I don't see what new things can be added to the topic at hand without
> Hank speaking for Mahz to address the key points mentioned here,
> Mahz speaking for himself in an open post in this thread, the far more optimal course

Otherwise, 'yall have already said your pieces, and you're just going in circles on the same old shit. The most important factor - the face that actually owns this place - is the factor that can add something new to the discussion, and take everything that is said and turn it into something cohesive.

Otherwise there's not much of a point to going on and on and on here. As for when he gets back -

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

It was a good post Hillan, until you said the part about Inkarnate running away with his tail between his legs and not being welcome there.

We should consider how Inkarnate would feel having to read that.

@Hillan

Literally who cares

If you (Ink that is) are too butthurt from reading that you really shouldn't be in the talks

@Andreyich

I didn't think I was going to be making another post, and despite my earlier plea to not jump down people's throats, you deserve special attention.

So far you've done nothing but use inflammatory language and insulted people participating in this discussion without adding anything of remote value. Please stop or start participating in the talk at large. Thank you.

<Snipped quote by Gareth>

Literally who cares

If you are too butthurt from reading that you really shouldn't be in the talks

we cant have conversation if we dont care about each other.

<Snipped quote by Andreyich>

we cant have conversation if we dont care about each other.

I care about others which is exactly why I think someone should be mature enough to not be "hurt" after reading Hillan's post because considering the nature of the thread such stuff to raise "feelings" will repeat/rise again.

Oh and I did join """the talk at large," unwillingness to read is an indictment of the other party rather than me, and your whining also detracts from "the talk at large" so don't white knight plox

<Snipped quote by Andreyich>

we cant have conversation if we dont care about each other.

We don't have to care about each other, but we can make a minimal bloody attempt to be civil.

Otherwise the whole line about changing things for the better looks like nonsense and is far easier to dismiss.

@Andreyich

Please discuss civilly or leave the thread. I want to welcome all forms of feedback and opinions including yours, but if you can't do it in an eloquent manner than I am politely asking you to leave.

I stand my ground.

defending useless statements aimed at someone's character and saying they simply shouldnt care or be mature about it.

I guess they could overlook a slight on their character, but defending it and saying they shouldnt be 'butthurt' is not a mature thing to do.

maturity takes into consideration politeness.

and saying only civility is needed is not enough.

emotions run high because people dont care about each other and so they dont care about what the other person says.

civility alone equates to I agree to disagree. Anger and frustration bubble beneath the surface, believe me, I've been there.

I was going to make an exhaustive post and quote every relevant post that I wanted to reply to but the thread had since moved with such speed that I'm just abandoning the idea and going with a more general approach. Thank you for your concern, by the way, @pugbutter. I'm already feeling better.

First things first: no, I cannot speak for Mahz or his actions. In the end, this is his site and his site only -- we're not equals. But I'm a strong, independent black woman who don't need no man co-Admin so I'm going to assert my authority anyway. And, knowing what Mahz is dealing with at the moment, I think he'd want me to take charge of this situation, so here goes.

We (the moderators) have talked about these issues very extensively over the past few months. In fact, this has been practically the only thing on our plate for ages. I believe the only unrelated permaban we had to hand out these months was Ace of Hearts. Everything else has orbited around this particular piece of drama, so it's obviously a serious situation and I understand its gravity. And I would like to apologize on behalf of all of us. We regret the sequence of events that has led us here and understand that we're not blameless.

Several of the bans in question will be overturned -- some starting immediately, others in the near future. I will contact the parties involved myself. Those who said that the rules haven't been applied uniformly and that emotion was a factor are right, I won't deny that. But we're humans, we're all emotional creatures, and especially when it comes to something we're as passionate about as the Guild. Sometimes people, who are just as passionate about it, bring up issues they have with combative rhetoric after previous attempts to get something done (and nothing much happened) and it's easy to fall trap to the idea that they're being disingenuous in their concern. To those people, and especially @Odin, I want to emphasize my regret over how this situation has escalated (in part) because of our inaction.

We will become more transparent. One way or another, preferably with Mahz's help (but I don't blame him if he can't spare the time right now), the staff will maintain a public audit log of our actions against offenders and, if possible, we will engage in dialogue with offending users to make sure they understand why we're taking action before we hand out bans. Discord, being as fast-paced as it is, will have to accordingly be moderated faster & looser, but such is the nature of chatrooms vs forums.

