Log Posting Standards
-
@Tez said in Enjoy the Reads!! (Admin: ETA a content warning. It's THE LOG from The Pack thread.):
I did make the choice to edit the thread to add a content warning
A choice supported by the rest of the team, at that.
-
@hellfrog said in Enjoy the Reads!! (Admin: ETA a content warning. It's THE LOG from The Pack thread.):
@GF forums are, by both definition and tradition, places to fish for debate/discourse.
I did not say I disapprove of fishing for debate. I said I disapprove of harassing people using fishing for debate as a pretext.
If the person in the log showed up and said they felt victimized or wanted admin to take the log down, that would be a little different! As it stands, we don’t need to assign them roles and feelings.
I did not assign the redacted individual any feelings. I assigned motivations to NaderElShammy. Harassment is determined by the harasser’s behavior, not by the recipient’s response to that behavior.
-
@GF said in Enjoy the Reads!! (Admin: ETA a content warning. It's THE LOG from The Pack thread.):
Harassment is a determined by the harasser’s behavior, not by the recipient’s response to that behavior.
Both are taken into account, emphasising how the recipient feels more than what the instigator did or intended to do.
-
@Pavel said in Enjoy the Reads!! (Admin: ETA a content warning. It's THE LOG from The Pack thread.):
@GF said in Enjoy the Reads!! (Admin: ETA a content warning. It's THE LOG from The Pack thread.):
Harassment is a determined by the harasser’s behavior, not by the recipient’s response to that behavior.
Both are taken into account, emphasising how the recipient feels more than what the instigator did or intended to do.
But we know how the recipient feels: they already reported this incident to Cobalt as harassment, and Cobalt already reported that it was so, in her words, obscenely traumatic to read she shut down her game over it. Cobalt, who just announced leaving for an extended period before this log was posted. So that’s funny timing, innit? Funny coincidence.
But I’m just saying, if the recipient’s response is necessary to call a thing harassment, then we got that response five days ago.
-
@GF said in Enjoy the Reads!! (Admin: ETA a content warning. It's THE LOG from The Pack thread.):
But we know how the recipient feels: they already reported this incident to Cobalt as harassment
No, we know how the recipient feels about the incident in the log, not about the log being posted. The admin team here is only concerned with the latter.
We don’t know who the poster is, or their intentions. And we aren’t going to discourage people from posting logs unless their intention to harass (or otherwise break our few rules) is clear, or the individuals concerned make it clear to us that they feel harassed.
Do I think the poster is foolish for posting these logs without comment? Yes.
Is that against the rules? No.He/Him. Opinions and views are solely my own unless specifically stated otherwise.
BE AN ADULT -
@GF said in Enjoy the Reads!! (Admin: ETA a content warning. It's THE LOG from The Pack thread.):
@Pavel said in Enjoy the Reads!! (Admin: ETA a content warning. It's THE LOG from The Pack thread.):
@GF said in Enjoy the Reads!! (Admin: ETA a content warning. It's THE LOG from The Pack thread.):
Harassment is a determined by the harasser’s behavior, not by the recipient’s response to that behavior.
Both are taken into account, emphasising how the recipient feels more than what the instigator did or intended to do.
But we know how the recipient feels: they already reported this incident to Cobalt as harassment
I’m not actually sure that they were the one who reported it to Cobalt. Someone else might have. I don’t think Cobalt was 100% clear about that.
-
@Pavel said in Enjoy the Reads!! (Admin: ETA a content warning. It's THE LOG from The Pack thread.):
@GF said in Enjoy the Reads!! (Admin: ETA a content warning. It's THE LOG from The Pack thread.):
But we know how the recipient feels: they already reported this incident to Cobalt as harassment
No, we know how the recipient feels about the incident in the log, not about the log being posted. The admin team here is only concerned with the latter.
We don’t know who the poster is, or their intentions. And we aren’t going to discourage people from posting logs unless their intention to harass (or otherwise break our few rules) is clear, or the individuals concerned make it clear to us that they feel harassed.
Do I think the poster is foolish for posting these logs without comment? Yes.
Is that against the rules? No.I’m very disappointed. This log being here is harassment; it is so bad that reading it made Cobalt shut down her game. If people aren’t joking, it’s been triggering people. This is…harassment, this is obviously harassment, and the victim not showing up and going ‘please take it down’ – that’s…I don’t understand the reasoning behind this.
