Welcome, Guest
Please Login or Register.    Lost Password?

Unofficial Code of Conduct
(1 viewing) (1) Guest
Go to bottomPage: 12345
TOPIC: Unofficial Code of Conduct
#6787
Unofficial Code of Conduct 9 Years, 4 Months ago  
I agree with this at least in sentiment. We don't need to be aruging with one another. Not sure thought, sometimes I have the feeling that I have too much Dwarven Forge. Or at least more than I can afford to have purchased.
brvheart
Ogre
Posts: 965
User Offline Click here to see the profile of this user
Gender: Male Location: San Antonio, TX Birthday: 08/20
The administrator has disabled public write access.
 
#6788
Unofficial Code of Conduct 9 Years, 4 Months ago  
It looks like whatever was in #8 is gone so I never saw it. Good job. I agree with it. Lets use it and point violators to it if they need a hint.
DaggerdaleDM
Orc
Posts: 278
User Offline Click here to see the profile of this user
Location: Esko, MN, USA
The administrator has disabled public write access.
 
#6789
Unofficial Code of Conduct 9 Years, 4 Months ago  
Well I am willing to sign on to L's modified Code. I never saw #8 either and sounds like I might be better off!
brvheart
Ogre
Posts: 965
User Offline Click here to see the profile of this user
Gender: Male Location: San Antonio, TX Birthday: 08/20
The administrator has disabled public write access.
 
#6790
Unofficial Code of Conduct 9 Years, 4 Months ago  
Hey great code, I agree that the space for this forum must cost a fair amount and I am very greatful for it being here. I began to be worried that that string was going to be common place but it seems they put the lock down on this fairly quick. I do agree with Calico Dave on Official Dwarven Forge representatives. Maybe they or we with thier permision can apoint a strong Modderator? for the Forum? :?: :idea:
whitewind
Minotaur
Posts: 1229
User Offline Click here to see the profile of this user
The administrator has disabled public write access.
 
#6791
Unofficial Code of Conduct 9 Years, 4 Months ago  
As Stated in Another Post, I've Been away for a Bit, And A lot seems to Have Happened...<Grin>...

As to the CoC... I Think that these are All Great Ideas... (Apparently "#8" has Been Edited)?... My Two Comments on this (The CoC Not #8 Specifically), Would be:

1) Anyone Who Reads A CoC, and Agrees with it at least in Spirit is Probably NOT the Kind of Person Who ends up being a Problem Child...

2) Unless it were an "Official" Part of the Terms for Use of the Forums, those Problem Children Out there will likely be Quick to Point out that this List is, Although Nice, NOT Binding...




So While I Personally Like the Tone of this Proposed CoC, I Feel that Admin Having a Moderator on the Boards is Really the Best Solution... Incidently, Does anyone Know Specifically What Happened? Did We Just Lose the One Poster?
MyLordVoid
Minotaur Lord
Posts: 2552
User Offline Click here to see the profile of this user
Location: Florida... (The One in North A
The administrator has disabled public write access.
"To Succeed We Attack!"
 
#6792
Unofficial Code of Conduct 9 Years, 4 Months ago  
I agree with MLV here. I appreciate the motivation behind it, but it is not official and I don't want an individual or group to set themselves up as the forum police.
brvheart
Ogre
Posts: 965
User Offline Click here to see the profile of this user
Gender: Male Location: San Antonio, TX Birthday: 08/20
The administrator has disabled public write access.
 
#6793
Unofficial Code of Conduct 9 Years, 4 Months ago  
As the person who posted the code, I absolutely agree. I don't want anyone setting themselves up as Forum police. I hope I made that clear in the post itself -- I certainly tried. I encourage suggestions as much as possible in order to make clear that this is not ME or MY TASTE or preference. This is a consensus.

The thing is, it's pretty clear that the website, including the forums, is not something DF has the resources for. They don't have anyone to be an admin, they don't have the money to pay them, and they don't have the time. This isn't a forum where there are likely to be moderators any time soon.

That means that, from the very beginning, we've all had to take that responsibility for ourselves. And without a code, without some kind of clear list of what is acceptable and what is not, it's too easy for things to be confused and for disagreements to spark about who is causing trouble and who is an innocent victim. In the recent trouble, everyone included thought THEY were the victim.

So -- we've always been self-policing, but until now we've done it without stopping to discuss and agree upon WHAT the rules are, what the standards are.

I don't want a small group deciding what is fair here, but the fact is, there is either going to be a community effort to police the forums or there is going to be NO effort. The staff at DF simply can't do it.

As you guys have pointed out, this code is unofficial. That means, neither myself nor anyone else CAN ban anyone for violating it. It would be physically IMPOSSIBLE to set ourselves up as police.

What it CAN do is clarify what the rules are, so we can point to them in order to resolve disputes. There will be less "he said/she said" and less "but look what they're doing!" Instead it will be a matter of "There's the code, that's the rule, and here you are breaking it." If the person still wants to cause trouble, we can ask for a ban. But at least the ban won't look like a posse or a lynch mob -- there were rules, they were agreed to, and they were broken.

