☞ Rave Radbury ☜ /tg/station - #1 Together

[RaveRadbury]

Campaign art by Aspev

Greetings /tg/station community!

Here we are again for another exciting headmin election. Last time was close as I came in second for the Player and Admin votes, losing the Player election by only 20 votes, wow!
When I went out on last campaign's platform I was uncertain with how voters would respond. I appreciate each and every one of you that voted in support. Now I can step forward with confidence into this term's election knowing that others around here share in my vision of a pleasant community that they can take pride in.

This campaign's platform is a lot like the last one, but I'm adding a focus on admin conduct. More on that later, first a little background info.

Rave Radbury Lore
BYOND account: Spring 2018
Joined: Beginning of 2019
Adminned: End of 2019
Trained by: Headmin Coconutwarrior97
Trained: Sylphet, Misdoubtful, Dreathtil, Cybersaber101, NoxVS, Pumpkin0, MrMelbert, MarketMonkey
Noteable PRs:

• Made the Prisoner role
• Gave "civilian" jobs service lathe + headset access and moved them towards full service integration
• Added Foreigner quirk
• Added Clown and Mime Fan quirks
• Added Introvert and Extrovert quirks
• Gave pAIs a proper HUD, gave 'em encryption keys
• Reworked light tiles and added color cycle variant
• Added quirks to medical notes
• Revoked lizard "X" privileges

Recent Lore (What I've done in the last term)

• Facilitated the return of drones
  In the aftermath of the last election I was the one who reached out to JJRCop and helped him set up a meeting with headmins to get drones back in
• Kicked terry with keyholder
  Before the great memory expansion Terry was crashing a lot. I was there to answer pings and get Terry back up on his feet.
• TM'ed features for testing, bug fixes for convenience
  If a neat feature needed testing or a crucial fix was up on the github but not merged yet, I made sure that these PRs would be on the live servers for the players to enjoy.
• Tied for 2nd in the recent Talent Show
  Our clown and mime comedy routine tied with Hiynastrike's fast painting, losing out to hangman!
• Reworked Social Anxiety
  What was once a stutter mixed with silent stacks is now so much more!
• Worked with an artist to add new emojis
  The art is 100% Cybersaber's, but we did collaborate on design
• Assisted DevOps team with getting the interview system set up
  Using key holder privileges I was able to assist a DevOps team member get our interview system up and running via approved edits to the config

Stances

We need to prepare for the future
I can't say for certain when the next tide will be, or if an SS13 project succeeds and frees us from BYOND. What I do know is that if one of those things happens, really takes off, when the flood of new people shows up, I want us at the top. Our codebase is #1, and so is our community. If we want it to stay that way we need to make preparations, largely concerned with smoothing out some of the rough community edges that might drive people away to other servers. I'd like to discuss ways to improve the community in the next community meeting.

As I said last election,

Community members put so much time contributing to this game and playing it to have to add a bunch of caveats and warnings to the project they have dedicated themselves to before showing it to their IRL friends. Have you ever wanted to tell someone about this game, but held back because of the kinds of behaviors and things that are said around here? I think that’s a shame, and I would like to change that.

Admins are role-models in the community

Maintain professional conduct both in game and outside of the game. It is expected that you take the position seriously. This doesn't mean you can't talk casually to the playerbase, but remain professional on the forums, as well as on other Space Station 13 communities.

It seems to me that we have been letting admin conduct slip. Change starts at home, administrators should be setting a good example in the community. If admins can't behave, how can we expect the rest of the community to do the same?

Redefining how rule 11 is treated
Casual use of slurs bring nothing positive to the table. It's not a good look for us and it drives away people who would otherwise enjoy our servers. Content creators (coders, artists) work really hard and usually want to show off what they've made to others, and this kind of behavior limits that.
A zero-tolerance Rule 11 policy is unreasonable and I will not consider it. I'm just asking everyone to use a little more judgement when you talk. Nearly every conversation about rule 11 I've had in a ticket with players has been reasonable and respectful. Talking it out usually produces understanding and compliance, we do not need to kick people out over it.
Just as we do not have a list of names that aren't allowed, likewise we will not have a list of banned words. We are counting on you, like with naming policy, to use your best judgement in your decision making and listen up if an admin bwoinks you over it.

Better handling of peanut threads
Peanut threads aren't super great, but leaving them up forever is an especially bad idea. We need peanuts to be deleted sooner or later as well as not be publicly-facing while they are up. Peanuts are frequently pretty ugly affairs, and when they're left out in the sun some of them can become scars on the forum that aren't a good look for the community. I am committed to finding a solution to this problem and hope to have fruitful conversations with site staff and community in the future.
This could include bringing the hut back in some form, but will have to be discussed and settled with powers beyond the headmin team for it to happen. Definitely something I want to explore.

