I don't like ("fear" is the wrong word, no?) threads being locked when I don't understand why they are locked, or when I don't understand how the policy is applied one way here and another way there. And there are ways of locking threads; several in the recent past have been accompanied by comments directed at very specific people, so I'm afraid that I have to disagree as to it being impersonal or not deciding who is right and wrong. I agree that having more moderators per se is not necessarily the solution; what I was suggesting was a change in style, if you will.

I run a forum also. And I run an intermud network.
Let me make sure everyone is superclear on the fact
that I am not against moderation. I exercise it. I
am well known for exercising it ;)

So. One more time, just to make sure everyone is
on the same page with me:
Cratylus strongly supports moderation.

I do not think that this thread is about "Moderation? Yes/No".
Some people may have got that impression, but that is not
what is being seriously discussed.

What I think has happened is that one administrator here
has, through recent thread locks, begun a conversation
about what is *appropriate* moderation in the context
of those threads.

I agree that "iron fist" implies very severe penalties…
but hear me out for a minute.

I think that the events of the past few days have given
reasonable people considerable doubt as to what is allowed.
One admin allowed the Georgia thread to run. Another locked
it. Why? The explanation given seems to indicate it was due
to the substance of an opinion. If it was because political
talk is not allowed, why would the first admin have allowed
it to live?

Now, probably these questions have good answers. My point
is not necessarily about the issues involved in the Georgia
thread. My point is that different admins have been making
decisions that *appear* arbitrary and potentially conflicting,
and maybe even motivated out of personal political opinion.

That is scary. That makes me wonder who is driving the bus,
and where it's going…and the aggressiveness of the responses
made me think that it wasn't ok to ask. After all, in the past,
discussion of policy has led to sadness.

It may be that the kind of severe stuff one associates with
an iron fist wasn't happening…I don't know of bans or toadings
recently. But there was a real sense of not knowing what is
going on, or why, or what is ok to say.

At least, for me there was this sense.

HK can speak for himself, but I know what it's like to
have threads where you're honestly participating in good
faith get locked one after the other and the blame placed
on you. From the admin side maybe it seems harmless. When
it's you getting the finger and blame, it sure can feel
like a heavy sanction.

I know that there is some kind of "common sense" rule in
effect, and a prevailing opinion that if you're not saying
anything wrong, you don't have anything to worry about.

The problem I have with these undocumented understandings
is that I'm seeing threads locked that violate neither
common sense rules nor written policy I'm aware of, and
it looks like it's some kind of personal thing, and I
think that's a problem. I don't think you really want people
unsure if they should talk. Actual "trolls" don't care about
this stuff, they'll just troll and flame. It's conscientious posters
that will think twice and maybe avoid contributing. I don't
think that's desirable.

Davion, I know that to you this site is much more than
just forums. I think that in your eyes the forum is a
minor resource, and a minor sanction on a minor resource
perhaps seems like the most trivial matter for people
to get twitchy about.

I argue that what you have here is a community and the
lifeblood of a community is communication and that halting
its flow for arbitrary reasons (as opposed to clear violations
of policy everyone has read) is harmful. If it has to happen,
I think it should be in response to *actual* harm, rather
than a thread you don't like or one that *might* go in
a direction you would not prefer.

If nothing else, I think this would be a good time to
decide whether non-mud topics are welcome here, and if
they are, what the criteria are for their locking. That
way I can avoid wasting my time on something that will
be cut off before the community is done discussing it.

In summary:

Moderation with clear guidelines and consistent enforcement YES
Moderation that gags people for disagreeing with admin opinions NO

While it is your forum, I humbly suggest the community does not actually belong to you,
and it might be healthy to adopt a less "my way or the highway" approach to
people who just want to contribute and participate in a constructive way. It is
the attempt to mold the community through intolerant moderation of the forum
that got mudmagic its reputation. Is that really the strategy we want here?

-Crat
http://lpmuds.net

Alright, I looked into it, and I'm pretty sure, that at the time, I wasn't around to say anything about it. I needed a break as it were, GNU is causing me a lot of frustration lately. ;) Looking further, that was after I had walked away to play Ace Combat 4 again. There's just something about blowing communists out of the skies with really fast moving explosives that's calming. Who'da thought, eh?


It's also impossible, because No one is perfect, sometimes something sets them off and they lose their composure, and thus become a spearhead for "side two" even if they have an impeccable posting record.


I thought that was a good style of moderation as well.


