Spring Cleaning 2023: Moderation

[RKD]

(...) the ones that haven't been as active here, have been active on our Discord within that time.

Maybe I'm just a black sheep and everyone else is indeed in both the Discord server and here in the forums, but since I'm only here I'm not entirely in favor of having staff that only (or mostly) is active on Discord. We've gotta keep in mind that each situation that appears and requires a disciplinary action needs to be considered on a case-by-case basis. If someone with power who isn't a regular here comes and see X's post and interprets it the worst way possible, it may lead to an action beyond of what is really deserving, ultimately hindering the situation even more. My perspective may sound overly-dramatic and oddly-specific, but I just don't wanna see another "Please have a good life. No hard feelings"-like almost irrepairable situation again because of that.

Granted (and I may not be saying anything new), this could easily be solved by just having a team that knows moderation in their own actions. If someone in the staff reads a post or a comment and feels the urge to go the hammer route, the recommended approach should be to go to the rest of the team and say "Hey, I interpreted this in this way. What about you guys?" and come to a conclusion then. Basically, to moderate their moderation, if that makes sense. Of course, I'm leaving aside clear cases like purposely trolling. I'm refering more to whenever a delicate matter arises.

Overall, I trust the current staff will judge better each situation from now on, but I just wanted to put into words this worry of mine anyways.

[Player701]

I tend to feel like moderators should feel less like cops and more like guides. Which is interesting, because we already have a community guide program which seems to be quite successful. Our moderation process could look more like that both in terms of responsibility and nomination/selection process, so anyone on the blue list is probably a good candidate for moving to the green list.

I agree this might be a good idea, but it's not that easy. For example, as much as I wish to participate, I realize that I'm probably not going to be very productive in this regard - primarily because my interest in Doom (and hence visiting the forums often) is very on-and-off at the moment. Granted, I still visit sometimes when I don't play (like now), but it's rare enough and mostly to check out the new scripting topics. (I consider ZScript to be the single greatest thing that happened to GZDoom, and I feel the need to help other people utilize it properly.) Aside from that, not much else - and I most certainly would not want to deal with the kinds of things that happened here recently. Having just come back after about a month of absence, I'm not sure if I understand all of it yet. I don't even know if I want to because it's really none of my concern. For me, life goes on, and that's it.

[Artbor]

Sorry if this isn't the place for this but I didn't want to make a thread or anything.
Has "Hall of Unpleasantness" (Archives > The Halls of the Dead > Hall of Unpleasantness) always been restricted?
The following thread gives me the error "You are not authorised to read this forum." (or asks me to log in if I'm not logged in)
viewtopic.php?t=77290
However apparently it was accessible to Google just a few hours ago
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/ ... Ft%3D77290

[Caligari87]

Much like Doomworld's "Post Hell," the "Hall of Unpleasantness "is a relic of a bygone era where showcasing bad behavior was sort of a funny thing and meant to be a deterrent, instead of just deleting it (as would normally happen). But over time, it's become more like a trashcan that never gets cleaned out; it just stinks up the room.

Talking with Randi and some other moderators, I decided to hide the Hall from public view. Stuff that's bad enough it needs to be split and locked, usually doesn't need to remain on-display (can remain available to moderators if it ever needs to be referenced for either transparency or investigation). Stuff that's simply off-topic for a thread can be split to appropriate forums.

As for the fact that the Google bot could access it, that was an oversight on my part (I'm still learning the permission system). That access has been removed as well.

[SanyaWaffles]

As hinted in previous discussions, I welcome this change. It seemed to glorify the very behavior it intended to repel/deter from.

[fakemai]

I don't because it was a source of mod transparency visible to the users of the site, case in point the things PB actually said. Being loser'd might have had some appeal and I may have found some amusement out of Post Hell when it existed, but nobody cares about being part of the HoU when they can just fuck with you and score points elsewhere.

[SanyaWaffles]

I can understand the change being controversial. It's just I'm a firm believer that the way it was being used under the previous administration was very much conducive to martyring bad actors and not deterring them.

I feel if it were to remain, there needs to be a strict "don't feed the trolls" policy.

Bad actors don't care about evangelical essays, just gives them more to work with in their bad corners of the internet.

[Graf Zahl]

The main problem was that it was publicly visible and still being used as a dumping ground for undesirable content. So effectively none of the undesirable content ever disappeared. It's one thing to move posts there of people acting dumb, but not for things that can really be harmful if seen by the wrong people.

I once reported a post in there that contained content that should have been hidden from public view, yet nothing ever came out of it. The report was closed and the problem post remained for everyone to see, if so inclined.

[Caligari87]

I do admit the HoU provided some level of transparency. But even that was always dependent on us actually putting stuff there, instead of just deleting or putting it in some hidden forum (which, full disclosure, also exists separate from the HoU and is what's supposed to be used for sensitive info situations like Graf is describing).

So the way I see it, there's a few situations where the question of what to do with "bad" content arises. Stuff like spam, gore/porn/hate/etc doesn't need to remain visible to the public, so we should be either removing it entirely, or putting it in a hidden "evidence" area as a sort of log for why someone got banned.

