Discuss New Forum Policy Here

I strongly disagree. One vicious bully can create such a hostile environment in the forums that many people simply stop participating. Driving people away because they don't wish to constantly be flamed in forums, badgered in PMs, and harassed in world... or they simply hate the feeling they have after they read the forums, does more to stifle debate than the well-deserved banning of a few individuals.

As for the supposed FIC favoritism... I think it's a chimera created by a hateful individual to stir up feelings of division and class hatred. I have yet to see a confirmed case of the Lindens letting a supposed FIC member skate on TOS violations. If anything, I think the Lindens have been way too patient across the board.

We have a moderated forum - let's have effective moderation. I prefer not having to use a shovel to dig through people's personal drama to find out information I want/need to know.

I totally agree with and love the new guidelines. Thanks..it's long overdue

Everyone who supports the new forum rules should remember that people who have been banned from the forums are dependent on those who aren't banned to use the "Report Bad Post" icon to report posts that contain personal attacks against the banned to the forum moderators.

One example of such a post is:

/120/d4/50541/9.html#post535581

Happy to see LL has finally decided to rein in the forums. The grid is a huge place and the forums are a way to keep in touch with people, to stay on top of projects happening in world and to just generally stay informed about what's happening.

Recently it had become virtually impossible to have a discussion about anything without it degenerating. Although the new policy about posting with alts will be distressing to some (particularly those who have already posted in this thread), I think it was a logical step to stop the "gaming of the forums".

Thanks LL.

I would have to say that others have done the same as Prok for a long time before Prok did. I would also have to say that I understood the decision of the Lindens if all those other ppl were also banned.

I would also have to say that I find the timing more than suspicious. I dig all the lindens everyone knows that.

I do commend Path for his actions after the fact, as I do the Lindens.

Reguardless the timing of the Path and Prok, and the new fourm rules, realy bothers me right now.

Cat

Unfortunately, I can't bring myself to report any such posts, Chuck. Not even when Ingrid, who I considered a friend, blasts me out of nowhere for no reason, surprising me inordinately when I first got on here, by saying "both Coco and Prok arrived here with a chip on their shoulders, I don't know why." (somewhat paraphrased)

Such an undeserved slam being, itself, a very good example of the reason why, as she says, it is "virtually impossible to have a discussion about anything without it degenerating." On the other hand (while on the topic of Ingrid), she is the one who finally saved me by letting others who trusted her knowledge know that I was not anyone's alt. It would have been better for all of us if she had done that at a much earlier stage.

That people either cannot understand that some of them helped form this very climate - and will, I predict, again in the future - or, if they do, they excuse their actions on the basis of "he made me do it" rather than owning up to them - is why getting rid of Prok does not get rid of what's wrong with these forums.

In addition, others came to view ANYTHING Prok said in a negative light, and derailed his every post to put it in that light, regardless of how innocuous the post was. People can't manage to understand that others of us DID NOT SHARE THAT VIEW. Others of us read some of those same posts with interest, amusement, and either agreement or disagreement. But somehow our views, or our desire to discuss the topic at hand, don't count.

So many of you think banning people not just from the forums but the game is a good idea. You seem to be saying that this will provide a "greater deterrant." In my experience with both kinds of forums in TSO, first the one tied to the game, then the one not, this is not true. The fact is, most of us who enjoy participating in the forums and care about the game would consider being banned from the forums practically CRIPPLING to our enjoyment of the game, so I say this is punishment enough.

Nonetheless, I hope the Lindens decide to do this, because people should get this if they want it, particularly when they have the misguided notion that it somehow will never end up applying to themselves. I happen to be pretty gifted at not getting warnings or anything for things I write, so I have an extra degree of safety some of the rest of you don't.

And since I think others should have been punished, some of them many times over, if they do put this in, some of you will wind up being punished far worse than he was. Then you might understand that tying fear of speaking to the ability to play the game is a bad thing.

