New rule against offsite harassment

6 minutes ago, stewboy said:

I don't think dew's comments came 'out of nowhere'.

no, he brought up something from 8 years ago with him for some reason.
So, its a personal problem of him, its seems.
And yes... crickets.
becuase, as it been said before, there is a fear to the moderator and how they act.
Again, if three moderators were there, and nobody said anything about another moderator insulting a member, is that right?
are you ok with moderator insulting members?
or you are more interested on what happened 8 years ago?
nothing rings a bell for you on that situation?

aside from that, the point is clear:
is a moderator job to insult and harass a regular member?


 

Thread still locked, but I've updated OP's followup with some clarifications based on comments here in this thread.

All I want is peace between the two sites. This rule was definitely needed.

Well played, DW staff.

A couple of comments & observations:

- A oversized list of rules and regulations really isn't needed. Surely a simple "be nice to each other" should be enough?

- Doomworld is not the only forum in existence. If you feel an overwhelming need to express prejudice against a particular segment of the world's population, why not find a more appropriate location to do so? (Reddit or 4chan, for example.) Or to put it another way, in real life would you discuss the same topics and express the same feelings to your family, close friends, and work colleagues, or would you limit these between the different groups?

- This is a Doom forum. If you're a Christian fundamentalist who has strong feelings against homosexuals/soldiers/non-white people/members of other religions/etc I'm pretty sure if other members of your congregation found out you enjoyed playing violent video games, they would have choice words for you as well!

1 minute ago, NiGHTMARE said:

A couple of comments & observations:

 

- A oversized list of rules and regulations really isn't needed. Surely a simple "be nice to each other" should be enough?

 

- Doomworld is not the only forum in existence. If you feel an overwhelming need to express prejudice against a particular segment of the world's population, why not find a more appropriate location to do so? (Reddit or 4chan, for example)

 

- This is a Doom forum. If you're a Christian fundamentalist who has strong feelings against gays/soldiers/non-white people/etc I'm pretty sure if other members of your congregation found out you enjoyed playing violent video games, they would have choice words for you as well!

Do you have specific people you're thinking of when you say these things, or is it maybe just like a boogeyman made of straw?

I'm just highlighting a few repeated themes I noticed in posts made over the past 7 pages of this thread.

Calling out specific posters would kind of go against the "be nice to each other" rule!

46 minutes ago, NiGHTMARE said:

- A oversized list of rules and regulations really isn't needed. Surely a simple "be nice to each other" should be enough?

If that were sufficient, this thread wouldn't exist, and you probably wouldn't need moderators at all.

49 minutes ago, NiGHTMARE said:

- Doomworld is not the only forum in existence. If you feel an overwhelming need to express prejudice against a particular segment of the world's population, why not find a more appropriate location to do so? (Reddit or 4chan, for example.)

Sure, but the point of the new rule is that it applies to your actions in those other places, hence the "offsite" in the thread title.

54 minutes ago, Nine Inch Heels said:

And what exactly is preventing anybody from creating an account on some other site that goes under the very same name as another forum member in an attempt to get the actual DW forum member banned due to supposed off-site misconduct...?

Nothing.

But can we do anything about that ?

Not intervene when doomworld harassement continues out of DW ?

Trying to stop offsite harassment is better than not doing it.

17 hours ago, Major Arlene said:

We have been working on an FAQ/rules list which will be ready to post shortly. We recognize the lack of clear rules is less than ideal.

finally while i didnt mind the lack of rules before hand i think this will be for the best

1 hour ago, Nine Inch Heels said:

And what exactly is preventing anybody from creating an account on some other site that goes under the very same name as another forum member in an attempt to get the actual DW forum member banned due to supposed off-site misconduct...?

THIS is what really concerns me, it's easy to fake images and impersonate another being

10 minutes ago, JezChrist said:

Nothing.

But can we do anything about that ?

Not intervene when doomworld harassement continues out of DW ?

Trying to stop offsite harassment is better than not doing it.

