Should admins be allowed to participate in Peanut threads?

[Bisar]

I have personal feelings about Peanut threads, and I'll be quite frank that they're not positive. Far be it from me, however, to tell people how to have their stitch and bitches organized. Honestly, they may be a good thing, because if they didn't air their grievances there, they'd do it in private messaging, where the stories could morph into unrecognizable monstrosities that no longer resemble the events in question.

But, regarding Peanut threads, is it really appropriate for admins to participate in them? The admin code of conduct that I've seen has specific restrictions against administrators participating in behavior that either shows favoritism or negative bias towards a player, whether that's their in-game actions or the way they speak about the player in public forums.

I know(?) that Peanut threads are (probably?) meant to be some good-fun heckling, but having admins take part in it seems a tacit administration rubber stamp of talking or acting this or that way toward a particular player, whether its positive or negative. The admin appeal forum already has specific rules against weighing in on an approval you weren't an immediate party to the events of, so Peanut threads already seem to toe the line of that rule. Having admins take part seems to take it a fair sight further into encroaching onto the purported admin code of conduct.

Am I being sanctimonious or some kind of killjoy? Or am I onto something here? What do you think?

[Vekter]

MSO has already made it clear that he thinks there's value in peanut threads existing for the sake of public discussion of admin actions. I don't see a reason why admins shouldn't be allowed to post, though I'll say that we've regularly been yelled at for being too toxic in them and the general vibe is "Admins probably shouldn't be rude to the player who's ban is being posted about".

I think their existence is fine; it keeps discussion of bans in a forum where we can moderate them instead of it being on some Discord server somewhere, and I don't see any issue with admins participating.

[britgrenadier1]

everyone is allowed to post in peanuts, its good for content.

[TheLoLSwat]

its a little lame but they should have as much of a right to participate as anyone. Shame them (like how you would someone posting in their own peanut) but why more?

[TheRex9001]

I think its fine, it can keep the thread healthy and generally is just good fun. It also makes it so admins arent just faceless banbots and you can actually get their opinions on things.

[RaveRadbury]

I bring this up every term or two on the admin side because I think that it's important that we think about it.

Most admins feel that there are conduct expectations but they don't extend to not creating or not posting in peanut threads.

I myself have questioned whether or not admins should start peanut threads. There are some really great arguments for the status quo.

[Jackraxxus]

I think its fine, it can keep the thread healthy and generally is just good fun. It also makes it so admins arent just faceless banbots and you can actually get their opinions on things.

This is sQ fvcking trve admins being individuals and not some unknowable, unfathomable hivemind leads to healthier and more personal moderation which ultimately contributes to a better experience.

[bingusdingus]

I'm not really a fan of peanut threads in general and I think they can cause some dogpiling on someone if things get too out of hand. This makes the impression that the person appealing is being gossiped about and may even discourage people from trying to appeal, and rather than asking for a second chance they just go somewhere else. I understand the ideas in practice, and the value of having a place to discuss admin decisions, but I feel like this is not the way to do it.

Peanut threads can just turn into a roast very quickly and the optics of admins participating in this kind of thing, especially the banning admin, can give a poor impression of the administration and the community. It can also make people feel excluded because they feel that they aren't liked, or even if their appeal does get accepted, their ban and peanut is still readable and acts as a permanent stain on their presence in the community, like some kind of unspoken note. Sometimes the appealer made a simple mistake and wants to rejoin, but may be dissuaded by the things people say in peanut threads, about other players. They can't even defend themselves in the thread because they are discouraged from replying, lest they just make it harder for themselves. Peanut threads are also hidden behind the Players Club which looks like its trying to be placed out of the way of random users and lurkers, and isn't even indexed by search engines.

It's one of those blind spots with admin conduct along with giving ban notes like "Fuck off" or "Go away" that I think should be fixed before it becomes a bigger issue.

[Bisar]

I think its fine, it can keep the thread healthy and generally is just good fun. It also makes it so admins arent just faceless banbots and you can actually get their opinions on things.

This is sQ fvcking trve admins being individuals and not some unknowable, unfathomable hivemind leads to healthier and more personal moderation which ultimately contributes to a better experience.

I agree wholeheartedly with everything you just said. I apologize if it seems like I was trying to argue that admins shouldn't be allowed to have opinions or post in general. I'm wanting to focus the scope of this policy thread on admins participating in Peanut threads.

Like I said, if it seems like I was trying to broaden the subject into admins participating in the community outside of their role as a moderator and enforcer of the rules, that wasn't my intent at all.

Very specifically and to resummarize what I was saying; I
think Peanut threads are an invitation for negative dialogue about the players and admin that are the subjects an appeal. Is it appropriate for an admin to engage in that dialogue? Is it an invitation to toe the line of expected admin conduct?

I don't see a reason why admins shouldn't be allowed to post,

Ah, as above. I hope you specifically mean Peanut threads even though I diasgree. I think admins goofing around the community is fine.

though I'll say that we've regularly been yelled at for being too toxic in them and the general vibe is "Admins probably shouldn't be rude to the player who's ban is being posted about".