However, you won't be getting reported by me. If you had been, I daresay a number of you would have stopped with the personal attacks on Prok and on me and on others long ago.

coco

I'd like to take Chip's excellent comment and run with it for a minute.

I arrived on this board at the tail end of the worst of the forum fires. It took me a couple of weeks to figure out what had happened and get a superficial idea of why.

Know what? It's nothing new. I've seen it before. It is, quite frankly, a very common ailment with many web boards/communities. If you want to be insulting about it, it's like inbreeding. I prefer to think of it as over-familiarity compounded by the after-effects of anonymity. All of us probably say things behind the cover of anonymity that we would never say to a friend face to face. And as we become more familiar with names, and the positions they take, we find ourselves more given to saying things which could be construed as hurtful.

It's also occurred to me, based on some of the things said in this thread, that a large measure of the problem may have been inconsistent admin enforcement of guidelines. I've been a board admin - in Compuserve, for Sony's original EQ boards, and on a number of private boards. (A thankless job I don't ever care to have again, thank you. ) It's a hard enough job as it is even with a firm, consistent enforcement policy and management who backs your decisions. Take that away and it becomes an impossible task akin to herding cats.

And truthfully, the best way to handle board enforcement is to let people sort out the small flames on their own. It looks to us on the user end as though they're not acting but it may well be that they are only choosing their battles. Or their boss has said to let it go. We don't know, and we won't know since we're not privy to admin discussions. Trust me, forum trolls make their presence painfully obvious to admins before most average posters even know there's a problem.

The worst way to handle board enforcement is to intervene whenever someone says something that might be considered offensive -- we're talking borderline stuff, not the obvious, egregious offenses. Overintervention only breeds a culture of unhealthy dependence and further drama among the posters and ultimately will KILL a board.

I think there's a compromise between the two extremes. But I think it begins with our own personal responsibility to always address the issues rather than the person; to not take offense at things which may not have been intended to offend and to realize that underneath all of the differences of opinion, there usually lies a common thread of love for Second Life.

I will be the first to stand up and admit that I can be quick to anger at times, especially when my own cherished ideals may be denigrated. But I also note that while that has happened hundreds of times over the years I'm still kicking, I'm still largely happy, and my ideals remain intact

Here's hoping that the new policy will accompany a stronger effort by LL to be more openly even-handed with forum enforcement. It's a little different here than in-world simply because this is a smaller, more visible place. But we don't really have any other choice than to trust in their fairness and their intention of making these boards a useful adjunct to Second Life. Not unless one of you has a few Gig of server space, a PHP script and a few years of admin experience to start your own board. Do you really want to go to that kind of trouble? I sure as hell don't

Getting back to the topic of the thread. I like the new rules. It seemed to me in the past if someone got suspended or banned from either the forums or inworld their thoughts about why, be they right or wrong, were then drug into the other. A suspension or ban is meaningless if it simply changes the venue where the reason for the suspension or ban can be carried on.

I've tried to steer clear of most of the debate regarding Prok, basically because I eventually stuck him on ignore and resisted the urge to read his material. But overall, I had only a few observations I want to note:

Do not annoy a dragon, you thou art crunchy and taste well with ketchup. For all of Prok's points, he always tried to annoy the dragon. He eventually made himself too much of a headache, and the admins decided to remove his distraction from their plate.

The TSO forums did indeed have a similar problem as the ones here, but not all folks agreed that the move to Stratics improved them. There was quite a large group of TSO players that simply left Stratics and started private forums, due to TSO/Stratics' forum policies. I wont dig up that old corpse here, basically because this is SL, not TSO.


As much as I believe people should feel free to speak their mind on these forums, I more strongly believe there's a right way and a wrong way to express it. Even negative/controversial subjects can be discussed if done with the intention to have a positive, contributory intention to the forums. It only takes a few seconds before hitting that post button to say to one's self: "Have I worded this in such a way that will encourage people to listen with an open mind and consider my points? Or will this make them defensive and instead want to get into a flame war?"