I was referring to the entire community in that entire post, and even here TMC has something to do with it, because a lot of people here post in both places, and what's acceptable here, and what's acceptable on TMC are polar opposites. And I think that that's a large reason why so many of the threads here that got considerably out of hand, got to that point in the first place. Take the thread that started this entire argument (some 6 odd months ago I believe, maybe longer..) for example, the Taser thread. The vast majority of the people involved in that thread post on TMC; Where that kind of thread, and those kinds of responses are acceptable. Whereas here, that's not really acceptable and it spiraled out of control quickly.


When I said that it wasn't something I see happening, I was referring to all the trolls and flamers setting aside their differences and working to try and take the community back to what it once was. If I'm wrong, great, maybe TMC can become a great resource again, I know it was at one point, but it's certainly not anymore. And FUSS is exactly one of those little patches of grass I was referring to. It's a small base catering to a small portion of the MUDing community, and without so much as a care for the other parts of the community. How many of us on the FUSS forums can honestly claim an understanding of a base Not listed on that site. Can any of us over there claim to be able to find and fix errors in Circle like we can in Smaug? No, probably not, because it's not our cup of tea. Just like most of the Circle people would probably have difficulties fixing errors in Smaug. Some would argue that this is so because Smaug is a tangled mess of bloat. But one could argue the same about any mud codebase. Well, except Socketmud. You can't really call that a tangled mess of bloat.. since.. well, there's nothing to it.. :P

Wow.. I'm not sure which to be most shocked by in all that's transpired here since yesterday…
The fact that Samson now has "Members" instead of "Administrators" beside his "Group:" connotation under his name, this bit of flattery, or Sandi's frank disclosure of her take on DavidHaley… or maybe the fact that only one person outside the admins here wanted actual useful moderation..


Thank you to both, Samson & The_Fury, for such gallant defense in my absence, and apology accepted Zenn.


Um, which of us was that? Or should I really be asking this… no, probably not. Suffice it to say that I think this is simply not true and a mistake has been made. Samson, I fully feel your frustration and won't try to talk you into returning or what not, but I will point out that should this be a final decision, I firmly believe that your presence as an administrator here will be greatly missed by many.

Ya…



Well! No need to argue that we have become a community. The next MudBytes update will likely coin us as the MudBytes Community ;).


The problem with the application of moderation here is more or less the rule



This rule, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder, especially when talking about politics. Saying "The US invaded Iraq because of oil" is, in some peoples eyes a total bait for flaming, and insulting. Due to the difference in political beliefs of our staff you should understand that some of us just don't care about US politics (probalby the reason some would allow, where others wouldn't.) We don't want to impose restrictions on what you can and cannot post here. All we can do ATM, without strict guidlines, is allow for the discussion to go until it gets out of hand and needs to be nipped in the bud. We will make an effort not to nip to hard in the initial encounter of would-be locked threads, next time :).

I think part of the problem is that it's a little unclear if you guys are really acting as a "we" or as several "I's", if the difference makes sense. I'm not sure it's very stable for you guys to act upon different ideas about what is acceptable and what isn't. But I think you're wrong about the limits of what you can do: you guys set the tone for the whole site by your actions or lack thereof, so you have considerable influence by how you phrase things and what topics you engage in, and not just with moderators' tools.

@Kayle, I think the people here truly care about the state of mudding, they might not all be inspired to try and solve the problems, but i am sure everyone who has posted in this thread would like to see things change.

@Sandi, Thank you, great post. Well thought out and structured. I too feel the pain of posts taking forever to write. Over the last few days threads have been closed before i have had a chance to hit submit. A lot of things can change in 30 minutes. Mud Quest is a great idea, so much so that i decided to emulate the idea. Where you went with top tiered games, i was looking at 2nd tier games, the trouble i found is that no one was interested, you can see the page Here. The one complaint i have heard about Mud Quest is that its its a bit elitist and not really open to everyone to list their games on. The intent i had was to promote the site to non core mudders and to attempt to grow new players. I have one website that attracts about 1000 hits a day, if i could emulate those numbers with a games site i am sure that I could convert someone into a mudder.


@Mudbytes, I know when you guys started Mudbytes that you wanted to have it as a code resource, it would seem to me that it has well and truly outgrown that scope and is becoming a community portal site. There seems to be a growing demand for Staff and Player adverts with a really well written post added just before i started to write this epic tome. Like Sandi, I see that Mudbytes has the potential to become much more than it currently is and the only mud related site capable of making lasting and real change to muds as a whole. Like Sandi, i have been spending more time here and less time on elsewhere.

This is totally off topic, but what the heck, isn't that what mudbytes forums are for? Heh.

I liked the concept of mudquest that Sandi started, I think the smaller muds in fact need
to unite and combine efforts to compete with the big pay to play muds out there that are
taking to heavily from the already to spread thin players out there.