I think this may be at odds with the last third of your post actually.
If an admin attends Festivus to air their grievances, it's almost inevitable that some of that is going to be negative feedback. Admins aren't supposed to be giving public negative feedback about players outside the context of an appeal as far as I know. Cutting up and talking shit on problem players in admin channels is something I'm well familiar with. I've done it myself for games that I've been an admin for. I'm not arguing to you all aren't allowed to have opinions.

I just think it might not be appropriate to express them in that particular public forum that is more or less obviously meant to be a roast session or less flatteringly, the work up to a mobbing.

[Jackraxxus]

especially the banning admin,

This is facts Mr Dingus and what an excellent point indeed
The banning admin should probably be heavily discouraged (or banned) from participating in the peanut thread
Unless they are speaking to the benefit of the player in question (For example dispelling unsubstantiated criticism of the banned player's actions) EDIT: and without qualification such as "they might have done X but at least they didnt do Y" it should be 100% positive comment

[Vekter]

I don't see a reason why admins shouldn't be allowed to post,

Ah, as above. I hope you specifically mean Peanut threads even though I diasgree. I think admins goofing around the community is fine.

I am explicitly discussing this in the context of peanut threads.

though I'll say that we've regularly been yelled at for being too toxic in them and the general vibe is "Admins probably shouldn't be rude to the player who's ban is being posted about".

I think this may be at odds with the last third of your post actually.
If an admin attends Festivus to air their grievances, it's almost inevitable that some of that is going to be negative feedback. Admins aren't supposed to be giving public negative feedback about players outside the context of an appeal as far as I know. Cutting up and talking shit on problem players in admin channels is something I'm well familiar with. I've done it myself for games that I've been an admin for. I'm not arguing to you all aren't allowed to have opinions.

I just think it might not be appropriate to express them in that particular public forum that is more or less obviously meant to be a roast session or less flatteringly, the work up to a mobbing.

I think that there's a large difference between voicing one's opinion on a player or note/ban and actively shitting on the persons involved. I don't think it's wise to outright ban admins from posting in peanut threads, though I think there should be more care as to how we talk to or about players in them in general, and I say this as someone who spent most of the last Ekaterina peanut thread shitting on them. I acknowledge that I can be doing better and should be held to a higher standard than players.

I do, however, think admins absolutely should not be making peanut threads. I feel like that's in poor taste in general.

[wesoda25]

Admins are members of the community and should be free to engage with it. If some aspect of the community is so problematic that admins aren't allowed to engage with it, then it needs to be changed anyways.

I think Peanut threads are an invitation for negative dialogue about the players and admin that are the subjects an appeal.

Really well put. They aren't inherently negative but have the potential to be. Therefore, admins should lead by example and not fuel negativity in pnuts. I'm of the opinion that if you start a conversation (thread) off on a thoughtful note (post), the rest of the discussion is more likely to follow that example. Ultimately, I don't think there needs to be any sort of restriction other than that.

PS the stigma around posting in your own thread is STUPID that is the place for unofficial discussion and allows one to engage with arguments not presented within the appeal itself. just dont be a dick!!

[dendydoom]

we had a very longwinded discussion about this in the admin subforum, and my thoughts (which i posted when i was the lowly forum jannie and not headmin) was that:

peanuts offer a place for players and admins to discuss things openly and impartially - admins can't delete posts or ban users from the forums, they can only escalate that to headmins or forum jannies. there is more of an equal level of power and the discussion is more casual and offhanded. there is value in trying to see eye-to-eye in that sense.

admins represent more than themselves but admins are not a monolithic entity. some issues admins as individuals will feel more strongly about, or have more of a personal involvement in, and them being able to speak their mind openly without that input leading to real administrative action is worth something. if an admin then goes on to act in those interests, their personal bias will be extremely obvious for all to see. furthermore, it allows admins to do that one thing that players rarely see outside of adminbus: disagree with each other, and get players involved in that discussion. from a player's position, this is a good thing because you are interacting with a real person who just happens to be an admin in a space where the discussion is equal, rather than contending with the faceless admin hivemind in some other context.

i ultimately think it's a good thing that admins are willing to participate in peanuts, despite the possible downsides of doing so. there have been plenty of cases where my opinion has been swayed because of thoughtful input in appeal peanut threads, conclusions that i never would've come to if i hadn't bothered to participate, or worse, not been allowed to. obviously this is different for each admin. having a peanut made about something you did can be pretty intense and disheartening, especially when it's clear that no one involved actually read the logs or checked their facts. but that's just how it goes, and there are plenty of people to readily challenge misinformation as it is.

[BONERMASTER]

Here is my answer: Freedom of speech, buddy!

With tyrant-hunting regards
-BONERMASTER

[PapaMichael]

if admins are banned from peanut threads, they're just gonna take all their discussion to adminbus and their thoughts are going to become much more inscrutable to all of us.

with that said, admins should be classy, admins dunking on people is anti-classy, quadruply so for their own bans

[RedBaronFlyer]

I feel like it’s fine as long as the admin the appeal is for doesn’t comment until it either gets resolved or handed to headmins. Other have explained other aspects better than I.