If the tone of the message becomes more the focus than the message, then the message is lost. There's no excuse to start or continue a flame war over any subject. Those who repeatedly do so - and know it will definitely cause a flame fest - deserve the ban they get.


- Newfie

Cocoanut,

You speak often of your sense of outrage about how you were treated, and rightfully so. What you don't acknowledge or seem to recognize are the feelings of those who were constantly targetted on both personal and professional levels by Prokofy. Whether you will ever acknowledge it or not, there were people who Prokofy came after repeatedly in thread after thread. Sometimes he would do it under the guise of talking about a project, but then maligning the creator, sometimes he would just skip the pretense of having to have a reason and just talk about the individual. To be the subject of that, especially when someone is making direct statements about you that are false in public is both frustrating and even painful.

Sound familiar? Do you really think being called an alt is any better or worse than having someone try to trash your business and the projects you have worked hard on by trying to cause doubt and fear about them? Niot once, but for months? This is not an effort to diminish what you went through at all, but after a few of your posts like this, I had to speak up. Prokofy as victim and sacrificial dove is not the reality.

As you know, I am very fond of you Cocoanut, but I must admit, I find your efforts to portray Prokofy as blameless, yourself and Prokofy as horribly victimized, and everyone else some wild forum mob that is fully to blame is insulting. You want people to take responsibility and recognize their part in it? When do you begin to own up to anything, or does it just apply to everyone else?

I recognize mine - I often times fought back more fiercely than I should have with Prokofy, though Prokofy often sought me out in world and unleashed expletive filled torrents of abuse upon me that you never got to see. I did let him push my buttons too much, but I am also very protective of my work and reputation - and will not under any circumstances let someone get away with lying about me. What Prokofy said about my site in regards to using IP addresses to track him, find out his RL info, etc.. was a complete lie, and I was subjected to some variation on that same argument for months.

Please don't take this harshly, Coco, it is not meant to be. It is simply to let you know that there are other sides to this. You have stated yours repeatedly, here is mine.

I am totally agains the new guidelines if they are written in the ever-cahgning stone/hardness that has been LL policy up to this point. Black and whhite rules banning gone from the forums for an inworld violation that is "formal warning" eligible is the type of absolutism just begging for disputation.

Likewise, being a horse's ptoot here in the forums should not affect your inworld status - if one gets heated here, at worst, a few words have been/might be exchanged. It's not like you have been crashed, push-gunned off-world or something like that. Ultimately, here in the forums, you can choose to simply read... you can even ignore posts and pepople in their entirety. Inworld, it is not possible to ignore (ok.. that's an absolute, but we're talking grieferkin here) someone intent on harassing you physically.

If someone banned form either the forums or inworld runs to the other venue and violates THOSE rules/that decorum, then and only then should a "new" ban be considered.

I think this is a bad, bad, bad blanket policy.

Of course... certain people here can't seem to recognize the difference between rpg in he forums and in world, or the difference between actions in one community and actions in another.

I vote - LL screwed up on this one.

Alan, I think you put it very well. This thread in itself is an improvement. I went over some of the old posts and had to stop after a few posts. This thread, I tihnk, is well behaved. Congrats to all.

Fantastic and well thought out post Cris. You managed to put into very easy to understand words what alot of us have tried to convey.

As one that has never posted with an alt, and doesn't believe anybody ever should, and in fact believes the whole idea of alts is flawed anyway as it tends to not be used as a seperate identity but rather as a tool to get around the rules, I'm all for this.

I've always thought, and still do, that you should have ONE master account, under which you may post. All alts started by the same user should be tied to that master account, and in the event of abuse, the master account is banned, not the alt.

Master accounts also creates a more secure environment by making your avatar identity entirely seperate from your login credentials (your avatar name is 2/3 of your login creds, both for the game and for the site. And sites can be hacked. Nowhere else can you find the information, other than Second Life, that the name Tcoz has ever been associated with the name Bach...because it never has been and never will be again).