The remaining bit is usually centered around arguments and flamewars. So, if a thread gets bad enough that it needs to be split and/or locked, then should it remain available to the public?

• If yes (because of some important info or context), then it can stay locked in the same subforum, optionally with a closing statement from a moderator. No need for the HoU, and it'll fall off the frontpage naturally over tiume.
• If no, then it can be moved to a mod-only "evidence" sub-forum or removed entirely. No need for the HoU.

Ultimately, the main reason stuff ever got moved to the HoU was because we wanted to ostensibly "clean up" a problem with a note of finality, but also make sure a moderator's final words could be tacked on to the problem in a place where everyone would still see. There's also the problem of how such splits often invite meta-discussion about the split itself, usually dominated by whoever "won". The more I've grown up and the more I've thought about the problems of moderation over the last decade+, the more I feel like showcasing and encouraging that kind of behavior in the pursuit of "making an example" is almost always counterproductive and just breeds adversarial discontent.

If transparency is ever a concern, just ask me. I can provide context and/or logs if it's Really That Serious.

[SanyaWaffles]

I once reported a post in there that contained content that should have been hidden from public view, yet nothing ever came out of it. The report was closed and the problem post remained for everyone to see, if so inclined.

... that's disturbing to say the least. Given the kind of stuff that was in there to begin with.

Yeah, if that's the kind of stuff being shoved in there, I can do without the Hall. Even with new administration in play, something I don't wanna see chanced again.

[fakemai]

Realistically most of post hell's additions weren't disputed or interesting on their own, although the condescending walls of text and "getting the last word in" by the mods, that I despised, and it reflected a problem attitude towards users. I'd mainly just stop with that outside of a basic explanatory reason and maybe rename the subforum since, and you should know this already, people will save posts that they think are important, especially when there's a lot of attention to an issue. It's not really under your control and I just don't see much point to hiding it for that reason. If anything usually it indicated you're doing your job.

[cyber_cool]

So effectively none of the undesirable content ever disappeared. It's one thing to move posts there of people acting dumb, but not for things that can really be harmful if seen by the wrong people.

If you get hurt by looking at some words on a monitor, don't look at them. Don't go to the forum that is named "Hall of Unpleasantness" and expect to see only positive things. It's like clicking on a youtube video documentary about a murder and complaining in the comments that it ruined your day and it should be deleted.

It wasn't a bad idea to keep posts that were banned for being a) controversial b) offensive in there purely for the sake of transparency. Just silencing users instead is a change for the worse.

[Graf Zahl]

So effectively none of the undesirable content ever disappeared. It's one thing to move posts there of people acting dumb, but not for things that can really be harmful if seen by the wrong people.

If you get hurt by looking at some words on a monitor, don't look at them. Don't go to the forum that is named "Hall of Unpleasantness" and expect to see only positive things. It's like clicking on a youtube video documentary about a murder and complaining in the comments that it ruined your day and it should be deleted.

It wasn't a bad idea to keep posts that were banned for being a) controversial b) offensive in there purely for the sake of transparency. Just silencing users instead is a change for the worse.

Sorry, pal, but that's just some really stupid attitude. There's people around here who won't think one bit before posting stuff that may harm other people - and a few times it happened that such posts were just moved off to the Hall of Unpleasantness instead of outright dumping them. And then when they got reported, nothing more happened.
But I guess that concept goes over your head. "Words on a screen" can be some of the most harmful things that exist.

[yum13241]

And don't forget that online crimes exist too, if I started sending death threats to Graf, or anyone really, that person has every right to get me punished.

And getting doxxed is a whole nother story. Tell your family you love them, because you're probably dead at that point*.


*Not legal advice, I am not, in any way, shape, or form, responsible for what happens.

[cyber_cool]

And don't forget that online crimes exist too, if I started sending death threats to Graf, or anyone really, that person has every right to get me punished.
And getting doxxed is a whole nother story.

Can you stop acting like a retard? I clearly wrote "It wasn't a bad idea to keep posts that were banned for being a) controversial b) offensive"
Where the fuck is any mention of doxing or death threats? It's the same as spamming gore or nsfw and should be immediately removed and the user banned, because there is nothing to see here. I didn't say at any point that it was OK to leave it for anyone to see.

But I guess that concept goes over your head. "Words on a screen" can be some of the most harmful things that exist.

I guess I can't convince you that's what Internet is and that noone cares about your feelings out there. Following your point of view, if one goes on 4chan or a slightly racist Discord server their brain will literally explode from all these "harmful messages". Please consider this. It's not a private club. It's not a family. It's not a bunch of friends. It's not any kind of "friendly" environment. We give a shit about each other only because of Doom, Doom mods, Doom engines, and other Doom-related things.

I am making these useless posts because I want to see things actually improve after this whole shitstorm and staff change. But the first real change I see is, without a doubt, for the worse. It can't start like that. As I mentioned over and over in the thread about Marisa, hiding any kind of information that is directly related to moderation decisions is a harmful move. YOU HAVE ALREADY SEEN THE CONSEQUENCES. Why do you have to repeat the same mistake?

User was warned for this post ~~Caligari87