Night of the Long Knives?

[Peacekeeper]

Originally Posted by Annette

Maer,

I greatly appreciate your productive post. You are correct - while these forums are not a profit center for Shrapnel Games, they do exist as a sales tool. Two very important components of the tool are our customers who contribute valuable content and our moderators who volunteer their time to help us maintain a peaceful, productive environment. Without their unpaid help, Shrapnel Games would have a difficult time keeping these forums open for our customers' use.

We all understand that tempers will flare and posts will be made that violate the rules we've put in place. And we appreciate cooperation when a moderator must step in to calm things down. The problem in this situation, and the reason I exercised our right to escalate beyond our infraction system, is that Sombre indicated to us that he did not intend to honor our requests to follow the standards we expect of all our users and that he would ignore future private messages asking him to refrain from using personal attacks. Would a temporary ban change his mind? So we're faced with the question, do we allow one user to post in a manner that we would not tolerate from anyone else?

you handled this poorly. Be big enough to admit it and move on.

[Peter Ebbesen]

Originally Posted by Squirrelloid

I'm not sure moderators or administrators should be able to claim privacy for decisions made in an official capacity, since those decisions should be open to scrutiny.

If this were a public discussion forum, you would have a point.

However, it is not. It is a private forum for a commercial entity with very clear rules. As most other moderated commercial forums, it bans public discussion and second-guessing of moderator actions as that sort of discussion very seldom provides any sort of benefit to the company or to customers as a whole but do take up a lot of moderator time, keeps grievances going (self-perpetuating and escalating in the worst cases), and gives a bad impression to new forum members.

As is, you may not feel sure that this is the right way for things to work, but you don't have a say.

We are essentially in a private club with clearly stated rules and your choice is to accept the rules (even if you disagree with them) or to get out of the club.

Attempted rules-lawyering of the "I don't think A warrants action B" or "surely their own rules prohibit this because they say that A=>C (if we ignore the anti-rules-lawyering clause in the rules that says that these are guidelines* and the management retains the right to do as it sees fit**)" is futile in any well moderated forum. EDIT: And in case anybody is in doubt; The REASON that it is futile is because the management does not ignore its own anti-rules-lawyering clauses or its retained right to do as it sees fit to better serve the cause for which the forums exist.

* point #1 in the banning section, "but may be tailored on a case by case basis"
** point #7 in the banning section "A permanent ban can be applied for any reason if the Admins determine it is warranted to promote the harmony of the community"


If somebody's response to moderator actions taken against him for violating the rules is to categorically reject changing his actions to avoid doing so in the future, he is likely to be kicked out of the club (for some time or forever), no matter how valuable other members consider him to be; Being popular does not exempt one from following the club rules.

How relevant is my last paragraph to the case on hand with the user Sombre? I neither know, nor care. What I do know is that the forum rules state explicitly how you are supposed to deal with disagreeing with forum moderation: sending a PM or email to the relevant moderator or administrator.


And yes... I too have valued Sombre's positive contributions to this community but I value a well-moderated forum even more. My views on game forum moderation are shaped by experiences ranging from Blizzard's WoW forums (the cesspit of civilized discourse) and Paradox' strategy forums (at the opposite end of the spectrum). The Shrapnel Games' forums definitely belong in the higher end where the signal-to-noise ratio is high and most violations of the forum rules are done when tempers occasionally flare rather than as par for the course - and I really, really, really, hope it stays that way.

[reverend]

Still I say it's bad PR to ban him and not provide ANY information - letting rumours and speculation run rampant, then closing those threads as well.

[Soyweiser]

Originally Posted by reverend

Still I say it's bad PR to ban him and not provide ANY information - letting rumours and speculation run rampant, then closing those threads as well.

Perhaps creating a subforum in which infractions and bans are listed is an idea.

[Baalz]

This community is not big or robust enough to lose the few people with enough drive to really contribute to it. Got no idea about the details of what happened, and I don't really care. Sombre was an overwhelming net positive for the community and I really can't imagine doing most anything in a single thread to change that outside of something illegal. Because he broke the forum rules? I don't think its really all that much of an exaggeration to say this sort of thing (along with all the ripple effects) is a catastrophic blow to a community that possibly can't take it. Presumably the "forum rules" are there to protect and nurture this community but its not the mods that make the community, and it's not Sombre that's assaulting it.

