Pretty much everything I have to say on the matter has been touched on above, but I will give my thoughts nonetheless.
if anything. if nothing else can come from this post or thread, i leave my petition for the pf.co staff to incorporate a (ANTI-)TROLLING clause/entry in the updated Terms of Services and Rules.
This is in the works right now. We have a rough draft of the new rules written up that are clarified and updated now that the community is older and requiring less restriction.
In our new rules we have a rule pertaining to trolling.
As per above, a revised set of rules are in the works. Among the changes are a clause pertaining to trolling. When the changes are ready, we will be sharing them with the community for feedback.
I think we are waiting on our NSFW functionality from
@Davy Darkrage (it was completed, but Davy accidentally bricked it all
).
They are almost ready to be released to everyone to make sure everyone agrees/likes the revisions, but as John said we are waiting on Davy still
I just want to confirm that I am the reason the new rules have been in limbo for so long. The other staff here have been very quick to collaborate with each other on revisions, and have been waiting on me for a while now. I'm trying to get this wrapped up as soon as possible. Special thanks to
@Captain Redhorn for coming up with the initial draft/changes.
in a matter of speaking, i believe that the site's rules unconsciously allow abusers to bend and loop through the guidelines. the guidelines allow the trolls to play and create animosity for too long a time before action is taken against them.
Well, you're not wrong... but there are reasons for that which I believe are vital to the overall integrity of our moderation practices. I'm certainly not trying to claim we've never been too lenient where we should have been more strict, or too strict where we should have been more lenient, but overall we do try to follow protocol that considers:
1) Discussion should be as uninhibited as possible without creating a problematic atmosphere.
2) Moderators should interfere only when rules are actually being broken.
3) Moderation decisions should be made collaboratively.
The first point is
extremely difficult to balance. It's about how we come up with and interpret rules in the first place. Moderation is hard. A lot of the time, it's not easy to figure out the most appropriate thing to do. It can vary a lot on a case-by-case basis. The second part is a little easier, but sometimes it means we can't step in even if something has the potential to be troublesome... and other times it means we have to step in even when we would rather not. The last part is key to understanding how we make decisions, and why some things take so long to deal with. Often people walk a fine line with the rules, so we have to talk about it before taking action. We try to see things from both sides (I play devil's advocate a lot, as do others), and sometimes we disagree about what to do. So we have to hash it out and reach a compromise or consensus.
Shamus and Sparky both put it very well:
As a past staff member here, I can vouch that the decisions made are not one-dimensional. What I mean to say is, various members of staff have adequate time and opportunity to provide their own input on how someone specifically should be dealt with. As such, oftentimes certain things are not reacted upon as quickly as you might expect (due to the level of staff fairness and 'collaboration' which is experienced here). That is a good thing.
When we couple the above with the basic (troll) understanding that they oftentimes choose to position themselves right up to the edge of breaking a rule but don't necessarily break it, the odds themselves are not always to the staff's own favor (based upon the level of fairness held as a priority here).
I would say every now and then there is leniency on repeat offenders, but ultimately these decisions are made as a whole by a group of staffers. I know in dealing with some users, who will go unnamed out of respect for the staff (not the offenders), that often "offenses" aren't technically "offenses" but just a quick flirtation with the red line drawn. I feel the best way to answer your second part as to what gets what (behavior to punishment) though would be this:
Each person, repeat offender or not, is different.
Two different people may have never sweated on here ever.
One might have done it on accident, one might have done it purposely and used the profane word to inflict insult on someone or something. Context is one of the main factors that go into the punishment. There might be a general guideline but ultimately it is a case by case basis.
Fighting fire with fire just results in a bigger fire. I know trolls are annoying, but John had a point. If they're not breaking the rules, they can't be punished. The punishment comes after the crime, not before. So just relax a little bit.
I agree. While it can lend itself to prolonged periods of unrest, we really aim to be
reactive rather than proactive about moderation.
So if I were to titter myself along the line of trollish behavior in order to get rid of a vicious troll, those who do come on here to hurt the staff and devs I care about, that will be fine? Regardless of the fact that my intent is for good reasons, but because my actions are done in a barely rule infringing way?
I'm not going to give anything like that an explicit green-light. We do try to keep a sharp eye on anyone who gets too close to the boundaries of the rules. Intent
is something we take into consideration, and it's probably one of the most important factors in making decisions for these kinds of cases. If someone is
only here to be a nuisance, we are much more likely to intervene. If someone is careful and seems as though they are here to contribute and respond to legitimate discussion without crossing the line, we try not to get in the way... even if they're cutting it close.
And my question is: why isn't that general guide not stated?
The "general guidelines" would be the rules. Reminds me of a certain quote from the first Pirates movie. If there's further information regarding moderation practices that you (or anyone) feel is deserving of official clarification, I am more than happy to give that attention (time permitting).
As always, anyone is free to report content they want us to review. And if anyone ever has a question about why a particular action was (or wasn't) taken or feels an erroneous decision was made, they are welcome to contact me or another administrator for an explanation or correction.
a breakdown! .. will this be c/p onto the Guidelines/Rules for ppl who think of doing malicious things will know what's coming to them?
