The PPC Posting Board - Latest posts

Firstly, the difference between your and Matt's conduct.

Matt's harassment of July caused no irrevocable damage. When he saw the error of his ways, he was able to make amends for the totality of his actions - there was no risk of permanent physical or mental harm to July.

You, on the other hand, posted private information about her in a public place. This potentially placed her at risk of actual, physical harm. This difference, I think, justifies calling for your ban while allowing Matt to remain.

However, I believe that the people calling for you to be permanently banned are taking things too far. You have been an upstanding member of the community in every post of yours that I've seen, and I see no reason for you to be thrown under the bus for a first offence.

Furthermore, upon having the implications of your behaviour pointed out to you, you immediately recognised that you had done wrong and did everything in your power to make amends for it. By the Constitution, you should be given a second chance, which I think some people here have overlooked.

Because of the severity of what you did, though, I feel your second chance has to come after a period of banning from the PPC as a whole. There is a risk - however small - that your actions may lead/have led to JulyFlame suffering severe harm.

I hope that this sufficiently explains my perspective on your situation (and hopefully some of the people calling for permanent bans read this and come to their senses).

(I'm not sure whether voting is meant to go here, but I'll say it just in case: I vote for a six month ban of Tomash. I also call upon everyone involved in the Discord debacle to apologise to anyone hurt by their conduct.)

A six month ban for Tomash and resignation of Discord modship. No ban for anyone else.

Many people feel that I should be banned from the PPC, either permanently or temporarily, because I posted July's real name and face in the Discord chat on Thursday. I again acknowledge that what I did was completely unacceptable, and I cannot overstate my regret that I invaded another PPCer's privacy in such a drastic way.

I acknowledge that there was a remote possibility that what I did could have posed a threat to July's life, and I am horrified that I contributed to the possibility of that. I do, however, feel that, given the rather limited distribution of the screenshot (at most, say 30 people, none of whom I believe would want July killed, could have seen it before it was deleted, and I expect that the number of people who actually saw the information that didn't already know it is much smaller), several people have rather overstated an extremely improbable outcome.

I would like to attempt to describe what I was (or, more importantly, wasn't) thinking when I posted that screenshot. At that time, the chat was considering Iximaz's allegations. I wanted to provide a piece of evidence that would help the community decide whether or not Iximaz was right. I had been discussing that screenshot privately for several days, and, in my mind, it was the "conversation between July and Iximaz". In my emotional disarray at Iximaz's possible death (which was still entirely possible at the time) and how I might have helped cause it, I didn't think through what I was posting. I forgot that screenshot contained July's real name. Not paying attention to that was a terrible mistake, and I yet again apologize to JulyFlame for what I did. It shouldn't have happened.

Now, to those of you calling for a permanent ban, I would like to request my Article 7 second chance. I have stopped (or, in this case, attempted to mitigate the damage). I have apologized. I have come to a more complete realization of what I did. I would like to make amends. I beg all of you to allow me to do so instead of driving me out forevermore!

I don't know what form the amends will take. That is for you, the community, to decide. There need to be consequences for what I did. A common proposal has been a temporary ban from the Discord or the entire PPC community for some length of time. I can't say that wouldn't be an appropriate thing for me to do.

I'm a self-imposed ban (one that, in future debates, could be counted as a ban) from at least the chat if not the whole PPC so I can reflect on my actions in this entire mess. Could y'all please suggest an term? I can't seem to decide what would be a fitting one.

Additionally, several people have reminded us that a permanent ban has, in the past, been reserved for those who are so detrimental to the continued healthy working of the community that their presence will tear the place apart. They haven't been, and I understand, weren't meant to be, a penalty for a first offense by a PPCer who was otherwise in good standing. Is my mistake so terrible a sin that I should be cast out forever? Am I so beyond redemption that I can't be allowed here? Please tell me if you think that, I would like to know where I stand.

There are a few additional things I'd like to point out.

First, I would like to note that this is a much harsher range of proposed responses than were proposed when Matt Cipher harassed July about returning to the Discord. In that case, Matt apologized and resigned his power over the Discord server. To my knowledge, no one called for Matt to be banned. Could we, while voting on this, clarify if the reason for this is that my conduct was so much worse than Matt's or if it's because we have decided to get tougher on wrongdoers? I think answering that question will help the PPC make these decisions in the future.

