Controversial Discussions

[CharlieKasper]

What exactly do you classify as "controversial" discussions?

Would these be topics that begin in lets say a general board then spiral out of control; then get moved to this new board for more close watching... or is it something like the racist and prejudice stuff that occurs in the world news board?

If you all think this is something worth trying, we'd need to have specifics.

Topics that are aimed at bettering the situation in the server, between the players and/or admins, unifying the community, etc.

But get siderailed or changed into an admin vs players topics or HQ vs players topic because someone decides to voice their 'hq is arrogant' words when its completely unrelated.

[Marcel]

What exactly do you classify as "controversial" discussions?

I think that depends on the perspective. Where a player might consider a rule against bunnyhopping controversial, an HQ member might find unfounded criticism controversial. So, are we taking both perspectives into account, the players' perspective, the HQ perspective?

[Teddy]

I'll speak with the web team about specifics. I don't see a problem with giving this a trial and here is why:

I feel that discussions to improve the server, the administration team, and the community overall are often tainted by false information, trollish behaviors, and utterly useless junk. At the same time I feel having these open dialogues to make improvements are absolutely vital to the community. For the sake of being able to have these dialogues I guess utilizing this to facilitate legitimate lines of communication would be something worth trying.

[CharlieKasper]

I think that depends on the perspective. Where a player might consider a rule against bunnyhopping controversial, an HQ member might find unfounded criticism controversial. So, are we taking both perspectives into account, the players' perspective, the HQ perspective?

Both, that's how a community works.

[EenBeeFour]

It's a good idea, but it's also a bad idea. It just needs revisions.

Possibly trusted people to do the job instead of pre existing admins?

[Teddy]

How would a "trusted" third party be established and be ensured not to contain a bias?

[Murt]

Terrible idea. We aren't babysitters, this isn't a daycare.

If people can't handle themselves here then we can gladly show them out.

Because it is really fun when you create a topic and there are people derailing the topic deliberately to get it locked by trolling and provoking. Then it is your guys job to clean the topic properly so the discussion can carry on with the respective parties.

[Teddy]

Because it is really fun when you create a topic and there are people derailing the topic deliberately to get it locked by trolling and provoking. Then it is your guys job to clean the topic properly so the discussion can carry on with the respective parties.

I'll speak with the web team about specifics. I don't see a problem with giving this a trial and here is why:

I feel that discussions to improve the server, the administration team, and the community overall are often tainted by false information, trollish behaviors, and utterly useless junk. At the same time I feel having these open dialogues to make improvements are absolutely vital to the community. For the sake of being able to have these dialogues I guess utilizing this to facilitate legitimate lines of communication would be something worth trying.

Read an entire topic before replying; it's important for progression as well.

[Brian]

Idea being worked on!

[Murt]

Read an entire topic before replying; it's important for progression as well.

That was done but not interpreted as that from you side. Just something that I had to get off from my chest.

What I wrote was not targetted towards you solely but said in general.

[Teddy]

That was done but not interpreted as that from you side. Just something that I had to get off from my chest.

I understand, and I agree. I know the topic you made the other day was in the best of interests of the community but very quickly turned into a topic filled with hate and degrading posts. Once this is in a trial phase feel free to reopen that discussion if you feel it wasn't concluded to your liking.

[Teddy]

We will trial it now with leaders at the helm. Only division leaders+ can approve topics and posts until a legitimate method can be established to get trusted persons to keep the dialogue productive and on track.

http://www.argonathrpg.eu/index.php?board=358.0

[Brian]

Also, please read through the rules set up in that board, just because a post is not approved does not mean you can not get punished. If it is a proper response then nothing to worry about.

As this item has been created I will lock this topic now. If trial fails I will post on here again.