For one I have always think it would be great if some of these struggling muds could combine
their muds/staff/players to make larger better quality muds. It seems people are so caught
up with wanting to make a mud how they want it, they cant compromise on some issues
and work together.

Also think combining efforts to advertise would be great. Advertising is major expense for
hobby muds. I advertised on mudconnect for 3 months a couple months ago, and it cost
150 dollars. I did get some new players connecting, but the expense doesn't outweigh the
cost.


Anyway, I'm done rambling.

Vladaar

Philosophical moment; Heh: If they're not inspired to try and solve the problems, do they truly care to begin with?



I don't mean to nitpick, but that doesn't make any sense. An expense is a cost. >.>

Everybody thinks that everybody else is a part of the problem, and refuses to back down..

We're like the Old Republic in Star Wars. Like the United Nations, like the Republicans versus the Democrats. This is pointless. If we can stop arguing long enough to think about a real solution, we'll be able to figure things out. Quite simply, Divided We Fail. Enough of the Washington-esque gridlock and somebody in the administration make an actual decision.


-Zenn

P.S.:
I'm wondering who Palpatine is..

P.P.S.: If we actually SUCCEED here, everybody keep a backup copy of every second of it. We'll make millions off the book. And maybe fix Washington DC while we're at it..

I kinda thought this thread was done, but I'm game.

Let's get empirical.

(Note, however, that argument will still be key to progress.)

Define the problem, exactly, and what you think is a good solution.

-Crat
http://lpmuds.net

The problem is that there's no new blood. No fresh ideas. It's all just the same arguments over and over. No one talks about code design for groundbreaking (at least for MUDs) new systems, It's always discussions about the Diku License or how Medievia is evil incarnate, or how Locke is the father of all OLC (read: Locke's a crackpot with delusions of grandeur).

The Solution then would be that we need new blood, fresh ideas, and obviously come up with some groundbreaking code discussions. And we need to step out of our armchair lawyer roles, and go back to what really matters, and that's the code, the game design, and the philosophy behind what makes a game great.

I think the problem has already been clearly defined.

1) Political discussions downspiral into a flaming war. To fix this particular problem, I propose a separate subforum for such discussions, with everyone starting out in a Member group that has access privileges to it. Have it where such discussions are NOT allowed anywhere else on the site, and employ a "Three-Strikes-And-You're-Out" policy, where the MAJORITY of the Admins and Moderators (Which there need to be more of, but I'll get to that in a moment) agree that they have become a problem; if they DO become too much of a problem, simply have take a vote to remove them from the privilege group.

2) More moderators, but for gods' sakes, make them people who are diverse in their opinions but are also level headed and can get along well. The LAST thing you need is a power struggle.

3) Palpatine. We NEED Palpatine.

Okay, back to being serious. Quick recap:
Subforum for sensitive topics. More diverse moderators that can get along well (3-5?). And a little more cooperation from the rest of us.


- Zenn

This is interesting. Hold that thought a moment, I want to address Zenn's proposal…



I strongly agree. I have found that an optionally-visible forum for stuff that is wildly offtopic/offensive
does *wonders*. It avoids muzzling the outspoken, and prevents ruffling the feathers of the sensitive.
Five stars, and a hearty huzzah.

Back to resurrecting muds…

Aside from "knocking off the bullshit", what are some active steps you see as viable
for attracting new blood, fresh ideas, and groundbreaking code discussions?

-Crat
http://lpmuds.net

I would not disagree for at least a trial run of a forum for sensitive topics, if it worked well I would have no problem leaving it running.

I am curious as to why you think we need more moderators… I thought we were fairly active, no?

A subforum for sensitive topics isn't going to work. Just ask Andy why he no longer has a "flames" forum on TMC or why Kyndig no longer has similar on MM or why such a thing no longer exists on TMS. The mere existence of such a thing invites disaster.

"Need more moderators" screams "I want power". But that's just me.

As for resurrecting MUDs, aside from contemplating the problem, and a possible solution I hadn't put much thought into that, too absorbed with figuring out this Montauk Monster thing, and watching this ridiculous Scorpion King 2: Rise of a Warrior movie. It's so cheesy it's become almost funny.