Secondly, during this thread, there's been many mentions of witch-hunting and mob mentality. I would like to raise the possibility that many of the people involved in the doxxing, potentially including myself, are being unintentionally targeted by an angry mob. I think it's possible that the community, or some parts of if, want something, anything to be done, and my actions and the actions of others in the Discord have made us easy targets for collective anger. That's not saying I don't deserve to be punished for this, but could we all please take a moment to make sure I'm being punished with a clear collective head?

I would also like to ask that, since this is now a community vote, someone start making posts with tallies and such to make it easier to keep track of the status of the vote.

- Tomash

Perfectly happy to oblige. Thanks for the invitation.

1) I more than agree that Tomash was in the wrong for sharing that information. I more than agree that he ought to be punished. But not only has he already explained why he did the things he did and where he was coming from, he has deleted every copy he had of what was shared (last I heard, the only copy left around was in Ix's possession, but that might be outdated news now). I have also gathered that this was his first time doing things like this. A perma-ban? I don't think that's right. Several months - let's say six to be on the generous side - should be a sufficient show of not-letting-you-in.

2) A year's ban for that? No. That's still too much. I'm not going to say they should go unpunished - they were undeniably exacerbating the situation, from what I've gathered - but a year is way too long. It's long enough that there would almost be no point in coming back after the sentence was done. Two or three months is still more than I'd really like to give, but I'm trying to be impartial here.

3) I really don't have too many problems with Ekyl's period - but that's because he has admitted that he doesn't want an end to this mess. So I'm being a little less objective than I could be on that front.
But for Aegis? Heck no. In my opinion, he doesn't need a ban at all - he was worried for his not-yet-engaged-to-person. But if he were banned at all, a week or two would be fine.

4) An apology is fine.

I mentioned that we should, in fact, censor the information to protect July's privacy. I also specifically requested July's contact information so that I could get in touch with her obtain both her side of the story and her consent in posting the screenshot (and even that only in the event it became relevant). I wasn't even going to post it if she didn't give me permission.

I wasn't advocating plastering July's name and face all over the Board. I wasn't advocating anything but looking further into this mess by getting July's side of the story. I'm no longer advocating even that, as it's obvious to me, as explained by Neshomeh and Kaitlyn, that doing so would further no one's ends.

I wanted her opinion on all of this. The punishment for that, I'll happily accept.

You're right, I shouldn't put words in your mouth, and no, I'm not saying that silent once is silent forever.

My logic train goes something like this:

As you've noted, the idea of revising the Constitution (possibly from scratch) has come up here and in Discord, the idea being to put it in the rules that bullying behavior is not acceptable. Well, we already did that, and I find most of the names involved in the current discussion missing from that conversation. That's frustrating. The Board had a shot then at getting what they say they want now, but they apparently didn't take it seriously at the time. I don't see that it makes any sense to blame a failing of the rules for this situation when the rules would be there right now if more people had said unequivocally "Yes, we want this set in stone, please make it so" when it was under discussion before. That's what I mean when I say they have no right to complain about the Constitution. A document cannot be blamed for a failure on the part of the people responsible for creating and upholding it.

To explain the OR ELSE bit: What I see as a major contributing factor to this fracas is a serious lack of understanding of how to handle mental illness. I've attempted to explained this in my various posts. Therefore, in my head, any new rules meant to prevent a situation like this from arising again would have to address that facet of it, which I don't think would be appropriate or effective. That's where the hyperbole came from. I'm sorry for skipping the context.

~Neshomeh

A, you use your actual name when making that sort of random attack at Palindromordinlap,

B, you do so in its own thread,

C, you actually provide evidence beyond "trust me they're a terrible person"

And D, you do so on a forum where this stuff actually occurred, rather than trying to drag us into a Kintsugi witch-hunt?

Do I support building a community that's better at detecting and dealing with abusive members? Absolutely. Do I think hijacking an existing high-drama thread with vague, anonymous accusations is going to help with that? Absolutely not.

My own, if voted up, I will accept without objection. Heck, if I get a vote in this, I vote for my own. I'm not exactly a constructive influence at the best of times, and, regardless of what I think of any individual person, I can't say what I think of the community as a whole.