As for people agreeing to the rules, or complaining that they were kicked out by an elite cadre of self-appointed forum police, or anything like that, I have two thoughts:

1. The rules are common sense, fair, and everyone can contribute to them. If you are SUCH an anarchist that any sort of rules upset you, then you probably will be a disruptive presense, and shouldn't come here. Is "be nice and courteous" really that much to ask?

2. It kinda sounds like you want there to be NO rules, that we should be free to do whatever we want and hope no flamewars erupt. Rules just cause trouble.

I have to disagree there. It will save us a lot of grief if we can say "Be courteous" and "if you disagree, do it politely" beforehand. The recent flamewar was FULL of personal insults. Heck, one person since the posting of the code has issued a vague threat. I think it is preferable to point to a list and say "You can't do that here, please don't."

It isn't a question of getting banned. It's a question of knowing what the community standards are. I don't see how it causes trouble to say "You can't insult people. You can't belittle them." Sure, it won't prevent it from happening. But it does prevent this whole notion of a self-appointed group or individual acting as police. "This isn't just MY preference for this rule. This is something we agreed upon as a community!"

And if you STILL feel that the list is a self-appointed thing, then I urge you to show me how you would change it. Isn't "Don't belittle people" somethign you want, too? How is that me, or anyone else, setting ourselves up as an authority? I put the list out there as a tentative starting point -- does everyone think "Don't insult people" sounds like a good idea? If we all agree to it, then fine, it's up there. And it wasn't ME, or a small group, it was all of us thinking that behavior is out of line. Then if someone does it, we can ask them to stop, and it won't be one person or a small group asking to stop, it will be an agreed-upon standard.

At that point, if it comes to banning, there won't be any justification to grumbling that it was a smear campaign or blackballing or anything.

I just want a set of standards that we can all agree to.

The rule of LAW (and no, that's not meant as a reference to my identity on some other boards) is always preferable to the rule of MEN. This would not be rules, since they would be unofficial, but they'd be standards and requests that would be more like laws in that they would be an expression of community will rather than one individual's.

I can't be any more clear than that. This code is not meant to solve every problem. It's meant to nip potential flamewars off before they start by being able to tell people "Please don't do that" without looking like a personal attack. It isn't meant to be binding. It's meant to be a way to say "That's not right" without having it sound like "That's not something I personally approve of."


If we all agree that insults are out of line, then anyone who points that out in the future is not stating a personal preference, they are pointing to the will of the community as a whole. That's what the code does. It is the opposite of having self-appointed police. If anyone doesn't see that, I can't make it any clearer. I can't see how it's possible to view it any other way.

L
Law
Minotaur Lord
Posts: 3211
User Offline Click here to see the profile of this user
The administrator has disabled public write access.
"In every real man a child is hidden that wants to play."

-- F. Nietzsche
 
#6794
Unofficial Code of Conduct 9 Years, 4 Months ago  
I Sincerley Hope that My Comments Were Not Seen as Antagonistic to the Idea of the CoC... I Certainly Think that these are ALL Good Points, (As I Have Already Said),...

My Points were Simple Observations that Most of us have Managed to Keep at least Realatively Composed Here, Those Who Have Not Could Hardly Be Expected to "Follow" Common Sense, Friendly and Respectful Guidlines, since if they Could we would Have the Occasional Miscommunication which would Get Resolved Naturally, Instead of the Insanity of the Last Few Months...

That Having Been Said, Let me Restate Emphatically, that I Agree with the Principles of Your Idea... And I 'll Take it a Step Further and Be the First to Actively Say "Count Me In"... (In Terms of Being Willing to Attempt Civil Communication)...
MyLordVoid
Minotaur Lord
Posts: 2552
User Offline Click here to see the profile of this user
Location: Florida... (The One in North A
The administrator has disabled public write access.
"To Succeed We Attack!"
 
#6795
Unofficial Code of Conduct 9 Years, 4 Months ago  
L you are starting to get more than a little testy about this. Give me the rule of reasonable men over law any day of the week is what I say. The problem isn't the CoC, it is pushing it at this point when one AND ONLY one of the parties involved is banned. RF had agreed to settle down and start acting more civily prior to getting banned. The poll was completely mean spirited and nasty. If it is allowed to stay, then this CoC means nothing. As I have stated elsewhere, I WASN'T on anyones side in this. The comments on both sides were innappropriate and didn't belong. The CoC might have worked if it had allowed things to cool off. I think RF would have agreed to submit to them if both sides did, BUT continuing to push this at this time is going to force me to take a side. It is saying that "we got rid of the troublemaker, let's make sure that we keep it that way" when he wasn't the only one with a behavior problem. So no, not that I don't agree with it in principle, but under the current circumstances I cannot sign on to this at this time. I am not in favor of flame wars or insulting people. I am not. But this is pouring salt in the wound. Let it lie for awhile and then bring it up again when people's feelings get a chance to cool off.
brvheart
Ogre
Posts: 965
User Offline Click here to see the profile of this user
Gender: Male Location: San Antonio, TX Birthday: 08/20
The administrator has disabled public write access.
 
