At the very least, a public apology might go a long way towards hopefully getting Snarf to change his mind.

It was Snarf who precipitated this unfortunate state of affairs, with the comments quoted in the moderation post. We are all free to stay or go, and if somebody wants to walk away after being reminded to treat others well, that's their prerogative.

 

[Malmuria]

It was Snarf who precipitated this unfortunate state of affairs, with the comments quoted in the moderation post. We are all free to stay or go, and if somebody wants to walk away after being reminded to treat others well, that's their prerogative.

Not sure this is the place to discuss it, but the offending paragraph was this

....which doesn't work. It's why most of the thoughtful 5e players don't engage in these lengthy ... threads ... with the same conversations. It's pointless to try and discuss a bad example (with some people who don't even play the game) with exemplars from other games.

In sum, the position is that that people criticizing 5e in that thread are not players of 5e, and thus "most" (not all) posters who play 5e had dropped out of the discussion by that point. The mods interpreted this as saying the other commenters in the thread were "not thoughtful," but that's weird; the thrust of it was doubt that the discussion by that point was operating in good faith. The other post that got moderated in that thread was much more pointed and impolite.

The mods have a difficult job. A lot of the arguments in threads devolve into Team A and Team B, with people "liking" only the posts from their teams. I think what could be effective is if you ("you" in the general sense) see someone being impolite who is otherwise on your "team" to, instead of liking their post let them know that they might be coming across as overly aggressive or condescending.

 

[Umbran]

Not sure this is the place to discuss it

It is not. We don't publicly discuss individual moderator actions.

 

[Malmuria]

It is not. We don't publicly discuss individual moderator actions.

ok

 

[Blue]

Given that EN World would absolutely be poorer without Snarf here, and that his account won't be deleted until Monday, I hope the mods are discussing ways to fix this, since it was one of their own that precipitated this unfortunate state of affairs. At the very least, a public apology might go a long way towards hopefully getting Snarf to change his mind.

Oh gods, I hope not. Mods won't be able to do their job if they feel that if they happen to give a single warning to a prolific poster will cause a backlash and a forced public apology. An apology, that forced, is probably not sincere.

Also, considering Snarf's comment in this thread:

There's not much else to comment on, other than I respect the hard and thankless work that is done to keep this website running so well.

It does not seem like they are pushing against the moderation. Which makes it more likely that it's a bigger issue or issues and the moderation was just the straw that broke the camel's back. Leading to an apology not correcting the issue either.

Basically, I disagree complete with the concept of moderators having to tiptoe around giving out moderation and being forced to give apologies if someone is upset for having earned one. They have to read us at our worst, and do so to keep the whole site better for everyone.

 

[Fifth Element]

Heck, I walked away, for like a year.

Burnout is a thing. It happens. It is certainly better to walk away than to be miserable.

I've only recently returned from being away for like eight years. The site has improved since that time. Far fewer toxic posters.

 

[Lazvon]

Me too. Has been about 17-years for me though. Joined when some folks in a campaign I was in recommended it and then I forgot about it. Started playing 5e with the kids, and rediscovered it.

Really there are only about 5 posters that annoyed me (until I clicked ignore) with their constant back and forth posting, showing they weren’t really listening or evolving their opinions. Instead, just seems they want to be right or have the last word by dragging down a thread. With those 5 ignored, forums have been great for such a large population. Folks sometimes need reminding to keep it great; but again, amazing it generally works the last couple of months I’ve been back.

 

[Cadence]

Selfishly*, using ideas from above, @Snarf Zagyg should ask for a one year ban, save up and just dump some big post on us at the one year mark, and then ask for another one. We can call it Snarf Day and celebrate by burning bard character sheets and ordering pizza only from places that don't have pineapple.

* Me being selfish, that is.

 

[Eric V]

Given that EN World would absolutely be poorer without Snarf here, and that his account won't be deleted until Monday, I hope the mods are discussing ways to fix this, since it was one of their own that precipitated this unfortunate state of affairs. At the very least, a public apology might go a long way towards hopefully getting Snarf to change his mind.

I hope you're not blaming the mod...

 

[aia_2]

Re-logged in just for this. I apologize for the confusion- I just want my account deactivated. The other thing was a reference to the precipitating event, not a request for deletion of likes. I wasn't trying to be unclear.