So why should anybody support a rule that can be turned against anyone at will and with permanent consequences, for that matter..? You realize that, all politics and whatnot aside, this is basically just putting different people at risk of "hate campaigns" instead of actually solving anything, right..?

EDIT: To be fair, there's lots of stuff going around and about that is just not possible to "solve", however, unless you happen to be fortunate enough to have somebody who matters on speed-dial, some internet troll may just target you for the lulz... Alternatively you may have had beef with somebody, and they decide to play a friendly round of "among us" at your expense...

7 minutes ago, Nine Inch Heels said:

 

So why should anybody support a rule that can be turned against anyone at will and with permanent consequences, for that matter..? You realize that, all politics and whatnot aside, this is basically just putting different people at risk of "hate campaigns" instead of actually solving anything, right..?

and what you propose instead?
Because critizicing something, looking for the weak point on the argumentations is easy.
Most of us already know that it will be use for bad sometimes, and probably Mordeth, too.

as some other members said, its better than nothing.
And also, the people in the job of doing the recollection of the information in the diferent cases, if sentences are not rushed, they would probably be able to see if there is an impersonator or not.
Everybody has quirks, and those are inimitable at some extent.

So, what is your propose to stop that from happening?
Or this is just an speculative matter to you?

I think its better to try and help our fellow harassed members, than not help because an ill-minded individual might act in a very cunning way.

The flat ratio of people helped against people bothered would be positive.

For me it stays the better choice.

I think moderators should answer the question of NIH (and I asked something similar on page one and was ignored), not random users. How will you ensure the reports are legitimate?! 

9 minutes ago, P41R47 said:

and what you propose instead?
Because critizicing something, looking for the weak point on the argumentations is easy.

Well, apparently it wasn't all that easy, since I've not seen anybody else talk about this over the course of nearly 8 pages (never mind evidently I happened to miss it somehow)... What do I propose instead..? Well if nobody can know for sure if they're swinging the hammer in the right person's direction, then the results should never be permanent to begin with...

Alternatively, people need to be given a chance to verify that whichever account is spewing bullshit is not them, but somebody else, for example by way of some agreed upon codeword only the person in question and the moderators would know at that point in time... So there might be workable solutions to the problem, but it bothers me that nobody seems to have given any thought to how false flags can be avoided...

If this ruling does go into effect, as a sign of good faith I believe it should extend both ways. If offsite harassment of DW members is a bannable offense, so too should harassment of members of other communities from members of DW. Whether this has happened or not in the past is irrelevant to the conversation. There should be a zero harassment policy across the board without exception. It should also be stated that a non-inflammatory difference of opinion is not harassment. Tolerance is neither a signal of agreement or disagreement. It's a show of respect in letting people do their own thing without provocation.

Personally, I think topics centered around race, gender, sexuality, political affiliation, etc. should be left off the site entirely. Nothing good every comes from such posts and there are quite frankly better places to discuss them than a video game forum. Perhaps someday in the future we can discuss such matters without political turmoil, but that is not the current landscape of today.

1 hour ago, Nine Inch Heels said:

And what exactly is preventing anybody from creating an account on some other site that goes under the very same name as another forum member in an attempt to get the actual DW forum member banned due to supposed off-site misconduct...?

I would guess that such things would have to be dealt with on a case-by-case basis. A new account under another member's name which immediately starts breaking this rule could arouse suspicion, for example; and although it's certainly not inconceivable that someone with a bee in their bonnet about a specific user might play the long game and start an innocuous account under their name and spend time making it seem legitimate, that's a lot of effort to go to and it would be highly unlikely to happen more than once in a very blue moon.

12 minutes ago, Nine Inch Heels said:

Well, apparently it wasn't all that easy, since I've not seen anybody else talk about this over the course of nearly 8 pages (never mind evidently I happened to miss it somehow)... What do I propose instead..? Well if nobody can know for sure if they're swinging the hammer in the right person's direction, then the results should never be permanent to begin with...

 

Alternatively, people need to be given a chance to verify that whichever account is spewing bullshit is not them, but somebody else, for example by way of some agreed upon codeword only the person in question and the moderators would know at that point in time... So there might be workable solutions to the problem, but it bothers me that nobody seems to have given any thought to how false flags can be avoided...

