Slitherine

quote:

No poster, no matter how long they've been here or how helpful they've been, is above the forum rules.

quote:

Bottom line is that the first insult gets the bulk of the punishment and that we do not moderate things we missed months ago, but we take history into account for new and current moderation decisions.

quote:

Ok, that's hopefully enough to finally put this to bed.

quote:

In summary, Alfred earned his ban.

quote:

ORIGINAL: actrade

What I find very telling is that in the last linked thread, Evoken, who goes above and beyond to try and help Tanaka, proves Alfred wrong while others suggest a bug is the culprit. Funny how when a bully gets punched in the mouth, he often runs away.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yaab

The question remains who owns Alfred posts, especially his long detailed guides?

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing
It would be good to see it be just more than warm words.

quote:

If you'd like something fresh off the press, perhaps revisit your community and moderation discussion. Plenty there that can be quite firmly pointed to as breaking the rules outright, and even rudeness or bullying under your own definition.

quote:

There are also other, clear cases, of non-application of the moderation process in other threads that you have linked, including (but not limited to) political content.

quote:

quote:

Bottom line is that the first insult gets the bulk of the punishment and that we do not moderate things we missed months ago, but we take history into account for new and current moderation decisions.

Ah, quelle surprise.

quote:

Enforcement of the moderating policy should not be based on ones overall popularity with the forum (nor, needless to say, proximity to senior Matrix figures).

quote:

To have banned Alfred for "rudeness" (which - despite what others would argue - is largely subjective) when there are many more significant issues at play displays a monumental laxity towards moderation. The phrase "re-arranging deck chairs on the Titanic" comes to mind.

quote:

If that's your view, for such "rudeness", then I can certainly provide a list of forum users equally deserving of a ban, myself included.
It's an indication of how strong my views are that I'm certainly content with you to start with me.
In an ironic twist I also not a half hour ago got a notification that I've been with Matrix for 9 years.

Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC



For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

quote:

Enforcement of the moderating policy should not be based on ones overall popularity with the forum (nor, needless to say, proximity to senior Matrix figures).

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

quote:

Ok, that's hopefully enough to finally put this to bed.

To be frank, not for me.

To have banned Alfred and then attempt to draw a line under the entire affair and start fresh is, candidly, shambolic.

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

Perhaps there is a point in the more distant past where all this began which I have not seen. Perhaps if we follow the chain all the way back to the beginning, this starts with someone else. If any of you have such evidence, please provide it to me. I acknowledge that my decision was limited by the time I had to look back through Alfred's old posts to see if there was a pattern and the fact that I had not been active in this sub-forum for years before I responded to that moderation request.

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

quote:

Ok, that's hopefully enough to finally put this to bed.

To be frank, not for me.

To have banned Alfred and then attempt to draw a line under the entire affair and start fresh is, candidly, shambolic.

warspite1

We are talking about a guy that can come back anytime he chooses. It is his decision not to.

This latest post, after Erik is doing his best to draw a line under things, doesn't help Alfred or you. Genuinely, you need to get some perspective here. We are not talking about someone wrongly imprisoned for a crime they didn't commit. It's a war gaming forum and he over stepped the mark. He got a week's ban as a result. That's it.

What do you want to do? Keep going until you get a ban yourself? Why? m_m you need to do an Elsa and let it go.

I hope you can.

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1
We are talking about a guy that can come back anytime he chooses. It is his decision not to.

This latest post, after Erik is doing his best to draw a line under things, doesn't help Alfred or you. Genuinely, you need to get some perspective here. We are not talking about someone wrongly imprisoned for a crime they didn't commit. It's a war gaming forum and he over stepped the mark. He got a week's ban as a result. That's it.

What do you want to do? Keep going until you get a ban yourself? Why? m_m you need to do an Elsa and let it go.

I hope you can.
warspite1

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

I've seen a lot of folks in the other thread claim repeatedly that there was no real issue with Alfred, that he was only a bit rough around the edges, that his rudeness was only perceived by some with thin skins, etc. When I banned Alfred, I thought it would be very clear to every active member of the community that he had been engaging in what amounts to bullying and certainly was not the civil behavior that we require on this forum.