Notes shouldn’t be a punishment
When admins set "ban x if they do it again" notes it's effectively kicking the can down the line while also acting as a sort of punishment to the player. Notes are meant to be factual entries of what occurred, not a space to push bans onto other admins. As was discussed last term, so called "Final Warning" notes are different as they are evidence of a conversation to address an issue; the notes I am taking issue with are far more casually made.

Fewer notes/bans, more conversations
In my time adminning Manuel and getting it set up I was advised by my trainer and headmin CoconutWarrior to engage players with a light touch and err on the side of correction over noting. I think that this has been really worthwhile advice that the community would benefit from experiencing on a larger scale. I would like to encourage this as headmin.



If you'd like to support my campaign feel free to take a button and add it to your avatar or signature.
☟Campaign Button (Rare)☟

Spoiler:

Thank you for taking the time to read my campaign thread. /tg/station is such a wonderful project and I am so thankful to have everyone and everything here. Here's hoping we can make things better together!

[youtube]zOt6ppIBOd4[/youtube]

[PKPenguin321]

>Bring the Hut back
absolutely fucking not, and let me add that this is an especially paradoxical stance given your stances on toxicity and whatnot up until that point
before you add "we can moderate it!" let me say that no i will fucking not moderate it, veto'd, denied, get out of my domain

[MortoSasye]

How would you change the way we enforce rule 11, if not by a list of banned words? Would something that someone considers offensive be punishable, even if it’s a rare slur?

How would being a headmin allow you to handle peanut threads better? Would you discuss the enforcement of the forum rules with the forum admins? How do you plan to bring the hut if our host was the one that removed it?

I don’t quite understand how saying “ban x if they do it again” is different from the “Final Warning” notes. What makes them different to you?

While a noble goal, sometimes conversation is not possible on servers with players that are much more agressive than a Manuel player. If admins are expected to discuss a player misbehavior every single time, this would increase the burn-out rate. If you get the chance to implement this, how would you track the efficiency of such a measure at the scale of all our servers, and the rate at which admins tire out?

[Super Aggro Crag]

what is your response to this video
[youtube]e1IxOS4VzKM[/youtube]

[sinfulbliss]

Fewer notes/bans, more conversations
In my time adminning Manuel and getting it set up I was advised by my trainer and headmin CoconutWarrior to engage players with a light touch and err on the side of correction over noting. I think that this has been really worthwhile advice that the community would benefit from experiencing on a larger scale. I would like to encourage this as headmin.

This is one of the points you make which I profoundly agree with. I feel I am not able to treat bwoinks the same as I would a conversation, because a bwoink almost always implies you are in trouble (unless it explicitly states otherwise). This system pushes players to be extremely defensive when they are bwoinked, because if you admit any wrongdoing whatsoever, you risk the bwoink turning into a note. Notes are indeed punishments since they limit the legal (non-rulebreaking) behavior you can do out of fear you will be punished for something you wouldn't have been punished for without the note.

Some admins end their ahelps with, "but I'll be noting this down for future reference, nbd" or otherwise not even mention that they will note the behavior. This forces it to go to an appeal, during which your chances of overturning the note are no longer a matter of "should he have been noted for this" and are now a matter of, "was the note factually accurate." If the note is factually accurate, you have no defense against it, and are simply stuck with it. For example, "Pied a clown when they were dying from rads, leading them to die. Warned to be more careful." This note is factually accurate and therefore could not be overturned. Yet it exists as a blemish on the player's record, regardless of whether this was done in good-faith or bad-faith.

Sorry for the preamble, but I am glad you have also seen this as an important topic and would like to hear your thoughts on what specific measures you plan to take to correct the problem.

[PKPenguin321]

>Bring the Hut back
absolutely fucking not, and let me add that this is an especially paradoxical stance given your stances on toxicity and whatnot up until that point
before you add "we can moderate it!" let me say that no i will fucking not moderate it, veto'd, denied, get out of my domain

I should say that, this aside, I think Rave has a pretty good attitude and has long since shaken my old opinion of them. Not a bad pick.

Fewer notes/bans, more conversations
In my time adminning Manuel and getting it set up I was advised by my trainer and headmin CoconutWarrior to engage players with a light touch and err on the side of correction over noting. I think that this has been really worthwhile advice that the community would benefit from experiencing on a larger scale. I would like to encourage this as headmin.