I am with you, Snarf! You have all my shympaty! You could not take a better decision. I wish i will meet you on other boards as i enjoyed reading you!

 

[Lanefan]

It is not. We don't publicly discuss individual moderator actions.

Which while understandable from one angle may, from another, be part of the problem.

Once in a while a mod action really is puzzling (my current example is what seems like a completely harmless thread here in Meta titled "Trades" was locked); in these cases the ability to publicly ask why it was done and get a public answer would be appreciated.

 

[Morrus]

Which while understandable from one angle may, from another, be part of the problem.

Once in a while a mod action really is puzzling (my current example is what seems like a completely harmless thread here in Meta titled "Trades" was locked); in these cases the ability to publicly ask why it was done and get a public answer would be appreciated.

You can ask questions in meta. That’s what it’s for. In that case, the question was asked and answered.

But having mods forced to defend at length every single decision (because that’s what that would be) = not having mods. And a mod-free community is not the sort of community I’m interesting in hosting. There are plenty of places like that out there for those who want them. This ain’t one of them.

 

[Umbran]

Which while understandable from one angle may, from another, be part of the problem.

Yes, well, perfection is denied us in this life. We make do with what we can.

Once in a while a mod action really is puzzling ... ; in these cases the ability to publicly ask why it was done and get a public answer would be appreciated.

Oh, we understand it would be appreciated. But it would be an unsustainable practice.

 

[R_J_K75]

@Snarf Zagyg should ask for a one year ban, save up and just dump some big post on us at the one year mar

I bet there's phonebooks smaller than this post would be. Well not anymore, they don't make phonebooks. Hopefully this is a case of a bad day, misunderstanding, or we could've all handled the situation better, and it'll get worked out. If it's a case of all sides sticking to their stance, then sometimes it's better to just walk away.

 

[Muso]

Toxic people are part of D&D forums. I recently left an Italian famous forum (considering Italian standards for "famous" with respect to international forums ). Few toxic people made funny people to move away and now they can speak within themselves. I don't want to see it also here (OK, here you need tons of toxic people to make all the nice people to leave, but in the Italian forum it started with few nice persons leaving). Just take a break or ignore toxic people, but stay here.

 

[Mallus]

Godspeed Snarf! Here's hoping you either decide to stay or return at some point in the future. You had great taste in film, if somewhat questionable taste in Italian pastry...

 

[overgeeked]

Apologies, but not all red text is created equal. Mod actions, i.e. telling posters to stop breaking the rules is one thing, but snarking at posters in red text should not be covered by those same forum rules of no discussing mod actions. If any non-mod poster had told another to "go have a snickers" the mods would rightfully red text that post. Yet, in this case, it's a mod and done in red text...so it's somehow above reproach. That's a bit much.

 

[Umbran]

Apologies, but not all red text is created equal. Mod actions, i.e. telling posters to stop breaking the rules is one thing, but snarking at posters in red text should not be covered by those same forum rules of no discussing mod actions. If any non-mod poster had told another to "go have a snickers" the mods would rightfully red text that post.

We already noted that we do not, and will not, be discussing individual moderations in public. Please respect that - it is in the rules, you know. Those aren't in abeyance here.

Yet, in this case, it's a mod and done in red text...so it's somehow above reproach.

Not really. We answer to Morrus, since he's the one who owns the place. If he doesn't like something we do, he tells us. If we ever did anything he felt was way out of line, I would expect him to boot us from the role.

 

[FrogReaver]

This seems as good a place as any to say this. One trend that I'm noticing more and I'm very pleased to see is mods red texting threads with a general warning to be nicer to each other first and then proceeding to mod more strictly after that. I don't know if this was planned or just coincidence or heck, maybe it always happened and I'm just now noticing, but it's a practice I think most of us likely appreciate. Obviously, this can't be a 100% all the time thing but I wanted to give props.

 

[overgeeked]

We already noted that we do not, and will not, be discussing individual moderations in public. Please respect that - it is in the rules, you know. Those aren't in abeyance here.

Right. And that’s the problem. I’m not interested in talking about this mod enforcing the rules. I am curious about this mod breaking the rules. Telling a poster to “go get a snickers” is not something anyone else would get away with. We all know that. That’s a problem. The mods should not be above the rules.