I feel I have a lot to reply to, so I'm just going to do it in order that things were posted…




In past discussions here and on TMC, I was among the camp that would describe TMC as a cesspool, as the last place you would want to send new MUDers. That's been probably about a year ago. I went on a personal crusade against various flamers and things stayed calm for about 3 months. As you say,
inevitably such posts or people will show up again. I, too, was there and did what I could to beat
them back. Aside from one particularly nasty thread that happened there about 6 months ago, and with
some choice words between Synorel and myself, things have been relatively calm there for about the
last year, which is a vast improvement over the year before that, and the year before that. I think
all it really takes are a few "bliss ninnies" or "white knights" (as I've been called both) to take a
stand against behavior like that and you see that things in a place like that will improve. Sure,
it's not moderated and thus will never be perfect, and things here will likely always be "nicer"
overall, I don't dispute that. Don't mistake me for someone who doesn't support moderation here. In
the last great push toward trying to see some moderation over on TMC (the same push that saw Osiris
finally bow out of that site) I was among the group that was supporting moderation there.
When it was clear that wasn't going to happen, that's when I took it upon myself to do what good that
I could. It got me jumped by a few certain individuals, and labeled things such as bliss-ninny or
white-knight, but oh well, other people seemed to have joined my cause and things are better there
now and I like to think I had some impact.



I actually agree with you here. I don't think that thread should have been brought up in the first
place, but enough time had passed since it was started, and an Admin had posted within that thread,
that it was clear to me that such a thread was apparently appropriate. If it weren't appropriate,
then I think it's reasonable to assume that when the Admin had posted within the thread, it would
have contained some sort of warning (which other controversial threads have had such before) or it
would have been locked. That is common sense. That is where the common sense rule applied for me.
By posting in the thread with no warning and without locking it, the Administration of this site
validated the thread as ok to post. I didn't post until -after- that, and I maintain my suggestion
that the US invaded Iraq for oil was as valid and no different than the OP's suggestion that Russia
invaded Georgia for Oil. I also maintain that since the thread wasn't locked when Russia was
suggested to have invaded Georgia for Oil, that my only error in that aspect was being on the wrong
side of the debate. Despite there being a vast amount of evidence to make the suggestion that the US
invaded Iraq for Oil, and despite being insulted by a member of the Administration that was locking
the thread, I didn't make a stink about it. I did what has been asked by the Administration of this
site… I took it to PMs. Samson and I went back and forth about this issue, and despite whatever
history he and I may have, I offered my opinion (respectfully) about how I felt that situation was
handled. And since I've been pointed out by certain individuals as apparently being "part of the
problem" I offered to be part of the solution, to try to work with the Administration to get a peek
inside of the mind of the type of people they are having problems with. I asked to be looked at as
an asset instead of an enemy. I've extended olive branches.



That's the tricky thing about posting in a forum is that generally the only thing you can infer about
tone is the words themselves and any particular bias or preconcieved notions you may have about the
person posting. Besides, are we locking threads (or supporting the locking of threads) now based on
the actual content of posts, or for the tone of them? I think that's an important distinction to
make.





I won't insult anyone's intelligence by suggesting that there wasn't some small bit of
tongue-in-cheek with my reply about the China thing, but ultimately the overall intent was to warn
against going there because the thread would be locked. The subsequent locking of the thread proved
me right. With as quiet as things have been here over the last month and despite my utter lack of
interest in that thread, it was nice to see -some- discussion happening and I didn't want to see that
get stifled.



Thank you.



I agree. And for the record, I don't hold grudges against anyone here. Despite having every other
thread I've posted in locked, I don't hold a grudge against the Admins. Despite the issues Samson
and I have had, I've gone out of my way to settle any problems between he and I. Despite nothing
being settled, I don't hold a grudge against him. Not too long ago he was being flamed on TMC and I
went out of my way to defend him because I felt like he was being treated unfairly. When he fingered
me out as one of the reasons why he quit the last time, I went out of my way to voice my support on
him -not- leaving/coming back to the site. I don't hold a grudge against Kayle, even though I still
feel like I'm owed an apology.





And that is such a refreshing attitude. I've let players argue with me for half an hour, call me
names (my favorite was a player who logged in as "Diablows" trying to upset me since my MUD
character's name is Diablos), but I've found that under almost any complaint is some sort of valid
criticism, just that a good bit of people (particularly MUDers) seem incapable of communiticating
that in a constructive way (particularly to Admins). I try to get to the bottom of even people that
seem to be throwing a temper-tantrum, even though you do find that with some people there is nothing
under it all. But I think it's good to try to see past things like that.





I agree with this, and as I said, I'm not holding any grudges. I'd like to see us as a site and
community be able to move past all this, but it seems like the same crap keeps coming up by the same
people.





DavidHaley said it perfectly:



The last several months following the wake of the taser thread, things have been very calm in regards
to any sort of trolling or flaming, or even moderation. Up until the last week or so, that is. Then
it seems like all of a sudden "things aren't working like this" and the hammer has come down for what
has seemed like the most trivial of perceived offenses. That's where this is coming from on our
part. I know I don't see how all of a sudden this type of moderation has all of a sudden become a
necessity.