“We have no proof that the abuser intended to harass the victim by posting this, so it’s not harassment.” wtf. What the actual fuck. This isn’t a debate, this isn’t a discussion, nothing helpful or positive or constructive can come out of this log. There’s nothing to talk about, there’s nothing to verify, there’s no function this log serves beyond harassment. Cobalt already posted enough of it.
“We don’t know how the victim feels.” Yeah, but that doesn’t mean we need to enable them to be further victimized using our tools.
“Light moderation” is no excuse for condoning harassment. HARASSMENT is the whole reason we need mods at all.
the entity previously known as Sunny
-
I think there’s a fine balance here and I don’t like the direction that we would take if we removed this log. If I am accused of being a bad actor to someone in a scene, and I come here and post the log of the scene in the entirety, that person accusing me (or their friends) can say I am harassing them by posting the log and get it taken down?
Idk, that worries me. People who have logs should be able to post logs.
-
@IoleRae Without context, I have trouble saying what makes this harassment without knowing who it is that is posting this. There is no context at all, no explanation, and no reasoning.
I do suspect it was not posted with good intentions, but I don’t know that – and I have trouble with admin being the arbiters of what logs are allowed and what logs are not. I tend to believe the text speaks for itself and to let people make their own judgments.
I WOULD like to hear more though about what people think about this, so I am glad that you and @GF HAVE dissented.
-
I am honestly very, very upset, putting myself in NAMEDELETED’s position. I genuinely do not understand how given the entire context of the situation, ‘hands off’ is the correct approach. Y’all have context. Y’all know this isn’t positive. You “suspect” but…won’t act without that suspicion confirmed. “pick and choose” what is and isn’t against the rules is the role of a moderator.
Somebody is being victimized, and we are perpetuating and providing their abuser a platform to continue.
-
she/they
-
Yes.
-
I’m going to fork this discussion so that people can engage in it without needing to take part in this thread. I think it is worth talking about to see what standard the community wants to set around logging.
-
@Tez said in Enjoy the Reads!! (Admin: ETA a content warning. It's THE LOG from The Pack thread.):
Do you believe it was okay when Cobalt posted the log?
It’s my understanding that Cobalt posted that log with permission of the other person on the condition of minimum available info and anonymity.
Anonymity has already been broken by the person posting and mods had to edit to remove the name, and there is a lot of identifying information about the other player involved, from the little I could stomach reading.
This was obviously done with malicious intent.
-
T Tez moved this topic from Rough and Rowdy on
-
I have forked this thread and moved it to Comments & Feedback. Please keep that in mind when discussing.
-
@Meg said in Log Posting Standards:
I think there’s a fine balance here and I don’t like the direction that we would take if we removed this log. If I am accused of being a bad actor to someone in a scene, and I come here and post the log of the scene in the entirety, that person accusing me (or their friends) can say I am harassing them by posting the log and get it taken down?
Idk, that worries me. People who have logs should be able to post logs.
IoleRae and GF (I avoided tagging you because you might not WANT to be involved, but you are the ones I would particularly like to hear from) how do you feel about Meg’s example?
AGAIN, SINCERE VOICE. I’m sorry the internet isn’t great at tone, but I really do want to hear.
she/they
-
Done with malicious intent or not, the logs do not make the harasser look any better, nor make the person being harassed look at all culpable.
I agree heartily with content warnings and removing names of the innocent player, but posting logs of bad actors - and having bad actors or others post logs that they think might provide more context is kind of a cornerstone of this subsection of community discussion.
-
Thank you for forking the thread. Whatever other decision is reached I think it’s a nasty log that we don’t need to increase traffic to.
My main reaction to the other thread was genuine confusion; I don’t understand what anyone got out of posting it. Even as cruelty it seems to fail (to me). I’m sorry that my empathy is failing me here, I can’t quite see what you’re seeing.
-
I genuinely think that the mod team here can tell the difference, and that telling that difference is both a- the whole reason for mods, and b- the hardest part of your job.
“I may not always be able to define it, but I know what it looks like.”
the entity previously known as Sunny
-
@Meg said in Log Posting Standards:
I come here and post the log of the scene in the entirety, that person accusing me (or their friends) can say I am harassing them by posting the log and get it taken down?
^
It comes across as “and don’t message me back!!!” if you can’t even defend yourself in public when you got called out in public.
If your defense turns out to be more damning than exculpatory… well, that just sorta makes the point for us: you don’t know how to read the room.