This is one of the points you make which I profoundly agree with. I feel I am not able to treat bwoinks the same as I would a conversation, because a bwoink almost always implies you are in trouble (unless it explicitly states otherwise). This system pushes players to be extremely defensive when they are bwoinked, because if you admit any wrongdoing whatsoever, you risk the bwoink turning into a note. Notes are indeed punishments since they limit the legal (non-rulebreaking) behavior you can do out of fear you will be punished for something you wouldn't have been punished for without the note.

Some admins end their ahelps with, "but I'll be noting this down for future reference, nbd" or otherwise not even mention that they will note the behavior. This forces it to go to an appeal, during which your chances of overturning the note are no longer a matter of "should he have been noted for this" and are now a matter of, "was the note factually accurate." If the note is factually accurate, you have no defense against it, and are simply stuck with it.

Sorry for the preamble, but I am glad you have also seen this as an important topic and would like to hear your thoughts on what specific measures you plan to take to correct the problem.

I'll say that I rarely note too because a message will usually get the message across, but there's also some confirmation bias here. I think a lot of admins do this, but you won't see it because if there's no note then there's no need to appeal at all, meanwhile notes that are placed do get appealed so you will only ever see appealed notes.

[Domitius]

If notes shouldn't be a punishment how do you feel about more short bans(15 minutes) on a frequent basis to track repeated behavior? Should we be more willing to ban on first timers? If we're only keeping track of repeated rule breakers by word of mouth how do you feel about bringing back secret notes?

[Swept]

How do you feel about nuking the "politics-containment" channels on the official tgstation Discord?

[damneddog]

Can you list some bulletpoints for what you plan on doing to improve the community?

[Boot]

Hey there, love the PR history, love the fact that you arn't a cat, like your idea for the future.

If you could expand on your ideas for rule 11, you mention how slurs don't bring anything to the table yet fallback onto the "no banned words list" that is the current policy. Is your idea just that of the status quo? How does the future of more casual, not targeted, slurs look under a Rave Radbury headminship? What do these conversations look like?

[RaveRadbury]

How would you change the way we enforce rule 11, if not by a list of banned words? Would something that someone considers offensive be punishable, even if it’s a rare slur?

We can handle it the way that we handle other things. Lists are for bots, we're meant to be capable of finer distinctions and understanding of context. We get by on naming policy without a list, while there might be the occasional difficult point here and there a lot of naming policy is pretty straightforward and easily handled in a ticket.

I'm not quite sure what you mean by a "rare" slur, but if you're talking about edge cases our system already allows for appeals and disputes to be settled on the forums.

How would being a headmin allow you to handle peanut threads better? Would you discuss the enforcement of the forum rules with the forum admins? How do you plan to bring the hut if our host was the one that removed it?

Headmins have forum powers so if it comes down to it I will handle it myself.

I'd prefer to work with the existing forum admins, hear about their experiences and their thoughts on matters, then work together to find a solution that we can all approve of.

MSO has recently revealed (!!!) that the hut's removal was at headmin request, so it seems like talks might be possible.

I don’t quite understand how saying “ban x if they do it again” is different from the “Final Warning” notes. What makes them different to you?

The main marker is the amount of effort put into them.

Can kicker notes usually detail an offense and then passes a judgement that is meant for the next admin to act on.

Final warnings tend to be more along the lines of a rule 7 concerned note, where details of a history of behavior are noted as well as noting a specific conversation wherein an admin really tried to sit down and address things with the person. They are a much higher level of effort, something that I think is good for the community.

While a noble goal, sometimes conversation is not possible on servers with players that are much more agressive than a Manuel player. If admins are expected to discuss a player misbehavior every single time, this would increase the burn-out rate. If you get the chance to implement this, how would you track the efficiency of such a measure at the scale of all our servers, and the rate at which admins tire out?

I don't think this is something that I want to track with efficiency. The stances I'm taking are more about setting a course and precedent for expectations over trying to make promises I might not be able to follow through on if the other headmins disagree. If people are down for the whole leadership and vision thing they will give it an honest shake and ask questions if they have them. There are suggestions I can make that would hopefully ease the experience for admins. To be clear, I am not looking to adopt a "Customer is always right" mindset here, if people are being rude or hostile staff should be free to shut that down and not have to bear through it.

Burn-out is a primary concern in staff and I would place it before my stance here. You're right to point out that there is a challenge here, but I don't think it's impossible. We can all work together to have a better experience.

[MortoSasye]

Great replies, thanks. Another top pick!

[NikNakFlak]

Your points aren't bad. I am hesitant of you since I find you to be one the most sensitive and emotionally involved of the admins we have and it's def come up in the past.