I think that uber-heavy, oppressive moderation is more of a thread to ruining MudBytes then an
occasional troll or flame. As I've been maintaining, TMC has come a long way in the last year and
isn't quite the place it was before. Clearly you have some issues over the way you've been treated
there your last round of posting there, and I did what I could to try to defend you and beat the
flames down, but I think you are over-reacting as to what would happen here if the leash were a
little less tight.



You can count me in the camp that wants truly actual useful moderation. But there is a huge
difference "actual useful moderation" and oppressive, lock the thread the moment a controversial
opinion or disagreement with the Admin word is uttered.



I don't know if you truly haven't come to realize this yet… But that's what people do. No one is
ever happy with what they have. I've been in some form of Administrator role in MUDs for almost 10
years now, and the one thing I've come to realize in that time is that players of a MUD or users of a
forum, or in any role where you have an authority figure (or group of authority figures) and a larger
group of people who are "under" those authority figures is that the users/players in that situation
will mistrust the authority, will blame everything on the authority, and will complain when something
doesn't go their way. That's simply the nature of the beast. God forbid you be even just a lowly
builder with no power to affect anything in the game (especially your own characters) or not have any
sort of "special" knowledge… but if you have a strong character then you are automatically a
cheater! There is no way around this… that is how it is. All you can do as an Admin is grow
thicker skin and try to weed out the useless complaints and try to see what you can learn from the
complaints that aren't just people lashing out.



Years running a theme in which the average maturity rating may be lower than a typical game has, as
mentioned above, caused me to grow a bit of thicker skin in regards to that. Being in an authority
role whether it be a moderator on a forum or an Admin of a game isn't even usually a fun job.





As I see it… Zenn posted something about the Russian invasion of Georgia and suggested they might
be invading for oil. I made a comment that it was a territory dispute in regards to the area of
South Ossetia and doesn't seem to be movitated by oil greed, then followed that with another comment
that its countries like Iraq and the US that invade other countries for oil. Samson then followed my
post with a post/insult of his own saying that my comment was either intentional flamebait (which it
wasn't) or vastly ignorant (despite there being a wealth of evidence to support my claim). Then
later DavidHaley posted a comment in a recent thread that was a very thinly veiled comment to China
faking parts of the Olympics and basically touched on some of the recent controversy with that, to
which I replied warning that veering toward such topics will likely get the thread locked, and that
we wouldn't want to see that happen before it reaches 100 posts (which was a reference to Crat's
inclination to see threads become "legendary" by reaching 100 posts). The thread was then locked
based on my comment about staying away from those topics because that will get threads locked (as
opposed to the post in question which was politically controversial in nature). Later |spider|
posted an ad for builders, but it was riddled with terrible spelling and grammar. That topic was
actually left alone. After a few days, he posted against asking why he likely hasn't had any
responses. I responded that a possible reason would be his spelling/grammar, and that regardless of
whether or not thats an indication of his MUD's quality is irrelevant because people will assume
that. I was accused of flaming him and getting two other threads locked because of my incessant
flaming by Kayle (which all three accusations were in fact lies, and it is for that reason that I'm
still awaiting an apology). It came out that |spider| has a form of dyslexia and so I suggested he
make a note of that in his signature so that way people will overlook his spelling/grammar and
potential builders/players will understand that his spelling/grammar isn't an indication of his MUD's
quality. He and others saw I intended my comments in good faith, but others still suggested I was
just being a trouble maker, some flaming ensued by others and the thread got split. After some more
flaming, it finally got locked, but I hadn't had an opportunity to respond to some material posted
that I felt was directly aimed at me, so I created another thread called 'Thread Locking' to respond
to those issues directly, and since my subject matter was separate from the material that got the
thread locked in the first place and was a completely different matter, I felt like it was
appropriate to start a new thread. Unfortunately, it was locked before any further resolution could
come from the matter. As a result, this thread was created.





I think the only category that I can be safely placed into would be the category of someone who
speaks his mind and gets on Samson's nerves. I don't feel like that I'm somehow on an opposite side
of you or anyone else for that matter. I, for one, didn't "pick on" anything anyone posted. I
wasn't picking on spider for his spelling/grammar, and I wasn't "picking on" you for your suggestion
that Russia might be invading Georgia for Oil. I merely provided the facts on the situation as I saw
them, and provided a counter point that countries like Iraq and the US are known for invading other
countries for Oil. Only one thread has been locked for any flaming, and I would hardly call that a
flame war. It seemed more like to me that Drizzt/Fizban (can't remember which name he was posting
under) posted some stuff toward someone else that was a bit rude and thus the thread was locked but
it hardly snowballed into a flame war.



