Suggestion: New Rule?

[Kura]

So.. being completely unrelated to the TOPIC of my previous thread (Morkula asked me to PM him regarding -that- and I have done so,) I just had a simple suggestion that I thought I could bring up to all of the staff.

It seems to be a consensus that proper forum etiquette was to PM a moderator regarding their decisions (even if it encompasses a large group of people) instead of posting a thread here in the feedback forum.

I don't see this in the FAQ or the general rules, and I thought perhaps to clear up some mishaps, that it could be put into the FAQ under the general posting/comments section. It would be especially helpful to new members. I remember one particular one a while ago who kept making threads asking why his threads were locked, (though he was a bit stubborn in ignoring the fact that in the thread mods asked him to PM another mod.) Either way it might help avoid confusion and mishaps in the future.

What do you guys think? :3

 

[bobandbill]

It seems to be a consensus that proper forum etiquette was to PM a moderator regarding their decisions (even if it encompasses a large group of people) instead of posting a thread here in the feedback forum.

I don't see this in the FAQ or the general rules

But in the rules thread (bottom of the first post):

If you disagree with an infraction or ban you've received, you must bring it up with either the moderator that awarded the infraction, or a higher staff member. This is to be done via PM only, do not post a thread or post a visitor message about it.

Grantd it doesn't also specifically say stuff about decisions with closing threads but I would think that the above would indicate that the same protocol would apply to contesting a moderator's decision on something, be it a thread closure or infraction or the like.

 

[Morkula]

I'll simply copy/paste from my reply to your PM since it's pretty much the same thing I'd say here. We really shouldn't have to outline every single thing in the rules...something like this should just be common courtesy. It should just be common courtesy to approach the moderator first rather than make a thread in public knowing that it could cause drama or make someone look bad.

Also, like bobandbill pointed out, the same protocol that exists for infractions can be applied to locks, deleted threads, or any other moderator action.

 

[Sydian]

I think it's clearly been seen here tonight that not everyone has common courtesy and it probably is necessary to outline the things that rule doesn't include specifically. I'm all for adding it. Not sure how much it'll help, but it couldn't hurt.

 

[Oryx]

Well couldn't we just edit that rule to say "If you disagree with a moderator's actions, you must bring it up with either the moderator in question, or a higher staff member. This is to be done via PM only, do not post a thread or post a visitor message about it."

I agree that's it's pretty much common sense not to do it but it can't hurt to generalize it some more to make it encompass everything, right?

 

[Kura]

I PMed Morkula about this again.. but I'll sorta shorten it here in that a questionable thread I had recently made was actually not to simply address the decision to close a thread .. but was more about the content within that thread being acceptable (and not the comments.) I thought it was fine, and I would like to continue on the discussion.. (I wrote this in the second post) and I asked if the thread could be reopened for that reason. If not I was going to ask if I could make a similar thread regarding that. I felt in a way it was locked as a misunderstanding. I didn't want to go to him directly because it wasn't my thread.. so it'd be weird to like.. be addressing it without the creator's approval. *Shrug* Honestly that's where my thoughts were. I was trying to be polite that way and I didn't see how doing this would be rude.

Although the thread wasn't directly to ask about the moderator's decision, was it still "in bad taste" to post it? I didn't think so.. but apparently that's the consensus with the moderators.
For that you have my apologies- I didn't know it was raising other (or even personal/workplace) issues, and I'm sincerely sorry for that. I did not mean it to judge anyone.

Figured maybe this thread could help clarify some of the rules and etiquette for us so it wont happen again? Pokecommunity is not the only forum I frequent and I didn't realize that this was a lockable issue.

 

[Esper]

To add redundancy a mod could always try to be blatantly clear about why a particular thread gets locked. I know that's normal already, but even with those threads where it's obvious why it gets closed someone could still say something like "Talk to me if you have questions" or "Post threads like this over there" or whatever else seems appropriate.

I'd hate to see a new rule added or changed every time something came up that wasn't specifically written in the rules.

 

[parallelzero]

The problem I see with the whole thing is it isn't possible write down everything. Sometimes things are left up to a mod or other staff member's discretion. In regards to the foot fetish thing, Raichu felt it wasn't necessary, and in that case I'd support him. It's his forum to mod, and if he feels foot fetishes aren't something that need to be discussed there, than so be it. My entire problem with that whole ordeal is that those involved clearly broke the rules repeatedly by remaking it. I don't care if they don't feel they broke the rules, or that they assumed the thread was okay, nor do I care about their personal sense of justice in remaking it. Regardless of the reason of closing, continuing to remake a thread that was closed or deleted IS against the rules. Particularly coming from members that have been here so long, it was kind of disappointing to see and really immature.

That said, I'm fine with updating the rules and FAQ to reflect some things, but you'll never be able to update it to cover every scenario.

 

[Oryx]

That said, I'm fine with updating the rules and FAQ to reflect some things, but you'll never be able to update it to cover every scenario.

