In Regards to Wild West

[RobertEHouse]

This is unacceptable! You had no right to do that on your own! This isn't the mod's site any more than it is anybody else's, the mods just ended up being the one's who were handed the keys when Defy stopped caring. The vote was in favour of keeping the WW open, there should have been community discussion and a revote before any action was taken! You just couldn't stand having a section of the site where you couldn't enforce your powers, just like you couldn't stand not being able to punish Epyc Wynn.

Edit: Also so much for that "April Fools" joke. Each part of it is coming true. First the site gets fixed, and now the WW is canned. I guess we can start expecting the draconian moderation next.

Hello all.

As some of you may have noticed, the Wild West sub-forum is no longer accessible. This is not a glitch, nothing Defy did, but something that we, as a moderation team, have decided to do, and this was something that was not done lightly nor without group consideration and discussion.

Yeah, yeah, we saw what "group consideration and discussion" looked like when Epyc Wynn's Pub Club was removed. It was a joke. Completely unprofessional with only a cursory amount of discussion. Not anything like the line we were fed at the time about how the decision was "not taken lightly" and the vote was "unanimous". I don't buy that this discussion was any more professional than the last.

At the very least make the WW visible, but disallow posts in it so that we can still view the old threads for posterity. There were A LOT of fun threads there, and I don't remember what they all were and you gave us no warning before you decided to shut the west down on a whim!

Whether or not you believe any of that is really up to you, and I really have no reason to lie. We've had discussions before in the past about WW, and we did listen to the community and left WW well alone. I know I hardly went in there since it's the kind of place that doesn't interest me, and, as a mod, I can't do anything about it. So, no, it wasn't on a whim. We didn't collectively decide that WW was going to be shut down one day.

While it's true that I've made my opinion of WW known, and it is known, I went along with the users that wanted WW around since it was their call and not mine. In the end, WW ended up being a place that wasn't fun and it was turning into a place where people felt they could get away with being assholes and go after users. Sure, you and I may not like some users but that doesn't excuse the behavior that went on in there, fun threads or not.

So, no. The WW will not be readily open to just view, unless the CM says any different.

This isn't a power trip, this isn't an effort to control the site, nor is it some grand conspiracy to meddle in the affairs of user just for giggles or whatever. And, again, whether or not you choose to believe myself or any other mod is really your choice to make.

I am not saying all the member of the WW had the best judgment in mind when they wrote anything. Some in fact should have been pushed to the winds years ago because of not understanding the world "limits". This was clearly the case when reading a few of the responses to a few call outs posts. Yet, i would not say that ever member participated in such bulling that it required the full shut down of the WW. Just a removal of "bad" members whom at this point appears might have gotten off lightly with the destruction of the WW.

Ironically while typing i found out one which is still able to exist on this site and comment on this very post...Why?

 

[Gethsemani_v1legacy]

Yet, i would not say that ever member participated in such bulling that it required the full shut down of the WW. Just a removal of "bad" members whom at this point appears might have gotten off lightly with the destruction of the WW.

Ironically while typing i found out one which is still able to exist on this site and comment on this very post...Why?

As moderators it is a quite major catch 22. The Wild West had very few rules (don't break the law or the site was basically it), so people could be just as bad as they wanted. Now, if we as Mods had gone around revoking access to WW or banning members that were living out the "no rules"-decision to the fullest, that would have backfired on us (just as the closing down is apparently doing). So we could punish people for acting out when told it was alright, or we could remove the playground where acting out was alright. We choose the latter.

As a personal aside, as the moderator who most closely monitors R&P, I've witnessed several threads that had to be locked and infractions handed out because of animosity that intensified in the WW and then spilled over to the rest of the boards. Sure, people might be passive aggressive and pissy against each other anyway, but WW took it from that to outright hostility and that hostility wasn't contained to WW alone.

 

[Arnoxthe1]

As moderators it is a quite major catch 22. The Wild West had very few rules (don't break the law or the site was basically it), so people could be just as bad as they wanted. Now, if we as Mods had gone around revoking access to WW or banning members that were living out the "no rules"-decision to the fullest, that would have backfired on us (just as the closing down is apparently doing). So we could punish people for acting out when told it was alright, or we could remove the playground where acting out was alright. We choose the latter.

As a personal aside, as the moderator who most closely monitors R&P, I've witnessed several threads that had to be locked and infractions handed out because of animosity that intensified in the WW and then spilled over to the rest of the boards. Sure, people might be passive aggressive and pissy against each other anyway, but WW took it from that to outright hostility and that hostility wasn't contained to WW alone.