This has been going on for as long as there has been a community. If it hasn't destroyed it by now,
I don't think it will. I certainly don't advocate or enjoy any of this, but I think if the only
sites that anyone has to choose from as general community portals are places with zero moderation or
places with oppressive moderation, that WILL destroy the community. The only thing throughout this
ordeal I've been pushing for is sensible moderation, not a lack thereof.





I'm genuinely not trying to insult you, but you must understand and see why it has been suggested so
many times in the past that you have a bit of a martyr complex. No one is trying to target you or
drive you off or make you mad. If anything, I've gone out of my way to try to mend fences with you
and try to work with you to try to solve these issues that you've been having with certain
individuals and types of individuals, including myself. I don't think anyone here is
anti-moderation, I think we're anti-tyranny, and there is a big difference there.





I think this type of attitude is the absolute last thing we need in a moderator, and I also think
that the last thing we need out of a moderator is someone who has been the OP on so many of the
controversial posts/threads that has gone out of control. I'd be much more comfortable with someone
that already posts in the way that the Administration here would view as a model poster.



I also think that this type of divisive rhetoric is also part of the problem here. I don't think we
have some sort of clear battles lines drawn here between a group of people who want no moderation and
the Admins+the people supporting them. I think we have a group of individuals concerned over the way
the moderation has been handled in the last couple of weeks, a group of individuals who apparently
see no issue with it, and the administrators who have been dealing out that type of moderation. I
think a lot of this also stems from a severe degree of misreading the intentions behind others
actions. Apparently some people feel that I'm just some little troll trying to goad a situation or
get under Samson's skin when all I'm trying to do is state what I feel that this route of moderation
will do to this site.



This is also the exact type of attitude we don't need. If I can be seen as having done anything
wrong here, its simply been one of two things… 1) holding opinions contrary to certain members of
the administration, or 2) committing the grevious sin of publicly disagreeing with the
administration. Out of my 200+ posts you'll be hard pressed to find many instances in which I was
just trolling, flaming, or flame baiting. I pride myself on my ability to approach nearly any
subject with a matter of respect for the other person on the other end of the debate, no matter how I
might personally feel about them or the topic they are supporting. I can't stress enough that I've
done what I can to try to mend things between Samson and I. I can't stress enough that I've done
what I can to help this site, whether it be the fact that I was among the first group of people to
register here, among the first group of MUDs to list my MUD here (despite not being listed anywhere
else, I was doing it to try to help fill out the MUD list here to try to make it competitive),
anytime anyone is looking for code I do what I can to direct them here, I've actually written
snippets or released code specifically to help have Mudbytes have some exclusive code that other
places don't have, I've allowed one of the people who coded a good portion of my MUD (Midboss) to
actually release several parts of my MUD as snippets to help this place have more exclusive code. As
far as a place like TMC, I've ranted enough about how much I've tried to do what I can to enact some
sort of user-based moderation since there is little Administration based moderation. I've risked the
image of my MUD, I've risked even monetary damages over possible lawsuits to do what I've felt was
right for this community. So as you can imagine, I deeply resent and am deeply bothered by any sort
of insinuation that I'm somehow a part of the problem or somehow among a handful of idiots.





Again, I genuinely ask, what "anti crowd" are we talking about here? The only thing I'm trying to
accomplish is for there to be a bit more care taken over the oppresive thread locking we've seen and
the occasional insult thrown in along with the post announcing a thread lock.



I agree with the poster that said this thread wouldn't exist if people didn't care. I wouldn't be
spending such a ridiculous amount of time with such a thorough reply if I didn't care. If I didn't
care, I would have been gone from here for a long time. The problem is, perhaps, is that I DO care
and don't want to see this place either die from a general fear of any real conversation because of
oppressive moderation or degeneration into total anarchy.





Once again, see above. It's people like me that care enough to actually try and change things
whether it be trying to stand against oppressive moderation or trying to stand against total anarchy
that has been known to occur at TMC. Like I said, in the interest of what's right for the community,
I've risked the reputation of my MUD to try to stand out against some of the crap that would happen
over at TMC. When I believe in something, I go out of my way to take a stand. Most of the time I
full well realize that me being a single voice in a sea of conversation will do little, but if
everyone feels that way, then it becomes the truth. Sometimes it only takes a single person to stand
up and say "enough!" Like I said, I hope to think the recent upturn in the way TMC has been lately
has something to do with that. Despite however I might feel about where Mudbytes, TMC, the community
or where MUDing in general is heading, I'm not one to just sit idly by and watch it go a direction
I'm not happy with. Why is that? It is because I care.



And I stand by that I have and will continue to do what I can to see that this happens.



That may be you, but I feel confident that I can point to my past actions and say that I'm different,
that I've shown that I do care.





