We are creating a consistent standard for the community conduct for both site and Discord. The Discord is an extension of the site community. These rules will hold staff accountable for making consistent decisions for the entire community, not just part of it. I’m also a fan of holding staff accountable in all areas where we have failed before, which would include the site since unsavory content also exists on the site.

The discord is, indeed, an extension of the site.

And it is not, in fact, the domain called roleplayerguild.com.

I don't use the third party program chatroom so I'm, quite frankly, not sure why I need to care about anything that goes on in there. Set up a rules channel. Make it "guild rules + these guidelines". You already have what's essentially a separate mod team; regulate yourselves. Discord staff aren't guild staff, and before anyone suggests making them as such, I'd really rather they not be.

I'm gonna be real with you, I'm not even against the suggested change. I haven't been from the first, I just think you all make some really bad arguments in favor of it and the situation that spawned it is completely irrelevant to the conduct of members on-site. Unless something fresh is said on the topic, I'm gonna hop out of this thread again. I'm mostly spinning my wheels right now.

Either start banning people on the forums for bans they eat in discord, or treat them as separate things. I don't support a subsection of the community getting to decide what's best for everyone else, quite frankly.

Either start banning people on the forums for bans they eat in discord, or treat them as separate things. I don't support a subsection of the community getting to decide what's best for everyone else, quite frankly.

Yeah that's my main problem.

I don't support a subsection of the community getting to decide what's best for everyone else, quite frankly.

+1

Especially whenever it comes from an insincere place.

From experience in dealing with the staff in the past to extreme lengths on both sides as the reporter and the reportee, a small subsection of the community has always gotten to decide what's best for everyone else regardless, that will never change, it's the nature of the beast and it comes down to whomever can best rules-lawyer their way into getting other people in trouble and/or who has the best friendship/rapport with a given moderator. The only case where this isn't the case is where two completely unknown people in the community are involved and there can be no friendship nor rapport.

The succinct lack of features to support a) holding community members accountable, b) holding staff members accountable and c) streamlining the actual bloody process you need to go through to report anything or anyone means that this will never get better.

We can make rules all we want.

Fact of the matter is rules are flaunted left and right as is. Being friends with the moderators, as unfortunate as it is, helps quite a bit in doing so. This is simply an undeniable truth at this point and while moderators may be remiss to admit as such in public, I've spoken to many (ex-)moderators and admins who have shared this view with me and agree, so I don't think I can be moved from this stance in the slightest.

Something else I've struggled with for a long time in the context of moderating content is that art is stolen left and right (whatever, we RP, it's sort of just what happens) and that when an artist (sometimes in a foreign language, trying their best) posts about this or makes a remark, they have been ignored in the past. This, back then, really soured my taste of the moderator in question and really consolidated my view of the moderator team

Either way the point I'm making is -- none of this matters if the rules are just a small blip on the radar of literally anyone, lol. We can beg for all the representation we want, it's gonna be irrelevant because nobody gives a rats ass about the rules anyway and as much as we've asked for the rules to be streamlined, we basically still have the rule of Fonz Cool. Just in more words. And, if we go by the letter of the rule, you are already represented.

Big "If" in that last sentence. Fundamental If.

lol are they trying to extend the rule of Discord to the site now? How sad.

We did it.

I want to express a sincere thank you to everyone who added their voice to the proposition that lead to this amendment. A lot of eloquent and thoughtful motherfuckers really came out of the woodwork and helped refine/expand the scope of what needed to be done. Good-good stuff.

Hopefully the next step, holding one another accountable, will reinforce the groundwork accomplished this month.

GGs.

We did it.

I want to express a sincere thank you to everyone who added their voice to the proposition that lead to this amendment. A lot of eloquent and thoughtful motherfuckers really came out of the woodwork and helped refine/expand the scope of what needed to be done. Good-good stuff.

Hopefully the next step, holding one another accountable, will reinforce the groundwork accomplished this month.

GGs.

I wonder how long until someone cries about it.

@Mao Mao Probably hours before I was informed that the proposal had gone through. q:

I was holding off celebrating until the changes went live. So, tonight, I get to go drinking and eat something fancy.

@Mao Mao Probably hours before I was informed that the proposal had gone through. q:

I was holding off celebrating until the changes went live. So, tonight, I get to go drinking and eat something fancy.

So what actually changed? I saw the rules and I don't see any differences in the people there. I'm one of said people that were kicked from the discord for having different opinions, and there was still problems occurring even with me not there.

So again: what has actually changed?

@silentmusician

They spelled out what isn't allowed by basically copying what Google's Adsense doesn't allow, at least, if you want a page to be monetized with ads. The dozen or so people who demanded the change basically got what they wanted. There's no grounds for them or for anyone to ask for additional changes to the rules. We're already accountable to the rules and to the mods and admins of the site, not to a group of self-appointed political crusaders. That's the thing, whenever anyone says they want to hold you "accountable", it's important to ask "accountable to what?" They often mean "accountable to my view of how the world should be."

