The PPC Posting Board - Latest posts

It might be worth thinking about setting the requirement to consensus among the Community Managers and one other person, so as to prevent an excess of groupthink among those elected. I suspect finding one more person to weigh is something that wouldn't be much of a problem, On the other hand, I'm not sure if it'd have any effect on the groupthink that may-or-may-not otherwise take hold. I'm just tossing random thoughts out there.

I'd also like to point out that we used something like this procedure (a few influential people and a few newer people in favor of a ban + a lack of objections) in the Rifle Caliber Guy case (references to NSFW stuff in parts of the surrounding thread), so it's not like this is completely unprecedented.

- Tomash

None of the people involved in the incident with me are to my knowledge members of the PPC, which means they obviously weren't involved in the witch-hunt against JF. The incident in question involved a DeviantArt group that has since had to heavily revise its management system, with no connections to the PPC.

That being said, I said before that I wasn't entirely blameless, and that was because I'd angered these people by shoehorning myself into and attempting to take over their existing writing/art project, which is Not Cool and should in theory be handled by simply removing me from their group, which did happen. The smear campaign happened in the months afterward with several of the people concerned posting hateful remarks about my artwork, interests, and personality on my then-active DeviantArt profiles, and ultimately publishing an angry slanderous journal entry in a similar fashion. Only one or two people have made amends with me afterward for it; the rest have since ostracized me and from what I've heard, still regard me in a disparaging light, regardless of how much I've changed for the better. (The person who apologized to me via PM said that these people aren't worth my time, either, partly because they too had a falling out with them later on.)

I joined the PPC partly because I thought incidents of this nature wouldn't happen here. I should've understood that I was dead wrong, especially knowing the nature of communities in general, but at the same time I also know that we're not the kind of people to stoop as low as the ones who publicly humiliated me on dA. That's more than I can for, personally; I just hope we can do better in the future, and I certainly hope the disaster last March will be the last bit of drama I'll be forced to witness for a good long while.

I've been getting that feeling about us a lot lately, come to think of it. Perhaps it's just because I'm still a little enraged and disappointed at how things have been these past few months, though.

First, I'm not sure if the call for Community Managers is a proposal for moderators under a different name or something akin to Delta's suggestion downthread. On the assumption that it's the latter, I'm going to set out what I think you're asking for in more detail.

The proposal is that we should elect a group of Community Managers. On issues of community management (should X be banned? should X be given One Last Chance? should X be given a very stern collective warning? and so on) consensus among the Community Managers constitutes a decision by the community unless objected to. If people object to the decision, there's something controversial about it and we need to have a full vote.

This, of course, doesn't mean that non-Community Managers should stay out of community management (making proposals, voting on them, etc.), and certainly doesn't mean that everyone else loses their responsibility for calling out bad behavior. Heck, if everyone stayed away from that stuff, we wouldn't have any data with which to pick new community managers for if some the old ones leave.

What seem to be the arguments for this system is that we're basically doing it already, except we don't admit to it, and that, right now, the de facto Community Managers can't do anything without a long, arduous process of getting people to actually vote. Also, the current system means that issues that are important but not outrage-generating or controversial tend to never get resolved because not enough people feel bothered to do something about them, which is bad.

My personal thoughts on what I proposed above is that I hope we don't need to do it, but I fear that we do. I'm not currently planning to campaign for this, but if people seem to think it needs to happen, count me as a supporter.

As to minor roles, I don't think we need to formalize that stuff to any major degree. However, it might be a good idea to keep a list somewhere of community things we tend to do (unless we've already done this and I just haven't noticed), just in case someone would like to get things moving but is low on creative ideas.

As to proxy votes, I'm opposed. From what I can imagine, proxy votes (especially what we'll probably end up with, which is revocable proxy votes, where you can have someone vote for you in general, but take back your support on particular issues) will basically create the Community Managers proposal above, but worse. One problem is that you can only hand out a proxy once, which makes the group of proxy vote holders smaller than the hypothetical group of Community Managers. Another that you have serious liveness problems since it's really hard to decide who's a member around here. For example, if I had Laburnum's proxy for some reason, everyone would probably agree that that's completely pointless, since she's not around anymore. But where do you draw the line? That veers into a thorny patch of meta-questions no one actually wants to answer in a rigid way, so let's not do it.