For the others, however, I think you're going too far. Tomash, particularly, does not deserve a permanent ban for a single mistake. To be clear, this is in light of the fact that, as far as I know, every copy of the screenshot in question has been deleted. Let us say that the screenshot was available for forty-eight hours, even though I believe it was likely more of a twenty-four hour matter. Assuming that we at least suppose PPC members are not secretly assassins for the Kremlin, that means there is a forty-eight hour window in which a hostile entity could have accessed the Board or Discord and found July's identity. For this small, accidental window created with the sole intention of bringing context to the general Discord, you propose a permanent removal. Whether there should be a temporary ban, I'll let others work out.

On the others? Firstly, a year-long ban effectively is a permanent ban. Expecting most people to come back after a year of absence is ridiculous. Such a period of exile for essentially seeing some kind of problem and wanting to move against it while acknowledging that in order to do so, they would have to take it to the Board, which I would like to remind you, they did, and I would also note that if they hadn't done so, it's very possible you wouldn't even know this had happened. For Aegis and Ekyl? Also ridiculous. We are talking about removing them for a third of a year for, essentially, continuing to present opinions about a future course of action. That's great. Truly.

An apology, I think, is in order from everybody, regardless of who is banned for how long, except perhaps Desdendelle, who argued against our actions and couldn't do much to actually stop us because he can't, say, forcibly prevent us from posting on the Board. I make one here.

JulyFlame, I would like to apologize for my actions and thoughts on you. I assumed the worst, without first knowing your side of the story, and because of that, I did not object when your personal information was revealed, and pushed to move the matter into an official inquiry without taking the time to examine why I did so. For this, I am sorry.

And now, two last notes. The first is on the nature of bans and temporary bans themselves. A ban is supposed to be the removal of an person who, to quote a friend, ".. is a repeat offender, is consistently not accepting of responsibility or punishments, and is unable to fit in with the community whatsoever." It is only to be used when somebody has proven that they cannot, beyond a shadow of a doubt, repent and reform into a constructive member of the community. A temporary ban is a moral punishment in which one person violates previously existing rules, and is intended to serve as a punishment, not as a way to drive them away from the community without initiating a full ban.

The second note is something that I believe everybody looking at this message knows, but I will say it anyways, because somebody must. Most, if not all, people looking at this thread say that Desdendelle's idea cannot be implemented, and so you have devised this new version, targeting specific people in order to attempt to sway others who would be opposed to this under most circumstances, to vote for lesser punishments in order to avoid ones of the severity you have proposed. I intend to pass no judgement here, I simply want to spell out what I think is on everybody's minds, that it may be acknowledged, perhaps argued against, and eventually moved past without turning into a festering sore in the minds of some.

This is all I have to say on the matter.

How people started going "We should change our Board policy so that the Iximaz situation will never happen again", and then promptly turn around and call people who defended them bullies and call for their bans.

For the record, we have confirmed abusers in the PPC community. As an example, palindromordnilap is a repeat offender who has harassed, threatened to doxx, and suicide baited and sent death threats to people.

Why shouldn't we ban those instead?

1) That was a mistake. I trusted Aegis. His reasons (he wanted to mitigate the damage when Ix's withdrawal ended (he thought it'd be the next morning)) sounded good at the time. It turned out that the deletions were the wrong thing to do, and I regret my panicked involvement.

2) When I initially heard the complaints several days before they were raised on the Board, I felt they couldn't be entirely accurate, but I trusted Iximaz enough to try and look in to them. My actions while doing so (see my reply to hS elsewhere) probably made things worse. I realize now that she had never spoken out about the things she was complaining of, publicly or otherwise. It took me a long time and several missteps to realize that I was hearing an extremely skewed interpretation of events and that no one else know anything about how Iximaz felt. I had a gut feeling something was off about what I was hearing, but I didn't want to dismiss it because of my frinedship. I'm sorry for all the trouble I caused with my half-hearted investigations and crusades.

I didn't really understand what had happened to Iximaz and what I (and she) needed to do that would be actually helpful.

3) I tried to not unconditionally believe what I was hearing without completely ignoring it. I didn't realize what was going on, especially since I didn't know about the mood swings caused by the new meds until after I'd heard Ix's thoughts on the community.

3.5) Good point.

4) Nesh, I completely understand your actions, and I think they were the right thing to do given the circumstances I am now more aware of. I thought ill of you without all the facts, and I shouldn't have done that.