That said, the rules are not going to be rewritten again. They were changed recently and I believe in them as they stand. I am, however, open to suggestions on the application of said rules and the moderation policy itself.

I am also not going to change the staff roster at this time, nor will moderators be elected democratically. I reiterate that this isn't a country and real life political systems do not apply. But your concerns have been heard and lessons learned by all of us.

Now.

In return, I want to ask something of the community as well. Please help me in deescalating this situation. I have taken a step back, evaluated the current situation as objectively as I can, and in the future I want to hear & fairly treat everyone's concerns with staff members, should they arise again... but not in public threads like this. You've all seen how quickly this got sidetracked repeatedly and it was only through frequent reminders of both moderators and regular users that it hasn't spiraled out of control. Threads like this are always a hotbed for drama. And I understand that many people feel the moderators should be held to a higher standard than the other users, and that's definitely true to some extent, but the rules are still the rules and witch-hunts against moderators are just as bad as witch-hunts against regular users -- which are against the rules. I know @pugbutter doesn't want us to cry about how tough our jobs are, but we're still people with feelings trying to do our best. Alright?

Not speaking for myself, by the way. I have no feelings. Shit on me as hard as you want, I can take it. But show a little mercy to the others and if you want to vent and rage about a moderator, do it to me.

Any questions?

I won't get everything I want out of your decisions, @Hank, but that's fine. I'm glad that some progress, any progress, has resulted from this, and that with some cooperation between users and staff, we might never again have to create a thread like this and let it grow so big and urgent. I'm satisfied with the compromise.

That said, the rules are not going to be rewritten again. They were changed recently and I believe in them as they stand. I am, however, open to suggestions on the application of said rules and the moderation policy itself.

If I might make a suggestion in the interest of helping you with your audit log?

Maybe try something like this?

User Reports
[b]Username of the Mod who responded to the situation:[/b]
[b]User action was taken against:[/b]
[b]Rule that was broken:[/b]
[b]Evidence of infraction:[/b]
[b]Actions taken:[/b]

I don't know if this will make things easier, or more difficult for you, but I thought I'd try and suggest it anyway.

Looks good, @Celaira. I was thinking along very similar lines myself.

I hope so too, @pugbutter. That said, I would like to award you the prize of Most Offensive User during the recent events. The frequent Nazi comparisons and other formidably venomous words have been a constant source of top-grade vitriol over the last few months. You have a skill for dragging someone's name through the mud that few people can match. It both impresses and appalls. Have you considered a career in politics?

@Hank An inconsistency I find myself thinking of 99% of the time when considering bans on RPG is that 99% of the time you guys take forever to ban the people that are really unwanted here (i.e. ace of hearts who had already been warned a few times if memory serves me right) but when it comes to non-offending members or members that made a minor transgression against the wrong person the response time can sometimes be within a minute.

Ace of Hearts is an example of that. Took way too long.

If I could only be a fly on the wall of the moderator discussions. I'd be sure to add more to my stash of hilarious RPG memes and screenshots (all for hilarity, none for drama mind you).

@Hank An inconsistency I find myself thinking of 99% of the time when considering bans on RPG is that 99% of the time you guys take forever to ban the people that are really unwanted here (i.e. ace of hearts who had already been warned a few times if memory serves me right) but when it comes to non-offending members or members that made a minor transgression against the wrong person the response time can sometimes be within a minute.

Ace of Hearts is an example of that. Took way too long.

Context is important to us. Ace of Hearts was a frequent offender, yes, but his behavior (that I know of) was contained to the Mildly Political Hangout thread, a place we've taken a more lax approach with when it comes to moderation because there has to be somewhere the people can bitch at each other for being on the wrong side of the political spectrum.

Response times are also heavily subjected to where our attention happens to be at any given time. This was less of a problem in Oldguild because there was a fully fleshed-out report system in place, but I know that a proper report system for the current Guild is at or near the top of Mahz's list.

@Cyndyr

First of all, a toast to cynder. None of this would have happened without her, for better or worse. I am in your debt, a thousand salutations to you.

@Ruby @Hank @Kangaroo

I have to thank Ruby for being understanding and even attempting an earlier repeal. Thanks, I really appreciate it, as you had my back since the beginning.

Thanks to Hank, who has responded to this situation in a respectful way. Thanks again for the unban.

And thanks to kangaroo, who I assume investigated the situation for me.

Yeah, I'm happy with how this turned out.