I also feel like you would go full restrict on rule 11 if you had your way but mrstonedone being the host will forever prevent you from doing that so it's not a major concern, but it does give me thought. I however don't really like slurs anyway and have the exact same opinion as you that I have not told people about this game due to the community, but it's much better nowadays, so I honestly dont know about this one.

Besides that, I heavily agree with the admin conduct thing and have no large opinions otherwise. Your contributions to code the community are otherwise great! And you especially give pAIs love which makes me pretty biased.

I have no idea where to put you yet but hesitant support I suppose. pAI GAGS tho.... WINK WINK NUDGE NUDGE PLEASE YOU HAVE SAID YOU WERE WORKING ON THEM ITS ALL I WANT RAVE PLEASSEEEEE

[Agux909]

I am also confused about your stance on rule 11. Right now the ruling already works and admins can enforce it with their discretion, we've seen it.

What exactly would you be changing? Because to me it reads like a moot point that rehashes what the rule has already been doing. I would love it if you could clarify further on the matter.

Other than that, I've been wanting you and your platform to succeed since last election, definitely a top pick.

[RaveRadbury]

what is your response to this video

[Domitius]

Debates and threads have been open for questions for almost three days now. You've only made two posts in the related forums since it's started. Are you just busy IRL or is this a sign of what your activity will look like if you are elected?

[RaveRadbury]

Debates and threads have been open for questions for almost three days now. You've only made two posts in the related forums since it's started. Are you just busy IRL or is this a sign of what your activity will look like if you are elected?

I've had some real life stuff come up in the last week. It shouldn't be an issue moving forward. Sorry for the delay. ?

[Domitius]

Debates and threads have been open for questions for almost three days now. You've only made two posts in the related forums since it's started. Are you just busy IRL or is this a sign of what your activity will look like if you are elected?

I've had some real life stuff come up in the last week. It shouldn't be an issue moving forward. Sorry for the delay. ?

No worries, was just curious!

[RaveRadbury]

Fewer notes/bans, more conversations
In my time adminning Manuel and getting it set up I was advised by my trainer and headmin CoconutWarrior to engage players with a light touch and err on the side of correction over noting. I think that this has been really worthwhile advice that the community would benefit from experiencing on a larger scale. I would like to encourage this as headmin.

... I am glad you have also seen this as an important topic and would like to hear your thoughts on what specific measures you plan to take to correct the problem.

A lot of it, as you pointed out, has to do with approach. There are many times where an investigative bwoink against someone has through investigation unveiled that the original ahelper was the instigator, so I like to approach with something neutral like "hey what happened between you and X this shift?". Even a broad "what's been happening in your shift this round" can really ease initial contact and help the person on the other end open up to a conversation rather than feeling like they need to be defensive.

In these cases it's not uncommon for the player to openly share what's been going on, and usually within their own words the choices they've made sound reasonable and make sense. At this point I can usually address what happened "yeah, doing x is a real problem, it can cause y issues. can you see why this is a thing we have to talk about?" If someone is coming at it with good faith and talking out this stuff usually I can feel comfortable with letting the conversation end there.

I know that there is a "If it wasn't documented, it didn't happen" sort of mindset with notes, but I think that even with that strategy we are left at a loss with issues like Rule 7 (which Nameless has big cool plans for!!!). I've spent time working in fields where I had to monitor people and make daily notes, it was not uncommon for suicide watches to be involved. I bring this up because I mean to say that I have worked in environments where noting was a literal life or death situation. So when it comes to spaceman game and people making mistakes and understanding what they did it just comes across as something that we could be alright with letting go on, instead taking the moment to engage the player and have them feel more like they are talking with a DM and less like they are talking to a cop.

[Korusho]

I supported Rave in the last election, I'll continue to support him until he betrays me in some deep, philosophical manner. Like not enjoying scones.

... You do enjoy scones, yes?

[Nist]

Good lad, has my vote.

[RaveRadbury]

If notes shouldn't be a punishment how do you feel about more short bans(15 minutes) on a frequent basis to track repeated behavior? Should we be more willing to ban on first timers? If we're only keeping track of repeated rule breakers by word of mouth how do you feel about bringing back secret notes?

This kind of relates to Rule 7 conversation, so I'm going to point over at Nameless's plan for tracking rule 7 stuff.

The way I see it if you're an active admin you're going to see the same players over several shifts. I myself have been able to have casual note-less corrections with someone and then find them doing something on another shift at which point I can say "hey man, we talked about this, I have to note you for it."

A lot of this is going with your gut and playing by ear, giving people a chance when you feel they're not going to make an issue out of it. Sometimes those people will take advantage of those chances, it happens. Eventually they get caught out anyway.