5) There was a witchhunt. I'm ashamed that I threw fuel onto the fire by posting what I did. I hope that the remainder of the record shows that I didn't want to blame or punish July for that sort of thing, but I worry I was not clear about this at the time.

In general, Neshomeh, your comments on this situation and how it has been handled have been extremely helpful to me. I realized that I made a lot of mistakes in how I reacted to what Iximaz was doing and saying, and I believe I have learned from what you and others have been saying on the board so that I will be less unintentionally damaging in the future.

I admit I may have, as you said, wound myself too tightly around Iximaz's feelings, and done some very bad things because of it. Can I be forgiven?

I don't care for him or his contributions to the PPC one whit, but that doesn't and shouldn't invalidate his judgement; while I have my reservations about a self-confessed lurker barrelling into a sensitive discussion, this doesn't mean he shouldn't be listened to. This affects everyone in the PPC because it's indicative of cracks in the wall, and that isn't helped by dismissing other viewpoints out of hand. Isn't that what I've been complaining other people do?

(i am a hypocrite. this is not new information.)

PC, I apologise for that. Tempers are running high right now but that is no excuse.

Not everyone who said anything in the disaster wanted to go through with the Board doxxing. I know didn't. I've said multiple times that I told Aegis via PM not to go through with posting the info on the Board unless it was really needed, with consent, and with all personal information obscured for safety. I had not, to my knowledge, seen any instance of the information in the screencap being called for. I knew it wasn't a good idea to have anything to do with that screenshot; what I didn't know at the time is that the Discord channel is as public as the Board because not only could people who have access pop in and see the screenshot simply by scrolling to the conversation date, but the invite is publicly distributed so that, well, anyone else could. I've stated several times that I cannot apologize enough for not taking action against Tomash, and for doing absolutely nothing about the screencap being put on the Discord in the first place, as hS noted. I'm a busy, busy person, I was working on proofreading multiple academic papers at the time, and my dad was sitting right behind me while all this was happening, so if he so much as glanced in my direction I could be in serious trouble. Hence my relative lack of activity compared to certain other members. I've realized since then that I should've just taken the risk and spoken up against the Discord doxxing in the first place. Hindsight is 20/20, I guess.

With that being said, I have already apologized to the Board at large for not acting when I should have - and for that matter, not directing the actions I did take at the source of the issue - and I am willing to extend my apologies to JulyFlame specifically for the same reason. So, I imagine, would everyone else you've listed who have to do the same thing.

What I am not convinced about, however, is the notion that outright banning a number of people for taking part in a single huge offense is the best choice, especially after they've admitted, repeatedly, that they feel genuinely guilty about their actions. Tomash has stepped down as a chat mod and apologized multiple times to the entire Board for this incident. Granz and Alleb have also stated that they feel awful and that they won't repeat anything even close to this. I believe their words and accept their apologies, but at the same time I do feel that just a simple warning might not be enough. Banning them from the entire PPC community, though, is probably going to do more harm than good, even if said ban is temporary. Even if it was for good reason, I believe it would send the wrong message to those who've just found us and taken a first glance at what's been going on. Permabanning Tomash, who has been apologetic about the doxxing ever since it was first pointed out, could give the impression that you're not willing to listen to his feelings and give him a second chance. The closest I can think of to a metaphorical slap on the wrist would probably be to temporarily kick him and the others who started and/or exacerbated this incident from the Discord, for the amount of time you've proposed for each of them, but still allow them to participate in the PPC community as a whole, thereby at least giving them a chance to learn from their collective mistake. I don't know what other people would think of this, but it's probably the best approach I can think of to penalizing the kickstarting of what was plainly a witch hunt (even if I didn't realize that it was at the time). I repeatedly stated that there was nothing any of us could do to make things better, and I should've added that rampaging after someone else as though they were some sort of scapegoat would ultimately result in a complete and total cataclysm for everyone concerned. I can personally attest to that, having been subject to a witch hunt at least once in the past, and I can say with confidence that we as a community can and should do better than to start anything even close to one.