This is *our* forum. The people who write the mods, the people who write the guides, the people who help the newbs start games. The forum is created 100% by this community. You can argue that it's your site, but I promise if people don't feel like this is their community it is going to dry up very quickly. While you've got the undeniable power to pull the plug, you are hosting *our* community and banning people contrary to what the community wants is a surefire way to very rapidly kill it.

[Valerius]

Originally Posted by Peter Ebbesen

And yes... I too have valued Sombre's positive contributions to this community but I value a well-moderated forum even more.

Well said.

Originally Posted by Annette

The problem in this situation, and the reason I exercised our right to escalate beyond our infraction system, is that Sombre indicated to us that he did not intend to honor our requests to follow the standards we expect of all our users and that he would ignore future private messages asking him to refrain from using personal attacks. Would a temporary ban change his mind? So we're faced with the question, do we allow one user to post in a manner that we would not tolerate from anyone else?

The strange thing is that Sombre is being presented as a victim. He was asked to stop making personal attacks and refused to do so. I gather his defenders would say that the importance of his contributions outweighs the importance of forum rules. I disagree. To me, having the type of civilized forums Peter Ebessen refers to is more important (even than something crucial to the MP community like the hosting llamabeast and Gandalf provide).

[Rookierookie]

The only difference appears to be I didn't tell you that I won't follow the rules in the future.

I think that might be a major difference, just a hint.

Should you make a special case for certain members of this community? Why not? You have all the power and can rewrite the rules as required. You own these boards. The question is really why make a special case for Sombre. Because he's important to this community.

Oh, wait, wouldn't it mean banning mods and you, Annetter too? You know, for allowing some users to break rules? I'm pretty sure you know what I'm talking about Shrapnel loves some forum trolls and has different rules for them.

Now I wonder, if they do have to listen to the users, which side should they listen to.


This incident isn't something unique to these forums. Hell, I almost got kicked out of school once for doing something quite similiar. This isn't school, and it's not like one forum will make much of a difference in your life or anything.

Frankly, if I'm not happy at how a site runs things, I'm just going to walk away and never give a second glance back, because they don't deserve my attention. This isn't school or a job, where you don't really have the freedom to walk away when you want to. That's what Burnsaber says he will do in another thread, and I respect that. It's fruitless to call the people you aren't happy with "Nazis" or such and then try to get them to listen, because if they were they would certainly not listen to you, by definition. To lash out at unrelated passersby and anybody who isn't in your in-group, as some people did last night, is really quite pathetic. Makes it look as though you are taking your anger out on other people because you couldn't shake your main target.

[Raiel]

I could be wrong, but I strongly suspect that the "rules" mean little or nothing to the majority of the members of this community. They certainly don't mean a thing to me... but I rarely would consider doing something outside of most of those "rules" because, in general, they represent orderly conduct.

Perhaps Shrapnel took what Sombre said out of context of his normal behaviour. As has been said, he "can be a bit of p***k at times, but I've always just seen him as a cantankerous curmedgeonly type that does amazing work."

So, he's stepped out of line how frequently and how severely? Has his conduct actually been outside of forum guidelins on a consistent basis? No... but not because he gives a hoot about the rules. This comes across as a power trip along the lines of, "if you can't respect the rules because we made them, you're out of here."

[Graeme Dice]

Originally Posted by Rookierookie

I think that might be a major difference, just a hint.

You're presuming that rules deserve to be followed simply because they are rules. That's ridiculous.

Frankly, if I'm not happy at how a site runs things, I'm just going to walk away and never give a second glance back, because they don't deserve my attention.

I suspect that most of us are quite happy with Illwinter, but despise Shrapnel for being ineffective and incompetent. It was what, six years before Shrapnel finally admitted that they had made a mistake by not selling Dominions in digital form?. It's funny how Gandalf stopped spouting the party line about how physical media and manuals prevents piracy as soon as the game was available for download.

[Rookierookie]

Originally Posted by Graeme Dice

You're presuming that rules deserve to be followed simply because they are rules. That's ridiculous.

When I'm in somebody else's place I do follow the rules, even if it is to speak in 1337 24/7. Like I said, if I'm not happy with the rules, I can perfectly leave with no cost to myself. This isn't a situation where I might lose money or sacrifice my career by just turning away and leave.

Maybe you consider this your home, but I don't. I follow the rules here because I don't have to follow them outside of what little time I spend on the boards, and if I don't like the rules, I lose nothing by not coming here.

For what's worth, I actually don't think Sombre's perm ban was appropriate for the offense, from what information I've been able to gather. But the reactions of some of the other members are really quite jarring, for example in the communions thread last night.