You can make a note to track behavior without it being a punishment. Appending an opinion like "ban if they do it again" is the problem. I don't think we should ban first timers any more than we already do.

[Domitius]

If notes shouldn't be a punishment how do you feel about more short bans(15 minutes) on a frequent basis to track repeated behavior? Should we be more willing to ban on first timers? If we're only keeping track of repeated rule breakers by word of mouth how do you feel about bringing back secret notes?

This kind of relates to Rule 7 conversation, so I'm going to point over at Nameless's plan for tracking rule 7 stuff.

The way I see it if you're an active admin you're going to see the same players over several shifts. I myself have been able to have casual note-less corrections with someone and then find them doing something on another shift at which point I can say "hey man, we talked about this, I have to note you for it."

A lot of this is going with your gut and playing by ear, giving people a chance when you feel they're not going to make an issue out of it. Sometimes those people will take advantage of those chances, it happens. Eventually they get caught out anyway.

You can make a note to track behavior without it being a punishment. Appending an opinion like "ban if they do it again" is the problem. I don't think we should ban first timers any more than we already do.

I totally understand going with your gut but I disagree with everything else you've said here.

Being an active admin isn't a tall order but if there is no notes about a rule-breaking situation they will think it's a first time thing. Heck you can be active and just not have overlapping shift times. Too many what-ifs and legitimate can kicking.

How long is eventually? How many shifts could a bad actor be able to fuck up other peoples rounds before they get caught out?

Notes that track behaviour are regularly seen as punishment by many players. I agree "Ban if they do again" is unneeded as the decision should fall onto the next admin to look at the situation.

[RaveRadbury]

I totally understand going with your gut but I disagree with everything else you've said here.

Being an active admin isn't a tall order but if there is no notes about a rule-breaking situation they will think it's a first time thing. Heck you can be active and just not have overlapping shift times. Too many what-ifs and legitimate can kicking.

How long is eventually? How many shifts could a bad actor be able to fuck up other peoples rounds before they get caught out?

Notes that track behaviour are regularly seen as punishment by many players. I agree "Ban if they do again" is unneeded as the decision should fall onto the next admin to look at the situation.

I'm a little confused, because my stances are essentially unchanged from last term, wherein you said

While adminning on MRP I was advised by headmins during its early days to take an approach of correction and discussion over noting. This is something that I embraced, and when I was made admintrainer I sought to pass it on to those I trained for the MRP server. Having originally adminned on Bagil and Sybil, I found that this approach produced a lot of fruitful conversations with players that resulted in growth and a lack of future problems on their part. As such I would like to consider a lighter touch on the LRP servers as well, we’re all here to enjoy the game and mistakes happen.

I have seen Rave implement this lighter touch to great effect and found great results using it myself. If Headmins can be used to set an example this is the best example I could ever hope for.

RaveRadbury has devoted enormous amounts of their time to the community and would for sure make sure all the work gets done. Everything in their platform is readily achievable with their skillset.

+1

Has your opinion here changed or have I altered my platform in a significant way in your eyes?


Eventually could be the next day or even the next shift, within a week. If someone ahelps something problematic it usually gets dealt with. I'm specifically referring to on-the-fence moments, rather than clear cut things that need to be addressed (grief)

What bad thing do you see going unaddressed for several shifts? Once something crosses a line of severity it's usually a problem that gets dealt with in that round.

[Domitius]

There may have been some disconnect on what we see as "note-worthy" and I've also shifted my stance towards more of "If there isn't a note it never happened". On the fence situations are dictated by related prior note history and how receptive they are during the ahelp.

While a light touch is still great as a Game Admin I no longer think it's desired as a Headmin. If you are called in for a situation as one you need to finish the conversation to not let things drag on.

[RaveRadbury]

There may have been some disconnect on what we see as "note-worthy" and I've also shifted my stance towards more of "If there isn't a note it never happened". On the fence situations are dictated by related prior note history and how receptive they are during the ahelp.

While a light touch is still great as a Game Admin I no longer think it's desired as a Headmin. If you are called in for a situation as one you need to finish the conversation to not let things drag on.

I don't see a light touch being the same as dragging things out, I'm not sure how that connection is being made. One can be decisive and lenient.

What's more, you've conflated game admin actions (which my stance is in regards to) with headmin decisions (which are separate and while influenced by my stance are not beholden to it)

[WineAllWine]

I think Rave's previous headmin manifesto was a little extreme. I believe I made this clear to them at the time.

However, I find this current manifesto no less than perfect and Rave will have my #1 vote. I rarely admin with them — since I never leave Terry — but every interaction I've had with them has been exactly what I'd want from a headmin.

[RaveRadbury]

How do you feel about nuking the "politics-containment" channels on the official tgstation Discord?

