Yeah. Between 5 promotions (I think I got that right), a suspension, a demotion, a resign, a takeover, a rank update, a new staff rank, New rule update, and plenty of other things you need a break.
I read it all, and it seems you are operating under a long list of misconceptions on what is going on. Not only that, you actually contradict yourself in your own explanation. First you say you understand that not everything can be put up to the community to decide; but then you criticize the very idea of not making everything completely open to the community to decide.
On top of that, you are assuming that we're doing this to exert power or to be tyranical; when that's not the case. You cite the latest news thread as an example. That thread was made because people were engineering their way around the rules to hurt people & get away with it.
Now, I don't think you can, in all honesty say, stopping that form happening is in any way harmful to the community. On the same token; ANY rule made to stop this from happening, could -also- be abused by staff members. As such, steps needed taken to draw the line in the sand.
That's why I intentionally set up a situation where a heated debate would help draw the line in the sand and make it crystal clear to the staff just where the line is. On the same token, a majority of the population of this community are between 9 and 17, as a result, they are not mature enough to handle a debate of this nature without it getting openly hostile.
This isn't due to some failing on their part, or them being jerks or anything, this is just due to the fact their brain's are not done developing the necessary areas for that to work very well. The process is incomplete. Its biological.
As for censorship, which is what you are basically describing there, that is what I was preventing by making that heated debate happen so that the staff could see what to do and what not to do. It served as an excellent precedent to show the staff why rules cannot be treated as black and white, why they cannot just blindly "enforce" things.
I also needed to make sure they understood to watch for legitimate expressions of opinion, or legitimate uses of past events as an example when trying to explain something, vs. someone trying to cleverly disguise an attempt to hurt a single individual or a group.
Last but not least. You pretty much flat out claim that people were attacked or censored in the latest thread...even though I clearly stated in my final post that nobody was issued any warning points whatsoever for that heated debate, since I was the one that rigged the situation to be so openly hostile. I used a trigger I knew would start it in order to prove a point to the staff with a live example.
Further; I don't care if people express their opinions. Great. Go ahead. But watch the tone when you do. The problem we've had is that people try to start a riot by only telling part of the story, on purpose. Or by intentionally throwing personal attacks in.
Anyway, sorry for so many messages in rapid fire, but the character limits on these posts are pretty ridiculously low. To read the whole thing, just click the link under the first msg to make the rest pop out.
Truth be told, I expected quite a few people to pop up with the perception you displayed there. I will not deny that yes, some of my past rules -were- abused, maybe not intentionally, but they were abused nonetheless, by staff members. From what I can tell its usually just a misunderstanding of just how strict it was meant to be.
That's why I started that argument on purpose. I wanted to set an "example of whats bad" next to an "example of whats good" that both did a few of the same things I was speaking against...yet with one doing it right, and one doing it wrong.
Then let the heated debate force the staff to see just exactly why they need to be more vigilant, not only of user activities, but of their -own- enforcement of the rules. Being too strict isn't good for the community; yet there are some things that letting slide would be terrible for the community. That's the tough tight-rope that staff must walk every day.
;-; Help my alerts ;-; Ok I understand that they must be carefull with new enforcment as many things got bottled up unreviewed. Sometimes I came to thing that change can't be done wih people that following old habbits that long. A little refresh maybe would be healty to draw a clear line to the new area.
Bingo. That's why the rapid fire of so many earth shaking changes. I'm having to forcibly change habits that have been around for many months. Also, some of these over-strict rules are temporary solutions to help forcibly jerk habits around, in preparation for the 'real' solution down the road.
So slow adaption wouldn't work? I would be very confused as a team when its goes out like that. First we have to thread everyone as a terrorist now touching them with pink glowes again. xD Not saying that was a bad idea but indeed earth shaking a lot.
Well, plus, when I saw the flaw in how the staff handled such things, I had to make that flaw apparent to the staff in a way that couldn't be argued...this will hopefully now have the staff a bit more cautious of that type of mistake.
Nah its ok, I'm glad you brought your points up with me in the first place. As I said, I am happy to see outside opinions. I only ask they be presented in an appropriate manner; as yours was. :)
I think I got this down so I think this.could work. I came up with this as a conclusion after all of this: you are relying WAY too much on a few rules for staff to follow. You need the.communities help. To resolve flame just make a poll and lock the thread.
You are relying too much on staff.
Nah, its not that simple. If things were that simple; there wouldn't be half the problems there are already. Also, polls are useless anyway, people spoof them with alt accounts anyway, so, honestly, I never take polls seriously.
Comments on Profile Post by ShaunPoppy830