One last final thank you to everyone who understood where we came from, thanks for the support!

This thread got surprisingly stupid and vitriolic for a bit there. Wouldn't have even blamed the mods for locking it. Glad y'all came back from the brink.

I disagree with the idea that we shouldn't have public discussion threads like this in the future on a fundamental basis. Threads like this are a hotbed for drama and frankly will attract undesirable people to the conversation at times, but when private discussions get nowhere then something like this is necessary. However, ideally there shouldn't be a need for threads like this in the future and that can be achieved through staff accountability as has been generally agreed upon in here.

I suppose that's my last two cents before I actually take it to PMs.

P.S. @Inkarnate just because you try to word yourself eloquently or politely doesn't mean you haven't been "combative and antagonistic" yourself. Discreetly hostile isn't much better than openly hostile. Just wanted to point that out since the phrasing you used and others repeated bothered me a little. It applies to more people than just you and moreso to some of them. I probably don't need to name them, they aren't difficult to guess. I'd be on the list too if I cared to persecute myself.

@The Spectre
Two parts to this answer.

Firstly the return, a while ago (around or month or two I'd guess) a fair chunk of my time freed up and I mentioned to Hank that if he felt like he wanted me back on the team, I'd be happy to do it. I was then invited by Hank a few days ago to rejoin the team as my perspective on this issue was wanted and I delivered that as I saw best.

As for my own activity, well I finished my masters degree so I'm no longer both studying full time and working full time. Will I be an active role player? I would say unlikely because I felt out of the loop with that a while ago. Will I be active on the forums? If I see a thread that I feel I can positively contribute to and piques my interest then I will be involved in it.

I'll likely be most active on the discord due to accessibility and quicker response times, but unless my work blows up something crazy and starts bleeding 6-7 days a week out of me, all should be well.

Everything else has orbited around this particular piece of drama, so it's obviously a serious situation and I understand its gravity. And I would like to apologize on behalf of all of us. We regret the sequence of events that has led us here and understand that we're not blameless.

First and foremost, I would like to thank you for acknowledging that this isn't a minor matter or that I've "simply been seeking attention". Over the past few days, I've been subject to quite a bit of mockery for creating this topic and it is very refreshing for someone to acknowledge that perhaps I have a point, let alone someone that is authority. That being said, I also acknowledge that the users are somewhat at fault ourselves in some ways, so I apologize on behalf of myself for any faults that I personally hold responsibility for.

Several of the bans in question will be overturned -- some starting immediately, others in the near future. I will contact the parties involved myself.

I've seen that Nytem4re has already been unbanned on the Discord, so thank you (and the rest of the Staff team) for doing this.

The staff will maintain a public audit log of our actions against offenders and, if possible, we will engage in dialogue with offending users to make sure they understand why we're taking action before we hand out bans. Discord, being as fast-paced as it is, will have to accordingly be moderated faster & looser, but such is the nature of chatrooms vs forums.

Thank you for this as well, I'm looking forward to seeing this function being implemented.

That said, the rules are not going to be rewritten again. They were changed recently and I believe in them as they stand. I am, however, open to suggestions on the application of said rules and the moderation policy itself.

While this slightly disappoints me, I entirely understand. If it isn't too much to ask, I think there should be notification for when the rules are updated in the future. Perhaps I am misinterpreting this scenario (which I admit is VERY possible, so bear with me), but it seemed as if Mahz had added the "No Discord drama" rule right around the time that J8cob placed the screenshot in his signature as if to find a reason to ban J8cob. Of course, I don't disagree with this rule in general nor am I accusing Mahz of this, but I do think that there should be announcements in the future when the website's rules are rewritten/revised, even if said announcement is only done in the Dev Journal.

Please help me in deescalating this situation. I have taken a step back, evaluated the current situation as objectively as I can, and in the future I want to hear & fairly treat everyone's concerns with staff members, should they arise again... but not in public threads like this.

I can't really promise anything for the future, but I will seek out staff members before resorting to "going public" when situations arise in said future. That being said, I can promise to help de-escalate this situation and will happily do so. If there is any specific measure that I could take in order to help this process along, then please let me know. I will certainly help to the best of my ability.

Any questions?

None, but if you have any for me and/or the other parties involved, then my PM box is always open. Thank you again for responding and thanks to @Rilla, @Ruby, @Sherlock Holmes, @NuttsnBolts, and @Kangaroo for giving this thread a bit of their time. The same goes for all users that offered their thoughts and feedback or simply read along.