Politics containment has come a long way from where it was when I first joined the community.

At this point its effectively a sub-community here. Last election I thought that adding a discord jannie just for the channel might be a good idea. It seems like in the last six months there hasn't been anything too dramatic there, so maybe that isn't necessary.

If things start to go off the rails again there we can discuss how to move forward as a community, figure out what we can do to keep it around.

[RaveRadbury]

Hey there, love the PR history, love the fact that you arn't a cat, like your idea for the future.

If you could expand on your ideas for rule 11, you mention how slurs don't bring anything to the table yet fallback onto the "no banned words list" that is the current policy. Is your idea just that of the status quo? How does the future of more casual, not targeted, slurs look under a Rave Radbury headminship? What do these conversations look like?

Lists are inflexible things that are meant to be checked against. They constantly need updating and people bicker over them. When I say the word "slur" to you, odds are certain words come into your mind as examples of slurs. Coincidentally, those are the ones that we most need to deal with. Administration involves a lot of judgements and calls that aren't as easy as checking a list. So too is the case with slurs.

Is this the status quo? No, it isn't. I have spoken at length about this in bus and been informed by headmins that they do not consider slur usage to be inherently bigoted speech. This is a problem.

I plan for this to be carried out with a fairly light touch. Unless someone is going out of their way to be a jerk about it most ahelps about slurs should be a small conversation with a correction.

Example conversation

Code: Select all

Admin: Hey, please don't say stuff like this [log with slur from player]
Player: Oh shit really? That's against the rules now?
Admin: Yeah, we're trying to clean things up a bit, get a better look
Player: Okay
Admin: Thanks for understanding, have a good one.
--Ticket resolved--

The above conversation has been most of my tickets with players over rule 11 stuff. If I see them later doing it again I bwoink them with "We talked about this earlier, I gotta note you for it now"

If any complicated cases come up we always have bus and appeals to work things out.

[Not-Dorsidarf]

1] How do you think you can get your slurs platform working if you were to get naloac as a co-headmin, who casually and liberally uses slurs of varying severity, including in high-profile interserver cases? Do you think this would cause issues when combined with your admins as community role model goal?

2] If your policy isn't zero-tolerance, what is your policy? You've provided examples of idealised conversations where the player elegantly comes to accept that they are doing wrong, but what will your push be for the inevitably unhelpful people who say "No" or "Why?" when challenged by an admin?

[RaveRadbury]

1] How do you think you can get your slurs platform working if you were to get naloac as a co-headmin, who casually and liberally uses slurs of varying severity, including in high-profile interserver cases? Do you think this would cause issues when combined with your admins as community role model goal?

I think we can talk through most things and respect each other's goals.
If it really comes to odds there is a 3rd headmin. If it really, really, comes to odds, MSO can do something about it.
I respect Naloac and I think we have the professionalism to not push things to the point where MSO would have to step in.

2] If your policy isn't zero-tolerance, what is your policy? You've provided examples of idealised conversations where the player elegantly comes to accept that they are doing wrong, but what will your push be for the inevitably unhelpful people who say "No" or "Why?" when challenged by an admin?

Players who do not agree to our ruleset are not allowed to play on our servers. We have already had instances where people refused to follow rule 11 when asked to in an ahelp. They were unbanned provided that they agreed to follow the rules.

If someone is going to pay lip service and continue on or tries to line toe about it that pushes past the realm of "light touch" and into "standard handling"

[Cobby]

Fewer notes is not something i want, I would actually prefer MORE notes and instead we move away from "this guy has X notes he is a baddie" mentality unless its actually relevant to the issue at hand. Everytime I see "I just talked about it with them!" conversations with no trail to suggest they actually did without parsing the logs of every previous round I roll my eyes a bit because Its absurd for either of us to assume you're going to be on 24/7 when i might need you to tell me that "you just talked to them about it".

I go back to the sticky complaint situation since that one is pretty fresh in my mind (rent free btw), how would less notes fix the situation where we have supposedly tons of conversations but none of them were actually logged when the admin needed it to make a judgment call?

Its not only unfair to other admins, its pretty unfair to players too. I would much rather have something playerfacing like a note that I know what is being said about me than a conversation im hoping the admin is fairly explaining the situation to others about. I can appeal a note if I think its a bit overbearing, I cant appeal a conversation you refer to in adminbus that may drive someone to make a decision administratively.

The other obvious anti-player sentiment that comes from low notes is the more obvious "please stop having 'first time convos' with this guy and ban him already jesus".

If it works for you because you are regularly active on the server you "main" I would highly encourage you to walk the walk and "prepare for the future", being you will eventually not be as active as you are now. A lack of logging is not the way to do that.