Be that as it may, I've stated this before in the Discord chat, and I'll state it again here: I am very, very disappointed in and ashamed of this entire clusterflock and the current state of the community in light of it. I joined the PPC in the hopes that it'd be more welcoming than any previous online community I'd known, but my faith in it has been repeatedly shaken, though not yet broken, by things like this happening more than once. In the aftermath of this fiasco, a very small part of me wants to say that if it weren't for my PPC writing responsibilities and the fact that I've made a number of good friends here that I can only contact via the PPC, I'd have walked out on everyone else here without a second thought. It's only a very small part, though, and I know ragequitting would not be helpful to anyone when I , and everyone else, should be striving to make this community a better place for anyone who visits it. (I'm also going to take this moment to say that I'm not even close to interested in being a mod for the Discord channel, having read your earlier opposition to electing anyone who was involved in this mess to that position. I've been through multiple occasions that have demonstrated that I'd make a horrible admin, plus I don't have even half the time to manage the Discord chat when I have so many other things to do as it is.)

Still, we as a community are better than this. We should be, and I hope we can be in the future. As it stands, though, there's still a long way to go before we can repair the damage that's been done to our collective spirit over the past few months, especially the past few days. And honestly, I think it's probably for the better that I distance myself from this whole conversation until my input or intervention is needed. The longer I read this entire mess, the worse I feel.

I'm not exactly pleased by some of what he's had to say, particularly calling for my head, but he's a respectable member of the community with valuable insight.

So, I've been here on and off for about a month and a half now. More recently, thanks to my stressful job and personal life, I've been off. But, I have really enjoyed being here, and i have decided that I would definitely like to write some PPC of my own. So, I humbly request permission to do so, and include the agent profiles I've written up. If you guys could check over them and see that everything is okay, that'd be much appreciated.

--------------------------

Agent Conrad Harke:

Age - 25

Species - Human

Gender - Male

Home Continuum - Warhammer 40,000

Appearance - Conrad has short jet black hair, pale skin and and blue eyes. His usual outfit consists of black military fatigues, a pair of leather Guard-issue boots, ident-tags and a white undershirt. The patch identifying him as an agent is on the right sleeve of his tunic. Thanks to his universe being originally from the UK, he has a pronounced British accent, though has never been there himself.

Personality - Conrad spent seven years serving in one of the most discipline-heavy armies in the multiverse, and it shows. Anyone above him gets called 'sir' or 'ma'am' whether they like it or not. He spends his free time either binge watching for research, working out in the gym or cleaning his gear. What sense of humour he has left is darker than your average Frankie Boyle routine. When on missions, he tends to be very focused to the point of being taciturn, and off mission, he is usually quite quiet, with any speech kept short and to the point. It takes a lot to get him angry, but when he does, revenge tends to be short but painful/humiliating.

History - Originally hailing from the grimdark universe of Warhammer 40,000, Conrad joined the PPC in 2014 after he fell into a Warp portal during a campaign against Chaos cultists and ended up in HQ. After being talked down from opening fire on several unlucky agents, he was recruited and took to the field eighteen months ago as a Floater. His previous life has served him well in his time at HQ, with his training as an Imperial Guardsman preparing him for working in Word Worlds, and his upbringing as a hiver lets him feel a little more at home in the corridors of HQ than most. While he has mostly adapted to the 21st Century, and understands most of the pop culture he works with, more obscure references and concepts still pose a bit of a problem.

Abilities - Conrad has had military training, and even if it wasn't very good or safe training, he still picked up some useful skills. He can provide basic medical aid if an agent gets injured in the field, has bushcraft knowledge and is skilled with both melee and ranged weapons, although he prefers the latter. He was a qualified sharpshooter in the Imperial Guard, but as he himself is quick to point out, he is no sniper.

Favourites/Lust Objects - Conrad has no lust objects, but he does have a soft spot for the entire crew of Serenity, as well as a great respect for Max Rockatansky.

--

Agent Elly Ruskowski:

Age - 22

Species - Human

Gender - Female

Home Continuum - Real World

Appearance - Elly is Caucasian, with dyed red hair and brown eyes. She usually wears blue jeans, a t-shirt of some description, trainers (sneakers) and a brown leather jacket with her Department of Floaters patch sewn on, along with a single nose stud. She speaks with an American accent, but likes to impersonate others, with varying degrees of success.