New things have slow times to catch up with new the situations. Adaptability its not done from one moment to another.

In fact, your point is interesting, so taking them in consideration would be useful.

Permabaning is big no for me. Temporary, and even long temp banning should be enough i think.
People change.
If we don't believe that, no rule will solve anything.

I liked the idea of a codeword, it could be visible for the moderators on the user page, but how it could work outside the forums?
For example, X has an account here with code 1234, and on another site, someone make a fake account with his image and same user name, but holds completely opossite opinions to those X holds on here, and is also harassing other members.
people report X believing he was the one that harassed them.

How the code would work in this case? Thats what i don't understand
 

1 minute ago, Charlie Love said:

I believe it should extend both ways

That's something you definitely should take up with the other board's administrators, because their policies are outside of Doomworld's control.

1 minute ago, AlexMax said:

 

That's something you definitely should take up with the other board's administrators, because their policies are outside of Doomworld's control.

Try reading more than one sentence at a time my man.

7 minutes ago, P41R47 said:

I liked the idea of a codeword, it could be visible for the moderators on the user page, but how it could work outside the forums?
For example, X has an account here with code 1234, and on another site, someone make a fake account with his image and same user name, but holds completely opossite opinions to those X holds on here, and is also harassing other members.

How the code would work in this case? Thats what i don't understand

The only way it would work is to reach out the person here on these forums, give them a codeword, have them link their account on some other site, and then have them make a post that contains said codeword... That would be the only way that I could see this actually work, because there's no chance in hell some off-site harasser would give themselves away voluntarily... (of course there is probably still legroom to play the system, but it's certainly better than letting people impersonate anybody they want to "ruin" them over here)

Here's the problem with this though: If this is supposed to be the way to avoid false flags, then the moderation of this very site needs to extend their reach to other sites accordingly, meaning this solution would require additional work...

1 minute ago, Nine Inch Heels said:

The only way it would work is to reach out the person here on these forums, give them a codeword, have them link their account on some other site, and then have them make a post that contains said codeword... That would be the only way that I could see this actually work, because there's no chance in hell some off-site harasser would give themselves away voluntarily...

 

Here's the problem with this though: If this is supposed to be way to avoid false flags, then the moderation of this very site needs to extend their reach to other sites accordingly, meaning this solution would require additional work...

interesting!
it could work.

But as you say, yes, it is indeed, more work.
the codeword being use on a post is something tricky, as if the word is too normal, people will don't know if it was use on purpose or not, and if it looks totally out of context, well it will be obvious that is somekind of code for something...maybe?

have you seen The Haunting 2?
''Quesadilla'' was the word for one member being in danger.
It was a funny moment seeing one man in danger shouting ''Quesadilla, Quesadilla'' to the hidden microphone.
Anyway, back on track, think on how many escenarios you could use that word.
Not much, right? 
Well, the same applies here somehow.

Its an nteresting idea, but seems really difficult to apply.

Seems some people are still under the impression that a single post offsite, faked or not, can get you permbanned?  Not sure how many times I need to reiterate that this is not the case and never will be, nor will this be done on the flimsiest of evidence or hearsay.

3 minutes ago, P41R47 said:

Its an nteresting idea, but seems really difficult to apply.

If we were to assume that effort involved is no problem whatsoever, then you could extend "codeword" to entire sentences, if that's what it takes, so the reliability of the codeword itself is not the issue as far as I'm concerned...

21 minutes ago, Charlie Love said:

Try reading more than one sentence at a time my man.

You misunderstand.  Doomworld cannot de-escalate in a vacuum.  You cannot solve anything with rules specifically designed to be invoked by outsiders targeting doomworlders.  Far more effective would be for other boards to enact similar anti-harassment rules, because then people have skin in the game.

I wonder how effective this rule would really be, considering that people often use different aliases on different sites. You can't actually link a harasser on a different site to a Doomworld member unless they give themselves away somehow, and with the existence of this rule, perpetrators have greater incentive to make sure that doesn't happen.