Exactly! I disagree that it's easier said than done as Kiasyn said. I think this thread has been
proof we can skirt a sensitive issue without things getting out of hand.



This says it so well, and much of the Private Messaging Samson and I were doing back in forth after
the first thread was locked was very much to this end… It isn't clear what is acceptable, and based
off the Administration's behavior in that thread, the message was sent that it was okay for Zenn to
suggest that perhaps Russia invaded Georgia for Oil but it wasn't acceptable for me to suggest that
the US invaded Iraq for Oil. I don't think I need to point out the obvious contradiction in logic
there.



And that was one of the main issues I tried to bring to Samson's attention. Regardless of how I felt
about the situation, I tried to communicate to him as clearly and respectfully as I could that it at
least appeared as though he were taking a cheap shot before locking a thread that he didn't agree
with, and that doing such wouldn't cast a very favorable light upon the way the administration
handles moderation, and that perhaps in the future it would save them some grief to refrain from
exhibiting their own opinions about the topic or poster in question when locking the thread,
otherwise they risk it simply seeming like a petty attempt at getting in the last word and ensuring
no response or retort could be made. I tried to make it as much of an impartial plea as I could,
leaving out the fact that I felt like he was taking a cheap shot and that I felt personally insulted
by his comments.





Again, its refreshing to basically see the words being taken directly out of my mouth, and many
instances I'm simply quoting for reference, reiteration, or support of the opinions presented. Such
as the following I feel are necessary to be quoted in of themselves because I whole heartedly agree:











With all due respect, I think people are vastly exaggerating that "so many of the threads here …
got out of hand." I certainly agree that the old war between Cratylus and Samson over the post
editing that spilled over to TMC got out of hand, and I agree the taser thing got out of hand too.
But other than those two incidents in the (three?) years this place has been open, I think that's a
significantly impressive record. Certainly I haven't seen anything since the taser thread that has
gotten out of hand, and maybe I've simply just overlooked some of these threads, but there certainly
hasn't been anything since the taser thread that I can think of that would warrant this sudden rash
of oppressive thread locking. I genuinely ask that if I'm missing something, could you point out
some threads that have gotten out of hand so I have a point of reference for all the comments that
this apparently is a common problem here?





In my private correspondence with Samson, I did my best to try to relate where he was coming from,
despite my opinion of his need to play the martyr. That said, being an Admin here clearly doesn't
make him happy, and despite my insistance the last time he quit that he not do so, maybe he needs to
do this for him. When you can no longer take joy from a hobby, then that's often times when you need
to find something else to do with your time. For the record, and despite what I feel has been poor
decisions and mistreatment on his part, I don't want to see Samson leave. I've told him numerous
times despite whatever has happened between us, I respect him and his contributions to the community,
and I feel he could continue to be a constructive part of it if he would let certain things go, quit
feeling like everyone is out to get him, and actually listen to the group of people he is moderating.





I'm not trying to be difficult, but what is against the rules here is flaming/trolling. Nothing in
my post about the US and Oil was trolling or flaming. The topic of dicussion was the Russia/Georgia
conflict, and part of that topic was invading countries for oil. My suggestion that the US invaded
Iraq for oil was perfectly on topic and thus was in no way a troll. I certainly wasn't "flaming
America" and the fact remains that there is substantial evidence that supports the belief that oil
could have been a motivating factor in our invasion of Iraq. Likewise, the rule continues on the
guidelines for what is allowed. Allow me a moment to dissect this…

-Offensive: Sure, some people could have been offended by my comment, I fully acknowledge that, but I
also stand behind the idea that questioning one's government to help keep it in line is one of the
most important things a person can do as a proud citizen of their country. I love America, I really
do, and I don't want to see it go bad. I feel like questioning our government is a very patriotic
thing to do. Afterall, the horrors of WWII might have been avoided if Germany had been full of
people willing to question the motives of their government. If the US is invading other countries
for less than truthful reasons, or reasons motivated by greed, then I think it is our duty as
US-loving citizens (for those of us that are) to do what we can to keep our country from going the
route of other countries so that America stays the country we are proud to be a part of. It is the
Government's job to govern on behalf of its citizens, and it is the citizen's job to hold the
government accountable for what it does.

-Inaccurate: Again, there is plenty of evidence to support what I have claimed. This doesn't apply.

-Aimless: Once again, this doesn't apply.

"..to get attention, provoke an argument, or otherwise egg on other users." This is the important
part here. Sure, my suggestion that the US invaded Iraq for Oil might be offensive to some (no more
than Zenn's suggestion Russia might have invaded Georgia for Oil might have been offensive to a
Russian), but within the context of the intent of the statement as per the rules, then I did
nothing wrong as per the policy of this site. I certainly didn't do anything worse or different than
what Zenn did, and again, since his original post was basically validated and discussed by the
Administration, then there was absolutely nothing for me to think that my post might be any different
other than being on the "other side" of the debate.