[RaveRadbury]

I am also confused about your stance on rule 11. Right now the ruling already works and admins can enforce it with their discretion, we've seen it.

What exactly would you be changing? Because to me it reads like a moot point that rehashes what the rule has already been doing. I would love it if you could clarify further on the matter.

Other than that, I've been wanting you and your platform to succeed since last election, definitely a top pick.

According to the way things currently are slurs are not inherently bigoted. This means that we can't really bwoink for it or tell them to stop. With my changes admins would be able to tell people to knock that stuff off and actually have the teeth to follow through on it if need be.

Does this answer your question fully? Please let me know.

[Agux909]

I am also confused about your stance on rule 11. Right now the ruling already works and admins can enforce it with their discretion, we've seen it.

What exactly would you be changing? Because to me it reads like a moot point that rehashes what the rule has already been doing. I would love it if you could clarify further on the matter.

Other than that, I've been wanting you and your platform to succeed since last election, definitely a top pick.

According to the way things currently are slurs are not inherently bigoted. This means that we can't really bwoink for it or tell them to stop. With my changes admins would be able to tell people to knock that stuff off and actually have the teeth to follow through on it if need be.

Does this answer your question fully? Please let me know.

I think it does. You mean so admins feel less pressured about bwoinking someone casually using a slur, right?

So basically, there's no list of slurs but if someone uses any slur, they should know that they can get bwoinked at any given moment depending on admin discretion, even if they weren't being specifically bigoted in the sense of what has been usually interpreted from rule 11.

If this is the case then fine by me. This would allow admins to simply be able to bwoink and tell someone to chill with the words, without the need to note/ban immediately cause they used one of the "forbidden words on the list".
I think this aligns with the general direction of your platform about "more communication, less punishment", (when it's reasonable of course) and might reduce some of the tension when handling such cases.

Thanks for the answer, I'm satisfied.

[Qustinnus]

I don't really care about rule 11, but you say you want to improve how rule 11 works by giving admins more discretion. Naming policy already barely ever works, but with slurs this would just get worse because opinions on what is a slur and what isn't are already super divided (Some admins would tell you not to use cunt or retard), but also the degree of how much they care is on opposite ends of the spectrum. Any player would have to essentially follow the ruling of the strictest admin because if they don't they risk getting booted by said admin. How do you realistically expect this to work?

[Not-Dorsidarf]

2] If your policy isn't zero-tolerance, what is your policy? You've provided examples of idealised conversations where the player elegantly comes to accept that they are doing wrong, but what will your push be for the inevitably unhelpful people who say "No" or "Why?" when challenged by an admin?

Players who do not agree to our ruleset are not allowed to play on our servers. We have already had instances where people refused to follow rule 11 when asked to in an ahelp. They were unbanned provided that they agreed to follow the rules.

If someone is going to pay lip service and continue on or tries to line toe about it that pushes past the realm of "light touch" and into "standard handling"

Apologies if I was unclear, I guess I meant what the difference between not tolerating any use of these disallowed words and your rejection of a zero-tolerance policy is? Like if it isn't allowed and people who say it are ordered to stop or be banned, isn't that just the case that we're banning them outright? (Which would be good, I'm just confused about the policy being put forwards here)

[RaveRadbury]

Apologies if I was unclear, I guess I meant what the difference between not tolerating any use of these disallowed words and your rejection of a zero-tolerance policy is? Like if it isn't allowed and people who say it are ordered to stop or be banned, isn't that just the case that we're banning them outright? (Which would be good, I'm just confused about the policy being put forwards here)

Zero-tolerance is commonly used to define policies that respond immediately and harshly. A zero-tolerance slur policy would instantly perma or otherwise severely ban for any use of slurs. I'm suggesting instead that admins take a moment to talk with people and explain what's up rather than just banning people instantly.

[Rohesie]

Rave is pure empathy personified. It'd do the headmin team a great good by being a part of it. They didn't come in second last term at random.
Top-pick.

[Not-Dorsidarf]

Apologies if I was unclear, I guess I meant what the difference between not tolerating any use of these disallowed words and your rejection of a zero-tolerance policy is? Like if it isn't allowed and people who say it are ordered to stop or be banned, isn't that just the case that we're banning them outright? (Which would be good, I'm just confused about the policy being put forwards here)

Zero-tolerance is commonly used to define policies that respond immediately and harshly. A zero-tolerance slur policy would instantly perma or otherwise severely ban for any use of slurs. I'm suggesting instead that admins take a moment to talk with people and explain what's up rather than just banning people instantly.