- Tomash

If so, please can you either outline the details here, or email them to me at huinesoron@hotmail.com.

This is particularly important if you feel some of the people involved were also involved in the witch-hunt; if there has been a repeated trend, I feel the community is better off being aware of it.

Please note that this is a request, not a demand.

hS

Please take the time to talk to your moms today, and tell them that you love them as any child should. I'm sure they'll appreciate your gesture and your love as much as you do to them! :)

I think it's not so much a matter of the people the witch-hunt was apparently targeting accepting apologies from everyone who participated in it, including myself, though granted, that is a big hope of mine and I'm still holding out on the possibility that it happens eventually, no matter how long it takes. What's more important, though, is that it doesn't happen again. I've been told consistently in real-life that apologies for a bad habit won't matter if you keep repeating it, and in light of that I'm beginning to worry about the risk of another smear campaign happening to someone else in the future, especially given the hitherto untold issues that have come out of the woodworks in this very discussion. This is, after all, coming from someone who, despite not at all being blameless, was victimized by that very tactic a few years back (with only very about two of the ten or so people involved apologizing for it later). What good would making amends with Desdendelle and JulyFlame do to this community in the long term if, for example, the rest of you go on to turn on me for being, and I quote, "an intolerable and domineering attention whore", without giving me the chance to explain myself and make up for my own poor behavior? Look, even if Des and July forgive us (and mind you, I've already stated above that I sincerely hope they do), what good would that do if we just let this behavior continue?

I tried as much as I could to stop everyone literally while this whole fiasco was unfolding before my eyes, but I didn't have any significant time on my hands, and I certainly didn't want my dad to walk in on me and force an explanation as to what was happening out of me for fear of being forcibly pulled out of this community because of it (as he has done with other online social networks before). From what I've heard, though, the heat of the moment meant that there were far too few people speaking out against the witch-hunt in any major capacity, with Des being the only one to have done so IIRC. Almost everyone else either actively participated in said witch-hunt, did nothing to stop it, or tried to speak up but got drowned out.

And I'm not even going to get started on the accidental doxxing. Everyone's talked about it better than I ever could, and I just hope that senseless act does not happen again.

In any case, I think there's more to be done about the witch-hunt than simply making peace with the targeted people, as welcome as that would be. If it looks like a smear campaign is about to form against anyone, period, then more people need to work harder and speak louder in a bid to nip it in the bud. It also upsets me greatly that I shouldn't even have to explain all this, and I won't have to in most cases. If by some anti-miracle this running out of people for petty reasons ends up becoming a habit, gods forbid, then I'll have lost faith in this community as a whole.

http://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen7ou-576216916

Sorry I missed the first comment

The way I see it, the majority of the community seems passive on these matters, unwilling to put their big-boy/girl/nonconforming boots on and dive in. Other times, helping seems like an arduous task. My second post on the Board was about my need to feel like I'm contributing, but it took a great act of will for me to even type this. This is why I propose the following command structure:

*A handful of people to be elected Community Managers. Those in this position are responsible for calling votes, approving proposals for the community, and if worst comes to worst, banning members.

*Several minor community roles are to be created. These roles may be things like running weekly CAHQ games or teaching the ropes to newbies. Roles should be simple things that make our community feel more like a community. Everyone who has been around for a few months is encouraged to take up a role.

*Some representatives. Those who do not wish to partake in votes or discussions can instead put their support behind representatives. Representatives vote on behalf of their supporters. This is far from ideal, but as-is we have a rather large participation problem, and need to grease the wheels in some way.

Since there is some doubt about how many Boarders even look that far down the page, here is a link to follow.

Since Tomash is currently only allowed to post in that one thread, I advise against taking the discussion up here. Please continue commenting on the original thread. Thanks in advance for your – yes your - participation.

HG

This appears to be the original meaning of the Italian word confetto, while the small pieces of paper called Konfetti (German) or confetti (English) are coriandolo in Italian. Sergio Turbo could tell you more about that. Also, throwing sweets as well as Konfetti is still a thing in German carnival.