That's understandable, but considering this issue comes up nearly once in every page of threads it seems like a big enough issue to put in the rules. :3;

 

[Livewire]

It's kinda obvious. Implied, but still kinda obvious. It's always been in OC's rules.

 

[Kura]

As stated in the main rules,


It doesn't necessarily apply to decisions, but since most decisions are the result of a rule anyway, it's kinda left implied who you have to contact. I can imagine adding a few lines about rules being subject to interpretation or discretion, and a line on who to contact if you'd like a decision reviewed.

I don't feel that contesting a moderator's decisions needs to be made a rule, but I feel it's a kind of rule that mods are free to add for their own rules.

Just a question but how would we know if our suggestion was actually taken in consideration with the staff instead of just one mod or upper staff deeming it unnecessary and throwing it in the wastebasket?
Should there then be a rule in this section pertaining to.. not posting any threads about questioning or suggesting alternatives to things set in place by staff (including rules and having to make everything private regarding moderator action)?

Because it seems to me like.. people just don't want to feel like they're wrong or made a mistake or something. Like.. the forums and forum rules don't just affect you guys- why aren't members allowed to have a say? You guys are only human too.. so like I just don't get why it has to be some secret that's only between all of you guys.. it feels like it's a conspiracy or something equally silly when it's like that.

But like.. in a way, silly or not I get the feeling that other members feel the same way when approaching a moderator one-on-one. It can be intimidating, certainly. I'm not saying moderators are in the wrong or that we shouldn't respect their privacy but I don't see what's so bad about bringing a suggestion about general rules to the entirety of the form for initial suggestion where it then can be brought to the staff lounge for further discussion?

Please explain it to me. I must be dumb or something because I don't know if I'm the only person who doesn't get this whole "having to be tiptoe-ing around staff's choices."

 

[Kura]

Basically, we kinda display the transparency you see here. If we seriously feel that something is needed, it gets brought higher up.

Okay, get it. Small question (sorry haha, I'm trying to get a full conclusion here) After the staff considers it, would the staff then also consider the entire forum's opinion on a change of rules? Or would it be strictly staff-only who would implement something on behalf of the rest of the members?


Also.. I don't exactly know what you mean by transparency. Do you mean it by "openness/ straightforwardness?"
I see more of a want to keep it private than openness.. and it doesn't seem exactly straightforward (some staff lean one way, and others on another way.) Do you mean that it is brought up with all staff/ staff regarding a certain section.. or only staff that is close with each other initially/ staff that is currently online?
(For example, the other thread.. some staff in there said it was fine for content such as Igiko, Ryoutarou, and Sydian said the content was fine too but the trolling wasn't- which I personally agree with btw- whereas Raichu, Nica, and Mork (initially but later found it okay) wasn't fond of the subject matter.) BASICALLY- Does it get brought up to greens and reds? or do the yellows and babyblues have a say too? Everyone here can be neutral but I don't know exactly who would be regarded and how it works/ could work in the members' best interest.

I'm not asking for anything to be leaked but a little bit of insight on how all of our issues are handled when an issue is not brought to the public would be very much appreciated.


Edit: Oh cripes.. >_> my small question turned into a tl;dr again.. ;o; I am just somewhat tired of buttpattery that I see (from everyone not just staff) on occasion and I don't think this is ever really addressed as maturely as it can be regarding everyone. Frankly it's leaving me a bit disappointed.. and the fact that it's never out in the open is what, in my opinion, is adding to the problem. I don't feel it's right for members to gang up on staff, and equally not right for staff to gang up on members (the latter does happen, I'd appreciate it if you wouldn't deny it- especially with one-post sudden attitude shifts.) For that reason I get the fact that stuff needs to be private, but I also feel that personal grounds then start to conflict in that situation and opinions are never thoroughly heard and considered. It's a double-edged sword.
Would you not agree?


Also just to note, I have typed, many times, PMs as large and thoughtful as the one above to staff that have often not gotten replies back. I understand staff are busy, but then would it not be forum etiquette- (as you call it) for them to at least say "thanks I read the message" or "I am considering what you have written" back to the sender? I don't think that this sort of common courtesy regarding member-to-staff should only be on members' behalfs. Even if the PM was, in staff opinion, a completely junky idea, it'd be nice to say "thanks for the PM, we will review it and if it is taken further you may be informed" or even just "we will be addressing your issue soon."
Just a thought. I don't know if you've ever done this but it's certainly happened to me over the years quite a few times and it is a little frustrating and a bit disheartening. It's also one of the reasons I prefer public suggestion. If you want us to wholly respect you, why not respect us too? Why can't we just be fair to each other?


Edit 2: >_> Cruds.. this turned into a mega tl;dr now ;O;..