P.S. @Inkarnate just because you try to word yourself eloquently or politely doesn't mean you haven't been "combative and antagonistic" yourself. Discreetly hostile isn't much better than openly hostile. Just wanted to point that out since the phrasing you used and others repeated bothered me a little. It applies to more people than just you and moreso to some of them. I probably don't need to name them, they aren't difficult to guess. I'd be on the list too if I cared to persecute myself.

That’s a very good point, but my “ousting” of the aforementioned server wasn’t done in the name of hostility just for the record. I answered a question that asked to me directly and a good amount of people didn’t like the question which is definitely fine. My opinion of the situation is exceptionally biased and are observations based on the perspective that is extensively critical, but such wrongful actions I criticized I did admit to involvement within. Like I posted in the status I find it peculiar people are upset of an answer when they asked the question. I’m more awake now and have a clearer mind so I’m looking over my previous posts to see if I were emotionally compromised or wrong in my own rhetoric.

Also, I appreciate Gareth’s posts, but I don’t need someone to play moral defender of me or my actions. I don’t need a stuffed animal to hug because mean inclinations will hurt my feelings.

On the subject of Grimhildr I never suggested they were indoctrinated but simply their purview radically changed within a short time thus equating that people she were around influenced her and by extension her actions greatly. Just because I think Valhalla had a role to play in all of this and I criticized that role doesn’t mean I want to slanderize or “go after” the server. And also, writing off my entirely subjective stance as bait is rather flimsy but I can understand emotions were running time at the time of the post. This had nothing to do with me “running with the tail between my legs” or inflaming members of a third party community because no emotions are hurt. I’ve buried that and I think everyone going forward should bury it just the same. As I respect discourse, I will reply to some key points that were written whilst I was sleeping.

And I don't think that it was bad. People were rightfully upset by Ruby's action and demanded that she was punished. It sounds fair to me. It isn't bad to ask why the staff isn't doing anything about the whole Ruby situation. Do you think it's bad?

Yes, due to a variety of reasons. It’s not that people were upset about a staff appointment, but more that they were trying to plan ways to remove her due to strictly emotional dissonance.

I hope that you have some examples that directly links to Valhalla? I can understand if you are talking about Grim but it sounds like you are talking about other people besides Grim.

Understand this observation was during my time in Valhalla and not its current state of affairs. It also happens to be an observation that is entirely subject to what I think about a popular server loosely connected to the site spreading what we could call crass and filterless decorum to the point it was making certain behaviors popularly acceptable. This is also something that cannot be objectively measured, but you did want my answer to the question of how Valhalla fits into things subjective (and prospectively wrong) or not, correct?

Please tell me an example where someone was targeted by members of Valhalla.

Did anyone target people beyond the blacklist by my memory? I don’t think so. But I didn’t say they went beyond their server and antagonized anyone directly. My point is Valhalla impact on the community is distinct and measureable, not that it has made a conspiracy to attack users beyond its inner confines and should be 'shut down' or some other sentiment. Your central idea was that it is just a chatroom with users to talk about the staff of the site, no? Ultimately, after re-reading all of this I have come to the conclusion that I have no fucking idea how I went from How do you think Valhalla impacts the site to effectively answers Why do you think Valhalla is issue. You did not ask me that question and I just sort of loosely answered your question before misdirecting it which is an asinine tactic that is not only idiotic but intellectually dishonest. While I still believe what I believe there is no explanation or excuse for that kind of misdirect.

Apologies.

With that, I’d like to publicly clarify and correct something Hillan inferred – that I’m projecting feelings of members. I do not currently have any feelings about the people involved only actions done retrospectively. I have no problems with Odin or his friends and acquaintances despite misdirecting in a discussion when I should not have. Just because I criticize it does not mean I am currently in discontent; same with people here who have constructively had issues with staff policy. Beyond that, I am glad this is all sorted out and the only reason I replied is I said I would respond to points directed at me in the name of equal dialogue. If anyone wants to continue this discussion it probably would be better suited away from the thread as I much like everyone else do not want to deconstruct the work done here from all sides to effectively end the issues present. My PM and DM boxes are open. I will not ignore them.

Did anyone target people beyond the blacklist by my memory? I don’t think so. But I didn’t say they went beyond their server and antagonized anyone directly.