#6796
Unofficial Code of Conduct 9 Years, 3 Months ago  
Ok with RabidFox back and some time for it to settle down, perhaps it is time we start discussing this again so we might prevent these things from happening again.
brvheart
Ogre
Posts: 965
User Offline Click here to see the profile of this user
Gender: Male Location: San Antonio, TX Birthday: 08/20
The administrator has disabled public write access.
 
#6797
Unofficial Code of Conduct 9 Years, 3 Months ago  
I am in agreement about fairness which is why I argued that RF should be allowed back. As to what happens to the others, I am more concerned about preventing such things in the future to try and keep people from being singled out - again -.
brvheart
Ogre
Posts: 965
User Offline Click here to see the profile of this user
Gender: Male Location: San Antonio, TX Birthday: 08/20
The administrator has disabled public write access.
 
#6798
Unofficial Code of Conduct 9 Years, 3 Months ago  
One of the reasons I wanted a CoC was to avoid the "Why me?" retort.

If you are caught shoplifting, telling the cops your friends did it first won't get you out of trouble. The CoC applies to everyone, and anyone who is told "Please comply" shouldn't be able to say "What about them?" The answer is "They have to as well." But in any case, the request still holds.

IMO, one reason flamewars get out of hand is that everyone wants the last word. People want to defend themselves, they want to win the argument, they want to show how unfairly they are being treated. And it just goes on and on. The CoC isn't really aimed at people who START trouble. There's really no way to prevent that. It's aimed at everyone else, to remind us that we have to let it go, to respond through PMs or emails, and just in general to keep the board clean.

Think of these flames and arguments as vomit on the rug. If someone vomits on your rug, the solution isn't to vomit in response. You just add to the mess.

So the CoC is a way of saying "Be polite, keep fights off the board, and don't insult people." There's no way to keep Person A from doing it, but it at least tells Person B that responding in kind is not a good idea.

It isn't binding, it does not have anything to do with banning. It's just a simple codification of the standards of hte community. It exists to remind everyone that the best way to keep flamewars away is to fit these standards, EVEN WHEN OTHER PEOPLE ARE NOT.

It should hopefully clean things up. If someone comes along and says you are a moron etc. etc. all you have to say back is "Please obey the CoC." If you insult them, if you defend yourself, if you do anything else, they are simply going to respond and it will go on and on. If you just say "Please obey the CoC" what can they possibly say in response? "Make me!"? That just makes it clear that they aren't willing to fit the community standards, and at that point we can consider bringing in the admin. "Please follow the CoC" is a nice way of responding to a troublemaking post without, hopefully, causing the trouble to continue.

It shouldn't be too hard. If you are REALLY riled up by something and you HAVE to respond -- JUST DO IT IN A PM. Why assume the rest of us care? Why assume we come to this forum to read this sort of thing? Just respond in a PM and carry on your fight off the board. Is that really so much to ask?

Asking someone to follow the CoC isn't singling them out. It's simply pointing out that in this instance, you don't think they have. If they want to PM you and say "Why are you singling me out?" then fine. But again, why keep it public? Why pollute the forums?


Another reason I hope the CoC can avoid trouble is that it is not making any judgments. If I say to you "Please follow the CoC," I'm not telling you that you are a bad person, the only problem on the board, etc. I can say "Look, I agree with you, this guy's an idiot, but it really isn't going to do any good to get into it with him, so let it go, and follow the CoC." Asking someone to follow the CoC isn't CHARGING or THREATENING or ATTACKING them with anything, it's just asking them to be polite and keep fights off-board and private. It's an earnest request that makes sense for the good of the community as a whole. It doesn't have to imply that the person is WRONG, only that their actions are going to disrupt the forums.

I would like to see a lot of people giving input on the CoC and making use of it, because I really don't want it to be the whims of one individual or small group. I want it to reflect the standards of everyone. And I don't want to tie it to banning or anything, because I don't want it to be a threat. I just want it to be something we can point to, just to remind people that our priority is a friendly, open discussion of a shared interest, and that anything else gets in the way of that.

L
(oh, and incidentally, BH, the reason I used the phrase "rule of law," I was referring to a school of thought in political philosophy, "rule of law" is always the foundation of egalitarian social systems, where no individual is above the law -- "rule of men," even reasonable men, assumes that nobody can tell the rulers what to do, they are above the law and immune to it, and that's NOT what I would want for this forum -- I would want a simple rule like "Be polite" to apply to everyone, and not be the expression of one person's arbitrary self-appointed authoritarian will)
Law
Minotaur Lord
Posts: 3211
User Offline Click here to see the profile of this user
The administrator has disabled public write access.
"In every real man a child is hidden that wants to play."

-- F. Nietzsche
 
Go to topPage: 12345
Your Cart:
0 Items Order Total: $0.00

0 Product
$0.00



Login to see your account info

Once you login you will be able to see your different account areas here, order history, shipping information and your account information.