@silentmusician

They spelled out what isn't allowed by basically copying what Google's Adsense doesn't allow, at least, if you want a page to be monetized with ads. The dozen or so people who demanded the change basically got what they wanted. There's no grounds for them or for anyone to ask for additional changes to the rules. We're already accountable to the rules and to the mods and admins of the site, not to a group of self-appointed crusaders. That's the thing, whenever anyone says they want to hold you "accountable", it's important to ask "accountable to what?" They often mean "accountable to my view of how the world should be."

I'm aware of why they did it. There was another reason they did it, and it was because supposedly, the discord was still ripe with problems. Problems that were still going on despite "problem makers" having been removed from it.

To give context, I was one of the people who engaged in the politics channel for some time. It use to be far more sensible and mature, but then certain parties did not like certain opinions. And thus, people like myself were removed. And now I come back to this news that for some reason "issues are still going on." And they had to remove said channel to curb it. This is not the first time that channel has been removed and added back. Clearly there is a fundamental problem going on.

I see no evidence that anything really changed, and I'm certain the problems will keep occurring no matter how many words they put into the rules. Personally, I have a solution that would solve all their problems if they really cared to have a good environment. Unfortunately, it would require a great sacrifice on their part that they would not want to take themselves.

@silentmusician So you were "silenced", so to speak which in my point of view leads me to believe no matter the infraction someone or something will be punished.

@silentmusician So you were "silenced", so to speak which in my point of view leads me to believe no matter the infraction someone or something will be punished.

Unfortunately, yes. Not for anything ill on my part. I did not insult anyone or even downplay people's traits. It was simply cause I liked guns. That's literally the reason I got kicked. lol

Which is ironic considering I'm black. You'd think they'd like black guys who like guns considering we are one of the most marginalized groups in America. Already broke one of their rules. I didn't come to this site to be told again that guns are bad. I heard it enough from politicians that keep disarming our communities.

<Snipped quote by Dark Cloud>

Unfortunately, yes. Not for anything ill on my part. I did not insult anyone or even downplay people's traits. It was simply cause I liked guns. That's literally the reason I got kicked. lol

Which is ironic considering I'm black. You'd think they'd like black guys who like guns considering we are one of the most marginalized groups in America. Already broke one of their rules. I didn't come to this site to be told again that guns are bad. I heard it enough from politicians that keep disarming our communities.

I have no opinions on the laws in place as I live in Canada, regardless the thing that I clearly can tell is that if you make someone uncomfortable with your viewpoint on a subject you'll be struck by the swift might of the ban-hammer and that in itself is a problematic matter. Something like this was bound to happen and now this has created an entirely new issue. In most cases it is understandable but when someone has an opinion that shouldn't be as inflammatory it brings me to worry on the judgement of those who make the decision of whether they punish someone or let them off with a warning.

why in the fresh hell is this argument still going

It got added to the rules, big whoop. Move on lads.

@Ammokkx

Sadly, you are right. There's not much more to say or do about the matter as things stand.

@Dark Cloud

On a minor note, personal firearm ownership is a right in the United States under the Second Amendment to the US Constitution, provided one pays for the guns and passes background checks to prove that one doesn't have disqualifying past crimes or a history of mental illness. Further restrictions can apply, but that's a controversial matter for another discussion.

<Snipped quote by silentmusician>

I have no opinions on the laws in place as I live in Canada, regardless the thing that I clearly can tell is that if you make someone uncomfortable with your viewpoint on a subject you'll be struck by the swift might of the ban-hammer and that in itself is a problematic matter. Something like this was bound to happen and now this has created an entirely new issue. In most cases it is understandable but when someone has an opinion that shouldn't be as inflammatory it brings me to worry on the judgement of those who make the decision of whether they punish someone or let them off with a warning.

And that's the issue here. The real one: No one is being punished for being inflammatory. They're being punished for holding different viewpoints. The rules they added don't change anything. And I feel this needs to be addressed more than anything.

Summary: the rules won't stop anything. More or less of them won't change the discord either.

@Dark Cloud
On a minor note, personal firearm ownership is a right in the United States under the Second Amendment to the US Constitution, provided one pays for the guns and passes background checks to prove that one doesn't have disqualifying past crimes or a history of mental illness. Further restrictions can apply, but that's a controversial matter for another discussion.

I'm very aware of that constitutional right, and the controversy around it but that is neither here nor there as it is a touchy subject that sets plenty of people off,

*Ahem* Just gonna say it, you people should have made this new change of rules quite clear to EVERYONE from the get go. So just dropping it like a video game update was just BS.

<Snipped quote by Aristocles>

I'm very aware of that constitutional right, and the controversy around it but that is neither here nor there as it is a touchy subject that sets plenty of people off,

Frankly, it was not really a bad discussion, at least from my side. Just a few actors in the discord did not like the pro-gun crowd, so I, and likely others, were removed for it. If that is all it takes to get kicked from the discord, and the rules are the same for the site itself, we all are going to live very short lives.