Personality - She has a tendency to get very excited when meeting characters she admires, and very angry when they're messed with, especially when her favourite shippings are broken up. This anger is usually worked out on mission with weapon practice or off mission with video games, though outside of missions in her favourite fandoms, she's usually either pretty calm and easygoing, or very hyperactive if something takes her personal interest, and especially if Conrad hasn't seen or read something she thinks is important. She swears a lot, but more as part of her everyday vocabulary than any real anger. In contrast, when she is in a rage, she tends to get much quieter, and use less explicit language.

History - A twenty-two year old from Colorado, Elly had a normal childhood, with good parents and little to worry about except exams, all very middle class. During her high school years, she was a civilian watcher, which lead to her being given the opportunity to join the PPC, a choice she now regrets. She has been working with Conrad in the Department of Floaters for around eighteen months.

Abilities - Elly isn't very good with ranged weapons, and generally prefers using swords and knives on missions where possible. She's a natural speedreader, which lets her pick up details from a Word World quicker than most would. Her encyclopedic knowledge of both pop culture and fandoms also comes in handy. She usually handles the exorcisms and charge lists.

Favourites/Lust Objects - Both of Elly's come from the MCU, and are Black Widow and the Winter Soldier/Bucky, respectively. However, she also has quite a special place in her heart for Ed and Ein of Cowboy Bebop fame.

--

RC #819: Some RC's are old enough to have seen many agents come and go over the unknown amount of time since HQ was set up. Old enough to have acquired quirks, non-standard design features, even personalities in a way. RC #819 is one of these.

It is laid out like a small apartment, with a central hallway leading to the door, and two rooms on each side. On the left as you come in are the two bedrooms, each with room for a bed, desk, shelves and not much more. On the right, there is a tiny bathroom with a shower, sink and toilet, as well as a lounge area. The lounge contains a television and Xbox, a mid-range desktop gaming computer, a well-loved sofa and the console.

As stated previously, #819 is old, and has been lived in by agents almost continuously since the mid 1990's, and more infrequently even earlier in the PPC's history. It shows. The amenities are all mostly modern, but small problems remain. Small unidentifiable scratches and marks are dotted around the RC, some of which look disturbingly like blood. The door has over a dozen names stenciled on it in white paint, and crossed out in red. The console took several bullets around the time of the Fanfic Explosion, and the alarm system is irreparable. Unfortunately, some well-meaning soul patched in an 2003-era iPod, which means that instead of the classic "BEEEEEEEEEP!!!", Conrad and Elly get Dies Irae from Verdi's Requiem blasted at them at one hundred and twenty decibels whenever a mission comes through.

Despite this, it is fairly homely. The lights aren't too bright, the electrical sockets all work, the beds are comfy and it somehow never seems as far to the cafeteria as it does from other places in HQ. What more could a pair of Agents ask for?

Which I made because I do not even slightly care what PC has to say about... basically anything, but particularly this.

Are you suggesting that because some chose not to speak up at one point on a single issue they are then henceforth banned from ever addressing that issue again in the future?

I am also not suggesting something so nonsensical as you think I am suggesting. I think that the amount of humor inserted may make some people not take all the rules seriously. At no point did I ever suggest that the rules should be "Behave like someone who's been taught to manage this incredibly difficult situation. OR ELSE!" Those were never my words.

I am merely suggesting something that looks like a real websites terms/conditions/rules/etc. And that gets to another point that has been addressed previously and I am now seconding that idea. I think we need some kind of formal moderation system. Because let's face it, if you leave it up to the individual, it is an exercise in futility.

Also again? No right to complain now? If you think that's what this is, then fine. Consider this me reoppening that discussion then.

Mainly because you can't dictate that people know how to handle themselves and others when someone is in crisis. "Behave like someone who's been taught to manage this incredibly difficult situation, OR ELSE!" Come on, if you want to be serious, be serious.

Also because, no matter how many times you rewrite the rules, it still falls to each individual to understand and uphold them. If people don't understand that the Constitution calls for decency, respect, and socially responsible conduct now, they won't after yet another re-write, either.

Also because we just did a re-write to address the subject of bullying and harassment and to streamline the articles. Not enough people pitched in to ratify it. Some claimed they didn't feel qualified to comment; most didn't say anything at all. The discussion was put aside for later on the grounds that the few people who were involved were burned out. If you were around then and could have stepped up but chose not to, you have no right to complain now.

~Neshomeh