Forum Toxicity - An Open Discussion

[Dmanwuzhere]

The separation point lies in the 'additional' role of a moderator. It is an additional task. Do not treat it as a perk. When a mod acts in a forum discussion, he should either refrain from participating in arguments/discussions as a mod. Else, participate in the discussion as a player and do not use your mod powers. Moderator actions should be left to non participant moderators. When you treat it as a perk, you are being partisan in blocking players.

You can't perform both tasks and then claim to be a neutral mod.

Best way is to have a checkbox for all moderators when they want to participate in a discussion. If they click on yes, they would be able to chat, but their mod features are disabled. If they click on No, then their ability to chat is disabled, only mod functionality to ban/remove texts is enabled. How difficult is that?

as much as i like this i also dislike it
it would force mods into their respective roles easily
but a mature mod wouldnt need it
when it gets to the point of a mod needing this there is no need for that mod imo

[Padrevaters]

The separation point lies in the 'additional' role of a moderator. It is an additional task. Do not treat it as a perk. When a mod acts in a forum discussion, he should either refrain from participating in arguments/discussions as a mod. Else, participate in the discussion as a player and do not use your mod powers. Moderator actions should be left to non participant moderators. When you treat it as a perk, you are being partisan in blocking players.

You can't perform both tasks and then claim to be a neutral mod.

Best way is to have a checkbox for all moderators when they want to participate in a discussion. If they click on yes, they would be able to chat, but their mod features are disabled. If they click on No, then their ability to chat is disabled, only mod functionality to ban/remove texts is enabled. How difficult is that?

as much as i like this i also dislike it
it would force mods into their respective roles easily
but a mature mod wouldnt need it
when it gets to the point of a mod needing this there is no need for that mod imo

This is the part I like. How can we be expected to behave responsibly online in a pirate's game?!? Take that!

[PhoenixKnight]

phoenix why would the root cause analysis 1a be the solution?
if it were a daycare i might agree but its not
my interpretation of the post is how to get us as a community posting less toxic posts
putting it on the mods entirely is lazy and defeats the point of an open discussion

dez said "we as a community"

while mods are part of the solution (the band aid part) as it is just a temporary fix
the real work is on/for/by the community as a whole

to be quite honest though i think the whole toxic posts complaint is a farce
here we are no toxicity in the post and there is a small percentage of the community posting

the rest of your work up in parts is sound imo but anything that just makes mods the end all action to remove toxicity will not remove the root cause
or end toxicity

1.A was not the solution but the answer to the first Why.

I listed my possible solutions at the end. I by no means indicated they are the only solutions or that they are comprehensive. I am only suggesting some


Possible solutions:
1. Implementing a mechanism to regularly remind players of the guidelines
2. Assign more moderators across time zones with multiple in the same time zone.
3. Moderators regularly go through forum posts for violations
4. More déterrant measures against violators
5. All moderators receive notification from a common mailbox when report is submitted
6. Players need to exercice sound judgement and consider the community as a whole with every post they submit or read.
7. Both players and moderators need to be vigilant

[Dmanwuzhere]

toxicity vs intent

i personally dont care what people post and i dont judge it as toxic
i judge its intent
if the intent is constructive then it gets that in return
if the intent is to be ugly then i may respond then or at a later date in the same fashion

some think the intent is hidden behind a post not considered toxic by a certain crowd
i personally dont care how you word it
if the intent is to inflame escalate or denigrate then i will respond in kind
if others see one as more toxic than the other it is normally due to relationship values of those involved
but the fact remains the first cause although worded carefully is as toxic as one that is brutally offered

feigning outrage to one and not the other is counterproductive
if you wish to root out toxicity by your own definition then it will always require judging the intent of the conversation as a whole not a single post of someone you happen to dislike
that requires honesty and in a fantasy world where one post can cost a friendship that honesty is smothered in lieu of contributing to the intent by "defending" your pals

[Captain Jack]

You cannot expect that in a society full of toxicity, these forums will have none.
I won't be tired to repeat though, that this community is well below average toxicity found elsewhere.

Forum mods are given the hard task to keep active forums while keeping toxicity low. My rule of the thumb is to leave harassments outside. Flaming cannot be left outside. Flaming cannot be banned. The difference is that in Flaming I can express my frustration (including accusations) without however calling names.

For example, below is not accepted:
CJ is a moron.
Hey CJ, you are a moron.
CJ is full of shit.

However, below is accepted:
I am fed up with CJ because xyz.
CJ messed up with specific_issue.
CJ, you are crossing the line once again.
I am not at all happy with CJ.

In general, I do not like:
-Bans
-Topic Locks

I do like:
-Warnings
-Second chances

Bans should be used:
-When user fails to cooperate.
-Repeats same violation and warnings are met.
-When a user is in rage mode.

Topic locks should be used:
-Only when there is no room for more feedback.

Topic should not be locked when they are derailed. Edits can happen instead and warnings can be issued. In general. topics lock is not advised.

Eventually, forum mods have a hard task as at one hand they are asked to keep forums active and at another they are asked to keep things civilized.
This is hard because it is freedom of speech that brings activity to the forums and it is the exact same thing that also brings toxicity.

Our best bet here is to define what is acceptable and what is not, in order for the community to operate. This is administration's responsibility and these limits have already been set. This is just a context of elaboration. More has been provided in the past and more can be provided on request. The general rules still apply: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3