I fully respect that opinion, and I believe that I probably made myself about as clear as I could
above. However…



If the initial post wasn't getting out of hand, then there is nothing to suggest that my post somehow
derailed the entire thread into having gotten out of hand. There was no chance for it. There was no
chance for it to get out of hand, to continue with someone asking me why I felt that way, no chance
for me to explain further if prompted on why I felt the way I did, no chance for us to continue to
discuss the Russian/Georgia conflict, no chance for me to respond to the personal insults made by
Samson… There was no chance for any sort of resolution, and I think that's part of the issue.





Totally agreed here. That's one of the reasons why I was suggesting to Samson in private and to the
forum in general that some sort of addition to the rules, the description of the General Board, or
some actual written point of reference on what is and isn't accepted discussion here would be
beneficial to the site and save the Administration a ton of trouble.





Count me in that group.



Amen to that. This post is going over 3 hours long for me to type. If I didn't care, I wouldn't
waste my time.





This entire process I've been suggesting what I felt like were solutions. Let me break it down a bit
more in a numbered order:

1) Ease up on locking threads the moment something sensitive is posted, it stifles conversation,
doesn't allow for any resolution, doesn't allow people a chance to discuss why they feel a certain
way, doesn't allow time for apologies (I'm still waiting on one), etc.

2) Be more clear in the rules page or the description of the General Discussion page on what is
accepted discussion here. If no politically sensitive discussion is allowed, say so. If no non-MUD
related discussion is allowed, say so and remove the General Discussion board. If no politically
sensitive discussion that disagrees with a more conservative, possibly right wing/republican opinion
is allowed, say so. Regardless of what is or isn't allowed, make it clear and enforce it equally.

3) When locking threads, avoid personal insults or opinions on the posters or subject at hand.
Basically, don't take a side then lock the thread. It does no one any favors, particularly the image
of the Administration. I feel like Kiasyn and Davion generally handle this pretty well: warning
that the thread is closed to being locked if people don't get back on track, splitting a thread if it
gets too far off, and ultimately locking a thread only if it steps over an established line or
boundary.




That isn't always the case, and I guess we'll never know if our political disagreements would have
went that way. I know I never had any intentions of flaming you, and if you had no intentions of
flaming me, maybe we could have actually discussed in a mature and respectful manner where we
disagreed.



I don't think that would do anything other than possibly increase the appearance of a group of
administrators with vastly different opinions and enforcement policies. I think a solid group of 3-5
moderators total with a clearly outlined policy and equal enforcement would be what would solve the
problem. If I know what discussion isn't allowed and I have a reference point, then either I'll
avoid that type of discussion or at least have no reason to complain if I indulge in it and the
thread gets locked. Its also important that if a thread has been validated by a moderator, not to
jump on the people that continue to discuss it. If a topic is taboo, it's really easy to see where
that started, and it's easy to stop it at the top rather than allow a subject that shouldn't be, then
jump on someone who partakes in the discussion in almost an identical manner that it was first
presented.



That's pretty much it for me. I don't know if I could be more clear about my position on all of
this, and what I feel my role and participation has been in it all. I absolutely mean no offense to
anyone I've replied to or have replied about. I want to see a solution come from all this, and I've
outlined what I feel would be appropriate actions. I consider myself to be a very reasonable person,
and I'll be more than happy to continue to discuss this in a mature manner as we have been doing, and
I'll be more than happy to work with the Administration of this site (as I offered to Samson) to help
reach some sort of middle ground or understanding on things that just boil down to miscommunication
or misinterpretation between some of the Administration and the Users here. As I said to Samson, I'm
really trying to play in their sandbox by their rules and do things the way they want them done. I
did what I could to keep that a private matter and conversation between Samson and myself, but other
matters and other people have made what I initially took to him in private a public conversation (not
saying our conversation exactly, but the topics we discussed have become things other people are
concerned about as well). So yeah, I'm here trying to help, along with everyone else, reach some
sort of solution that is good for everyone and for this site.

I'm reading what HK posted, but here's something else:

I tried that a few times and was met with such utter disinterest that I eventually gave up. Unfortunately, the topics were lost with the FUSS data loss, but, well, it just seems that people aren't interested in this even when somebody else gets things started. :shrug:

We're not them. Their failure is not our destiny.




Not on my forum ;)

Pretty sure we can make it work, if we're of a mind to.

-Crat
http://lpmuds.net

PS LOL HK megapost