Is the passive aggressiveness really better though? I mean, is the banishing of the WW really going to make people feel differently about each other? The answer is no, and this thread alone can attest to that. And you could argue that we only just got rid of it, but we all know that even before it existed, even going so far back to the Susan Arendt days, people were still nasty to each other even without WW to supposedly help it along.

And once again, people are saying there's so many problems with hostility, but in my entire time here during when the only content creator was and is Yahtzee, I haven't noticed any problems at all. Now to be fair, I haven't gone over to R&P ever, but that seems entirely irrelevant to WW anyway.

If some really can't learn to ignore a post, are they people who are really worth banishing the entire WW for? When does the responsibilities of the site team end and the responsibilities of the user begin? When is it no longer the site's fault concerning content that is posted? Is it really too unreasonable to expect a certain level of maturity out of our posters? Do we really need to be everybody's babysitter whenever others call them a mean name?

 

[Baffle]

I'm probably gonna get banned from here soon, but if I do, I'm probably not gonna be coming back. And that's not a threat or anything.

Well... that's the point of a ban. If it was a threat, it'd be a shockingly rubbish one.

 

[Arnoxthe1]

Well... that's the point of a ban. If it was a threat, it'd be a shockingly rubbish one.

Nah, not the ban. The me not coming back. Although I probably should have said suspended instead of banned.

 

[Dr. Thrax]

-Snorp-

The entire situation is a no-win scenario for y'all, for which I do not envy any of you.

Can't simply remove problematic users - Wynn's case aside - as it violates the whole shtick of WW, no rules aside from "Nothing illegal" and "Don't break the site". Can't bop people for things they've said in WW, so you have to wait and creep around until they slip up out of WW, but some don't even post anywhere but in WW because it lets them get away with things they'd otherwise be bonk'd for.

People still want the WW around, so unless you've got a serious problem on your hands you can't just get rid of it, and even if you do have a serious enough problem, removing WW will still cause outrage because of that "community vote" business or "mod takeover" whackadoodle.. But keeping WW meant that all this toxicity was being allowed to simply fester and simmer and it would occasionally spill out into other forums that you guys had to hammer on. And since y'all don't have control over back-end stuff, it's not like you could simply hide the WW from view because its threads still showed up in the forums box on any of the non-forum pages.

You couldn't police it, the only options available to you was to just ignore it or get rid of it and bunker down for all the rage that's going your way. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

 

[Arnoxthe1]

But keeping WW meant that all this toxicity was being allowed to simply fester and simmer and it would occasionally spill out into other forums that you guys had to hammer on.

FFS, where is all this "toxicity" that everyone keeps talking about? Is there some magical Toxicity dumpster in WW that sometimes magically floats into the other sub-forums and spews bad System of a Down lyrics?

Show me where the Toxicity dumpster touched you.

 

[The Lunatic]

This isn't a power trip, this isn't an effort to control the site, nor is it some grand conspiracy to meddle in the affairs of user just for giggles or whatever. And, again, whether or not you choose to believe myself or any other mod is really your choice to make.

So, it's not a power trip despite the fact:
A. It's not what the community voted for.
B. It's not what the original staff of the site implemented.
C. It's doesn't appear to have any oversight from anyone above the mod team and Basement.
D. Was against things which were said in the past about WW by the current mod team and staff.

 

[RobertEHouse]

Yet, i would not say that ever member participated in such bulling that it required the full shut down of the WW. Just a removal of "bad" members whom at this point appears might have gotten off lightly with the destruction of the WW.

Ironically while typing i found out one which is still able to exist on this site and comment on this very post...Why?

As moderators it is a quite major catch 22. The Wild West had very few rules (don't break the law or the site was basically it), so people could be just as bad as they wanted. Now, if we as Mods had gone around revoking access to WW or banning members that were living out the "no rules"-decision to the fullest, that would have backfired on us (just as the closing down is apparently doing). So we could punish people for acting out when told it was alright, or we could remove the playground where acting out was alright. We choose the latter.

As a personal aside, as the moderator who most closely monitors R&P, I've witnessed several threads that had to be locked and infractions handed out because of animosity that intensified in the WW and then spilled over to the rest of the boards. Sure, people might be passive aggressive and pissy against each other anyway, but WW took it from that to outright hostility and that hostility wasn't contained to WW alone.

I get your where you guys are coming from,it is a catch-22. The problem i think is really to do more to with the individuals then the community.