I recognize Alfred's positive contributions to the forum. He is clearly highly intelligent and knows the game very, very well. I said as much to him and have said that to others here. I'm sure many wish that he would still be here contributing constructively. However, Alfred as with all of us is a package deal and he seemed to be at least more recently unable to contribute without frequently being rude to other members. The ban was only for a week and I meant what I said - if he just responds to my e-mails and confirms he is willing to follow the forum rules, his account will be reinstated and he'll have a second chance. Also, just to be clear about another point of some conjecture, Alfred was not on the WITP-AE team and never participated in the development (unless "Alfred" is an alias for someone else, but I don't think so).

No poster, no matter how long they've been here or how helpful they've been, is above the forum rules.

I think it's also important to note that I received multiple messages from various forum members reporting Alfred's behavior. In addition, while some forum members stood up for Alfred after the ban and asked me to reconsider, more sent me messages which were grateful that something was being done, in roughly a 2:1 ratio in favor of the ban. In the recent discussions, the PMs I've received in favor of enforcing the forum rules and the principles I've explained are running about 10:1 in favor of neutral enforcement of the rules. For what it's worth, while this is non-scientific, I think it's important to note that there are many here who felt that the community was dealing with some real problems before any enforcement action was taken.

We always reserve the right to go straight to a ban if the case for it is clear enough, but as I posted in the other thread, we strongly prefer to explain the issue and give a chance for a course correction. In hindsight, that's what I should have done as clearly, despite hearing from fellow community members who saw the same things I did, some folks still believe there was no "there" there. So better late than never. Here are some examples that I shared with Alfred in an e-mail explaining the reason for the ban to him:

-----

(note these are excerpts from an e-mail I wrote to Alfred, so the "you" here means Alfred)

Let's take a look at a couple of past threads:

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=5094598

In this one, HansBolter first posts a rude reply and you post a polite one. I've spoken with Hans separately after watching him do the same in more recent threads.

Tanaka then replies with exasperation to HansBolter, quoting his rude post to make it clear who he was responding to. He also mentions that his searches have not turned up an answer.

You then return in Post #8 and accuse Tanaka of either calling you a liar (which he did not), being lazy/incompetent or having low comprehension skills. You then proceed to further belittle and ridicule him in another paragraph and multiple points.

I will note again that his frustrations were directed at Hans, who responded initially by ridiculing him, but you responded as if he had attacked you. He did not, but you sure did attack him.

Of course, it's not your first encounter with Tanaka. In looking back, I came across this thread:

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=5075689

In your initial reply, you decided this time to start out with ridicule in Post #4. He ignored that and responded politely.

By the time we get to Post #17, his issue has been answered and the thread is on its way to a positive conclusion, but then you jump in again in an accusatory fashion, once again attributing a variety of negative traits to him and closing by questioning whether he graduated high school.

After that, he responds with a series of personal insults. Not a surprise as he has been comprehensively insulted by you in the previous post and per our forum moderation that puts the responsibility on you. Yet in Post #24, you play the victim and others support you in this despite the clear chain of cause and effect showing that you started the insults and thus created the problem.

Or this one, where Professor Chaos actually tries to self-deprecate in his initial post to disarm any negative reply:

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=5095998

Your reply, while mild compared to some above, still includes a slap by calling him an opinionated polemicist easily disarmed by facts and then concluding by saying he is an exemplar of cherry-picking results to support a narrative. Take out those two sentences and the rest of your reply is excellent, but you for whatever reason had to throw those in.

He decides to let that go, but Castor Troy jumps in in Post #112 with a rude reply to you that also includes a politically charged meme after you once again threw a few rocks towards Professor Chaos' post. Mind_Messing then jumps in to insult both Castor Troy and Dili.

It's worth noting that the thread only derailed and went personal after your insulting reply.

Or this one:

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4997335

...where Tanaka once again is looking for help and in Post #9, you once again jump to insults. What a surprise that after insulting him, he returns the favor and once again the thread derails further. The following insults then result in your detractors and your defenders going after each other, but the clear beginning is again an unprovoked insult by you. This is how a community gets torn apart.