Yes, I understand that some people, like a family, may use one account to create avatars for the entire family. I don't think that changes anything. It is up to the account owner to ensure the people using their master account do not game the alt system.

I don't take it harshly. And I do understand the frustration one feels. Remember, I have been, myself, mischaracterized by Prokofy. And I have gotten plenty exercised about it. And even so, I was not the target of the bulk of his verbosity. So I can take what I felt and multiply it a hundred times in the case of the rest of you, who were more often the target of his verbosity than I ever was.

And, while we're at it, one of the things I took issue with him about was the characterization of what could go on at a web site such as yours as something that in fact "did" go on on your website. He stated that as fact, when it was not and there was no evidence that it did. I thought that was wrong, and told him so.

I don't say Prok is blameless. Obviously, his lack of diplomacy brings a lot of this on himself. I have said so before on these forums. I guess it is SO obvious that I consider it somewhat beside the point.

What is the point is how people react to it. When they react to it with a mob mentality, by making far worse personal attacks than he ever did, when they run over a new player like me for stating my thoughts and feelings, when they start a shunning campaign, when they conspire to get rid of him, when they celebrate when they finally do, and when they think all these actions are justified - all that is a much bigger problem than one individual running off at the mouth.

When all this is done for the "good of the community," then the "community" is being defined as, "people like me who want to get rid of him." I have to strongly differentiate myself from that. I can sit and tell you and tell everyone else till the cows come home that I know how he is, I know he isn't as hostile as you think (he lives in a far more remote realm of ideas than most of us), and I know that I can't change an individual, but I can either change a group's mob behavior or leave the group.

Prok as victim and sacrificial dove - that he is, and for all of us. He was an extreme example, yes, but sometimes it takes extreme examples to pinpoint the problem. And the problem is, Prok is all of us - magnified. What happens to him happens to all of us. If he can be called horrid things, so can all of us. If he can have a group form about him, and discuss how to get rid of him, the same thing can happen to any of us. If people can decide to shun him, the same thing can happen to all of us. If his threads can be shut down by others derailing them for no good reason except their knowledge of his world view and their dislike of it, the same thing can happen to any of us. If people can turn like a pack of rabid dogs to tear up a new poster who happens to agree with him, that can happen to all of us. If people can celebrate his demise on the boards in an unseemly fashion, including hurling further insults his way, that can happen to any of us.

The only difference is, all of it will happen to any of us in smaller, less dramatic ways. And all of it HAS happened to a number of us, albeit in a smaller frame. And will continue to happen to any of us. Now what is happening to all of us is we are under the threat of losing our game if enough people don't like what we say here.

That is why I focus on everyone else, with Prok being more or less unimportant in the larger scheme of things. God KNOWS I know what he's like, and how over the top he is. Unlike most of you, I don't take it personally, and if it's something wrong about me, I yell at him for it - just as I do to the rest of you. I don't report him, I don't decide he is a cancer which must be excised. Wherever a group goes about deciding that one of their peers is a cancer that must be excised, that represents danger to all of us.

I have thought about my part in it, Cristiano. For example, I feel my own arguments are, though not invalidated by my bias of being a friend of Prok, are colored by it. If I hadn't known him before I got on, I would have talked less about it, and thereby added less to the whole mess. It would have been better, maybe, if I didn't know and understand him as well as I do; I would have been that much more objective. And you know what? I could be wrong about him! There are some people irl that I have known and liked for, say, ten years, before finally what was bothering others about that person started bugging me, too. I still like the person, but sometimes it takes me ten years to actually "feel" what others feel.

And I would certainly feel it sooner if expletive-filled torrents of abuse had ever been heaped on me.

But even given all that, I feel, and have always felt, there are bigger principles at stake here. One of them - one I've long held - is not ganging up on other people, no matter what. Another is not thinking you (the general you) own the forums and speak for all of us. Another is not abusing anyone who agrees with someone you disagree with. Another is not mounting a campaign to erase someone. And so on and so forth.

All of these affect us. So does this new in-game banning. Y'all think you are safe from that? You are not.