Let's be honest though, it's a lot easier to eliminate thought point of contention then to actual address the fact that we really have some "interesting" people in our community. Members in our community whom have either on purpose or for other reasons have no control in what they type. Either rules or no rules these individuals are still going to be an issue. Zebras after all cannot try to change their stripes.

In essence with the Removal of the WW ,eliminates one front for the admins to worry about. In the long term at least for their sanity i hope it works.

 

[Marik2]

And the change happened one day before the one year anniversary of one of the game threads. That's unfortunate.

Which one?

Finish the sentence. I don't know if you remember or saw it, but one of the last posts I made in that thread was one where I alluded to this by starting a sentence with "In another two days..."

You friends with the mods?

 

[Bedinsis]

And the change happened one day before the one year anniversary of one of the game threads. That's unfortunate.

Which one?

Finish the sentence. I don't know if you remember or saw it, but one of the last posts I made in that thread was one where I alluded to this by starting a sentence with "In another two days..."

You friends with the mods?

I am not. And I won't lose any sleep over; it's just unfortunate that a milestone never got to be experienced.

 

[bluegate]

Can't simply remove problematic users - Wynn's case aside - as it violates the whole shtick of WW, no rules aside from "Nothing illegal" and "Don't break the site". Can't bop people for things they've said in WW, so you have to wait and creep around until they slip up out of WW, but some don't even post anywhere but in WW because it lets them get away with things they'd otherwise be bonk'd for.

Only if one is either especially vindictive or has some twisted obsession with policing people. The Wild West was supposed to be without moderation, moderators were supposed to not patrol that section. No matter how big of a dick people were in the Wild West, what happens in the WW stays in the WW, or that is how it should have been IMHO.

Things done and said in the Wild West should have been ignored for the most part, but I guess some people couldn't.

Ah well, by the way, did everyone notice that Chrome has started blocking ads on the Escapist by default because the ads shown here are considered bad practice? Now Defy will even miss out on adclicks from wayward Chrome souls that come breezing by. 👺

 

[BreakfastMan]

I know you think that not taking it seriously makes how you acted okay.

I don't think it says anything one way or the other, honestly.

Dude it says when you are un-directed you gravitate towards bullying. That's... that's kind of a lot. If you seriously don't notice it yourself you might need to talk to someone. I honestly always assumed you were doing it intentionally as part of the fun, but if not then wow dude.

Lol. Dude, you can make posts that aren't just calling me mentally unstable too, you know. Try it, you might even find it fun! XD

 

[BreakfastMan]

Ah well, by the way, did everyone notice that Chrome has started blocking ads on the Escapist by default because the ads shown here are considered bad practice? Now Defy will even miss out on adclicks from wayward Chrome souls that come breezing by. 👺

Yeah, I noticed that as well. Kind of weird, in light of other site functionality coming back like quote notifications and view counts.

 

[RedRockRun]

Let's all just go to /b/, /v/, /a/, /mlp/, /pol/, and /int/. Fuck /tv/ though.

 

[BreakfastMan]

Let's all just go to /b/, /v/, /a/, /mlp/, /pol/, and /int/. Fuck /tv/ though.

Nah, fuck that. REAL heroes go to /mu/, /x/, and /leftypol/.

 

[BrawlMan]

I'll leave with this.

 

[EvilRoy]

I know you think that not taking it seriously makes how you acted okay.

I don't think it says anything one way or the other, honestly.

Dude it says when you are un-directed you gravitate towards bullying. That's... that's kind of a lot. If you seriously don't notice it yourself you might need to talk to someone. I honestly always assumed you were doing it intentionally as part of the fun, but if not then wow dude.

Lol. Dude, you can make posts that aren't just calling me mentally unstable too, you know. Try it, you might even find it fun! XD

Man this aint me calling you mentally unstable this is me being taken aback by the things you're telling us about yourself. When someone says "sometimes I just need to count bricks in walls" you say "oh you have a little ocd". I dunno what you acting like this when nobody has your leash says about you but considering it involved two long term bullying campaigns it definitely says a LOT of something.

 

[Baffle]

Christ, I wish you'd just kept it if this was all the crying that I wasn't reading.

Never saw the place for it to be honest. Why does a website about games need a place where people can act like cocks? None of the other hobby forums I use seem to need one. Eh, maybe it says something about gamers.

 

[CaitSeith]

It has now turned into a place that some users feel that they can now get away with this behavior and consequences will not happen due to the lawlessness of the sub-forum.

Well, some people wanted it to be their own 4chan, so it's unsurprising this would eventually happen in an "everything goes" forum.