Let's Stop the Dehumanization

[Maximillion]

I think Staff Warnings should show up as an Inbox Message in our Inboxes, and Staff - in general - should not be allowed to snub players, ignore their PMs, and only talk to people if it's to Warn them, or demand a change of topic.

Now, I've heard "we don't want our staff to be harassed", but Warning Anonymity cures a symptom, not the actual problem.


Players should know who to talk to, if they find themselves with a Warning, and Staff should find the time to hash out the details with the player, on an "Innocent Until Proven Guilty" basis. It creates an environment where both Players and Staff are being treated like the human beings they are, rather than just chess pieces being moved about and discarded at-will.

Heavens knows, it takes an act of God and Congress to get a Staffer to ever reply to a message from me. Who am I, what grade of plebeian, that I am of such little significance, that I can not only NOT speak to my Accuser (even civilly) about my alleged wrongdoings, but that I don't even warrant replies to my PMs regarding what happened to me?

TL;DR


People need to talk, to use their words, to treat each other like human beings deserving of at least minimum-level human respect.

◘ Staff should have their names attached to Warnings (they'll use more discretion when assigning Warnings, if they can't do it anonymously)

◘ Players should get to discuss the terms of a Warning, and not immediately be assumed Guilty, due to the very real possibility of extenuating circumstances.

◘ Staff should respond to PMs.

◘ Players should not belittle, namecall, etc. Staff.

[straywolf174]

I can agree with some of this, again, out of morality. I feel that staff should be personal and honest with how they treat the members and vice versa. Dishing out punishments without a face means a staff can't be traced and thus, leaves them more prone to punishing the wrong person.

Also, this site doesn't run on that system already? An innocent until proven guilty system is not only the most reliable system to use, but it saves good members from being punished for nothing. If staff are targeting members off of just a whisp of "They did this" then that's obviously yet another problem that needs to be fixed for the good of the community.

I agree with those two things entirely. Not for one person - but for the future of WoB, and the staff that run it.

[Maximillion]

Of all the times I was assaulted with a Warning, only one person (Hitori) ever even so much as made me aware there might be an issue, and gave me a chance to make changes.

I don't agree that what I did to earn his disapproval was an actual rule violation (nor that it warranted adverse action being taken against me), but I at least respect him for having the decency to talk to me like I was more than just some stray, unknown, unwanted dog to kick around without a second thought.

When someone takes those measures to treat me like a human being, it turns the incident into a "conflict of opinion", rather than a cruel and unjust assault.

[straywolf174]

When someone takes those measures to treat me like a human being, it turns the incident into a "conflict of opinion", rather than a cruel and unjust assault.

I appreciate those measures as well, but only if the measure has effort. If what a staff says is something along the lines of, "I've punished you because of this" instead of, "You got a report. Prove to me you don't deserve it before I punish you."

I firmly believe all members should be able to explain themselves if the violation is

A) Not blatantly presented
B) Possibly given a catalyst beforehand
C) Can possibly be proven valid for said catalyst

instead of staff blatantly stating "I have power over you, this is why I have power over you, now carry on knowing I have power over you."

Like I said above and many times before, communication is the most important thing every between anyone in any form. Work, school, relationships, games, etc etc

Taking the measure just to say "F you" in a polite manner is like wasting my time and the staff's. Know what I mean?

[Legend]

The staff will not just accuse someone of being guilty. When a report is submitted we have to go back to review how it originated. Examples would be like reading the whole PM or reading the social up until the post that was reported. Most of the times the report is easy to decide because it normally falls under Harrasment or Spam. If a player can explain to me why he/she posted 4 post in a roll or stretched the social using 10+ memes for spam or why he/she called "player" an inappropriate name without saying he/she triggered me or called me a name first when they should of just reported it in the first place or blacklisted said player then thats awesome but I'm sure most the time thats not the case. If a report comes by that falls in a grey area we don't just mark it guilty and punish the user. We have our own chat called Staff Only where we discuss amongst each other. If we can't figure it out that way we simply ask Hitori or Lsm for advice in dealing with the report. Normally for cases that aren't serious like accidentally posting 4 posts in a roll we would just give a verbal warning. If a user has had a past of spamming then it may warrant an Official Warning or even worse a social ban. Warnings and ban severity scale with players record. If they have a clean record the likely hood of them getting banned is a lot lower than someone who gets reported for harassment once a week. You guys don't see but we mark just as many not guilty reports as we do guilty. Do note a user can attempt to prove the report or warning was unjust by simply submitting a support or messaging Hitori or Ama.  