To clarify this blacklist: it was a 'project' that I did not agree with but was willing to host for the purpose of seeing if it did anything at all in terms of helping people avoid others. This was not for OOC grievances and I took great care to ensure that the only reason people could get placed on there was if there was any risk of them being a nuisance in an RP environment. I repeatedly left people off of this 'blacklist' because I felt the reasons were personal, not objectively due to RP experience.

An example I can give was I put a user on the blacklist that couldn't take no for an answer, and got upset emotionally when people declined her infinite requests for a roleplay leading up to suicide threats. I found that to be an objectively rational and reasonable reason to put someone on the blacklist.

An example of someone I didn't put on there was when someone brought forward evidence of someone being a bit of a twat and after reviewing the person's evidence, I decided that yes, the user was being a bit of a twat but keeping in mind the context I decided that this wasn't really worth a blacklisting because of caveat emptor, but also because it just wasn't that serious. It looked like personal grievance, not a legit complaint, and thus I didn't want it in my server.

I feel like your critique then is a bit dismissive of what it actually was, as if you looked at the title and decided 'blacklist' meant we simply put everyone we didn't like on there to publicly shame them.

You'll find that is a mistake and that RPG's hall of fame is more like a public hall of shame.

I hope I clarified what it was. I deleted it now because like I said, I didn't really see the merit and after hosting it it fell out of use because the idea was less good than people originally thought it'd be.

My point is Valhalla impact on the community is distinct and measureable, not that it has made a conspiracy to attack users beyond its inner confines and should be 'shut down' or some other sentiment. Your central idea was that it is just a chatroom with users to talk about the staff of the site, no?

Let me speak here as the owner of the server. The server was originally made as an off site hangout for my friends, from RPG and off of RPG. There was and is no relation to RPG beyond the fact that some members (most) come from RPG. The intent of my server however has nothing to do with RPG, and that includes 'talking about the staff'. If people perceive it to be that and thus join for that, that is not my concern, because they'll find that the server is more than that.

Yes, it happens to be that most banned people/critical people have treated my server as a sort of refuge to say things they can't say elsewhere. Treating that as the core of Valhalla is your mistake, not ours, because that's not what the server is about regardless of if that's how it's treated by some. Similarly that is their mistake, not ours.

Nor is it supposed to be a closed server where 'the guild terrorists' can meet, twist their mustaches and prepare terrorist strikes on the cities and streets of RPG. There's a reason I made it open to all. You know that. There's a reason why I let Hank into my server to assist him at some point to investigate claims made by a member of the server.

It's not because I want to bad mouth the admins. If I did, then I'd have kicked RomanAria and the person that keeps screenshotting things and sending it to you long ago. I am well aware of who enters my server and who is doing what behind the scenes. I'm not blind nor am I stupid.

Ultimately, after re-reading all of this I have come to the conclusion that I have no fucking idea how I went from How do you think Valhalla impacts the site to effectively answers Why do you think Valhalla is issue. You did not ask me that question and I just sort of loosely answered your question before misdirecting it which is an asinine tactic that is not only idiotic but intellectually dishonest. While I still believe what I believe there is no explanation or excuse for that kind of misdirect.

Apologies.

Nobody cares. Like you said. 'Valhalla' is not a topic worthy of discussion, which perhaps leads me to question why it was brought up to Mahz in the grand scheme of things, but honestly, none of the moderators have ever asked me about my server so it has lead me to believe that they, as a whole, agreed that my server is entirely uninteresting to RPG as a whole. Of course, there's a moderator presence now, but it hasn't stopped us from saying what we want to say. If anything it has made the time spent in my server for that mod slightly more unbearable, lol.

With that, I’d like to publicly clarify and correct something Hillan inferred – that I’m projecting feelings of members. I do not currently have any feelings about the people involved only actions done retrospectively. I have no problems with Odin or his friends and acquaintances despite misdirecting in a discussion when I should not have. Just because I criticize it does not mean I am currently in discontent; same with people here who have constructively had issues with staff policy. Beyond that, I am glad this is all sorted out and the only reason I replied is I said I would respond to points directed at me in the name of equal dialogue. If anyone wants to continue this discussion it probably would be better suited away from the thread as I much like everyone else do not want to deconstruct the work done here from all sides to effectively end the issues present. My PM and DM boxes are open. I will not ignore them.

The discussion is entirely irrelevant and I don't feel like it's gonna warrant another discussion because I don't think there are questions between us about the meaning of Valhalla. I think I clarified what Valhalla is and isn't.