[GamerAndYeahMick]

admins are players, and some players are admins, there is of course a level of conduct, but we are also gamers, and volunteers, we don't have to be uber professional all smiles customer service, we should set a standard in terms of behaviour, but everyone slips up and can go too far. Idk. freeze peach anyway!!11!!

[GamerAndYeahMick]

if admins are banned from peanut threads, they're just gonna take all their discussion to adminbus and their thoughts are going to become much more inscrutable to all of us.

with that said, admins should be classy, admins dunking on people is anti-classy, quadruply so for their own bans

Yes, this is also true. Admins will just have their opinions voiced in admin chatter or bus, with no player oversight, there is nothing wrong with the [redacted] tower conversations but it is good that admins get to voice their opinion in the open where it can be challenged or discussed

[iwishforducks]

if peanut threads are getting negative/toxic then they should be getting admin intervention’d. i understand that some folks like their Free Speech but peanut threads get really miserable at times when people are just being mean to each other. (the toxicity of peanut threads has massively gone down in the past couple years!)

i’ve never subscribed to the thought that admins shouldn’t be allowed to post in peanut threads. the best peanut threads are when there’s admin(s) giving insight into the situation. it helps players and admins connect, both in terms of rapport and coming to conclusions on issues.

admins should stay professional in peanut threads just cause that’s conduct. but i don’t see any benefits in sealing off admins from participating in peanut threads entirely.

[conrad]

From the time I had a purple name admins were already heavily discouraged (i.e.: "Why did you do that you dumb fuck") from creating peanut threads in general, much moreso for their own bans. If an admin creating a thread for their own ban happened in the last year I completely forgot about it and I bet someone will unearth a thread I missed but who cares.

Regarding an admin posting on peanut threads, or posting on a thread someone else created for their own ban, I think rules that apply for players apply to admins, i.e.: it's cringe and THE CURSSSEEEEEEEEE'd to post on your own thread.

"B-b-but conrad what if the banning admin starts swinging their dick around since they have authority, etc.?"

Then present your much bigger dick and remind them about admin conduct.

[Lacran]

Admins generally lack the tact and posting prowess of the average player.

admins exist to clean the community I use, I'm not fond of them participating in it in most capacities.

[Constellado]

I personally think:

Yes. They should be allowed to participate.
Now, posting into your own peanut, yeah, that aint good. well, it is good for the peanut gallery as it adds more popcorn but sometimes the popcorn tastes bad.

However I think that if you are an admin that is watching the appeal from the sidelines and is not part of the thing that is being peanutted, they are not much different to a player imo.
With only one difference: admins posting in peanuts is a great way to see what the admin team in general feels about a situation. It helps add more very important conversation to the thing that is being discussed. It helps me see what kinds of things the admin team is expecting with us players.

I noticed that players and admins can have different opinions, and having those opinions is important for me and other players and admins to be able to gauge what people want to see in the community.

[WineAllWine]

Either admins should be able to post in peanut threads or peanut threads should be banned entirely.

[DrAmazing343]

Either admins should be able to post in peanut threads or peanut threads should be banned entirely.

+1

Peanut threads are entertaining, but ultimately can be kinda harmful. They are usefully sequestered away from the actual ban, but sometimes, they can result in some foul feelings about already dour circumstances.

I'm still entertained by the threads on more ridiculous bans, admittedly, but I can understand tossing them away. Regardless, we should NOT disallow admins from posting in them mostly for the reasons Constellado posted above. I think an admin posting in a peanut for their own ban should be disallowed, as it's too easy to make it into a slap fight if the banned come back to post in their own peanut, as well. However, we also have forum admins for policing that, so ???

[Constellado]

Peanut threads are good to have.

They lead to QC bans and other situations as they show a spotlight onto the ban for headmins to look at. It also is a place for players (admins are players too) to say their opinions and experiences to hopefully improve the server in a democratic way one peanut at a time.

[Longestarmlonglaw]

Why is it considered poor if an admin makes a peanut thread on their own ban?
An admin bans someone for whatever reason, it could be justified or not, whatever the case is, the appellant makes an appeal, and the banning admin makes a peanut thread.
Why is it also bad if you make a peanut thread on your own ban? (When you're the one getting punished)

[Vekter]

Why is it considered poor if an admin makes a peanut thread on their own ban?
An admin bans someone for whatever reason, it could be justified or not, whatever the case is, the appellant makes an appeal, and the banning admin makes a peanut thread.
Why is it also bad if you make a peanut thread on your own ban? (When you're the one getting punished)

Because it would be the same as a cop arresting someone and then going on social media to talk shit about them. It's in poor taste. Admins are supposed to be at least somewhat impartial.

[Lacran]

I think the main issue here is admins don't actually have anything to add to a peanut thread. Admins aren't very smart or funny, they smell bad. People really shouldn't be expected to interact with admins unless it's an emergency.

!	Message from: dendydoom
	USER WAS PERMANENTLY BANNED FOR THIS POST

[dragomagol]

We are not interested in restricting admins from posting on peanut threads.