I'm gonna miss this next events meeting, too, if I don't stop with this and it would be highly wonderful if I gave others a chance to talk. I'm not sure I even still care about events, as I have argued that one to death, too, and know that many of you are dead set against game support for it, or anything else that might help it. Anyway, I'm not even an entertainer any more, so why should I take up for that cause? I've argued, you - those of you who frequent the boards as much as I do - have made it clear that that is not in the Linden Vision, and okay, I dig it. It's your game. I know that.

I just want to build my little houses.

coco

Speaking for myself, I was never part of any gang. I merely responded to attacks against me. For others, I have seen the same.

As for Prok being a sacrificial dove. That would imply helplessness and was forced to be sacrificed. I just don't see that here.

Funny, all I wanted was to have my house too.

God I hate the victim mentality that has swept our modern day culture. Someone robs a bank and kills people, and then blames society. Someone is a thug and asshole, and blames something that happened to his ancetors.

I so disagree with your point, and your characterization Coco. Prok did in fact attack people and call the names and insult and mud-sling and complain. He did focus on certain "successful or well-liked" people. And when people defended themselves, or got upset, or attacked back, it made him a victim in your eyes. I don't understand. Where is the personal responsibility for one's own actions here? The cause and effect.

If I walked into a biker bar, and started calling them all harsh names, insulting their intelligence and generally causing a lot of bad feelings and chaos, and I did it over and over again, shouldn't I expect to get my ass kicked, or even killed?? Should I take responsibility for my own actions?

If I want to discuss things reasonably with a group of people, or even one person, I would certainly try to start out in a logical, polite and respectful way. If I started out by calling him a turd and saying that no matter what his opinion is, he is still a turd, then shouldn't I expect that the communication won't go smoothly or constructively?

People are always looking to blame others for their actions, instead of having the integrity and honor to stand up and take personal responsibility. We see it in all facets of life now, from the President, many parents, criminals, some minorities, and many other sources.

When you take an action, . it usually has an effect. Prok took the action and caused the effect, time and time again. He was no victim, but those he attacked certainly were.

Cocoanut,

Thank you for the well thought out reply. The only thing I will comment on is you speaking of a group wanting to get him excised from these forums. Who would that group be? When do individuals responding to their own outrage and disgust with something stop becoming an individual? I never responded to Prokofy as part of any group. I was just me, responding with my own feelings. If everyone else had been praising Prokofy, I still would have responded the same way. Chip Midnight - just him. Cubey - check, just Cubey. Ingrid is a total individual. Aimee has multiple personalities, but they got together and voted, so she was also speaking as an individual. The list goes on and on. None of speaks for each other or somehow act together in some secret orchestrated manner.

Ardith, the famous shun leader? She just posted that she was ignoring Prokofy. No group there. Others made the individual choice to do the same. I had actually put Prokofy on ignore several days prior to the famous shun post. That others collectively reached the same breaking point I did close to that time is no accident - there was a torrent of endless attacks happening at that time. The choice to "shun" Prokofy was made by individuals, simply using the ignore tools provided to them.

There is no group "ganging up" on anyone. What you have are individuals, with the same individual voice you have, reacting to posts and behavior. One or two or ten being offended by a poster and pushing back against that does not mean they are operating in group think mode. There is no consensus, even among those of us who are friends. Ironically, Prokofy's divisiveness brought many of us closer together. Even so, we act as individuals. We are no more a group or mob because we agree with each other than you and Prokofy are a mob because you are friends.

Where does an individual's voice end?

Please remember it's not really fair to talk about someone who is unable to reply. And the specific details of any suspension/banning are a private matter between Linden Lab and the individuals directly involved in the disclipinary actions.

Try to keep this discussion focused on Policy, not specific People.

Thanks.


-Pathfinder

*ahem*

I'm closing this thread as we seem to have gotten very much off-topic. But, I will restart it with the caveot that we must stick to discussing the new forum policy and refrain from personally attacking one another.