-----

Perhaps there is a point in the more distant past where all this began which I have not seen. Perhaps if we follow the chain all the way back to the beginning, this starts with someone else. If any of you have such evidence, please provide it to me. I acknowledge that my decision was limited by the time I had to look back through Alfred's old posts to see if there was a pattern and the fact that I had not been active in this sub-forum for years before I responded to that moderation request.

However, I did afterwards speak with Admiral Dadman who is the community moderator, to make sure I hadn't missed anything and he confirmed my impressions - that he has seen more frequent rudeness from Alfred in recent times. Dadman also now knows that any future insults, from anyone, he can escalate to me for action beyond warnings and I've asked him to make sure the rules are neutrally enforced. I've had this same discussion now with Edmon.

Bottom line is that the first insult gets the bulk of the punishment and that we do not moderate things we missed months ago, but we take history into account for new and current moderation decisions.

-----

The history above is why Alfred received a one week ban instead of just a warning. In hindsight, I should have laid this all out and given the warning.

Regarding the other elements of that entire event, relating to Markshot, I spoke about this before but I'll repeat it again. I think Mark was trying to establish his bona fides with a hard-core wargaming community by referencing his past work with us on other projects. Mark has been a very helpful beta tester, rising to the level of something like an auxiliary dev team member on some of the Panther Games titles we published in the distant past. However, that didn't give him any special status or put him above the rules. He just didn't have the history Alfred did, so I warned him about going to personal insults and ended up exchanging more e-mails with him in that week than I had in the previous ten years while discussing all this.

I think Mark is a decent guy who was shocked at the reception he got here and was one of many who have felt that way in recent times, as some who contributed to the threads then and now have publicly stated. I didn't appreciate the perception Mark created that he had some kind of special status or that we were somehow corrupt. None of that was true, but when a community member in good standing tells me that a post or thread needs moderating, I do pay attention and investigate. It's what I saw there rather than the fact that Mark was reporting it that resulted in action being taken.

Ok, that's hopefully enough to finally put this to bed.

In summary, Alfred earned his ban. I'm sorry, but I don't want to hear any more about how he was not rude or only rude after being attacked. If you read the threads above, you'll see that he was quite capable of being objectively rude, without provocation.

Also, in respect for the community I should have laid out all the evidence, warned Alfred and banned him the next time he violated those forum rules. I recognize that as a result of going right to the one week ban, I left part of the community behind in terms of creating consensus. This is why as I explained in the other thread, we're going to try hard to explain and warn before banning and locking.

Regards,

- Erik

quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

What is an "Elsa?" Are people using that term as an insult or to insinuate an insulting behavior? Or is it a suggestion that they become a fierce predator and prey on their enemies?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0NQh3pPv7o

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edmon

quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

What is an "Elsa?" Are people using that term as an insult or to insinuate an insulting behavior? Or is it a suggestion that they become a fierce predator and prey on their enemies?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0NQh3pPv7o

You've not watched Disney's Frozen?

It's worth a watch...

quote:

Married couple George Adamson and Joy Adamson have long lived in northern Kenya for George's work as the senior game warden of the region. One of George's primary responsibilities is to deal with dangerous animals that may be chronically threatening to humans, livestock and/or crops. It is in this vein that George and his staff end up killing a man eating lion and its lioness, resulting in their three young female cubs being orphaned. Although difficult to begin, George and Joy are able to wean and take care of the three cubs, who they adopt as pets. But soon, they know they have to provide a more suitable environment for the cubs, namely sending them to Rotterdam Zoo... that is except for the smallest, who they have named Elsa and to who Joy in particular has become attached as the emotional fighter among the three. As Elsa grows into lioness maturity, George and Joy provide her with greater freedom away from their property, which may get her into trouble as a largely tame animal. Ultimately, John Kendall, George's boss, directs them to send Elsa to a zoo like they did with her sisters, especially as with anyone in George's job he is soon being reassigned. Joy cannot bear the thought of Elsa being locked up for the rest of her life, believing that they can reintegrate her back into the wild instead, something that had never been done with a tame lion. John gives them three months to accomplish this task, which most specifically involves getting Elsa to be able to kill for food, other creatures which up to this point she has seen only as fellow playthings, and to be accepted by other lions, most specifically mate with and provide food for a male partner while standing up successfully to female competitors. —Huggo

quote:

After several unsuccessful attempts at reintroducing her back into the wild, Elsa begins to get the idea of killing to feed herself. When she goes into season, the Adamsons make one more attempt to release her into an existing pride. They find a lion who seems to be receptive to her and set her loose. Unfortunately, the lion already has a lioness in his pride, and she attacks Elsa. This time, however, Elsa fights back and, after Joy fires off a shot, the three of them run off together. A year later, after being away in Britain, the Adamsons return to Kenya. They set up camp at the spot where they last saw Elsa and spend the next week looking for her, but she never shows. Forced to give up the search, they return to base camp to prepare to fly back to Britain. Suddenly, Joy hears lion sounds and is overjoyed to see Elsa come walking out the bushes accompanied by three cubs. After a fond reunion in which Elsa makes it clear that she hasn't forgotten them, her mate calls to her, and Elsa and the cubs join him. In a voiceover, Joy says, 'We saw her many times again...born free and living free. But to us, she was always the same...our friend Elsa.'

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing
Consider this.

Would you want to return to a forum that where, since you're departure, you have been publicly pilloried? Worse still, an exercise that has actively been empowered by the moderation team deciding on a course of non-enforcement to "let people get off steam".

I certainly wouldn't, and my current disgust is certainly a key motivating factor right now.

Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC



For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

What is an "Elsa?" Are people using that term as an insult or to insinuate an insulting behavior? Or is it a suggestion that they become a fierce predator and prey on their enemies?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0NQh3pPv7o

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing
Consider this.

Would you want to return to a forum that where, since you're departure, you have been publicly pilloried? Worse still, an exercise that has actively been empowered by the moderation team deciding on a course of non-enforcement to "let people get off steam".

I certainly wouldn't, and my current disgust is certainly a key motivating factor right now.

You know, the evidence of Alfred's behavior is right there.

quote:

I'm sorry, but the efforts to sweep that behavior under the rug and try to ignore it or enable it is what got us here and what is the biggest single cause of division within this community.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing
Consider this.

Would you want to return to a forum that where, since you're departure, you have been publicly pilloried? Worse still, an exercise that has actively been empowered by the moderation team deciding on a course of non-enforcement to "let people get off steam".

I certainly wouldn't, and my current disgust is certainly a key motivating factor right now.

You know, the evidence of Alfred's behavior is right there.

There's all sorts of behaviour on show, in the selfsame threads you have linked.

I know you've explained your rationale, but I'm still at a loss as to why there's zero intention for wider action.

Or, to be more accurate, why there's only the willingness to act in a single instance.

quote:

I'm sorry, but the efforts to sweep that behavior under the rug and try to ignore it or enable it is what got us here and what is the biggest single cause of division within this community.

To be perfectly honest, the effective absence of any moderation efforts got us here. I say that without malice, as a simple statement of fact.

As for sweeping it under the rug, that's certainly one way you could view what seems to be the current strategy.

If the overall strategy is to fire off a couple of week long bans around, ignore the egregious breaches of the forum rules, plaster over the cracks and boldly go forward, then I am sceptical that this will offer an effective solution in the long run.

My logic for this is:
- this approach is superficial at best, and ignores the wider field. The best term to my mind is a damage control exercise rather than resolving the underlying issues.
- it reinforces negative behaviour; a number of individuals have "gotten away with it", in the sense of breaking forum rules with zero consequences.
- furthermore, the optics of those comments, with no moderator intervention visible, will to some extent "set the tone" for the wider forum unless challenged. This is mitigated somewhat by displacement of newer posts, but the core issue remains.
- it does absolutely nothing to challenge the underlying norms that have developed; the digital version of being told to "play nice".

Now, I'm obviously not informed as to what the intentions are going forward, and my inferences from your comments here and elsewhere may be off the mark, so happy to be corrected and challenged on any of this.