As for what Stray said staff can be traced back to who did what report or handed out which warning. Everything is logged and can be viewed by other staff so its not like we can just hand out warnings and ban players for silly trivial things such as "I don't like him/her" thats why I banned them for spamming the social.

[straywolf174]

As for what Stray said staff can be traced back to who did what report or handed out which warning. Everything is logged and can be viewed by other staff so its not like we can just hand out warnings and ban players for silly trivial things such as "I don't like him/her" thats why I banned them for spamming the social.

I was more so mentioning tracing via the member, not a staff position, but I appreciate the information all the same since it clears up some of my own confusion with how the system worked.

[Legend]

Yeah, I have no issue with people knowing I handed out a warning because I try to be as fair and impartial as I can when dealing with anyone. If they break the rules they get punished its as simple as that. I've banned friends before in the past and I will continue to do so now.

[straywolf174]

Yeah, I have no issue with people knowing I handed out a warning because I try to be as fair and impartial as I can when dealing with anyone. If they break the rules they get punished its as simple as that. I've banned friends before in the past and I will continue to do so now.

Such things are only fair. I'm curious about staff policies though - are these your own personal morals, are all the staff held to the same standards via some sort of secret illustrious codex?

[Legend]

Most of it is my own personal morals but the staffs ideas aren't far from my own. I come from a military background so its pretty much what I was taught growing up. Every person should be treated equal regardless of age, gender, race, religious background and ideas.

[straywolf174]

Most of it is my own personal morals but the staffs ideas aren't far from my own. I come from a military background so its pretty much what I was taught growing up. Every person should be treated equal regardless of age, gender, race, religious background and ideas.  

That's quite the neutral approach to things, I - and probably many others - appreciate knowing when people hold that sort of outlook.

[Hitori]

Staff guidelines are present in a staff forum area - that's a bit more to go into than I have time for right now (work in about 20 minutes). But they are present and they act as an additional set of rules that moderators have to follow.

When it comes to the warning anonymity, the current system was done this way to sort issues where players were just responding endlessly to the staff member that issued the warning. This isn't how we want things done, especially when you consider that once a warning is issued a moderator can no longer do anything about it. However, by guideline standards moderating staff -should- be including that appeals / concerns about an warning or ban can be appealed or discussed in supports. (Appeal supports are handled by myself and Lsm -- and we bring Amaterasu in on things as we come about them).

As for not knowing who sent the warning. There are multiple systems in place where staff supervisors have access to staff logs. Which is reviewed on a regular basis so that we can see what each staff member is doing. And as Legend has said, these logs indicate who issued the action and who the action was taken against.

When it comes to discussing warnings and bans, moderators cannot really tell you all that much. They should be responding to the first message and directing you towards supports. Supports puts you in contact with staff administration - those responsible for reviewing moderator actions on a particular case and responding with the appropriate action.

[Maximillion]

Making it so a player's only recourse is to go straight to Supports/LSM, adds more to their workload, which means either these Appeals/Inquiries go neglected...or other things get put on the backburner. It would require only the smallest iota of effort, to include the Staff Member's name at the end/start of the letter, along with an explanation of why the Warning was issued.

Or, better yet, make it so you (Hitori) aren't the only person on Staff who doesn't just shoot Warnings into people's foreheads, and belch out "CHANGE OF TOPIC" just to move an otherwise healthy, mellow conversation onto one more of their choosing.

Nothing, and I mean *NOTHING* should be done with Anonymity behind it. What if the average player could send PMs to other players Anonymously, and it required someone sending in a Support to find out who Messaged them?

