/tg/Station 13

Permabanned/burnt out players do not provide interesting or relevant discourse to the future health of the server. They are, at best, off topic or misinformed, and at worst, actively harmful to the discussion. The Player's Club intentionally limits posting (but not viewing) only to those who have played recently, of which what is considered "played" is fairly generous (even oranges got in, har har). I don't see any reason to let people who have removed themselves from the game, or worse--banned, try to push against administrative changes.

I would exclude admins from these restrictions, as they are more likely to have their finger on the pulse of what is a good/bad change, especially if they're an active admin. I know a handful of admins who don't meet Player's Club restrictions but are still very active administrators, and would not like to see them lose their voice.

I don't mind if the time considered "player" for policy discussion is increased by a lot, I think Player's Club is already fairly generous, but I wouldn't mind.

The extension doesn't work like this now, but I want to know if this is desirable before I take the ~10 minutes it would take to update it (plus whatever time it takes to get the most updated version of it).

I don't think that's necessary. You take a permabanned or burnt-out player's opinion with a grain of salt, sure, but they should still be allowed to voice it. Even if they make a bad point, replies to said point can yield discussion that will inform future admins about the intentions behind a given policy change.

Of course, if a particular permabannee/non-player is actively derailing policy discussions, then that should be dealt with. But it should happen on an individual basis.

I think at times inactive people do have something valuable to say, precedents from the past or insight into past rulings made during the prehistoric era of 2014 etc but generally letting burnt out or intensely shit individuals post in the policy threads adds nothing but misery and long off topic rants
of course a better solution would be to ban shitters off the forums but, lol thats never gonna happen

don't agree, a lot of burnt out players burned out because they at some point didn't like a change we made in either code or policy or whatever, and their opinions on how things should be still hold some value to me regardless of that, I think there are probably a few knobheads but just ban the outliers instead of punishing everyone

Mothblocks wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 1:45 am Permabanned/burnt out players do not provide interesting or relevant discourse to the future health of the server. They are, at best, off topic or misinformed, and at worst, actively harmful to the discussion.

This is very true. We should apply these standards to code contribution and maintainership as well.

Farquaar wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 1:50 am I don't think that's necessary. You take a permabanned or burnt-out player's opinion with a grain of salt, sure, but they should still be allowed to voice it. Even if they make a bad point, replies to said point can yield discussion that will inform future admins about the intentions behind a given policy change.

Of course, if a particular permabannee/non-player is actively derailing policy discussions, then that should be dealt with. But it should happen on an individual basis.

I'm 100% all about this right here. There is already a barrier that people should be contributing at least something to the topic. That something opens the door to more somethings.

Some people don't ask questions or poke at points about something that a misinformed or harmful person would, that lets it be resolved and preserved in text, in the thread related to the matter.

If someone is actually trying to push something that people see as a net negative, people aren't afraid to jump on it.

This could exclude people that don't have the time to put into the game, those people might have something reasonable or historically relevant to contribute.

It just feels weird to consider gating server policy like this. Policy thread moderation can kill the actual problem children, and policy posters already do the rest. What is there to solve here? What is the issue? I don't see some recurring issue happening here.

I agree with burger

cSeal wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 1:57 am of course a better solution would be to ban shitters off the forums but, lol thats never gonna happen

Yeah if this happened more often I probably wouldn't have any care for this at all

I'm not attached to this idea in any way I just thought it was worth discussing

Policy discussion is about more than just active players.

The decisions can impact permabanned players when rules, policies and precedents shift. It is also a platform for ex-tg/retired/inactive players to give their thoughts on things that may draw them back to the servers, or the things that caused them to quit playing/play elsewhere.

The (current term's) headmins and forum moderators are sharp as tacks when it comes to removing shitposts and bad-faith posts. I think reporting the bad posts is the best compromise between stopping bad-faith posters shitting up discussions while allowing inactive players to give their views, opinions and experiences.

You don't have to tell me about reporting posts, that's what prompted this thread in the first place--it's the same few shitposters I'm constantly reporting for off topic posts.

Alright yeah I don't care about this that much anymore, I think I'm going to poke at forum admins harder about actually banning/warning people rather than just removing the post, thanks for the intelligent discourse all