Edit3: Okay.. well seems like I addressed too many points and it's gotten a bit difficult to reply. I don't know if you guys just don't believe me or something but I do have a couple screencaptures on hand atm to back up a few of my claims. (Mainly the PMing ones.)

 

[Alex]

You guys are all a bunch of wimps. When you're in a position of power, you better expect people to not like what you're doing. Cause you're obviously not gonna appeal to everyone, especially not to a forum with this big of an active user base. If you can't take the heat, don't dish it out. You think President Obama's gonna go crying in front of his state, pleading that they only address concerns to him privately? No. You Staff Admins, and Asst. Admins are the presidents of PC here. All the mods are your underlings. If y'all are too self-conscious to take some public criticizing then why should I count on you to run a forum at all?

It's just sad that you guys actually pass a law to forbid public complaints. This place is getting closer and closer to the PokeCommunism Community than anything else.

 

[Livewire]

You guys are all a bunch of wimps. When you're in a position of power, you better expect people to not like what you're doing. Cause you're obviously not gonna appeal to everyone, especially not to a forum with this big of an active user base. If you can't take the heat, don't dish it out. You think President Obama's gonna go crying in front of his state, pleading that they only address concerns to him privately? No. You Staff Admins, and Asst. Admins are the presidents of PC here. All the mods are your underlings. If y'all are too self-conscious to take some public criticizing then why should I count on you to run a forum at all?

It's just sad that you guys actually pass a law to forbid public complaints. This place is getting closer and closer to the PokeCommunism Community than anything else.

PC isn't/never was a Democracy, sad to say. No internet forum is, it's too big and complicated. Should we operate more Democratically? Yes. But it's not up to me.

 

[Oryx]

Saying that if you have a personal problem with how a mod handled something, bring it up with them instead of bringing up with everyone isn't unreasonable imo. It's between the person making the thread and the person who moderated the thread (and any h-staff if either party chooses), not the person making the thread, the person moderating the thread, luvinpikachu2002 who didn't even read the thread, Gary_Oak who just hates the staff and wants to troll them, Tears of a Dark Angel who wants to catfight on the side of the staff to get mod, etc.

Changes to rules in specific sections are up to the moderator entirely unless it gets completely out of hand, so they would be the person to go to if you disagree with a rule as well, as well as h-staff if that doesn't work. I don't like the "me vs. them" attitude people seem to be adopting here...while moderators do have the job of maintaining the rules, most of the time they're active in the section as well and so have to follow the rules they themselves set down, so being unfair to members would also be being unfair to themselves, and why would they do that?

In the end, I feel like there's a sense of helplessness that members feel that isn't really there, because they get shut down by a mod and are too intimidated or don't want to go to h-staff and then they feel they have no recourse when that really is a great appeal system. I know I've personally seen plenty of infractions marked 'reversed' on profiles because the h-staff didn't agree with the moderator's action, so don't think that it doesn't get listened to and replied to.

 

[Alley Cat]

Live_Wire pretty much nailed it. PC isn't a democracy. If you hate it so much, leave. No one is forcing you to be here. These are rules, not laws. The difference being that you can't just leave the world because you don't agree with laws.

Talking to a mod in private about their action isn't something too arduous. It is completely reasonable for the staff to want this. It is a simple thing: X mods section Y. You create thread Z. X locks Z, so you go to X about to about the locking of Z, because he is the one who is in charge of Y. It doesn't make sense to make a thread about it, because no one else really needs to get involved, like Toujours said.

It isn't about the Staff wanting privacy and not wanting to admit their wrong. When I read that, I just headdesk'd. The staff are mature people, and in most cases will admit that they were wrong. Not every time of course, but then you take it up with a higher staff member. Then they will deal with it accordingly. There is no need to make a grand ordeal(a pointless thread) over such a small matter that could be better solved elsewhere.

The staff can take criticism, they took a whole bunch in this thread. They just don't feel the need to make a thread to answer something that can be solved by a simple PM. It's a question that requires an answer, and it doesn't really require anything more than that.

The staff is here to make PC fun and enjoyable, they can't and won't appeal to everyone. If that bothers you so much, then stop coming to PC/posting in the section. Simple. The staff do a pretty damn good job, and it keeps them pretty busy in some aspects.

@Kura: I agree, the staff should give you some sort of acknowledgement if you contact them about a legit matter. Staff members have lives yes, but they are also staff to address the issues of PC. That's why they are staff, and they need to balance their life with their psuedo-job. Approaching a moderator shouldn't be intimidating, though. Maybe PC could implement a feature that helps members get to know mods better, if that is actually a problem. I.E. A staff interview, that interviews a different staff members(if they don't mind.) It doesn't have to be anything deep and personal, but just something to show people who might be afraid/intimidated by the moderators that they are normal people, just the same as all of us.

This kind of makes me sad really. :/ People are making such a huge fuss over something so simple. Is it so hard to just do as the staff(keeping in mind that without them, there would be no PC) ask? It takes just the same amount of time/effort.