Except that erroneous Warnings are harmful to players, causing black marks on them that will be used as reasons for drastic action being taken against their account.

Accountability is key in making sure people don't just go about, doing as they like, willy-nilly. Many believe (rightly so) that, their word against a Staff Member's, is rubbish. Staff already get to show mercy, or harshness, at their own discretion. Letting them dole out invisible punishments, hiding behind the veil of anonymity, will only result in more of the same emotional/psychological detachment some staff have towards their behavior with people they like/dislike, oftentimes without them even realizing it (and who is going to tell them otherwise?)

[Legend]

Nothing gets put on the back burner when it comes to supports. I've watched Lsm do supports and even helped him with a few when I was visiting.  When he does supports they go from oldest to newest, nothing is skipped or set aside. As for staff being shown on warnings, like Hitori said staff are hidden to prevent people from lashing out at them. People hate to admit they are wrong, so they will argue with the mod about the warning. I've also seen harassment and spam being sent to a mod or staff member for issuing a player a warning. Its better this way because it prevents things from escalating to the point were the player ends up getting in more trouble then they should have. I myself have been called some silly stuff for issuing players warnings, mainly back when WoB was relatively new but I've seen some stuff that would offend some people. I myself don't care, I just ignore spam and blatant remarks. I feel that if you can't talk to me intelligently with out harassing me, its not worth my time replying. As Hitori stated above if a support leads to a case being reviewed then the mod/staff is also reviewed along with the case.

As for the whole social topic thing. If a topic turns out to cause an argument/conflict, harassment, doesn't follow the current rule guidelines or causes discomfort to any player the topic will be changed. There is no if ands or buts. Topics in the social should be appropriate to all ages since the game is PG 13, religious backgrounds, and should not show hate towards any race, country or political views. Stuff like that can be shared off site. If a topic is asked to be changed you can take it off site via Skype or something honestly.

Punishments aren't invisible, you receive what you did via PM as a warning. Trust me none of us staff can just go and ban someone without legitimate reason and keep their position. Admins and Headmods along with fellow Mods can review any report when ever we feel like it. A players word is = to any staff members, but it has to be addressed via supports. Speaking with a mod who gave you a ban will get you no where because we can't lift a ban. Thats kinda like arguing with a cop about a ticket you received for speeding, its his word against yours. You will still get the ticket and a court date no matter how much you try to debate with him about not doing anything wrong. Most people just pay the ticket because they know the evidence is there that they did something wrong instead of going to court unless its mandatory. Thats kinda how it works here. You get a warning/ban > You either accept it and carry on or you submit a support to protest vs the warning/ban. If you beat your case your ban/warning is lifted and the person who banned you for ill intent will get punished.

[Hitori]

To weigh in a bit more on supports. Lsm isnt the only onw wbo manages them, as Im sure you know from some of the suppoorts of yours ive responded to. There are some things that can take priority in supports, such as ban appeals, reports on staff members and locked accounts as a couple examples. I assist Lsm by processing these prioirty supports if its in my lower to do so. Ill also help go thrpugh supports in standard order if i can. This lightens his work load substantially at times.

The current warning and ban system is in place to encourage users to follow the chain of command when it comes to appealing - which is 100% necessary. I assure you that we strive to answer supports in a timely manner and dont ignore them. It is also 100% your right to dispute a warning or ban if you fewl it is unfair - Lsm, Mavis and I will review and respond to these and never ignore them. We take these issues seeiously and are in constant comminication about staff and current events in game in superviser chat on Skype.

A bit of further elaboration: Ive recevied warnings and bans on multiple games - yes i make mistakes too, Im human -- and all of those systems follow somethong similar to ours. You dont know who iasued it, you only get the name of the customer seevice rep that responds to your ticket. Additionally being staff on multiple games and websites, currently the only game i know where you see the staff members name that issued a warning is on TNR.

While I appreciate that youre wanting to have a change in the way a game system works because you feel it isnt the correct way, Lsm and I feel that this is the best way to go about it. Theread now closed.

[Sponsored content]