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing
Consider this.

Would you want to return to a forum that where, since you're departure, you have been publicly pilloried? Worse still, an exercise that has actively been empowered by the moderation team deciding on a course of non-enforcement to "let people get off steam".

I certainly wouldn't, and my current disgust is certainly a key motivating factor right now.

You know, the evidence of Alfred's behavior is right there.

There's all sorts of behaviour on show, in the selfsame threads you have linked.

I know you've explained your rationale, but I'm still at a loss as to why there's zero intention for wider action.

Or, to be more accurate, why there's only the willingness to act in a single instance.

quote:

I'm sorry, but the efforts to sweep that behavior under the rug and try to ignore it or enable it is what got us here and what is the biggest single cause of division within this community.

To be perfectly honest, the effective absence of any moderation efforts got us here. I say that without malice, as a simple statement of fact.

As for sweeping it under the rug, that's certainly one way you could view what seems to be the current strategy.

If the overall strategy is to fire off a couple of week long bans around, ignore the egregious breaches of the forum rules, plaster over the cracks and boldly go forward, then I am sceptical that this will offer an effective solution in the long run.

My logic for this is:
- this approach is superficial at best, and ignores the wider field. The best term to my mind is a damage control exercise rather than resolving the underlying issues.
- it reinforces negative behaviour; a number of individuals have "gotten away with it", in the sense of breaking forum rules with zero consequences.
- furthermore, the optics of those comments, with no moderator intervention visible, will to some extent "set the tone" for the wider forum unless challenged. This is mitigated somewhat by displacement of newer posts, but the core issue remains.
- it does absolutely nothing to challenge the underlying norms that have developed; the digital version of being told to "play nice".

Now, I'm obviously not informed as to what the intentions are going forward, and my inferences from your comments here and elsewhere may be off the mark, so happy to be corrected and challenged on any of this.

Erik made this quite clear. In one thread, Erik started the thread with post #1, your first post was #5 and you quoted part of Erik's post #1. You might not believe what he wrote, but he certainly informed you.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

That, you'll find, was a little bit of irony. Intended to provide a wee bit of self-deprecation to shift the tone before concluding my post.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing
I know you've explained your rationale, but I'm still at a loss as to why there's zero intention for wider action.

quote:

Or, to be more accurate, why there's only the willingness to act in a single instance.

quote:

To be perfectly honest, the effective absence of any moderation efforts got us here. I say that without malice, as a simple statement of fact.

quote:

As for sweeping it under the rug, that's certainly one way you could view what seems to be the current strategy.

If the overall strategy is to fire off a couple of week long bans around, ignore the egregious breaches of the forum rules, plaster over the cracks and boldly go forward, then I am sceptical that this will offer an effective solution in the long run.

quote:

My logic for this is:
- this approach is superficial at best, and ignores the wider field. The best term to my mind is a damage control exercise rather than resolving the underlying issues.
- it reinforces negative behaviour; a number of individuals have "gotten away with it", in the sense of breaking forum rules with zero consequences.

quote:

- furthermore, the optics of those comments, with no moderator intervention visible, will to some extent "set the tone" for the wider forum unless challenged. This is mitigated somewhat by displacement of newer posts, but the core issue remains.
- it does absolutely nothing to challenge the underlying norms that have developed; the digital version of being told to "play nice".

quote:

Now, I'm obviously not informed as to what the intentions are going forward, and my inferences from your comments here and elsewhere may be off the mark, so happy to be corrected and challenged on any of this.

Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC



For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

What is an "Elsa?" Are people using that term as an insult or to insinuate an insulting behavior? Or is it a suggestion that they become a fierce predator and prey on their enemies?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0NQh3pPv7o

Elsa in "Frozen" is a Princess who has had to keep the secret of her power hidden all her life. Events lead to her accidentally using that power and she flees the palace to live on her own. She decides not to treat her powers as a handicap, but an asset. At that point she breaks into the song "Let It Go" as she can freely unleash the power for the first time.

So pulling an Elsa - would be letting go of the negative view and letting things be as they are.