I guess I misunderstood the term's use, thanks for clarifying Rave!

[RaveRadbury]

I don't really care about rule 11, but you say you want to improve how rule 11 works by giving admins more discretion. Naming policy already barely ever works, but with slurs this would just get worse because opinions on what is a slur and what isn't are already super divided (Some admins would tell you not to use cunt or retard), but also the degree of how much they care is on opposite ends of the spectrum. Any player would have to essentially follow the ruling of the strictest admin because if they don't they risk getting booted by said admin. How do you realistically expect this to work?

The instances of naming policy that you see are the appeals, which can get a bit heated but are ultimately about people getting attached to names (personalized things to describe a character) as opposed to slurs (general things that are used casually).

As for the "ruling of the strictest admin" scenario: if it truly arises that one admin is significantly more strict than the others, then that’s a matter for the team to address internally.
It's not like some doomsday scenario is going to be enacted wherein one admin order 66's a bunch of players. The headmin team and admin team will be very involved in the whole process, there's not really room to run amok.

It's all pretty straightforward and easily done. Servers other than us already do zero tolerance and they seem to be alright with it. We should have an even easier time seeing as we won't be.

But you don't really care about rule 11, right? ?

[RaveRadbury]

I think it does. You mean so admins feel less pressured about bwoinking someone casually using a slur, right?

So basically, there's no list of slurs but if someone uses any slur, they should know that they can get bwoinked at any given moment depending on admin discretion, even if they weren't being specifically bigoted in the sense of what has been usually interpreted from rule 11.

If this is the case then fine by me. This would allow admins to simply be able to bwoink and tell someone to chill with the words, without the need to note/ban immediately cause they used one of the "forbidden words on the list".
I think this aligns with the general direction of your platform about "more communication, less punishment", (when it's reasonable of course) and might reduce some of the tension when handling such cases.

That about sums it up.

It is a strong policy to move forward on which is why I think it needs to be implemented lightly. I've heard players talk about getting instantly banned on other servers for using a slur and that strikes me as intolerant in a way that's not necessary. People are usually pretty reasonable to discussing rules and following them provided that they aren't being treated with hostility. We should feel comfortable talking with players and giving them a chance to cooperate instead of punishing them.

[Qustinnus]

But you don't really care about rule 11, right? ?

just so you don't get the wrong idea, I don't care about it being implemented because I can agree with part of what its trying to achieve and don't have a very strong opinion. I do care about how its implemented because if its implemented wrong I can get banned for saying retard to someone in coderbus.

[RaveRadbury]

But you don't really care about rule 11, right? ?

just so you don't get the wrong idea, I don't care about it being implemented because I can agree with part of what its trying to achieve and don't have a very strong opinion. I do care about how its implemented because if its implemented wrong I can get banned for saying retard to someone in coderbus.

No one should be banning you for saying something once.

We talked about this last term and you brought it up again this one so I guess you feel a bit anxious about it. Sorry that you're feeling discomfort about considering the words that you might avoid saying.

My main focus is taking care of racial slurs as those are particularly egregious in the public spotlight. A lot of people are against the use of "retard" but that doesn't seem to have as much support within our culture.

Obviously I can't officially write down a list of words that are going to be exempted just as I can't write down a list of what counts.

Ultimately you might have to accept that its best for the community going forward if you tried to not say anything that would get you gitbanned if you said it there. Believe it or not many of your fellow coders want to show off the work that they have done and your use of "retard" could get in the way of and tarnish that. It's also concerning if its being thrown at new people who are still learning the ropes, as we are looking to have a less hostile environment for new people.

[RaveRadbury]

I was in the live debate
[youtube]EZ4qbTSz528[/youtube]
I show up around 17:00 in

Give it a listen if you want to hear me talk more about my thoughts on /tg/station.

[RaveRadbury]

Thank you to my voters! Let's do this!

[youtube]zuuyR7vrL6M[/youtube]

[Stickymayhem]

I demand an anarchy server and 333 years of darkness Rave the bloodpact will be upheld

[Swept]

Congrats on the win Rave!

I'd love it if you still formulated a response to Cobby's post in this thread as I think he brought up some interesting things.

Thanks!

[RaveRadbury]

Congrats on the win Rave!

I'd love it if you still formulated a response to Cobby's post in this thread as I think he brought up some interesting things.

Thanks!

I've heard a lot of opposition to this stance and not much support for it. I can't deny that Cobby makes great points. We both seem to agree that there are issues with the current noting process, but my idea might not be a good solution to it. I'm open to discussing and re-evaluating my stance here and I'd encourage anyone with further thoughts on all this to contact me on discord if you'd like to pitch any ideas or give your input.