HG

(On a meta note, I suspect people generally don't scroll this far down the Board. If that's the case, could someone either link to or repost this further up the front page?)

So, I've looked over this thread and some of the discussion from March, and I've noticed that there's a general sentiment that there's something wrong with the PPC's social dynamics. That is, something about how we view each other, interact with each other, or what we do or don't do as a community is causing a serious issue.

However, no one seems to quite agree on what the problems are, let alone the solutions. I've heard (this is not a comprehensive list):
- People being too deferential to oldbies
- People expecting the oldbies to run the place
- The newbie-oldbie split in general
- Newer people not participating in the community like previous new people did
- Direct democracy failing, in general, because people don't engage with discussions like this one
- The community being too forgiving of bad behavior
- The community tending to ignore bullying when it occurs
- Live chats being a cause of drama and problems by their very nature
- A group of people having wound themselves too tightly around Iximaz's feelings
- A spade of recent incidents eroding everyone's trust in each other, especially when it comes to private information

We've already decided that sweeping bullying/harassment under the rug is an issue, and we seem to be doing a decent job (see the Bram thread) of changing our behavior (or are we?). However, as the recent posts in this discussion have shown, other general issues appear to exist.

So, two questions:

1. What, if any, are the social dynamics of the PPC that are or could become problems?

2. Who should do what to solve those problems?

Then, when it comes to the people or group specifically named as problems, here's what I've heard:

- Ekyl (Brink): Ekyl and Iximaz seem to be satisfied that the matter is resolved (or at least that appropriate apologies have been given), so there's probably not much more to discuss here

- Ekyl (DIA ownership claims): Ekyl's said he sort-of did this in the past and that it won't be happening again. It's unclear (but likely) that this counts as a resolution.

- Ekyl (being manipulative/insincere): There's a general sense that Ekyl's words often come off this way, even if (as a lot of people seem to believe) that wasn't intended. Ekyl has been given advice on how to avoid giving off this impression.. It's unclear that this counts as a resolution.

- Scapegrace: No clear consensus. Can we get a few more opinions?

- HerrWozzek and Nord Ronnoc: They've apparently mutually decided to stay away from each other, which should resolve things

- Granz: Has apologized and acknowledged that the second chat server was a bad idea. It sounds like this has resolved the issue, but it's not entirely clear given how few people are in that part of the thread.

- Huinesoron and Neshomeh: The general sense seems to be that they're good people who put a lot of work into the community, and that they're not controlling evil dictators who prevent their friends from getting banned or anything like that. They've also come up in discussions of the newbie-oldbie split, but the general feeling is that there's not anything much they can do about it.

- The witch-hunt: Heck if I know. The thoughts I've seen seem to be that no one needs to get banned over that, that it was bad, and that the people who did it shouldn't do it again. Unfortunately, the people who can accept apologies for what happened there aren't around anymore, so it's hard to declare that resolved.

So, that's what I've heard. Not a very short summary, but these weren't short threads either.

On a personal note, it might be a good idea for the people who've been told they've come off wrong when apologizing during this to retry their apologies, taking the advice they've gotten into account.

- Tomash

Have a look at Luke's burning Jedi Academy, and tell me it might not run in the family.

--Aegis, encouraging wonderfully ridiculous fanfiction.

We're gonna talk about taking a whole planetary system and setting the orbital interactions to music and we're not gonna talk about this?

"Everything has to be fandom related these days" indeed. :P

I will be free before 12:00 Eastern Times, and After 18:00 Eastern Time.

I'm too lazy to go back and rewatch the match, but if I remember right, I panicked, realized I didn't have any good counters, and started forcing AI to switch out and doing my best to annoy him into losing. Sometimes it works. :P It's a good backup when things go sideways.

I had too many sweepers to really make the hazard thing work, but no matter; next tourney, I'm planning on a Rapid Spin+Haze team to irritate everyone even more.

My team got trounced by a six-year-old earlier today, so they need time to recover their morale anyway. ^_^

(Well, he spends so much time playing imaginary Pokemon fights that just involve him declaring that his Pokemon wins everything that I thought a proper battle might do him good...)

How are you fixed for tomorrow?

hS